This Gazette may contains Multiple Subjects

REGD . NO . D. L. (N) 04/0007/2003-05 रजिस्ट्रीसं० डी० एल० ( एन ) 04/0007/ 2003-05

भारत का राजपत्र The Gazette of India

प्राधिकार से प्रकाशित

PUBLISHED BY AUTHORITY

साप्ताहिक

WEEKLY

सं. 42]

नई दिल्ली, अक्तूबर 11 अक्तूबर 17 , 2009 , शनिवार/आश्विन19-आश्विन 25 , 1931

No. 42]

NEW DELHI, OCTOBER 11-OCTOBER 17, 2009, SATURDAY/ASVINA 19- ASVINA 25, 1931 इस भाग में भिन्न पृष्ठ संख्या दी जाती है जिससे कि यह पृथक संकलन के रूप में रखा जा सके

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

भाग 11- खण्ड 3-उप-खण्ड (ii)

PART II-Section 3-Sub- section (ii)

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

कार्मिक , लोक शिकायत तथा पेंशन मंत्रालय

MINISTRY OF PERSONNEL, PUBLIC GRIEVANCES AND PENSIONS

(कार्मिक और प्रशिक्षण विभाग )

नई दिल्ली, 6 अक्तूबर , 2009

(DepartmentofPersonnel and Training ) New Delhi , the 6th October, 2009 का.आ 2815.-केन्द्रीय सरकार एतद्वारा अपराध प्रक्रिया संहिता, 1973 (1974 का अधिनियम सं. 2) की धारा 24 की उप- धारा ( 8 ) द्वारा प्रदत शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए दिल्ली विशेष पुलिस स्थापना (सीबीआई ) द्वारा स्थापित मामलों के अभियोजन के लिए गोवा राज्य में विधि द्वारा स्थापित पुनरीक्षण अथवा अपीलीय न्यायालयों में इन मामलों के अपील , पुनरीक्षण का संचालन करने के लिएनिम्नलिखित अधिवक्ताओं को विशेष लोक अभियोजक के रूप में नियुक्त करती है :

S.O. 2815.- In exercise ofthe powers conferred by sub- section (8 ) of Section 24 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Act No. 2 of 1974), the Central Government hereby appoints following Advocates as Special Public Prosecutors for conducting prosecution of cases instituted bythe Delhi Special Police Establishment (CBI ) in the State ofGoa as entrusted to them by the Central Bureau of Investigation in the trial courts and appeals / revisious or other matters arising out of these cases in revisional or appellate courts established by law.

[No. 225 /21 /2009- AVID- II ] सर्वश्री

1. जोसेफ एस. वाज

2. संतोष रामा रिवंकर

CHANDRA PRAKASH , Under Secy . नई दिल्ली, 6 अक्तूबर , 2009

का.आ 2816.-केन्द्रीय सरकार एतद्वारा दिल्ली विशेष पुलिस स्थापना अधिनियम 1946 ( 1946 का अधिनियम सं. 25 ) की धारा 6 [सं. 225/21/2009 ए. वी. डी.- [ 1 ] चंद्र प्रकाश , अवर सचिव

3633 GI/2009

(6151) 6152

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 17, 2009/ASVINA 25, 1931

के साथ पठित धारा 5 की उप- धारा ( ए) द्वारा प्रदत शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए कर्नाटक राज्य सरकार सचिवालय, विधान सौध, बंगलौर की दिनांक 25 अगस्त, 2009 की अधिसूचना सं एच. डी. 110 पी.सी.आर. 2009 द्वारा प्राप्त सहमति से पुलिस स्टेशन, बंगलौर सिटी हाई ग्राउंडस में पंजीकृत मै.फ्यूचर मेटल्स (प्राइवेट ) लि. तथा अन्यों के विरूद्ध भारतीय दण्ड संहिता , 1860 ( 1860 का अधिनियम सं.45 ) की धारा 405 ,468 , 420, चारा 34 के साथ पठित 120-जी के अंतर्गत अपराध संख्या 176/09 के संबंध में अपराध संबंधी प्रयास, दुष्प्रेरणों एवं षडयंत्रों अथवा संव्यवहार के अनुक्रम में किए गए अथवा उन्हीं तथ्यों से उद्भूत अन्य अपराध या अपराधों का अन्वेषण करने के लिए दिल्ली विशेष पुलिस स्थापना के सदस्यों की शक्तियों और क्षेत्राधिकार का विस्तार संपूर्ण कर्नाटक राज्य के संबंध में करती है ।

[सं. 228/50/2009-ए, वी. डी.- II ]

चंद्र प्रकाश , अवर सचिव New Delhi , the 6th October , 2009

S.O. 2816. In exercise of the powers conferredby sub-section( 1) of section 5 read with Section 6 of theDelhi Special Police Establishment Act, 1946 (Act No. 25 of 1946), the Central Government with the consent of the State Government of Karnataka , Secretariat , Vidhana Soudha, Bangalore vide Notification No. HD 110 PCR2009 dated 25th August, 2009, hereby extends the powers and jurisdiction of the members of the Delhi Special Police Establishment to the whole of the State of Karnataka for investigation ofCrime No. 176/09 under Sections 405,468, 420, 120-B read with Section 34 ofthe Indian PenalCode, 1860(Act No. 45 of 1860) against M/ s . Future Metals (P) Limited and others registered at Police Station Bangalore City High Grounds and attempts , abetments and conspiracies in relation to or in connection with the offences mentioned above and any other offence or offences committed in the course ofthe same transaction or arising out of the same facts .

[No. 228/50/2009-AVD- II]

CHANDRA PRAKASH, Under Secy.

वित्त मंत्रालय

(आर्थिक कार्य विभाग )

नई दिल्ली , 29 सितम्बर , 2009

का.आ 2817.-वित्त मंत्रालय , आर्थिक कार्य विभाग की दिनांक 25 जून , 2009 की समसंख्यक अधिसूचना में आंशिक संशोधन करते हुए बित्त मंत्रालय , आर्थिक कार्य विश्वाग के निम्नलिखित अधिकारियों को एमआई प्रभाग में केन्द्रीय जन सूचना अधिकारी के रूप में मनोनीत किया जाता है:

क्र.सं. नाम

इनसे संबंधित मामले

पदनाम

1. श्री दलीय

अकर

कृषि, ग्रामीण विकास,

सचिव

कबूर

विकेन्द्रीकरण , सिकाई, जल

(एमआई ) सलाम तथा आपदा प्रबंधन

[PART II-SEC. 3 (ii)]

अवर

श्रीसौम्या

विश्वबैंक-नीतिगत चटोपाध्याय सचिव

(एमआई)

मामले , स्वास्थ्य एवं शिक्षा , परिवहन , जलापूर्ति तथा एमआई प्रभाग में सामान्य समन्वयन

3. श्रीपी.

मोहनदासन

अवर सचिव. ऊर्जा, पर्यावरण एवं वानिकी, एडीबी-शहरी एवं विद्युत क्षेत्र

(एडीबी)

अवर

श्री एस. के.

सिंह

सचिव

(एडीबी)

एडीबी: सभी क्षेत्रकों (शहरी एवं विद्युत क्षेत्रों को छोड़कर) से संबंधित परियोजनाएं तथा अंतरराष्ट्रीय मुद्रा कोष से संबंधित कार्य ।

[फा. सं. 1/1/2005- आरटीआई ] एस. कामकम्बरन , अवर सचिव ( आरटीआई ) MINISTRY OF FINANCE

(Department ofEconomic Affairs)

NewDelhi, the 29th September, 2009 50.2017.- Partial modification of Ministry of Finance Department ofEconomic Affairs' notification of even sumber dated 5th June, 2009, the following officers of the Ministry of Finance, Department of Economic Affairs isdesignated are Central Public Information Offiers in MI Division.

S.bio . Name

Designation Matter relatingto 1. Sh.Dalip US (MI) Agriculture , Rural Kapur

Development, Decentra- lization, irrigation, Water Resources & Disaster Management.

2 Sh. Soumya US (MI)

Chattopad-

hyay

World Bank -Policy matters . Health & Educ- ation, Transport, Water Supply&General Coor- dissation within MI Division.

3. Sh P. Mohan US( ADB )

adasan

Energy, Environment & Forestry,ADB-Urban& Power sectors .

4. Sh. S. K. US (ADB)

Singh

ADB: Projects relatingto all sector (excluding Urban & Power Sectors) and work related to IMF .

[F.No. 1 / 1 /2005-RTI ] S. KANAKAMBARAN , Under Secy (RTI) 6153. [ भाग II-खण्ड 3(ii) ]

भारत का सममत्र : अक्तूबर 17, 2009/आश्विन 25, 1951

नई दिल्ली, 6 असून, 2009

(किली सेवाएं विभाग )

नई दिल्ली, 5 अक्तूबर , 2009

उपबंध) स्थीम 1970/1900 को यो उप ( 1 ) के साथ पठित , बैंककारी कंपनी ( उपक्रमों का अर्जन एवं अंतरण ) अधिनियम , 1970/1980 की भात 9 की उपभास 3 (ज) और (3 ) द्वारा प्रदत शक्तियों का प्रयोग की तिथि से सीन का सभाल को अभिसूचना अवाले आलों तक को भी पहले हो, सेन्ट्रल बैंक आफया के निदेशक मंडल में गैरसरकारी निदेशक के रूप में नामित करती है । का. 2818. बैंककारी विनियमन अधिनियम, 1949(1949 कत 10) की थास 53 ( 1 ) द्वारा प्रदेश समितनों का प्रयोग करते हुए, भारत सरकार , भारतीय रिजर्व बैंक सिफारिस पर, एक मह चोषणा करती है कि उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 19 ( 2 ) के प्रावधान , बैंक आफ इंडिया पर लागू नहीं होंगे , जहां तक उनका संबंध, संयुक्त उद्यम कंपनी-स्टार यूनियन डाई- ईची लाइफ इंश्योरेंस कंपनी लि. की चुकता शेयर पूंजी के 30 % से अधिक की शेयरधारित से है ।

[फा. सं. 9/26/2006-बीजी-1 ] [फा. नं.-7/86/2007-बीगोर ] डी. बी. माहेरी , अवर सचिव

जी. बी. सिंह , उप सचिव

New Delhi, the 6thOctober,2009 (DepartmentofFinancialServices) New Delhi, the 5thOctober, 2009

5.0. 2820-In exercise ofthe powers conferredby sub-section 3 (h) and (3-A) of Section 9 of the Banking Companies (Acquisition & Transfer ofUndertakings ) Act, 1970/1900 road with sobrance ( 1) of clause 3 of the Nationalised Banks (Management & Miscellaneous Provisions) Scheme, 1976/1980, the Central Government herebynominates Shrivomesls Sabharwal, as part-timenon- official director on the Board ofDirectors of CentralBank of India for a period of three years from the date of notification or until further onders, whichever is earlier.

S.O. 2818.- In exercise of the powers conferredby Section 53 (1 ) of the Banking Regulation Act, 1949 ( 10 of 1949), the Government of India, on the recommendations ofReserve Bank of ledia, hereby declares that the provisions ofSection 19 (2) ofthe said. Act shall not apply toBank of India in so far as they relate to its holding ofthe shares in excess of 30 % of the paid up share capital ofthe Joint Venture company -Star Union Dai -ichi Life Insurance Co. Ltd.

[F. No. 7/86/2007-BOA

[F.No. 9/26/2006-BO-I ] G.B. SINGH, Dy. Secy.

D. D.MAHESHWARI , Under Secy.

(Department ofRevenue)

नई दिल्ली, 6 अक्तूबर , 2009

(Central Board ofDirect Taxes)

CORRIGENDUM

New Delhi , the30th September,2009 का.आ 2819. रुग्ण औद्योगिक कंपनी ( विशेष उपबंध) अधिनियम , 1985 की धारा 6 की उप-धारा (5 ) द्वास प्रदत समितों का प्रयोग करते हुए , केन्द्रीय सस्कार , एस , श्री कके. चेरियात वरगीस को बाइफर में स्ठितम सदस्य होने के 17 सितम्बर, 2009 से अगले आदेश होने तक बाइकर को अध्यक्ष को रूप में कार्य करने के लिए प्राधिकृत करती है ।

इसे 16 सितम्बर , 2009 के समसंख्यक अधिसूचना के अधिक्रमण में जारी किया जाता है ।

5.O. 2821 In the Notification Number 68/2009 dated 15-9-2009 the words and figure " clause (ii ) of sub- section(1) ofthe Section 35 ofthe Income tax Act, 1961 " of the first para ofthe Notification, may be corrected to read as "clause (iii) ofsub-section ( 1 ) of the Section 35 of the IncometaxAct, 1961 " .

[फा. सं. 20( 1 )/2004-आई एफ-11 ] जे. एस. फौगाट, अवर सचिव

Other terms and condition of the said notification remain unchanged.

NewDelhi , the 6th October, 2009

[F. No.203/6/2009- ITA- II]

Dr. SANJAY KUMAR LAL, Under Secy.

(राजस्व विभाग)

(कॉन्द्रीय प्रत्यक्ष कर बोर्ड )

S.O. 2849. In exercise of the powers- conferredby sub-section (5) of Section 6 of the Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions ) Act, 1985, the Central Government hereby authorises Shri K...Cherian Varghese, being the senior most Member in BIFR. to act as Chairman, BIFR from 17th Septensber, 2000, until further onders.

नई दिवशी , 5 अवाटतूबर, 2009

This issues in supersession of Notification of even number dated: 16th September, 2009.

का. आ. 2822, सर्वसाधारण की जानकारी के लिए एत‌द्वारा यह अभिसूचित किया जाता है कि केन्द्र सरकार द्वाश आयकर नियम्सवली , 1962 ( उपसं नियमावली ) के मियम 5 ग तथा 5घ के [F.No: 20( 1)/2004-IF. J.S.PHAMNGAT, Under Secy .

6154

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 17, 2009 / ASVINA 25 , 1931

[PART II-SEC. 3 (ii) ] साथ पठित आयकर अधिनियम , 1961 ( उक्त अधिनियम ) की धारा 35 की उपधारा ( 1 ) के खंड ( ii ) के प्रयोजनार्थ कर निर्धारण वर्ष 2009-10 के आगे से संगठन तलवार रिसर्च फाउंडेशन , नई दिल्ली को निम्नलिखित शर्तों के अधीन " अन्य संस्था " की श्रेणी में अनुमोदित किया गया है, नामतः-

Foundation , New Delhi has been approved by the Central Government for the purpose of clause ( ii) of sub- section ( 1) of Section 35 of the Income-tax Act , 1961 ( said Act) , read with rules 5C and 5D of the Income- tax Rules , 1962 (said Rules) from Assessment year 2004-05 onwards in the category of ' other institution ' subject to the following conditions , namely: -

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

(a) fails to maintain books of accounts referred to in sub paragraph ( iii) of paragraph 1 : or

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

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

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

(c) fails to furnish its statement of donations received and amounts applied for scientific research referred to in sub -paragraph ( iv) of paragraph 1 ; or (घ) अपना अनुसंधान कार्यकलाप करना बंद कर देगा अथवा इसके अनुसंधान कार्यकलाप को जायज नहीं पाया जाएगा; अथवा

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

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

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

[NotificationNo. 76/2009 /F.No.203/6/2008/ITA- II ] DR. SANJAY KUMAR LAL, Under Secy.

[अधिसूचना सं. 76/2009/फा. सं. 203/6/2008- आ.क.नि. - 11 ] डा. संजय कुमार लाल , अवर सचिव

नई दिल्ली, 6 अक्तूबर , 2009

(Department ofRevenue)

(Central Board of Direct Taxes )

New Delhi , the 5th October , 2009

S.O. 2822. It is hereby notified for general information that the organization Talwar Research

का.आ. 2823. सर्वसाधारण की जानकारी के लिए एतद्वारा यह अधिसूचित किया जाता है कि केन्द्र सरकार द्वारा आयकर नियमावली , 1962 ( उक्त नियमावली ) के नियम 5 ग तथा 5ङ के साथ पठित आयकर अधिनियम , 1961 ( उक्त अधिनियम) की धारा 35 की उपधारा ( 1 ) के खंड ( ii ) के प्रयोजनार्थ कर निर्धारण वर्ष 6155 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र: अक्तूबर 17, 2009/आश्विन 25 , 1931

New Delhi , the 6th October , 2009 2009-10 के आगे संगठन ओरोविले फाउंडेशन ओरोविले , तमिलनाडु कोनिम्नलिखित शर्तों के अधीन आंशिक रूप से अनुसंधान कार्यकलापों में संलग्न " अन्य संस्था" की श्रेणी में अनुमोदित किया गया है , नामतः-

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

S.O. 2823. It is hereby notified for general information that the organization Auroville Foundation , Auroville, Tamil Nadu has been approved by the Central Government for the purpose of clause ( ii ) of sub -section (1) of Section 35 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ( said Act) , read with rules 5C and 5E of the Income-tax Rules , 1962 (said Rules) from Assessment year 2009-2010 onwards in the category of ' other institution'partly engaged in research activities subject to the following conditions , namely:-

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

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

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

(iii ) अनुमोदित संगठन वैज्ञानिक अनुसंधान के लिए प्राप्त धनराशि के संबंध में अलग बही - खाता रखेगा अनुसंधान करने के लिए प्रयुक्त राशि कों उसमें दर्शाएगा तथा उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 288 की उप धारा ( 2 ) के स्पष्टीकरण में यथा परिभाषित किसी लेखाकार से ऐसी खाता- बही की लेखा परीक्षा कराएगा और उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 139 की उप धारा ( 1 ) के अंतर्गत आय विवरणी प्रस्तुत करने की नियत तिथि तक ऐसे लेखाकार द्वारा विधिवत सत्यापित एवं हस्ताक्षरित लेखा परीक्षा रिपोर्ट मामले में क्षेत्राधिकार रखने वाले आयकर आयुक्त अथवा आयकर निदेशक को प्रस्तुत करेगा ;

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

(c) fails to furnish its statement of donations received and surtis applied for scientific research referred to insub-paragraph (iv) ofparagraph 1 ; or (घ) अपना अनुसंधान कार्यकलाप करना बंद कर देगा अथवा इसके अनुसंधान कार्यकलाप को जायज नहीं पाया जाएगा ; अथवा

(d) ceases to carry on its research activities or its research activities are not found to be genuine ; or ( ङ) उक्त नियमावली के नियम 5ग और 5ड़ के साथ पठित उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 35 की उपधारा ( 1 ) के खंड ( ii ) के प्रावधानों के अनुरूप नहीं होगा तथा उनका पालन नहींकरेगा ।

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

[Notification No. 77/2009/F . No. 203 /68/2009 /ITA- II] DR. SANJAY KUMAR LAL, Under Secy.

[अधिसूचना सं. 77/2009/फा. सं. 203/68/2009-आ.क.नि.- II ] डा. संजय कुमार लाल , अवर सचिव 6156

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 17, 2009 /ASVINA 25 , 1931

विदेश मंत्रालय

(सीपीवी प्रभाग)

नई दिल्ली , 1 अक्तूबर , 2009

का.आ. 2824.-राजनयिक और कोंसलीय ऑफिसर ( शपथ और फीस ) के अधिनियम, 1948 की धारा 2 के खंड ( क) के अनुसरण में, केंद्र सरकार एतद्वारा श्री दर्शन कुमार , सहायक को 1-10-2009 से भारत के राजदूतावास, स्टोकहोम सहायक कोंसुलर अधिकारी के कर्त्तव्यों का पालन करने के लिए प्राधिकृत करती है ।

[सं टी 4330/01/2006] आर. के. पेरिनडिया, अवर सचिव (कोंसुलर) MINISTRY OF EXTERNAL AFFAIRS (C.P.V. Division)

New Delhi , the 1st October, 2009

S.O. 2824. In pursuance of the clause ( a) of the Section 2 of the Diplomatic and Consular Officers ( Oaths and Fees ) Act , 1948 (41 of 1948 ) , the Central Government hereby authorise Shri Darshan Kumar, Assistant in the Embassy of India, Stockholm to perform the duties of Assistant Consular Officer with effect from 1st October , 2009.

[No. T. 4330/01/2006]

R. K. PERINDIA, Under Secy.

मानव संसाधन विकास मंत्रालय

(उच्चतर शिक्षा विभाग )

(तकनीकी अनुभाग -1 )

नई दिल्ली, 22 सितम्बर , 2009

का.आ. 2825. प्रौद्योगिकी संस्थान अधिनियम, 1961 की धारा 35 द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए केन्द्र सरकार एतद्द्वारा परिषद् (प्रोद्योगिकी संस्थान ) नियमावली , 1962 में संशोधन हेतु निम्नलिखित नियम प्रारूपित करती है नामतः

1. ( 1 ) इन नियमों को परिषद् संशोधन नियमावली , 2009 (प्रौद्योगिकी संस्थान ) के नाम से जाना जाएगा । (2) ये नियम राजकीय राजपत्र में प्रकाशन की तारीख से लागू होंगे ।

2. परिषद् (प्रौद्योगिकी संस्थान ) नियम , 1962 ( जिसे आगे से उक्त नियम कहा जाएगा ) के नियम 4 में -

(i ) उप नियम (ङ) के अंत में निम्नलिखित प्रावधान जोड़ा जाना चाहिए :

" बशर्ते अध्यक्ष आपात स्थिति में और लिखित में रिकार्ड किए जाने वाले कारणों से बैठक से कम -से- कम तीन सप्ताह

[PART IISEC .3 ( ii)] पहले नोटिस जारी करने की आवश्यकता से छूट प्रदान कर सकता है"

( ii ) उप नियम ( छ ) के अंत में निम्नलिखित प्रावधान जोड़ा जाना चाहिए :-

" बशर्ते अध्यक्ष आपात स्थिति में और लिखित में रिकार्ड किए जाने वाले कारणों से बैठक से कम - से- कम दस दिन पहले कार्यसूची परिचालित करने की आवश्यकता से छूट प्रदान कर सकता है" :

3. उक्तनियमों में नियम 6 के उप- नियम ( 1 ) को निम्नलिखित प्रकार से प्रतिस्थापित किया जाना चाहिए :-

" ( i ) परिषद् की बैठकों में भाग लेने के लिए की गई यात्रा हेतु परिषद् के पदेन सदस्य यात्रा भात्ता और दैनदिन भत्ते के अधिकारी होंगे । ये भत्ते उन्हें उसी दर पर प्रदान किए जाएंगे जिस दर पर उनके मूल कार्यालय द्वारा उन्हें प्रदान किए जाते हैं :

बशर्ते कि परिषद् के सदस्य , पदेन सदस्य के अतिरिक्त उसी यात्रा भत्ता और दैनंदिन भत्ता के अधिकारी होंगे जो सचिव , भारत सरकार को प्रदान किए जाते हैं । "

[एफ. सं. 13-1/2008-टीएस -1 ( भाग ) ]

सीमा राज, निदेशक टिप्पणी: प्रमुख नियम भारत के राजपत्र में अधिसूचना संख्या का.आ. 1793, दिनांक 9 जून , 1962 द्वास प्रकाशित किए गए । MINISTRY OF HUMAN RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT

(Department ofHigher Education)

(TechnicalSection-1)

New Delhi , the 22nd September , 2009 S.O. 2825. In exercise of the powers conferredby Section 35 of the Institutes of Technology Act , 1961 (59 of 1961), the Central Government hereby makes the following rules further to amend the Council ( Institutes of Technology) Rules, 1962, namely:-

1. ( 1) These rules may be called the Council ( Institutes ofTechnology) Amendment rules, 2009.

(2)They shall come into force on the date of their publication in the Official Gazette.

2. In the Council (Institutes ofTechnology) Rules , 1962 (hereinafter referred to as the said rules) , in rule4 , - (i) in sub- rule ( e), the following proviso shall be inserted atthe end, namely :-

"Provided that the Chairman may, in an emergent situation, and for reasons to be recorded in writing, 6157 1 [भाग II-खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र: अक्तूबर 17, 2009/आश्विन 25 , 1931

dispensewith the requirement of giving notice ofat least three weeks before the meeting";

(ii) in sub-rule (g), the following proviso shall be inserted at the end, namely :-

"Provided that the Chairman may, in an emergent situation , and for reasons to be recorded in writing, dispense with the requirement of circulation of agenda at least ten days before the meeting";

Occupants) Act, 1971 (40 of 1971 ), the Cental Governmet hereby appoints Shri Jay Chanda, Assistant Registrar (Estates), University of Delhi, being an officer equivalent tothe rankofa gazetted officer of the Central Government, as Estate Officer for the purposes of the said Act, who shall exercise the powers conferred, and perform the duties imposed, on the estate officer by or under the said Act withinthe local limits ofhis jurisdiction in Delhi in respect ofthe publicpremises under the administrative control of the University of Delhi .

3. In rule 6, ofthe said rules , for sub-rule ( 1 ) , the following sub-rule shall be substituted, namely:-

[No. F.4-21/2009-Desk(U)] R. D. SAHAY, Director

स्वास्थ्य और परिवार कल्याण मंत्रालय "(1 ) The ex-offico member of the council shall be entitled to the traveling allowances and daily allowances in respect ofjesumey performed by him/ her for attending the meetings of the Council at the rates as are admissible to him/her in the officewhich he/she holds by virtue of which he/she is member:

(स्वास्थ्य और परिवार कल्याण विभाग ) नई दिल्ली, 7 अक्तूबर, 2009

Provided that the menibers ofthe Council, other than cx-officiomembers shall be ontitled to such traveling allowance and daily allowance as are admissible to the Secretary of the Government of India."

का.आ. 2827.- केन्द्र सरकार भारतीय चिकित्सा परिषद् अधिनियम , 1956 ( 1956 का 102 ) की धारा 12 की उप- धारा (2 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए भारतीय चिकित्सा परिषद् से परामर्श करने के बाद एतद्‌द्वारा उक्त अधिनियम की प्रथम अनुसूची में निम्नलिखित और संशोधन करती है , अर्थात्:-

Note : The principal miles were published in the Gaattic of India, vide notification number S.O. 1793 , dated the 9th June, 1962.

उक्त अनुसूची में, शीर्षक " महाराष्ट्र स्वास्थ्य विज्ञान विश्वविद्यालय , नासिक " के अंतर्गत अंतिम प्रविष्टि के बाद निम्नलिखित अन्तः स्थापित किया जाएगा, अर्थात्:-

[F.No. 13-1 /2008- TS.1 (Pt. )] SEEMA RAJ, Director

नई दिल्ली, 13 अक्तूबर, 2009

" महाराष्ट्र स्वास्थ्य विज्ञान विश्वविद्यालय , नासिक द्वारा प्रदत्त सभी स्नातकोत्तर डिक्रिनपीएस और जाति विशिष्ठता पाठयक्रम मान्यता प्राप्त है जो पूर्व में मुंबई विश्वविद्यालय , पुणे विश्वविद्यालय , शिवाजी विश्वविद्यालय , डा. बाबा साहब अम्बेडकर मराठवाड़ा विश्वविद्यालय , स्वामी रामानन्द तीर्थ मराठवाड़ा विश्वविद्यालय , नान्देड , श्रीमती नातिबाई दामोदर ताजरसेट महिला विश्वविद्यालय , श्रीमती गाडगे बाबा अमरावती विश्वविद्यालय , आर टी एम विश्वविद्यालय और उत्तर महाराष्ट्र विश्वविद्यालय द्वारा प्रदान किए जाते थे । "

[सं. वी. 11015/2/2009-एम ई पी-1 ] डा. शरत चौहान , निदेशक का.आ. 2826. सार्वजनिक स्थान ( अनधिकृत अधिभोगियों कीबेदखली ) अधिनियम , 1971 ( 1971 का 40 ) की बारा 3 में प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए केन्द्र सरकार एतद्‌द्वारा श्री जय चन्द, सहायक रजिस्ट्रार ( संपदा ) , दिल्ली विश्वविद्यालय , केन्द्र सरकार के राजपत्रित अधिकारी के रैंक के समकक्ष अधिकारी होने के नाते उक्त अधिनियम के उद्देस्यार्थसम्पदा अधिकारी नियुक्त करती है , जोदिल्ली विश्वविद्यालय के प्रशासनिक नियंत्रण के अंतर्गत सार्वजनिक स्थान के संबंध में दिल्ली में उसके क्षेत्राधिकार की स्थानीय सीमाओं के अंतर्गत उक्त अधिनियम के अंतर्गत या इसके द्वारा सम्पदा अधिकारी को सौंपे गए दायित्त्वों का निर्वाह करेंगे और प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करेंगे ।

MINISTRY OF HEALTH AND FAMILY WELFARE (Department ofHealth and Family Welfare)

New Delhi, the 07th October , 2009 [सं.एफ. 4-21/2009-डेस्क(यू) ]

आर. डी. सहाय , निदेशक

New Delhi, the 13th October , 2009

S.O. 2826.- In exercise ofthe powers conferredby section 3 ofthe Public Premises (Eviction ofUnauthorised

S.O. 2827.- In exercise ofthe powers conferredby sub-section (2) of the Section 12 of the Indian Medical Council Act, 1956 ( 102 of 1956), the Central Government, after consultingthe Medical Council of India, hereby makes the following further amendments in the First Scheduleto the said Act, namely:-

6158

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 17, 2009/ASVINA 25, 1931

[PART II-SEC. 3 (ii) ]

Indian Medical Council Act, 1956 ( 102 of 1956) under Section 14 of the said Act;

Inthe said Schedule under the heading "Maharashtra University of Health Sciences , Nashik" , after the last entry the following shall be inserted, namely :-

Whereas medical qualification Doctor ofMedicine granted by University of Jaffna, Srilanka is a recognized medical qualification for the purpose ofthe Indian Medical CouncilAct, 1956 ( 102 of 1956) .

And Whereas Dr. Shobana Anojan , Srilankan National, who possess the said qualification is attached to The Diabete Department, Chennai for the purpose of training and not for personal gain;

"All Postgraduate degrees MD/MS and super- speciality courses awarded by Maharashtra University of Health Sciences, Nashik are recognized which were earlier granted.by Mumbai University , Pune University, Shivaji University, Dr. Baba Saheb Ambedkar Marathwadar University , Swami Ramanand Tirath Marathwada University, Nanded, Smt . Nathibai Damodar Tgajerset Women's University , Smt . Gadge Baba Amrawati .University , RTM University and North Maharashtra University" .

[No. V.11015 /2/2009-ME-P- 1 ]

DR . SHARAT CHAUHAN , Director

Now, therefore, in pursuance of clause ( c) of the sub-section ( 1 ) ofthe Section 14 ofthe said Act, the Central Government hereby specifies that the period ofpractice of medicine by Dr. Shobana Anojan in India shall be limited to:-

नई दिल्ली , 12 अक्तूबर, 2009

(a) a period ofOne year i.e. from 01-05-2009 to 01-05-2010; or

(b ) the period during which Dr. Shobana Anojan is attached to The Diabete Department, Chennai whichever is shorter .

[File No.V.11016/ 15/2009- ME (Policy-I) ] का.आ. 2828.-जबकि जाफना विश्वविद्यालय , श्रीलंका द्वारा प्रदत्त आयुर्विज्ञान वाचस्पति की आयुर्विज्ञान अर्हता भारतीय आयुर्विज्ञान परिषद् अधिनियम , 1956 ( 1956 का 102 ) के प्रयोजन के लिए उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 14 के अधीन मान्यता प्राप्त आयुर्विज्ञान अर्हता है ।

R. SANKARAN , Under Secy.

पोत परिवहन विभाग

नई दिल्ली , 7 अक्तूबर, 2009

जबकि जाफना विश्वविद्यालय , श्रीलंका द्वारा प्रदत्त आयुर्विज्ञान वाचस्पति की आयुर्विज्ञान अर्हता भारतीय आयुर्विज्ञान परिषद् अधिनियम , 1956 ( 1956 का 102 ) के प्रयोजन के लिए एक मान्यता प्राप्त अर्हता है ।

और जबकि डा. शोभना अनोजन , श्रीलंका राष्ट्रीक जो उक्त अर्हता रखते हैं, मधुमेह विभाग , चेन्ई से प्रशिक्षिण के लिए संलग्न है और व्यक्तिगत लाभ के लिए नहीं ।

का.आ. 2829.-दिनांक 3 जुलाई , 2009 और 31 जुलाई , 2009 की पहले की अधिसूचनाओं में आंशिक संशोधन करते हुए , केन्द्र सरकार , एतदद्वारा श्री अरविन्द कुमार , भारतीय आर्थिक सेवा, सदस्य ( परिवहन अनुसंधान स्कंध ) , सड़क परिवहन और राजमार्ग मंत्रालय को दिनांक 15 मई , 2009 से 14 मई , 2011 तक दो वर्ष की आगे की अवधि के लिए या अगले आदेशों तक में से जो भी पहले हो तब तक के लिए अंशकालिक सदस्य, महापत्तन प्रशुल्क प्राधिकरण के रूप में अतिरिक्त कार्य संभालने हेतु नियुक्त करती है । अतः अब उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 14 की उपधारा ( 1 ) के खण्ड ( ग ) के अनुसरण में केंद्र सरकार एतद्वारा विनिर्दिष्ट करती है कि भारत में डा. शोभना अनोजन द्वारा आयुर्विज्ञान के व्यवसाय की अवधि:--

[फाईल सं. पी आर-14019/ 14/2009- पी.जी. ]

राकेश मल्होत्रा, उप सचिव ( क) एक वर्ष की अवधि अर्थात 01-05-2009 से 01-05-2010 तक; अथवा

MINISTRY OF SHIPPING

NewDelhi, the 7th October , 2009

(ख) उस अवधि तक जिसके दौरान डा. शोभना अनोजन मधुमेह विभाग , चेन्नई से संलग्न हैं , जो भी लघुत्तर हो , परिसीमित होगी ।

[फा. सं. वी. 11016/15/2009 - एम ई ( नीति-1 ]

आर. शंकरन , अवर सचिव

New Delhi , the 12th October , 2009

S.O. 2829. In partial modification of the earlier Notifications dated 3rd July , 2009 and 31st July, 2009 , the Central,Government hereby appoints Shri Arvind Kumar , IES, Member ( Transport Research Wing) , Ministry of Road Transport andHighways to hold additional charge as Part- Time Member , Tariff Authority for Major Ports for a further period oftwo years from 15th May , 2009 to 14th May , 2011 , oruntil further orders , whichever is earlier.

S.O. 2828.- Whereas medical qualification Doctor ofMedicine granted by University of Jaffna, Srilanka is Recognized medical qualification for the purpose of the

[No. PR- 14019/14/2009-PG] RAKESH MALHOTRA, Dy. Secy.

6159 [भाग II- खण्ड 3( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : अक्तूबर 17 , 2009/आश्विन 25 , 1931

उपभोक्तामामले , खाद्य और सार्वजनिक वितरण मंत्रालय

(उपभोक्ता मामले विभाग )

नई दिल्ली , 6 मई, 2009

का.आ. 2830.-केन्द्रीय सरकार का , विहित प्राधिकारी द्वारा उसे प्रस्तुत रिपोर्ट पर विचार करने के पश्चात् यह समाधान हो गया है कि उक्त रिपोर्ट में वर्णित मॉडल ( नीचे दी गई आकृति देखें ) बाट और माप मानक अधिनियम , 1976 ( 1976 का 60 ) तथा बाट और माप मानक (मॉडलों का अनुमोदन ) नियम , 1987 के उपबंधों के अनुरूप है और इस बात की संभावना है कि लगातार प्रयोग की अवधि में भी उक्त मॉडल यथार्थता बनाए रखेगा और विभिन्न परिस्थितियों में उपयुक्त सेवा प्रदान करता रहेगा;

अतः , अब , केन्द्रीय सरकार , उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 की उप- धारा ( 7 ) और उप- धारा ( 8 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए, मैसर्स एवरी इंडिया लि. , प्लाट नं. 50-59 , सेक्टर 25 , बल्लभगढ़ -121004 हरियाणा द्वारा विनिर्मित मध्यम यथार्थता ( यथार्थता वर्ग III ) वाले " E 12 " श्रृंखला के अंकक सूचन सहित, अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण ( वेब्रिज टाइप ) के मॉडल का , जिसके ब्रांड का नाम " एवरी " है ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/09/09/ 194 समनुदेशित किया गया है , अनुमोदन प्रमाण पत्र जारी करती है ।

उक्तमॉडल एक विकृत गेज प्रकार का भार सेल आधारित अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण ( वेब्रिज टाइप ) है । इसकी अधिकतम क्षमता 40 टन है कि न्यूनतम क्षमता 200 कि. ग्रा. है । सत्यापन मापमान अंतराल ( ई ) 10 कि.ग्रा. है । इसमें एक आधेयतुलन युक्ति है जिसका शत प्रतिशत व्यकलनात्मक धारित आधेयतुलन प्रभाव है लिक्विड क्रिस्टल डायोड ( एल सी डी ) तोलन परिणाम उपदर्शित करता है । उपकरण 230 वोल्ट और 50 हर्ट्ज प्रत्यावर्ती धारा विद्युत प्रदाय पर कार्य करता है ।

0000

स्टाम्प और सीलिंग के सत्यापन के लिए इंडीकेटर के किसी भी तरफ आउटर और इनर कवर काट कर दो छेद किए गए हैं और इन दोनों छेदों को लीड और वायर से कसा गया है । उपकरण को सील से छेड़‌छाड़ किए बिना नहीं खोला जा सकता । मॉडल को सीलबंद करने के उपबंध का एक प्ररूपी योजनाबद्ध डायग्राम उपरोक्त दिया गया है ।

उपकरण में केलिब्रेशन के लिए बाहरी पहुंच है । बाहरी केलिब्रेशन तक पहुंच को रोकने के लिए ए/डी कार्ड/ मदर बोर्ड में डिप स्विच भीदिया गया है ।

और केन्द्रीय सरकार उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 की उपधारा ( 12 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए यह घोषणा करती है कि उक्त मॉडल के अनुमोदन के इस प्रमाण पत्र के अंतर्गत उसी विनिर्माता द्वारा उसी सिद्धांत, डिजाइन के अनुसार और उसी सामग्री से जिससे उक्त अनुमोदित मॉडल का विनिर्माण किया गया है , विनिर्मित उसी श्रृंखला के वैसे ही मेक , यथार्थता और कार्यपालन के तोलन उपकरण भी होंगे जो 5 ग्रा. या उससे अधिक के " ई" मान के लिए 500 से 10,000 तक के रेंज में सत्यापन मापमान अंतराल ( एन ) सहित 5 टन से 200 टन तक की अधिकतम क्षमता वाले हैं और " ई " मान 1 × 10 , 2× 10 , 5× 10 के, के हैं, जो धनात्मक या ऋणात्मक पूर्णांक या शून्य के समतुल्य हैं ।

[फा. सं. डब्ल्यूएम 21 ( 82 )/2009 ]

आर. माथुरबूथम, निदेशक, विधिक माप विज्ञान 3633 GI/09-2 6160

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 17, 2009/ ASVINA 25, 1931

[PART II-SEC. 3 (ii) ] MINISTRY OF CONSUMER AFFAIRS, FOOD AND PUBLIC DISTRIBUTION

(Department of Consumer Affairs)

New Delhi , the 6th May , 2009

S.O. 2830.- Whereas the Central Government after considering the report submitted to it by prescribed authority, is satisfied that the Model described in the said report ( see the figure given below) is in conformity with the provisions of the Standards of Weight and Measures Act, 1976 (60 of 1976 ) and the Standars of Weight and Measures (Approval of Models ) Rules, 1987 and the said Model is likely to maintain its accuracy over period of sustained use and to render accurate service under varied conditions;

Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub- sections (7) and ( 8 ) of Section 36 of the said Act, the Central Government hereby issues and publishes the certificate of approval of the Model of non - automatic weighing instrument ( Weighbridge Type) with digital indication of medium accuracy (Accuracy class - III ) of series "E12 " and with brand name " AVERY" ( hereinafter referred to as the said model ) , manufactured by M/s . Avery India Ltd , Plot Nơ. 50-59, Sector - 25, Ballabgarh - 121004, Haryana and which is assigned the approval mark IND/09/09 / 194;

The said Model is a strain gauge type load cell based non- authomatic weighing instrument (Weighbridge type ) with a maximum capacity of 40 tonne and minimum capacity of200kg. The verfication scale interval ( e ) is 10kg . It has a tare device with a 100 per cent subtractive retained tare effect. The liquid crystal diode (LCD ) indicates the weighing result . The instrument operates on 230 Volts , 50Hertz alternative current power supply.

Figure-1 Model

0.000

Figaro-2 Senting diagram of the sealing provision of the model

By the either side of the indicator two holes are made by cutting the outer and inner cover and fastened by the lead and wire through these two holes for receiving the verification stamp and seal . The indicator can not be opend without tampering the seal. A typical schematic diagram of sealing provision of the model is given above .

Theinstrument has external control to calibration . A dip switch has also been provided in A/D card/mother board todisable access to external calibration.

Further, in exercise ofthe powers conferred by sub - section ( 12) of Section 36 ofthe said Act , the Central Government herebydeclares that this certificate ofapproval ofthe said Model shall also cover the weighting instruments of similar make, accuracy and performance of same series with maximum capacity above 5 tonne and up to 200 tonne with verification scale interval (n) in the range of500 to 10,000 for e ' value of 5g or more and with ' e' value of Ix 10k, 2x10 or 5x10 , wherekis a positive or negative whole number or equal to zero manufacturedby the same manufacturer in accordance with the same principle , design and with the same meterials with which , the said approved model has been manufactured.

[F. No. WM-21 (82)/2009 ]

R. MATHURBOOTHAM, Director of Legal Metrology 6161 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : अक्तूबर 17, 2009/आश्विन 25, 1931

नई दिल्ली , 6 मई, 2009

का.जा. 2831. केन्द्रीय सरकार का , विहित प्राधिकारी द्वारा उसे प्रस्तुत रिपोर्ट पर विचार करने के पश्चात् यह समाधान हो गया है किउक्त रिपोर्ट में वर्णित मॉडल ( नीचे दी गई आकृति देखें ) बाट और माप मामक अधिनियम , 1976 ( 1976 का 60 ) तथा बाट और माप मानक (मॉडलोंका अनुमोदन ) नियम , 1987 के उपबंधों के अनुरूप है और इस बात की संभावना है कि लगातार प्रयोग की अवधि में भी उक्त मॉडल यथार्थता बनाए रखेगा और विभिन्न परिस्थितियों में उपयुक्त सेवा प्रदान करता रहेगा;

अतः , अब, केन्द्रीय सरकार , उक्त अधिनियमकी धारा 36 की उप- धारा ( 7) और उपचारा ( 8 ) द्वारा प्रदत शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए, मैसर्स आभा टेक्नोलोजी , न. 31 ए, पी.टी. राजन सालाई , के. के. नगर, चेन्नै-600078 द्वारा विनिर्मित मध्यम यथार्थता ( यथार्थता वर्ग III ) वाले " PS " श्रृंखला के अंकक सूचन सहित , अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण ( इलेक्ट्रोनिक कॉयन आपरेटिड व्यक्ति तोलन मशीन टिकिट प्रिंटिंग के सहित या उसके बिना ) के मॉडल का , जिसके ब्रांड का नाम " LEGEND " है ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/09/09/ 100 समनुदेशित किया गया है , अनुमोदन प्रमाण- पत्र जारी करती है ।

उक्त मॉडल एक विकृत गेज प्रकार का भार सेल आधारित अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण ( इलेक्ट्रोनिक कॉयन आपरेटिड व्यक्ति तोलन मशीन-टिकिट प्रिंटिंग के सहित या उसके बिना ) है । इसकी अधिकतम क्षमता 150 कि.ग्रा. और न्यूनतम क्षमता 2 कि.ग्रा. है । सत्यापन मापमान अंतराल ( ई ) 100 ग्रा. है । इसमें एक आधेयतुलन युक्ति है जिसका शत प्रतिशत व्यकलनात्मक धारित आधेयतुलन प्रभाव है प्रकाश उत्सर्जक डायोड ( एल ई डी ) प्रदर्श तोलन परिणाम उपदर्शित करता है । उपकरण 230 वोल्ट और 50 हर्ट्ज प्रत्यावर्ती धारा विद्युत प्रदाय पर कार्य करता है । स्टाम्प और सीलिंग के सत्यापन के लिए इंडीकेटर के दायीं तरफ अपर कबर और साइड प्लेट में काट कर दो छेद किए गए हैं और इन दोनों छेदों को लीड वायर से कसा गया है । उपकरण को सील से छेड़छाड़ किए बिना नहीं खोला जा सकता । मॉडल को सीलबंद करने के उपबंध का एक प्ररूपी योजनाबद्ध डायग्राम उपरोक्त दिया गया है ।

उपकरण में केलिब्रेशन के लिए बाहरी पहुंच है । बाहरी केलिब्रेशन तक पहुंच को रोकने के लिए ए/ डी कार्ड/ मदर बोर्ड में डिप स्विच भी दिया गया है ।

और केन्द्रीय सरकार उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 की उपधारा ( 12 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए यह घोषणा करती है कि उक्त मॉडल के अनुमोदन के इस प्रमाण- पत्र के अंतर्गत उसी विनिर्माता द्वारा उसी सिद्धांत , डिजाइन के अनुसार और उसी सामग्री से जिससे उक्त अनुमोदित्त मॉडल का विनिर्माण किया गया है , विनिर्मित उसी श्रृंखला के वैसे ही मेक, यथार्थता और कार्यपालन के तोलन उपकरण भी होंगे जो 5 ग्रा. या उससे अधिक के " ई " मान के लिए 500 से 10,000 तक के रेंज में सत्यापन मापमान अंतराल ( एन ) सहित 100 कि. ग्रा. से 200 कि. ग्रा. तक की अधिकतम क्षमता की रेंज वाले हैं और " ई" मान 1× 10 * , 2 × 10 के, 5× 10 के, के हैं, जो धनात्मक या ऋणात्मक पूर्णांक या शून्य के समतुल्य हैं ।

[फा. सं. डब्ल्यूएम-21 ( 50 )/2009 ]

आर. माथुरबूथम , निदेशक , विधिक मापः विज्ञान 6162

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 17 , 2009 / ASVINA 25 , 1931

[PART II-SEC. 3(ii)]

New Delhi, the 6th May , 2009

S.O. 2831. Whereas the Central Government after considering the report submitted to it by prescribed authority, is satisfied that the Model described in the said report (see the figure given below) is in conformity with the provisions of the Standards of Weights and Measures Act , 1976 (60 of 1976) and the Standards of Weights and Measures (Approval ofModels) Rules , 1987 and the said Model is likely to maintain its accuracy over periods of sustained use and to render accurate service under varied conditions ;

Now, therefore , in exercise of the powers conferred by sub - sections (7) and (8) of Section 36 of the said Act, the Central Government hereby issues and publishes the certificate of approval of the Model of non - automatic weighing instrument (Electronic Coin operated Person Weighing Machine- with or without ticket printing) with digital indication of medium accuracy (Accuracy class - III ) of series " PS" and with brand name " LEGEND" ( hereinafter referred to as the said model) , manufactured by M/s . Abha Technologies , No. 31A , P. T. Rajan Salai , K. K. Nagar , Chennai -600078 which is assigned the approval mark IND/09/09 / 100 ;

The said Model is a strain gauge type load cell based non -automatic weighing instrument (Electronic Coin operated Person Weighing Machine - with or without ticket printing) with a maximum capacity of 150 kg. and minimum capacity of2kg. The verification scale interval ( e) is 100g. It has a tare device with a 100 per cent subtractive retained tare effect . The Light Emitting Diode (LED) display indicates the weighing results . The instrument operates on 230 Volts , 50Hertz alternative current power supply

Legend

From the right side of the indicator two holes , are made by cutting the upper cover and side plate and fastened by a leaded wire through these two holes for receiving the verification stamp and seal . The indicator can not be opened without tampering the seal . A typical schematic diagram of sealing provision of the Model is given above .

The instrument has external control to calibration . A dip switch has also been provided in A/ D card/ mother board to disable access to external calibration .

Further . in cxercise ofthe powers conferred by sub - section ( 12) of section 36 of the said Act, the Central Government hereby declares that this certificate of approval of the said model shall also cover the weighing instruments of similar make , accuracy and performance of same series with maximum capacity in the range of 100kg . to 200 kg . with verification scale interval (n ) in the range of 500 to 10,000 for ' e ' value of 5g or more and with ' e ' value of 1x10k , 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 (50 )/2009 ]

R. MATHURBOOTHAM , Director of Legal Metrology 6163 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र: अक्तूबर 17, 2009/आश्विन 25 , 1931

नई दिल्ली , 6 मई , 2009

का.आ. 2832.-केन्द्रीय सरकार का, विहित प्राधिकारी द्वारा उसे प्रस्तुत रिपोर्ट पर विचार करने के पश्चात् यह समाधान हो गया है कि उक्त रिपोर्ट में वर्णित मॉडल ( नीचे दी गई आकृति देखें ) बाट और माप मानक अधिनियम, 1976 ( 1976 का 60 ) तथा बाट और माप मानक (मॉडलों का अनुमोदन ) नियम, 1987 के उपबंधों के अनुरूप है और इस बात की संभावना है कि लगातार प्रयोग की अवधि में भी उक्त मॉडल यथार्थता बनाए रखेगा और विभिन्न परिस्थितियों में उपयुक्त सेवा प्रदान करता रहेगा;

अतः , अब , केन्द्रीय सरकार , उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 की उप- धारा ( 7 ) और उप- धारा (8 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए , मैसर्स आभा टेक्नोलोजी , न. 31 ए, पी.टी. राजन सालाई , के. के. नगर, चेन्नै-600078 द्वारा विनिर्मित मध्यम यथार्थता (यथार्थता वर्ग III ) वाले " पीएफ" श्रृंखला के अंकक सूचन सहित , अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण (प्लेटफार्म प्रकार ) के मॉडल का, जिसके ब्रांड का नाम " LEGEND " है (जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/09/09/ 101 समनुदेशित किया गया है, अनुमोदन प्रमाण-पत्र जारी करती है ।

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

स्टाम्प और सीलिंग के सत्यापन के लिए इंडीकेटर के दायीं तरफ अपर कवर और साइड प्लेट में काट कर दो छेद किए गए हैं और इन दोनों छेदों को लीड और वायर से कसा गया है । उपकरण को सील से छेड़छाड़ किए बिना नहीं खोला जा सकता । माडल को सीलबंद करने के उपबंध का एक प्ररूपी योजनाबद्ध डायग्राम उपरोक्त दिया गया है ।

उपकरण में केलिब्रेशन के लिए बाहरी पहुंच है । बाहरी केलिब्रेशन तक पहुंच को रोकने के लिए ए/डी कार्ड/मदर बोर्ड में डिप स्विच भीदिया गया है ।

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

[फा. सं. डब्ल्यूएम-21 ( 50) /2009]

आर. माथुरबूथम , निदेशक, विधिक माप विज्ञान 6164

[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii )] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 17 , 2009 /ASVINA 25 , 1931

New Delhi , the 6th May, 2009

S.O. 2832. Whereas the Central Government after considering the report submitted to it by prescribed authority, issatisfied that the model described in the said report (see the figure given below) is in conformity with the provisions of the Standards of Weight and Measures Act , 1976 (60 of 1976) and the Standars of Weight and Measures (Approval of Models ) Rules , 1987 and the said model is likely to maintain its accuracy over periods of sustained use and to render accurate service under varied conditions;

Now, therefore, in exercise ofthe powers conferred by sub - sections ( 7) and ( 8 ) of Section 36 of the said Act, the Central Government hereby issues and publishes the certificate of approval of the model of non - automatic weighing instrument (Platform type ) with digital indication of medium accuracy (Accuracy class - III ) of series " PF " and with brand name " LEGEND " ( hereinafter referred to as the said model ) , manufactured by M/s . Abha Technologies , No. 31A, P. T. Rajan Salai , K. K. Nagar, Chennai -600078 and which is assigned the approval mark IND/09/09/ 101;

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

gend

The instrument has external control to calibration. A dip switch has also been provided in A/D card /mother board to disable access to external calibration .

further, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub - section ( 12) of Section 36 ofthe said Act, the Central Government hereby declares that this certificate of approval of the said model shall also cover the weighing instruments of similar make, accuracy and performance of same series with maximum capacity up to 50kg and up to 5000 kg with veification scale interval (n) in the range of 500 to 10,000 for ' e ' value of 5g or more and with ' e ' value of 1x10k , 2x10k or 5x10% , wherek 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 meterials with which , the said approved model has been manufactured.

[F. No. WM- 21 (50)/2009]

R. MATHURBOOTHAM , Director ofLegal Metrology 6165 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

भारत का राजपत्र: अक्तूबर 17, 2009/आश्विन 25 , 1931

नई दिल्ली, 6 मई , 2009

का.आ. 2033. केन्द्रीय सरकार का, विहित प्राधिकारी द्वारा उसे प्रस्तुत रिपोर्ट पर विचार करने के पश्चात् यह समाधान हो गया है कि उक्त रिपोर्ट में वर्णित मॉडल (नीचे दी गई आकृति देखें ) बाट और माप मानक अधिनियम , 1976 ( 1976 का 60 ) तथा बाट और माप मानक (मॉडलों का अनुमोदन) नियम , 1987 के उपबंधों के अनुरूप है और इस बात की संभावना है कि लगातार प्रयोग की अवधि में भी उक्त मॉडल यथार्थता बनाए रखेगा और विभिन्न परिस्थितियों में उपयुक्त सेवा प्रदान करता रहेगा;

अतः , अब , केन्द्रीय सरकार , उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 की उप - धारा ( 7 ) और उप - धारा ( 8 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए , मैसर्स आभा टेक्नोलोजी ,न. 31 ए, पी.टी. राजन सालाई , के. के. नगर, चेन्नै-600078 द्वारा विनिर्मित मध्यम यथार्थता ( यथार्थता वर्ग III ) वाले " ई बी" श्रृंखला के अंक सूचन सहित अभयासिक तोलन उपकरण ( टेबलयम प्रकार ) के मॉडल का, जिसके ब्रांड का नाम " LEGEND " है (जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उबतमॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/09/09 /102' समनुदेशित किया गया है , अनुमोदन प्रधान पत्र जारी करती है ।

उक्त मॉडल विकृत गेज प्रननर का भार सेल आधारित अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण ( टेबलटाप प्रकार ) है । इसकी अधिकतम क्षमता 30 कि.ग्रा. और न्यूनतम क्षमता 100 ग्रा. है । सत्यापन मापमान अंतराल ( ई ) 5 ग्रा. है । इसमें एक आधेयत्तुलन युक्ति है जिसका शत प्रतिशत व्यवकलनात्मक थारित आधेयतुलन प्रभाव है । प्रकाश उत्सर्जक डायोड (एल ई डी) प्रदर्श तोलन परिणाम उपदर्शित करता है । उपकरण 230 वोल्टऔर 50 हर्ट्ज प्रत्यावर्ती धास विद्युत प्रथा पर कार्य करता है ।

को सम्मानको लिए इंदोरके दामों तक अपर कबर और साइड प्लेट में बनट कर दो छेद किए गए हैं और इन दोनों खेलें बने लीक और कमर से कफ है । उपकरण को सील से छेड़छाड़ किए बिना नहीं खोला जा सकता । मॉडल को सीलबंद करने के उपबंध का एक प्ररूपी योजनाबद्ध डायग्राम उपयोक्त दिया गया है ।

उपकरण में केलिब्रेशन के लिए बाहरी पहुंच है । बाहरी केलिब्रेशन तक पहुंच को रोकने के लिए ए/डी कार्ड/मदर बोर्ड में डिप स्विच भीदिया गया है ।

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

[फा. सं. डब्ल्यूएम -21 ( 50 ) /2009 ]

आर. माथुरबूथम, निदेशक , विधिक माप विज्ञान 6166

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 17 , 2009/ ASVINA 25 , 1931

[PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii) ]

New Delhi , the 6th May, 2009

S.O. 2833.-Whereas the Central Government after considering the report submitted to it by prescribed authority, is satisfied that the model described in the said report (see the figure given below) is in conformity with the provisions of the Standards of Weight and Measures Act, 1976 (60 of 1976 ) and the Standars of Weight and Measures (Approval of Models) Rules, 1987 and the said model is likely to maintain its accuracy over periods of sustained use and to render accurate service under varied conditions;

Now, therefore , in exercise of the powers conferred by sub - sections (7) and ( 8 ) of Section 36 of the said Act, the Central Government hereby issues and publishes the certificate of approval of the model of non - automatic weighing instrument ( Tabletop type) with digital indication of medium accuracy (Accuracy class - III ) of series "EB" and with brand name "LEGEND " ( hereinafter referred to as the said model ) , manufactured by M/s . Abha Technologies , No. 31A, P. T. Rajan Salai , K. K. Nagar, Chennai- 600078 which is assigned the approval mark IND/09 /09 / 102 ;

The said model is a strain gauge type load cell based non -authomatic weighing instrument (Tabletop type ) with a maximum capacity of30 kg . and minimum capacity of 100 g . The verfication scale interval ( e) is 5g. It has billing machine with key board operation facility. It has a tare device with a 100 percent subtractive retained tare effect. The Light Emitting Diode ( LED) display indicates the weighing result. The instrument operates on 230 Volts , 50Hertz alternative current power supply.

Digital Scak Legend

From the right side of the weighing scale two holes , are made by cutting the upper cover and bottom plate and fastened by a leaded wire through these two holes for receiving the verification stamp and seal . The weighing scale can not be opened without tampering the seal . A typical schematic diagram of sealing provision of the model is given above .

The instrument has external control to calibration . A dip switch has also been provided in A/ D card/ mother board to disable access to external calibration .

Further , in exercise of the powers conferred by sub -section ( 12 ) of Section 36 of the said Act, the Central Government hereby declares that this certificate of approval of the said model shall also cover the weighing instruments of similar make, accuracy and performance of same series with maximum capacity up to 50kg . and with veification scale interval (n) in the range of 100 to 1,000 for ' e ' value of 100 mg . to 2g. and with veification scale interval (n ) in the range of 500 to 10,000 for ' e ' value of 5g . or more and with ' e' value of 1x10k , 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 meterials with which , the said approved model has been manufactured.

[F. No. WM-21 (50)/2009]

R. MATHURBOOTHAM, Director of Legal Metrology 6167 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3(ii ) ]

भारत का राजपत्र: अक्तूबर 17 , 2009/आश्विन 25 , 1931

नई दिल्ली , 6 मई , 2009

का.आ. 2834.-केन्द्रीय सरकार का, विहित प्राधिकारी द्वारा उसे प्रस्तुत रिपोर्ट पर विचार करने के पश्चात् यह समाधान हो गया है कि उक्त रिपोर्ट में वर्णित मॉडल ( नीचे दी गई आकृति देखें ) बाट और माप मानक अधिनियम , 1976 ( 1976 का 60 ) तथा बाट और माप मांनक (मॉडलों का अनुमोदन ) नियम , 1987 के उपबंधों के अनुरूप है और इस बात की संभावना है कि लगातार प्रयोग की अवधि में भी उक्त मॉडल यथार्थता बनाए रखेगा और विभिन्न परिस्थितियों में उपयुक्त सेवा प्रदान करता रहेगा;

अतः , अब, केन्द्रीय सरकार , उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 की उप - धारा ( 7 ) और उप - धारा ( 8 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए, मैसर्स आभा टेक्नोलोजी, न. 31 ए, पी.टी. राजन सालाई , के. के. नगर , चेन्नै-600078 द्वारा विनिर्मित मध्यम यथार्थता ( यथार्थता वर्ग III ) वाले " टी टी" श्रृंखला के अंकक सूचन सहित , अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण ( टेबलटाप प्रकार ) के मॉडल का, ज़िसके ब्रांड का नाम " LEGEND " है ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/09/ 09/ 103 समनुदेशित किया गया है, अनुमोदन प्रमाण-पत्र जारी करती है ;

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

स्टाम्प और सीलिंग के सत्यापन के लिए इंडीकेटर के दायीं तरफ अपर कवर और साइड प्लेट में काट कर दो छेद किए गए हैं और इन दोनों छेदों को लीड और वायर से कसा गया है । उपकरण को सील से छेड़छाड़ किए बिना नहीं खोला जा सकता । मॉडल को सीलबंद करने के उपबंध का एक प्ररूपी योजनाबद्ध डायग्राम उपरोक्त दिया गया है ।

उपकरण में केलिब्रेशन के लिए बाहरी पहुंच है । बाहरी केलिब्रेशन तक पहुंच को रोकने के लिए ए/डी कार्ड/मदर बोर्ड में डिप स्विच भी दिया गया है ।

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

[फा. सं. डब्ल्यू एम-21 ( 50 ) / 2009 ]

आर. माथुरबूथम , निदेशक , विधिक माप विज्ञान 3633 G1/09-3 6168.

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 17 , 2009 /ASVINA 25 , 1931

[PART II-SEC. 3 (ii) ]

NewDelhi , the 6th May, 2009

S.O. 2834.-Whereas the Central Government after considering the report submitted to it by prescribed authority, is satisfied that the model described in the said report (see the figure given below) is in conformity with the provisions of the Standards of Weights and Measures Act, 1976 (60 of 1976) and the Standards of Weights and Measures (Approval of Models) Rules , 1987 and the said model is likely to maintain its accuracy over period of sustained use and to render accurate service under varied conditions ;

Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferredby sub- sections (7) and (8 ) of Section 36 of the said Act, the Central Government hereby issues and publishes the certificate of approval of the model of non-automatic weighing instrument (Tabletop type) with digital indication of medium accuracy (Accuracy class- III) of series " TT" and with brand name "LEGEND " (hereinafter referred to as the said model) , manufactured by M/s . Abha Technologies , No. 31A, P. T. Rajan Salai , K. K. Nagar, Chennai -600078 which is assigned the appreval mark IND/09/09/103 ;

Thesaid model is a strain gauge type load cell based non-authomatic weighing instrument (Tabletop type) with a maximum capacity of30 kg. and minimum capacity of 100 g . The verfication scale interval (e) is 5g. It has a tare device with a100 percent subtractive retained tare effect. The Light Emitting Diode ( LED) display indicates the weighing result. The.. instrument operates on 230 Volts , 50Hertz alternative current power supply;

Legend

From the right side of the weighing scale two holes are made by cutting the upper cover and bottom plate and fastenedby a leaded wire through these two holes for receiving the verification stamp and seat. The weighing scale cannot be openedwithout tampering the seal . A typical schematic diagram of sealing provision of the model is given above .

The instrument has external.control to calibration . A dip switch has also been provided in A/ D card/mother. board todisable access to external calibration

Further, in exercise.of.thepowers.confarzod by sub- section ( 12) of Section 36 of the said Act, the Central Government hereby declares that this certificate of approval of the said model shall also cover the weighing instruments of similar make; accuracy and performansofiaavions witwirecapacity upto 50kg and withevotionscale interval ( sinthe range of 100 to 10,000 fumtelevalimo £00gd2.gandwiths veificationscaleintalnithe range of 500 to 40,000 forfe valueof5gormontandwitzcevalimobil x104 2x10kopóx 10%, where k is a positive or negative wholenumber.or equal to zenamanuntunedbythesame manufacturer imaccordance with the same principle , design and with the same meterials with which, the sailkappenswoodenbeansductured...

[F.No WM-21 (50)/2009]

R. MATHURBOOTHAM , Director ofLegal Metrology 6169 भारत का राजपत्र: अक्तूबर 17, 2009/आश्विन 25 , 1931

भारा II खण्ड 3( ii) ]

नई दिल्ली, 26 अगस्त, 2009

अामा, 35. नोद्रीय सरकार का मितिभिकारीद्वारा से रिपोर्ट पर करने केात यह समान होप्या है कि उक्त स्पिोर्ट मेंमें वर्णितवर्णित मॉडलस (नीचे दी गई आकृति देखें ) बाट औरमाप मानक अधिनियम, 1976 (1976 का 60 ) तथाम्पाटऔरपापमानक (मॉडलों का अनुमोदन ) नियम , 1987 के उपबंधों के अनुरूप है और इस बात की संभावना है कि लगातार प्रयोग की अवधिमें भी उमतमॉडल मर्थता जनाएकोगा और विभिन्न परिस्थितियों में ठपयुक्त सेवा प्रदान करता रहेगा;

अतः अब केन्द्रीय सरकार , उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 की उपधारा ( 7 ) औरउमरा (8) दत्त शनियों का प्रयोग करते हुए, मैसर्स एक्सिस इलेब्रट्रोनिक्स , जी-72 , सेलाकी इंडस्ट्रियल एस्यिा, देहरादून-248197 , उत्तराखण्ड द्वारा मर्पित मध्यम मार्गता स्वार्थता वर्ग ) आले " PLAX "श्रृंखला के अंकक सूचन सहित , अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण ( प्लेटफार्म टाइप ) के मॉडल का, जिसके ब्रांड कानाम " SMART IMPACT " है ( जिसे इसमें इसके सपश्चात् उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह आई एन डी/09/09/06-समनुदेशित किया गया है, अनुमोदन प्रमाण -पत्र जारी करती है;

जबत मॉडल एक विकृत मेजाकार का भार सेल आधारित अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण ( प्लेटफार्म टाइप ) है । इसकी अधिकतम क्षमता 1000 किया है और किया है नामान अंतराल ( ई ) 200 ग्रा. है । इसमें एकआधेयतुलनयुक्ति है जिसका शत प्रतिशत व्यवकलनाराकारितामातुलन प्रभावः है । प्रकाश उत्सर्जक डायोड ( एल ई डी ) प्रदर्श तोलन परिमाम उपदर्शित करता है । उपकरण 230 बोल्ट और 50 हर्ट्ज अण्णावर्ती आसरा विद्युत अक्षय सर कार्य करता है ।

इंडीकेटर सीमा हिस्सों से बना है, ऊपरी कवर , तल कवर और प्रिंटिङसर्किट बोर्ड प्रोटेक्शन कवर स्केल का कबर एक लम्बे पेच, जिसके ऊपरी सिरे पर एक छेद है, के सांचे में ढला है । प्रिंटिड सर्किट बोर्ड प्रोटेक्शन के ऊपरी कवर पर इलैक्ट्रोनिक लगाया गया है । एक बार लगाने पर , प्रिंटिड सर्किट बोर्ड प्रोटेक्शन प्लेट में से ऊपरी कवर में ढाला गया पेच को चूडीदार छेद में से निकलने पर प्रिंटिड सर्किटबोर्डप्रोटेक्शन प्लेट पर नट की सहायता से कस दिया जाता है । सीसे की तार घुसा कर फंदा बनाया जाता है ताकि सील तोड़े बिना उपकरण को खोला न जा के।

सकारणमें बाहरी कोलिब्रेसनतक पहुंचकी सुविधा है । बाहरी केलिब्रेशनतक पहुंच को रोकने के लिए ए/डी कार्ड/ मदर बोर्ड में डिप स्वित्वम्भीमियागया है । माडल को सीलबंद करनेके उपबंध का एक प्ररूपी योजनाबद्ध डायग्राम जम्मर दिया गया है ।

और केन्द्रीय सस्कार उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 की उपधारा ( 12 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए यह घोषणा करती है कि जगातॉडल के अनुमोदन के इस प्रमाण - पत्र के अंतर्गत उसी विनिर्माता द्वारा उसी सिद्धांत , डिजाइन के अनुसार और उसी सामग्री से जिससे उक्त मोदित कला का कमलनिर्माण किया गया है, मिनिर्मित उसी श्रृंखला के वैसे ही मेक , यथार्थता और कार्यपालन के तोलन उपकरण भी होंगे जो अधाःम्या अल्के " ईनके लिए 300 से 10,000 तक के रेंज में सत्यापन मापमान अंतराल (एन ) सहित 50 कि. ग्रा. से अधिक और3000 किया कमकी अधिमानता वाले हैं मौर "ई " मान 1x10के , 2010 के के रुके हैं, उजो धनास्मक म्यानमाणास्मक पूर्णाक या के समतुरंकहैं।

[फा.सं. डब्ल्यूएम-21 ( 289 ) /2008 ]

आर. माथुरबूथम , निदेशक, विधिक माप विज्ञान 6170

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 17 , 2009/ ASVINA 25 , 1931

[PART II- SEC. 3 ( ii )]

New Delhi , the 26th August , 2009

S.O. 2835.- Whereas the Central Government after considering the report submitted to it by prescribed authority, is satisfied that the model described in the said report ( see the figure given below) is in conformity with the provisions of the Standards of Weights and Measures Act , 1976 (60 of 1976 ) and the Standards of Weights and Measures (Approval of Models) Rules , 1987 and the said model is likely to maintain its accuracy over periods of sustained use and to render accurate service under varied conditions;

Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferredby sub - sections ( 7) and ( 8 ) of Section 36 of the said Act, the Central Government hereby issues and publishes the certificate of approval of the model of non- autornatic weighing instrument ( Platform type) with digital indication of medium accuracy ( Accuracy class - III ) of series " PLAX " and with brand name " SMART IMPACT" ( hereinafter referred to as the said model ), manufactured by M/ s . Axis Electronics , G- 72 , Selaqui Industrial Area, Dehradun- 248197 , Uttrakhand and which is assigned the approval mark IND/09/09/06;

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

The indicator consists of three parts, that is the top cover, bottom cover and the pcb protection cover. The cover of the scale is moulded with a long screw which has a hole towards the top end. The electronic is fitted in the top cover of the pcb protection cover is fitted , the screw moulded in the top cover comes out of the pcb protection plate , once fitted, the threaded hole which is coming out of the pcb protection plate is fastened with the help of a nut . A leaded wire is inserted and a loop is made to prevent the opening of the instrument without breaking of the seal .

The instrument has external access to calibration . A dip switch has also been provided in A/D card/ mother board to disable access to external calibration . A typical schematic diagram of sealing provision of the model is given above .

Further, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub- section ( 12) of Section 36 ofthe said Act, the Central Government herebydeclares that this certificate ofapproval of the said model shall also cover the weighing instruments of similar make, accuracy and performance of same series with maximum capacity above 50 kg . and upto 5000 kg . with verification scale interval ( n) in the range of 500 to 10,000 for ' e ' value of 5g . or more and with ' e ' value of Ix 10k , 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 meterials with which , the said approved model has been manufactured.

[F. No. WM-21(289)/2008]

R. MATHURBOOTHAM, Director of Legal Metrology 6171 [भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र: अक्तूबर 17, 2009/आश्विन 25 , 1931

नई दिल्ली, 26 अगस्त, 2009

का.आ. 2836.-केन्द्रीय सरकार का, विहित प्राधिकारी द्वारा उसे प्रस्तुत रिपोर्ट पर विचार करने के पश्चात् यह समाधान हो गया है कि उक्त रिपोर्ट में वर्णित मॉडल ( नीचे दी गई आकृति देखें ) बाट और माप मानक अधिनियम, 1976 ( 1976 का 60 ) तथा बाट और माप मानक (मॉडलों का अनुमोदन ) नियम, 1987 के उपबंधों के अनुरूप है और इस बात की संभावना है कि लगातार प्रयोग की अवधि में भी उक्त मॉडल यथार्थता बनाए रखेगा और विभिन्न परिस्थितियों में उपयुक्त सेवा प्रदान करता रहेगा; :

अतः , अब, केन्द्रीय सरकार, उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 की उप- धारा ( 7 ) और उप- धारा ( 8 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए, मैसर्स एक्सिस इलेक्ट्रोनिक्स , जी-72 , सेलाकी इंडस्ट्रियल एरिया, देहरादून -248197, उत्तराखण्ड द्वारा विनिर्मित मध्यम यथार्थता ( यथार्थता वर्ग II ) वाले " PLAX " श्रृंखला के अंकक सूचन सहित , अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण ( प्लेटफार्म टाइप ) के मॉडल का , जिसके ब्रांड का नाम " SMART IMPACT " है ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/09/09/07 समनुदेशित किया गया है , अनुमोदन प्रमाणपत्र जारी करती है ।

SMART

उक्त मॉडल एक विकृत गेज प्रकार का भार सेल आधारित अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण (प्लेटफार्म टाइप ) है । इसकी अधिकतम क्षमता 600 कि.ग्रा.है और न्यूनतम क्षमता 2.5 कि.ग्रा. है । सत्यापन मापमान अंतराल (ई ) 50 ग्रा. है । इसमें एक आधेयतुलन युक्ति है जिसका शत प्रतिशत व्यकलनात्मक धारित आधेयतुलन प्रभाव है प्रकाश उत्सर्जक डायोड ( एल ई डी ) प्रदर्श तोलन परिणाम उपदर्शित करता है । उपकरण 230 वोल्ट और 50 हर्ट्ज प्रत्यावर्ती धारा विद्युत प्रदाय पर कार्य करता है ।

इंडीकेटर तीन हिस्सों से बना है , ऊपरी कवर , तल कवर और प्रिंटिड सर्किट बोर्ड प्रोटेक्शन कवर । स्कैल का कवर एक लम्बे पेंच, जिसके उपरी सिरे पर एक छेद है , के सांचे में ढ़ला है । प्रिंटिड सर्किट बोर्ड प्रोटेक्शन के ऊपरी कवर पर इलैक्ट्रोनिक लगाया गया है । एक बार लगाने पर, प्रिंटिड सर्किट बोर्ड प्रोटेक्शन प्लेट में से ऊपरी कवर में ढाला गया पेच को चूड़ीदार छेद में से निकलने पर प्रिंटिड सर्किट बोर्ड प्रोटेक्शन प्लेट पर नट की सहायता से कस दिया जाता है । सीसे की तार धुसा कर फंदा बनाया जाता है ताकि सील तोड़े बिना उपकरण को खोला न जा सके । उपकरण में बाहरी केलिब्रेशन तक पहुंच की सुविधा है । बाहरी केलिब्रेशन तक पहुंच को रोकने के लिए ए/डी कार्ड/मदर बोर्ड में डिप स्विच भी दिया गया है । मॉडल को सीलबंद करने के उपबंध का एक प्ररूपी योजनाबद्ध डायग्राम ऊपर दिया गया है ।

और केन्द्रीय सरकार उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 की उपधारा ( 12 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए यह घोषणा करती है कि उक्त मॉडल के अनुमोदन के इस प्रमाणपत्र के अंतर्गत उसी विनिर्माता द्वारा उसी सिद्धांत , डिजाइन के अनुसार और उसी सामग्री से जिससे उक्त अनुमोदित मॉडल का विनिर्माण किया गया है , विनिर्मित उसी श्रृंखला के वैसे ही मेक, यथार्थता और कार्यपालन के तोलन उपकरण भी होंगे जो 100 मि. ग्रा. या उससे अधिक के " ई " मान के लिए 5000 से 50,000 तक के रेंज में सत्यापन मापमान अंतराल ( एन ) सहित 50 कि. ग्रा . से अधिक और 5,000 कि.ग्रा. तक की अधिकतम क्षमता वाले हैं और " ई " मान 1x10 के, 2x10 * , 5x10 , के हैं , जो धनात्मक या ऋणात्मक पूर्णांक या शून्य के समतुल्य हैं ।

[फा. सं. डब्ल्यूएम -21 ( 289 ) /2008 ]

आर. माथुरबूथम, निदेशक, विधिक माप विज्ञान 6172

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 17, 2009/ASVINA 25, 1931

[PART SEC. 3 (ii)]

New Delhi , the 26th August, 2009

S.O. 2836.- Whereas the Central Government after considering the report submitted to it by prescribed authority, is satisfied that the model described in the said report ( see the figure given below) is in conformity with the provisions of the Standards of Weights and Measures Act, 1976 (60 of 1976 ) and the Standards of Weights and Measures (Approval of Models) Rules, 1987 and the said model is likely to maintain its accuracy over periods of sustained use and to render accurate service under varied conditions;

Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub- sections ( 7) and ( 8) of Section 36 of the said Act, the Central Government hereby issues and publishes the certificate of approval of the model of non-automatic weighing instrument (Platform type) with digital indication of medium accuracy (Accuracy class- II) of series "PLAX" and with brand name " SMART IMPACT" (hereinafter referred to as the said model ) , manufacturedby M/ s . Axis Electronics ,G-72, Selaqui Industrial Area , Dehradun -248197, Uttrakhand and which is assigned the approval mark IND/09/09/07;

SMART

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

The indicator consists of three parts , that is the top cover, bottom cover and the pcb protection cover . The cover ofthe scale is moulded with a long screw which has a hole towards the top end . The electronic is fitted in the top cover of thepcbprotection cover is fitted , the screw moulded in the top cover conies out- ofthe poboprotestion plate , once fitted, the threaded hole which is coming out of the pcb protection plate is fastened with the help of amut.Aleaded wire isänserted and a loop is made to prevent the opening of the instrument without breaking of the seal .

The instrument has external access to calibration . A dip switch has also been provided in A/D card/mother board to disable access to external calibration . A typical schematic diagram ofsealing provision of the model is given above .

Further, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub- section ( 12 ) of Section 36 ofthe said Act, the Central Government hereby declares that this certificate of approval of the said model shall also cover the weighing instruments ofsimilar make , accuracy and performance of same series with maximum capacity above 50 kg . and upto 5000 kg. with verification scale interval ( n) in the range of 5,000 to 50,000 for ' e ' value of 100mg . or more and with ' e ' value of 1x10,2x10kor 5x10k , where k isa 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 (289)/2008]

R. MATHURBOOTHAM, Director ofLegal Metrology 6173 भारत का राजपत्र: अक्तूबर 17 , 2009 आश्विन 25, 1931

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3( ii) ]

नई दिल्ली 26 20

का.आ. 2837. केन्द्रीय सरकार का, विहित प्राधिकारी द्वारा उसे प्रस्तुतःरिपोर्ट पर विचार करने के पश्चात् यह समाधान हो गया है कि उक्त रिपोर्ट में वर्णित मॉडल ( नीचे दी गई आकृति देखें ) बाट और माप मानक अधिनियम, 1976 ( 1976 का 60 ) तथा बाट और माप मानक (मॉडलों का अनुपोसक) निकोपों के अनुरूप है और इस बात की संभावना है कि लगातार प्रयोग की अवधि में भी उक्त मॉडल यथार्थता बनाए रखखेमा औशविभिन्न परिचित उपयुक्त सेवा प्रदान करता रहेगा,

अतः, अब, केन्द्रीय सरुमार, उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 की उप- धारा ( 7 ) और उप- धारा ( 8 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए, मैसर्स एक्सिस इलेक्ट्रोनिक्स, जी-72 , सेलाकी इंडस्ट्रियल एरिया , देहरादून -248197 , उत्तराखण्ड द्वारा वनिर्मित मध्यम यथार्थता (यथार्थता वर्ग III) वाले के अंकसूचनासहित अमालिश शोलन उपकरण (है। टाइप ) केमॉडल का जिसकोब्रांड कर माम "SMART IMPACT " है ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चाद उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन विह आई एन डी/09/09/08 समनुदेशित उक्त मॉडल विकृतमेज प्रकार का भारसेल आभारित अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण ( हैगिंग टाइप ) है । इसकी अधिकतम क्षमता 150 कि.ग्रा. और न्यूनतम क्षमता किया है। सम्मामा मामा ( ई) 100 ग्राम है । इसमें एक आधेयतुलन युक्ति है जिसका शत एलईडी प्रदर्श तोलन पसिमाम उपदर्शित करता है । उपकरण 230 मोहीम

में एक दूसरे से जुड़े हों, इनको खोजने सेरोकने पोलिस पर लॉप हे सील को सोड़े विचारले स्केल के फ्रंट कबर और पिछले कबश में छेद है । लीडे तारको इन दो छेदों में से निकाल कर कंडयूट और लूप बनाया जाता है । सील , कवरों कोखोले जाने से रोकने के लिए फ्रंट और पिछले कमर को एक साथ रखती है और उपकरण बाक्स के अन्दर तक पहुंच को रोकती है । उपककम में बाहरी केलिब्रेशन तक पहुंच की सुविधा है । बाहरी केलिब्रेसन तक पहुंच को रोकने के लिए ए/डी कार्ड/मदर बोर्ड में डिप स्विच भी दिया गया है । मॉडल को सीलबंद करने के उपबंध का एक प्ररूपी योजनाबद्ध डायग्राम ऊपर दिया गया है ।

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

[फा, सं. डब्ल्यूएम-21 (289 )/2008]

आर. माधुरबूथम, निदेशक , विधिक माप विज्ञान :

6174

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 17 , 2009 /AsvINA 25, 1931

[PART II-SEC. 3 ( ii)]

New Delhi , the 26th August , 2009

S.O. 2837. Whereas the Central Government after considering the report submitted to it by prescribed authority, is satisfied that the model described in the said report (see the figure given below) is in conformity with the provisions of the Standards of Weights and Measures Act, 1976 (60 of 1976) and the Standards of Weights and Measures ( Approval of Models) Rules , 1987 and the said model is likely to maintain its accuracy over period of sustained use and to render accurate service under varied conditions;

Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub - sections (7) and (8 ) of Section 36 of the said Act, the Central Government hereby issues and publishes the certificate of approval of the model of non - automatic weighing instrument (Hanging type ) with digital indication of medium accuracy (Accuracy class - III ) of series " HAX" and with brand name " SMART IMPACT" ( hereinafter referred to as the said model ), manufactured by M/s . Axis Electronics ,G- 72, Selaqui Industrial Area, Dehradun - 248197, Uttrakhand and which is assigned the approval mark IND/ 09/09/08

SMIT

The said model is a strain gauge type load cell based non- automatic weighing instrument ( Hanging type ) with a maximum capacity of 150 kg and minimum capacity of 2 kg . The verfication scale interval (e ) is 100g . It has a tare device with a 100 percent subtractive retained tare effect . The Light Emitting Diode ( LED) indicates the weighing results . The instrument operates on 230 Volts , 50Hertz alternative current power supply .

The scale has 2 covers which snap, on each other form a lock. The covers can not be easily opened when they are snapped with each other as there are 8 locks protecting it from opening . There is a hole in front cover and also a hole in the rear cover of the scale . A leaded wire is inserted in the two holes forming a conduit and a loop is made to prevent the opening ofthe instrument without breaking of the seal . The seal prevents opening of the covers as it holds the front and the arear cover together and hence preventing access to the inside of the instrument box.

The instrument has external access to calibration . A dip switch has also been provided in A/D card / mother board todisable access to external calibration. A typical schematic diagram of sealing provision of the model is given above .

Further, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub - section ( 12) of Section 36 ofthe said Act , the Central Government hereby declares that this certificate of approval of the said model shall also cover the weighing instruments of similar make , accuracyand performance of same series with maximum capacity up to 500kg . with verification scale interval (n) in the range of500 to 10,000 for ' e' value of 5 g or more and with ' e ' value of 1x10k , 2x10 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 ( 289 )/ 2008 ]

R. MATHURBOOTHAM, Director of Legal Metrology 6175 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

भारत का राजपत्र: अक्तूबर 17, 2009/आश्विन 25 , 1931

नईदिल्ली, 26 अगस्त, 2009

का. आ. 2838.-केन्द्रीय सरकार का, विहित प्राधिकारी द्वारा उसे प्रस्तुत रिपोर्ट पर विचार करने के पश्चात् यह समाधान हो गया है कि उक्त रिपोर्ट में वर्णित मॉडल ( नीचे दी गई आकृति देखें ) बाट और माप मानक अधिनियम , 1976 ( 1976 का 60 ) तथा बाट और माप मानक (मॉडलों का अनुमोदन ) नियम, 1987 के उपबंधों के अनुरूप है और इस बात की संभावना है कि लगातार प्रयोग की अवधि में भी उक्त मॉडल यथार्थता बनाए रखेंगा और विभिन्न परिस्थितियों में उपयुक्त सेवा प्रदान करता रहेगा;

अतः , अब , केन्द्रीय सरकार , उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 की उप- धारा ( 7 ) और उप - धारा ( 8 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए , मैसर्स एक्सिस इलेक्ट्रोनिक्स , जी-72 सेलाकी इंडस्ट्रियल एरिया , देहरादून-248197 , उत्तराखण्ड द्वारा विनिर्मित मध्यम यथार्थता ( यथार्थता वर्ग III ) वाले " MAX " श्रृंखला के अंकक सूचन सहित, अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण ( व्यक्ति तोलन मशीन ) के मॉडल का, जिसके ब्रांड का नाम " SMART IMPACT ' है ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/09/09/09 समनुदेशित किया गया है , अनुमोदन प्रमाण-पत्र जारी करती है ।

उक्त मॉडल एक विकृत गेज प्रकार का भार सेल आधारित अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण (व्यक्ति तोलन मशीन ) है । इसकी अधिकतम क्षमता 150 कि.ग्रा. है कि न्यूनतम क्षमता 2 कि. ग्रा. है । सत्यापन मापमान अंतराल ( ई ) 100 ग्रा. है । इसमें एक आधेयतुलन युक्ति है जिसका शत प्रतिशत व्यकलनात्मक धारित आधेयतुलन प्रभाव है । लिक्विड क्रिस्टल डायोड ( एल सी डी ) तोलन परिणाम उपदर्शित करता है । उपकरण 230 वोल्ट और 50 हर्ट्ज प्रत्यावर्ती धारा विद्युत प्रदाय पर कार्य करता है ।

इलेक्ट्रोनिक के बेस कवर से बाहर निकले कब्जे में लीड तार डाल कर फन्दा बनाया जाता है , जो सील को तोड़े बिना उपकरण को खोले जाने से रोकता है। ऊपरी और पीवीसी प्रोटेक्शन कवर को आपास में जोड़ती सील , कवर को खोलने से और उपकरण बाक्स की भीतरी पहुंच में जाने से रोकती है । मॉडल को सीलबंद करने के उपबंध का एक प्ररूपी योजनाबद्ध डायग्राम ऊपर दिया गया है ।

और केन्द्रीय सरकार उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 की उपधारा ( 12 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए यह घोषणा करती है कि उक्त मॉडल के अनुमोदन के इस प्रमाण- पत्र के अंतर्गत उसी विनिर्माता द्वारा उसी सिद्धांत , डिजाइन के अनुसार और उसी सामग्री से जिससे उक्त अनुमोदित मॉडल का विनिर्माण किया गया है , विनिर्मित उसी श्रृंखला के वैसे ही मेक, यथार्थता और कार्यपालन के तोलन उपकरण भी होंगे जो 5 ग्रा. या उससे अधिक के " ई " मान के लिए 500 से 10,000 तक के रेंज में सत्यापन मापमान अंतराल ( एन ) सहित 120 कि.ग्रा. से 200 कि.ग्रा. तक की अधिकतम क्षमता वाले हैं और " ई " मान 1× 10 , 2 × 10 , 5 × 10 के, के हैं , जो धनात्मक या ऋणात्मक पूर्णांक या शून्य के समतुल्य हैं ।

[फा. सं. डब्ल्यूएम-21 ( 289 ) /2008 ] आर. माथुरबूथम , निदेशक, विधिक माप विज्ञान 3633Gl/09-4 6176

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 17 , 2009/ ASVINA 25 , 1931

[PART II-SEC. 3 (ii) ]

New Delhi , the 26th August, 2009

S.O. 2838. Whereas the Central Government after considering the report submitted to it by prescribed authority, is satisfied that the model described in the said report (see the figure given below) is in conformity with the provisions of the Standards of Weights and Measures Act, 1976 (60 of 1976 ) and the Standards of Weights and Measures (Approval of Models) Rules , 1987 and the said model is likely to maintain its accuracy over period of sustained use and to render accurate service under varied conditions;

Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub - sections (7 ) and (8 ) of Section 36 of the said Act, the Central Government hereby issues and publishes the certificate of approval of the model of non - automatic weighing instrument (Person Weighing Machine) with digital indication of medium accuracy (Accuracy class - III ) of series "MAX" andwith brand name " SMART IMPACT" ( hereinafter referred to as the said model) , manufactured by M/s . Axis Electronics , G-72, Selaqui Industrial Area, Dehradun- 248197, Uttrakhand and which is assigned the approval mark 1ND/ 09/09/09;

Figure- 2 Sealingdiagram of the sealing provision of the model

The said model is a strain gauge type load cell based non - automatic weighing instrument ( Person Weighing Machine) with a maximum capacity of 150 kg and minimum capacity of 2kg. The verfication scale interval (e) is 100g. It has a tare device with a 100 percent subtractive retained tare effect . The Liquid Crystal Diode ( LCD) indicates the weighing results . The instrument operates on 230 Volts , 50 Hertz alternative current power supply.

The base cover of the electronic has a hing coming out with where a leaded wire is inserted and a loop is made to prevent the opening of the instrument without breaking of the seal . The seal prevents opening of the covers as it holds the top and the PCB -protection cover together and hence preventing access to electronic of the inside of the instruments box. A typical schematic diagram of sealing provision of the model is given above .

Further, in exercise ofthe power conferredby sub- section (12 ) ofsection 36 ofthe said Act, the Central Government hereby declares that this certificate ofapproval of the said model shall also cover the weighing instruments of similar make, accuracy and performance of same series with maximum capacity in the range of 120 kg, to 200 kg with verification scale interval (n) in the range of 500 to 10,000 for ' e ' value of 5g or more and with ' e ' value of 1x10k, 2x10 or 5x10k , wherek is a positive or negative whole mumber or equal to zero manufactured by the same manufacturer in accordance with the same principle, design and with the same meterials with which , the said approved model has been manufactured.

[F.No. WM-21 (209)/2008 ]

R. MATHURBOOTHAM, Directoraf Legal Metrology 6177 [ भामः II- खण्ड 3 (ii ) ]

भारत का राजपत्र: अक्तूबर 17, 2009/आश्विन 25 , 1931

नई दिल्ली , 26 अगस्त, 2009

का. आ.. 2889 केन्द्रीय सरकार का, विहितः प्राधिकारी द्वारा उसे प्रस्तुतः रिपोर्ट पर विचार करने के पश्चात् यह समाधान हो गया है कि उक्स रिपोर्ट में वर्णित मॉडल ( नीचे दी गई आकृतिः देखखें) बार औरमाप मानक अधिनियम, 1976 ( 1976 का 60) तथा बाट और माप मानक (मॉइलों का अनुमोदन ) नियम , 1987 के उपबंधों के अनुरूप है और इस बात की संभावना है कि लगातार प्रयोग की अवधि में भी उक्त मॉडल यथार्थता बनाए रखेगा और विभिन्न परिस्थितियों में उपयुक्त सेवा प्रदान करता रहेगा;

अतः, अब, केन्द्रीय सरकार, उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 की उप- धारा (7 ) और उप- धारा ( 8 ) द्वास प्रदत शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए , मैसर्स एक्सिस इलेक्ट्रोनिक्स , जी-72 सेलाकी इंडस्ट्रियल एरिया , देहरादून -248197 , उत्तराखण्ड द्वारा विनिर्मित मध्यम यथार्थताः ( यथार्थता वर्ग 111 ) वाले " BAX " श्रृंखला के अंकक सूचन सहित , अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण (शिशु तोलन मशीन ) के मॉडल का, जिसके ब्रांड का नाम" SMART IMPACT' है ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्वात् उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/09/09/10 समनुदेशित किया गया है, अनुमोदन प्रमाण-पत्र जारी करती है ।

उक्त मॉडल एक विकृत गेज प्रकार का भार सेल आधारित अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण ( शिशु तोलन मशीन ) है । इसकी अधिकतम क्षमता 20 कि.ग्रा. हैं और न्यूनतम क्षमता 100 ग्रा. है । सत्यापन मापमान अंससल (ई) 5 ग्रा. है । इसमें एक आधेयतुलन युक्ति है जिसका शत प्रतिशत व्यकलनात्मक धारित आधेयतुलन प्रश्माषः है। प्रथमश उत्सर्जक डायोड ( एल ई डी ) प्रदर्श तोलन परिणाम उपदर्शित करता है । उपकरण 230 वोल्ट और 50 हर्ट्ज प्रत्यावर्ती घासः विद्युत प्रदाय पर कार्थ करता है ।

स्कल का ऊपरी कवर एक आधार कब्जे से जुड़ा है , जो बाक्स को साथ जोड़ने से तल आमार से बाहर निकलता है । इसमें एक लीड तार डाल कर फन्दा' बनाया जाता है , जो सील को तोड़े बिमा उपकरण को खोले जाने से रोकता है । ऊपरी और तल कवर को आपस में जोड़ती सील , कवर को खेलने से और उपकरण बाक्स की भीतरी पहुंच में जाने से रोकती है ।

उपकरण में बाहरी केलिब्रेशन तक पहुंच की सुविधा है । बाहरी केलिब्रेशन तक पहुंच को रोकने के लिए ए/ डी कार्ड/ मदर बोर्ड में डिप स्विच भी दिया गया है । मॉडल को सलीबंद करने के उपबंध का एक प्ररूपी योजनाबद्ध डायग्राम ऊपर दिया गया है ।

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

[फा. सं. डब्ल्यूएम-21 ( 289 )/2008 ]

आरु माधुश्बूक्षम, निदेशक , विधिक माप विज्ञान 6178

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 17 , 2009/ ASVINA 25 , 1931

[PART 11-SEC. 3( ii )]

New Delhi , the 26th August, 2009

S.O. 2839.- Whereas the Central Government after considering the report submitted to it by prescribed authority, is satisfied that the model described in the said report ( see the figure given below) is in conformity with the provisions of the Standards of Weights and Measures Act, 1976 (60 of 1976) and the Standars 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 fender accurate service under varied conditions ;

Now, therefore , in exercise of the powers conferred by sub- sections ( 7) and (8 ) of Section 36 of the said Act , the Central Government hereby issues and publishes the certificate of approval of the model of non - automatic weighing instrument (Baby Weighing Machine) with digital indication of medium accuracy (Accuracy class- III ) of series " BAX" and with brand name " SMART IMPACT " (hereinafter referred to as the said model) , manufactured by M/s . Axis Electronics, G-72, Selaqui Industrial Area, Dehradun -248197 , Uttrakhand and which is assigned the approval mark IND/09/09/ 10;

The said model is a strain gauge type load cell based non -automatic weighing instrument ( Baby Weighing Machine) with a maximum capacity of20 kg and minimum capacity of 100 g. The verification scale interval ( e) is 5g. It has a tare device with a 100 percent subtractive retained tare effect . The Light Emitting Diode ( LED) Display indicates the weighing results . The instrument operates on 230 Volts, 50Hertz alternative current power supply .

Figure-2 Sealing diagram of the sealing provision ofthe model

The Top cover of the scale is fitted with a hinge mounting which comes out of the bottom base when the box is fitted together . A leaded wire is inserted and a loop is made to prevent the opening of the instrument without breaking of the seal . The seal prevents opening of the covers as it holds the top and the bottom cover together and hence preventing access to the inside of the instrument box .

The instrument has external access to calibration . A dip switch has also been provided in A/D card/ monther board to disable access to external calibration . A typical schematic diagram of sealing provision of the model is given above .

Further, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub - section ( 12) of section 36 ofthe said Act, the Central Government hereby declares that this certificate of approval of the said model shall also cover the weighing instruments of similar make, accuracy and performance of same series with maximum capacity upto 50 kg, with verification scale interval (n ) in the range of100 to 10,000 for ' e' value of 100mg to 2g . and with verification scale interval ( n) in the range of500 to 10,000 for ' e ' value of 5 g . or more and with ' e ' value of Ix10k, 1x10k 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 meterials with which , the said approved model has been manufactured .

[F.No. WM -21 (289 )/ 2008 ]

R. MATHURBOOTHAM , Director of Legal Metrology 6179 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र: अक्तूबर 17, 2009/आश्विन 25 , 1931

नई दिल्ली , 26 अगस्त, 2009

का. आ. 2840.-केन्द्रीय सरकार का, विहित प्राधिकारी द्वारा उसे प्रस्तुत रिपोर्ट पर विचार करने के पश्चात् यह समाधान हो गया है किउक्तरिपोर्ट में वर्णित मॉडल ( नीचे दी गई आकृति देखें ) बाट और माप मानक अधिनियम , 1976 ( 1976 का 60 ) तथा बाट और माप मानक (मॉडलों का अनुमोदन ) नियम , 1987 के उपबंधों के अनुरूप है और इस बात की संभावना है कि लगातार प्रयोग की अवधि में भी उक्त मॉडल यथार्थता बनाए रखेगा और विभिन्न परिस्थितियों में उपयुक्त सेवा प्रदान करता रहेगा;

अतः , अब , केन्द्रीय सरकार , उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 की उप - धारा ( 7 ) और उप - धारा ( 8 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए , मैसर्स एक्सिस इलेक्ट्रोनिक्स , जी-72 सेलाकी इंडस्ट्रियल एरिया , देहरादून-248197, उत्तराखण्ड द्वारा विनिर्मित मध्यम यथार्थता ( यथार्थता वर्ग III ) वाले " PAX " श्रृंखला के अंकक सूचन सहित, अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण ( टेबल टाप प्रकार ) के मॉडल का , जिसके ब्रांड का नाम " SMART IMPACT" है ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/09/09 / 11 समनुदेशित किया गया है , अनुमोदन प्रमाण- पत्र जारी करती है ।

उक्त, मॉडल एक विकृत गेज प्रकार का भार सेल आधारित अस्वचालित ( टेबल टाप प्रकार ) तोलन उपकरण है । इसकी अधिकतम क्षमता 15 कि.ग्रा . है और न्यूनतम क्षमता 40 ग्रा. है । सत्यापन मापमान अंतराल ( ई ) 2 ग्रा. है । इसमें एक आधेयतुलन युक्ति है जिसका शत प्रतिशत व्यकलनात्मक धारित आधेयतुलन प्रभाव है । प्रकाश उत्सर्जक डायोड ( एल ई डी ) प्रदर्श तोलन परिणाम उपद‌र्शित करता है । उपकरण 230 वोल्ट और 50 हर्ट्ज प्रत्यावर्ती धारा विद्युत प्रदाय पर कार्य करता है ।

じ

स्केल का ऊपरी कवर एक आधार कब्जे से जुड़ा है , जो बाक्स को साथ जोड़ने से तल आधार से बाहर निकलता है । इसमें एक लीड तार डाल कर फन्दा बनाया जाता है , जो सील को तोड़े बिना उपकरण को खोले जाने से रोकता है । ऊपरी और तल कवर को आपस में जोड़ती सील , कवर को खोलने से और उपकरण बाक्स की भीतरी पहुंच में जाने से रोकती है ।

उपकरण में बाहरी केलिब्रेशन तक पहुंच की सुविधा है । बाहरी केलिब्रेशन तक पहुंच को रोकने के लिए ए/ डी कार्ड/ मदर बोर्ड में डिप स्विच भी दिया गया है । मॉडल को सीलबंद करने के उपबंध का एक प्ररूपी योजनाबद्ध डायग्राम ऊपर दिया गया है ।

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

[फा. सं. डब्ल्यू एम-21 ( 289 )/2008 ] आर. माथुरबूथम , निदेशक , विधिक माप विज्ञान 6180

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 17 , 2009/ ASVINA 25 , 1931

[PART 11-SEC.3 (ii) ]

New Delhi , the 26th August , 2009

S.O. 2840.-Whereas the Central Government after considering the report submitted to it by prescribed authority, issatisfied that the model described in the said report ( see the figure given below) is in conformity with the provisions of the Standards of Weights and Measures Act , 1976 (60 of 1976) and the Standards of Weights and Measures (Approval of Models) Rules , 1987 and the said model is likely to maintain its accuracy over period of sustained use and to render accurate service under varied conditions ;

Now, therefore , in exercise of the powers conferred by sub - sections (7) and ( 8) of Section 36 of the said Act, the Central Government hereby issues and publishes the certificate of approval of the model of non - automatic weighing instrument (Table Top Type ) with digital indication of medium accuracy (Accuracy class - III ) of series " PAX" and with brand name " SMART IMPACT" (hereinafter referred to as the said model) , manufactured by M/s . Axis Electronics , G-72, Selaqui Industrial Area, Dehradun- 248197 , Uttrakhand which is assigned the approval mark IND/09/09/ 11 ;

The said model is a strain gauge type load cell based non- authomatic weighing instrument ( Table Top Type ) with amaximum capacity of 15 kg. and minimum capacity of 40 g. The verification scale interval ( e) is 2g. It has a tare device with a 100 per cent subtractive retained tare effect. The Light Emitting Diode ( LED) display indicates the weighing result . The instrument operates on 230 Volts , 50Hertz alternative current power supply.

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

The Top cover of the scale if fitted with a hinge mounting which comes out of the bottom base when the box is fitted together. A leaded wire is inserted and a loop is made to prevent the opening ofthe instrument without breaking of the seal . The seal prevents opening of the covers as it holds the top and the bottom cover tagether and hence preventing access to the inside of the instrument box .

The Instrument has external aceess to calibration . A dip switch has also been provided in A/D card/monther board to disable access to external calibration . A typical schematic diagram of sealing provision of the model is given above.

Further, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub- section ( 12) of Section 36 of the said Act, the Central Governmenthereby declares that this certificate of approval of the said model shall also cover the weighing instruments of similar make, accuracy and performance of same series with maximum capacity upto 50 kg, with verification scale interval (n) inthe range of 100 to 10000 for ' e ' value of 100mg. to 2g . and with verification scale interval (n) in the range of500 to 10,000 for ' e ' value of 5g. or more and with ' e' value of 1x10k, 2x10 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 (289)/2008]

R. MATHURBOOTHAM , Director of Legal Metrology 6181 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र: अक्तूबर 17, 2009/आश्विन 25 , 1931

नई दिल्ली, 26 अगस्त, 2009

का. अ. 2041 , केन्द्रीय सरकार का, विहित प्राधिकारी द्वारा उसे प्रस्तुत्त रिपोर्ट पर विचार करने के पश्चात् यह समाधान हो गया है कि उक्त रिपोर्ट में वर्णित मॉडल (नीचे दी गई आकृति देखें ) बाट और माप मानक अधिनियम , 1976 ( 1976 का 60 ) तथा बाट और माप मानक (मॉडलों का अनुमोदन ) नियम, 1987 के उपबंधों के अनुरूप है और इस बात की संभावना है कि लगातार प्रयोग की अवधि में भी उक्त मॉडल यथार्थता बनाए रखेगा और विभिन्न परिस्थितियों में उपयुक्त सेवा प्रदान करता रहेगा;

अतः , अब, केन्द्रीय सरकार , उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 की उप- धारा ( 7 ) और उप- धारा ( 8 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए, मैसर्स एक्सिस इलेक्ट्रॉनिक्स, जी-72 , सेलाकी इंडस्ट्रियल एरिया , देहरादून -248197 , उत्तराखण्ड द्वारा विनिर्मित मध्यम यथार्थता ( यथार्थता वर्ग III ) वाले " TAX " श्रृंखला के अंमल्क सूचन संहित , अस्वच्यालित कोलम उपकरण (टेबल टाप प्रकार ) के मॉडल का , जिसके ब्रांड का नाम " SMART IMPACT" है (जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/09/09/ 12 समनुदेशित किमा पाया है , अनुमोदस प्रमाण- पत्र आसे करती है ।

उक्त मॉडल एक मिना गेच्च अमगर का भार सेल आधारित अस्वचालित ( टेबल टाप प्रकार ) तोलन उपकरण है । इसकी अधिकत्तम क्षमता 30 कि.ग्रा. है और न्यूनतम क्षमता 100 ग्रा. है । सत्यापन मापमान अंतराल (ई ) 5 ग्रा. है । इसमें एक आधेयतुलन युक्ति है जिसका शत. प्रतिशत व्यकलनात्मक धारित आधेयतुलन प्रभाव है । प्रकाश उत्सर्जक डायोड ( एल ई डी ) प्रदर्श तोलन परिणाम उपदर्शित करता है । उपकरण 230 बोल्ट और 50 कर्म अत्यामी पारा विद्युत प्रदाय पर कार्य करता है ।

स्केल का ऊपरी कञ्चर एक आधार कब्जे से जुड़ा है , जो चाक्स को साथ जोड़ने से तल आधार से बाहर निकलता है । इसमें एक लीड तार डाल कर फन्दा चनाया जाता है , जो सोल को जोड़े बिना उपकरण को खोले जाने से रोकता है । ऊपरी और तल कवर को आपस में जोड़ती सील, कवर को खोलने से और उपकरण चाबस की भीतरी पहुंच में जाने से रोकती है ।

उपकरण में चाहरी केलिब्रेशन तक पहुंच की सुविधा है । बाहरी केलिब्रेशन तक पहुंच को रोकने के लिए ए/डी कार्ड/ मदर बोर्ड में डिप स्विच भी दिया गया है । मॉडल को सीलबंद करने के उपबंध का एक प्ररूपी योजनाबद्ध डायग्राम ऊपर दिया गया है ।

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

[फा. सं. डब्ल्यू एम -21 ( 289 )/2008 ]

आर. माथुरबूथम , निदेशक, बिधिक माप विज्ञान 6182

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 17, 2009/ASVINA 25 , 1931

[PART II-SEC. 3 (ii) ]

New Delhi , the 26th August , 2009

S.O. 2841.-Whereas the Central Government after considering the report submitted to it by prescribed authority, is satisfied that the model described in the said report (see the figure given below) is in conformity with the provisions of the Standards of Weights and Measures Act , 1976 (60 of 1976 ) and the Standards of Weights and Measures (Approval of Models) Rules , 1987 and the said model is likely to maintain its accuracy over period of sustained use and to render accurate service under varied conditions ;

Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub - sections (7) and (8) of Section 36 of the said Act , the Central Government hereby issues and publishes the certificate of approval of the model of non - automatic weighing instrument(Table top type) with digital indication of medium accuracy (Accuracy class - III) of series " TAX" and with brand name " SMART IMPACT" (hereinafter referred to as the said model ) , manufactured by M/s . Axis Electronics ,G- 72, Selaqui Industrial Area, Dehradun - 248 197 , Uttrakhand and which is assigned the approval mark IND/09/09/ 12;

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

Figure-2 Sealing diagram of sealing provision of the Model

The Top cover of the scale is fitted with a hinge mounting which comes out of the bottom base when the box is fitted together .Aleaded wire is inserted and a loop is made to prevent the opening of the instrument withou breaking ofthe seal . The seal prevents opening of the covers as it holds the top and the bottom cover together and hence preventing access to the inside of the instrument box .

The Instrument has external access to calibration . A dip switch has also been provided in A/D card/mother board to disable access to external calibration . A typical schematic diagram of sealing provision of the model is given above .

Further, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub- section ( 12) ofSection 36 ofthe said Act, the Central Government hereby declares that this certificate of approval of the said model shall also cover the weighing instruments ofsimilar make , accuracy and performance of same series with maximum capacity upto 50 kg , with verification scale interval (n) in the range of100 to 10,000 for ' e ' value of 100mg . to 2g. and with verification scale interval (n) in the range of 500 to 10,000 for (e) value of5g. or more and with ' e ' value of 1x10k , 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 ( 289 )/2008 ]

R. MATHURBOOTHAM , Director of Legal Metrology 6183 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : अक्तूबर 17, 2009/आश्विन- 25 , 1931

नई दिल्ली, 26 अगस्त, 2009

का. आ. 2842,-केन्द्रीय सरकार का , विहित प्राधिकारी द्वारा उसे प्रस्तुत रिपोर्ट पर विचार करने के पश्चात् यह समाधान हो गया है कि उक्त रिपोर्ट में वर्णित मॉडल ( नीचे दी गई आकृति देखें ) बाट और माप मानक अधिनियम, 1976 ( 1976 का 60 ) तथा बाट और माप मानक (मॉडलों का अनुमोदन ) नियम , 1987 के उपबंधों के अनुरूप है और इस बात की संभावना है कि लगातार प्रयोग की अवधि में भी उक्त मॉडल यथार्थता बनाए रखेगा और विभिन्न परिस्थितियों में उपयुक्त सेवा प्रदान करता रहेगा;

अतः , अब, केन्द्रीय सरकार , उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 की उप - धारा ( 7 ) और उप- धारा ( 8 ) द्वारा शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए , मैसर्स एक्सिस इलेक्ट्रोनिक्स , जी -72 , सेलाकी इंडस्ट्रियल एरिया , देहरादून-248197 , उत्तराखण्ड द्वारा विनिर्मित मध्यम यथार्थता ( यथार्थता वर्ग III ) वाले " KAX " श्रृंखला के अंकक्र सूचन सहित , अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण ( किचन स्केल ) के मॉडल का , जिसके ब्रांड का नाम " SMART IMPACT ' है ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/ 09/09 / 13 समनुदेशित किया गया है , अनुमोदन प्रमाण - पत्र जारी करती है ।

उक्तमॉडल एक विकृत गेज प्रकार का भार सेल आधारित अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण ( किचन स्केल ) है । इसकी अधिकतम क्षमता 6 कि.ग्रा. है और न्यूनतम क्षमता 20 ग्रा. है । सत्यापन मापमान अंतराल ( ई ) 1 ग्रा. है । इसमें एक आधेयतुलन युक्ति है जिसका शत प्रतिशत व्यकलनात्मक धारित आधेयतुलन प्रभाव है। लिक्विड क्रिस्टल डायोड ( एल सी डी ) प्रदर्श तोलन परिणाम उपदर्शित करता है । उपकरण 230 वोल्ट और 50 हर्ट्ज प्रत्यावर्ती धारा विद्युत प्रदाय पर कार्य करता है ।

स्केल के टॉप कवर में एक छेद है और एक छेद बॉटम बेस में है । इसमें एक लीड तार डाल कर फन्दा बनाया जाता है , जो सील को तोड़े बिना उपकरण को खोले जाने से रोकता है । ऊपरी और तल कवर को आपस में जोड़ती सील , कवर को खोलने से और उपकरण बाक्स की भीतरी पहुंच में जाने से रोकती है । मॉडल को सीलबंद करने के उपबंध का एक प्ररूपी योजनाबद्ध डायग्राम ऊपर दिया गया है । और केन्द्रीय सरकार उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 की उपधारा ( 12 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए यह घोषणा करती है कि उक्तमॉडल के अनुमोदन के इस प्रमाणपत्र के अंतर्गत उसी विनिर्माता द्वारा उसी सिद्धांत , डिजाइन के अनुसार और उसी सामग्री से जिससे उक्त अनुमोदित मॉडल का विनिर्माण किया गया है , विनिर्मित उसी श्रृंखला के वैसे ही मेक, यथार्थता और कार्यपालन के तोलन उपकरण भी होंगे जो 100 मि. ग्रा. से 2 ग्राम तक के " ई " मान के लिए 100 से 10,000 तक के रेंज में सत्यापन मापमान अंतराल ( एन ) और 5 ग्रा. या उससे अधिक के " ई " मान के लिए 500 से 10,000 तक की रेंज में सत्यापन मापमान अंतराल (एन ) सहित 50 कि. ग्रा. तक की अधिकतम क्षमता वाले है और " ई " मान 1 × 10 , 2× 10 *, 5 × 10 , के हैं, जो धनात्मक या ऋणात्मक पूर्णांक या शून्य के समतुल्य हैं ।

[फा. सं. डब्ल्यूएम- 21- ( 289 )/2008 ] आर. माथुरबूथम , निदेशक , विधिक माप विज्ञान 3633/ 91 / of - 5 6184

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 17, 2009/ ASVINA 25 , 1931

[PART II-SEC. 3( ii) ]

New Delhi , the 26th August, 2009

S.O. 2842. Whereas the Central Government after considering the report submitted to it by prescribed authority , is satisfied that the model described in the said report (see the figure given below) is in conformity with the provisions of the Standards of Weights and Measures Act, 1976 (60 of 1976) and the Standards of Weights and Measures (Approval of Models) Rules , 1987 and the said model is likely to maintain its accuracy over periods of sustained use and to render accurate service under varied conditions ;

Now, therefore , in exercise of the powers conferred by sub - sections (7) and (8) of Section 36 of the said Act , the Central Government hereby issues and publishes the certificate of approval of the model of non -automatic weighing instrument ( Kitchen Scale) with digital indication of medium accuracy ( Accuracy class- III ) of series "KAX" and with brand name " SMART IMPACT" ( hereinafter referred to as the said model ) , manufacturedby M/ s . Axis Electronics , G -72 , Selaqui Industrial Area, Dehradun - 248197, Uttrakhand and which is assigned the approval mark IND/09/09/ 13 ;

Thesaid model is a strain gauge type load cell based non - authomatic weighing instrument ( Kitchen Scale) with a maximum capacity of 6kg . and minimum capacity of 20g . The verification scale interval (e) is 1g. It has a tare device with a 100 percent subtractive retained tare effect . The Liquid Crystal Diode Display ( LCD) indicates the weighing result. The instrument operates on 230 Volts, 50Hertz alternative current power supply.

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

There is a hole in the top cover and also a hole in the bottem base of the scale . A leaded wire is inserted in the two holes and a loop is made to prevent the opening of the instrument without breaking of the seal . The seal prevents opening ofthe covers as it holds the top and the bottom cover together and hence preventing access to the inside of the instrument box.A typical schematic diagram of sealing provision of the model is given above.

Further , in exercise of the powers conferred by sub- section ( 12 ) of Section 36 of the said Act , the Central Government hereby declares that this certificate of approval of the said model shall also cover the weighing instruments of similar make, accuracy and performance ofsame series with maximum capacity upto 50 kg , with verification scale interval ( n) inthe range of 100 to 10000 for ' e ' value of 100mg . to 2g. and verification scale interval ( n) in the range of 500 to 10,000 for (e) value of 5g . or more and with ' e ' value of 1x10k, 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 (289)/2008 ]

R. MATHURBOOTHAM , Director ofLegal Metrology 6185 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : अक्तूबर 17, 2009/आश्विन 25 , 1931

नई दिल्ली , 26 अगस्त, 2009

का. आ. 2843.-केन्द्रीय सरकार का, विहित प्राधिकारी द्वारा उसे प्रस्तुत रिपोर्ट पर विचार करने के पश्चात् यह समाधान हो गया है किउक्त रिपोर्ट में वर्णित मॉडल ( नीचे दी गई आकृति देखें ) बाट और माप मानक अधिनियम , 1976 ( 1976 का 60 ) तथा बाट और माप मानक (मॉडलों का अनुमोदन ) नियम , 1987 के उपबंधों के अनुरूप है और इस बात की संभावना है कि लगातार प्रयोग की अवधि में भी उक्त मॉडल यथार्थता बनाए रखेगा और विभिन्न परिस्थितियों में उपयुक्त सेवा प्रदान करता रहेगा;

अतः , अब, केन्द्रीय सरकार , उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 की उप - धारा ( 7 ) और उप- धारा ( 8 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए , मैसर्स एक्सिस इलेक्ट्रोनिक्स , जी-72 , सेलाकी इंडस्ट्रियल एरिया, देहरादून-248197 , उत्तराखण्ड द्वारा विनिर्मित उच्च यथार्थता ( यथार्थता वर्ग II ) वाले " CAX " श्रृंखला के अंकक सूचन सहित , अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण ( टेबल टाप प्रकार ) के मॉडल का, जिसके ब्रांड का नाम " SMART IMPACT " है ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/ 09/09/ 14 समनुदेशित किया गया है, अनुमोदन प्रमाण- पत्र जारी करती है ।

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

0000000

स्केल का ऊपरी कवर एक आधार कब्जे से जुड़ा है , जो बाक्स को साथ जोड़ने से तल आधार से बाहर निकलता है । इसमें एक लीड तार डाल कर फन्दा बनाया जाता है , जो सील को तोड़े बिना उपकरण को खोले जाने से रोकता है । ऊपरी और तल कवर को आपसे में जोड़ती सील , कवर को खोलने से और उपकरण बाक्स की भीतरी पहुंच में जाने से रोकती है ।

उपकरण में बाहरी केलिब्रेशन तक पहुंच की सुविधा है । बाहरी केलिब्रेशन तक पहुंच को रोकने के लिए ए/डी कार्ड/मदर बोर्ड में डिप स्विच भी दिया गया है । मॉडल को सलीबंद करने के उपबंध का एक प्ररूपी योजनाबद्ध डायग्राम ऊपर दिया गया है ।

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

[फा. सं. डब्ल्यूएम-21.( 289) /2008 ]

आर. माथुरबूथम, निदेशक , विधिक माप बिज्ञान 6186

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 17, 2009/ASVINA 25 , 1931

[PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii) ]

New Delhi , the 26th August, 2009

S.O. 2843.- Whereas the Central Government after considering the report submitted to it by prescribed authority, is satisfied that the model described in the said report ( see the figure given below) is in conformity with the provisions of the Standards of Weights and Measures Act , 1976 (60 of 1976) and the Standards of Weights and Measures (Approval of Models) Rules , 1987 and the said model is likely to maintain its accuracy over periods of sustained use and to render accurate service under varied conditions ;

Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub - sections (7) and ( 8 ) of Section 36 of the said Act , the Central Government hereby issues and publishes the certificate of approval of the model of non - automatic weighing instrument (Table top type) with digital indication of medium accuracy (Accuracy class - II ) of series " CAX " and with brand name " SMART IMPACT" ( hereinafter referred to as the said model ), manufactured by M/ s. Axis Electronics , G - 72, Selaqui Industrial Area, Dehradun-248197 , Uttrakhand and which is assigned the approval mark IND/09/09/ 14;

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

0000000

000000

Figure-2 Schematic diagram of sealing provision ofthe model

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 of the said model shall also cover the weighing instruments ofsimilar make , accuracy and performance of same series with maximum capacity upto 50 kg , with verification scale interval (n) in the range of 100 to 50,000 for ' e' value of 1mg to 50mg . and with verification scale interval ( n ) in the range of 5000 to 50,000 for ' e ' value of 100mg . or more and with ' e ' value of 1x10k , 2x 10k 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 ( 289)/2008 ]

R. MATHURBOOTHAM , Director of Legal Metrology 6187 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3(ii ) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : अक्तूबर 17 , 2009/आश्विन 25 , 1931

नई दिल्ली, 26 अगस्त, 2009

का. आ. 2844.-केन्द्रीय सरकार का , विहितं प्राधिकारी द्वारा उसे प्रस्तुत रिपोर्ट पर विचार करने के पश्चात् यह समाधान हो गया है किउक्त रिपोर्ट में वर्णित मॉडल ( नीचे दी गई आकृति देखें ) बाट और माप मानक अधिनियम , 1976 ( 1976 का 60 ) तथा बाट और माप मानक (मॉडलों का अनुमोदन ) नियम , 1987 के उपबंधों के अनुरूप है और इस बात की संभावना है कि लगातार प्रयोग की अवधि में भी उक्त मॉडल यथार्थता बनाए रखेगा और विभिन्न परिस्थितियों में उपयुक्त सेवा प्रदान करता रहेगा;

अतः , अब, केन्द्रीय सरकार, उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 की उप- धारा ( 7 ) और उप - धारा ( 8 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए, मैसर्स एक्सिस इलेक्ट्रोनिक्स , जी-72, सेलाकी इंडस्ट्रियल एरिया , देहरादून -248197 , उत्तराखण्ड द्वारा विनिर्मित उच्च यथार्थता ( यथार्थता वर्ग II ) वाले " TAX" श्रृंखला के अंकक सूचन सहित , अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण ( टेबल टाप प्रकार ) के मॉडल का, जिसके ब्रांड का नाम " SMART IMPACT" है ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/09/ 09/ 15 समनुदेशित किया गया है , अनुमोदन प्रमाण- पत्र जारी करती है ।

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

स्केल का ऊपरी कवर एक आधार कब्जे से जुड़ा है , जो बाक्स को साथ जोड़ने से तल आधार से बाहर निकलता है । इसमें एक लीड तार डाल कर फन्दा बनाया जाता है, जो सील को तोड़े बिना उपकरण को खोले जाने से रोकता है । ऊपरी और तल कवर को आपस में जोड़ती सील , कवर को खोलने से और उपकरण बाक्स की भीतरी पहुंच में जाने से रोकती है ।

उपकरण में बाहरी केलिब्रेशन तक पहुंच की सुविधा है । बाहरी केलिब्रेशन तक पहुंच को रोकने के लिए ए/डी कार्ड/मदर बोर्ड में डिप स्विच भी दिया गया है । माडल को सीलबंद करने के उपबंध का एक प्ररूपी योजनाबद्ध डायग्राम ऊपर दिया गया है ।

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

[फा. सं. डब्ल्यू एम-21 ( 289 ) /2008 ]

आर. माथुरबूथम , निदेशक , विधिक माप विज्ञान 6188

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 17, 2009/ ASVINA 25 , 1931

[PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii) ]

New Delhi , the 26th August , 2009

S.O. 2844.- Whereas the Central Government after considering the report submitted to it by prescribed authority , issatisfied that the Model described in the said repreport (see the figure given below) is in conformity with the provisions of theStandards of Weights and Measures Act, 1976 ( 60 of 1976) and the Standards of Weights and Measures (Approval of Models) Rules , 1987 and the said Model is likely to maintain its accuracy over periods of sustained use and to render accurate service under varied conditions;

Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub -sections ( 7) and (8) of Section 36 of the said Act, the Central Government hereby issues and publishes the certificate of approval of the Model of non - automatic weighing instrument (Table top type) with digital indication of high accuracy (Accuracy class - 11 ) of series " TAX " and with brand name " SMART IMPACT" (hereinafter referred to as the said Model), manufacturedby M/ s . Axis Electronics , G- 72 , Selaqui Industrial Area , Dehradun - 248197, Uttrakhand and which is assigned the approval mark IND/09/09/ 15 ;

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

Figure- 2 Sealing diagram of the sealing provision of the Model.

The top cover of the scale is fitted with a hinge mounting which comes out of the bottom base when the box is fitted together . A leaded wire is inserted and a loop is made to prevent the opening of the instrument without breaking of the seal . The seal prevents opening of the covers as it holds the top and the bottom cover together and hence preventing access to the inside of the instrument box .

Further , in exercise ofthe powers conferred by sub- section ( 12) of Section 36 ofthe said Act, the Central Government herebydeclares that this certificate of approval ofthe said Model shall also cover the weighing instruments of similar make , accuracy and performance of same series with maximum capacity upto 50 kg, with verification scale interval ( n) in the range of 100 to 50,000 for ' e ' value of Img to 50mg and with verification scale interval ( n) in the range of 5,000 to 50,000 for ' e ' value of 100mg.or more and with ' e ' value of 1x10k , 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 (289)/2008]

R. MATHURBOOTHAM , Director of Legal Metrology 6189 [भाग II-खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र: अक्तूबर 17, 2009/आश्विन 25, 1931

नई दिल्ली, 26 अगस्त,2009

का. आ. 2845.-केन्द्रीय सरकार का , विहित प्राधिकारी द्वारा उसे प्रस्तुत रिपोर्ट पर विचार करने के पश्चात् यह समाधान हो गया है किउक्त रिपोर्ट में वर्णित मॉडल ( नीचे दी गई आकृति देखें ) बाट और माप मानक अधिनियम , 1976 ( 1976 का 60 ) तथा बाट और माप मानक (मॉडलों का अनुमोदन ) नियम, 1987 के उपबंधों के अनुरूप है और इस बात की संभावना है कि लगातार प्रयोग की अवधि में भी उक्त मॉडल यथार्थता बनाए रखेगा और विभिन्न परिस्थितियों में उपयुक्त सेवा प्रदान करता रहेगा;

अतः , अब , केन्द्रीय सरकार, उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 की उप - धारा ( 7 ) और उप- धारा ( 8 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए, मैसर्स एक्सिस इलेक्ट्रोनिक्स, जी-72 सेलाकी इंडस्ट्रियल एरिया , देहरादून -248197 , उत्तराखण्ड द्वारा विनिर्मित मध्यम यथार्थता ( यथार्थता वर्ग II ) वाले " JAX" श्रृंखला के अंकक सूचन सहित, अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण ( टेबल टाप प्रकार ) के मॉडल का, जिसके ब्रांड का नाम " SMART IMPACT ' है ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त मॉडल कहां गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/ 09/09 / 16 समनुदेशित किया गया है , अनुमोदन प्रमाण- पत्र जारी करती है ।

उक्तमॉडल एक विकृत गेज प्रकार का भार सेल आधारित अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण ( टेबल टॉप प्रकार ) है । इसकी अधिकतम क्षमता 300 ग्रा. है और म्यूनतम क्षमता 200 मि.ग्रा. है । सत्यापन मापमान अंतराल ( ई ) 10 ग्रा. है । इसमें एक आधेयतुलन युक्ति है जिसका शत प्रतिशत व्यकलनात्मक धारित आधेयतुलन प्रभाव है। प्रकाश उत्सर्जक डायोड ( एल ई डी) प्रदर्श तोलन परिणाम उपद‌र्शित करता है । उपकरण 230 वोल्ट और 50 हर्ट्ज प्रत्यावर्ती धारा विद्युत प्रदाय पर कार्य करता है ।

स्केल के टॉप कबर पर एक छेद है और एक छेद बॉटम बेस में भीनहै । उन दोनों छेदों में एक लीड तार डाल कर फन्दा बनाया जाता है, जो सील को तोड़े बिना उपकरण को खोले जाने से रोकता है ऊपरी औोतल कवर को आपस में जोड़ती सील , कवर को खोलने से और उपकरण बाक्स की भीतरी पहुंच में जाने से रोकती है।

उपकरण में बाहरी केलिब्रेशन तक पहुंच की सुविधा है । बाहरी केलिब्रेशन तक पहुंच को रोकने के लिए ए/डी कार्ड/ मदर बोर्ड में डिप स्विच भी दिया गया है । मॉडल को सीलबंद करने के उपबंध का एक प्ररूपी योजनाबद्ध डायग्राम ऊपर दिया गया है ।

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

[फा. सं. डब्ल्यूएम-21 ( 289 )/2008 ]

आर. माथुरबूथम, निदेशक , विधिक माप विज्ञान 6190

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 17 , 2009/ASVINA 25 , 1931

[PART II-SEC. 3 ( ii)]

New Delhi , the 26th August, 2009

S.O. 2845.- Whereas the Central Government after considering the report submitted to it by prescribed authority, is satisfied that the Model described in the said report (see the figure given below) is in conformity with the provisions of the Standards of Weights and Measures Act, 1976 (60 of 1976) and the Standards of Weights and Measures (Approval of Models) Rules , 1987 and the said Model is likely to maintain its accuracy over periods of sustained use and to render accurate service under varied conditions;

Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub -sections (7) and (8) of Section 36 of the said Act, the Central Government hereby issues and publishes the certificate of approval of the Model of non- automatic weighing instrument (Table Top type ) with digital indication ofmedium accuracy (Accuracy class - II ) of series " JAX" and with brand name " SMART IMPACT " ( hereinafter referred to as the said Model ) , manufactured by M/ s . Axis Electronics , G- 72, Selaqui Industrial Area, Dehradun - 248197 , Uttrakhand and which is assigned the approval mark IND/09/09/16;

The saidModel is a strain gauge type load cell based non- authomatic weighing instrument (Table top type) with amaximum capacity of300g and minimum capacity of 200mg. The verification scale interval (e ) is 10mg. It has a tare device with a 100 per cent subtractive retained tare effect . The Light Emitting Diode ( LED) display indicates the weighing result. The instrument operates on 230 Volts , 50Hertz alternative current power supply.

Figure- 2 Sealing diagram of the sealing provision of the Model.

There is a hole in the top cover and also a hole in the bottom base of the scale . A leaded wire is inserted in the two holes and a loop is made to prevent the opening of the instrument without breaking ofthe seal . The seal prevents opening ofthe covers as it holds the top and the bottom cover together and hence preventing access to the inside of the instrument box.

The Instrument has external access to calibration . A dip switch has also been provided in A/D card/mother board to disable access to external calibration. A typical schematic diagram of sealing provision of the Model is given above.

Further , in exercise of the powers conferred by sub- section ( 12) of Section 36 of the said Act, the Central Government hereby declares that this certificate of approval of the said Model shall also cover the weighing instruments of similar make , accuracy and performance of same series with maximum capacity upto 50 kg , with verification scale interval (n) in the range of 100 to 50000 for ' e ' value of Img to 50mg and with verification scale interval (n) in the range of5000 to 50,000 for ' e' value of 100mg. or more and with ' e ' value of 1x10k , sx10 % or 5x10k , wherek 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 (289)/2008 ]

R. MATHURBOOTHAM, Director of Legal Metrology 6191 [भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र: अक्तूबर 17, 2009/आश्विन 25 , 1931

नई दिल्ली, 26 अगस्त, 2009

का.आ. 2846. केन्द्रीय सरकार का, विहित प्राधिकारी द्वारा उसे प्रस्तुत रिपोर्ट पर विचार करने के पश्चात् यह समाधान हो गया है कि उक्त रिपोर्ट में वर्णित मॉडल ( नीचे दी गई आकृति देखें ) बाट और माप मानक अधिनियम , 1976 ( 1976 का 60 ) तथा बाट और माप मानक (मॉडलों का अनुमोदन ) नियम, 1987 के उपबंधों के अनुरूप है और इस बात की संभावना है कि लगातार प्रयोग की अवधि में भी उक्त मॉडल यथार्थता बनाए रखेगा और विभिन्न परिस्थितियों में उपयुक्त सेवा प्रदान करता रहेगा;

अतः , अब , केन्द्रीय सरकार , उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 की उप - धारा ( 7 ) और उप - धारा ( 8 ) द्वारा शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए , मैसर्स एक्सिसइलेक्ट्रोनिक्स, जी-72 , सेलाकी इंडस्ट्रियल एरिया , देहरादून-248197 , उत्तराखण्ड द्वारा विनिर्मित विशेष यथार्थता ( यथार्थता वर्ग 1 ) वाले " AXA" श्रृंखला के अंकक सूचन सहित अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण ( टेबल टाप प्रकार ) के मॉडल का , जिसके ब्रांड का नाम " SMART IMPACT " है ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/09/09/17 समनुदेशित किया गया है , अनुमोदन प्रमाण- पत्र जारी करती है ।

उक्त मॉडल एक इलैक्ट्रो मैगनेटिक फोर्स कम्पेनसेशन प्रिंसीपल पर आधारित अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण है । इसकी अधिकतम क्षमता 320 ग्रा. है और न्यूनतम क्षमता 100 मि.ग्रा . है । सत्यापन मापमान अंतराल ( ई) 1 मि. ग्रा. है । इसमें एक आधेयतुलन युक्ति है जिसका शत प्रतिशत व्यकलनात्मक धारित आधेयतुलन प्रभाव है । लिक्विड क्रिस्टल डायोड ( एल सी डी ) प्रदर्श तोलन परिणाम उपदर्शित करता है । उपकरण 230 वोल्ट और 50 हर्ट्ज प्रत्यावर्ती धारा विद्युत प्रदाय पर कार्य करता है ।

टॉप कवर और बाटम कवर के पिछे की तरफ एक एलायिनंग छेद बढ़ा दिया गया है । इन दोनों छेदों में लीड तार डाल कर एक कंड्यूट और एक फंदा बनाया जाता है , जो सील को तोड़े बिना उपकरण को खोले जाने से रोकता है । फ्रंट कवर और रीयर कवर को आपस में जोड़ती सील, कवर को खोलने से और उपकरण बाक्स की भीतरी पहुंच में जाने से रोकती है ।

उपकरण में बाहरी कलिब्रेशन तक पहुंच की सुविधा है । बाहरी केलिब्रेशन तक पहुंच को रोकने के लिए ए/डी कार्ड/मुदर बोर्ड मेंडिप स्विच भी दिया गया है । माडल को सीलबंद करने के उपबंध का एक प्ररूपी योजनाबद्ध डायग्राम उपर दिया गया है ।

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

[फा. सं. डब्ल्यूएम-21 (289 )/2008 ].

आर. माथुरबूथम, निदेशक , विधिक माप विज्ञान 3633 G1/09-6 6192

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 17 , 2009/ ASVINA 25 , 1931

[PART 11-SEC.3(ii ) ]

New Delhi , the 26th August, 2009

S.O. 2846.- Whereas the Central Government after considering the report submitted to it by prescribed authority, issatisfied that the model described in the said report (see the figure given below) is in conformity with the provisions of the Standards of Weights and Measures Act , 1976 (60 of 1976 ) and the Standars of Weights and Measures (Approval of Models) Rules , 1987 and the said model is likely to maintain its accuracy over period of sustained use and to render accurate service under varied conditions ;

Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub - sections (7 ) and ( 8) of Section 36 of the said Act, the Central Government hereby issues and publishes the certificate of approval of the model of non- automatic weighing instrument (Table top Type) with digital indication of special accuracy( Accuracy class -I ) of series " AXA " and with brand name " SMART IMPACT" (hereinafter referred to as the said model) , manufactured by M/ s. Axis Electronics , G - 72 , Selaqui Industrial Area, Dehradun - 248197, Uttrakhand and which is assigned the approval mark IND/09/09/ 17;

The said model is an electro magnetic force compensation principle based non - authomatic weighing instrument with a maximum capacity of 320g and minimum capacity of 100mg . The verfication scale interval (e ) is Img. It has a tare device with a 100 percent subtractive retained tare effect . The Liquid Crystal Diode Display (LCD) display indicates the weighing result . The instrument operates on 230 Volts , 50Hertz alternative current power supply.

Figure-IModel

Figure-2 Schematic diagram of the sealing provision ofthe model

The top cover and the bottem cover have a aligning hole on the rear side extened out . A leaded wire is inserted in the two holes forming aconduit and a loop is made to prevent the opening of the instrument without breaking ofthe seal . The seal prevents opening of the covers as it holds the front and the rear cover together and hence preventing access to the inside of the instrument box .

The instrument has external access to calibration . A dip switch has also been provided in A/D card/mother board todisable access to external calibration . A typical schematic diagram of sealing provision of the model is given above .

Further, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub- section ( 12) of Section 36 ofthe said Act, the Central Government hereby declares that this ertificateof approval ofthe said model shall also cover the weighing instruments of similar make, acouracy and performance of same series with maximum capacity up to 50 kg with veification scale interval ( n) in the range of50,000 or above for ' e' value of img or more and with ' e ' value of 1x10% , 2x10k or 5x10k, where k is a positive or negative whole number or equal to zora manufactured by the same manufacturer in accordance with the same principle , design and with the same meterials with which, the said approved model has been manufactured.

[F.No: WM-21 (289)/2008]

R. MATHURBOOTHAM , Director ofLegal Metrology [ भाग - खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

6193 भारत का राजपत्र: अक्तूबर 17 , 2009/आश्विन 25 , 1931

नईदिल्ली, 26 अगस्त, 2009

का.आ. 2847. केन्द्रीय सरकार का, विष्ठित प्राधिकारी द्वारा उसे प्रस्तुत रिपोर्ट पर विचार करने के पश्चात् यह समाधान हो गया है कि उक्त रिपोर्ट में वर्णित मॉडल ( नीचे दी गई आकृति देखें) बाट और माप मानक अधिनियम, 1976 ( 1976 का 60 ) तथा बाट और माप मानक (मॉडलों कन अनुमोदक) नियम, 1987 के उपबंधों के अनुरूप है और इस बात की संभावना है कि लगातार प्रयोग की अवधि में भी उक्त मॉडल यथार्थता बनाए रखेगा और विभिन्न परिस्थितियों में उपयुक्त सेवा प्रदान करता रहेगा;

अतः, अब, केन्द्रीय सरकार , उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 की उप- धारा ( 7 ) और उप- बासा( 8 ) द्वारा प्रदत शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए , मैसर्स एक्सिस इलेक्ट्रोनिक्स , जी-72 , सेलाकी इंडस्ट्रियल एरिया , देहरादून -248197, उत्तराखण्ड द्वारा विनिर्मित मध्यम यथार्थता ( यथार्थता वर्ग III ) वाले " WAX " श्रृंखला के अंकक सूचन सहित , अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण ( वेब्रिज मल्टी लोड सैल टाइप ) के मॉडल का, जिसके ब्रांड का नाम " SMART IMPACT " है ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/09/09/ 18 समनुदेशित किया गया है, अनुमोदन प्रमाण- पत्र जारी करती है ।

उक्तमॉडल एक विकृत गेज प्रकार जन भार सेल आधारित अस्मयालितः तोलन उपकरण ( वेब्रिज मल्टी लोड सैल टाइप ) है । इसकी अधिकतम क्षमता 40,000 कि.ग्रा.है और न्यूनतम क्षमता 200 कि.ग्रा. है । सत्यापन मापमान अंतराल (ई ) 10 कि.ग्रा. है । इसमें एक आधेयतुलन युक्तिहै जिसका शत प्रतिशत व्यकलनात्मक धारित आधेयतुलन प्रभाव है प्रकाश उत्सर्जक डायोड ( एल ई डी) प्रदर्श तोलन परिणाम उपदर्शित करता है । उपकरण 230 वोल्ट और 50 हर्ट्ज प्रत्यावर्ती धारा विद्युत प्रदाय पर कार्य करता है ।

इंडीकेटर तीन हिस्सों से बना है, उपरी कवर , तल कवर और प्रिंटिड सर्किट बोर्ड प्रोटेक्सन कवर । स्केल का कवर एक लम्बे पेंच , जिसके ऊपरी सिरे पर एक छेद है , के सांचे में ढला है । प्रिंटिड सर्किट बोर्ड प्रोटेक्शन के ऊपरी कवर पर इलैक्ट्रोनिक लगाया गया है । एक बार लगाने पर , प्रिंटिड सर्किट बोर्ड प्रोटेक्शन प्लेट में से उपरी कवर में ढाला गया पेच को चूडीदार छेद में से निकलने पर प्रिंटिड सर्किट बोर्ड प्रोटेक्शन प्लेट पर नट की सहायता से कस दिया जाता है । सीसे की तार घुसा कर फंदा बनाया जाता है ताकि सील तोड़े बिना उपकरण को खोला न जा सके ।

उपकरण में बाहरी केलिब्रेशन तक पहुंच की सुविधा है । बाहरी केलिब्रेशन तक पहुंच को रोकने के लिए ए/डी कार्ड / मदर बोर्ड में डिए' स्क्वि भी दिया गया है । मॉडल को सीलबंद करने के उपबंध का एक प्ररूपी योजनाबद्ध डायग्राम्म उपर दिया गया है ।

और केन्द्रीय सरकार उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 की उपधारा ( 12 ) द्वारा प्रदत शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए यह घोषणा करती है कि उक्तमॉडल के अनुमोदन के इस प्रमाण-पत्र के अंतर्गत उसी विनिर्माता द्वारा उसी सिद्धांत , डिजाइन के अनुसार और उसी सामग्री से जिससे उक्त अनुमोदितमॉडल वन विनिर्माण किया गया है , विनिर्मित उसी श्रृंखला के वैसे ही मेक, यथार्थता और कार्यपालन के तोलन उपकरण भी होंगे जो 500 ग्रा. या उससे अधिक के " ई " माम के लिए 500 से 10,000 तक के रेंज में सत्यापन मापमान अंतराल ( एन ) सहित 5 टन से अधिक और 100 टन तक की अधिकतम क्षमता वाले हैं और " ई " मान 1 × 10 के, 2× 10 के , 5 × 10 के , के हैं, जो धनात्मक या ऋणात्मक पूर्णांक या शून्य केसमतुल्य हैं ।

[फा. सं. डब्ल्यूएम-21 ( 289 )/2008 ]

आर. माथुरबूथम, निदेशक , विधिक माप विज्ञान [PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii) ] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 17 , 2009/ ASVINA 25, 1931

6194

New Delhi , the 26 August , 2009

S.O. 2847.- Whereas the Central Government after considering the report submitted to it by prescribed authority, is satisfied that the model described in the said report (see the figure given below) is in conformity with the provisions of the Standards of Weights and Measures Act , 1976 ( 60 of 1976) and the Standars of Weights and Measures ( Approval of Models ) Rules , 1987 and the said model is likely to maintain its accuracy ove periods of sustained use and to render accurate service under varied conditions ;

Now, therefore , in exercise of the powers conferred by sub - sections (7) and ( 8) of Section 36 of the said Act, the Central Government hereby issues and publishes the certificate of approval of the model of non - automatic weighing instrument ( Weighbridge- Multi Load Cell Type) with digital indication of medium accuracy (Accuracy class - III ) of series "WAX" and with brand name " SMART IMPACT " (hereinafter referred to as the said model) , manufactured by M/s . Axis Electronics ,G - 72 , Selaqui Industrial Area, Dehradun -248197 , Uttrakhand and which is assigned the approval mark IND/09/ 09/18;

The said model is a strain gauge type load cell based non - automatic weighing instrument ( Weighbridge-Multi Load Cell Type ) with a maximum capacity of40,000 kg and minimum capacity of 200 kg . The verification scale interval (e) is 10 kg . It has a tare device with a 100 percent subtractive retained tare effect. The Light Emitting Diode (LED) indicates theweighing results . The instrument operates on 230 Volts , 50Hertz alternative current power supply .

Figure-2Sealing provision of the indicator of the model

The indicator consists of three parts , that is the top cover, bottom cover and the pcb protection cover. The cover of the scale is moulded with a long screw which has a hole towards the top end . The electronic is fitted in the top cover of the pcb protection cover is fitted , the screw moulded in the top cover comes out of the pcb protection plate , once fitted , the threaded hole which is coming out of the pcb protection plate is fastened with the help of a nut . A leaded wire is inserted and a loop is made to prevent the opening of the instrument without breaking of the seal .

The instrument has external access to calibration . A dip switch has also been provided in A/ D card/ mother board to disable access to external calibration . A typical schematic diagram of sealing provision of the model is given above.

Further, in exercise ofthe power conferred by sub -section ( 12 ) of section 36 ofthe said Act, the Central Government herebydeclares that this certificate of approval of the said model shall also cover the weighing instruments of similar make, accuracy and performance of same series with maximum capacity above 5 tonne and up to 100 tonne with verification scale interval ( n ) in the range of 500 to 10,000 for ' e ' value of 500g or more and with ' e ' value of 1 × 10k , 2 × 10k or 5 × 10k , wherek isa 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 meterials with which, the said approved model has been manufactured .

[F.No. WM-21 ( 289)/2008 ]

R. MATHURBOOTHAM , Director of Legal Metrology 6195 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : अक्तूबर, 17 , 2009/आश्विन 25 , 1931

नईदिल्ली , 26 अगस्त, 2009

का.आ. 2848. केन्द्रीय सरकार का, विहित प्राधिकारी द्वारा उसे प्रस्तुत रिपोर्ट पर विचार करने के पश्चात् यह समाधान हो गया है कि उक्त रिपोर्ट में वर्णित मॉडल ( नीचे दी गई आकृति देखें ) बाट और माप मानक अधिनियम , 1976 ( 1976 का 60 ) तथा बाट और माप मानक (मॉडलों का अनुमोदन ) नियम , 1987 के उपबंधों के अनुरूप है और इस बात की संभावना है कि लगातार प्रयोग की अवधि में भी उक्त मॉडल यथार्थता बनाए रखेगा और विभिन्न परिस्थितियों में उपयुक्त सेवा प्रदान करता रहेगा;

अतः , अब , केन्द्रीय सरकार , उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 की उप - धारा ( 7 ) और उप- धारा ( 8 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए , मैसर्स एक्सिस इलेक्ट्रोनिक्स, जी -72 , सेलाकी इंडस्ट्रियल एरिया , देहरादून -248197 , उत्तराखण्ड द्वारा विनिर्मित मध्यम यथार्थता ( यथार्थता वर्ग III ) बाले " CRAX " श्रृंखला के अंकक सूचन सहित, अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण ( क्रेन टाइप ) के मॉडल का, जिसके ब्रांड का नाम " SMART IMPACT " है ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/09/09/19 समनुदेशित किया गया है , अनुमोदन प्रमाण - पत्र जारी करती है ।

उक्त मॉडल एक विकृत गेज प्रकार का भार सेल आधारित अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण ( क्रेन टाइप ) है । इसकी अधिकतम क्षमता 6,000 कि.ग्रा .है और न्यूनतम क्षमता 40 मि.ग्रा. है । सत्यापन मापमान अंतराल ( ई ) 2 कि. ग्रा. है । इसमें एक आधेयतुलन युक्ति है जिसका शत प्रतिशत व्यकलनात्मक धारित आधेयतुलन प्रभाव है प्रकाश उत्सर्जक डायोड ( एल ई डी ) प्रदर्श तोलन परिणाम उपदर्शित करता है । उपकरण 230 वोल्ट और 50 हर्ट्ज प्रत्यावर्ती धारा विद्युत प्रदाय पर कार्य करता है ।

स्केल की बैक प्लेट में एक छेद है जिसमें छेद वाला बोल्ट है । इस बोल्ट पर पेच कसा जाता है जो यह सुनिश्चित करता है कि यदि इस पेच को नहीं निकाला जाता तो इस प्लेट को हटाया नहीं जा सकता सील को तोड़े बिना उपकरण को खोले जाने से रोकने के लिए लीड तार को निकालकर लूप बनाया जाता है । सील, कवर को खोले जाने से रोकती है चूंकि इसके फ्रंट बाडी और बैंक प्लेट को एक साथ रखा है और उपकरण बाक्स के अन्दर के इलैक्ट्रानिक्स तक पहुंच को रोकता है ।

उपकरण में बाहरी केलिब्रेशन तक पहुंच की सुविधा है । बाहरी केलिब्रेशन तक पहुंच को रोकने के लिए ए/डी कार्ड / मदर बोर्ड में डिप स्विच भी दिया गया है । माडल को सीलबंद करने के उपबंध का एक प्ररूपी योजनाबद्ध डायग्राम ऊपर दिया गया है ।

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

[फा. सं. डब्ल्यूएम-21 ( 289 ) /2008 ] आर. माथुरबूथम, निदेशक , विधिक माप विज्ञान 6196

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 17, 2009/ASVINA 25 , 1931

[PART II-SEC. 3 ( ii) ]

New Delhi , the 26th August, 2009

S.O. 2848.- Whereas the Central Government after considering the report submitted to it by prescribed authority, issatisfied that the Model described in the said report ( see the figure given below) is in conformity with the provisions of the Standards of Weights and Measures Act , 1976 (60 of 1976) and the Standards of Weights and Measures (Approval of Models) Rules , 1987 and the said Model is likely to maintain its accuracy over periods of sustained use and to render accurate service under varied conditions ;

Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub- sections (7 ) and (8) of Section 36 of the said Act, the Central Government hereby issues and publishes the certificate of approval of the model of non- automatic weighing instrument ( Crane Type) with digital indication of medium accuracy (Accuracy class -III ) of series "CRAX" and with brand name " SMART IMPACT" ( hereinafter referred to as the said Model) , manufacturedby M/s. Axis Electronics , G- 72 , Selaqui Industrial Area, Dehradun - 248197, Uttrakhand and which is assigned the approval mark IND/09/09/ 19 ;

The said Model is a strain gauge type load cell based non -authomatic weighing instrument (Crane type) with a maximum capacity of6000 kg and minimum capacity of40 kg . The verification scale interval (e ) is 2kg . It has a tare device with a 100 per cent subtractive retained tare effect . The Light Emitting Diode (LED) indicates the weighing results . The instrument operates on 230 Volts, 50Hertz alternative current power supply .

HAMRALALE

Figure-2 Sealing arrangement

The black plate of the scale has a hole from which a bolt with a hole is available. A nut is tightned on this bolt which ensures that the plate in not removeable if this nut is not taken out . A leaded wire is inserted and a loop ismadeto prevent the opening of the instrument without breaking of the seal . The seal prevents opening ofthe covers as it holds the frontbody and back plate together and hence preventing access to the electronics of the inside of the instrument box.

The instrurnent has external access to calibration . A dip switch has also been provided in A/D card/mother board to disable access to external calibration . A typical schematic diagram of sealing provision of the model is given above.

Further, in exercise ofthe powers conferred by sub - section ( 12) of section 36 of the said Act , the Central Government herebydeclares that this certificate of approval ofthe said Model shall also cover the weighing instruments of similar make , accuracy and performance of same series with maximum capacity above 500 kg and up to 50 tonne with verification scale interval (n) in the range of 500 to 10,000 for ' e ' value of 500g . or more and with ' e' value of 1x10k , 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 (289)/2008]

R. MATHURBOOTHAM, Director of Legal Metrology 6197

भारत का राजपत्र : अक्तूबर 17, 2009/आश्विन 25, 1931

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

नई दिल्ली, 26 अगस्त, 2009

का.आ. 2849.-केन्द्रीय सरकार का, विहित प्राधिकारी नीदरलैंड मीटिनस्टिटूट( एन. एम. आई. ) नीदरलैंड द्वारा जारी मॉडल अनुमोदन प्रमाणपत्र के साथ उसे प्रस्तुत रिपोर्ट पर विचार करने के पश्चात् यह समाधान हो गया है कि उक्त रिपोर्ट में वर्णित मॉडल ( नीचे दी गई आकृति देखें ) बाटः और माफ मानक अधिनियम , 1976 ( 1976 का 60 ) तथा बाट और माप मानक ( मॉडलों का अनुमोदन ) नियम, 1987 के उपबंधों के अनुरूप है और इस बात की संभावना है कि लगातार प्रयोग की अवधि में भी उक्त मॉडल यथार्थता बनाए रखेगा और विभिन्न परिस्थितियों में उपयुक्त सेवा प्रदान करता रहेगा;

अतः , अब , केन्द्रीय सरकार, उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 की उप- धारा ( 7 ) और उप - धारा ( 8 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए, मैसर्स मैटलरटोलेडो (चांयझाउ ) सकेल्ज एंड सिस्टम लिमिटिड , नं. 111 , चांगक्सी रोड , चांगझाउ , जिआंगसू चाइना-213125 पी आर ऑफ चाइना द्वारा विनिर्मित मध्यम यथार्थता ( यथार्थता वर्ग III ) वाले " 8442 " श्रृंखला के अंकक सूचन सहित , अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण (हैंगिंग टाइप ) के मॉडल का, ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे मैसर्स मैटलर टोलेडो इंडिया प्राईवेट लि. अमर हिल्स, साकी विहार रोड, 'पोवई , मुंबई-400072 महाराष्ट्र द्वारा बिक्री से पहले या बाद में बिना किसी परिवर्तन के भारत में विपणित किया गया और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/09/09/200 समनुदेशित किया गया है , अनुमोदन प्रमाण- पत्र जारी और प्रकाशित करती है । उक्त मॉडल एक बिकृत गेज प्रकार का भार सेल आधारित अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण ( टेबलटाप प्रकार ) है । इसकी अधिकतम क्षमता 15 कि.ग्रा. ≤ Max ≤ 30 कि. ग्रा. और सत्यापन मापमान अंतराल (एन ) -3000 के लिए ई≤ 2≥ है । लिक्विड क्रिस्टल डायोड ( एल सीडी) प्रदर्श सोलन परिणाम उपदर्शित करता है । उपकरण 230 वोल्ट और 50 हर्ट्ज प्रत्यावर्ती धारा विद्युत प्रदाय पर कार्य करता है । उपकरण के तल में दो स्थानों पर सीलिंग की गई है ताकि सील तोड़े बिना मशीन को खोला न जा सके । मॉडल को सीलबंद करने के उपबंध का एक प्ररूपी योजनाबद्ध डायग्राम ऊपर दिया गया है ।

[फा. सं. डब्ल्यू एम-21 ( 27 )/2008 ] आर. माथुरबूथम, निदेशक , विधिक माप विज्ञान 6198

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 17, 2009/ASVINA 25, 1931

[PART II-SEC. 3( ii ) ]

New Delhi , the 26th August, 2009

S.O. 2849.-Whereas the Central Government after considering the report submitted to it by prescribed authority, alongwith the Model approval certificate issued by the Netherlands Meetinstituut (NMI ), Netherlands is satisfied that the Model described in the said report ( see the figure given below) is in conformity with the provisions of the Standards of Weights and Measures Act, 1976 (60 of 1976 ) and the Standards of Weights and Measures (Approval of Models) Rules , 1987 and the said Model is likely to maintain its accuracy over periods of sustained use and to render accurate service under varied conditions;

Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub - sections ( 7 ) and ( 8 ) of Section 36 of the said Act, the Central Government hereby issues and publishes the certificate of approval of the Model of non - automatic weighing instrument (Hanging Type) with digital indication of " 8442" series of medium accuracy (Accuracy class - III ) ( hereinafter referred to as the said Model ) , manufactured by M/s .Mettler- Toledo (Chang Zhou ) Scale & System Ltd. , No. 111 , Changxi Road, Changzhou , Jiangsu - 213125 , P. R. of China and marketed in India without any alteration before or after sale by M/s . Mettler Toledo India Pvt . Ltd. , Amar Hills , Saki Vihar Road, Powai , Mumbai , Maharashtra and which is assigned the approval mark IND/09/09/200;

The said Model is a strain gauge type load cell based non -authomatic weighing instrument (Tabletop type ) with amaximum capacity of 15 kg. ≤ Max ≤ 30 kg. in respect of verification scale interval (n ) ≤ 3000 for e≥2g . The liquid crystal diode(LCD) display indicates the weighing result . The instrument operates on 230 Volts , 50Hertz alternative current power supply.

Figure-2Sealing arrangement

Sealing is done at the bottom of the instrument at two places so that the machine cannot be opened without breaking the seal. A typical schematic diagram of sealing provision of the Model is given above .

[F. No. WM -21 (27)/2008 ]

R. MATHURBOOTHAM , Director of Legal Metrology 物 6199 [ भाग II-खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : अक्तूबर 17, 2009/आश्विन 25 , 1931

नईदिल्ली, 26 अगस्त, 2009

का.आ. 2850.-केन्द्रीय सरकार का, विहित प्राधिकारी द्वारा उसे प्रस्तुत रिपोर्ट पर विचार करने के पश्चात् यह समाधान हो गया है कि उक्त रिपोर्ट में वर्णित मॉडल ( नीचे दी गई आकृति देखें ) बाट और माप मानक अधिनियम , 1976 ( 1976 का 60 ) तथा बाट और माप मानक (मॉडलों का अनुमोदन ) नियम , 1987 के उपबंधों के अनुरूप है और इस बात की संभावना है कि लगातार प्रयोग की अवधि में भी उक्त मॉडल यथार्थता बनाए रखेगा और विभिन्न परिस्थितियों में उपयुक्त सेवा प्रदान करता रहेगा;

अतः , अब , केन्द्रीय सरकार, उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 की उप - धारा (7 ) और उप - धारा ( 8 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए , मैसर्स सराफ आटोमेशन सिस्टम्स नार्थ बलूचर , जुबली रोड, मालदा-732 101 ( पश्चिम बंगाल ) द्वारा विनिर्मित उच्च यथार्थता ( यथार्थता वर्ग II ) वाले ' एस टी एस " श्रृंखला के अंकक सूचन सहित , अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण ( टेबलटाप प्रकार ) के मॉडल का, जिसके ब्रांड का नाम " सराफ " है ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/09/08/326 समनुदेशित किया गया है , अनुमोदन प्रमाण- पत्र जारी करती है ।

उक्त मॉडल एक विकृत गेज प्रकार का भार सेल आधारित अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण ( टेबलटाप प्रकार ) है । इसकी अधिकतम क्षमता 11 कि.ग्रा . और न्यूनतम क्षमता 50 ग्रा. है । सत्यापन मापमान अंतराल (ई ) 1 ग्रा. है । इसमें एक अधेयतुलन युक्ति है जिसका शत प्रतिशत व्यवकलनात्मक धारित अधियतुलन प्रभाव उत्सर्जक डायोड ( एल ई डी ) प्रदर्श तोलन परिणाम उपदर्शित करता है । उपकरण 230 वोल्ट और 50 हर्ट्ज प्रत्यावर्ती धारा विद्युत प्रदाय पर कार्य करता है ।

SARAF AUTOMATION SYSTEMS

MALDA.

BRAND NAME- SARAF

बोटम प्लेट पर और इंडीकेटर के साइक प्लेट पर दो छेद करके सीलिंग की जाती है और इम छेदों से टिव्सट सीलिंग तार डाली जाती है उसके बाद लीड द्वारा सील की जाती है । मॉडल को सीलबंद करने के उपबंध का एक प्ररूपी योजनाबद्ध डायग्राम ऊपर दिया गया है । और केन्द्रीय सरकार उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 की उपधारा ( 12 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए यह घोषणा करती है कि उक्त मॉडल के अनुमोदन के इस प्रमाण - पत्र के अंतर्गत उसी विनिर्माता द्वारा उसी सिद्धांत , डिजाइन के अनुसार और उसी सामग्री से जिससे उक्त अनुमोदित मॉडल का विनिर्माण किया गया है , विनिर्मित उसी श्रृंखला के वैसे ही मेक, यथार्थता और कार्यपालन के तोलम उपकरण भी होंगे जो 1 मि. ग्रा. से 50 मि.ग्रा. तक के " ई " मान के लिए 100 से 50,000 तक के रेंज में और 100 मि.ग्रा. अथवा उससे अधिक के " ई " मान के लिए 5000 से 50,000 की सत्यापन मापमान अंतराल ( एन ) सहित 50 कि.ग्रा. तक की अधिकतम क्षमता वाले हैं और " ई " मान 1 × 10 *, 2×10 के, 5 × 10 के , के हैं, जो धनात्मक या ऋणात्मक पूर्णांक या शून्य के समतुल्य हैं ।

[फा. सं. डब्ल्यू एम -21 ( 256)/2008 ]

आर. माथुरबूथम , निदेशक , विधिक माप विज्ञान 3633 G1/097 6200

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 17 , 2009/ASVINA 25 , 1931

[PART II-SEC. 3 ( ii)]

New Delhi , the 26th August, 2009

S.O. 2850.-Whereas the Central Government after considering the report submitted to it by prescribed authority, issatisfied that the model described in the said report (see the figure given below) is in conformity with the provisions of the Standards of Weight and Measures Act, 1976 (60 of 1976) and the Standars of Weight and Measures (Approval of Models) Rules , 1987 and the said model is likely to maintain its accuracy over period of sustained use and to render accurate service under varied conditions ;

Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub - sections (7) and (8) of Section 36 of the said Act, the Central Government hereby issues and publishes the certificate of approval of the model of non- automatic weighing instrument (Table top Type) with digital indication of high accuracy (Accuracy class- II) of series "SARAF" and with brand name " STS" ( hereinafter referred to as the said model ) , manufactured by M/s . Saraf Automation Systems , North Baluchar , Jubli Road,Malda-732101 ( WB) which is assigned the approval mark IND/09/08/326;

The said model is a strain gauge type load cell based non - authomatic weighing instrument ( Tabletop type ) with amaximum capacity of 11 kg . and minimum capacity of 50g. The verfication scale interval (e ) is 1g. It has a tare device with a 100 percent subtractive retained tare effect . The light emitting diode (LED) display indicates the weighing result. The instrument operates on 230 Volts , 50Hertz alternative current power supply.

MAX 11 kg Min 50g e-1g SARAF AUTOMATION SYSTEMS MALDA.

BRAND NAME- SARAF

Figure-2 Sealing arrangement

Sealing is done by making two holes , one in bottom plate and other in the side plate and a twisted sealing wire is passed from these holes and then sealed by the lead . A typical schematic diagram of sealing provision ofthe model is given above .

Further, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section ( 12 ) of Section 36 ofthe said Act, the Central Government herebydeclares that this certificate of approval of the said model shall also cover the weighing instruments of similar make, accuracyandperformance ofsame series with maximum capacity up to 50 kg . with veification scale interval (n) in the range of100 to50,000 for ' e ' value of Img. to50mg . and with verification scale interval (n) in the rnage of5,000 to 50,000 for ' e' value of 100mg. or more and with ' e ' value of 1 × 10k , 2 × 10k or 5 × 10% , where k is a positive or negative whole number or equal to zeromanufactured by the same manufacturer in accordance with the same principle ,design and with the same meterials with which, the said approved model has been manufactured.

[F.No. WM-21 (256)/2008 ]

R. MATHURBOOTHAM, Director of Legal Metrology 6201 [भाग II-खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : अक्तूबर 17, 2009/आश्विन 25 , 1931

नई दिल्ली, 26 अगस्त, 2009

का.आ. 2851.-केन्द्रीय सरकार का , विहित प्राधिकारी द्वारा उसे प्रस्तुत रिपोर्ट पर विचार करने के पश्चात् यह समाधान हो गया है कि उक्त रिपोर्ट में वर्णित मॉडल ( नीचे दी गई आकृति देखें ) बाट और माप मानक अधिनियम , 1976 ( 1976 का 60 ) तथा बाट और माप मानक (मॉडलों का अनुमोदन ) नियम , 1987 के उपबंधों के अनुरूप है और इस बात की संभावना है कि लगातार प्रयोग की अवधि में भी उक्त मॉडल यथार्थता बनाए रखेगा और विभिन्न परिस्थितियों में उपयुक्त सेवा प्रदान करता रहेगा;

अतः , अब , केन्द्रीय सरकार, उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 की उप- धारा ( 7 ) और उप- धारा ( 8 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए, मैसर्स सराफ आटोमेशन सिस्टम्स नार्थ बलूचर , जुबली रोड, मालदा-732 101 ( पश्चिम बंगाल ) द्वारा विनिर्मित उच्च यथार्थता ( यथार्थता वर्ग 'III) वाले ' एस टी " श्रृंखला के अंकक सूचन सहित, अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण ( टेबलटाप प्रकार ) के मॉडल का, जिसके ब्रांड का नाम " सराफ" है ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/09/08/327 समनुदेशित किया गया है , अनुमोदन प्रमाण- पत्र जारी करती है ।

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

MAX 30 kg Min 100g e-5g

SARAF AUTOMATION SYSTEMS

MALDA.

BRAND NAME- SARAF

बोटम प्लेट पर और इंडीकेटर के साइड प्लेट पर दो छेद करके सीलिंग की जाती है और इन छेदों से टिव्सट सीलिंग तार डाली जाती है और उसके बाद लीड द्वारा सील की जाती है । मॉडल को सीलबंद करने के उपबंध का एक प्ररूपी योजनाबद्ध डायग्राम ऊपर दिया गया है । और केन्द्रीय सरकार उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 की उपधारा ( 12 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए यह घोषणा करती है कि उक्तमाडल के अनुमोदन के इस प्रमाण - पत्र के अंतर्गत उसी विनिर्माता द्वारा उसी सिद्धांत , डिजाइन के अनुसार और उसी सामग्री से जिससे उक्त अनुमोदित माडल का विनिर्माण किया गया है, विनिर्मित उसी श्रृंखला के वैसे ही मेक, यथार्थता और कार्यपालन के तोलन उपकरण भी होंगे जो 100 मि.ग्रा. से 2 ग्रा. तक के " ई" मान के लिए 100 से 10,000 तक के रेंज में सत्यापन मापमान अंतराल ( एन ) सहित 5 ग्रा. या उससे अधिक के " ई " मान के लिए 500 से 10,000 तक के रेंज में सत्यापन मापमान अंतराल ( एन ) सहित 50 कि.ग्रा. क्षमता वाले हैं और " ई " मान 1 ×10 , 2 ×10 *, 5 × 10 * , के हैं , जो धनात्मक या ऋणात्मक पूर्णांक या शून्य के समतुल्य हैं ।

[फा. सं. डब्ल्यूएम-21 ( 256) /2008 ]

आर. माथुरबूथम, निदेशक, विधिक माप विज्ञान 6202

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 17 , 2009/ASVINA 25 , 1931

[PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii)]

New Delhi , the 26th August, 2009

S.O. 2851.- Whereas the Central Govemment after considering the report submitted to it by prescribed authority , is satisfied that the model described in the said report (see the figure given below) is in conformity with the provisions of the Standards of Weight and Measures Act , 1976 (60 of 1976) and the Standars of Weight and Measures (Approval of Models) Rules , 1987 and the said model is likely to maintain its accuracy over period 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 Govemment hereby issues and publishes the certificate of approval of the model of non- automatic weighing instrument( Tabletop Type) with digital indication of medium accuracy (Accuracy class - III ) of series " SARAF " and with brand name " ST" (hereinafter referred to as the said model) , manufactured by M/ s . Saraf Automation Systems , North Baluchar, Jubli Road, Malda- 732101 (WB ) which is assigned the approval mark IND/09/08/327;

Thesaid model is a strain gauge type load cell based non -authomatic weighing instrument (Tabletop type) with a maximum capacity of 30 kg . and minimum capacity of 100g. The verfication scale interval ( e ) is 5g. It has a tare device with a 100 percent subtractive retained tare effect . The light emitting diode ( LED) display indicates the weighing result . The instrument operates on 230 Volts , 50Hertz altemative current power supply..

MAX 30 kg Min 100g e-5g

SARAF AUTOMATION SYSTEMS MALDA.

BRAND NAME- SARAF

Figure-2 Sealing arrangement

Sealing is done by making two holes , one in bottom plate and other in the side plate and a twisted sealing wire is passed from these holes and then sealed by the lead. A typical schematic diagram of sealing provision ofthe model is given above .

Further, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub - section ( 12) of Section 36 ofthe said Act, the Central Government herebydeclares that this certificate of approval of the said Model shall also cover the weighing instruments of similar make , accuracyand performance of same series with maximum capacity up to 50 kg . with veification scale interval ( n) in the range of 100 to 10,000 for ' e ' value of 100mg. to 2g. and withverification scale interval (n) in the rage of500 to 10,000 for ' e ' value of5g. or more and with ' e' value of 1 × 10k , 2 × 10k or 5 × 10k , where k is a positive or negative whole number or equal to zero manufactured by the same manufacturer in accordance with the same principle, design and with the same meterials with which, the said approved model has been manufactured.

[F. No. WM-21 ( 256)/2008 ]

R. MATHURBOOTHAM , Director of Legal Metrology 6203 [भाग II-खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : अक्तूबर 17 , 2009/आश्विन 25 , 1931

नई दिल्ली , 26 अगस्त, 2009

का.आ. 2852. केन्द्रीय सरकार का , विहित प्राधिकारी द्वारा उसे प्रस्तुत रिपोर्ट पर विचार करने के पश्चात् यह समाधान हो गया है कि उक्त रिपोर्ट में वर्णित मॉडल ( नीचे दी गई आकृति देखें ) बाट और साप मानक अधिनियम , 1976 ( 1976 का 60 ) तथा बाट और माप मानक (मॉडलों का अनुमोदन ) नियम , 1987 के उपबंधों के अनुरूप है और इस बात की संभावना है कि लगातार प्रयोग की अवधि में भी उक्त मॉडल यथार्थता बनाए रखेगा और विभिन्न परिस्थितियों में उपयुक्त सेवा प्रदान करता रहेगा;

अतः , अब, केन्द्रीय सरकार, उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 की उप - धारा ( 7 ) और उप - धारा ( 8 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए, मैसर्स सराफ आटोमेशन सिस्टम्स नार्थ बलूचर , जुबली रोड, मालदा -732 101 ( पश्चिम बंगाल ) द्वारा विनिर्मित उच्च यथार्थता ( यथार्थता वर्ग II ) वाले " एस पी एस " श्रृंखला के अंकक सूचन सहित , अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण ( प्लेटफार्म टाइप ) के मॉडल का, जिसके ब्रांड का नाम " सराफ" है ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/09/08/328 समनुदेशित किया गया है , अनुमोदन प्रमाण- पत्र जारी करती है ।

उक्त मॉडल एक विकृत गेज प्रकार का भार सेल आधारित अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण ( प्लेटफार्म प्रकार ) है । इसकी अधिकतम क्षमता 300 कि.ग्रा. और न्यूनतम क्षमता 1 कि. ग्रा. है । सत्यापन मापमान अंतराल (ई ) 20 ग्रा. है । इसमें एक आधेयतुलन युक्ति है जिसका शत प्रतिशत व्यकलनात्मक धारित आधेयतुलन प्रभाव है । प्रकाश उत्सर्जक डायोड ( एल ई डी) प्रदर्श तोलन परिणाम उपदर्शित करता है । उपकरण 230 वोल्ट और 50 हर्ट्ज प्रत्यावर्ती धारा विद्युत प्रदाय पर कार्य करता है ।

सीलिंग बोल्ट में से वायर निकाल कर , वायर और लीड से इंडीकेटर के पिछली तरफ स्टाम्पिंग के पास सीलिंग प्वाइंट है । मॉडल को सीलबंद करने के उपबंध का एक प्ररुपी योजनाबत्र डायग्राम ऊपर दिया गया है ।

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

[फा. सं. डब्ल्यूएम-21 ( 256 ) /2008 ] आर. माथुरबूथम , निदेशक, विधिक माप विज्ञान 6204

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 17, 2009/ ASVINA 25 , 1931

[PART II-SEC . 3( ii) ]

New Delhi , the 26th August, 2009

S.O. 2852. Whereas the Central Government after considering the report submitted to it by prescribed authority, is satisfied that the model described in the said report ( see the figure given below) is in conformity with the provisions of the Standards of Weights and Measures Act, 1976 (60 of 1976) and the Standars of Weights and Measures (Approval of Models) Rules, 1987 and the said model is likely to maintain its accuracy over period of sustained use and to render accurate service under varied conditions;

Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub - sections (7) and (8 ) of Section 36 of the said Act, the Central Government hereby issues and publishes the certificate of approval of the model of non - automatic weighing instrument (PlatformType) with digital indication of high accuracy (Accuracy class - II) ofseries " SPS" and with brand name "SARAF" (hereinafter referred to as the said model) , manufactured by M/s . Saraf Automation Systems , North Baluchar , Jubli Road, Malda -732101 ( WB ) which is assigned the approval mark IND/09/08/328;

The said model is a strain gauge type load cell based non -authomatic weighing instrument (Platform type) with a maximum capacity of 300 kg. and minimum capacity of 1kg . The verfication scale interval (e) is20g. It has a tare device with a 100 per cent subtractive retained tare effect . The Light Emitting diode (LED) indicates the weighing result . The instrument operates on 230 Volts , 50Hertz alternative current power supply.

ARAF

MFGAY SARAF SARAF AUTOMAOMATION

Figure-2Sealing Diagram

Sealing point location is near stamping place at back side of the indicator through wire and lead , passing wire through sealing bolt . A typical schematic diagram of sealing provision of the model is given above .

further, in exercise ofthe powers conferred by sub- section ( 12) of Section 36 ofthe said Act, the Central Government hereby declares that this certificate of approval ofthe said model shall also cover the weighing instruments ofsimilar make , accuracyand performance of same series with maximum capacity above 50 kg. and up to 5000kg . with veification scale interval (n) in the range of 5000 to 50,000 for ' e' value of 100mg . or more and with ' e ' value of 1 × 10%, 2 × 10 or 5 × 10k, where k isa 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 meterials with which , the said approved model has been manufactured.

[F. No. WM-21 (256)/2008 ]

R. MATHURBOOTHAM , Director of Legal Metrology 6205 [भाग II- खण्ड 3(ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र: अक्तूबर 17 , 2009/आश्विन 25 , 1931

नई दिल्ली , 26 अगस्त, 2009

का.आ. 2853.-केन्द्रीय सरकार का, विहित प्राधिकारी द्वारा उसे प्रस्तुत रिपोर्ट पर विचार करने के पश्चात् यह समाधान हो गया है कि उक्त रिपोर्ट में वर्णित मॉडल ( नीचे दी गई आकृति देखें ) बाट और माप मानक अधिनियम , 1976 ( 1976 का 60 ) तथा बाट और माप मानक (मॉडलों का अनुमोदन ) नियम , 1987 के उपबंधों के अनुरूप है और इस बात की संभावना है कि लगातार प्रयोग की अवधि में भी उक्त मॉडल यथार्थता बनाए रखेगा और विभिन्न परिस्थितियों में उपयुक्त सेवा प्रदान करता रहेगा;

अतः , अब , केन्द्रीय सरकार , उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 की उप- धारा ( 7 ) और उप- धारा ( 8 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए, मैसर्स सराफ आटोमेशन सिस्टम्स नार्थ बलूचर , जुबली रोड , मालदा-732 101 (पश्चिम बंगाल ) द्वारा विनिर्मित उच्च यथार्थता ( यथार्थता वर्ग III ) वाले " एस पी " श्रृंखला के अंकक सूचन सहित , अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण ( प्लेटफार्म टाइप ) के मॉडल का, जिसके ब्रांड का नाम " सराफ " है ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/09/08/329 समनुदेशित किया गया है , अनुमोदन प्रमाण- पत्र जारी करती है ।

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

सीलिंग बोल्ट में से वायर निकाल कर, वायर और लीड से इंडीकेटर के पिछली तरफ स्टाम्पिंग के पास सीलिंग प्वाइंट है । मॉडल को सीलबंद करने के उपबंध का एक प्ररुपी योजनाबद्ध डायग्राम ऊपर दिया गया है ।

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

[फा. सं. डब्ल्यू एम-21 ( 256 ) /2008 ] आर. माथुरबूथम , निदेशक, विधिक माप विज्ञान 6206

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 17 , 2009/ASVINA 25 , 1931

[PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii) ]

New Delhi , the 26th August, 2009

S.O. 2853. Whereas the Central Government after considering the report submitted to it by prescribed authority, is satisfied that the model described in the said report (see the figure given below) is in conformity with the provisions of the Standards of Weights and Measures Act , 1976 ( 60 of 1976 ) and the Standards of Weights and Measures ( Approval of Models) Rules , 1987 and the said model is likely to maintain its accuracy over period of sustained use and to render accurate service under varied conditions ;

Now, therefore , in exercise of the powers conferred by sub -sections (7) and (8 ) of Section 36 of the said Act, the Central Government hereby issues and publishes the certificate of approval of the model of non -automatic weighing instrument ( PlatformType) with digital indication of medium accuracy ( Accuracy class- III ) of series " SP " and with brand name " SARAF" (hereinafter referred to as the said model) , manufacturedby M/ s . Saraf Automation Systems , North Baluchar , Jubli Road, Malda - 732101 (WB ) which is assigned the approval mark IND/09/08/329;

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

BARAF SARA

Figure- 2 Sealing provision of the indicator of model

Sealing point location is near stamping place at back side of the indicator through wire and lead , passing wire through sealingbolt . A typical schematic diagram of sealing provision of the model is given above.

further, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub - section ( 12 ) of Section 36 of the said Act, the Central Government herebydeclares that this ertificate of approval of the sald model shall also cover the weighing instruments of similar make, accuracy and performance of same serles with maximum capacity above 50kg, and up to 5000kg. with veification scale Interval ( n) in the range of 500 to 10,000 for ' e ' value of 5g . or more and with ' e' value of 1 × 10k, 2 × 10k or 5 × 10k , where k isa positive or negativs whole number or equal to zero manufactured by the same manufacturer in accordance with the same principle , design and with the same meterials with which, the said approved model has been manufactured .

[F. No. WM- 21 (256)/2008 ]

R. MATHURBOOTHAM, Director of Legal Metrology [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

6207

भारत का राजपत्र : अक्तूबर 17, 2009/आश्विन 25 , 1931

नई दिल्ली, 26 अगस्त, 2009

का.आ. 2854.-केन्द्रीय सरकार का, विहित प्राधिकारी द्वारा उसे प्रस्तुत रिपोर्ट पर विचार करने के पश्चात् यह समाधान हो गया है कि उक्त रिपोर्ट में वर्णित मॉडल ( नीचे दी गई आकृति देखें ) बाट और माप मानक अधिनियम , 1976 ( 1976 का 60 ) तथा बाट और माप मानक (मॉडलों का अनुमोदन ) नियम , 1987 के उपबंधों के अनुरूप है और इस बात की संभावना है कि लगातार प्रयोग की अवधि में भी उक्त मॉडल यथार्थता बनाए रखेगा और विभिन्न परिस्थितियों में उपयुक्त सेवा प्रदान करता रहेगा;

अतः , अब , केन्द्रीय सरकार , उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 की उप- धारा ( 7 ) और उप- धारा ( 8 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए, मैसर्स सराफ आटोमेशन सिस्टमस , नार्थ बलूचर, जुबली रोड , मालदा-732101 ( पश्चिम बंगाल ) द्वारा विनिर्मित मध्यम यथार्थता ( यथार्थता वर्ग- III ) वाले " एस डब्ल्यू बी " श्रृंखला के अंकक सूचन सहित, अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण ( वेब्रिज टाइप ) के मॉडल क़ा , जिसके ब्रांड का नाम " सराफ " है ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/09/ 08/ 330 समनुदेशित किया गया है , अनुमोदन प्रमाण- पत्र जारी करती है ।

उक्त मॉडल एक विकृत गेज प्रकार को भार सेल आधारित अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण ( वेब्रिज प्रकार ) है । इसकी अधिकतम क्षमता 30 टन है और न्यूनतम क्षमता 100 कि.ग्रा. है । सत्यापन मापमान अंतराल ( ई ) 5 कि. ग्रा. है । इसमें एक आधेयतुलन युक्ति है जिसका शत प्रतिशत व्यकलनात्मक धारित आधेयतुलन प्रभाव है । प्रकाश उत्सर्जक डायोड ( एल ई डी) प्रदर्श तोलन परिणाम उपदर्शित करता है । उपकरण 230 वोल्ट और 50 हर्ट्ज प्रत्यावर्ती धारा विद्युत प्रदाय पर कार्य करता है ।

000

200 κα

MAX 50 t

氷の

108

SARAF

सीलिंग बोल्ट में से वायर निकाल कर , वायर और लीड से इंडीकेटर के पिछली तरफ स्टाम्पिग के पास सीलिंग प्वाइंट है । मॉडल को सीलबंद करने के उपबंध का एक प्ररूपी योजनाबद्ध डायग्राम उपरोक्त दिया गया है ।

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

[फा. सं. डब्ल्यूएम-21 ( 256 )/2008 ] 3633Gl/09-8

आर. माथुरबूथम , निदेशक, विधिक माप विज्ञान 6208

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 17 , 2009/ ASVINA 25 , 1931

[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii) ]

New Delhi , the 26th August, 2009

S.O. 2854.-Whereas the Central Government after considering the report submitted to it by prescribed authority, issatisfied that the model described in the said report ( see the figure given below) is in conformity with the provisions of the Standards of Weights and Measures Act, 1976 (60 of 1976) and the Standards of Weights and Measures (Approval of Models) Rules , 1987 and the said model is likely to maintain its accuracy over period of sustained use and to render accurate service under varied conditions;

Now, therefore , in exercise ofthe powers conferred by sub - sections (7) and (8) of Section 36 of the said Act , the Central Government hereby issues and publishes the certificate of approval of the model of non -automatic weighing instrument (Weighbridge Type) with digital indication of medium accuracy (Accuracy class - III) of series " SWB" and with brand name "SARAF" ( hereinafter referred to as the said model ) , manufacturedby M/ s . Saraf Automation Systems , North Baluchar, Jubli Road, Malda-732101 ( WB) and which is assigned the approval mark IND /09/08/330;

The said model is a strain guage type load cell based non - automatic weighing instrument ( Weighbridge Type) with a maximum capacity of30 tonne and minimum capacity of 100 kg . The verfication scale interval (e) is 5 kg. It has a tare devicewith a 100 percent subtractive retained tare effect . The Light Emitting Diode ( LED ) indicates the weighing results . The instrument operates on 230 Volts , 50 Hertz alternative current power supply .

Figure- 1Model

SARAF

Sealing point location is near stamping place at back side of the indicator through wire and lead, passing wire through sealing bolt. A typical settormatie diagram of sealing provision of the model is given above .

Further, in exercise ofthis power conferred by sub - section( 12) ofSection 36 ofthe saidAct, the Central Government herebydeclares that this certiffeate offapproval ofthe said model strail also cover the weighing instruments of similar make, accuracy and performarwasserieswmarimumcapacity above5 tonne ambupto 100 tonne withverificationscale interval (n) intherange of 300 to 10,000 for ' e ' value of 5 g. or more and with ' e ' value of 1x10k, 2x10k or 5x10% , where k is a positive ornegative wirotecnouromexpedito zero manufactured by the same manufacturer in accordance with the same principle, design and with the summermaterials with which , the said approved model has been manufactured.

[F.No. WM-211256)/ 2008 ]

R. MATHURBOOTHAM , Director ofLegal Metrology 6209 [भाग 11राखण्ड 3(ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र: अक्तूबर 17, 2009/आश्विन 25, 1931

नई दिल्ली, 26 अगस्त, 2009

नकाशा, 28585, कोद्रीय सरकारका विहितकारीद्वारा से सुतारारोहातगारहै।कि आपतििथयोर्ट मेंकार्णित मामी दी नई आकृतिबाट और विधि 1976 ( 1976 का(60 ) तथा बाट और माप मानक (सॉक्सोंचकाउनु ) नियम , 1987 के उपबंधों के अनुरूप है और इस बात की संभावना है कि लगातार प्रयोग की अवधि में भीआतमॉडल यथार्थता बाबए सहोगा और विभिन्न परिस्थितियों में उपयुक्त सेवा प्रदान करता रहेगा;

अत:, अभाव, कालेद्रीयस्सस्कार, उक्त अविनियमनकीधारा 36 की उप -धारा ( 7 ) और धारा सोग अमरते हुए, मैसर्स अमेषस फिमेरी इंथीनियरिंग ( 1 ) प्रा. लि. नं. 16 एंड 17, केआईएडीबी इंडस्ट्रियल एरिना, कोपुर-561203 प्रराविनिर्मित यथार्थता वर्ग 1 वाले " अमरीकन बाइसोन " श्रृंखला के डिस्कंटिन्युअस टोटलाजिंग स्वचालित तोलन उपकरण (टोटलाइजिंग हुपर व्हीपर बेचिंग प्लांट) अंकक सूचन संहित्त, के मॉडल का, जिसके ब्रांड का नाम " अजेक्स फिओरी " है ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उम्मत मॉडल कहा गया है) औरजिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/09/08 /371 समनुदेशित किया गया है , अनुमोदन प्रमाण - पत्र वारी करती है ।

उक्तमाहेकल एक किकृत मेन्त्र आकार का भार सेल अभारित डिस्कटित्युअस टोटलाजिंग स्वचालित कोलन उपकरण (ग्रेटसाइविंग हुपर व्हीयर- लेजिंग स्लांट ) है। इसकी अधिनममता 2400 कि.ग्रा. है और न्यूनतम क्षमता 200 कि.ग्रा. है । सत्यापन मायामान अंतसल (ई ) 1 कि. ग्रा. है । इसका एक 30m Mar का 1.0mm इस्रंट साइन है और अधिपनाम प्लांट क्षमता 40 m³/har है । जमातीत को सीमेंट लेविंग प्लांट आदि में विभिन्न इंग्रिडेंट्स को खोलने और भरने के लिए डिजाइन किया गया है । प्रकाश उत्सर्जक डायोड ( एल ई डी) प्रदर्श तोलन परिणाम उपदर्शित करता है । उपकारूण 415 कोट और 50 हाराकिच्द्युत प्रदाय पर कार्य करता है ।

सीलिंगका तरीका और स्थान :इंडीकेटर के पिछली तरफ दो छेद किए जाते हैं, एक टॉपधपर दाधीं तरफ और एक आउटर कवर काट कर तलमें बाबीं तरफ और स्टाम्प औरसील के सत्यापन के लिए छेदों को सीड वायर से बांधा जाता है । इस को सीलः से छेड़छाड़ किए बिना नहींखोला जा सकता ।

औरवोद्रीयम्सस्कार उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 की उपधारा ( 12 ) द्वारा प्रदत शनियों का प्रयोग करते हुए यह लोया करती है कि उक्त मॉडल के अनुम्भोदन के इस प्रमाण पत्र के अंतर्गत उसी विनिर्माता द्वारा उसी सिद्धांत, डिजाइन के भानुसार और उसी सामग्री सोथिससे उक्त अनुमोदित ममॉडल बका निर्माण गमाया है, विनिर्मित उसी श्रृंखला के वैसे ही मेक , यथार्थता और कार्यपालन के तोलन उपकरण भी होंगे जिनकी क्षमता 20 टन तक है ।

[श्रा. सं. डब्ल्यूएम-21: ( 264)/2008 ]

आर. माथुरबूथम , निदेशक , विधिक माप विज्ञान 6210

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 17 , 2009/ ASVINA 25 , 1931

[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii) ]

New Delhi , the 26th August, 2009

S.O. 2855.- Whereas the Central Government after considering the report submitted to itby prescribed authority, is satisfied that the model described in the said report ( see the figure given below) is in conformity with the provisions of the Standards of Weight and Measures Act , 1976 (60 of 1976) and the Standars of Weight and Measures (Approval of Models) Rules, 1987 and the said model is likely to maintain its accuracy over period of sustained use and to render accurate service under varied conditions ;

Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub - sections (7) and (8) of Section 36 of the said Act , the Central Government hereby issues and publishes the certificate of approval of the model of Discontinuous Totalizing Automatic weighing instruments (Totalizing Hopper Weigher -Batching Plant) with digital indication and ofaccuracy class- I series " AMERICAN BISON " and with brand name " AJAX FIORI " (hereinafter referred to as the said model ) , manufactured by M/s . Ajax Fiori Engineering ( I) Pvt . Ltd, No. 16 & 17, KIADB Industrial Area, Doddaballapur- 561203 and which is assigned the approval mark IND/09/08/371 ;

The said model is a strain guage type load cell based Discontinuous (Totalizing Automatic weigher instrument (Totalizing Hopper Weigher - Batching Plant) with a maximum capacity of 2400 kg and minimum capacity of200 kg . The verfication scale interval ( e) is 1 kg. It has a plant size of 30m³ /hr of 1.0m³ and maximum plant capacity up to 40m³ /hr . The machine is designed for weighing and filling the various ingredient used in cement batching plant etc. The Light Emitting Diode(LED) indicates the weighing results . The instrument operates on three phase 415 Volts , 50Hertz alternative current powersupply.

Figure-3

Manner and Place of Sealing : By the rear side of the indicator 2 holes are made one on top right side and one on bottomleft side by cutting the outer cover and fastened by a leaded wire for receiving the verification stamp and seal . It cannot be opened without tampering the seal .

[F. No. WM-21 (264)/2008 ]

R. MATHURBOOTHAM, Director of Legal Metrology 時 6211 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र: अक्तूबर 17, 2009/आश्विन 25 , 1931

नई दिल्ली, 26 अगस्त, 2009

का.आ. 2856.-केन्द्रीय सरकार का, विहित प्राधिकारी द्वारा उसे प्रस्तुत रिपोर्ट पर विचार करने के पश्चात् यह समाधान हो गया है कि उक्त रिपोर्ट में वर्णित मॉडल ( नीचे दी गई आकृति देखें ) बाट और माप मानक अधिनियम , 1976 ( 1976 का 60 ) तथा बाट और माप मानक (मॉडलों का अनुमोदन ) नियम, 1987 के उपबंधों के अनुरूप है और इस बात की संभावना है कि लगातार प्रयोग की अवधि में भी उक्त मॉडल यथार्थता बनाए रखेगा और विभिन्न परिस्थितियों में उपयुक्त सेवा प्रदान करता रहेगा;

अतः , अब, केन्द्रीय सरकार , उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 की उप- धारा ( 7 ) और उप- धारा ( 8 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए , मैसर्स अजेक्स फिओरी इंजीनियरिंग ( 1 ) प्रा. लि. नं. 16 एंड 17 , केआईएडीबी इंडस्ट्रियल एरिया , डोडाबालापुर -561203 द्वारा विनिर्मित यथार्थता वर्ग 1 वाले " आर एल ए-20" श्रृंखला के डिस्कंटिन्युअस टोटलाइजिंग स्वचालित तोलन उपकरण ( टोटलाइजिंग हुपर व्हीयर- बेचिंग प्लांट) अंकक सूचन सहित , के मॉडल का, जिसके ब्रांड का नाम " अजेक्स फिओरी " है ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/09/08/372 समनुदेशित किया गया है , अनुमोदन प्रमाणपत्र जारी करती है ।

उक्त मॉडल एक विकृत गेज प्रकार का भार सेल आधारित डिस्कंटिन्युअस टोटलाइजिंग स्वचालित तोलन उपकरण ( टोटलाइजिंग हुपर व्हीयर- बेचिंग प्लांट ) है । इसकी अधिकतम क्षमता 1200 कि.ग्रा. है और न्यूनतम क्षमता 200 कि.ग्रा. है । सत्यापन मापमान अंतराल ( ई ) 1 कि. ग्रा. है । इसका एक 20 m³/hr का 0.625 m³ प्लांट साइज है और अधिकतम प्लांट क्षमता 30 m³/hr है । उक्त मशीन को सीमेंट बेचिंग प्लांट आदि में विभिन्न इंगितंडेंट्स को तोलने और भरने के लिए डिजाइन किया गया है । प्रकाश उत्सर्जक डायोड ( एल ई डी ) प्रदर्श तोलन परिणाम उपदर्शित करता है । उपकरण 415 वोल्ट और 50 हर्ट्ज प्रत्यावर्ती धारा विद्युत प्रदाय पर कार्य करता है ।

सीलिंग का तरीका और स्थान इंडीकेटर के पिछली तरफ दो छेद किए जाते हैं , एक टॉप पर दायीं तरफ और एक आउटर कवर काट कर तल में बायीं तरफ और स्टाम्प और सील के सत्यापन के लिए छेदों को लीड वायर से बांधा जाता है । इस सील से छेडछाड़ किए बिना नहीं खोला जा सकता ।

[फा. सं. डब्ल्यू एम-21 ( 264)/2008]

आर. माथुरबूथम, निदेशक , विधिक माप विज्ञान 6212

[PART II SEC.3 (ii) ] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 17 , 2009/ASVINA.25 , 1931

New Delhi , the 26th August, 2009

SO..2856.- Whereas the Central Government after considering the report submitted to it by prescribed authority, issatisfied that the model described in the said report ( see the figure given below) is in conformity with the provisions of the Standards of Weights and Measures Act, 1976 (60 of 1976) and the Standars of Weights and Measures (Approval of Models) Rules , 1987 and the said model is likely to maintain its accuracy over periods of sustained use and to render accurate service under varied conditions;

Now, therefore , in exercise of the powers conferred by sub - sections (7) and ( 8) of Section 36 of the said Act, the Central Government hereby issues and publishes the certificate of approval of the model of Discontinuous Totalizing Automaticweighing instrument ( Totalizing Hopper Weigher- Batching Plant) with digital indication of (Accuracy class - 1 ) series " RLA 20 " and with brand name "AJAX FIORI " (hereinafter referred to as the said model) , manufactured by M/ s . Ajax Fiori Engineering ( 1 ) Pvt . Ltd, No. 16 & 17, KIADB Industrial Area, Doddaballapur -561203 and which is assigned the approval mark IND/09/08/372;

Figure-I Model

Figure-2

Thesaid model is a strain guage type load cell based ( Discontinuous Totalizing Automatic weighing instrument (Totalizing Hopper Weigher -Batching Plant) with a maximum capacity of 1200 kg and minimum capacity of200kg. The verfication scale interval ( e) is I kg . It has a plant size of20m³ /hr of0.625m³ and maximum plant capacity up to 30m³/ar..The machine is designed for weighing and filling the various ingredient used in cement batching plant etc. The Light Emitting Diode(LED) indicates the weighing results . The instrument operates on three phase 415 Volts , 50Hertz alternative current power supply.

Manner a Place of Sealing . By the rear side of the indicator 2 holes are made one on top right side ankome on bottom left side by cutting the outer cover and fastened by a leaded wire for receiving the verification stamp.and seal . It cannot be opened without tampering the seal .

[F.No. WM -21 (264)/2008]

R. MATHURBOOTHAM , Director of Legal Metrology 6213 [भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii ) ]

भारत का राजपत्र: अक्तूबर 17, 2009/आश्विन-25 , 1931

नई दिल्ली, 26 असससस्स, 2009

वहाआ 2897: कोन्द्रीयसस्कार का, विहित प्राधिकारी द्वारा उसे प्रस्तुत रिपोर्ट पर विचार करने के पश्चात् यह समाधान हो गया है कि उक्त रिपोर्ट में वर्णित मॉल (नीचे दी गई आकृति देखें ) बाट और माप मानक अधिनियम, 1976 ( 1976 का 60 ) तथा बाट और माप मानक (मॉडलों का अनुमोदत) नियम, 1987 के उपबंधों के अनुरूप है और इस बात की संभावना है कि लगातार प्रयोग की अवधि में भी उक्त मॉडल यथार्थता बनाए रखेगा और विभिन्न परिस्थितियों में उपयुक्त सेवा प्रदान करता रहेगा;

अतः, अब , केन्द्रीय सरकार , उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 की उप - धारा ( 7 ) और उप- धारा ( 8 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए, मैसर्स अजेक्स फिओरीं इंजीनियरिंग ( 1 ) प्रा. लि. नं. 16 एंड 17 , केआईएडीबी इंडस्ट्रियल एरिया , डोडाबालापुर -561203 द्वारा विनिर्मित यथार्थता. वर्ग 1 वाले " यूसेक्सस" श्रृंखला के मिटियुअस टोटलाइनिंग स्वचालित तोलग उपकरण ( टोटलाइजिंग हुपर व्हीयर- बेर्षिय प्लांट) अंकक सूचन सहित, के मॉडल कन, जिसके ब्रांड का नाम " अजेक्स फिओरी " है ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अमुसोमरसर ििवहः आईई एम 00708373 समनुदेशित किया गया है , अनुमोदन प्रमाणपत्र जारी करती है ।

उजमा मोडलः एलक मिजूत मे प्रमरः भार से आमारिकधिमन्युमस टोटलाइजिंग स्वचालित तोलन उम्रकरण ( टोटलाइजिंग हुपुर व्हीयर- बेचिंग प्लांट ) है । इसकी अधिकतम क्षमता 2400 किया है और न्यूनतम क्षमता 200 कि.ग्रा. है । सत्यापन मापमान अंतराल ( ई ) 1 कि. ग्रा. है । इसका एक60 वन 10 प्लस और अधिकतम प्लांकक्षमता 120 m³/hr.है । उक्त मशीन को सीमेंट बेचिंग प्लांट आदि में क्रिमिनको और भरने के लिए िकिया गया है । प्रकाश उत्सर्जक डायोड ( एल ई डी) प्रदर्श तोलन परिणाम उपदर्शित करता है । उपकरण 41.5 वोल्ट और 50 हर्ट्ज प्रत्यावर्ती धारा विद्युत प्रक्षय पर कार्य करता है ।

सीलिंग का तरीका औरस्थान इंडीकेटर के पिछली तरफ दो छेद किए जाते हैं, एक टॉप पर दायीं तरफ औरएक आउटर कवर काट कर तल में कार्यों तरफ और स्टसम्म और सील के सत्यापन के लिए छेदों को लीड वायर से बांधा जाता हैं । इसको सील से छेडछाड़ किए बिना नहीं खोला जा सकताः ।

और केन्द्रीय सरकार उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 की उपधारा ( 12 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियोंका प्रयोग करते हुए यह घोषणा करती है कि उक्त मॉडल के अनुमोदम के इस प्रमाणपत्र को अंतर्गत उसी विनिर्माता द्वारा उसी सिद्धांत, डिज़ाइन के अनुसार और उसी सामग्री से जिससे उक्त अनुमोदित मॉडल का विनिर्माण किया गया है , विनिर्मित उसी श्रृंखला के वैसे ही मेक, यथार्थता और कार्यपालन के तोलन उपकरण भी होंगे जिनकी क्षमता 20 टन तक है ।

[फा. सं. डब्ल्यूएम-21 (264)/2008 ]

आर. माथुरबूथम , निदेशक , विधिक माप विज्ञान 6214

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 17 , 2009/ ASVINA 25, 1931

[PART II-SEC. 3(ii )]

New Delhi , the 26th August, 2009

S.O. 2857.- Whereas the Central Government after considering the report submitted to it by prescribed authority , is satisfied that the model described in the said report ( see the figure given below) is in conformity with the provisions of the Standards of Weights and Measures Act , 1976 ( 60 of 1976) and the Standars of Weights and Measures (Approval of Models) Rules , 1987 and the said model is likely to maintain its accuracy over periods of sustained use and to render accurate service under varied conditions ;

Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub- sections (7 ) and ( 8 ) of Section 36 of the said Act , the Central Government hereby issues and publishes the certificate of approval of the model of Discontinuous Totalizing Automatic weighing instrument (Totalizing Hopper Weigher- Batching Plant ) with digital indication and of Accuracy class- 1 series " EUROAXN " and with brand name " AJAX FIORI " ( hereinafter referred to as the said model ) , manufactured by M/ s . Ajax Fiori Engineerilng ( I) Pvt . Ltd , No. 16 & 17, KIADB Industrial Area, Doddaballapur - 561203 and which is assigned the approval mark IND/09/08/373 ;

The said model is a strain guage type load cell based Discontinuous Totalizing Automatic weighing instrument (Totalizing Hopper Weigher- Batching Plant ) with a maximum capacity of2400 kg and minimum capacity of200 kg . The verfication scale interval (e) is 1 kg . It has a plant size of60m³ /hr of 1.0 m³ and maximum plant capacity up to 120 m³ /hr . The machine is designed for weighing and filling the various ingredient used in cement batching plant etc. The Light Emitting Diode (LED) indicates the weighing results . The instrument operates on three phase 415 Volts , 50Hertz alternative current power supply,

Figure- 1 Model

Figure-2

Manners Place of Sealing . By the rear side of the indicator 2 holes are made one on top right side and one on bottom left side by cutting the outer cover and fastened by a leaded wire for receiving the verification stamp and seal. It cannot be opened without tampering the seal .

Further, in exerce ofthe powers conferred by sub- section ( 12) ofSection 36 ofthe said Act, the Central Govemment hereby declares that this certificate of approval of the said model shall also cover the weighing instruments of similar make , accuracy and performance of same series with capacity in the range upto 20 tonne manufactured by the same manufacturer in accordance with the same principle,design and with the same meterials with which , the said approved model has been manufactured.

[F.No. WM- 21 (264)/2008 ]

R. MATHURBOOTHAM , Director of Legal Metrology 6215 [ भाग II-खण्ड 3( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : अक्तूबर 17, 2009/आश्विन 25 , 1931

नईदिल्ली, 26 अगस्त, 2009

का.आ. 2858.-केन्द्रीय सरकार का, विहित प्राधिकारी द्वारा उसे प्रस्तुत रिपोर्ट पर विचार करने के पश्चात् यह समाधान हो गया हैं कि उक्त रिपोर्ट में वर्णित मॉडल (नीचे दी गई आकृति देखें ) बाट और माप मानक अधिनियम , 1976 ( 1976 का 60 ) तथा बाट और माप मानक (मॉडलों का अनुमोदन ) नियम, 1987 के उपबंधों के अनुरूप है और इस बात की संभावना है कि लगातार प्रयोग की अवधि में भी उक्त मॉडल यथार्थता बनाए रखेगा और विभिन्न परिस्थितियों में उपयुक्त सेवा प्रदान करता रहेगा;

अतः , अब , केन्द्रीय सरकार , उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 की उप - धारा ( 7 ) और उप- धारा ( 8 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए, मैसर्स एक्वारियस इंजीनियरिंग प्रा. लि. , सर्वे नं. 480, 481 और 482 , विलेज-अम्बादवेत , तहसील- मुलशी , जिला पुणे द्वारा विनिर्मित यथार्थता वर्ग 1 वाले " एस एम पी " श्रृंखला के डिस्कॉटन्युअस टोटलाइजिंग स्वचालित तोलन उपकरण ( टोटलाइजिंग हुपर व्हीयर- बेचिंग प्लांट) अंकक सूचन सहित , के मॉडल का, जिसके ब्रांड का नाम " एक्वारियस " है ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/09/08/367 समनुदेशित किया गया है , अनुमोदन प्रमाण- पत्र जारी करती है;

उक्त मॉडल एक विकृत गेज प्रकार का भार सेल आधारित डिस्कंटिन्युअस टोटलाइजिंग स्वचालित तोलन उपकरण ( टोटलाइजिंग हुपर व्हीयर - बेचिंग प्लांट ) है । इसकी अधिकतम क्षमता 1250 कि.ग्रा. है और न्यूनतम क्षमता 200 कि.ग्रा. है । सत्यापन मापमान अंतराल ( ई ) 1 कि. ग्रा. है.। इसका एक 30 m³/hr का 0.5 m³ प्लांट साइज है और अधिकतम प्लांट क्षमता 30 m³/hr है । उक्त मशीन को सीमेंट बेचिंग प्लांट आदि मेंविभिन्न इंग्रिडेंट्स को तोलने और भरने के लिए डिजाइन किया गया है । प्रकाश उत्सर्जक डायोड ( एल ई डी ) प्रदर्श तोलनं परिणाम उपदर्शित करता है । उपकरण 3 फेज 415 वोल्ट और 50 हर्ट्ज प्रत्यावर्ती धारा विद्युत प्रदाय पर कार्य करता है ।

9999

F2RST

redton

आकृति-2 इंडीकेटर के माडल का सीलिंग प्रावधान

सीलिंग करने का तरीका और स्थान इंडीकेटर के पिछली तरफ आउटर कवर को काट कर एक ऊपर दायीं तरफ और दूसरा तल में बायीं तरफ दो छेद किए गए हैं और स्टाम्प और सील के सत्यापन के लिए छेदों को लीड वायर से बांधा गया है । सील से छेड़छाड़ किए बिना इसे खोला नहीं जा सकता ।

[फा. सं. डब्ल्यूएम-21 ( 265 )/2008 ]

आर. माथुरबूथम, निदेशक , विधिक माप विज्ञान 3633G1/09-م 6216

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 17 , 2009/ ASVINA 25 , 1931

[PART II-SEC. 3( ii) ]

New Delhi , the 26th August, 2009

S.O. 2858.- Whereas the Central Government after considering the report submitted to it by prescribed authority, is satisfied that the model described in the said report (see the figure given below) is in conformity with the provisions of the Standards of Weights and Measures Act, 1976 (60 of 1976) and the Standards of Weight and Measures (Approval of Models) Rules , 1987 and the said model is likely to maintain its accuracy over period of sustained use and to render accurate service under varied conditions;

Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub-sections (7) and (8) of Section 36 of the said Act, the Central Government hereby issues and publishes the certificate of approval of the model of Discontinuous Totalizing Automatic weighing instruments (Totalizing Hopper Weighing -Batching Plant ) with digital indication of Accuracy class- I , series " SMP " and with brand name " AQUARIUS" (hereinafter referred to as the said model ) , manufactured by M/s. Aquarius Engineer Pvt . Ltd. , Survey No. 480, 481 and 482, Village: Ambadwet, Tal : Mulsi, Dist : Pune and which is assigned the approval mark IND/09 /08/367;

The said model is a strain guage type load cell based Discontinuous Totalizing Automatic weighing instrument (Totalizing Hopper Weigher-Batching Plant ) with a maximum capacity of 1250 kg and minimum capacity of 200 kg . The verfication scale interval (e) is 1kg . It has a plant size of 30m³ /hr of 0.5 m³ and maximum plant capacity up to 30 m³ /hr . The machine is designed for weighing and filling the various ingredient used in cement batching plant etc. The Light Emitting Diode (LED) indicates the weighing results . The instrument operates on three phase 415 Volts , 50Hertz alternative current power supply.

Figure-1 Indicator

Figure-3 Schematic diagram of sealing arrangement

Manner and Place of Sealing : By the rear side of the indicator 2 holes are made one on top right side and one on bottom left side by cutting the outer cover and fastened by a leaded wire for receiving the verification stamp and seal . It cannot be opened without tampering the seal .

[F.No. WM-21(265 )/2008 ]

R. MATHURBOOTHAM, Director of Legal Metrology 6217 [भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : अक्तूबर 17 , 2009/आश्विन25 , 1931

नई दिल्ली , 26 अगस्त, 2009

का.आ. 2859.-केन्द्रीय सरकार का, विहित प्राधिकारी द्वारा उसे प्रस्तुत रिपोर्ट पर विचार करने के पश्चात् यह समाधान हो गया है कि उक्त रिपोर्ट में वर्णित मॉडल ( नीचे दी गई आकृति देखें ) बाट और माप मानक अधिनियम, 1976 ( 1976 का 60 ) तथा बाट और माप मानक (मॉडलों का अनुमोदन ) नियम , 1987 के उपबंधों के अनुरूप है और इस बात की संभावना है कि लगातार प्रयोग की अवधि में भी उक्त मॉडल यथार्थता बनाए रखेगा और विभिन्न परिस्थितियों में उपयुक्त सेवा प्रदान करता रहेगा;

अतः , अब, केन्द्रीय सरकार , उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 की उप- धारा ( 7 ) और उप- धारा ( 8 ) द्वारा शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए, मैसर्स एक्वारियस इंजीनियरिंग प्रा. लि. सर्वे नं. 480, 481 और 482 ,विलेज अम्बादवेत, तहसील - मुलशी , जिला पुणे द्वारा विनिर्मित यथार्थता वर्ग-1 वाले " एम पी " श्रृंखला के डिस्कंटिन्युअस टोटलाइजिंग स्वचालित तोलन उपकरण ( टोटलाइजिंग हुपर व्हीयर- बेचिंग प्लांट ) अंकक सूचन सहित , के मॉडल का, जिसके ब्रांड का नाम " एक्वारियस " है ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/09/08/368 समनुदेशित किया गया है , अनुमोदन प्रमाण - पत्र जारी करती है;

उक्तमॉडल एक विकृत गेज प्रकार का भार सेल आधारित डिस्कंटिन्युअस टोटलाइजिंग स्वचालित तोलन उपकरण ( टोटलाइजिंग हुपर व्हीयर- बेचिंग प्लांट ) है । इसकी अधिकतम क्षमता 2500 कि.ग्रा. है और न्यूनतम क्षमता 200 कि.ग्रा. है और सत्यापन मापमान अंतराल (ई ) 1 कि. ग्रा. है । इसका एक 60 m³/hr का 1.0 m³ प्लांट साइज है और अधिकतम प्लांट क्षमता 60 m³/hr है । उक्त मशीन को सीमेंट बेचिंग प्लांट आदि में विभिन्न इंग्रिडेंट्स को तोलने और भरने के लिए डिजाइन किया गया है । प्रकाश उत्सर्जक डायोड ( एल ई डी) प्रदर्श तोलन परिणाम उपदर्शित करता है । उपकरण 3 फेज 415 वोल्ट और 50 हर्ट्ज प्रत्यावर्ती धारा विद्युत प्रदाय पर कार्य करता है ।

FAR

450

आकृति-3 इंडीकेटर के मॉडल का सीलिंग प्रावधान

सीलिंग करने का तरीका और स्थान इंडीकेटर के पिछली तरफ आऊटर कंवर को काटकर एक ऊपर दायीं तरफ और दूसरा तल में बायीं तरफ दो छेद किए गए हैं और स्टाम्प और सील के सत्यापन के लिए छेदों को लीड वायर से बांधा गया है । सील से छेडछाड़ किए बिना इसे खोला नहीं जा सकता ।

[फा. सं. डब्ल्यू एम-21 ( 265 )/2008 ]

आर. माथुरबूथम , निदेशक, विधिक माप विज्ञान 6218

[PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii ) ] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 17, 2009/ ASVINA 25 , 1931

New Delhi , the 26th August, 2009

S.O. 2859. Whereas the Central Government after considering the report submitted to it by prescribed authority, is satisfied that the model described in the said report ( see the figure given below) is in conformity with the provisions of the Standards of Weights and Measures Act, 1976 ( 60 of 1976) and the Standards of Weights and Measures (Approval of Models) Rules, 1987 and the said model is likely to maintain its accuracy over periods of sustained use and to render accurate service under varied conditions;

Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub - sections (7 ) and (8) of Section 36 of the said Act , the Central Government hereby issues and publishes the certificate of approval of the model of Discontinuous Totalizing Automatic weighing instruments (Totalizing Hopper Weigher- Batching Plant ) with digital indication and of Accuracy class - I , series " MP " and with brand name " AQUARIUS " (hereinafter referred to as the said model ) , manufactured by M/s .Aquarius Engineer Pvt . Ltd. , Survey Nos . 480, 481 and 482, Village : Ambadwet, Tal : Mulshi Dist : Pune and which is assigned the approval mark IND/09/08/368;

The said model is a strain guage type load cell based Discontinuous Totalizing Automatic weighing instrument (Totalizing Hopper Weigher- Batching Plant) with a maximum capacity of 2500 kg . and minimum capacity of200 kg. The verfication scale interval (e) is Ikg . It has a plant size of 60m³ /hr of 1.0 m³ and maximum plant capacity up to 60 m³ /hr . The machine is designed for weighing and filling the various ingredient used in cement batching plant etc. The Light Emitting Diode (LED) indicates the weighing results . The instrument operates on three phase 415 Volts , 50Hertz alternative current power supply.

Figure-1 Indicator

redlon

6666

DSPPAR

Figure-3 Schematic diagram of sealing arrangement

Manner and Place of Sealing : By the rear side of the indicator 2 holes are made one on top right side and one on bottom left side by cutting the outer cover and fastened by a leaded wire for receiving the verification stamp and seal . It cannot be opened without tampering the seal .

Further , in exercise of the power conferred by sub - section ( 12) of Section 36 of the said Act, the Central Government hereby declares that this certificate of approval of the said model shall also cover the weighing instruments of similar make , accuracy and performance of same series with capacity in the range upto 20 tonne manufactured by the same manufacturer in accordance with the same principle, design and with the same meterials with which , the said approved model has been manufactured.

[F. No. WM - 21 (265 )/2008]

R. MATHURBOOTHAM , Director of Legal Metrology 6219 [भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र: अक्तूबर 17, 2009/आश्विन 25 , 1931

नईदिल्ली , 26 अगस्त, 2009

का.आ. 2860.-केन्द्रीय सरकार का, विहित प्राधिकारी द्वारा उसे प्रस्तुत रिपोर्ट पर विचार करने के पश्चात् यह समाधान हो गया है कि उक्त रिपोर्ट में वर्णित मॉडल (नीचे दी गई आकृति देखें ) बाट और माप मानक अधिनियम, 1976 ( 1976 का 60) तथा बाट और माप मानक (मॉडलों का अनुमोदन ) नियम , 1987 के उपबंधों के अनुरूप है और इस बात की संभावना है कि लगातार प्रयोग की अवधि में भी उक्त मॉडल यथार्थता बनाए रखेगा और विभिन्न परिस्थितियों में उपयुक्त सेवा प्रदान करता रहेगा;

अतः , अब , केन्द्रीय सरकार, उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 की उप - धारा ( 7 ) और उप- धारा ( 8 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए, मैसर्स एक्वारियस इंजीनियरिंग प्रा. लि. सर्वे नं. 480, 481 और 482, विलेज- अम्बादवेत , तहसील- मुलशी, जिला पुणे द्वारा विनिर्मित यथार्थता वर्ग 1 वाले " एस पी " श्रृंखला के डिस्कंटिन्युअस टोटलाइजिंग स्वचालित तोलन उपकरण ( टोटलाइजिंग हुपर व्हीयर- बेचिंग प्लांट ) अंकक सूचन सहित, के मॉडल का, जिसके ब्रांड का नाम " एक्वारियस " है (जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/09/08/369 समनुदेशित किया गया है, अनुमोदन प्रमाण- पत्र जारी करती है ।

उक्त मॉडल एक विकृत गेज प्रकार का भार सेल आधारित डिस्कंटिन्युअस टोटलाइजिंग स्वचालित तोलन उपकरण (टोटलाइजिंग हुपर व्हीयर- बेचिंग प्लांट ) है । इसकी अधिकतम क्षमता 9600 कि.ग्रा. है और न्यूनतम क्षमता 400 कि.ग्रा. है । सत्यापन मापमान अंतराल ( ई) 1 कि. ग्रा. है । इसका एक 60 m³/hr का 1.0 m³ प्लांट साइज है और अधिकतम प्लांट क्षमता 100 m³/hr है । उक्त मशीन को सीमेंट बेचिंग प्लांट आदि में विभिन्न इंग्रिडेंट्स को तोलने और भरने के लिए डिजाइन किया गया है । प्रकाश उत्सर्जक डायोड ( एल ई डी ) प्रदर्श तोलन परिणाम उपदर्शित करता है । उपकरण 415 वोल्ट और 50 हर्ट्ज प्रत्यावर्ती धारा विद्युत प्रदाय पर कार्य करता है ।

9999

FST

DSP PAR F14 F2

red ion

आकृति-3 इंडीकेटर के मॉडल का सीलिंग प्रावधान

सीलिंग करने का तरीका और स्थान इंडीकेटर के पिछली तरफ आउटर कवर को काटकर एक ऊपर दायीं तरफ और दूसरा तल में बायीं तरफ दो छेद किए गए हैं और स्टाम्प और सील के सत्यापन के लिए छेदों को लीड वायर से बांधा गया है । सील से छेड़छाड़ किए बिना इसे खोला नहीं जा सकता ।

और केन्द्रीय सरकार उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 की उप- धारा ( 12 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए यह घोषणा करती है कि उक्त मॉडल के अनुमोदन के इस प्रमाण- पत्र के अंतर्गत उसी विनिर्माता द्वारा उसी सिद्धांत , डिजाइन के अनुसार और उसी सामग्री से जिससे उक्त अनुमोदित मॉडल का विनिर्माण किया गया है , विनिर्मित उसी श्रृंखला के वैसे ही मेक , यथार्थता और कार्यपालन के तौलन उपकरण भी होंगे जो 20 टन तक की रेंज में हैं ।

[फा. सं. डब्ल्यूएम-21 (265) /2008 ]

आर. माथुरबूथम , निदेशक , विधिक माप विज्ञान 6220

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 17, 2009/ASVINA 25 , 1931

[PART II-SEC . 3(ii)]

New Delhi , the 26th August, 2009

S.O. 2860.-Whereas the Central Government after considering the report submitted to it by prescribed authority, is satisfied that the model described in the said report ( see the figure given below) is in conformity with the provisions of the Standards of Weight and Measures Act, 1976 (60 of 1976) and the Standars of Weight and Measures (Approval of Models) Rules , 1987 and the said model is likely to maintain its accuracy over period of sustained use and to render accurate service under varied conditions;

Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub - sections (7 ) and (8 ) of Section 36 of the said Act, the Central Government hereby issues and publishes the certificate of approval of the model of Discontinuous Totalizing Automatic weighing instruments (Totalizing Hopper Weighing- Batching Plant ) with digital indication and of Accuracy class- I , series " SP" and with brand name " AQUARIUS" ( hereinafter referred to as the said model ) , manufactured by M/s. Aquarius Engineer Pvt. Ltd. , Survey No. 480, 481 and 482 , Village : Ambadwet, Tal : Mulsi Dist: Pune and which is assigned the approval mark IND/ 09/08/369;

The saidmodel is a strain guage type load cell based Discontinuous Totalizing Automatic weighing instrument (Totalizing Hopper Weigher -Batching Plant) with a maximum capacity of 9600 kg . and minimum capacity of400 kg. The verfication scale interval (e) is 2 kg . It has a plant size of 60m³ /hr of 1.0 m³ and maximum plant capacity up to 100 m³ /hr . The machine is designed for weighing and filling the various ingredient used in cement batching plant etc. The Light Emitting Diode(LED) indicates the weighing results . The instrument operates on three phase 415 Volts, 50Hertz alternative current powersupply.

Figure- I Indicator

门品

Figure- 3 Schematic diagram of sealing arrangement

Manner and Place of Sealing: By the rear side of the indicator 2 holes are made one on top right side and one on bottom left side by cutting the outer cover and fastened by a leaded wire for receiving the verification stamp and seal . It cannot be opened without tampering the seal.

[F. No. WM-21 ( 265 )/2008]

R. MATHURBOOTHAM , Director ofLegal Metrology 6221 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र: अक्तूबर 17, 2009/आश्विन 25, 1931

नई दिल्ली , 26 अगस्त, 2009

का.आ. 2861. केन्द्रीय सरकार का, विहित प्राधिकारी द्वारा उसे प्रस्तुत रिपोर्ट पर विचार करने के पश्चात्यह समाधान हो गया है कि उक्त रिपोर्ट में वर्णित मॉडल ( नीचे दी गई आकृति देखें ) बाट और माप मानक अधिनियम , 1976 ( 1976 का 60 ) तथा बाट और माप मानक (मॉडलों का अनुमोदन ) नियम, 1987 के उपबंधों के अनुरूप है और इस बात की संभावना है कि लगातार प्रयोग की अवधि में भी उक्त मॉडल यथार्थता बनाए रखेगा और विभिन्न परिस्थितियों में उपयुक्त सेवा प्रदान करता रहेगा;

अतः , अब , केन्द्रीय सरकार , उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 की उप- धारा ( 7 ) और उप- धारा (8 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए, मैसर्स एक्वारियस इंजीनियरिंग प्रा. लि. , सर्वे नं. 480, 481 और 482 , विलेज अम्बादवेत , तहसील - मुलशी , जिला पुणे द्वारा विनिर्मित यथार्थतत्र वर्ग 1 वाले " एस पी " श्रृंखला के डिस्कंटिन्युअस टोटलाइजिंग स्वचालित तोलन उपकरण (टोटाइप व्हीयरमेन प्लांट) अंकासून सहित , केमॉडल का, जिसके ब्रांड का नाम " एक्वारियस " है ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन विह आई एन डी/09/08/370 समनुदेशित किया गया है , अनुमोदन प्रमाण-पत्र जारी करती है ।

आकृति-3 इंडीकेटर के माडल का सीलिंग प्रावधान

उक्तमॉडल एक विकृत गेज प्रकार का भार सेल आधारित डिस्कंटिन्युअस टोटलाजिंग स्वचालित तोलन उपकरण (टोटलाइजिंग हुपर व्हीयर- बेचिंग प्लांट ) है । इसकी अधिकतम क्षमता 2500 कि.ग्रा. है और न्यूनतम क्षमता 200 कि.ग्रा. है । सत्यापन मापमान अंतराल (ई ) 1 कि. ग्रा. है । इसका एक 60 m³/hr का 1.0m³ प्लांट साइज है और अधिकतम प्लांट क्षमता 100m² Au है । उक्त मशीन को सीमेंट बेचिन प्लांट आदि में विभिन्न इंग्रिडेंट्स को तोलने और भरने के लिए डिजाइन किया गया है । प्रकाश उत्सर्जक डायोड ( एल ई डी ) प्रदर्श तोलन परिणाम उपदर्शित करता है । उपकरण 415 वोल्ट और 50 हर्ट्ज प्रत्यावर्ती धारा विद्युत प्रदाय पर कार्य करता है ।

सीलिंग करने का तरीका और स्थान इंडीकेटर के पिछली तरफ आउटर कवर को काटकर एक ऊपर दायीं तरफ और दूसरा तल में बायीं तरफ दो छेद किए गए हैं और स्टाम्प और सील के सत्यापन के लिए इन छेदों को लीड वायर से बांधा गया है । सील से छेड़‌छाड़ किएबिना इसे खोला नहीं जा सकता ।

[फा. सं. डब्ल्यूएम-21 (265 )/2008]

आर. माधुरदूधम , निदेशक , विधिक माप विज्ञान 6222

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 17, 2009/ ASVINA 25 , 1931

[PART II-SEC. 3( ii) ]

New Delhi , the 26th August, 2009

S.O. 2861.-Whereas the Central Government after considering the report submitted to it by prescribed authority, is satisfied that the model described in the said report ( see the figure given below) is in conformity with the provisions of the Standards of Weights and Measures . Act, 1976 (60 of 1976) and the Standards of Weights and Measures (Approval of Models) Rules , 1987 and the said model is likely to maintain its accuracy over periods of sustained use and to render accurate service under varied conditions ;

Now,therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub - sections (7) and (8) of Section 36 of the said Act, the Central Government hereby issues and publishes the certificate of approval of the model of Discontinuous Totalizing Automatic weighing instrument (Totalizing Hopper Weigher - Batching Plant) with digital indication of Accuracy class - I , series " SP " and with brand name " AQUARIUS" ( hereinafter referred to as the said model ) , manufactured by M/s. Aquarius Engineer Pvt. Ltd. , Survey No. 480, 481 and 482, Village : Ambadwet, Tal : Mulhsi, Dist: Pune and which is assigned the approval mark IND/09/08/370;

Figure- I Indicator

段平成

Figure- 3 Schematic diagram of sealing arrangement

The said model is a strain guage type load cell based Discontinuous Totalizing Automatic weighing instrument (Totalizing Hopper Weigher -Batching Plant) with a maximum capacity of 2500 kg . and minimum capacity of200 kg. The verification scale interval (e) is 1 kg. It has a plant size of 60m³ /hr of 1.0 m³ and maximum plant capacity up to 100 m³/hr . The machine is designed for weighing and filling the various ingredient used in cement batching plant etc. The Light Emitting . Diode(LED) indicates the weighing results . The instrument operates on three phase 415 Volts , 50Hertz alternative current power supply.

Manner and Place of Sealing: By the rear side of the indicator 2 holes are made one on top right side and one on bottom left side by cutting the outer cover and fastened by a leaded wire for receiving the verification stamp and seal . It cannot be opened without tampering the seal.

[F.No. WM-21 (265)/2008 ]

R. MATHURBOOTHAM , Director of Legal Metrology 6223 [ भाग-खण्ड 3(ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : अक्तूबर 17, 2009/आश्विन 25, 1931

नई दिल्ली, 30 सितम्बर, 2009

कर. आ. 2862. भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो नियम , 1987 के नियम7 के उपनियम ( 1 ) के सांड ( ख) के अनुसरण में भारतीय मानक न्यूरो एतद्वाश अधिसूचित करता है कि जिन माणीक मानकों को भी अनुसूची में दिए गए हैं वे स्थान है

अनुसूची

स्थापित तिथि स्थापित भास्तीय मानक ( करें) की संख्या वर्ष

क्रम संख्या और शीर्षक

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

(2)

(3)

(4) (1)

31-07-2009

आई एस 210: 1993

आई एस 210: 2009 भूरे लोहे की कलाईयां विशिष्टि ( पाचयां पुनरीक्षणः)

इस भारतीय मानक की प्रतियों भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो , मानक भवन, 9, बहादुर शाह जफर मार्ग , नई दिल्ली-110002 , क्षेत्रीय कार्यालयों: नई दिल्ली, कोलकाता , चण्डीगढ़ , चेन्नई , मुम्बई तक शाका कार्यालयों: अहमदाबाद, बंगलौर, भोपाल, भुवनेश्वर, कोयम्बटूर , गुवाहाटी , हैदरावाद, जयपुर , कानपुर , नागपुर , पटना, पूणे तथा तिरूवनन्तापुरम में बिक्री हेतु उपलब्ध हैं ।

[संदर्भ एभठीशी

BUREAU OF INDIAN STANDARDS

NewDelhi, the30th Sepember,2009

S.O. 2862.-In pursuance of clause (b) of sub-rule( 1 ) ) ofRule 7 of the Bureau of Indian Standards Rules, 1987, theBureau of Indian Standards hereby notifies that the Indian Standards, particulars ofwhich are given in the Schodule hereto annexed have been established on the date indicated against each:

SCHOULE

SL No.

No.& Year of the Indian Standards Established

No. &Year of Indian Standards, ifany, Date of Superseded by the New Indian Standard Established

(4)

(1) (2)

(3)

210: 1993

31July2009 IS210: 2009Grey iron castings (fifth revision)

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

[Ref: MTD6/T-

SHRI P. GHOSH , Scientist ' E' & Head(MTD)

नईदिल्ली, 5 अक्तूबर , 2009

का. आ. 2863. भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो नियम, 1987 के नियम 7 के उपनियम ( 1 ) के खंड (ख) के अनुसरण में भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो एतद्द्वारा अधिसूचित करता है कि जिन भारतीय मानकों के विवरण नीचे अनुसूची में दिए गए हैं वे स्थापित हो गए हैं:-

अनुसूची

स्थापित तिथि स्थापित भारतीय मानक ( कों ) की संख्या वर्ष

क्रम संख्या और शीर्षक

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

(4) (2)

(3)

(1)

31मार्च 2009 आईएस/आईएसओ 2151: 2004 ( आईएस 11446 : 1985 का अतिक्रमण ध्वनिकी संपीडिकों और निर्वात पम्पों का ध्वनि परीक्षण संहित - इंजीनियरिंग पद्धति (ग्रेड 2)

आईएस 11446: 1985/आईएस ओ 2151 : 1972 बाहरी उपयोग के लिए अभीष्ट संपीडक इकाईयों द्वारा उत्सर्जित चाकुजनित ध्वनि का मानन

3633 G1/09-10 6224

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 17, 2009/ ASVINA 25 , 1931

(2)

(1)

आईएस/आईएसओ 2415 :2004( आई एस 6132: 2003 का अतिक्रमण) उत्थापक प्रयोजनों के लिए फोर्जित शैकल डी शैकल और धनु शैकल 3. आईएस/आईएसओ 3077: 2001 ( आई एस 6216: 1982 का अतिक्रमण ) उत्थापक प्रयोजनों के लिए शार्ट लिंक चेन- संकुचित-छूट होस्ट चेन ग्रेड टी ( टी, डेट और डीटी प्रकार )

आईएस/आईएसओ 3857: 1977 , संपीडक वायुदाब चालित औजार और मशीनें शब्दावली भाग । सामान्य 5. आईएस/आईएसओ 3857-2: 1977 ( आईएस 5727 ): 1981 का अतिक्रमण ) संपीडक, कंप्रेशर , वायुदाब चालित औजार और मशीनें- शब्दावली भाग 2 संपीडक 6. आईएस/ आईएसओ 4306-3: 2003 ( आईएस 13473 (भाग 3 ) : 1993 का अतिक्रमण ) क्रेन- शब्दावली भाग 3 टावर क्रेन

7. आईएस/आईएसओ 6194-1: 2007 ( आईएस 5129 (भाग 1 ): 2000 का अतिक्रमण ) इलास्टोमैरीक सीलिंग घटक को लगाकर रोटरी शाफ्ट लिप टाइप सील भाग । अभिहित आयाम और छूटें

8. आईएस/आईएसओ 18652 : 2005 (आईएस 4656: 1968 का अतिक्रमण ) भवन निर्माण की मशीनरी और उपस्कर कंक्रीट के लिए बाहरी वाइब्रेटर

9. आईएस/ आईएसओ 22883 : 2004 (आईएस 7261 : 1985 का अतिक्रमण ) कास्टर और व्हील 1.1 मी/से ( 4 कि मी/घंटा) तक के अनुप्रयोग की अपेक्षाएं

10.

कास्टर और व्हील 1.1 मी/से ( 4 कि मी/घंटा ) से अधिक और 4.4 मी/से ( 16 किमी/घंटा ) तक के आईएस/आईएसओ 22884 : 2004 (आईएस 7261 : 1985 का अतिक्रमण ) अनुप्रयोग की अपेक्षाएं

[PART II-SEC. 3( ii)]

(4) (3)

30जून 2009 आईएस 6132:2003/आईएसओ 2415:1987 उत्थापक प्रयोजनों के लिए फोर्जित शैकल डीशैकल और धनु शैकल ( सम्मिलित आईएस 6132का भाग 1 भाग 2 और भाग 3 )

31मार्च 2009 आईएस 6216 : 1982 पुली ब्लॉक और दूसरे उत्थापक उपस्करों के अंशशोधन के लिए शार्ट लिंक चेन , ग्रेड टी ( 8 ) ( प्रथम पुनरीक्षण )

30अप्रैल 2009

30अप्रैल2009 आईएस 5727 : 1981/ आईएसओ 3857-2: 1972 संपीडको और निर्वातों से संबंधित शब्दावली

31मार्च 2009 आईएस 13473 ( भाग 3 ): 1993/ आईएसओ 4306-3: 1991 क्रेन- शब्दावली भाग 3 टावर क्रेन

31मार्च 2009 आईएस 5129 ( भाग 1 ) : 2000 आईएसओ 6194-1: 1982 रोटरी शाफट लिप टाइप सील भाग 1 अभिहित आयाम और छूटें ( द्वितीय पुनरीक्षण )

31मार्च 2009 आईएस 4656 : 1968 कंक्रीट के लिए रूप वाइब्रेटर की विशिष्टि

31 मार्च 2009 आईएस 7261 : 1985/आईएसओ 2184: 1972 कास्टर के ऊपरी प्लेटों के आयाम (प्रथम पुनरीक्षण)

31मार्च 2009 आईएस 7261 : 1985/आईएसओ :1972 कास्टर के ऊपरी प्लेटों के आयाम (प्रथम पुनरीक्षण)

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

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

New Delhi , the 5th October,2009

S.O. 2863.-In pursuance of clause (b) of sub- rule ( I ) of Rule 7 of the Bureau of Indian Standards Rules, 1987, the Bureau of Indian Standards hereby notifies that the Indian Standards, particulars of which are given in the Schedule hereto annexed have been established on the date indicated against each:

6225 [भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii ) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : अक्तूबर 17, 2009/आश्विन 25 , 1931

SCHEDULE

Sl. No.

No. & Year of the Indian Standards Established

Date of Established

No.& Year of Indian Standards , ifany, Superseded by the New Indian Standard

(2)

(1)

(3)

(4) 1.

31 March 2009

IS 11446 : 1985/ISO2151 : 1972 Measurement of airborne noise emitted by Compressors units intended for outdoor use

IS/ISO 2151 : 2004 ( Superseding IS 11446 : 1985 ) Acoustics-Noise test code for compressors and vacuum pumps- Engineeringmethod (Grade 2)

30 June2009 IS/ISO 2415: 2004 (Superseding IS6132: 2003 ) Forged shackles for general lifting purposes -Dee shackles and bow shackles

IS 6132 : 2003 /ISO 2415 : 1987 Forged shackles for general lifting purposes-Dee shackles and bowshackles (Merging IS 6132 Pt 1 , Pt2andPt3)

31 March 2009

IS 6216: 1982) Short link chain , Grade T(8) Calibreated for pulley block and other lifting appliances (first revision)

IS/ISO 3077 : 2001 (Superseding IS 6216 : 1982) Short link chain for lifting purposes-Grade T (Types T, DAT and DT) , Fine - Tolerance hoist chain

30April2009 IS/ISO 3857-1 : 1977 Compressors , pneumatic tools and machines - Vocabulary Part 1 General

31 March 2009

IS 5727 : 1981 /ISO 3857-2: 1972 Glossary ofterms related to compressors and exhausters (first revision)

ISISO 3857-2 : 1977 ( Superseding IS 5727 : 1981 ) Compressors , pneumatic tools and machines- Vocabulary Part I Compressors

31March 2009

IS 13473 ( Pt3 ) : 1993/ISO4306-3: 1991 Cranes-Vocabulary Part 3 Tower Cranes

IS/ISO4306-3: 2003 [ Superseding IS 13473 ( Pt3 ): 1993] Cranes-Vocabulary Part 3 Tower cranes

31March2009 IS/ISO 6194-1 : 2007 [ Superseding IS 5129( Pt 1 ) : 2000] Rotary shaft lip- Type seals incorporating Elastomeric sealing elements Part I Nominal dimensions and tolerances

IS 5129 ( Pt1 ) : 2000/ISO 6194-1 : 1982 Rotary shaft lip - Type seals - Part 1 Nominal dimensions and tolerances (second revision )

31March 2009

IS46561968 : Specification for form vibrator and concrete

IS/ISO 18652: 2005 (Superseding IS4656: 1968) Building construction machinery and equipment- Extemal vibrators for concrete

31March 2009

1S7261 : 1985/ISO2184 : 1972 Dimension of top-plates and castors (firstrevision)

IS/ISO 22883 : 2004 ( Superseding IS 7261 : 1985) Castor and wheels-Requirements for applications up to 1.1 m/ s (4 km/h)

10.

31March 2009 IS/ISO 22884 : 2004 ( Superseding IS 7261 : 1985) Castor and wheels- Requirements for applications over 1.1 m/ s (4 km/h) and up to 4.4 m/ s ( 16 km/h)

IS7261 : 1985 : ISO2184 : 1972 Dimension of top-plates and castors first revison

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

[Ref: MED/G-2: 1 ]

C. K. VEDA , Sc . F & Head (Mechanical Engineering)

नई दिल्ली, 5 अक्तूबर, 2009

का.आ. 2864.-भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो नियम, 1987 के नियम 7 के उपनियम ( 1 ) के खंड ( ख ) के अनुसरण में भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो एतद्वारा अधिसूचित करता है कि जिन भारतीय मानकों के विवरण नीचे अनुसूची में दिए गए मानक (कों ) में संशोधन किया गया/किये गये हैं:

6226

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 17, 2009/ASVINA 25 , 1931

[PART II SEC. 3 (ii )]

अनुसूची

संशोषित भारतीय मानक की संख्या और वर्ष

संशोधन की संख्या और तिथि

क्रम संख्या

संशोधन लागूहोने कीतिथि (1)

(2)

(3)

(4) 1.

संशोधन नं. 3 अगस्त 2009

10सितम्बर 2009 आई एस 3196 ( भाग 1 ) : 2006 अल्प दाब द्रवणीय गैसों के लिए 5 लिटर से अधिक जल क्षमता वाले वेल्डित अल्प कार्बन इस्पात के सिलिंडर भाग । द्रवित पैट्रोलियम गैस ( एल पी जी) के लिए सिलिंडर की विशिष्टि

(पाचवां पुनरीक्षण)

संशोधन नं. 5 अगस्त 2009

09सितम्बर 2009 आई एस 12300 : 1988 रेफ्रीजरेंट सिलिंडरों की वाल्व फिटिंग्स-विशिष्टि

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

[संदर्भ एमईडी/जी-2 : 1 ]

[सी. के. वेदा , वैज्ञा. एफ एवं प्रमुख ( यांत्रिक इंजीनियरिंग ) ]

NewDelhi , the 5th October, 2009

S.O. 2864. In pursuance of clause (b) of sub- rule ( 1 ) of Rule 7 of the Bureau of Indian Standards Rules , 1987 , theBureau of Indian Standards hereby notifies that amendments to the Indian Standards, particulars of which are given in the Schedule hereto annexed have been issued:

SCHEDULE

No. and Year of the Indian Standards

No. and Year of the amendment

SL No.

Datefromwhich the amendment shall have effect (1)

(2)

(4)

(3)

1 .

10 September 2009

Amendment No. 3 August2009

IS3196( Part 1) : 2006 Welded low carbon cylinders exceeding 5 litre water capacity for low pressure liquefiable gases Part 1 Cylinders for liquefied petroleum gases (LPG)-Specification (fifth revision)

09 September 2009

IS 12300 : 1988 Valve fittings for refrigerant cylinders-Specification

Amendment No. 5 August 2009

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

[Ref: MED/G-2 : 1 ]

C. K. VEDA, Sc . F & Head ( Mechanical Engineering)

कोयला मंत्रालय

नई दिल्ली , 13 अक्तूबर , 2009

का.आ. 2865.-केन्द्रीय सरकार को यह प्रतीत होता है कि, इससे उपाबद्ध अनुसूची में उल्लिखित अवस्थान की भूमि में कोयला अभिप्राप्त किए जाने की संभावना है;

[ भाग 11- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

6227

भारत का राजपत्र: अक्तूबर 17, 2009/आश्विन 25 , 1931

अतः अब , केन्द्रीय सरकार , कोयला धारक क्षेत्र ( अर्जन और विकास ) अधिनियम , 1957 ( 1957 का 20 ) (जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त अधिनियम कहा गया है ) की धारा 4 की उपधारा ( 1 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए , उस क्षेत्र में कोयले का पूर्वेक्षण करने के अपने आशय की सूचना देती है;

इस अधिसूचना के अन्तर्गत आने वाले क्षेत्र के रेखांक सं. एसईसीएल/बीएसपी/सीजीएम (पीएलजी )/भूमि/09/346 तारीख 25 जून , 2009 का निरीक्षण कलेक्टर, उमरिया ( म.प्र. ) के कार्यालय में या कोयला नियंत्रक , 1 , काउंसिल हाऊस स्ट्रीट, कोलकाता-700001 के कार्यालय में या साऊथ ईस्टर्न कोलफील्ड्स लिमिटेड ( राजस्व अनुभाग ) , सीपत रोड , बिलासपुर-495006 ( छत्तीसगढ़ ) के कार्यालय में किया जा सकता है ।

इस अधिसूचना के अन्तर्गत आने वाली भूमि में हितबद्ध सभी व्यक्ति उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 13 की उपधारा ( 7 ) में निर्दिष्ट सभी नक्शों, चाटों और अन्य दस्तावेजों को इस अधिसूचना के राजपत्र में प्रकाशन की तारीख से 90 ( नब्बे ) दिन के भीतर , भारसाधक अधिकारी या विभागाध्यक्ष ( राजस्व) , साऊथ ईस्टर्न कोलफील्ड्स लिमिटेड , सीपत रोड , बिलासपुर -495006 ( छत्तीसगढ़ ) को भेजेंगे ।

अनुसूची

कुदरी खुली खदान ब्लाक , जोहिला क्षेत्र

जिला-उमरिया (म.प्र.)

दर्शाते हुए ) रेखांक संख्या- एसईसीएल/बीएसपी/सीजीएम ( पीएलजी )/ भूमि/09/346 तारीख 25 जून , 2009 ( पूर्वेक्षण के लिए अधिसूचना भूमि ब्लाक-क:

ग्राम का नाम

क्रम सं

पटवारी हल्का संख्या

साधारण संख्या 1.

104

कुदरी

2. खोदरगंवा

156 ब्लाक-ख:

क्रम ग्राम का नाम सं

साधारण संख्या

पटवारी हल्का संख्या

156

खोदरगंवा

सीमा वर्णन

ब्लाक-क:

तहसील

जिला

क्षेत्र हेक्टर में टिप्पण

123.00

भाग उमरिया

बांधवगढ़

भाग उमरिया

4.500

बांधवगढ़

कुल क्षेत्र : 127.500 हेक्टर ( लगभग ) या 315.05 एकड़ (लगभग) तहसील

क्षेत्र हेक्टर में टिप्पण जिला

8.000

भाग उमरिया

बांधवगढ़

कुल क्षेत्र : -8.000 हेक्टर ( लगभग ) या 19.77 एकड़ ( लगभग ) कुल योग (क+ख ) : 135.500 हेक्टर ( लगभग )

या 334.82 एकड़ ( लगभग ) क-ख रेखा ग्राम कुदरी में बिन्दु " क " से आरंभ होती है और ग्राम कुदरी से होती हुई जाती है फिर ग्राम खोदरगंवा में प्रवेश कर जाती है और बिन्दु " ख " पर मिलती है । ख-ग रेखा ग्राम खोदरगंवा के दक्षिणी भाग से होती हुई जाती है और ग्राम खोदरगंवा--कुदरी के सम्मिलित सीमा पर बिन्दु " ग " पर मिलती है ।

ग- घ-ङ रेखा ग्राम कुदरी के पूर्वी भाग से बिन्दु " घ " से होती हुई जाती है और ग्राम कुदरी में बिन्दु " ङ " पर मिलती है । 6228

ङ-च रेखा ग्राम कुदरी से होती हुई जाती है और बिन्दु " च " पर मिलती है ।

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 17 , 2009 /ASVINA 25 , 1931

[PART 11 -SEC. 3 ( ii)] च-छ - क रेखा ग्राम कुदरी के पश्चिमी भाग से बिन्दु " छ " से होती हुई जाती है और ग्राम कुदरी में आरंभिक बिन्दु " क " पर मिलती है । ब्लाक-ख :

क 1 - ख 1 रेखा ग्राम खोदरगंवा के केन्द्रीय भाग में बिन्दु " क 1 " से आरम्भ होती है और उसी ग्राम से होती हुई जाती है और बिन्दु " ख 1 " पर मिलती है ।

ख 1 - ग 1 रेखा ग्राम खोदरगंवा के पूर्वी भाग से होती हुई जाती है और बिन्दु " ग । " पर मिलती है ।

ग 1 -घ । रेखा ग्राम खोदरगंवा में रेखा क 1 - ख 1 के समानान्तर गुजरती है और बिन्दु " घ 1 " पर मिलती है ।

घ 1 -क 1 रेखा ग्राम खोदरगंवा से होती हुई जाती है और आरंभिक बिन्दु " क 1 " में मिलती है ।

[फा. सं.-43015/22/2009- पी.आर.आई. डब्ल्यू. - 1 ]

एम. शहाबुद्दीन , अवर सचिव

MINISTRY OF COAL

New Delhi , the 13th October , 2009

S.O. 2865.-Whereas it appears to the Central Government that coal is likely to be obtained from the lands in the locality mentioned in the Schedule hereto annexed;

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

The plan bearing number SECL/BSP/CGM (Plg )/Land/09/346 dated the 25th June , 2009 of the area covered by this notification can be inspected at the office of the Collector, Umaria ( Madhya Pradesh ) or in the office ofthe Coal Controller, 1, Council House Street, Kolkata- 700001 or in the office of the South Eastern Coalfields Limited (Revenue Section ), Seepat Road, Bilaspur-495006 ( Chhattisgarh).

All persons interested in the land covered by this notification shall deliver all maps , charts and other documents referred to in sub- section (7) of Section 13 of the said Act to the Officer- in - Charge or Head of the Department ( Revenue) , South Eastern Coalfields Limited, Seepat Road, Bilaspur-495006 ( Chhattisgarh ), within 90 (ninety ) days from the date of publication of this notification in the Official Gazette.

SCHEDULE

Kudari Opencast Block , Johilla Area

District-Umaria( Madhya Pradesh )

All Rights

Plan number SECL/BSP / CGM ( Plg )/Land/09 /346 dated the 25th June , 2009

(Showing the land notified for prospecting) Black-A:

Patwari Halka number

General number Sl. Name of No. village

01. Kudari

95 95

104 156

Remarks Tahsil

District

-Area in hectares

Umaria

123.000 4.500

Part Part Umaria

Bandhogarh

02. Khodargawan

Total :-127.500 hectares ( Approximately) or 315.05 (Approximately) Black-B :

Sl. Name of

Patwari Halka number

General number No. village

156 01. Khodargawan

Remarks Tahsil

District

Area in hectares

Umaria

8.000

Part Bandhogarh

Total: 8.000 hectares ( Approximately) or 19.77 acres (Approximately) Grand Total (A+ B) : 135.500 hectares (Approximately)

or334.82 acres (Approximately) 6229 [भाग II- खण्ड 3( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : अक्तूबर 17, 2009/आश्विन 25 , 1931

BOUNDARY DESCRIPTION :-

Block-A

A-B Line start from point ' A' in villages Kudari and passes through village Kudari then enter and passes in village Khodargawan and meets at point 'B' .

B-C Line passes on the southern part of village Khodargawan and meets at point ' C ' on the common boundary of villages Khodargawan-Kudari .

C-D-E Line passes on the eastern part of village Kudari , point ' D ' and meets at point ' E ' in village Kudari .

E-F Line passes through village Kudari , and meets at point ' F'

F-G-A Linepasses on the western part of village Kudari , point ' G ' and meets at starting point ' A' .

Block-B

Al -BI Line starts from point ' Al ' part on the central part of village Khodargawan and passes in the same village and meets at point ' BI '

BI -CI Line passes on the eastern part of village Khodargawan and meets at point ' CI ' .

CI -DI Linepasses in village Khodargawan parallel to line A1 - B1 meets at point 'DI ' .

DI -A1 Line passes in village Khodargawan and meets at starting point 'A1 ' .

[No. 43015/22/2009- PRIW- I ]

M. SHAHABUDEEN, Under Secy.

नई दिल्ली, 13 अक्तूबर , 2009

का.आ. 2866.- केन्द्रीय सरकार को यह प्रतीत होता है कि, इससे उपाबंद्ध अनुसूची में उल्लिखित अवस्थान की भूमि में कोयला अभिप्राप्त किए जाने की संभावना है;

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

इस अधिसूचना के अन्तर्गत आने वाले क्षेत्र के रेखांक सं. एसईसीएल/बीएसपी/जीएम ( पीएलजी )/ भूमि/ 351 तारीख 6 अगस्त, 2009 का निरीक्षण कलेक्टर , शहडोल ( मध्य प्रदेश ) के कार्यालय में या कोयला नियंत्रक , 1 , काउंसिल हाऊस स्ट्रीट, कोलकाता-700001 के कार्यालय में या साऊथ ईस्टर्न कोलफील्ड्स लिमिटेड ( राजस्व अनुभाग ) , सीपत रोड, बिलासपुर -495006 ( छत्तीसगढ़ ) के कार्यालय में किया जा सकता है;

इस अधिसूचना के अन्तर्गत आने वाली भूमि में हितबद्ध सभी व्यक्ति उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 13 की उपधारा ( 7 ) में निर्दिष्ट सभी नक्शों, चाटों और अन्य दस्तावेजों को इस अधिसूचना के राजपत्र में प्रकाशन की तारीख से नब्बे दिन के भीतर , भारसाधक अधिकारी या विभागाध्यक्ष ( राजस्व अनुभाग ) , साऊथ ईस्टर्न कोलफील्ड्स लिमिटेड , सीपत रोड, बिलासपुर -495006 ( छत्तीसगढ़ ) को भेजेंगे ।

अनुसूची

करकटी ब्लाक विस्तार , सोहागपुर क्षेत्र

जिला- शहडोल ( मध्य प्रदेश)

(रेखांक संख्या- एसईसीएल/बीएसपी/जीएम ( पीएलजी )/भूमि/351 तारीख 6 अगस्त, 2009 )

( क) ब्लाक-1 :

पटवारी

तहसील

जिला

क्षेत्र हेक्टर में टिप्पणियां क्रम ग्राम का नाम बंदोबस्त संख्या

हल्कासंख्या

सं.

88.000

भाग 1.

171

खनाथ

शहडोल

सोहागपुर

8.000

2. खैरहा

203

शहडोल

भाग

सोहागपुर

भाग 316

45.000

शहडोल

3. छिरिहटी

सोहागपुर

कुल क्षेत्र : -141.000 हेक्टर ( लगभग ) या 348.41 एकड़ ( लगभग ) 6230

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 17, 2009/ ASVINA 25 , 1931

[PART 11-SEC. 3(ii) ] ( ख ) ब्लाक- II:

ग्राम का नाम

पटवारी

टिप्पणियां

क्षेत्र हेक्टर में

तहसील जिला

क्रम सं.

बंदोबस्त संख्या

हल्का संख्या

1 .

316

शहडोल

छिरिहटी

111.000

भाग

सोहागपुर

2 सिरौंजा

988

शहडोल

भाग

311.000

सोहागपुर

3. धमनी खर्द

468

शहडोल

भाग

122.000

सोहागपुर

कुल क्षेत्र : -544.000 हेक्टर ( लगभग ) या 1344.22 एकड़ ( लगभग )

कुल योग (क+ख) : 685.000 हेक्टर ( लगभग ) या 1692.63 एकड़ (लगभग ) सीमा बर्णन: -

ब्लाक-1

क-ख रेखा ग्राम खैरहा में बिन्दु ' क' से आरंभ होती है और ग्राम खैरहा के पूर्वी भाग से गुजरती हुई ग्राम खन्नाथ में प्रवेश कर ग्राम के मध्य भाग से होती हुई बिन्दु ' ख ' पर मिलती है ।

ख-ग रेखा ग्राम खन्नाथ के उत्तरी भाग से आरम्भ होती है और ग्राम खन्नाथ - बरतरा की सम्मिलित सीमा में बिन्दु ' ग ' पर मिलती है । ग-घ रेखा ग्राम खन्नाथ के पूर्वी भाग से होती हुई ग्राम छिरिहटी में प्रवेश कर ग्राम के पश्चिमी भाग से गुजरती हुई ग्राम छिरिहटी - कदोहा की सम्मिलित सीमा में बिन्दु ' घ ' पर मिलती है ।

घ-क रेखा ग्राम छिरिहटी - कदोहा की भागत सम्मिलित सीमा से होती हुई जाती है फिर ग्राम खैरहा में प्रवेश कर ग्राम खैरहा से गुजरती हुई आरंभिक बिन्दु ' क ' ( पर मिलती है।

ब्लाक-11

ङ-च रेखा ग्राम छिरिहटी -कदोहा की सम्मिलित सीमा पर बिन्दु 'ङ ' से आरंभ होती है और ग्राम छिरिहटी से गुजरती है फिर ग्राम सिरौंजा में प्रवेश कर ग्राम सिरौंजा से होती हुई बिन्दु ' च ' पर मिलती है।

च- छ रेखा ग्राम सिरौंजा- देवगवा की सम्मिलित सीमा के साथ जाती है और बिन्दु ' छ ' पर मिलती है।

छ-ज रेखा ग्राम सिरौंजा- अरझुला की भागतः सम्मिलित सीमा से होती हुई जाती है फिर ग्राम धमनीखुर्द में प्रवेश कर ग्राम धमनीखुर्द से गुजरती है और ग्राम धमनीखुर्द - धमनीकला-कदोहा की सम्मिलित सीमा में बिन्दु ' ज ' पर मिलती है।

ज- ङ रेखा ग्राम कदोहा- धमनीखुर्द, कदोहा- छिरिहटी की सम्मिलित सीमा से जाती है और आरंभिक बिन्दु ' ङ ' पर मिलती है।

[फा. सं. 43015/26/2009-पी.आर.आई. डब्ल्यू. - 1 ]

एम. शहाबुद्दीन , अवर सचिव

New Delhi , the 13th October , 2009

S.O. 2866. Whereas it appears to the Central Government that coal is likely to be obtained from the lands in the locality mentioned in the Schedule hereto annexed ;

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

The plan bearing number SECL BSP/GM (PLG)/ LAND/ 351 dated the 6th August, 2009 ofthe area covered by this notification can be inspected at the office of the Collector , Shahdol (Madhya Pradesh ) or at the office of the Coal Controller , 1 , Council House Street, Kolkata- 700001 or at the office of the South Eastern Coalfields Limited ( Revenue Section) , Seepat Road , Bilaspur - 495006 (Chhattisgarh) .

All persons interested in the land covered by this notification shall deliver all maps, Charts and other documents referred to in sub - section (7 ) of section 13 of the said Act to the Officer- In - Charge or Head of the Department ( Revenue Section), South Eastern Coalfields Limited , Seepat Road, Bilaspur - 495006 ( Chhattisgarh ) , within ninety days from the date ofpublication of this notification in the Official Gazette .

6231 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : अक्तूबर 17, 2009/आश्विन 25 , 1931

SCHEDULE

Karkati Block Extension,

Sohagpur Area District-Shahdol ,

MadhyaPradesh

(Plan bearing number SECL/BSP /GM (PLG )/LAND/351 dated the 6th August, 2009)

(A) Block-I

Tahsil

District

Remarks Bandobast No.

Patwari halka number

Areain hectares

SI . No

Name of village

171

Khannath

Shahdol

88.000

Part

Sohagpur

2. Khairaha

203

8.000

Shahdol

Part

Sohagpur

3. Chhirihati

316

Part

Shahdol 45.000

Sohagpur

Total:-141.000 hectares (Approximately) OR 348.41 acres (Approximately) Black-B - II:

Tahsil

District

Remarks Bandobast number

Patwari halka number

Area in hectares

"Sl . No.

Name of village

1. Chhirihati

316

Shahdol

111.000

Part

Sohagpur

988

Shahdol

311.000

Part 2. Sirounja

Sohagpur

3. Dhemni Khurd 468

Shahdol

122.000

Part

Sohagpur

Total :-544.000 hectares (Approximately) OR 344.22 acres ( Approximately)

Grand Total (A+ B) = 685.00 hectares (Approximately)

Or 1692.63 Acres (Approximately) BOUNDARY

DESCRIPTION : Block - I

A-B

Line starts from point ' A' in village Khairaha and passes through eastern part ofthe same village then enter in village Khannath and passes through middle part of the village and meets at point 'B' .

B-C

Line passes through northern part of village Khannath and meets at point ' C ' on the common.boundary of villages Khannath - Bartara.

C-D

Line passes through eastern part of village Khannath then enter and passes through western part of village Chhirihati and meets at point ' D' on the common boundary of villages Chhirihati - Kadoha.

D-A

Line passes along partly common boundary of villages Chhirihati - Kadoha then enter and passes through village Khairaha and meets at starting point 'A' .

Block - II

E-F

Line starts from point ' E ' on the common boundary of villages Chhirihati Kadoha and passes through village Chhirihati then enter and passes through village Sirounja and meets atpoint ' F' .

F-G

Line passes along common boundary of villages Sirounja- Deogawa and meets at point 'G' .

G-H

Line passes along partly common boundary of villages Sirounja-Arjhula then enter and passes through village Dhamni Khurd and meets at point ' H' on the common boundary of villages Dhamni Khurd-Dhamnikala-.Kadoha.

H-E

Linepasses along common boundary of villages Kadoha- Dhamni Khurd , Kadoha-Chhirihati and meets at starting point ' E' .

[File No. 43015/26/2009-PRIW -I ]

M. SHAHABUDEEN , Under Secy. 3633Gl/09-11 6232

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: OCTOBER 17, 2009/ASVINA 25 , 1931

[PART 11-SEC. 3 (ii )]

नई दिल्ली , 13 अक्तूबर, 2009

का.आ. 2867.-केन्द्रीय सरकार को यह प्रतीत होता है कि, इससे उपाबद्ध अनुसूची में उल्लिखित परिक्षेत्र की भूमि में कोयला अभिप्राप्त किए जाने की संभावना है;

अतः अब , केन्द्रीय सरकार, कोयला धारक क्षेत्र ( अर्जन और विकास ) अधिनियम , 1957 ( 1957 का 20 ) ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त अधिनियम कहा गया है ) की धारा 4 की उपधारा ( 1 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए , उस क्षेत्र में कोयले का पूर्वेक्षण करने के अपने आशय की सूचना देती है ;

इस अधिसूचना के अन्तर्गत आने वाले क्षेत्र के रेखांक सं. एसईसीएल/बीएसपी/जीएम ( पीएलजी )/ भूमि/ 345 तारीख 25 जून , 2009 का निरीक्षण कलेक्टर , कोरबा ( छत्तीसगढ़ ) के कार्यालय में या कोयला नियंत्रक , 1 , काउंसिल हाऊस स्ट्रीट , कोलकाता-700001 के कार्यालय में या साऊथ ईस्टर्न कोलफील्ड्स लिमिटेड ( राजस्व अनुभाग ) , सीफ्त रोड , बिलासपुर-495006 ( छत्तीसगढ़ ) के कार्यालय में किया जा सकता है । इस अधिसूचना के अन्तर्गत आने वाली भूमि में हितबद्ध सभी व्यक्ति उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 13 की उपधारा ( 7 ) में निर्दिष्ट सभी नक्शों , चाटों और अन्य दस्तावेजों को इस अधिसूचना के राजपत्र में प्रकाशन की तारीख से नब्बे दिन के भीतर , भारसाधक अधिकारी या विभागाध्यक्ष ( राजस्व ) , साउथ ईस्टर्न कोलफील्ड्स लिमिटेड, सीपत रोड, बिलासपुर -495006 ( छत्तीसगढ़ ) को भेजेंगे ।

अनुसूखी

सरईपाली खुली खदान ( पहला विस्तार ) कोयला, ब्लॉक कोरबा क्षेत्र जिला- कोरबा ( छत्तीसगढ़ ) (रेखांक संख्या - एसईसीएल/बीएसपी/जीएम ( पीएलजी ) /भूमि/345 तारीख 25 जून , 2009 )

क्रम ग्राम का नाम

तहसील

जिला

पटवारी

क्षेत्र हेक्टर में टिप्पणियां सं

पटवारी हल्का संख्या

ग्राम संख्या

1 .

पाली

कोरबा

41.280

भाग बुडबुड

2. राहाडीह

पाली

कोरबा

4.720

भाग

कुल क्षेत्र : -46.000 हेक्टर ( लगभग ) या 113.67 एकड़ ( लगभग)

सीमा वर्णन:-

ब्लाक-1

क-ख रेखा ग्राम बुडबुड में बिन्दु " क " से आरंभ होती है और ग्राम बुडबुड के उत्तरी भाग से गुजरती है और बिन्दु " ख " पर मिलती है। ख-क रेखा ग्राम बुडबुड से गुजरती है और आरंभिक बिन्दु " क " पर मिलती है।

ब्लाक-2

ग-घ रेखा ग्राम बुडबुड में " ग " बिन्दु से आरंभ होती है और ग्राम बुडबुड के पश्चिमी भाग से गुजरती है और बिन्दु " घ " पर मिलती है। घ-ग रेखा ग्राम बुडबुड- कुकुपथरा की सम्मिलित सीमा से होकर जाती है और आरंभिक बिन्दु " ग " पर मिलती है।

ब्लाक-3

ड- च रेखा ग्राम बुडबुड में " ङ " बिन्दु से आरंभ होती और ग्राम बुडबुड के दक्षिणी भाग से गुजरती है और बिन्दु " च " पर मिलती है । च-ङ रेखा ग्राम बुडबुड -तेलीबार की सम्मिलित सीमा के पाश्वर्वस्थ से जाती है और आरंभिक बिन्दु " ङ " पर मिलती है। ब्लाक -4

छ-ज रेखा ग्राम बुडबुड में " छ " बिन्दु से आरंभ होती है और ग्राम बुडबुड के उत्तरी और पूर्वी भाग से गुजरती है और बिन्दु " ज " पर मिलती है।

ज-छ रेखा ग्राम बुडबुड से होती हुई जाती है और आरंभिक बिन्दु " छ " पर मिलती है।

ब्लाक-5

झ-अ रेखा ग्राम बुडबुड- राहाडीह की सम्मिलित सीमा में " झ " बिन्दु से आरंभ होती है और ग्राम राहाडीह के पश्चिमी भाग से गुजरती है और बिन्दु " अ " पर मिलती है ।

ञ-झ रेखा ग्राम राहाडीह से होती हुई जाती है और आरंभिक बिन्दु " झ " पर मिलती है।

[फा. सं. 43015/20/2009-पी.आर. आई. डब्ल्यू. - 1 ]

एम. शहाबुद्दीन , अवर सचिव 6233 [भाग 1 ]-खण्ड 3 (ii ) ]

भारत का राजपत्र: अक्तूबर 17, 2009/आश्विन 25 , 1931

New Delhi , the 13th October , 2009

S.O. 2867.- Whereas it appears to the Central Government that coal is likely to be obtained from the lands in the locality mentioned in the Schedule hereto annexed ;

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

The plan bearing number SECL/BSP /GM ( PLG )/ LAND/ 345 dated the 25th June , 2009 ofthe area covered by this notification can be inspected in the office of the Collector , Korba (CG. ) or in the office of the Coal Controller , 1 , Council House Street, Koikata - 700001 or in the office of the South Eastern Coalfields Limited ( Revenue Section), Seepat Road, Bilaspur -495006 (Chhattisgarh).

All persons interested in the land covered by this notification shall deliver all maps , charts and other documents referred to in sub- section ( 7 ) of Section 13 of the said Act to the Officer- in - Charge or Head of the Department ( Revenue) . South Eastern Coalfields Limited , Seepat Road , Bilaspur - 495006 ( Chhattisgarh ) , within ninety days from the date of publication of this notification in the Official Gazette .

SCHEDULE

Saraipali OC ( 1st Extension) Coal Block, Korba Area, District- Korba (CG. ) Plannurnber SECL/ BSP/ GM ( PLG)/ LAND/ 345 dated the 25th June , 2009

Tahsil

District

Remarks VillageNo.

Patwari halka number

Name of village

Sl . No.

Area in hectares

1. Budbud

Pali

Korba

41.280

Part 2. Rahadih

Pali

Korba

4.720

Part Total:-46.000hectares (Approximately) OR 113.67 acres (Approximately)

BOUNDARY DESCRIPTION :

Block -1

A-B

Line starts from point ' A' in village Budbud and passes through the northern part of village Budbud and meets at point 'B' .

B-A

Line passes through village Budbud and meets at starting point ' A'

Block - 2

C-D

Line starts from point ' C' in village Budbud and passes through western part of village Budbud and meets at point 'D' .

Line passes along common boundary of villages Dhukupathra - Budbud and meets at starting point ' C ' .

Block - 3

E-F

Line starts from point ' E' in village Budbud and passes through southern part of village Budbud and meets at point ' F' .

F-E

Line passes adjacent to common boundary of villages Telapar - Budbud and meets at starting point'E' .

Block-4

Line starts from point ' G ' in village Budbud and passes through northern and eastern part ofvillage Budbud and meets at point ' F' .

Line passes through village Budbud and meets at starting point ' G'

Block-5

I -J

Line starts from point ' I' on the common boundary of villages Rahadih Budbud and passes through western part of village Rahadih and meets at point ' J ' .

J- 1

Linepasses through village Rahadih and meets at starting point' 1' .

[No.43015/20/2009- PRIW- 1 ]

M. SHAHABUDEEN , Under Secy.

6234

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 17, 2009/ ASHVINA 25 , 1931

[Part 11 Sec . 3 (ii )| पेट्रोलियम और प्राकृतिक गैस मंत्रालय

नईदिल्ली, 15 अक्तूबर , 2009

का. आ. 2868.- केन्द्रीय सरकार को लोकहित में यह आवश्यक प्रतीत होता है कि गुजरात राज्य में वाडीनार से मध्यप्रदेश राज्य में बीना तक कूड ऑयल के परिवहन हेतु भारत ओमान रिफाइनरीज लिमिटेड द्वारा एक पाइपलाइन बिछाई जानी चाहिए;

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

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

कोई व्यक्ति, जो उक्त अनुसूची में वर्णित भूमि में हितबद्ध है, उस तारीख से जिसको इस अधिसूचना से युक्त भारत के राजपत्र की प्रतियों साधारण जनता को उपलब्ध करा दी जाती है, इक्कीस दिन के भीतर भूमि के नीचे पाइपलाइन बिछाई जाने के लिए उसमें उपयोग के अधिकार के अर्जन के सम्बन्ध में श्री एस. के. ब्रह्मभट्ट, सक्षम प्राधिकारी, वाडीनार बीना क्रूड ऑयल पाइपलाइन परियोजना , भारत ओमान रिफाइनरीज लिमिटेड, 14, 14-A कृष्णा बंग्लोज़, प्रहलादनगर , अहमदाबाद 380051 (गुजरात ) को लिखित रूप में आक्षेप भेज सकेगा ।

अनुसूची

तहसील: लिंबडी

जिला: सुरेन्द्रनगर

राज्य: गुजरात

क्षेत्रफल हेक्टेयर में

गांव का नाम

सर्वे नंबर

00.0450

15 पैकी

रासका

00.2145

16पैकी

00.0870

37 पैकी

00.0360

14पैकी

00.1620

14पैकी/2

00.0900

13पैकी

00.1068

39/1

00.1080

00.1471

236 6235

भारत का राजपत्र : अक्तूबर 17, 2009/आश्विन 25 , 1931

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

2 1.

रासका 2.

लिंबडी

अंकेवालिया 3.

00.0180

243पैकी

00.0060

243पैकी

00.0135

00.3850

586/2

224

00.3250

253

00.0795

00.0885

314/1 पैकी

भलगामडा

00.1380

323

292

00.0006

288

00.0010

161

00.0080

00.0040

1229

00.1700

296 पैकी 4

चोरणीया 6.

जाखन

कटारिया 7.

टीकराला 9.

रलोल

00.0600

279

00.0020

63पैकी

217/2

00.1260

00.0088

177/1

302/1

00.0710

78/2

00.0914

00.1325

103पैकी

00.0987

734

00:1200

744पैकी

00.0937

744/2पैकी

10.

जालमपुर 11.

जनशाली 825/1

00.0415

00.0534

666/2

666/1/1

00.2760

666/1/2

00.2580

00.0772

128

00.0455

112

00.0040

[फा. सं . आर-31015/44/2009-ओ.आर.- II ]

ए. गोस्वामी, अवर सचिव 6236

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 17 , 2009/ASHVINA 25. 1931

[ Part II Scc. 3 (ii) | Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Gas

New Delhi , the 15th October, 2009

S. O. 2868.-Whereas it appears to the Central Government that it is necessary in the public interest that for transportation of crude oil from Vadinar in the State of Gujarat to Bina in the state of Madhya Pradesh , a pipeline should be laid by Bharat Oman Refineries Limited;

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

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

Any person , interested in the land described in the said Schedule may , within twenty One days from the date on which copies of the Gazette of India containing this Notification are made available to the public , object in writing to the acquisition of the rightof user therein for laying of the pipeline under the land to Shri S. K. Brahmbhatt, Competent Authority , Vadinar-Bina Crude Oil Pipeline Project , Bharat Oman Refineries Limited , 14 & 14-A Krishna Bungalow , Near Prahladnagar, B/h. V.S.N.L. , Bldg . , Ahmedabad -380 051 ( Gujarat) .

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3( ii ) ]

6237

भारत का राजपत्र: अक्तूबर 17, 2009/आश्विन 25, 1931

SCHEDULE

STATE : GUJARAT TEHSIL: LIMBDI

DISTRICT : SURENDRANAGAR

S.No.

Area in Hectare NameofVillage

SurveyNo.

15 P

00.0450

Raska

16P

00.2145

00.0870

37 P

14 P

00.0360

14 P/ 2

00.1620

13 P

00.0900

39/1

00.1068

00.1080

236

00.1471

00.0180

243 P

00.0060

00.0135 2.

586/2

Limbdi

00.3850

00.3250 3.

224

Ankewaliya

253

00.0795

314/1 P

00.0885

323

00.1380

292

00.0006

Bhalgamda

288

00.0010

161

00.0080

1229

00.0040

00.1700

296/ P4

279

00.0600 5.

00.0020

63P

Choraniya

217/2

00.1260

Jakhan

00.0088

177/1

Katariya 6238

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 17, 2009/ASHVINA 25 , 1931

[Part 11-Sec . 3 (ii )| 1

Tokrala

302/1

00.0710

78/2

00.0914

103 P

00.1325

Ralol

734

00.0987

744 P

00.1200

00.0937

744/2P

825/1

00.0415

10.

666/2

00.0534

Jalampur

666/1/1

00.2760

666/1/2

00.2580

11.

Janshali

00.0772

128

00.0455

112

00.0040

[F. No. R-31015/44/2009- O.R. -II ]

A. GOSWAMI , Under Secy

नई दिल्ली, 15 अक्तूबर, 2009

का. आ. 2869.- केन्द्रीय सरकार ने पेट्रोलियम और प्राकृतिक गैस मंत्रालय के का.आ. 1781 दिनांक 19.06.09, द्वारा पेट्रोलियम और खनिज पाइपलाइन्स (भूमि में उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन) अधिनियम, 1962 (1962 का 50) (जिसे उसके पश्चात् उक्त अधिनियम कहा जायेगा) की धारा 3 (1 ) के अधीन अधिसूचना प्रकाशित कर, रमन मंडी (पंजाब राज्य में) से बहादुरगढ़ (हरियाणा राज्य में) तक, पेट्रोलियम उत्पाद के परिवहन के लिए हिन्दुस्तान पेट्रोलियम कॉर्पोरेशन लिमिटेड़ द्वारा "जी जी एस आर उत्पाद निष्क्रमण परियोजना रमन मंडी से बहादुरगढ़ पेट्रोलियम पाइपलाइन" के सम्बन्ध में उक्त अधिसूचना से संलग्न अनुसूची में निर्दिष्ट तहसील सिरसा जिला सिरसा राज्य हरियाणा की भूमि में उपयोग के अधिकार के अर्जन के अपने आशय की घोषणा की थी,

और, उक्त अधिसूचना की प्रतियां जनता को दिनांक 09.08.2009 को उपलब्ध करा दी गई थी ,

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

और, केन्द्रीय सरकार ने उक्त रिपोर्ट पर विचार करने के पश्चात् इस अधिसूचना से उपाबद्ध अनुसूची में उपयोग का अधिकार अर्जित करने का विनिश्चय किया है ।

अतः, अब, केन्द्रीय सरकार उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 6 की उपधारा (1 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुये घोषणा करती है कि इस अधिसूचना से उपाबद्ध अनुसूची में विनिर्दिष्ट भूमि में पाइपलाइन बिछाने के उपयोग का अधिकार अर्जित किया जाता है ।

और, केन्द्रीय सरकार उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 6 की उपधारा (4) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुये यह निर्देश देती है कि उक्त भूमि में उपयोग का अधिकार केन्द्रीय सरकार में निहित होने की बजाय सभी विल्लंगमों से मुक्त होकर हिन्दुस्तान पेट्रोलियम कॉर्पोरेशन लिमिटेड़ में निहित होगा । 6239 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : अक्तूबर 17, 2009/आश्विन 25, 1931

अनुसूची

तहसील : सिरसा

जिला : सिरसा

राज्य: हरियाणा

क्षेत्रफल

गाँव कानाम

हदबस्त संख्या

मुस्ततिल संख्या

वर्गमीटर

खसरा/किला संख्या हेक्टेयर एयर

(1)

(2)

(3)

(5)

(চ)

(6) (7)

6/1

168

87 1. सूरतिया

6/2

.00

10/1

10/2/1

10/2/2

14/1

14/2

16/1

16/2

16/3

20/1

20/2

नहर

13 3633G1/09-12 6240

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 17 , 2009/ ASHVINA 25. 1931

(2)

(1)

(3)

(4)

सडक

24/1

25/2

22/1

11/2

12/2

19/1

19/2

1/2

2/1

2/2

[Part II Sec . 3 ( ii ) ] (5)

(7)

(6)

14 00

62 00

25 00

63 00

28 00

39 00

84 00

06 00

78 00

01 00

63 00

78 00

63 00

90 00

06 00

25 00

51 00

65 00

57 00

28 00

02 00

25 00

81 00

25 00

03 6241

भारत का राजपत्र : अक्तूबर 17, 2009/आश्विन 25 , 1931

[ भाग II-खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

(2)

(5)

(4) (1)

(3)

2/3

3/1

3/2

6/1

8/1

8/2

8/3

सडक

19/1

19/2

100 .

124

25 (6) (7)

26 01

25 00

39 12

25 00

12 10

27 11

63 01

31 05

90 12

57 06

25 00

62 00

30 04

34 08

25 00

65 12

77 11

38 10

25 00 6242

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 17 , 2009/ ASHVINA 25. 1931

(3)

(1)

(4)

(2)

125

127

128

9/1

9/2

156

2/1

221

271

273

289

294

295

308

309

533

722

729

745

325

2. सिंघपुरा

21/1

[ Part 11 Scc . 3 ( ii ) |

(6) (7) (5)

12 00

02 00

62 00

91 00

63 00

54 00

25 00

36 00

08 00

15 00

78 00

01 00

25 00

75 00

27 00

50 00

75 00

25 00

75 00

26 00

01 00

53 00

75 00

81 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

6243

भारत का राजपत्र : अक्तूबर 17, 2009/आश्विन 25 , 1931

(2)

(3)

(1)

(4)

(5)

21/2

15/1

16/1

16/2

6/1

6/2

00.

11/2

14/1

00 (6) (7)

30. 13

09 6244

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 17 , 2009/ASHVINA 25, 1931

(1)

(2)

(3)

(4)

5/1

5/2

1/2

2/1

2/2

19/1

19/2

100

[Part II Sec . 3 (ii ) ] (5) (6) (7) 00

90 00

25 00

83 00

03 00

83 00

55 00

59 00

83 00

56 00

25.

63 00

25 00

78 00

06 00

30 00

16 00

78 00

61 00

51 00

50 00

90 00

59 00

66 00

83 00

25 00

14 6245 [भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : अक्तूबर 17, 2009/आश्विन 25, 1931

(7)

(2)

(4)

(5) (6)

(1)

(3)

101

112

11.

113

18/3

18/4

23/1

23/2

24/1

24/2

117

21/2

118

0002

16/2

25/1

25/2

00 6246

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 17 , 2009/ ASHVINA 25 , 1931

[Part 11 Sec . 3 ( ii )] (1)

(2)

(3)

(4)

(6)

(5)

(7)

119-

6/1

131

14/1/2

14/2

132

165

166

168

170

171

752

754

767

769

794

[फा. सं. आर-31015/14/2009- ओ.आर.- II ]

ए. गोस्वामी, अवर सचिव

New Delhi , the 15th October, 2009

S. O. 2869 .-- Whereas by the notification of the Government of India in the Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Gas , published in the Gazette of India vide number S.O. 1781 dated the 19th June 2009 , 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) , the Central Government declared its intention to acquire the right of user in the land specified in the Schedule appended to this notification for the purpose of laying pipeline for the transportation of Petroleum Products from Raman Mandi in the State of Punjab to Bahadurgarh in the State of Haryana by the Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Limited for implementing the "GGSR Products Evacuation Project pipeline from Raman Mandi to Bahadurgarh " in Tehsil Sirsa , District Sirsa , in Haryana State;

And whereas , copies of the said gazette notification were made available to the public on 09.08.09 .

6247 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3(ii ) ]

भारत का राजपत्र: अक्तूबर 17, 2009/आश्विन 25, 1931

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

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

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

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 users in the said land shall instead of vesting in the Central Government , vest from the date of publication of 'this declaration , in the Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Limited free from all encumbrances .

SCHEDULE

State : HARYANA

District: SIRSA

Tehsil : SIRSA

Area

Name of Village

Hectare Are

Mustatil No.

Khasra / Killa No.

Hadbast No.

Square Metre

(7)

(6)

(5)

(2)

(4)

(3)

(1)

6/1

168

1. SURTIYA

6/2

10/1

10/2/1

10/2/2

14/1

14/2

16/1

16/2

16/3

3633 Gl /09-13 6248

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 17 , 2009/ ASHVINA 25. 1931 (1)

(2)

(5)

(3)

(4)

20/1

20/2

00 00 00

Canal

21 24

00 00 00

Road

24/1

25/2

22/1

23 23 1

00 00 00

11/2

12/2

19/1

19/2

00 [Part 11 Sec . 3 ( ii )| (6) (7) 02

78 07

59 05

56 00

37 10

90 07

13 13 08 11

13 03

62 07

79 13 13

12 10 10

25 11

10 01

39 90

81 [भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र: अक्तूबर 17 , 2009/आश्विन 25, 170 ,

(1)

(4)

(2)

(3)

1/2

2/1

2/2

2/3

3/1

3/2

6/1

8/1

8/2

8/3

Road

19/1

19/2

100

124

6249

(7)

(6)

(5)

25 00

03 03 03

00 00 00

57 00

86 00

89 00

14 00

60 00

25 00

12 00

27 00

51 00

34 00

57 00

25 00

57 00

25 00

75 00

30 00

65 00

77 00

12 00

25 6250

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 17, 2009 /ASHVINA 25, 1931

(1)

(2)

(3)

(4)

125

127

128

9/1

9/2

156

2/1

221.

271

273

289

294

295

308

309

533

722

729

745

325

2. SINGHPURA

21/1

[Part II---Scc . 3 ( ii ) ]

(6)

(5)

(7) 00

02 00

55 00

77 00

91 00

25 00

63 00

54 00

25 00

07 00

36 00

08 .00

60 00

15 00

78 00

01 00

42 00

25 00

75 00

31 00

01 00

27 00

03 00

50 00

75 00

25 00

75 00

03 00

26 00

01 00

53 00

75 00

32 00

81 6251

भारत का राजपत्र: अक्तूबर 17, 2009/आश्विन 25 , 1931

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii ) ]

(5)

(3)

(4) (1)

(2)

21/2

15/1

16/1

16/2

6/1

6/2

11/2

14/1

(7)

(6)

25 00

75 04

86 09

09 6252

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 17, 2009/ ASHVINA 25 , 1931

(1)

(2)

(3)

(4)

5/1

5/2

1/2

2/1

2/2

19/1

19/2

100

[Part 11 Sec . 3 ( ii) | (5) (6) (7) 00

90 00

25 00

03 00

81 00

83 00

55 00

59 00

83 00

25 00

85 00

91 00

25 00

78 00

06 00

30 00

16 00

78 00

51 00

42 00

90 00

59 00

75 00

66 00

83 00

25 00

14 [भाग II-खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

6253

भारत का राजपत्र: अक्तूबर 17, 2009/आश्विन 25 , 1931

(1)

(2)

(3)

(4)

(5)

101

112

113

18/3

18/4

23/1

23/2

24/1

24/2

117

21/2

118

16/2

25/1

25/2

00 (6) (7) 11

89 08

85 05

55 10

12 05

56 00

12 02

66 13

75 01

50 00

25 11

63 00

10.

25 11

75 6254

Part II- Scc . 3 ( ii ) | THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 17, 2009/ ASHVINA 25 , 1931

(1)

(7) (2)

(3)

(5) (6)

(4)

119

6/1

131

14/1/2

14/2

132

165

166

168

-02

170

171

752

754

767

769

794

[F. No. R-31015/14/2009 - O.R. - II ]

A. GOSWAMI , Under Secy

नई दिल्ली, 15 अक्तूबर , 2009

का. आ. 2870-- केन्द्रीय सरकार ने पेट्रोलियम और प्राकृतिक गैस मंत्रालय के का.आ. 1782 दिनांक 19.06.09, द्वारा पेट्रोलियम और खनिज पाइपलाइन्स (भूमि में उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन ) अधिनियम, 1962 (1962 का 50) ( जिसे उसके पश्चात् उक्त अधिनियम कहा जायेगा) की धारा 3 (1 ) के अधीन अधिसूचना प्रकाशित कर, रमन मंडी (पंजाब राज्य में) से बहादुरगढ़ (हरियाणा राज्य में ) तक, पेट्रोलियम उत्पाद के परिवहन के लिए हिन्दुस्तान पेट्रोलियम कॉर्पोरेशन लिमिटेड़ द्वारा " जी जी एस आर उत्पाद निष्क्रमण परियोजना रमन मंडी से बहादुरगढ़ पेट्रोलियम पाइपलाइन " के सम्बन्ध में उक्त अधिसूचना से संलग्न अनुसूची में निर्दिष्ट तहसील रतिया जिला फतेहाबाद राज्य हरियाणा की भूमि में उपयोग के अधिकार के अर्जन के अपने आशय की घोषणा की थी,

और, उक्त अधिसूचना की प्रतियां जनता को दिनांक 04.08.2009 को उपलब्ध करा दी गई थी,

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

और, केन्द्रीय सरकार ने उक्त रिपोर्ट पर विचार करने के पश्चात् इस अधिसूचना से उपाबद्ध अनुसूची में उपयोग का अधिकार अर्जित करने का विनिश्चय किया है । [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

6255 भारत का राजपत्र: अक्तूबर 17 , 2009/आश्विन 25, 1931

अतः, अब , केन्द्रीय सरकार उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 6 की उपधारा (1 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुये घोषणा करती है कि इस अधिसूचना से उपाबद्ध अनुसूची में विनिर्दिष्ट भूमि में पाइपलाइन बिछाने के उपयोग का अधिकार अर्जित किया जाता है ।

और , केन्द्रीय सरकार उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 6 की उपधारा (4) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुये यह निर्देश देती है कि उक्त भूमि में उपयोग का अधिकार केन्द्रीय सरकार में निहित होने की बजाय सभी विल्लंगमों से मुक्त होकर हिन्दुस्तान पेट्रोलियम कॉर्पोरेशन लिमिटेड़ में निहित होगा ।

अनुसूची

राज्य: हरियाणा

तहसील : रतिया

जिला : फतेहाबाद

गाँव का नाम

वर्गमीटर

हेक्टेयर

क्षेत्रफल एयर

खसरा किला संख्या

मुस्ततिल संख्या

हदबस्त संख्या

(6) (7)

(3)

(5)

(4)

(1)

(2)

109

1. साहरन

4/1

7/1

7/2

205

108

2. मंढ

18/1

18/2

3633 G1 /09-14 6256

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 17 , 2009 / ASHVINA 25 , 1931

(5) (1)

(2)

(4)

(3)

104

115

118

119

11 [Part II Sec . 3 ( ii ) |

(7)

(6)

66 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3( ii) ]

6257

भारत का राजपत्र: अक्तूबर 17, 2009/आश्विन 25 , 1931

(1)

(2)

(3)

(4) (5)

119

128

21/1

21/2

3/1

129

3/2

134

140

141

1/1

1/2

00 (6) (7)

.79

10.

25 6258

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 17 , 2009/ASHVINA 25. 1931

(2)

(4) (1)

(3)

141

12/1

12/2

13/1/1

18/1

18/2

23/1

23/2

24/1

24/2

147

4/2

7/2

148

150

158

166

170

173/1

173/2

190

251

253

254

263

104

3. हडौली

[Part II Sec . 3 (ii ) ] (6) (7) (5)

33 00

50 00

25 00

39 00

25 00

56 00

89 00

36 00

03 00

14 00

50 00

87 00

89 00

75 00

56 00

83 00

02 00

01 00

25 00

08 00

27 00

75 00

79 00

90 00

04 भारत का राजपत्र: अक्तूबर 17 , 2009/ आश्विन 25 , 1931 [भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

(5)

(3)

(4)

(2)

(1)

139

22/1

140

142

8/1

8/2/1

143

24 00

21/1

174

21/2

गग्ना

175

9/2

6259 (6) (7)

26.

60 6260

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 17, 2009 / ASIIVINA 25. 1931

(2)

(3)

(4) (5)

175

24/2

176

183

184

208

25/1

25/2

00 [ Part II Sec . 3 ( ii ) | (6) (7)

50 6261

भारत का राजपत्र: अक्तूबर 17, 2009/आश्विन 25, 1931

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii ) ]

(5)

(3)

(4) (1)

(2)

209

220

221

241

22/1

242

6/2

253

2/1

2/2

14/1

17/1

17/2

00 (6) (7)

00. 25

11-

08 6262

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 17, 2009/ASHVINA 25 , 1931 (1)

(2)

(3)

(4)

(5)

253

24/2

271

22/1

272

4/2

5/1

5/2

15/1

15/2

280

7/2

14/1

14/2

16/2

25/1

281

21/1

21/2

296

10/1

10/2

00 [ Part II Scc . 3 ( ii ) | (6) (7)

56 6263

भारत का राजपत्र: अक्तूबर 17, 2009/आश्विन 25, 1931

भाग II- खण्ड 3( ii) ]

(4)

(3)

(5) (1)

(2)

296

23/2

24/1

24/2

304

5/1

5/2

305

20/1

23/1

315

3/1

316

3/2

326

14 3633 G1/09-15

(7)

(6)

26 6264

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 17 , 2009/ASHVINA 25. 1931 (1)

(4)

(2)

(3)

(5)

326

333

334

14/1

14/2

335

346

347

1/1

1/2

7/1

7/2

00 [Part II Sec . 3 (ii ) ] (6) (7)

25 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

6265

भारत का राजपत्र: अक्तूबर 17, 2009/आश्विन 25, 1931

(2)

(5) (1)

(3)

(4)

440

441

445

451

452

457

458

466

482

486

493

496

502

503

504

1294

1311

1325

1326

1337

1346

1351

205

127

4. अहरवा

23/1

23/2

206

24/1

24/2

25/1

25/2

208

5/1

5/2

00 (6)

55 6266

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 17, 2009/ ASHVINA 25, 1931 (1)

(2)

(3)

(5)

(4)

209

4/1

4/2

6/1

6/2

210

12/1

12/2

23/1

25/1

230

231

21/2

22/1

232

12/1

12/2

16/1

16/2

Scc. 3 (ii ) [ [Part 11

(6) (7)

39 [ भाग II - खण्ड 3( ii ) ]

6267

भारत का राजपत्र : अक्तूबर 17, 2009/आश्विन 25, 1931

(2)

(4)

(5) (1)

(3)

232

19/1/1

19/1/2 00

19/2/1

19/2/2

19/3

233

1/1

1/2

9/2

10/1

5/1

234

5/2

245

2/1

2/2

4/1

4/2

246

4/2

6/1

7/1/1

00 (6)

(7)

10.

25 6268

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 17, 2009/ ASHVINA 25 , 1931

(4)

(5)

(2)

(3)

(1)

247

7/1

7/2

248

10/1

10/2

00.

249

11/2

17/2

250

251

22/1

00 [ Part II---Sec . 3 (ii ) ] (6). (7)

80 [भाग II-खण्ड 3 (ii ) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : अक्तूबर 17 , 2009/आश्विन 25 , 1931 (1)

(2)

(3)

(4) (5)

253

365/1

310

गम्ता

321

333

334/2

342

351

352

354

370

140

00 5. शेखुपुर सोतर

00.

18/1

18/2

00.

23/2

13/1

13/2

17/1

6269

(7)

(6)

12.

25 6270

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 17, 2009/ ASHVINA 25 , 1931

[Part II--Scc . 3 ( ii ) | (1)

(2)

(3)

(4) (5) (6) (7)

148/1

24/1

26 6. पालसर

24/2

[फा. सं. आर -31015/15/2009- ओ.आर.- II ]

ए. गोस्वामी, अवर सचिव

New Delhi , the 15th October, 2009

S. O. 2870.- Whereas by the notification of the Government of India in the Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Gas , published in the Gazette of India vide number S.O. 1782 dated the 19th June 2009, 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 ) , the Central Government declared its intention to acquire the right of user in the land specified in the Schedule appended to this notification for the purpose of laying pipeline for the transportation of Petroleum Products from Raman Mandi in the State of Punjab to Bahadurgarh in the State of Haryana by the Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Limited for implementing the "GGSR Products Evacuation Project pipeline from Raman Mandi to Bahadurgarh " in Tehsil Ratia , District Fatehabad , in Haryana State;

And whereas , copies of the said gazette notification were made available to the public on 04.08.09 .

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

6271 भारत का राजपत्र: अक्तूबर17 , 2009/आश्विन 25, 1931

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3( ii ) ]

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

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

And further, iri 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 users in the said land shall iristead of vesting in the Central Government , vest from the date of publication of this declaration , in the Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Limited free from all encumbrances .

SCHEDULE

Tehsil : RATIA

District: FATEHABAD

State : HARYANA

Area

Nameof Village

Hadbast No.

Mustatil No.

Khasra / Killa No.

Are

Hectare

Square Metre (1)

(2)

(3)

(4)

(7)

(5) (6)

1. SAHARAN

109

4/1

7/1

7/2

81.

2. MADH

108

3633Gl/09-16 6272

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 17 , 2009/ ASHVINA 25 , 1931

(2)

(3)

(4)

(5)

18/1

18/2

00 00

104

.00

115

118

119

00 [Part II Sec . 3 ( ii ) ] (6)

(7)

66 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii ) ]

6273

भारत का राजपत्र: अक्तूबर17 , 2009/आश्विन 25, 1931

(4) (1)

(2)

(3)

(5)

119

00 8.8

128

21/1

21/2

3/1

129

3/2

134

140

1/1

141

1/2

00 (6)

(7)

09 00

50 03

62 10

25 00 6274

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 17 , 2009/ASIVINA 25 , 1931 (1)

(4)

(2)

(5)

(3)

141

12/1

12/2

13/1/1

18/1

18/2

23/1

23/2

24/1

24/2

147

4/2

7/2

148

150

158

166

170

173/1

173/2

190

251

253

254

263

104

3.HAROLI

104

00 [Part II Sec . 3 (ii ) ] (6) (7)

05.

04 6275

भारत का राजपत्र: अक्तूबर 17, 2009/आश्विन 25, 1931

[भाग II- खण्ड 3(ii) ]

(5) (1)

(2)

(3)

(4)

139

22/1

140

142

8/1

8/2/1

143

21/1

174

21/2

CartTrack

175

9/2

(7)

(6)

11 .

08 6276

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 17, 2009/ ASHVINA 25 , 1931 (1)

(2)

(3)

(4)

(5)

175

24/2

176

183

184

208

25/1

25/2 [Part II Sec. 3 ( ii) | (6) (7)

38-

50 भारत का राजपत्र: अक्तूबर 17, 2009/आश्विन 25, 1931 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii ) ]

(5)

(4)

(2)

(3)

(1)

209

220

221

241

22/1

242

6/2

253

2/1

2/2

14/1

17/1

17/2

6277

(7)

(6)

07.

89 11

26 01

07 06

08 07 6278

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 17 , 2009/ASHVINA 25, 1931 (1)

(2)

(3)

(4)

(5)

253

24/2

271

22/1

272

4/2

5/1

5/2

15/1

15/2

280

7/2

14/1

14/2

16/2

25/1

21/1

281

21/2

296

10/1

10/2

00 [Part 11- Sec . 3 (ii ) ] (6) (7)

56 भारत का राजपत्र: अक्तूबर 17, 2009/आश्विन 25, 1931 [भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii ) ]

(5)

(3)

(4)

(2)

(1)

296

23/2

24/1

24/2

304

5/1

5/2

305

20/1

23/1

315

00 8.8

3/1

316

3/2

326

14 3633Gl/09-17

(627) (6) (7)

51.

25 00

12 10

61 09

02 02

39 12

57 06

33 07

65 12

26 01 6280

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 17, 2009/ASHVINA 25. 1931 (1)

(2)

(3)

(4) (5)

326

333

334

14/1

14/2

330

1/1

1/2

7/1

7/2

00 [Part 11 Scc . 3 ( ii ) | (6) (7)

25 6281 भारत का राजपत्र : अक्तूबर 17, 2009/आश्विन 25, 1931

[भाग II- खण्ड 3(ii)]

(2)

(6)

(4)

(5)

(3)

440

441

445

451

452

457

458

466

482

486

493

496

00.

502

503

504

1294

1311

1325

1326

1337

1346

1351

127

205

00 8.8

4. AHEARWA

38-

23/1

23/2

206

24/1

05.

24/2

25/1

25/2

208

5/1

5/2

55 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 17, 2009/ASHVINA 25, 1931 (2)

(1)

(3)

(5)

(4)

209

4/1

4/2

6/1

6/2

210

12/1

12/2

23/1

25/1

230

21/2

231

22/1

232

12/1

12/2

16/1

16/2

00 [Part II Sec. 3 ( ii ) | (6) (7)

12,

39 [भाग II-खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

6283

भारत का राजपत्र: अक्तूबर17, 2009/आश्विन 25 , 1931

(1)

(2)

(3)

(5)

(4)

232

19/1/1

19/1/2 00

19/2/1 00

19/2/2 00

19/3

233

1/1

1/2

9/2

10/1

5/1

234

5/2

245

2/1.

2/2

4/1

4/2

246

4/2

6/1

7/1/1

(7)

(6)

00 6284

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 17, 2009/ASHVINA 25 , 1931 (1)

(2)

(3)

(5)

(4)

247

7/1

7/2

248

10/1

10/2

249

11/2

250

17/2

251

22/1

Scc . 3 ( ii ) | [Part II

(6) (7)

80 6285

भारत को राजपत्र: अक्तूबर 17, 2009/आश्विन 25, 1931

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

(4)

(3)

253

365/1

310

CartTrack

321

333

334/2

342

351

352

354

370 00

140

5. SHEKHUPUR SOTAR

00.

18/1

18/2

23/2

13/1

13/2

14.

17/100

06:

39 00

50 00

34 08

05 90

00 6286

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 17, 2009/ASIVINA 25 , 1931

(1)

(3)

(2)

(4)

148/1.

6. PALSAR

24/1

24/2

[Part II Sec . 3 ( ii ) | (5) (6) (7) 00

90 00

33 00

25 00

63 00

39 00

07 00

25 00

75 00

14 00

12-

39 00

01 00

77 00

26 00

01 00

66 00

77 [F. No. R-31015/15/2009- O.R. -II ] A. GOSWAMI , Under Secy

नई दिल्ली, 15 अक्तूबर, 2009

का.आ. 2871-- केन्द्रीय सरकार को लोक हित में यह आवश्यक प्रतीत होता है कि पंजाब राज्य में रमन मंडी से भटिंडा तक , पेट्रोलियम तेल के परिवहन के लिए हिन्दुस्तान पेट्रोलियम कॉर्पोरेशन लिमिटेड द्वारा ' जी जी एस आर उत्पाद निष्क्रमण परियोजना " के कार्यान्वयन हेतु एक पाइपलाइन बिछाई जानी चाहिए;

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

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

कोई भी व्यक्ति , जो उक्त अनुसूची में वर्णित भूमि में हितबद्ध है , उस तारीख से जिसको भारत के राजपत्र में यथा प्रकाशित इस अधिसूचना की प्रतियाँ साधारण जनता को उपलब्ध करा दी जाती हैं, इक्कीस दिन के भीतर उसमें उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन करने या भूमि के नीचे पाइपलाइन विछाने के संबंध में श्री गगनदीप सिंह , सक्षम प्राधिकारी, (पंजाब ) , हिन्दुस्तान पेट्रोलियम कॉर्पोरेशन लिमिटेड, गुरू गोविन्द सिंह रिफाइनरी उत्पाद निष्क्रमण परियोजना, गांवः फूलो खारी , रिफाइनरी गेट, तहसील: तलवंडी साबो, जिलाः भटिंडा, पंजाब को लिखित रूप में आक्षेप भेज सकेगा । 6287 [भाग II- खण्ड 3(ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र: अक्तूबर 17 , 2009/आश्विन 25, 1931

अनुसूची

तहसील : भटिंडा

राज्य: पंजाब

जिला: भटिंडा

क्षेत्रफल

गाँव कानाम

हदबस्त संख्या

हेक्टेयर

वर्गमीटर

मुस्ततिल संख्या

खसरा/किला संख्या

एयर

(1)

(2)

(3)

(4)

(5) (6) (7) 1. गहरी देवीनगर

1527/1

69 2. कोट समीर

247

286

305

344

14/2

365

25 3. कटारसिंह वाला

119

128

130

141/1

141/2

142

176/1

177

179

180

50 3633G1/09-18 6288

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 17 , 2009/ ASHVINA 25 , 1931

[Part 11 Scc . 3( ii )| (1)

(2)

(3)

(4)

(5) (6) (7)

182

312

351

96.

354

359

360

404

405

406

478

[फा. सं. आर-31015/40/2009-ओ.आर.- II ]

ए. गोस्वामी, अवर सचिव

New Delhi , the 15th October , 2009

S. O. 2871. Whereas, it appears to the Central Government, that it is necessary in the public interest that for the transportation of Petroleum Products from Raman Mandi to Bhatinda in the State of Punjab for implementation of "GGSR Products Evacuation Project pipeline from Raman Mandi to Bhatinda " , should be laid by the Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Limited;

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

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

Any person interested in the land described In the said schedule may, within twenty one daysfrom the date on which the copies of this notification issued under sub-section (1 ) of Section 3 of the said Act, as published in the Gazette of India , are made available to the general public, object in writing to the acquisition of the Right of User therein or laying ofthe pipeline under the land, to Shri Gagan Deep Singh, Competent Authority (Punjab), HindustanPetroleum Corporation Limited, Guru Gobind Singh Refinery Product Evacuation Project , Village: Phullo Khari , Refinery Gate, Tehsil : Talwandi Saboo, District : Bhatinda , Punjab.

6289 [भाग II- खण्ड 3(ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र: अक्तूबर 17, 2009/आश्विन 25 , 1931

SCHEDULE

State: PUNJAB

District :BHATINDA

Tehsil : BHATINDA

Area

Name of Village

Mustatil No.

Hadbast No.

Khasra/ KillaNo.

Are

Hectare

Square Metre

(6) (7)

(2)

(3)

(4)

(5)

(1)

1527/1

1. GAHRI DEVINAGAR

247

2. KOT SAMIR

286

305

24.

344

14/2

888

365

3. KATARSINGH WALA

119

128

130

141/1

141/2

142

176/1

177

> 25

179

180

50 6290

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 17. 2009/ ASHVINA 25. 1931

[Part II Sec . 3 ( ii ) | (1)

(2)

(3)

(4)

(5) (6) (7)

182

312

351

354

00 06

359

360

404

405

406

478

[F. No. R- 31015/40/2009- O.R. -II ]

A. GOSWAMI , Under Secy

नई दिल्ली, 15 अक्तूबर, 2009

का. आ. 2872-- केन्द्रीय सरकार ने पेट्रोलियम और प्राकृतिक गैस मंत्रालय के का.आ. 1941 दिनांक 08.07.09, द्वारा पेट्रोलियम और खनिज पाइपलाइन्स (भूमि में उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन) अधिनियम, 1962 (1962 का 50) (जिसे उसके पश्चात् उक्त अधिनियम कहा जायेगा) की धारा 3 (1 ) के अधीन अधिसूचना प्रकाशित कर , रमन मंडी से भटिंडा (पंजाब राज्य में) तक, पेट्रोलियम उत्पाद के परिवहन के लिए हिन्दुस्तान पेट्रोलियम कॉर्पोरेशन लिमिटेड़ द्वारा "जी जी एस आर उत्पाद निष्क्रमण परियोजना रमन मंडी से भटिंडा पेट्रोलियम पाइपलाइन " के सम्बन्ध में उक्त अधिसूचना से संलग्न अनुसूची में निर्दिष्ट तहसील भटिंडा जिला भटिंडा राज्य पंजाब की भूमि में उपयोग के अधिकार के अर्जन के अपने आशय की घोषणा की थी,

और, उक्त अधिसूचना की प्रतियां जनता को दिनांक 05.09.2009 को उपलब्ध करा दी गई थी,

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

और , केन्द्रीय सरकार ने उक्त रिपोर्ट पर विचार करने के पश्चात् इस अधिसूचना से उपाबद्ध अनुसूची में उपयोग का अधिकार अर्जित करने का विनिश्चय किया है ।

अतः , अब, केन्द्रीय सरकार उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 6 की उपधारा (1 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुये घोषणा करती है कि इस अधिसूचना से उपाबद्ध अनुसूची में विनिर्दिष्ट भूमि में पाइपलाइन बिछाने के उपयोग का अधिकार अर्जित किया जाता है ।

और , केन्द्रीय सरकार उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 6 की उपधारा (4) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुये यह निर्देश देती है कि उक्त भूमि में उपयोग का अधिकार केन्द्रीय सरकार में निहित होने की बजाय सभी विल्लंगमों से मुक्त होकर हिन्दुस्तान पेट्रोलियम कॉर्पोरेशन लिमिटेड़ में निहित होगा । अनुसूची संलग्न 6291 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

भारत का राजपत्र: अक्तूबर 17, 2009/आश्विन 25, 1931

अनुसूची

राज्य: पंजाब

जिला : भटिंडा

तहसील : भटिंडा

क्षेत्रफल

गाँव कानाम

वर्गमीटर

हेक्टेयर एयर

बसरा/किला संख्या

मुस्ततिल संख्या

हदबस्त संख्या

(7)

(4)

(6)

(5)

(2)

(3)

(1)

1527/1

1. गहरी देवीनगर

1527/2

1546/1

1546/2/2

1547

27.

1567

1568

1569

1594

1595/1

1595/2

1596/1

1596/2

1599

1600/1

1600/2

13-

1601/2

1709

2.कोट समीर

13/1

12/2/2

13/2

18 6292

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 17, 2009/ASHVINA 25. 1931

(4)

(5)

19/1

9/1

9/2

00 00

9/1

9/2

19/2

22/1

122

1/1

1/2

11/2

00 00 00 00

21/2

21/1

125

6/1

6/2

00 [Part 11 Scc .3 (8 )|

(7)

53 07

08 04

62 10

50 05

54 03

13 11

13 10

62 00

25 00

03 08

54 03

59 11

13 00

36 09

77 11

13 11

13 00

25 10

12 01

26 03

28 02

78 10

87 10

38 628 [

भारत का राजपत्र: 17, 2009/ रिपन 25, 1934

10/2/1

10/2/2

11件件

14/1

14/2

24 2888

竹林

竹

005

20 年8

17/4

1712

18/1

18/2 00

24 6294

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 17, 2009/ASHVINA 25 , 1931

(1)

(2) (3)

(4)

344

14/2

365

404

7/1

7/2

14/1

14/2

418

7/1

7/2

537

540

545

546

584

635

672

[Part II Sec . 3 ( ii ) | (5) (6) (7) 00

04 00

53 00

04 00

25 00

56 00

60 00

00 888

62 00

87 00

27 00

85 00

62 00

50 00

13 00

83 00

04.

30 00

84 00

53 00

51 00

01 00

50 00

25 6295 भारत का राजपत्र: अक्तूबर 17, 2009/आश्विन 25, 1931

[ भाग II- खष्ठ 3( ii) ]

(7)

(5) (6)

(2)

(4)

(3)

(1)

1344/2

00 00

1346

1407

1430

12/3

3. कटारसिंह वाला

15/1

15/2

16/1/2

16/1/3

16/2

118/1

119/1

119/2/3

119/2/4

119/2/2

130

135

141/1

141/2

178

953/183 00

954/183

958/185 00

188

351

00.

355

357/2

3633 Gl/09-19 6296

[Part II Scc . 3 ( ii ) | THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 17, 2009/ASHVINA 25, 1931

(2)

(1)

(4)

(5) (6) (7)

(3)

360/2

391

404

405

406

36/3

[फा. सं. आर-31015/40/2009-ओ.आर.- II ]

ए. गोस्वामी, अवर सचिव

New Delhi , the 15th October, 2009

S.O. 2872. Whereas by the notification of the Government of India in the Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Gas , published in the Gazette of India vide number S.O. 1941 dated the 08th July 2009, 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 ) , the Central Government declared its intention to acquire the right of user in the land specified in the Schedule appended to this notification for the purpose of laying pipeline for the transportation of Petroleum Products from Raman Mandi to Bhatinda in the State of Punjab by the Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Limited for implementing the "GGSR Products Evacuation Project pipeline from Raman Mandi to Bhatinda" in Tehsil Bhatinda , District Bhatinda, in Punjab State;

And whereas, copies of the said gazette notification were made available to the public on05.09.09.

Andwhereas, the Competent Authority has under sub-section ( 1 ) of section 6 of the saidAct, has submitted his report to the Central Government.

And whereas, the Central Government after considering the said report is satisfied thatthe right of user in the land specified in the Schedule appended to this notification should be acquired;

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

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

6297 भारत का राजपत्र: अक्तूबर 17 , 2009/आश्विन 25, 1931

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3( ii) ]

SCHEDULE

State : PUNJAB

District: BHATINDA

Tehsil : BHATINDA

Area

Name of Village

Mustatil No.

Hadbast No.

Hectare Are

Khasra / Killa No.

Square Metre

(3)

(6)

(1)

(2)

(4)

(5)

(7)

1527/1

1. GAHRI DEVINAGAR

1527/2

1546/1

1546/2/2

1547

1567

1568

1569

16.

.00

1594

1595/1

1595/2

1596/1

1596/2

1599

1600/1

1600/2

1601/2

1709

2. KOT SAMIR

13/1

12/2/2

13/2

07 6298

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 17, 2009/ ASHVINA 25 , 1931

(1)

(2)

(3)

(4)

19/1

9/1

9/2

9/1

9/2

19/2

22/1

122

1/1

1/2

11/2

21/2

21/1

125

6/1

6/2

[Part II--Sec . 3 (ii ) ] (5) (6) (7) 00

08 00

50 00

81 00

54 00

13 00

62 00

00.

25 00

09 00

59 00

13 00

36 00

77 00

13 00

25 00

12 00

26 00

28 00

78 00

87 00

38 6299

भारत का राजपत्र : अक्तूबर 17, 2009/ आश्विन 25, 1931

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii ) ]

(5)

(4)

(3)

(2)

(1)

1/1

126

10/2/1

10/2/2

4/2

163

5/1

5/2

14/1

14/2

-00

164

247

286

17/2

24/1

305

17/1

17/2

18/1

18/2

(7) (6)

12 10

04 04

01 01

50 00

04 04

55 03

28 00

13 11

30 04

08 07

62 00

75 02

36 09

02. 02

06 11

13 11

13 10

13 11

62 10

50 05

56 03

03 00

25 00

25 06

28 03

09 08

51 6300

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 17, 2009/ASHVINA 25, 1931

(1)

(2)

(3)

(4)

344

14/2

365

404

7/1

7/2

14/1

14/2

418

7/1

7/2

537

540

545

546

584

635

672

[Part II Sec . 3 (ii )| (5) (6) (7) 00

04 00

53 00

04 00

25 00

56 00

57 00

09 00

61 00

07 00

62 00

87 00

13.

62 00

27 00

85 00

62 00

50 00

13 00

83 00

30 00

13 00

84 00

53 00

51 00

77 00 01

01 00

50 00

25 [भाग II- खण्ड 3(ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : अक्तूबर 17, 2009/आश्विन25, 1931

(4)

(2)

(3)

(5)

6301 (4) (7)

1344/2

1346

1407

1430

12/3

00 3. KATARSINGH WALA

15/1

15/2

00 00

00.

16/1/2

16/1/3

16/2

118/1

00.00

119/1

37:

119/2/3 00

119/2/4 00

119/2/2

130

135

141/1

00 18

141/2

178

00 01

953/183

954/183

00 11

958/185

188

351

355

01 :

357/2 00

6302

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 17, 2009/ASHVINA 25 , 1931

[Part II Sec . 3( ii) ]

(2)

(3)

(4)

(5) (6) (7)

360/2

391

404

405

406

36/3

[F. No. R -31015/40/2009- O.R. -II ]

A. GOSWAMI , Under Secy

नई दिल्ली, 15 अक्तूबर , 2009

का. आर. 2873- केन्द्रीय सरकार को लोक हित में यह आवश्यक प्रतीत होता है कि पंजाब राज्य में रमन मंडी से हरियाणा राज्य में बहादुरगढ़ तक, पेट्रोलियम तेल के परिवहन के लिए हिन्दुस्तान पेट्रोलियम कॉर्पोरेशन लिमिटेड द्वारा ' जी जी एस आर उत्पाद निष्क्रमण परियोजना " के कार्यान्वयन हेतु एक पाइपलाइन बिछाई जानी चाहिए;

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

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

ई भी व्यक्ति, जो उक्त अनुसूची में वर्णित भूमि में हितबद्ध है , उस तारीख से जिसको भारत के राजपत्र में यथा प्रकाशित इस अधिसूचना की प्रतियाँ साधारण जनता को उपलब्ध करा दी जाती हैं, इक्कीस दिन के भीतर उसमें उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन करने या भूमि के नीचे पाइपलाइन बिछाने के संबंध में श्री प्रहलाद सिंह , (हरियाणा) , हिन्दुस्तान पेट्रोलियम कॉर्पोरेशन लिमिटेड, गुरू गोबिन्द सिंह रिफाइनरी उत्पाद निष्कमण परियोजना , एस सी एफ नं. 29, सैक्टर 6, बहादुरगढ -124507 , हरियाणा को लिखित रूप में आक्षेप भेज सकेगा । 6303 भारत का राजपत्र: अक्तूबर 17 , 2009/आश्विन 25, 1931

[भाग II- खण्ड 3( ii) ]

अनुसूची

तहसील: बरवाला

जिला:हिसार

राज्य: हरियाणा

खसरा/ किला

क्षेत्रफल

गाँव कानाम

मुस्ततिल संख्या

हदबस्त संख्या

संख्या हेक्टेयर

वर्गमीटर

एयर

(1)

(2)

(3)

(4)

(6)

(5)

(7) 1. बरवाला

128

347

12/1

24/1

383

रास्ता

384

2719

2778

75 2. ড়াত

31.

90 3633G1 /09-20 6304

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 17 , 2009/ ASHVINA 25, 1931 .

[Part II Scc . 3 (ii )|

(5)

(3)

(2)

(4)

(6) (7) (1)

08 16

3. ब्याना खेड़ा

[फा. सं . आर-31015/ 16/2009- ओ.आर.- II ]

ए. गोस्वामी, अवर सचिव

New Delhi , the 15th October, 2009

S. O. 2873. Whereas, it appears to the Central Government, that it is necessary in the public interest that for the transportation of Petroleum Products from Raman Mandi in the State of Punjab to Bahadurgarh in the State of Haryana for implementation of "GGSR Products Evacuation Project pipeline from Raman Mandi to Bahadurgarh" , should be laid by the Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Limited;

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

Any person interested in the land described in the said schedule may, within twenty one days from the date on which the copies of this notification issued under sub- section ( 1 ) of Section 3 of the said Act, as published in the Gazette of India, are made available to the general public , object in writing to the acquisition of the Right of User therein or laying of the pipeline under the land, to shri Prahlad Singh , Competent Authority ( Haryana) , Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Limited, Guru Gobind Singh Refinery Product Evacuation Project , SCF No. 29 , Sector - 6 Market , Bahadurgarh - 124507 , Haryana.

6305 [भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : अक्तूबर 17, 2009/ आश्विन 25, 1931

अनुसूची

जिला: हिसार

तहसील : बरवाला

राज्य: हरियाणा

क्षेत्रफल

गाँव का नाम

हेक्टेयर

वर्गमीटर

संख्या

मुस्ततिल संख्या

खसरा /किला संख्या

एयर

(1)

(2)

(3)

(5) (6)

(4)

(7)

128

347

1. बरवाला

12/1

24/1

383

रास्ता

384

2719

2778

00 00

2. हाड

3. ΒΙΥΑΝΑ ΚHERA

[F. No. R- 31015 /16/2009- O.R. - II ] A. GOSWAMI , Under Secy 6306

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 17 , 2009/ASVINA 25 , 1931

श्रम एवं रोजगार मंत्रालय नई दिल्ली , 15 सितम्बर, 2009

का. आ. 2874.-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में , केन्द्रीय सरकार स्टेट बैंक आफ ट्रावनकोर के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण, ऐरनाकुलम के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 19/2008 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 15-9-2009 को प्राप्त हुआ था । [सं. एल -12011 / 10/2008 - आईआर ( बी-1 ) ] अजय कुमार गौड़ , डेस्क अधिकारी MINISTRY OF LABOUR AND EMPLOYMENT New Delhi , the 15th September, 2009 S. O. 2874. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Govemment hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 19/2008) ofthe Central Government Industrial Tribunal -cum-Labour Court, Earnakulam as shown in the Annexure , in the Industrial Dispute between the management of State Bank ofTravancore and their workmen, received by the Central Government on 15-9-2009.

[No. L- 12011 /10/2008 - IR(B- 1 )]

AJAY KUMAR, Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

IN THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM - LABOUR COURT, EARNAKULAM Present : Shri P. L. Norbert, BA. ,LL.B. , Presiding Officer (Thursday the 20th day of August, 2009/29th Sravana, 1931)

I. D. 19/2008

Union :

TheGeneral Secretary , State Bank ofTravancore Staff Union (BEFI), TC/42/2003 BEFI Centre, MeleThampanoor , Trivandrum- I (Inperson)

Management :

The Zonal Manager, State Bank ofTravancore, ZonalOffice , Kozhikode .

(Inperson)

This case coming up for hearing on 14-8-2009, this Tribunal - cum- Labour Court on 20-8-2009 passed the following:

AWARD

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

"Wheather the action of the management of StateBank ofTravancore in dismissing Sri M. Raman w.e.f. 27-9-2004 against the alleged misconduct of financial misappropriation , is fair and justified? To what relief is the workman concerned entitled ?"

[PART II-SEC. 3 (ii )] 2. The facts ofthe case in brief are as follows:-Shri M. Raman was aPeon ofState Bank of Travancore, Karipur branch . He was entrusted two cheque books to be sent by post to two NRI customers . It is alleged that he removed two cheque leaves from the cheque books and destroyed the remaining. Utilising the two cheque leaves he forged the signature of two NRI customers and withdrew Rs . 30,000 from their accounts . He was chargesheeted , a domestic enquiry was conducted, he was found guilty of the charges and was dismissed from service.

3. According to the union the relevant records concerning dispatch of cheque books were not produced in the enquiry . None of the witnesses of the management has given evidence that the cheque books were mailed by theworkman. With regard to the withdrawal of money the only role of the workman was that he had issued token to the parties as usual and nothing more. The amounts were paid to the persons who had the tokens . None of the witnesses have stated that amounts were paid to the workman . There is no evidence to prove that the workman has committed the misconduct alleged . The management had obtained confession statement by threat and pressure . The workman is entitled to be reinstated .

4.According to the management the workman had admitted his guilt voluntarily . He also remitted the money tomake good the loss . There is enough evidence to prove the guilt of the workman . He was the only Peon in Karipur branch and he alone used to take postal articles to the post office for sending. The cheque amounts must have been received by a 3rd person to whom tokens were issued by the workman . Concerned subsidiary registers of the relevant dates were written by the workman and there were several mistakes which were corrected by him . The proved misconduct calls for deterrent punishment of dismissal . It is in no way excessive .

5. Inthe light ofthe above contentions the following points arise for consideration :

1. Are the findings sustainable ?

2. Is the punishment proper ?

6. The evidence consists of the oral testimony of MW! and documentary evidence of Ext. M1 on the side of the Management.

7. Point No. 1:-There are 4 charges levelled against the workman. The first charge is that during 1-9-2001 to 28-2-2003 the workman while on duty and in the process of mailing two cheque books to two NRI customers , had removed stealthily two cheques leaves . The 2nd charge is that he had destroyed the two cheque books containing the rernaining cheque leaves . The 3rd and 4th charges are that he had forged the signatures of two NRI customers , drawn the two cheques for Rs . 10,000 and 20,000 respectively and encashed them fraudulently. The workman gave a confession statement to the management admitting his guilt . Ext. PEX- 18 is the confession statement. All the 4 6307 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र: अक्तूबर 17 , 2009/आश्विन 25 , 1931

charges are admitted by him and he undertook to remit Rs.30,000 by3-3-2003 .

statement was given by the workman voluntarily and in thepresence ofmany staff (page 89 of Ext.M1 ). PW2 is a Clerk of the bank . He says that Ext.PEX- 18 confession statement was read out by PW8 in the presence of staff and the workman . The workman then asked for pardon to everyone (page 23 ) . PW3 is a Cashier. He too says that Ext.PEX- 18 was read out to the staff in the presence of workman by PW8 . PW5 is Branch Manager. He also says that Ext.PEX- 18 was read out in the presence of staff including him and the workman . PW5 felt sad and wept asking, "Do you do this" (page 54). PW6 is Clerk cum Cashier . She also says that Ext. PEX- 18 was read out in the presence ofall and workman . The workman asked for pardon to all . Thus the evidence of management witnesses is to the effect that the confession statement was given voluntarily by the workman and he was regretful. Ext. PEX- 18 was given on 26-2-2003 . Almost two months thereafter for the first time, he raised the protest that the confession statement was given under threat and coercion . Ext.DEX -4 is the explanation to the memo of charges . It is in the explanation that the workman comes with a contention that the confession statement was not voluntary . This is not the normal conduct of an innocent person . If at all he was threatened with police action and obtained a confession statement, as soon as he was out of the office or atleast whenhewas suspended from service , he should have raised the protest immediately by writing either to the Branch Manager or other superior officers of the bank. The circumstances reveal that there is no truth in his contention that Ext.PEX- 18 is a forced statement . Therefore it could be relied on by the Enquiry Officer . That apart there is independent evidence to prove the allegations.

8.According to the union the Enquiry Officer has based his findings on the confession statement of the workman . But it was obtained under duress . It is no doubt truethat confession statement was relied onby the Enquiry Officer. But it may not be correct to say that the findings are based solely on the confession statement . Ext.PEX- 18 confession statement is dated 26-2-2003 . The union has examined 4 witnesses on the defence side . DW1 is a retired Head Master. He struck acquaitance with the workman during bank transactions. He used to entrust money to the workman for taking DD for him (page- 114 of proceedings in Ext.M1 ) . The witness says that the workman was always honest. However he has no direct knowledge about any of the incidents alleged in this case . DW1 has also deposed that he came to know that the workman and his father were threatened by bank officers and under compelled circumstances the workman had to give and admission statement (page- 120). DW2 is a friend ofworkman. He also says that he came to understand that the workman was threatened and induced to admit the guilt . On the basis of the promise by the management that no action would be taken in case money is remitted, an amount of Rs . 30,000/- was raised and the witness also had helped in raising the money and he himself contributed some amount (pg. - 129). He says that the workman is an honest person and he used toentrust money for remittance (pg- 128 ) . DW3 is the father ofthe workman and an aged person . He says that a bank officer had been to his house and threatened him that action would be taken through police regarding cheque transactions of his son. He went to bank, talked to the officers and on their promise that no action would be taken the amount was remitted by his son. DW4 is the wife ofthe workman . She also says that a bank officer come home and threatened her and her father- in- law . DW3 then went to the bank . Her husband gave a confession statement because of the threat . The money was remitted by him on the promise of the bank that no action would be taken against him ( page 154 of Ext.M1 ) . It is to be noted that DW3 and 4 are family members of the workman . Their testimony can be taken only with a pinch of salt. DW1 and 2have only hearsay knowledge from the workman and his father about the alleged threat by bank officers . Regarding the incidents of removing cheque leaves and encashment of cheques they have absolutely no knowledge.

9. PW8 is the Chief Manager and investigating officer ofthe bank . He had been to the house of the workman . He had met the father of the workman and called him to the bank. The workman's father accompanied him to the bank. PW8 says that the father of the workman was called to the bank in order to verify whether he was the person who had received the cheque amounts . He denies that there was any threat from the bank officers or any promise that no action would be taken . He says that Ext.PEX- 18 confession

10.Theworkmanwas the only Peon in Karipur branch admittedly. The other sub- staff was a part- time sweeper , Muhammed alias Kunjappoo. He is PW1 . He says that he never used to take postal articles for mailing. It was done onlyby the workman (page- 16). The union had a suggestion that on the days whenever the workman was absent PWI used to take the postal covers to the post office. But PW1 denies it. There is no record to prove that the work if mailing was entrusted to PW1 at any time. PW2 Clerk says that NRI chequebooks are issued after entering them in ledger and cheque book issued register. Thereafter it is given to theAccountant and the Accountant after verification put them indespatch box . At that time NRI cheque books were sent by ordinary post. PW3 cashier says that the postal covers used to be taken to post office by workman as well as PW1 (page 38 ) . The defence had produced in the enquiry Ext.DEX- 1 copy of attendence register (2 pages) and DEX-2 copy of cheque book issued register (page 45 and 47).But it has come out in evidence that two cheque books were issued to two NRI customers . But it is not known on which date actually the cheque books were taken to the postoffice for sending . Therefore even assuming that PW1 also used to mail postal covers , it is not known whether 6308

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: OCTOBER 17 , 2009/ASVINA 25 , 1931

[PART II-SEC. 3( ii) ] cheque books were actually sent on a day when the workman was absent. It is for the workman to show that in fact he was absent on the particular day on which the cheque books were mailed. In the light of the above circumstances and evidence including Ext.PEX - 18 admission it has to be said that the cheque books were entrusted to the workman for sending them by post .

complaint. It is submitted by the management that the workman was showing undue interest in the matter . The evidence and circumstances lead to the conclusion that workman came in possession of two cheque leaves and theywere utilised for withdrawing the money. The workman remitted Rs . 30,000 as per sundry deposit account voucher dated 28-2-2003 ( PEX-6) . It is not proved that there was anypromise from the management to drop the disciplinary proceedings if money was remitted. Besides as per Ext . PEX- 18 confession statement there is clear admission of withdrawal of money through disputed cheques .

Inthe light ofthis evidence and circumstances there can be no doubt that the workman is the culprit and the EnquiryOfficer has rightly found so.

13. Point No. 2: The punishment is dismissal from service. No mitigating circumstances are mentioned inthe claim statement. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the union that the workman had an unblemished service and he belongs to a poor family . The family backgrounds and other aspects were considered by the Disciplinary authority as well as the appellate authority. But they were reluctant to show any leniency in the matter ofpunishment . The Branch Manager as well as other officers of the bank had put so much of trust in the workman that they allowed him to do certain clerical work also . But he took advantage of the position and committed the mischief. The bank cannottolerate such incidents as it will affect its reputation, a financial institution where customers money is handled. Thereforethe management cannot be blamed for imposing the maximum punishment of dismissal . Considering the gravity ofthe offence the punishment cannot be said to be shockingly disproportionate . Hence this court does not propose to alter the same .

In the result, an award is passed finding that the action of the management in dismissing the workman Sri M.Raman from service is legal and justified and he is not entitled for any relief.

The award will come into force 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 20thday of August , 2009 .

P. L. NORBERT, Presiding Officer

Appendix Witness for the Union- Nil Witness for theManagement MW1-23-7-2009 Shri P. Muraleedharan . Exhibits for the Union - Nil Exhibits for the Management M1-EnquiryFile .

11. The allegation that he had removed stealthily two cheque leaves out of the cheque books can be proved onlyfrom the circumstances that those two cheque leaves were drawn on the account of two NRI customers and encashedthem . Ext. PEX- 1 is the cheque for Rs . 10,000 drawn on the account of Sri Abdul Gafoor and Ext. PEX-2 is the cheque for Rs . 20,000 drawn on the account of SriMoosakutty. Both are NRI account holders . PW2 Clerk says that Ext . PEX- 1 cheque when presented for encashment was posted by him . It was passed by PW7 Assistant Manager (Accounts ) . The amount was paid by PW3 Cashier(page 33 of the proceedings). Ext.PEX-2 was posted by PW6 Clerk- cum- Cashier. It was passed by PW4 AssistantManager and was paid by PW2 Clerk (page 19) . However neither PW3 nor PW2 , who paid the cheque amounts under Ext.PEX- 1 and 2 respectively, are able to identify the person to whom the cash was paid. It is humanly not possible to remember each and every person whoreceive money from the counter . It was not necessary unlike contended by the defence , for the workman to receive money in order to accuse him of fraudulent withdrawal ofmoney and misappropriation . It is admitted that tokens in respect of the two cheques were issued by the workman, which is usually done by him . The persons who received the tokens might have received the amount and the workman might have made arrangements with them to receive same on his behalf. Exts . PEX - 11 and 12 are SB subsidiary registers relevant pages bearing the dates of 2-12-2002 and 23-1-2003 . The cheque amounts were recorded in the registers by the workman . PW2 says that relevant entries in Exts . PEX - 11 and 12 were made by the workman ( page 21 of the proceedings ) . PW6 Clerk- cum- Cashier also says that relevant entries in Exts . PEX - 11 and 12were made bythe workman in his own handwriting and there are corrections in the entries . Though the workman was a Peon he used to write registers , withdrawal slips and issue tokens with a view to help the staff as well as customers and nobody had objected . However in the present case two NRI customers had complained to the Branch Manager that they had not withdrawn the aforementioned amounts from their accounts . They also said that they have not received the cheque books . PW5 Branch Manager has given evidence to this effect. PW4 the Assistant Manager Smt . M. Karthiyani says that the workman as soon as he came to know that the NR1 customers had complained about the withdrawal he met PW4 in her house and told that if the money in dispute is remitted the account holders may not proceed with the 6309 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र: अक्तूबर 17, 2009/आश्विन 25 , 1931

नई दिल्ली, 17 सितम्बर, 2009

कां. अ . 2875.-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 (1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार बी.सी.सी.एल.के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच , अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण / श्रम न्यायालय सं. 1 , धनबाद के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 86/1990 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 17-9-2009 को प्राप्त हुआ था।

Thereafter the case proceeded along its course . However, incourse ofproceeding the representative ofthe workman submitted that the concerned workman involved in the dispute hasdied and he filed a substitution petition and prayed to fix the case for hearing on the said petition . On the date fixed for hearing on substitution petition none turned up onbehalf ofthe workman before the Tribunal to press the substitution petition . Accordingly substitution petition has been dismissed as not pressed.

[सं. एल-20012/306/89- आईआर ( सी-1 ) ] स्नेह लता जवास, डेस्क अधिकारी NewDelhi , the 17th September, 2009

Since the concerned workman has already died and nobody has been substituted, a 'No dispute Award is passed in this reference presuming non-existence of any industrial disputebetween the parties.

H. M. SINGH , Presiding Officer

नईदिल्ली , 17 सितम्बर , 2009

S. O. 2875. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No.86/1990) ofthe Central Government Industrial Tribunal /Labour Court, No.- 1 , Dhanbad now as shown in the Annexure , in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of M/s . B.C.C.L. and their workman, which was receivedby the Central Government on 17-9-2009 .

[No. L-20012/306/89- IR(C-I)]

SNEH LATA JAWAS , Desk Officer

का. अस. 2876, गऔधोगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 ( 1947 का 14) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में , केन्द्रीय सरकार बी.सी.सी.एल. के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण / श्रम न्यायालय सं..। , धनबाद के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्मा 196/99 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 17-9-2009 को प्राप्त हुआ था । ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL No. 1 , AT DHANBAD

[सं. एल-20012/307/99-आईआर ( सी-1 ) ] स्नेह लता जवास , डेस्क अधिकारी Present : ShriH.M.Singh , PresidingOfficer

NewDelhi, the 17th September,2009 Inthe matter of an Industrial Dispute under Section 10 (1 ) (d) ofthe I. D. Act, 1947

ReferenceNo. 86 of1990

Parties: Employers in relation to the management of Bhatdee Colliery in Mahuda Area No. II of M/s . BCCL and their workman .

S. O. 2876. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 196/99) ofthe Central Government Industrial Tribunal/ Labour Court, No.-1 , Dhanbad now as shown in the Annexure, in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of M/ s . B.C.C.L. and their workman, which was receivedby the Central Government on 17-9-2009.

APPEARANCES

[No. L-20012/307/99- IR(C-I)] Onbehalf ofthe employers : Mr. D. K. Verma , Advocate

Onbehalf of the workman: None .

SNEH LATA JAWAS, Desk Officer ANNEXURE

State : Jharkhand

Industry: Coal.

Dated, Dhanbed, the 9th Sept. , 2009

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL No. 1, AT DHANBAD AWARD

Inthe matter of an Industrial Dispute under Section 10 (1)(d) ofthe 1. D. Act, 1947

ReferenceNo.196 of99

Parties: Employers in relation to the management of Kusunda Area of M/s . BCCL.

The Government of India , Ministry of Labour, in exercise ofthepowers conferred on them under Section 10 (1)(d) ofthe I.D. Act, 1947 has referred the following dispute to this Tribunal for adjudication vide their Order No. L- 20012/306/ 89 - I.R. (Coal- I) , dated the nil.

And

SCHEDULE

Theirworkman

Present: Shri H.M.Singh, Presiding Officer

APPEARANCES

FortheEmployers : Sri S. N. Ghosh ,Adv .

"Whether the management of Bhatdee Colliery in Mahuda AreaNo. II of M/s. Bharat Coking Coal Ltd. , P.O. Mohuda, Dt. Dhanbad (Bihar) is justified in dismissing the workman Shri Ram Singh Under-ground Munshi w.e.f. 22-2-1988 . If not , towhat relief the said workman is entitled?"

For the Workman Sri C. Prasad, Adv .

2. In this case both the parties appeared and filed their respective Written Statement, documents etc. State : Jharkhand

Industry : Coal 6310

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 17 , 2009/ASVINA 25 , 1931

Dated, 3rd September,2009

AWARD

By Order No. L - 20012/ 307/ 99 ( C - I ) , dated , 26-11-1999 the Central Government in the Ministry of Labour has , in exercise of the powers conferred by clause (d) ofsub-section ( 1 ) and sub- section (2A) ofSection 10 of Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 referred the following dispute for adjudication to this Tribunal :

"Whether the action of the management of Kusunda Area ofBCCL in not giving Gr. ' D' to Shiv Dayal Sah E.P. Electrician of KOCP/Dhansar on the basis of valid House Wiring Certificate (Issued by Government Of Bihar ) is discreanatory and unjustified ? If so, what relief the workman is entitled to and from what date ? "

This case was received in this Tribunal on 7-12-99 . Thereafter on 18-6-09 Sri C. Prasad, Advocate appeared on behalf of the workman concerned and filed a petition stating therein that the concerned workman is not interested in contesting the case and wanted to withdraw the case .

In such circumstances , I render a No dispute Award inthis case .

H. M. SINGH, Presiding Officer नई दिल्ली , 17 सितम्बर, 2009

का. आ. 2877.-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में , केन्द्रीय सरकार ई.सी.एल. के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच , अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालय सं. 1 , धनबाद के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 335/2000 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 17-9-2009 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल-20012/316/2000- आई आर ( सी-1 ) ] स्नेह लता जवास , डेस्क अधिकारी New Delhi, the 17th September , 2009 S. O. 2877. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 335 / 2000) ofthe Central Government Industrial Tribunal /Labour Court, No. -1 , Dhanbad now as shown in the Annexure , in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to themanagement of M/s . E.C.L. and their workmen,which was received by the Central Government on 17-9-2009.

[No. L-20012/316/2000- IR(C- 1)]

SNEH LATA JAWAS , Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL No. 1 , DHANBAD Inthe natter of a reference under Section 10 ( 1) ( d) & (2A) of Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 Reference No. 335 of 2000

Parties: Employers in relation to the management of Raj Mahal Area of M/s . E. C. L.

[PART 11-SEC. 3 (ii)]

And

Theirworkman

Present: Shri H. M. Singh , PresidingOfficer APPEARANCES

For the Employers : None

For the Workman : None

State : Jharkhand

Industry : Coal Dated , 2nd September, 2009

AWARD

By Order No. L - 20012 / 316 /2000-( C- 1 ) , dated, 27-11-2000 the Central Government in the Ministry of Labour has , in exercise of the powers conferred by clause (d) ofsub-section ( 1 ) and sub-section (2A) ofSection 10 of Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 referred the following Disputes for adjudication to this Tribunal :

"Whether the demand of the Jharkhand Mazdoor Morcha from the management of Eastern Coalfield Ltd, Rajmahal Area for payment of remuneration/ honorarium to S/ Shri N. C. Pandit , Manan Tiwary , Mubarak Hassan & Rusole Murmur for attending training programme is justified ? If so , to what relief are the workman entitled ? "

Thisreference case was received in this Tribunal on 26-12-2000 . Thereafter notices were sent to the parties to file written statement by the sponsoring union/ workmen . Inspite of notice sent by speed post no written statement has been filed by the workmen till 8-6-09 . lt , therefore , appears that neither the concerned workman nor the sponsoring union is interested to contest the case.

In such circumstances , I render NO DISPUTE AWARD in this reference case .

H. M. SINGH, PresidingOfficer नई दिल्ली, 17 सितम्बर , 2009

का. आ. 2878. औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 (1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार टाटा आर्यन एण्ड स्टील कम्पनी के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण / श्रम न्यायालय सं. 1 , धनबाद के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 339/2000 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 17-9-2009 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल-20012/341/2000- आई आर ( सी-1 ) ] स्नेह लता जवास , डेस्क अधिकारी New Delhi , the I 7th September , 2009 S. O. 2878.-In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No.339/2000) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal /Labour Court , No. -I Dhanbad now as shown in [ भाग II- खण्ड 3( ii) ]

6311

भारत का राजपत्र: अक्तूबर 17, 2009/आश्विन 25 , 1931

the Annexure , in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of M/s. TISCO Ltd. and their workman, which was receivedby the Central Government on 17-9-2009.

[No. L-20012/341 /2000- IR(C- 1 )]

SNEH LATA JAWAS, Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL No. 1 , DHANBAD In the matter of a reference under Section 10 ( 1 ) (d) & (2A) of Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 Reference No.339 of2000

Parties: Employers in relation to the management of Sijua Colliery of M/s. TISCO Ltd, And theirworkman .

Present: Shri H.M.Singh , Presiding Officer

APPEARANCES

For theEmployers : None

Forthe Workman : None

State: Jharkhand

Industry :Coal Dated, Ist September, 2009

AWARD

By Order No. L - 20012/341 /2000-( C- 1 ) , dated, 29-11-2000 the Central Government in the Ministry of Labour has , in exercise of the powers conferred by clause (d) ofsub-section ( 1) and sub-section (2A) ofSection 10 of Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 referred the following dispute for adjudication to this Tribunal .

"Whether the action of the management of Sijua Colliery of M/s . TISCO in dismissing Sri Ram Ratan Harijan from the services of the company w.e.f. 15-12-97 is justified ? If not, to what relief is the concerned workman entitled? "

This reference was received in this Tribunal on 26-12-2000 . In spite of sending notices to the concerned workman , no written statement has been filed on behalfof the concerned workman till 8-6-09 .

Itappears that neither the concerned workman nor the sponsoring union is interested to contest this case.

In such circumstances , I pass No dispute Awardin thiscase.

H. M. SINGH , Presiding Officer नई दिल्ली , 17 सितम्बर , 2009

का. आ. 2879. औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947. (1947 का 14) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में , केन्द्रीय सरकार नार्थदन रेलवे प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच , अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण 3633 G1/00-21

लखनऊ के पंचाट (संदर्भ संख्या 130/2002 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 17-9-2009 को प्राप्त हुआ था । [सं. एल-41012/33/2002-आईआर( बी-1 ) ]

अजय कुमार , डेस्क अधिकारी New Delhi , the 17th September, 2009 S. O. 2879. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No.130/ 2002) ofthe Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum- Labour Court, Lucknow as shown in the Annexure, in the Industrial Dispute between the management of Northern Railway and their workmen, which was receivedby the CentralGovernment on 17-9-2009 .

[No. L-41012/33/2002 -IR(B- 1 )] AJAY KUMAR, DeskOfficer

ANNEXURÉ

CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM- LABOUR COURT, LUCKNOW

PRESENT

N. K. PUROHIT, Presiding Officer 1. D. No. 130/2002

ReferenceNo. L-41012/33/2002-IR (B-1) dated:18-07-2002

BETWEEN

TheDivisional Secretary, RailwayMazdoor Union , 1150-J , CPH Colony Lucknow (U.P .)- 226001

(Espousing the cause of Sh . R. K. Pandey) AND

TheDy. ChiefEngineer (Bridge Workshop) Northern Railway, Charbagh Lucknow (U. P. ) 226001.

AWARD

Dated:08-09-2009

1. By Order No. L-41012/33/2002- IR(B-1 ) , dated, 18-07-2002 the Central Government in the Ministry of Labour, New Delhi in exercise of the powers conferredby clause(d)ofsub-section ( 1 ) and sub- section (2A) ofSection 10ofthe Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947) referred thisIndustrial dispute between The Divisional Secretary, RailwayMazdoor Union , 1150- J , CPH Colony, Northern Railway, Charbagh, Lucknow and the Dy. Chief Engineer (Bridge Workshop) Northern Railway , Charbagh , Lucknowforadjudication .

2. The reference under adjudication is as under:

"क्याप्रबंधन , उत्तर रेलवे ( ब्रिज वर्कशॉप ) चारबाग , लखनऊ द्वारा श्री आर. के. पाण्डे, एम.सी.सी. को रेलवे बोर्ड के आदेश पत्र दिनांक 16-08-1978 तथा कैट ( ओ.एस.सं.- 133/91 ) केनिर्णय के अनुसार दिनांक 01-01-1973 से उच्च श्रेणी में 6312

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: OCTOBER 17 , 2009/ ASVINA 25 , 1931

[PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii )] वेतन निर्धारण [ upgradation & Fixation ] अपग्रेडेशन एण्ड फिक्सेशन नहीं किया जाना न्यायोचित तथा न्यायसंगत है ? यदि नहीं, तो कर्मकार किस अनुतोष का अधिकारी है ? "

dispute , he has contended that the representations given by the workman were not considered by the railway management besides this the SLP was filed against the decision of the CAT, Lucknow in the said O.A. which was dismissed on 16-8-94 and subsequently, the decision of the CAT, Lucknow was implemented in the year 1996. Не has also contended that benefit of the said decision of CAT, should have been extended to the workman .

3. Undisputedly the workman was initially appointed as casual labour on 21-1-61 and subsequently appointed asKhalasi w.e.f. 4-11-71 and promoted as Storeman w.e.f. 12-6-72. It is also not disputed that workman was promoted asMaterial CheckerGr . Rs.225-306/ 825-1200( RPS) on adhoc basas w.e.f. 1-12-75 and became regular as Material Checker w.e.f. 27-4-77 and after that he was selected for the post of Material Checking ClerkGr.260-400/950-1500 (RPS ) w.e.f. 15-2-84.

8.Per contra, the learned representative on behalf of the railway has argued that the decision of the CAT, Lucknow has been fully implemented and the benefit of the decision has been given to the petitioners therein. As perRailway Board's letter dtd . 24-7-95 the benefits of the abovedecision ofCAT was to be extended to the petitioners only. Moreover , the workman was not similarly situated employee as he was punished several time due to inaction. in duty . The union has raised the present dispute after retirement of the workman . The workman never made any representation challenging the provisional seniority list dtd. 25-9-96. he has also pointed out that union has claimed upgradation w.e.f. 1-12-1975 whereas in reference under adjudication it is to be decided whether the workman was entitled for upgradation w.e.f. 1-1-73 .

The contention of the union is that vide Railway Board , New Delhi Order dtd . 16-8-78 , the post ofMaterial Checker was upgraded as Material Checking Clerk, as such the workman was entitled for upgradation as Material Checking Clerk w.e.f. 1-12-75. It is also contended that as per decision in O.A. 133/91 ofCAT, Lucknow against which the SLP filed by the Railway has been dismissed , the workman is entitled for benefit of upgradation as given to similar situated other petitioners in the said O.A. and all consequential benefits and pensionary benefits arising thereof from the date his juniors Sh . Shitla Deel and Sh . R. P. Sanik & others were promoted.

9. I have given my thoughtful consideration on the rival submissions of both sides and perused the relevant material on record .

10. The relevant extract of the letter dtd . 16-8-78 of Railway Board , on the basis of which the union has raised the present industrial dispute , is reproduced as under ;

5. The railway management has denied the claim of the union . It is contended that the workman is retired from the railway on 31-12-2001 and all settlement dues have been paid to him . As per decision of the CAT, Lucknow in O.A. 133/91 a provisional seniority list was prepared and the benefit of the decision was extended to the petitioners therein . The said provisional seniority list has been circulated by the railway administration but the workman never raised any objection nor made any representation against the seniority list . It is alleged that the workman was transferred from Lucknow to Jalandar but he failed to join his duty. The railway management has denied that any juniors to the workman has been promoted as Sr. Clerk from the post of Material Checking Clerk. Further contended that claim of relief of upgradation and fixation since 1-1-73 is highly belated and it should not be adjudicated after the lapse of about 30 years as no sufficient and reasonable cause for such delay has been explained by the workman . Therefore , the claim of the union is liable to be rejected.

"As a result ofdiscussions in the P. N. Meeting between the Railway Board and the AIRP held on 10/11-4-78 , the Raiway Ministry have received the question of fixation of pay of the incumbents of the posts of Material Checkers upgraded as Material Clerks in terms of the orders contained in Board's letter No. PC- 62/ PS - 5 /SS - 1 dtd . 27-9-63 and No. PC-65 /EE -4 / 1 dtd . 26-10-72 . It has been decided, in supersession of all the prevision clarifications on the subject that the pay of the incumbents of the posts of Material Checkers , Tool Checkers etc. upgraded as Material Clerks , scale Rs . 110-180( AS) Rs . 260-400(Rs . ) as per orders aforecited should be refixed proforma under Rule 2018 -B ( FB 22 - C) no arrears on this account however , being paid for the period prior to Ist August , 1978. "

6. The union has examined Sh R. K. Pandey and railway management has examined Sh . D. C. Goel , Executive Engineer in support of their respective case . The union in support of its case has filed copies of the judgment of CAT, Lucknow in O.A. 133/91 and Railway Board's order dt. 16-8-78 .

11. In O.A. No. 133/91 the matter regarding implementation of the aforementioned order dtd. 16-8-78 was under consideration before the CAT, Lucknow the stand of the applicants therein was that after circular of 16-8-78 , earlier circular superceded and they were entitled topay scale ofmaterial clerks w.e.f. 1-1-1973 or the date of promotion to the post of material checkers which ever is later . No selection process is required as the same is not 7. The learned representative on behalf of the union has contended that as per Board's order dtd . 16-8-78 and decision of the CAT , Lucknow in O.A. 133/91 workman was to be upgraded as Material Checking Clerk w.e.f. 1-12-75 . The railway management has not prepared seniority list as per direction in said O.A. As regards delay in raising

標 6313 [भाग II- खण्ड 3( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र: अक्तूबर 17, 2009/आश्विन 25 , 1931

stipulated in letterdt . 16-8-79 whereas the stand of the respondent railway was that selection process is must to makematerial clerks as per circular dt. 16-8-78. The following directions were given in the said O.A. 133/91 ;

promotion on the post of material clerk i.e. 1-12-1975 when hewas promoted as adhoc material clerk. The management witness Sh . D. C. Goel has stated that the workman is retired from railway on 31-12-2001 and all settlement dues have been paid to him. Workman has raised fabricated industrial dispute he has further stated that workman is not similarly situated employee and he already punished by several punishments due to inaction in duty and after more than 30 years the present industrial dispute has been raised through unrecognized union therefore, claim is liable tobe rejected. The workman in his statement on affidavit has reiterated earlier pleadings in the statement of claim. In cross examination he has admitted that no reason has been assigned for delay in raising industrial dispute in his statement ofclaim but he has filed documents in this regard. Hehas also stated that he had made several representations and assurances were given by the railway administration.

"The applicants 1 to 3 were promoted in April toJune , 1977 and the applicants 4 to 7 were promoted in September , 1985 , and the applicants 8 to 9 were promoted in 1989 i.e. within these nine applicants only 3 were promoted before 1978. Vide letter dt. 24-10-72 the Railway Board after meeting of Joint Consultative Machiner laid down the criteria and pay scales ofpay of Food Issuers , Coak Checkers , Stores Issuers, Material Checking Clerk, Tool Checkers etc. , and criteria for datermining the scale ofpay of staff dealing with store matters in departments other than Stores, veriously designated as Clerk, Coal Issuers/ Clerk ect."

12. In the instant case this is not disputed that workman was promoted on 12-6-72 as Storeman in Grade Rs. 80-110 and he was promoted as material checker on adhoc basis on 1-12-75 and selected as material checker in grade Rs . 225-308 on 27-4-1977 . Since on 1-1-73 he was not on the post of material checker , the workman was not entitled for upgradation of the post of material clerk/MCC on 1-1-73 as per order dt . 16-8-78 thus, the action of the railway administration in not upgrading the workman as per said order w.e.f. 1-1-73 is not unjustified.

15.The benefit of upgradation in the scale of material clerk/MCC was given in the year 1978 and the dispute has beenraised in this regard in the year 2001 i.e. after lapse of 23 years. There is neither pleadings nor any evidence to explain such inordinate delay though workman has stated the several representations were given by him but in support of his statement he has not placed any copy of such representation on record moreover , there is no averments in this regard in his statement of claim . Further , the decision of CAT was given in the year 1992 and SLP in Hon'ble Apex Court was rejected in the year 1994 but the workman did not raise any dispute regarding his upgradation as per order of the CAT till year 2001. No explanation has been given for delay during this perind also. Apart from this he was not party in the O.A. 133/91 and he was at liberty to raise dispute regarding upgradation after he got adhoc promotion as material checker in the year 1975. Although the provision of Limitation Act are not material in the matter of industrial dispute but it does not mean the workman or union is free to raise dispute for any stale claim at any time . The power confirmed under the 1.D. Act must be exercise within a reasonable period and period of23 years can not be said to be reasonable period for claiming relief in pursuance oforder of 16-8-78 without assigning any reason & explanation for such inordinate delay. Therefore, in view of the latches on the part of workman and the union concerned, the workman is not entitled for the reliefeven from the date of his promotion as material clerk w.e.f. 1-12-1975 .

16. In view of the above discussion the action of the railway administration in not giving the benefit of upgradation and fixation w.e.f. 1-1-1973 in accordance with the order dt. 16-8-78 and decision of the O.A. 133/91 of CAT, Lucknow is not unjustified and illegal and workman isnot entitled for the relief claimed by him .

13. Admittedly, in O.A. 133/91 the benefit of upgradation has been given to the applicants therein in the light of order dt . 16-8-78 and benefit of the decision in the said O.A. has not been extended to the workman , The management witness Sh . D. C. Goel, Dy. Chief Engineer (Bridge) has stated that as per letter or Railway Board No. E(NG) 1-92/SR6/43 dt . 24-7-95 the benefit ofdecision in the said O.A. was to be given only to the applicant therein. The copy of the said letter is on the record. As per the above Railway Board letterdt. 24-7-95 in reference to Hon'ble Supreme Court Judgment dt. 16-8-94 in C.A. 15120/ 93 filed againstjudgment dt . 28-8-92 of CAT, Lucknow in Ο.Α. 133/91 Hari Dutt and others Vs. Union of India, directions were given to the General Managers of the Railway to implement the order of the CAT, Lucknow with further directions that the benefit of judgment may be extended to the petitioners only . The workman has not challenged the validity ofthe said order dt. 24-7-95 nor it is subject matter under adjudication, therefore , in the light of decision of Railway Board the action of the railway administration in not extending the benefit of decision in said O.A. 133/91 to the workman can not be said to be illegal or unjustified.

17. The reference under adjudication be answered accordingly.

N. K. PUROHIT, Presiding Officer

LUCKNOW 08-09-2009

14. Now it is to be considered whether in pursuance oforder dt. 16-8-78 the workman is entitled for upgradation to the post of material checker grade from the date of his 6314

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 17, 2009/ ASVINA 25 , 1931

[PART II-SEC. 3 (ii) ] नईदिल्ली, 17 सितम्बर , 2009

1. The Government of India, Ministry of Labour by its Order No. L-41012/ 189/2001 - IR (B- I) dated 22ndMarch , 2002 in exercise of the powers conferred by clause ( d) of sub-section ( 1 ) and sub - section 2 ( A) of Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 have referred the following dispute to this Tribunal for adjudication:

का. आ. 2880.-औधोगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 (1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में , केन्द्रीय सरकार वेस्टर्न रेलवे प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच , अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालय-2 मुम्बई , के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 33/2002 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 19-9-2009 को प्राप्त हुआ था।

[सं. एल-41012/ 189/2001- आईआर(बी-1 ) ] अजय कुमार , डेस्क अधिकारी

"Whether the action of the Management ofWestern Railway , Mumbai Central , Mumbai in removal from the services to Shri Vijay Mahadeo Gavli after imposing penalty isjustified ? If not, what relief the workman concerned is entitled?"

NewDelhi , the 17th September, 2009

2.Referencewas posted for cross examination ofthe 2nd Party . However, workman remained absent . His Advocate by Exhibit 23 withdrawn his appearance . Again Court sent notice, Exhibit 24, to the concerned workman which was returned unclaimed vide report Exhibit 25.

3. All this reveals that , the concerned workman is notinterested in proceeding with the reference . So marking his absence and noting it following order is passed .

S. O. 2880.-In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award ( Ref. No.33 /2002) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum -Labour Court-2Mumbai , as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the management of Western Railway and theirworkman,which was received bythe Central Government on17-9-2009 ,

ORDER

Reference is disposed of for want of prosecution .

[No. L-41012/ 189/2001 - IR(B - I ) ] AJAY KUMAR, Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

Bombay,

A. A. LAD, Presiding Officer

10th August, 2009

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL No. 2, MUMBAI

Present-A.A.Lad, Presiding Officer

नई दिल्ली, 23 सितम्बर, 2009

Reference No. CGIT-2/33 of2002

Employers in relation to the Management of Western Railway

The Divisional Railway Manager (Estd . ) ,

Western Railway, Mumbai Central , Mumbai-400008 .

.FristParty

का. आ. 2881.-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार सिंडिकेट बैंक के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच , अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण / श्रम न्यायालय नं. 1 , नई दिल्ली के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 47/2004) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 22-9-2009 को प्राप्त हुआ था।

V/s.

Their Workmen

[सं. एल-12012/87/2004- आईआर(बी- II ) ] राजेन्द्र कुमार , डेस्क अधिकारी

New Delhi , the 23th September , 2009 Shri Vijay Mahadeo Gavli, Laxman Motilal Patel Chawl , Dattawadi , Kurar Village, Malad(E), Mumbai -400008 .

Second Party

APPEARANCE :

For the Employer : Mr. Delilah Fernandez, Advocate For the Workmen : In person -Absent

Date ofpassing the Award : 10-08-2009.

S. O. 2881.-In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No.47/ 2004) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal -cum- Labour Court - No . 1 New Delhi , now as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employees in relation to the management of Syndicate Bank and their workman , which was received by the Central Government on 22-9-2009 .

AWARD

The matrix of the facts as culled out from the

[No. L- 12012/ 87/2004-1R(B - 11 ) ] RAJINDER KUMAR, Desk Officer proceedings are as under:

小 6315 [भाग II-खण्ड 3( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र: अक्तूबर 17, 2009/आश्विन 25 , 1931

ANNEXURE

BEFORE Dr. R.K YADAV PRESIDING OFFICER,

CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL -CUM- LABOUR COURTNo. 1, NEW DELHI

I.D.NO. 47/2004

"Whether the action of the management of Syndicate Bank in fixing the pay in pursuant of punishment awarded by the Disciplinary Authority of reduction of basic pay by two stages in the scale of pay for a period of two years on Shri S.K. Yadav. Clerk and non-grant of increments is legal andjustified? Ifnot, what reliefthe workman is entitled to?".

Shri Suresh Kumar Yadav ,

C/o Syndicate Bank, Nuh Branch ,

...Workman

Gurgaon

Versus

TheAsstt. General Manager,

Syndicate Bank,

Sarojini House,

%, Bhagwan Dass Road , New Delhi - 110001

...Management

AWARD

2.Claim statement was filed by the workman , pleading therein that he was working in clerical cadre of the bank andgoverned by Bipartite Settlements at industry level as wellas bank level. While working as clerk in Farukh Nagar Branch of the bank, he was suspended vide order dated 29-7-99, pending departmental enquiry . He remained under suspension till 2-8-2000. He was awarded punishment of reduction in basic pay by two stages in the pay scale for a period of two years , vide order dated 29-7-2000. The DisciplinaryAuthority further ordered that his suspension period will not be treated as part of service . The other of theDisciplinary Authority was implemented from the date of his joining the service, on revocation of suspension order. However, the management did not modify order of fitment so as to release increments, allen due during period ofpunishment, while restoring his basic pay on completion ofthe period of punishment . He was getting Rs.8600/ - as basic pay before his suspension . On implementation of punishment, he was given basic pay of Rs.7540/-by bringing it two stages down for the two years . After completion ofhis punishment his basic pay was fixed at Rs.8600/ - in August , 2000 , whereas he was entitled for two increments one ofRs . 380/- in January, 2001 and other ofRs.680/- in January,2002. After restoration ofhis pay, hewas eligible for two additional increments , which were notgranted to him . As per clause 21 ( iv)( c) of 6th Bipartite Settlement dated 14-2-95, he could be brought down to lower stage in the scale of pay upto maximum of two stages . The said Bipartite Settlement nowhere restrict the management for counting punishment period as part of his service . He pleads that fitment given by the management be set aside and his pay may be restored while fixing it at Rs .7540/- in January, 2001 at Rs.7920/-in January, 2002 , at Rs. 8600/- as August, 2002. at Rs.8980/- in January, 2003. at Rs.8980/ in January, 2004 and at Rs.8980/-in January, 2005.

Suresh Kumar Yadav was working as a clerk in Syndicate Bank in July, 99. He was posted in FarukhNagar Branch of the Bank. A charge sheet was served upon him for his roitious and disorderly behaviour . He was suspended, pending departmental enquiry . During the course of enquiry , he expressed his regrets over the incident and requested not to enter into merits and demerits ofthe case, assuring his good conduct in future . He also requested for a lenient view in the matter by bringing it under clause 19.12( e) of the Bipartite Settlement . With a viewto give him one opportunity a lenient view was taken bythe DisciplinaryAuthority and punishment ofreduction ofbasic pay by two stages for a period of two years each was proposed for gross misconduct in clause 19.5 (c) . 19.5(d) and 19.5(j ) of the Bipartite Settlement. Show cause notice dated 25-7-2000 was sent . In response to the said show cause notice , the ' workman expressed his regrets for his misconduct, vide letter dated 27-7-2000 and requested for personal hearing on punishment . Personal hearing was given to him on 28-7-2000 and thereafter the Disciplinary Authority awarded punishment of reduction ofbasic payby two stages for a period of two years each for the misconducts . referred above , which punishments were to run concurrently . It was further ordered that neither the period of suspension will be treated as service except for the purpose ofterminal benefits , nor he was eligible for any salary for that period except for subsistence allowance already paid. Order dated 29-7-2000 was assailed before theAppellate Authority, but to no avail . Shri Yadav was reduced by two stages in the pay scale vide order dated 20-10-2000 . When his basic pay was fixed in terms ofthe said order, he raised an industrial dispute before the ConciliationOfficer . Since conciliation proceedings failed, the appropriate Government referred the dispute to this Tribunal for adjudication, vide Order No. L- 12012/87/2004/ IR(B -11 ) dated, 3-9-2004, with the following terms:

3.Management demurred the claim pleading that theworkmanwas suspended vide order dated 28-7-99 and subsequently served with charge sheet dated 18-8-99 for gross misconduct of "riotous , disorderly and indecent behaviour on the premises of the bank . The facts giving riseto the misconducts are that on 28-7-99 Ranbir Singh went tothe cabin of the branch manager at 10.45 AM and asked him not to make any deduction in respect of loan availed by him as well as for his unauthorized absence between 28-6-99 to 2-7-99 . The branch manager expressed hisinability to accede to his demand . He started shouting at the branch manager and without any provocation 6316

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 17, 2009/ ASVINA 25 , 1931

[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii) ]

paywas fixed at Rs .7920 by releasing one annual increment. On 29-7-2002 his basic pay was fixed at Rs.8980 when his paywas restored after completion ofpunishment. On 29-7-2003 hisbasic pay was fixed at Rs.8980 besides Rs.421 as fixed personal pay and Rs.121 as professional qualification pay. Hispay was fixed at Rs.8980 on 29-7-04 , besides fixed personal pay of Rs.421 and professional qualification pay of Rs.242 . The said proposal of the management was denounced by the workman and he raised the dispute under reference . It has been claimed that he is not entitled for the reliefclaimed .

4. On the basis of the pleadings of the parties , following issues were settled :--

1. Whether the enquiry conducted by the management was just, fair and proper?

2. Whether the punishment of reduction of basic pay by two stages in the pay scale awarded to the workman is legal andjustified?

3. As in terms of reference .

4. Relief.

5. Shri S.K. Yadav tendered his affidavit in his evidence.Management opted not to cross examine him. Shri T.R. Jain , Manager Personnel , tendered his affidavit inevidence on behalf of the bank. Workman opted not to cross examine him . No other witness was examined by the parties.

6.Arguments were heard at the bar . Shri B. K. Prasad , Authorized Representative , for the workman raised his submissions over the matter . Shri Rajesh Mahendru , Authorized Representative , advanced arguments on behalf of the management . I have given my - careful consideration to the arguments advanced at the bar and cautiously perused the record. My findings on the issues involved in the controversy are as follows:-

Issue No.1 and 2

7. The workman as well as the management present thatwhen punishment of reduction of basic pay by two stages in the scale of pay for two years was awarded to the workman and his associate Ranbir Singh , they raised a dispute before the Concilation Officer . Since conciliation proceedings failed , appropriate Government referred that dispute for adjudication to this Tribunal with following terms:-

"Whether the action of the management of Syndicate Bank in imposing punishment of reduction in basic pay by two stages in the scale of pay for two years inrespect ofShri S.K. Yadav and Ranbir Singh , Clerks is legal and justified? If not to what relief the concerned workmen are entitled to ?"

8. Ithas been presented by the workman as well as by the management that issues relating to the virus of the enquiry and legality and justifiability of punishment awarded to the workman and his associate would be abused him . Ranbir Singh picked up a SB ledger with an intention to hit the branch manager. He also threatened him ofdire consequences . Ranbir Singh was in the habit ofcoming late to the branch and not discharging his duties properly .He availed various loans beyond his eligibilities by concealing direct/ indirect liabilities etc. At that stage Shri S.K. Yadav left his allotted seat and entered into the cabin of the branch manager . He joined Shri Ranbir Singh and abused the branch manager in filthy language. He also broke office telephone , kept on the table of the branch manager . The branch manager referred the matter to the higher authorities. He also lodged a complaint to S. H.O. , Police Station Farukh Nagar with a request to protect him as well as the property of the bank . It was decided to hold departmental enquiry . The Enquiry Officer fixed the date for ist of August, 2000 as well as for 2nd of August, 2000. In the meanwhile workman, vide letter dated 24-7-2000 requested Disciplinary Authority not to go into the merits and demerits of the case and expressed his regrets over the matter . He assured of his good conduct in future and requested for leniency in punishment by bringing the matter under clause 19.12( e) of the Bipartite Settlement . In order to give an opportunity to the workman, the matter was considered by the Disciplinary Authority by bringing it under clause 19.12( e) of the Bipartite Settlement by way of proposing punishment of reduction of basic pay by two stages, for a period or two years for each of the misconduct , which punishments were to run concurrently. Show cause notice dated 25-7-2000 was served and the workmanwas called upon to submit his explanation , within tendays.He expressed his regrets vide letter dated 27-7-2000 and requested for personal hearing. Disciplinary Authority gave personal hearing to him . The Disciplinary Authority awarded punishment of reduction in basic pay by twe stages for a period of two years for each of gross misconduct under clause 19.5 (c) , 19.5(d) and 19.5 (j ) of the bipartite settlement which punishments were to run concurrently. He further ordered that " the period of his suspension will not be treated as service except for the purpose of terminal benefits and he will not be eligible for any salary during this period of the suspension except for the subsistence allowance already paid to him . " Consequent upon imposition of the punishment, pay of the workman was reduced by two stages for the period of two years and fitment ofhis basic pay was communicated vide letter dated 20-10-2000 ofthe Zonal Office . Said fixation orderwas subsequently modified vide order dated 27-10-2000. Fixation ofbasic pay or the workman was as per guidelines and service conditions applicable to him , in tone with clause 21 ( iv) ( c ) of 6th Bipartite Settlement . Vide order dated 16-3-2004 management agreed to release annual increments for the tenure of punishment and refixed pay oftheworkman at Rs.8600 on 1-1-2000 , annual increment not released for the period of suspension . His pay was fixed at Rs.7540 on 3-8-2000 , when basic pay was reduced by two statges due to punishment . On 1-1-2001 his basic

6317 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) )

भारत का राजपत्र : अक्तूबर 17, 2009/आश्विन 25, 1931

adjudicated by the Tribunal while answering the above reference . Parties claim that there is no necessity to go into these issues at this juncture , since it would prejudge the questions referred to this Tribunal in the above reference. In view of the submissions made by the parties, it is thought expedient not to answer these issues here in. Consequently the aforesaid issues are left open to be adjudicated while answering the reference made by the appropriate government, in above terms .

Issue No. 3

9. Suresh Kumar swears that his basic pay was reduced by two stages in the pay scale for a period or two years . against which action he has raised an industrial dispute. The management erred by not granting two increments . one of Rs.380 in January , 2001 and other of Rs:680 in January 2002. which fell due during the period of punishment. He was also eligible for additional two increments and entitled to basic pay of Rs . 8980. plus Rs . 421 ( F.P.A. ) , Rs . 121 ( PQA) besides other allowances . In January, 2003 he became entitled to the pay of Rs.89801- + Rs. 421 ( FPA) and Rs . 242 (PQA) . Clause ( iv) ( C) of Vlth Bipartite Settlement dated 14-2-95 does not restrict release of increment for the period of punishment . The management ought to have granted him increments for theperiod of punishment. In the same way management was no where restricted from counting period of suspension and period of operation of punishment as part ofhis service. Withholding of increments for that period isillegal . He was served with a show cause notice. which was replied by him vide letter dated 11-11-01 . Copy ofthe shaw cause notice as well as his reply are Ex . WW1/ l and Ex.WW 1/2 respectively. He wrote letters dated 12-12-2000, 4-9-2002,6-9-2002,13-10-2004 and 16-12-2004 . which are Ex .WW1 /3 to Ex . WWI / 8 respectively.

workman expressed his regrets vide letter dated 27-7-2000 and requested for personal hearing on proposed punishment. Personal hearing was given to him on 28-3-2000 and thereafter punishment was awarded to the workman . with further stipulation that period of suspension will not be treated as service , except for the purposes of terminal benefits and he will not be eligible for any salary for that period except the subsistence allowance , already paid to him. An appeal was preferred which was dismissed . On imposition of punishment he was reduced to two stages in the pay scale and fitment of his basic pay was communicated to him vide letter dated 20-10-2000. The said fixation was subsequently modified vide order dated 27-10-2000. Fixation ofhis basic pay was as per guidelines and service conditions applicable to the workman . On 1-1-99 his basic pay was Rs . 8600, on grant of regular annual increment . On 1-1-2000 no annual increment was released to the workman , since he was under suspension . On 3-8-2000 his basic pay was reduced by two stages , on implementation of the punishment and it was fixed at Rs . 7540. On 3-8-2002 his basic pay was restored to Rs.8600 on completion of punishment . On 1-1-2003 basic pay of the workman was fixed at Rs . 8980 after grant of regular annual increment. However as a special case management agreed to extend benefits of circular No. 306 dated16-3-2004 and to refix his pay . On 1-1-2001 annual increment was released and basic pay ofthe workman was fixed at Rs .7900, On 29-7-2002 basic pay ofthe workman was restored, on completion of punishment and it was fixed at Rs . 8980. Basic pay of the workman was fixed Rs.8980/- besides FPP of 421 and PQP of Rs . 121 on 29-7-03 . On 29-7-04 basic pay of the workman was Rs . 8980 + FPP Rs.421 and PQP of Rs . 242. The workman had not accepted the said pay fixation . Hence he is not entitled for the benefit of circular No. 300 dated 16-3-04 FPP is only permissible after one year of completion of scale . Workman reached maximum of the scale on 20-7-2003 . Allowance of PQP is to be released after one year ofmaximum of the scale . Hence workman is entitled for the same w.e.f. 29-7-03 . Claim ofthe workman that he is entitled to those allowances w.e.f. 29-7-2002 is incorrect. It has been claimed that he is not entitled for any relief.

11.As testified by the workman and confirmed by T.R. Jain . the workman was reduced by two stages in the pay scale for a period of two years . Period of suspension w.e.f. 29-7-99-till 2-8-2000 was treated not spent on duty except for the purpose ofterminal benefits . He was not to get any salary for the said period except subsistence allowance already paid to him . On Ist January, 1999 basic pay of the workman was at Rs.8600 after grant of annual increment . No. annual increment was granted to him on 1-1-2000 since he was under suspension . On 3-8-2000 basic pay of the workman was reduced by two stages , on implementatlon of punishment and his pay was fixed at 10. Shri T.R. Jain swears that the workman was suspended on 29-7-99 and subsequently charge sheeted on 18-8-79 for gross misconduct of riotious , disorderly and indecent behaviour on the premises of bank, willful damage or attempt to cause damage to the property ofthe bank and for doing acts prejudicial to the interest of the bank . A report was lodged with the police, besides the matter was referred to the higher authorities . He had proved those documents as Ex.MW 1/1 and 2 respectively. Suspension order has been proved as Ex.M W 1/3 , while charge sheet as Ex.M W 1/4 . Enquiry was initiated against the workman. In the meantime workman , vide his letter dated 24-3-2000 , reported that he does not want to go into the merits and demerits in the case . Expressed his regrets and assured of his good behaviour in future . He requested the management to take lenient view by bringing the matter within clause 19.12( e ) of the Bipartite Settlement . Copy of letter written by the workman is Ex.M. W 1/5. Show cause notice dated 25-7-2000 , proposing punishment of reduction of basic pay by two stages for a period of two years for each misconduct was sent , which is Ex.M W. 1/15 . The 6318

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 17, 2009/ASVINA 25, 1931

Rs.7540 . On 1-1-2001 he was granted annual increment and hisbasic pay was fixed at Rs . 7920. On 29-7-2002basic pay of the workman was restored on completion of punishment and his basic pay, was fixed at Rs.8980 and thus he reached maxima of the scale . Therefore , basic pay ofthe workman was fixed at Rs.8980 besides FPP ofRs.421 and PQP of Rs . 121 on 29-7-03 . FPP is permissible one year after completion of the scale and since workman completed the scale on 29-7-2002, hence benefit of FPP could be released ill his favour w.e.f. 29-7-2003 only . His basic pay was fixed at Rs.8980 besides FPP ofRs . 421 and PQP ' of Rs.242 on 29-7-04. He was to be granted other increment (annual) on 1-1-2002 and his pay was to be fixed at Rs.8600. On 23-7-2002 his pay was fixed at Rs.8980 , on completion ofperiod ofpunishment . No illegality or unjustifiability in that fixation was has come over the record .

[PART 11-SEC. 3(ii)] नई दिल्ली , 23 सितम्बर , 2009

का. आ. 2882.-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 ( 1947 का 14) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में , केन्द्रीय सरकार मैसर्स साऊथ इण्डिया कारपोरेशन ( एजेन्सी ) लिमिटेड के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच , अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालय सं. 2 , मुम्बई के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 2/39/2007 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 22-9-2009 को प्राप्त हुआ था।

[सं. एल-36011 / 1/2007- आईआर( बी- II ) ] राजेन्द्र कुमार , डेस्क अधिकारी NewDelhi , the 23rd September, 2009 S. O. 2882. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ), the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No.2/39/ 2007) ofthe Central Government Industrial Tribunal/ Labour Court No.2 , Mumbai , now as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relationto the management of M/ s . South India Corporation (Agency) Ltd. and their workman , which was receivedby the Central Government on 22-9-2009.

[No. L-36011 / 1 /2007- IR(B- II) ] RAJINDER KUMAR, Desk Officer

ANNEXURE BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL No. 2, MUMBAI .

PRESENT A.A.Lad, Presiding Officer Reference No. CGIT- 2/39of2007 Employers in relation to the Management of M/s . South India Corporation (Agency) Ltd.

The Manager

12.Workman claims that Bipartite Settlement now here restricts the management from counting period of suspension as part of service . His contention is uncalled for, since order of punishment announces that period of suspension shall not be treated as part of service nor the workman will be entitled to any wages for that period. except subsistence allowance already paid . Therefore, for thatperiod he cannot claim any increment unless the said period of suspension is held to be spent on duty , while adjudicating the reference , sent by the appropriate Government as referred above . FPP can be released in favour of the workman after one year on reaching the maxima of the scale . As testified by Shri Jain the workman reached the maxima of the scale on 29-7-2002 , when his basic paywas restored after completion of the punishment. Consequently FPP was granted to the workman on 29-7-2003 . The workman can be granted personal qualification pay on completion of one year after reaching the maxima of the scale , therefore , personal qualification pay increment was granted to him on 29-7-2003 and the other increment was granted to him on 29-7-04 . The management wasjustified in granting FPP and PQP to the workman on the dates as detailed above . No illegality or unjustifiability was found in the action of the management. Issue is, therefore , answered accordingly.

Relief.

13. In view of above discussion, the workman is entitled for fixation of his payat Rs.7900 on 1-1-2001, on release ofannual increment. His pay is to be fixed at Rs.8600 on 1-1-2002, on release of annual increment . On 29-7-2002 hispay is to be fixed at Rs.8980, on restoration of his pay on completion of punishment. His basic pay is to be fixed atRs . 8980 , besides F.P.P. ofRs.421and PQP of Rs.121 on 29-7-03 and it is to be fixed at Rs.8980 , besides FPP of Rs.421 and PQP or Rs.242 on 29-7-04 . An award is accordingly passed .

Dated 9-9-2009 DR. R. K. YADAV, Presiding Officer South India Corporation (Agency) Ltd. Joshi Building Vasco-de-Gama Goa403 802

AND

Their Workmen

Shri Rymond Fernandes House No. 325 Near El - Monte Theatre Vasco-da-Gama Goa.

APPEARANCE

Forthe Employer

Mr. Manoj Shetye Advocate :

Forthe Workmen

: Mr. N.K. Dubey Advocate 6319 [ भाग - खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : अक्तूबर 17 , 2009/आश्विन 25 , 1931

Mumbai, dated 27th August, 2009

AWARD

story of his employment with first party and action taken by it . He also claim reinstatement saying that, he was illegallyterminated.

TheGovernment of India, Ministry of Labour by its Order No. L- 3601 1 /1 /2007 - IR (B -II) dated 24-8-2007 in exercise of the powers conferred by clause (d) of sub- section ( 1 ) and sub-section 2 (A) of Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 have referred the following dispute to this Tribunal for adjudication :

8.Though first party filed written statement at Ex -14 and challenged the status of second- party and his prayer ofreinstatement, failed to cross examine second party and disprove his case . On the contrary as far as evidence brought on record by the second party of his relation with first party as a workman is concerned , obviously it is not disputed by first party. The stand taken by first party that, second partywas casual labour remained unshaken which lead to conclude that , he was engaged by first party and wasworking with it.

"Whether the action of the Management ofM/ s . South India Corporation (Agency) Ltd. , Goa in terminating the employment of Shri Rymond Fernandes, Watchman w.e.f. 28-9-2006 is legal and justified? Ifnot, towhat reliefthe workman is entitled for?"

2. Claim Statement was filedby concerned workman at Ex. 6 making out case that , he joined first party as Watchman w.e.f. 29-6-2004. He served with first partytill 27-9-2006.

9.working continuously for more then 240 days in each calendar year attract protection to such type of employee as given in Indutrial Dispute Act . When second party says that , he was working with first party from 29-6- 2004 till 27-9-2006, as far as this period is concerned , it is notdisputed by the first party. Besides second party claims that, he worked continuously during that period which, is also not disputed by first party. That means second party worked for more than 240 days in each calendar year i. e . from 29-6-2004 till 27-9-2006 with first party.

3.On 28-9-2006, he was illegally terminated without following due process of law, No reason was given of termination so he prayed to reinstate with backwages and continuity of service.

10. When he worked continuously for such-period, definitelyhe became regular employee . In that scenario he is entitled for protection as given under Section 25 F of Industrial DisputesAct.

4. This is disputed by first party by filing reply Ex. 14 stating that reference is not maintainable . It is stated that, second party was not employed on regular basis . It is stated that he was engaged as casual labour . It is stated that, first party requires casual labourers of various categories and among them category of second party comes.It isstated that, since second party was not regular employee he cannot be reinstated as prayed him . So it is prayedthat , reference be rejected.

11. It is to be noted that, no notice was given, nor salary of one month in lieu of notice offered to the second party. Besides it is matter of record that , retrenchment compensation was not offered . Besides no charges are levelled against second party and without any blame second party was terminated in the guise of his casual employment with first party.

5. Inview ofabove pleadings , issues were framed at Ex- 15 which I answer as follows:

Jesues

Findings

(i) Does second party prove his relation with first party as its 'workman'?

Yes

(ii) Does he prove that, action takenby first party is illegal and deserves to quash?

(iii) Is he entitled for relief sought? Yes

Asperorder below.

(iv) Whatorder?

12. Though he worked as casual labour, the period as stated above which remained unchallenged permit him to claim permanency as well as permit himto claim protection under which employer is supposed to give notice of termination with retrenchment compensation and notice or salary of one month in lieu of notice . In the instant case nothing happend . Besides evidence brought on record and case made out by second party is not disturbed by the first party by leading any evidence . So I conclude that second party was illegally terminated without following due process of law and as such , order of termination deserve to set aside . Hence, I answere above issues to that effect and passes the following order .

Reasons

ORDER

Issue nos, 1 to 3 :

Reference is allowed .

6. By this dispute , second party challenged the termination dated 28-9-2006 stating that he was illegally terminated. Whereas case of the first party is that he was not regular employee and as such cannot call as workman and cannot claim reinstatement .

(ii) First party is directed to reinstate second party workman Shri Rymond Fernandes on receipt of this order as a watchman and give backwages as well as continuity of service from the date of termination under challenge. Date:27-8-2009

A. A. LAD, Presiding Officer 7. To prove that second party filed his affidavit at Ex.- 18 in lieu of examination- in - chief where he narrate

3633 Gl/00-22 6320

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 17, 2009/ ASVINA 25 , 1931

नई दिल्ली , 24 सितम्बर , 2009

का.आ. 2883.-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार एवं न्यवेली लिग्नाइट कार्पोरेशन के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच , अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण , चेन्नई के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 81 , 82 , 83 , 84 , 85 , 86 , 87 , 88 , 89, 90, 91 , 92 , 93 , 94 , 95 , 96, 97, 98 , 99/2005 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 24-9-2009 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल-22012/415/2004- आईआर ( सी- II ) ,

एल-22012/416/2004- आईआर ( सी -11 ) ,

एल-22012/417/2004- आईआर ( सी- II ) ,

एल-22012 /426/ 2004- आईआर ( सी -11 ) ,

एल -22012/427/2004- आईआर ( सी-11 ) ,

एल-22012 /428/2004- आईआर ( सी-11 ) ,

एल-22012/429/2004- आईआर ( सी-11 ) ,

एल-22012/430/2004- आईआर ( सी-11 ) ,

एल-22012/442/2004- आईआर ( सी-11 ) ,

एल-22012/479/ 2004-आईआर ( सी-11 ) ,

एल-22012/480/2004- आईआर ( सी-11 ) ,

एल-22012/481/2004-आईआर ( सी- II ) ,

एल -22012/482/2004- आईआर ( सी- II ) ,

एल-22012/483/2004- आईआर ( सी-11 ) ,

एल-22012/484/2004- आईआर ( सी-11 ) ,

एल-22012/485/2004- आईआर ( सी-11 ) ,

एल -22012/486/2004- आईआर ( सी-11 ) ,

एल-22012/487/2004- आईआर ( सी-11 ) , एल-22012/488/ 2004-आईआर ( सी- II ) , ]

अजय कुमार गौड़ , डेस्क अधिकारी New Delhi, the 24th September , 2009 S.O. 2883.- In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the award ( Ref. Nos . 81 , 82, 83, 84, 85 , 86, 87, 88 , 89 , 90 , 91 , 92, 93, 94, 95, 96, 97 , 98 , 99/2005 ) ofthe S. I.D. No. No.

Reference No. & Date

Name of the 1 Party

Name of the II Party

(4)

(1) (2)

(3)

TheGeneral 1. 81/2005 L-22012/415/ 2004- IR( C - II ) 、 dated 31-8-2005

Sangam

Secretary, NLC Indco Serve Thozhilar Uzhiyar Neyveli -607802

[PART II-SEC. 3 (ii ) ] CentralGovernment Industrial Tribunal -cum - Labour Court, Chennai as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of Neyveli Lignite Corporation and their workman, which was received by the Central Government on 24-9-2009.

[No. L-22012/415 /2004- IR(C- II ),

L-22012/416/2004- IR(C- II ) ,

L-22012/417/2004- IR( C- II ),

L-22012/426/2004- IR(C- II ),

L-22012/427/2004- IR(C-11 ) ,

L -22012/428/2004- IR(C- II ) ,

L-22012/429/2004- IR(C- II ),

1-22012/430/2004-IR( C- II),

1-22012/442/2004- IR(C- II ),

L-22012/479/2004- IR(C- II),

L-22012/480/2004- IR( C- II),

1.-22012/481 /2004- IR(C- II ),

L-22012/482/2004- IR(C- II ),

1-22012/483/2004- IR(C- II ),

1-22012/484/2004-4R(C- II),

L-22012/485/2004- IR(C- II ),

L-22012/486/2004- IR(C - II ) ,

1-22012/487/2004-IR(C- II ),

L-22012/488/2004- IR(C - II ) ] AJAY KUMAR GAUR, Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

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

Wednesday, the 16th September , 2009 Present : A. N. Janardanan , Presiding Officer .

Industrial Dispute Nos . 81 , 82 , 83, 84, 85, 86, 87, 88 , 89, 90 , 91 , 92 , 93 , 94, 95 , 96 , 97 , 98 and 99 of2005 (Inthe matter of the dispute for adjudication under clause (d) of sub-section ( 1 ) and sub - section 2(A) of Section 10 ofthe Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) , between theManagement of NLC Indco Serve and their Workmen) Appearance for Workman

Appearance for Respondent

(7)

(5)

(6)

M/s. T.S. Gopalan &Co.

M/s. R. Singgaravelan &Co.

1. TheManaging Director . NLC IndcoServe Opp . To Thermal Station Neyveli -607807

Sri N.A.K. Sarma

2. The Chairman

Neyveli Lignite

Corporation Ltd.

Neyveli

[ भाग II-खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

भारत काराजपत्र: अक्तूबर 17, 2009/आश्विन 25 , 1931

(3)

(5)

(4)

(1) (2)

2. 82/2005

L-22012/416/ 2004- IR( C- II ) , dated 31-8-2005

The General Secretary, NLC Indco Serve Thozhilar Uzhiyar Sangam Neyveli-607802

1.TheManaging Director , NLC Indco Serve Opp . To Thermal Station Neyveli-607807

6321

(7)

(6)

M/s. T.S. Gopalan &Co.

M/s . R. Singgaravelan &Co.

Sri N.A.K. Sarma

2. The Chairman

Neyveli Lignite.

Corporation Ltd.

Neyveli

3. 83/2005

L-22012/417/ 2004-1R(C-11), dated 31-8-2005

1.TheManaging Director, NLC Indco Serve Opp . To Thermal Station Neyveli-607807

TheGeneral Secretary, NLC Indco Serve Thozhilar Uzhiyar Sangam Neyveli-607802 M/s. R. Singgaravelan &Co.

M/s. T.S. Gopalan &Co.

Sri N.A.K. Sarma

2. The Chairman

Neyveli Lignite

CorporationLtd.

Neyveli

4. 84/2005 1-22012/426/ 2004- JR(C -11 ) . dated 31-8-2005

TheGeneral Secretary, NLC Indco Serve Thozhilar Uzhiyar Sangam Neyveli -607802

1. TheManaging Director, NLC Indco Serve Opp . To Thermal Station Neyveli -607807

M/s. T.S. Gopalan &Co.

M/s.R. Singgaravelan &Co.

Sri N.A.K. Sarma

2. The Chairman

Neyveli Lignite

Corporation Ltd.

Neyveli

5. 85/2005

L-22012/427 / 2004- IR(C - II ) . dated 31-8-2005

TheGeneral Secretary, NLC Indco Serve Thozhilar Uzhiyar Sangam Neyveli -607802

1. TheManaging Director , NLC Indco Serve Opp . To Thermal Station Neyveli-607807

M/s. R. Singgaravelan &Co.

M/ s. T.S. Gopalan &Co.

Sri N.A.K. Sarma

2. The Chairman

Neyveli Lignite

Corporation Ltd.

Neyveli

TheGeneral

6. 86/2005

L-22012/428/ 2004- IR(C- II ). dated 31-8-2005

Secretary. NLC Indco Serve Thozhilar Uzhiyar Sangam Neyveli -607802

1. TheManaging Director, NLC Indco Serve Opp . To Thermal Station Neyveli -607807

M/s. R. Singgaravelan &Co.

M/s. T.S. Gopalan &Co.

Sri N.A.K. Sarma

2. The Chairman

Neyveli Lignite

Corporation Ltd.

Neyveli

7. 87/2005

M/ s. T.S. Gopalan &Co.

M/s. R. Singgaravelan &Co.

1. TheManaging

Director , NLC

Indco Serve

The General Secretary, NILC Indco Serve

1-22012/429/ 2004- IR( C- 11 ). dated 31-8-2005 6322

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 17, 2009/ASVINA 25, 1931

(3)

(1) (2)

(4)

(5)

Thozhilar Uzhiyar

Sangam

Neyveli-607802

[PART II SEC . 3(ii) ]

(7)

(6)

Opp . To

Thermal Station

Neyveli-607807

Sri N.A.K. Sarma

2. The Chairman

Neyveli Lignite

Corporation Ltd.

Neyveli

8. 88/2005

L-22012/430/ 2004 - IR ( CM - II ), dated 31-8-2005

TheGeneral Secretary , NLC Indco Serve Thozhilar Uzhiyar Sangam Neyveli -607802

1. The Managing Director , NLC Indco Serve Opp . To Thermal Station Neyveli-607807

M/s. R. Singgaravelan &Co.

M/s. T.S. Gopalan &Co.

Sri N.A.K. Sarma

2. The Chairman

Neyveli Lignite

Corporation Ltd.

Neyveli

L-22012/442/ TheGeneral 9. 89/2005

Secretary , NLC 2004- IR( CM - II ), dated 31-8-2005 Indco Serve

1. TheManaging Director, NLC Inaco Serve Opp . To Thermal Station Neyveli -607807

Thozhilar Uzhiyar Sangam Neyveli -607802 M/s. R. Singgaravelan &Co.

M/s. T.S. Gopalan &Co.

Sri N.A.K. Sarma

2. The Chairman

Neyveli Lignite

Corporation Ltd.

Neyveli

10. 90/2005

TheGeneral

Secretary , NLC L-22012/479/ 2004- IR( CM - II ) , dated 31-8-2005 Indco Serve Thozhilar Uzhiyar

Sangam Neyveli-607802

1. TheManaging Director, NLC Indco Serve Opp . To Thermal Station Neyveli-607807

M/s . R. Singgaravelan &Co.

M/s. T.S. Gopalan &Co.

2. The Chairman

Neyveli Lignite

Corporation Ltd.

Neyveli

11. 91/2005

L-22012/480/ 2004-1R( CM - II ) , dated 31-8-2005

The General Secretary, NLC Indco Serve Thozhilar Uzhiyar Sangam

Neyveli -607802

1. The Managing Director , NLC Indco Serve Opp . To Thermal Station Neyveli -607807

M/s. R. Singgaravelan &Co.

M/s. T.S. Gopalan &Co.

SriN.A.K. Sarma

2. The Chairman

Neyveli Lignite

Corporation Ltd.

Neyveli

12. 92/2005

TheGeneral Secretary , NLC Indco Serve M/s. R. Singgaravelan &Co.

M/s. T.S. Gopalan &Co.

1. TheManaging

Director , NLC

Indco Serve

L -22012/481 / 2004 - IR ( CM - II ) , dated 31-8-2005 भारत का राजपत्रः अवबर 17, 2009/आश्विन 25 , 1931

[भाग II- खण्ड 3(ii) ]

(4)

(5) (1) (2)

(3)

6323 (6)

(7)

Opp . To

ThermalStation .

Neyveli-607807

Thozhilar Uzhiyar Sang Neyveli-607802

Sri N.A.K. Sarma

2.The Chairman

Neyveli Lignite

CorporationLtd.

Neyveli

13. 93/2005 1-22012/482/ 2004- IR( CM- II ), dated 31-8-2005

TheGeneral Secretary, NLC Indco Serve Thozhilar Uzhiyar Sangam Neyveli -607802

1.TheManaging Director,NLC Indco Serve Opp . To Thermal Station Neyveli -607807

M/s. R. Singgaravelan &Co.

M/s. T.S.Gopalan &Co.

Sri N.A.K. Sarma

2.The Chairman

NeyveliLignite

Corporation Ltd.

Neyveli

TheGeneral 14. 94/2005

L-22012/483/ 2004 -IR( CM - II ) , dated 31-8-2005

Secretary , NLC Indco Serve Thozhilar Uzhiyar Sangam Neyveli-607802

1.TheManaging Director , NLC Indeo Serve Opp . To Thermal Station Neyveli -607807

M/s. R. Siriggaravelan &Co.

M/s. T.S. Gopalan &Co.

Sri N.A.K. Sarma

2. The Chairman

NeyveliLignite

Corporation Ltd.

Neyveli

TheGeneral 15. 95/2005

Secretary , NLC 1-22012/484/ 2004- IR(CM - II) , dated 31-8-2005 Indco Serve

Thozhilar Uzhiyar

Sangam

Neyveli-607802

1. TheManaging Director, NLC Indco Serve Opp . To Thermal Station Neyveli-607807

2. The Chairman

M/s. T.S. Gopałan M/s: R: Singgaravelan &Co.

&Co.

Sri N.A.K. Sarma

Neyveli Lignite

Corporation Ltd.

Neyveli

16. 96/2005 L-22012/485/ 2004-1R( CM- II ), dated 31-8-2005

1.TheManaging Director, NLC Indco Serve Opp . To Thermal Station Neyveli-607807

TheGeneral Secretary, NLC Indco Serve Thozhilar Uzhiyar Sangam Neyveli -607802 M/s.R. Singgaravelan &Co.

M/s. T.S. Gopalan &Co.

Sri N.A.K. Sarma

2. The Chairman

Neyveli Lignite

Corporation Ltd.

Neyveli

17. 97/2005

L-22012/486/ 2004 - IR ( CM - II ), dated 31-8-2005

M/s. R. Singgaravelan &Co.

M/s. T.S. Gopalan &Co.

1.TheManaging

Director, NLC

Indco Serve

Opp . To

TheGeneral Secretary, NLC Indco Serve Thozhilar Uzhiyar 6324

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 17 , 2009/ASVINA 25 , 1931

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

(3)

(4)

(5)

(7)

(6)

Sangam Neyveli-607802

Thermal Station

Neyveli -607807

SriN.A.K. Sarma

2. The Chairman

Neyveli Lignite

Corporation Ltd.

Neyveli

18. 98/2005

TheGeneral

M/ s. R. Singgaravelan &Co.

M/ s. T.S. Gopalan &Co.

Secretary , NLC

Indco Serve

L-22012/487/ 2004 - IR( CM - II ) , dated 31-8-2005

Thozhilar Uzhiyar

Sangam

Neyveli-607802

1. TheManaging Director, NLC Indco Serve Opp . To Thermal Station Neyveli -607807

Sri N.A.K. Sarma

2. The Chairman

Neyveli Lignite

Corporation Ltd.

Neyveli

19. 99/2005

TheGeneral

M/ s .R. Singgaravelan &Co.

M/s. T.S. Gopalan &Co.

Secretary, NLC

L-22012/488/ 2004- IR( CM - 11 ), dated 31-8-2005 Indco Serve Thozhilar Uzhiyar

Sangam Neyveli -607802

1. TheManaging Director, NLC Indco Serve Opp . To Thermal Station Neyveli-607807

Sri N.A.K. Sarma

2. The Chairman

Neyveli Lignite

Corporation Ltd.

Neyveli

COMMON AWARD

SriM. Chandramurthy is legal and justified ? If not, to what relief he is entitled ?"

ID 85 of 2005

The Central Government , Ministry of Labour vide theabove order of references refferred the IDs mentioned above to this Tribunal for adjudication.

2. The Sechedule mentioned in the orders of reference in the above IDs are as under :

"Whether the action of the management of NLC Indco Serve in not providing employment to Sri V. Sundaram is legal and justified ? If not , to what relief he is entitled ?יי

ID 81 of2005

ID 86 of 2005

"Whether the action of the management of NLC Indco Serve in not providing employment to Sri N. Ranganathan is legal and justified ? If not, to what relief he is entitled ? "

"Whether the action of the management of NLC Indco Serve in not providing employment to Sri V. Padmanabhan is legal andjustified ? Ifnot, to whatrelief he is entitled ?"

ID 82 of2005

ID 87.of 2005

"Whether the action of the management of NLC Indco Serve in not providing employment to Sri K. Selvakumar is legal and justified ? If not , to what relief he is entitled ? "

"Whether the action of the management of NLC Indco Serve in not providing employment to Sri D. Sivan is legal and justified ? If not , to what relief he is entitled ? "

ID 83 of 2005

ID 88 of 2005

"Whether the action of the management of NLC Indco Serve in not providing employment to Sri S. Elangovan is legal and justified ? If not , to what relief he is entitled ? "

"Whether the action of the management of NLC Indco Serve in not providing employment to Sri G. Palanisamy is legal and justified ? If not ,to whatrelief he is entitled ? "

ID 84 of 2005

ID 89 of 2005

"Whether the action of the management of NLC Indco Serve in not providing employment to

"Whether the action of the management of NLC Indco Serve in not providing employment to [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

Sri K. Govindraj is legal and justified ? If not , to what relief he is entitled ? "

ID 90 of 2005

"Whether the action of the management of NLC Indco Serve in not providing employment to Sri T. Duraiyarasan is legal andjustified ? If not, to what relief he is entitled ? "

ID 91 of2005

"Whether the action of the management of NLC Indco Serve in not providing employment to Sri K. Vedhamani is legai and justified ? Ifnot, to what relief he is entitled ? "

ID 92 of 2005

"Whether the action of the management of NLC Indco Serve in not providing employment to Sri R. Devaraj is legal and justified ? If not to what reliefhe is entitled ?"

ID 93 of 2005

"Whether the action of the management of NLC Indco Serve in not providing employment to Sri S. Ramalingam is legal and justified ? If not, to what relief he is entitled ? "

ID 94 of 2005

"Whether the action of the management of NLC Indco Serve in not providing employment to Sri R. Kamaraj is legal and justified ? If not , to what relief he is entitled ? "

ID 95 of2005

"Whether the action of the management of NLC Indco Serve in not providing employment to Sri G. Mayakrishnan is legal and justified ? If not, to what relief he is entitled ? "

ID 96 of2005

"Whether the action of the management of NLC Indco Serve in not providing employment to Sri G. Chelladurai is legal and justified ? If not, to what relief he is entitled ?"

ID 97 of2005

"Whether the action of the management of NLC Indco Serve in not providing employment to Sri P. Jayapal is legal and justified ? If not , to what relief he is entitled ? "

ID 98 of 2005

"Whether the action of the management of NLC Indco Serve in not providing employment to SriT. Kaliyaperumal is legal andjustified ? Ifnot, to what reliefhe is entitled ? "

ID 99 of 2005

"Whether the action of the management of NLC Indco Serve in not providing employment to

6325

भारत का राजपत्र: अक्तूबर 17, 2009/आश्विन 25 , 1931

Sri S. Thangamani is legal and justified ? If not, to what relief he is entitled ?"

3. After the receipt of Industrial Disputes , this Tribunal has numbered it as 81 , 82, 83 , 84, 85, 86, 87, 88, 89 , 90, 91 , 92, 93 , 94, 95, 96, 97, 98 and 99 of2005 and issued notices to both sides . Both sides entered appearance through their Advocates and filed their claim statements, subsequently substituted by the amended claim statements consequent upon the impleadment of Second Party/Second Respondent and Counter Statements as the case may be.

4. The First Party filed a memo forjoint trial of all the above IDs stating that the parties in all the IDs are same and the reliefs involved in all the above IDs are common which was at the inception objected to by the 2nd Respondent in the memo of objection alleging that ist Party Union has no locus- standi to raise the dispute which is in respect of the reference of each individual separately who alone has an accrued right to do so . Each case stands on its own footing , Each case is characterized by its distinctiveness and the same cannot be jointly tried . However, Respondent has had no objection for taking all the disputes together . Pending consideration of the prayer. for joint trial , the IDs went up for trial and evidence was commenced to be recorded in all the IDs recorded separately examining WWI and marking Ex. Pl to Ex. P7 ( Ex. WI to Ex. W7). While so , giving a go by to the objection for joint trial, the Respondent expressed its preparedness to have joint trial ofall the IDs and the further enquiry was continued recording the defence evidence in ID 81/2005 in common for all the IDs treating the same as the leading case and Ex . W8 to Ex . WII were marked over and above the examination of WWI and marking of Ex. WI to Ex. W7 separately in each ID which have been treated as common evidence as recorded in ID 81/2005 for all the IDs . On the sideofthe Respondents , MWI and MW2 were examined and Ex. MI to Ex . MII were marked exactly on the same pattern . The award, herein , accordingly is passed as common award for all the IDs and a copy of the same containing the original signature of the Presiding Officer willbe kept in each of the separate ID file.

5. The averments in the amended Claim Statements common to all IDs briefly read as follows:

The First Party is a registered Sangam represented byGeneral Secretary competent to file the Claim Petition onbehalfofall the individual petitioners . The members of the First Party were appointed as Casual Labourers in the Neyveli Lignite Corporation ( NLC ) through Private Contractors and they have put in more than 10 years of service. The object of First Respondent NLC Co- operative Society is to take and execute various items of work entrusted by NLC and to provide employment to its members/workers , rendering equal treatment to all ofthem for regular appointment on seniority basis in NLC. The Society is expected to register the employees engaged through Private Contractors as members on the basis of seniority with reference to their date of entry through 6326

[PART IISEC. 3 ( ii) ] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 17, 2009/ASVINA 25 , 1931

ofthe said Contractor are engaged to carryout that work. It is on that basis the job opportunities are made available. The petitioners are not entitled to be engaged in view of the above principle . The names of its members were sponsored to NLC for regularization. Membership in Society is not the sole criterion for the regularization. There was no employment of the concerned persons under the Society. Therefore, there is no termination of them. It is for theNLCto consider absorption ofthe persons in its service. Byreason ofmembership in the Society alone , they are not entitled toany right or right for employment in NLC . Mere being members of the Societydoes not mean that they are enrolledby the Society. The persons were not engaged by the Society and therefore they cannotbe sponsored for regularization . The claim of the petitioners may be dismissed.

7. The 2nd Respondent in its Counter Statement raised contentions which briefly read as follows:

Private Contractors in NLC . The First Party has recommended them for absorption under NLC on the basis of seniority. The First Respondent has not provided employment to them while in the year 1990 NLC was taking members of Society as regular employees . They enrolled employees serving in NLC as members without following seniority according to their whims and fancy. It refused enrolment to most of the senior most employees in an arbitrary manner. NLC was to regularize the employees sponsored by the Society without verifying whether the Societyhas enrolled them on a seniority basis . In a list so given, none of the members is included on the top but included juniormost candidates on the top . In the place of a person, now no more , another person is included with the same father's name mischievously. Land Displaced Persons having preferential treatment have also not been givenproper places in the list . Lot of irregularities and illegalities have been committed in the recruitment and therefore the same is liable to be declared ultra vires the Constitution . Persons whose father was in service were givenappointment but were sent out of employment for no reasonand they are not considered for regular appointment whereas persons whose father has put in lesser number of service are included in the list . Under the Contract Labour, (Regulation andAbolition ) Act, 1970, NLC has to provide employment to the contract labour . All the contract labour has tobe absorbed in NLC irrespective of their status . It is not for the NLC Ltd. to contend that in view of the formation ofthe Society, its members alone can be absorbed. In that case the NLC has had to direct the Society to enroll its members on the basis ofthe date of first engagement inthe Corporation . The Society cannot enroll the members at its whims and fancies in disregard of seniority. It is prayed that the Society maybe directed to recommend the names ofthepetitioners for regular employment in NLC on seniority basis.

6. In the Counter Statement filed by First Respondent the raised contentions briefly read as follows:

NLC used to give jobs to Contractors who bring theirown men, carryout the work and they are paid charges . In November , 1990 at the intervention of Government of

The reference in respect of individuals separately is not to be espoused by the Union and the same are liable to be dismissed . NLC was not a party in the reference. In the Claim Statements, the First Party attempted to enlarge the scope of the reference asking to the First Respondent to recommend the persons for regular employment in NLC which is not sustainable . Nobody can traverse materially beyond the terms of reference. The initial dispute of the persons was with respect to not providing employment by the NLC Indco- Serve Society. The Second Respondent is not liable to grant any relief. The dispute referred is only between the individual workers and the Society. The Petitioner Sangam is not a party to the dispute. Regular employment under NLC isby appropriate rules and orders . NLC is not a necessary party. The Petitioner Sangam as a wrong claimant placed claims totally different from the dispute referred. The employment to an individual is a personal dispute. If Petitioner Sangam was a disputant there was no need for filing 19 IDs . Impleading NLC was not necessaryorjustified. The impleadment is erroneous and iscontrary to law and facts . The relief sought under the reference is only against the First Respondent . It is denied that in 1999, the Second Respondent was taking the members ofthe Society as regular employees. It is trite that even in thecase ofabolition of contract labour under Section - 10 of the Contract Labour (Regulation and Abolition) Act, 1970 , acontractworker is not vested with right for regularization atany cost. Names of the concerned persons have not been recommended by the First Respondent. The claim may be dismissed.

Tamil Nadu through its Department of Industries and Commerceandthe NLC an Industrial Cooperative Society inNeyveli by absorbing the workmen employedby various Contractors and entrusting jobs with minimum wages to the displaced persons was formed . As per its Byelaw-6, any individual above 18 years was entitled to be a nember and preference was given to dependent/wards of serving employees of NLC , ( ii) dependent/wards of deceased employees or retired employees of NLC ( iii ) displaced persons consequent upon acquisition of land and ( iv) persons already working under the Contractors whose work is executed by the Society. As per policy of the Society when the work performed by any Private Contractors is awarded to the Society, then the workmen

8. Though the enquiry proceeded separately in each 10 initially In spite of a request jaid by the petitioner by a written memo for joint trial but was opposed by the Respondents and the same was for that reason at the interregnum the Respondents themselves by their conduct ofadducing common defence evidence in ID 81/2005 for and on behalf of all the other IDs and thus giving a go by 6327 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र: अक्तूबर 17, 2009/आश्विन 25 , 1931

to their stand against the joint trial eventually adduced evidence recorded in common in I. D. 81/2005 and hence an award is passed in common for all the 19 IDs .

Second Respondent taking members of the Society as regular employees in 1999. Further according to it even in the case of abolition of contract labour a contract workers is not vested with right for regularization invariably. In relation to NLC there has not been any Government notification prohibiting contract labour employment . No names of the concerned persons have been recommended by the First Respondent for regularization .

9. Common evidence in all the IDs as recorded in ID 81/2005 consists of the testimony of WW1 and Ex . W1 to Ex. W11 on the side of the petitioners and the oral evidence ofMW1 and MW2 and Ex . M1 to Ex . M11 on the side of the Respondents .

10. The points for consideration are :

(1) Whether the non - providing of employment to the workmen/ members by the Management of NLC Indco - Serve is legal and justified?

(ii) To what relief the workmen are entitled?

12. As against the above , the case of the First Party isasserting its competency to represent . Their case is that the Society has to register the employees engaged through Private Contractors as its members and recommend them forregularization in NLC on the basis of seniority that it has departed from that and opted to enroll employees without following seniority and according to their whims and fancies . They have cited some instances , the veracity ofwhich is not brought home . Even on the showing of their case as averred in the Claim Statement , they are not already enrolled in the Society. Hence it insists on the Society to enroll as its members and recommend them for regularization under NLC . To put in a nutshell, the claim of the concerned persons espoused through the Petitioner Sangam is to provide them employment under the Society in relation to which as made clear by the Second Respondent Corporation is not at all a necessary party.

11. The verbatim reference of the Ministry as already mentioned is as to non -providing of employment of the workmen is legal and justified? But Petitioner Sangam by taking to itself the espousing of the cause of the workman as its members by the Claim Statement seeks to recommend their names by the Indco -Serve for regular employment in NLC on seniority basis . This is assailed by the Second Respondent as not sustainable since by this according to them the scope ofthe reference is attempted to be enlarged . According to the Respondents , the claim by the Petitioner Sangam is not maintainable because reference is in the name of individuals and on that ground alone the same is liable to be dismissed . According to the Second Respondent the NLC was not a party in the reference and therefore it is not a necessary party and is not liable to grant any relief. It is also contended by the Respondent that the Petitioner Sangam is also not a party to the dispute and the same figures as a wrong claimant. Ifthe petitioner were to espouse the cause of the workmen there was no need for filing 19 IDs . According to the First Respondent membership in the Indco - Serve Society is open to any individual above 18 years . Preference was given to the four categories of persons as mentioned in the Counter Statement . But the concerned workmen do not come under any of the said categories . They have never worked under the First Respondent. Mere being member does not confer entitlement to them to be enrolled and engaged as workers under it . On a policy matter when the work of Private Contractors is entrusted to the Society, the workers of that Contractor are engaged to carry out that work . It is accordingly that the job opportunities are made available to the members. The petitioners have not had any occasion to work under it though they were members . Therefore they do not answer the eligibility criteria for being engaged under it and for being sponsored for regularization . Membership does not mean that they are enrolled by the Society. The case of concerned persons is admittedly that they have not worked under the Society . That shows evidently that they are not entitled to be sponsored by the Society for regularization in NLC. Further accordingto the Second Respondent . The regular employment under NLC isby means of specific recruitment rules and procedural formalities to be observed . There was no instance of the

13. The short question is whether the First Respondent NLC Indco- Serve is bound to provide employment to the concerned persons numbering to 19. Whenthe criteria is indisputably enrolment and engagement asworkers under the Society and that qualification is not answered by the concerned persons in their favour, the answer to the question whether the workmen are to be recommended for regularization has to be emphatically in the negative . The historic background of the formation of the NLC Indco - Serve is traceable to the convening of a meeting of the Government of Tamil Nadu through the Deptt . of Industries and Commerce and the NLC Administration in which it was decided to absorb the workmen employed by various Contractors and entrust jobs with minimum wages to the displaced persons . The fact that the contract workers were being exploited by the different Contractors was also a weighing consideration forthe formation of the Society. The said Society was to provide employment preferentially to the four categories of workers made mention of. According to the First Respondent, these persons are not enrolled members for engagement under it. It is the common case that these persons have not worked under the Society. That is to say itisadmitted by the said persons that they have not worked under the NLC Indco - Serve Society. The same fact that they did not work under the Indco- Serve as enrolled contract labour seems to be the reason that they are not provided employment by the Society. The Society does not have a case that the concerned persons are not its members . They only say that the y nave not worked under it. In this context , it is pertinent to consider why in spite of these persons having become members under it they are 3633 GI /09-23 6328

[PART II-SEC. 3 (ii )] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 17, 2009/ ASVINA 25 , 1931

the First Respondent to provide employment to them also taking itself as their sponsoring authority of contract labour for Neyveli Lignite Corporation Ltd. by suitably changing the policy and enlisting them also as a 5th category of eligible persons for engagement under the Society.

15. The point is answered accordingly.

(Dictated to the P.A. , transcribed and typed by him, corrected and pronounced by me in the open court on this daythe 16th September, 2009)

A. N. JANARDANAN , Presiding Officer

Witnesses Examined :

Forthe 1 Party/Petitioner : WWI , Sri N. Swamynathan

Forthe II Party/ : MW1 , Sri L. Santhanakrishnan MW2 , Sri N. Muthu

Management

Documents Marked:

Onthe petitioner's side

Date

ExNo.

Description

Ex . WI ( Series)

Attendance shows that petitioner is employed in the 2nd Respondent through various contractors before formation of Society

Ex .W2( Series)

Ex. W3

Bunch of Cash receipt paid for the membership of the 1st Party The list of members Indco-

Serve

Ex. W4

Rules and regulations of the 1st Respondent

2-5-2000

Ex. W5

Legal notice

Ex . W6

26-6-2000 Counter Affidavit of Ist Respondent

Ex. W7

Order in WP No. 20690/99

14-10-2003

Ex. W8

Registration Certificate

27-6-1994

Ex. W9

Members List

Ex. W10 28-12-2003 Copy of the resolution passed in General Body Meeting authorizing General Secretary

Ex. W11 30-12-2003 Copy of the letters subr of the Union on beha ! workers to the Conc Officer

On the Management's side

Date

Ex. No.

Description

Ex .MI

21-11-1998

not engaged for work in connection with the various activities of NLC. The First Respondent has not pointed out any difficulty or disadvantageous situation in which it is placed , not to provide work to them also under the NLC taking to itself the role of sponsoring them as contract labour to carry out the various activities under NLC. The case of the First Respondent that the four categories of persons mentioned are to be preferred in the matter of engagement of work and that as a policy matter when the work of a Private Contractor is entrusted to it the contract workers under such Private Contractors are engaged to do the said work . The First Respondent discemibly speaks for a policy and only for a preferential treatment as the mode of selecting the contract labour to be engaged in an item of work under NLC . It seems that this stand of the Society is notjust and fair . It is relevant to consider why in spite of the concerned persons having been members under it they are not provided any work under the Society in connection with the activities of NLC as a major Public Sector Undertaking under the Govemment of India . The case of the concerned persons that they had been contract workers under various Private Contractors and it was thereafter that they became members of the Society is a matter not denied by the First Respondent . The said persons , from the very nature of their claim and allegations under- standably clamour for some employment through the Society under the NLC . It is alien to comprehension why they are still hesitated to be employed under the Society to form a set of contract labour to work for the NLC . The unchallenged fact that they have been working for more than 10 years in different wings under NLC through various Private Contractors until they became members of the Society furnishes sufficient testimony for the fact that they cannot be relegated to be persons short of experience in any of the working fields under the NLC. Why not the policy consideration and the preferential treatment given to the above enumerated 4 categories of persons be changed so as to accommodate the claimants workmen herein too as a 5th category ? This question assumes significance especially for the reason that it is not shown on what established sound principles or considerations the said four categories of persons are engaged by the Society to the exclusion ofanother category as the claimants herein. It is in terms of the equitable consideration consistent with justice , fairness and good conscience and on the larger interest of social justice vis-a- vis natural justice that I am compelled to direct my thoughts on these lines as an Industrial Adjudicator which has power to mould relief in order to meet the ends of justice. In the circumstances , I am of the considered view that the non - providing of employment to the concerned persons by the First Respondent NLC Indco- Serve is not legal and justified. So found .

Point No. 2

To what relief the workmen are entitled ?

Minutes of the meeting between NLC and Deputy Director of Industries and Commerece (Industrial Cooperative) Govt. of Tamil Nadu

Ex. M2

Bye- Laws of the 1st Respondent Society

14 In the light of above findings , I hold that the non-providing of employment to the concerned workmen by NLC Indco - Serve is not legal and justified and Idirect [ भाग 11 - खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

6329

भारत का राजपत्र: अक्तूबर 17, 2009/आश्विन 25 , 1931

Ex. M3

9-5-2000 License granted to NLC Indco- Serve ( R1 ) till May 2007 .

Ex. M4

Listofmembers who have not been given work at any time .

Ex. M5

25-6-1998 Last Membership Receipt No. 5499 of P. Jayakumar.

Ex.M6

Blank (unfilled) Membership Receipt bearing No. 5500.

Ex. M7

Industrial Dispute between the management of Kanhan Area of WCL and their workmen , received by the Central Government on 24-9-2009 :

[No. L- 22012/58 /2005-1R( CM - II ) } AJAY KUMAR GAUR, Desk Officer ANNEXURE

BEFORE SHRI A. N. YADAV, PRESIDING OFFICER, CGIT-CUM - LABOUR COURT, NAGPUR Case No. CGIT/NGP /94/05

Date : 11-9-2009

Petitioner/

PartyNo. 1

16-11-2007 Statement of details-Extructi from-Form - VI . Return submittedto Regional PF Commissioner-Trichy- Mentioning yearwiseMember-- Workmen ( given work ) from 1995 to 2006-07.

Ex. M8

24-11-2004 Conciliation Failure Report issued by Asstt . Labour Commissioner (Central -I) .

: Shri Nanhu S / o Jhanak , Through: The Joint General Secretary, Bhartitya Koyala Khadan Mazdoor Sangh (BMS) , Post- Parasia, Dist . Chhindwara , Chhindwara

Versus

Respondent/

PartyNo. 2

Ex.M9

21-11-1998 Minutes of the meeting between NLC and Deputy Director of Industries (Industrial Cooperatives ) Government of Tamil Nadu .

Ex. M10

on 18-5-1995 Memorandum of Settlement under Section12( 3 ) absorption of Indco - Serve Member -Workmen.

Ex. M11

19-4-2003 Agreement signed between NLC Ltd. and NLC Indco- Serve.

नई दिल्ली, 24 सितम्बर , 2009

का.आ. 2884.-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 (1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में , केन्द्रीय सरकार एवं डब्ल्यू. सी. एल. के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच , अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालय , नागपुर के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 94/2005 ) कोप्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 24-9-2009 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल-22012/ 58 /2005- आईआर ( सीएम-11 ) ] अजय कुमार गौड़ , डेस्क अधिकारी NewDelhi , the 24th September , 2009 S.O. 2884.- In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award ( Ref. No. 94/ 2005) ofthe Central Government Industrial Tribunal - cum- Labour Court, Nagpur as shown in the Annexure in the : The General Manager , Kanhan Area of Western Coalfield Limited, Dist . Chhindwara , Chhindwara AWARD (Dated: 11th September , 2009)

1. The Central Government after satisfying the existence of dispute between Shri Nanhu S/ o Jhanak , through : The Joint General Secretary, Bhartiya Koyala Khadan Mazdoor Sangh Chhindwara (Party No. 1 ) and the General Manager , Kanhan Area of Western Coalfield Limited, Chhindwara (Party No. 2) referred the same for adjudication to this Tribunal vide its letter No. L-22012/58/ 2005-1R ( CM - II) dated 5-12-2005 under clause ( d) of sub- section ( 1 ) and sub - section (2A) of section 10 of Industrial Dispute Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) with the following schedule:

2. "Whether the action of the Kanhan Area of WCL , Distt . Chhindwara in dismissing Shri Nannu S /o Shri Jhanak , Tub Loader, Token No. 1391 , Nandan No. 2 Mine from service w.e.f. 26-9-1995 is legal and justified? If not, to whatrelief is the workman entitled ?"

3. The reference came up for hearing on 28-8-2009 on which the Petitioner and his Counsel were absent . The counsel for Respondent was present. The Petitioner is not attending the case since 7-12-2006 i.e. from filing of the case , He has also not even filed a statement of claim . I do not think it proper to continue it on the same stage years together . It seems that the Petitioner is not interested in prosecuting the case . In the circumstances , no purpose will be served in continuing the case , hence it dismissed for the default of the Petitioner and pass the negative award that he is not entitled for any relief.

Date 11-9-2009

A. N. YADAV, Presiding Officer 6330

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 17 , 2009/ ASVINA 25 , 1931

[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii )] नई दिल्ली , 24 सितम्बर , 2009

Act, 1947 referred the following dispute for adjudication to this Tribunal :

का. आ. 2885.--औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 ( 1947 का 14) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में , केन्द्रीय सरकार एवं भारतीय खाद्य निगम के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच , अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण , नं. 1. धनबाद के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 29/1992 ) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 24-9-2009 को प्राप्त हुआ था।

"Whether the action of the Management of Food Corporation of India, in terminating four casual workmen , viz . , S/ Sri Ram Kripal Singh . Saryug Choudhary, Satish Kumar and Anil Kumar without complying the provisions of Section 25 - F of I.D. Act . , 1947 and denying to take them back in employment from the date of their retrenchment with full back wages and regularisation in the time scale of Food Corporation of India was right and justified ? If not, to what relief the said workmen are entitled to ? " [सं. एल-22012/419/ एफ/1991- आईआर ( सी- II ) ] अजय कुमार गौड़ , डेस्क अधिकारी

New Delhi, the 24th September , 2009

2. The concerned workmen through the sponsoring union have appeared and filed written statement stating therein that they have worked for more than 240 days in 12 calendar months as per Section 25 - B of the I.D. Act, 1947 and they were already paid their wages but they were stopped from work from the dates given below without any reason or notice given thereunder and their retrenchment as below was void as such :

31-8-1987 .

1. Sri Ram Kripal Singh

S. O. 2885.-In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the award ( Ref. No. 29/1992) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal , Dhanbad as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of Food Corporation of India and their workman , which was received by the Central Government on 24-9-2009.

31-8-1987.

2. Sri Saryug Choudhary

31-10-1982 .

3. Sri Satish Kumar

[No. L - 22012/ 419/F / 1991 - IR(C- II )] AJAY KUMAR GAUR, Desk Officer

4. Sri Anil Kumar

31-10-1982.

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL No.1 , AT DHANBAD

Present- H. M. Singh , Presiding Officer

In the matter of a reference under Section 10(1) (d) ofthe Industrial Disputes Act , 1947

Reference No. 29 of 1992

Parties:

3. In view of circular dated 6-5-87 of the F.C.I. Headquarters all casual workmen having completed 90days ofservice on or before 2-5-86 were to be regularised against entry level of class III and IV post as per their qualification and the concerned workmen had qualification for appointment against Class IV and their service ought to have been regularised. It is further said as many as 75 workmen were regularised as Watchmen but the concerned workmen were not considered by the management inspite ofregular request.

Employers in relation to the Management of Food Corporation of India and their workman.

APPEARANCES

FortheEmployer : Shri A. Thakur, Authorised Representative

4. It is therefore submitted that the concerned workmen having completed more than 240 days in 12 calendarmonths they were entitled for their regularisation and their retrenchment was in contravention of provisions under Sec . 25 - F of the I.D. Act. , 1947 and they were also entitled for their regularisation as per office circular dated 6-5-87. It is finally said that the award be passed in favour ofthe workmen accordingly.

FortheWorkmen : Shri V. Kumar , State Joint Secretary

State : Bihar

Industry: Food

Dated, the 11th September , 2009

AWARD

5. 1 further find that the management of F.C.I. has appeared and filed written satement stating, interalia that the reference was not maintainable and the claim made by the workmen was at very belated stage and the sponsoring union could not sponsor the case of the workmen and they had not completed 240 days of continuous service . It is further said that the concerned workmen were working at Masauri depot of the management which was in hired building from February , 1978 till February , 1984 and they By Order No. L- 22012/419 /F/ 91 - IR ( C- II ) dated 24-3-92 the Central Government in the Ministry of Labour , has in exercise of the powers conferred by clause (d) of sub -section ( 1 ) of Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes 6331

भारत का राजपत्र: अक्तूबर 17, 2009/आश्विन 25 , 1931

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

were engaged as and when required on the basis of daily wage and the principle of ' no work no pay ' . It is said that they did not complete 240 days of continuous service so as to attract provision under Section 25 - F of the I.D. Act and there was no violation at all . There was also labour problem in the depot and it was closed from February, 1984 and was finally dehired on 31-8-87 , so the concerned workmen were not working at all.

6. It is further said that a dispute was raised in the year 1985 by the FCI Workers' Union and on agreement was reached between the management and the workers ' Union and services of 56 labourers were regularised by the management and these workmen had not come forwardto state their demand and now they are raising dispute after seven years which is not be granted to them . It is finally said that they did not complete 240 days of regular continuous service and as such they are not entitled for their regularisation as claimed and award be passed accordingly.

7. 1 further find a rejoinder to the written Statement of the workmen has also been filed by the management denying specifically and parawise the contentions of the concerned workmen and it is said to be incorrect or not correct fully and the same has been specifically denied .

8. I further find that a rejoinder has also been filedby the workmen denying the contentions of the management in its written statement and the rejoinder filed by the management and the same is said to be incorrect and the misleading and the same being wrong in the face of facts and circumstances of the case .

9. On the basis ofpleadings of the parties as taken in their respective written statement and rejoinder the point to be considered in this reference is :--

(a) As to whether or not the concerned workmen are entitled of the provision under Sec . 25 -F of the 1.D. Act . 1947;

(b) As to whether or not the concerned workmen are entitled for regularisation of their service as per circular of the Headquarters of the management dated 6-5-87; and

10. All the above noted three points are interlinked and as such are taken together for their consideration.

11. I further find that two witnesses have been examined on behalf of the management being MW- 1 Naurangi Lal who is Asstt . Grade - l in FCI Dopot at Baxur and MW -2 is Binod Kumar who was earlier posted at FCI , Masaurhi as Asstt . Grade - II since 1983 and he was Incharge of the depot since 1985 there . They have tried to support the case of the management and have also proved Ext .

M- 1 and as per evidence of MW - 1 about 25 employees were posted as Class IV employees in the depot and he did not engage the concerned workmen as casual workers in the depot . MW- 1 has further stated that attendance -cum- payment is under his signature marked as Ext . M-2 which includes name of workmen Ram Kripal Singh and Satish Kumar and from exhibit it was clear that the engagement of these two workmen were approved by the District Manager. However , he could not say that his successor retained these casual workmen in service or not . MW-2 who was Incharge of Godown from 1986 onwards has stated that during his time godown was closed and no casual worker was engaged. He knew the workmen , Ram Kripal Singh and Sarju Choudhary but he did not know any workmen , Anil Kumar and Satish Kumar and above noted two workmen were engaged by the office when required for working as watchmen or other works on daily wage basis. He has further proved Ext . W-2/ 1 and certificate granted by him Exts . W- 1 , W- 1 / 1 and W- 1 /2 . He admitted that Ram Kripal Singh and Sarju Choudhary had worked occasionally on daily wage basis after his joining there till 1987. But he denied that Satish Kumar and Anil Kumar were there during his tenure . He has further admitted that two workmen were paid full day wages for the days they worked and full day work was taken from them when they were so employed . He has also admitted that the workmen were put to work for six days in a week with one day break , but he could not say that those two workmen completed 240 days work in a year or not .

12. Two witnesses have been examined on behalf of the workmen, namely, WW- 1 Bhagirath Prasad Singh and WW- 2 Lal Babu Singh . WW- I is posted as Asstt . Grade- 11 at Patna FCI for last 18 years and WW -2 is posted at Fulbari Sarif Food Storage Depot as Asstt . Grade. III and from 1978 to December , 1983 was posted as Watchman at Masaurhi Depot . He knew the concerned workmen and during the aforesaid period of posting they were working as casual workers and besides these four workmen 40 to 50 more casual workmen were working there and services of latter workmen have been regularised but these concerned workmen were left for regularisation and they working for 18 to 22 days in a month and have completed more than240 days attendance in a year. The conerned workmen were engaged as casual workers and carrying letters etc.and for putting spilled grains in the bags . No regular messenger or sweeper was posted at the godown at that time. He has also proved the circulars marked Ext . W-1 to W- 1 /5 . He has denied that the work at Masaurhi godown was stopped from 1981 to 1987 and during his tenure six Assistants in Grade - I to Grade - III were working at the depot. He has seen the workmen working in the depot during day time he was on leave as his quarter was nearby godown .

13. Evidence of WW- 1 is on similar line . He has further proved letter marked as Ext. W- 2/ 1 which is in the 6332

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 17 , 2009/ASVINA 25 , 1931

[PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii ) ]

than 240 days . Ext. W- 5 is statement of staff position as on 31-8-90 signed by Asstt . Manager ( P) F.C.I. showing the vacancy position in Class - III and Class - IV posts .

16. On the basis of the above documents filed on

behalf of the workmen it is submitted that from Ext . W-4

and also Ext . M -2 filed by the management it is clear that

the concerned workmen have completed more than 240

days of continuous work in a year in 12 calendar months

whenadded to 52 Sundays which is paid holiday and other

paid holidays being the part . It is also submitted that in

view of the circular Ext. M -9 their services ought to have

beenregularised as they have completed many more than

90 days as stipulated in column 4 of the said circular and in

the light ofthe said circular 56 casual workers belonging to

other union were regularised by the management in the

year 1987-88 and were transferred to other depot and when writing ofB. N. Prasad, the then AG- I , ( D) who was Depot Incharge at Masaurhi and has also proved another letter Ext. W- 3 and photo copy of chart under signature of S.K. Bhaumik, then District Manager , marked Ext . W-4 and staff position statement in three pages under the signature of S.S. Rai marked Ext . W -5 . He has further stated that Massaurhi Godown was running in a rented building and from February , 1984 onwards there was labour problem. He has clearly stated that the present dispute was raised by the sponsoring union in the year 1991 and after regularisation of 56 workmen in the year 1988-89 the sponsoring union waited till 1991 on the verbal assurance given by the management regarding regularisation of service of the concerned four workmen and relying their assurance the sponsoring union waited for three more years and thereafter they raised dispute . There is no other witness in the case .

these workmen approached to the management verbal

assurance was given to them about considering their case

favourably and for that they waited till 1991 when this

dispute was raised . In this view of the matter it is submitted

that the plea taken by the management that thisdispute

has been raised by the concerned workmen at a belated

stage and due to such delay the parties defeated and they

are not entitled for the relief as claimed . However , it is

submitted that in view of the circular of the management

Ext. M- 9 it was incumbent upon the management to

regularise the services of the concerned workmen as they

have completed more than 90 days on 2-5-86 and the

management's witnesses have also admitted that they were

working till 1987 for different works and it is also admitted

case that no notice or retranchment compensation was

given to the concerned workmen as per provision of under

Sec . 25 -F of the 1.D. Act , 1947 and their stoppage from

work or retrenchment becomes void ab inition . It is further

submitted that in view of the vacancy existing with the

management at different godowns and closure of dehiring 14. Some documents have been filed on behalf of the parties . Ext . M- 1 is photo copy of lease agreement of the Godown at Massaurhi which was taken from Baijnath Prasad and Ext . M-2 is photo copy of attendance-cum- payment sheets which includes the name of the two concerned workmen , namely, Ram Kripal Singh and Satish Kumar. Exts . M -3 to M-8 are letters of different dates about shifting of godown and dehiring at Massaurhi and it appears that finally in May, 1987 the Godwon was dehired vide Ext. M- 8 . Ext. M-9 is settlement document by which 56 casual workers were regularised and transferred to other depot and Ext. M - 9 is letter of the Headquarters ofthe FCI dated 6-5-87 and as per clause 4 all the casual workers who completed more than 90 days work on or before 2-5-86 were to be regularised. This Ext . M-9 has been explained by the workmen to place their position that in view ofthis circular 56 workers were regularised in service which is clear from Exts . M - 7 and M - 8 where these concerned four workmen were left and discriminated for the reason best known to the management.

ofMassaurhi godown can't be said to be closure of the

company or establishment rather Massaurhi depot is simply

one unit of the FCI management which has more than 100

depots and Regional and Divisional offices of Bihar . It is

further pointed out that vide Exts . M - 7 and M-8 other 56

workmenwhose services were regularised as per settlement

with the management and who were working at Massaurhi

depot and after regularisation of service in the year 1987-

88 they were transferred to other depot of the management

and no question of closure of Massaurhi depot raised in

their case so this plea of closure of Massaurhi depot as

envisaged under Sec . 25 - FFF can't be taken by the

management in the case of the present concerned workmen

also . I find much force in the contention of the sponsoring

union and I am agreeable with their contention that in view

ofExt. M-2 and Ext. W -4 and also Ext . M -9 it is clear that the

concerned workmen had completed more than 240 days

attendance in 12 calendar months in a year and had 15. Similarly some documents have also been filed on behalf of the workmen which is Ext . W - 1 series certificates granted in the name of the workmen to show that they have worked for a considerable period at Massaurhi Godown of FCI from 1979 to 1982 or upto 1987. Ext. W- 2 goes to show that certificate issued by Depot Incharge to show Ram Kripal Singh completed more than 240 days continuous service in the depot as per official record . Similarly Ext . W - 2/ 1 a letter written by the Depot Incharge to the District Manager, Patna about regularisation of services of the concerned workmen , Sarjug Chaudhary and Ram Kripal Singh who were Class - VII pass and worked atMassaurhi depot since 1979 till 1987. Ext . W -4 is chart showing that the concerned workmen have worked in between 202 to 211 days from April, 1979 to May, 1980 and in the year April , 1975 to March , 1980 this period was in between 202 to 211 days plus 52 Sundays in a year which is weekly paid holidays and adding to that it becomes more completed many more 90 days so as to cover under the 6333 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र: अक्तूबर 17, 2009/आश्विन 25 , 1931

15. In the result, my award is that the action of the management of Food Corporation of India in terminating four casual workmen, vis . S/Sri Ram Kripal Singh , Saryug Choudhary, Satish Kumar and Anil Kumar , without complying the provisions of Sec . 25 -F of the I.D. Act , 1947 and denying to take them back in employment from the date oftheir retrenchment is notjustified . The management isdirectedto re - instate the concerned workmen with effect from June , 1987 with full back wages and to regularise their service in Class - IV post .

However, there will be no order so as to cost .

TARKESHWAR PRASAD , Presiding Officer circular dated6-5-87 ( Ext . M - 9 ) and it was for the management to regularise their services as they had minimum educational qualification for being absorbed under Class IV in Watchman post. MWs and WWs examined on behalf ofthe parties have admitted that payment for full days workwas made to the workmen when they were engaged and worked for whole day was taken from them on the working days and they had worked throughout during the year 1987. Delay has also been explained that relying on the verbal assurance of the management they waited that their case also would be considered by the management about their regularisation but when it did not materialise the dispute was raised by the sponsoring union in the year 1991 .

16.Against the above Award of this Tribunal a petition has been moved by the management of FCI before theHon'ble Patna High Court vide C. W.J.C. No. 3094 of 1997 and an order has been passed by the Hon'ble Court on 17-11-08 quashing the Award . Thereafter a L.P.A. has been filed by the Food Corporation of India, Executive Staff Union , Firdaus Building , Exhibition Road , Patna through Vijandra Kumar, the State Joint Secretgary vide L.P.A. No. 40 of 2009 and the Hon'ble Patna High Court has passed order on 1-7-2009 regarding the Award and directed that the file be remitted back to Tribunal for re- examination of the facts already available on record for giving proper finding before coming to a decision whether provision of Section 25 (F ) of the Industrial Disputes Act are available for the help of the workmen or not.

17. On this point argument of both sides has been heard on 14-8-2009 .

13. On the other hand , the plea has been taken on behalf of the management that there was abnormal delay onthe part ofthe workmen or the union to raise the dispute and it goes against the workmen as per principles of law that delay defeated purpose and the case both and they are not entitled relief and that they have not completed 240days regular service in 12 calendar month in a year and the workmen are not entitled for any notice or compensation under Sec . 25 - F of the Industrial Disputes Act . , 1947 nor they were covered under Circular Ext. M -9 for completing 90 days against regular job and they are not entitled for regularisation . But in view of the discussion made above 1 do not find any merit in the plea taken by the management and it is absurd to any that if 56 co - workers of the same depot placed similarly like the present concerned workmen would be regularised vide Exts . M - 8 and M - 9 then there was no vacancy for these four concerned workmen because of the fact that they belonged to some other union and now the plea was taken that delay was made by them in not agitating the matter in time . However , there was no any such column in the Circular Ext. M-9 that the workmen has to agitate for his absorption in view of this circular after completing 90 days continuous service on or before 2-5-86- rather it was the incumbent upon the management to consider the case of the workmen individually and to regularise , finding the workman fit and qualified for the post in Grade- III or Grade - IV as the case may be . It is also clear that the concerned workmen were qualified and fit for being absorbed under class - IV post similar to other 56 co- workers who were regularised and shifted to other depot by the management and as such the action of the management in not regularising the services of the concerned workmen was not justified. I also find that these 56 workers were regularised from June , 1987 as per agreement reached between the management and the sponsoring union and accordingly the present concerned workmen are entitled for their regularisation from the same date i.e. June , 1987, if not from any earlier date , with full back wages in Class IV post .

18. The representative of the workman argued that as per Ext. W-4 Shri Satish Kumar has done work total 211 days from April , 1979 to March , 80 , Shri Anil Kumar has donework total 202 days from April, 1979 to March , 1980, Shri Sarjug Choudhary has done work total 204 days from April, 1979 to March , 1980 and Shri Ram Kripal Singh has done work from April, 1979 to March , 1980 totalling 211 days .He argued that in these working days 52 Sundays , 12 Saturdays and 16 Gazetted Holidays to be added . In otherwords 80 days of Sundays , Saturdays and Gazetted Holidays to be added . He referred that Sundays , Saturdays and Gazetted Holidays should be included in the working days . In this connection he has referred to a decision reported in 1986 Lab I.C. Page 98 in which Hon'ble Supreme Court laid down regarding Sections 25 - F and 25 - B (2 ) of 1947 that continuous services are or actual working days has to be calculated and Sundays and other paid holidays should be taken into account while calculating 240 days . So as per law laid down by Hon'ble Supreme Court Holidays and Saturdays be included for calculation of 240 days . In this respect WW- 2 Lal Babu Singh stated in examination - in- chief that the concerned workmen though were working for full working days every month, but their attendances were marked for 18 to 22 days a month . They 14. Accordingly all the points were decided infavour of the workmen and following Award was passed by my predecessor - in - office on 9th October , 1996 :-

6334

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 17 , 2009/ ASVINA 25 , 1931

[PART II- SEC . 3 ( ii))

work for less than 240 days , the service of the workman can be terminated without compliance with Section 6 - N of theU.P. Industrial Disputes Act despite hishaving worked for a number of years and for more than 240 days such year except the last . Such an intention cannot be attributed to the U.P. "

had been working more than 240 days in a year . The concerned workmen used todo cleaning work and also carry letters etc. from one to other place and were also collecting spille grains and were putting that in bags . During that period no regular messenger or sweeper was posted in that Godown . Inthis respect MW- 2 Binod Kumar has stated in cross-examination at page " It is fact that they were put. towork for six days a week with one day break thereafter . " This statement of MW - 2 shows that only one day break was given to the concerned workmen and work was taken from them for 6 days in a week. It also shows that they were paid andwork was taken from them for full month but break ofone day was given to them in a week after taking 6 days work.

19. Another law referred to by the representative of workman reported in AIR 1986 Supreme Court page 132 in which Hon'ble Supreme Court laid down the following :-

As per law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court once the workmen have worked for240 days during earlier years they connot be retrenched without complying legal procedure prescribed under Section 25F of the I.D. Act . , 1947. So it shows that the conerned workmen have completed 240days in a year and they are entitled for the benefit of Section 25F of the Industrial Disputes Act . In the result , the Award passed by this Tribunal earlier on 9-10-96 is substituted by the following Award :-- "(A) Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947) Ss . 2 (00) 25F and 2A - Retrenchment- Striking offname of workmen from rolls Amounts to retrenchment-Non- observance of procedure in S. 25F- Retrenchment is invalid - Dispute is covered by S. 2А. "

Another law referred by the representative of workman reported in (2003 ) 8 Supreme Court cases 334 in which Hon'ble Supreme Court laid down the following :---

" The action of the management of Food Corporation of India in terminating four casual workmen , viz . S/ Sri Ram Kripal Singh , Saryug Choudhary , Satish Kumar and Anil Kumar , without complying the provisions of Sec . 25F of the I.D. Act, 1947 and denying to take them back in employment from the date of their retrenchment is not justified . The management is directed to re - instate the concerned workmen with effect from June , 1987 with full back wages and to regularise their services in Class - IV post."

However, there will be no order so as to cost.

H.M. SINGH , Presiding Officer

नई दिल्ली, 24 सितम्बर , 2009

"A. Labour Law -U.P . Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (28 of 1947) Ss . 6-N & 2 (g )- Continuous Service-1f a workman has worked for more than 240 days in earlier years , then even though during the year ofhis retrenchment he has not worked for 240 days , he would be deemed to be in continuous service and his retrenchement would be violative of S. 6N - S . 2 ( g )-Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 , S. 25 - B ( as substituted by Amendment Act, 36 of 1964 ) .

का. आ. 2886.-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में , केन्द्रीय सरकार एवं भारत इलेक्ट्रानिक्स लिमिटेड के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच , अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालय नं. -2, मुम्बई के पंचाट (संदर्भ संख्या सीजीआईटी-2/49 का 2005 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 24-9-2009 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

C. Interpretation of Statutes -Particular Statutes- Welfare Statute ---Broad interpretation needed -When statute provides relief against certain mischief, court should not deny such relief-- Subsidiary rules Interpretation- Mischiefrule .

[सं. एल-42012/9/2004-आईआर( सीएम -11 ) ] अजय कुमार गौड़ , डेस्क अधिकारी

New Delhi , the 24th September, 2009

S. O. 2886.- In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. CGIT- 2/49 of 2005 ) ofthe Central Government Industrial Tribunal- The interpretation propounded for the appellant is wholly untenable . If the viewpoint propounded by the management is accepted, then every year the workman would be required to complete more than 240 days . If in any one year the employer gives him actual [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

6335

भारत का राजपत्र: अक्तूबर 17, 2009/आश्विन 25 , 1931

cum-Labour Court No. 2, Mumbai as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the management of M/s. Bharat Electronics Ltd. and their workmen , which was received by the Central Government on 24-9-2009 .

[No. L-42012/9/2004- IR (CM - II ) ]

AJAY KUMAR GAUR, Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL No. 2, MUMBAI Present : A. A. Lad, Presiding Officer Reference No. CGIT-2/49 of 2005 Employers in relation to the Management of M/ s . Bharat Electronics Limited

The Additional General Manager (P)

Bharat Electronics Ltd.

L- 1 , MIDC Industrial Area , Taloja, Tal . Panvel , Distt. Raigad ( M.S. )

And

Their Workmen

Shri Sharad V. Mahamulkar

329/5, Menwel Village Ward Pereira House OldKurla Mumbai -400070

APPEARANCES

Forthe Emploler : Mr. George Kurian , Advocate For the Workmen : Mr. M.B. Anchan , Advocate Mumbai , dated 26th August , 2009.

AWARD

TheGovernrnent of India, Ministry of Labour by its order No. L -42012/9 /2004-1R ( CM - 11 ) dated 27-1-2005 in exercise of the powers conferred by clause ( d) of sub- section ( 1 ) and sub-section 2 (A) of Seetion 10 of the Indutrial Disputes Act, 1947 have referred the following dispute to this Tribunal for adjudication:

filing application ( Ex- 15) intimated that second party workman has expired and his legal heir does not want to proceed further with this reference and suggested, to dispose of the reference.

4. In view ofEx- 15 , following order is passed:

ORDER

Inview ofEx- 15 , reference is disposed of for want of prosecution .

Date:26-8-2009

A. A. LAD, Presiding Officer नई दिल्ली, 24 सितम्बर , 2009

का. आ. 2887. औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में , केन्द्रीय सरकार एवं डब्लू.सी . एल. के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच , अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालय , नागपुर के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 33/2005 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 24-9-2009 को प्राप्त हुआ था।

[सं. एल-22012/97/2004-आईआर( सीएम- II ) ] अजय कुमार गौड़ , डेस्क अधिकारी New Delhi , the 24th September , 2009 S. O. 2887. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award ( Ref. No. 33/2005 ) of the Central Govemment Industrial Tribunal - cum- Labour Court , Nagpur as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the management of Dhoptala Sub Area of Western Coalfields Limited , and their workman , which was received by the Central Government on24-9-2009.

[No. L -22012/97/2004-IR(CM - 11 ) ]

AJAY KUMAR GAUR , Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

BEFORE SHRI A. N. YADAV , PRESIDING OFFICER , CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL- CUM- LABOUR COURT, NAGPUR

DATE : 11-9-2009 Case No. CGIT/NGP/33/2005

Petitioner/

:The Secretary

PartyNo. 1

"Whether the action of the management of M/s. Bharat Electronics Ltd. , in dismissing Shri Sharad V. Mahamulkar from service w.e.f. 13-11-2002 isjust , fair and legal ? If not, to what relief the workman is entitled?"

2. Claim statement is filed by second party at Ex . - 5 which was replied by first party by filing written statement at Ex- 6 . Issues were framed at Ex- 12 and matter was fixed for recording evidence .

Rashtriya Koyala Khadan Mazdoor Sangh,

Br. Sasti Incline , C/ o Shri Mudatsar Ahmed S/ o Khalil Ahmed Bibayani Azad , Ward Rajura, Tah . Rajura , Distt: Chandrapur , Chandrapur (M.S. )

Versus

The Sus Area Manager

Respondent/

PartyNo. 2

3.However second party did not remain present for recording evidence . Today advocate for second party by 3633G1/09-24

Dhoptala Sub -Arca of WCL. , Post- Sasti , Tah . Rajura , Dist . Chandrapur . Chandrapur (M.S. ) 6336

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 17 , 2009/ ASVINA 25 , 1931

AWARD (Dated: 11th September , 2009 )

1. The Central Government after satisfying the existence of dispute between the Secretary, Rashtriya Koyala Khadan Mazdoor Sangh , Chandrapur on behalf of Shri Mudatsar Ahmed S/ o Khalil Ahmed Bibayani Azad (Party No. 1 ) and the Sub -area Manager , Dhoptala Sub- area of WCL , Chandrapur (Party No. 2) referred the same for adjudicationto this Tribunal vide its letter No. L- 22012/ 97/2004 /IR( CM - II) dated 14-2-2005 under clause (d) of sub- section ( 1 ) and sub- section (2A) of Section of Industrial Dispute Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947) with the following schedule:

2. "Whether the action of the management in relation to Dhoptala Sub- Area of Western Coalfields Limited in terminating the services of Shri Mudatsar Ahmed S/o Khalil Ahmed Bibayani , Electrician Helper , Sasti Colliery , vide Office Order No. वेकोलि/साका/45-B/ 384 dated 26-5-2003 is legal and justified ? If not , to what relief is the workman entitled ?"

3. The Petitioner Shri Mudatsar Ahmed S/ o Khalil Ahmed Bibayani was working as Electrician Helper in Sasti Colliery, vide Office Order No. वेकोलि/साका/45/-B/384dated 26-5-2003 has raised the dispute before the ALC and on failing of the conciliation proceeding, the Government had referred it to the CGIT. During the pendency of the dispute i.e. reference No. 33/2005 on 20-7-2009 both the parties settled it amicably outside the Court . They arrived at following certain conditions .

Terms and Conditions :

1. Shri Mudatsar Ahmed will be re - employed afresh as General Mazdoor in Cat - I for underground mine and he will be paid initial basic ofCat . I ( UG ) in Ballarpur Area .

2. Such re-employment will be subject to medical fitness so certified by the Company Doctor .

3. Shri Mudatsar Ahmed shall remain on probation for a period of one year from the date ofjoining and he has toput in minimum 190 days of attendance in a year . In case his attendance and general performance is not found satisfactory by the management , his services shall automatically stand terminated without any enquiry or assigning any reason thereof.

4. Shri . Mudatsar Ahmed had received his entitled gratuity for the service he had rendered for the period 14-7-1984 to 26-5-2003 in the company . As such the service ofcontinuitywill not be provided for the purpose ofgratuity.

5. The period from the date of his termination till re- employment and joining on his duty will be treated as dies-non on the principle of no work no pay.

6. Form -H settlement individually or through union, incorporating the above terms and conditions for entering

[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii)] into employment and the same will be sent for registration to the Labour Ministry.

7. In case any dispute is pending before the CGIT , the re-employed person should withdraw the same from CGIT by filing a copy of Settlement for consent award . If any matter is pending before any other Courts , the union/ ex-employees will withdraw the case from the concerned Court.

stage. 8. He shall have no right to apply for VRS at later They agrred it before the Court by filing the pursis and requested for the Award in that terms . I accepted it and recorded the compromise Award in the terms of it . Consequently, there remained no dispute due to the compromise.Hence , this no dispute Award.

Date; 11-9-2009 . A. N. YADAV, Presiding Officer नई दिल्ली , 25 सितम्बर , 2009

का. आ. 2888.-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार बैतरनी आयर्न माईन्स के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच , अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालय , भुवनेश्वर के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 125/2002 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 23-9-2009 को प्राप्त हुआ था।

[सं. एल-26012/37/2002- आईआर( एम ) ] कमल बाखरू , डेस्क अधिकारी New Delhi , the 25th September , 2009 S.O. 2888.-In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 141947 ) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 125 / 2002) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal/ Labour Court, Bhubaneswar now as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of Baitarani Iron Mines and their workman , which was received by the Central Governmen' on23-9-2009,

[No. L-26012/37/2002- KAMAL BAKHRU , Desk Ol

ANNEXURE

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

Present : Shri N.K.R. Mohapatra , Presiding Officer, Industrial Dispute Case No. 125/2002 Date of Passing Award -8th May , 2009 (Rourkela Camp) [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

6337 भारत का राजपत्र : अक्तूबर 17, 2009/आश्विन 25 , 1931

BETWEEN

The Management of the Agent,

Baitarini Iron Mines of Dr. Sarojini Pradhan , At. /P.O . Barbil , Dist . Keonjhar, Orissa- 758035

1stParty-Management

And

Their Workman Sh . Sabai Chatter ,

S/o Shri Bike Chatter, At . /P.O . Kolhi Hundula,

Dist. Keonjhar , Orissa .

2nd Party-Workman

APPEARANCES

Mr. R. N. Rath ,

Forthe 1st Party-Management

Legal Advisor

None

Forthe 2nd Party-Workman

AWARD

mine on piece rated basis as and when necessary upon their offering to work and they were being paid depending upon the quantum of work performed by them each day. It isfurther alleged that during non - engagement period these piece rated workers used to work in other mines on daily rated basis . So far as the case of the workman is concerned it isfurther submitted by the management that the workman having worked for days as a piece rated worker did not turn up for work voluntarily much before the alleged date oftermination and as such the allegations of the workman thathe was refused employment from 24-12-1999 without any advance notice or terminal benefits is nothing but a myth and fictitious story. It is further contended by the management that the present reference is the brain child of one Shri B. S. Pati , the General Secretary of the so called North Orissa Workers Union with which the Management had got no connection . It is alleged that this and several other cases have been mooted against the Management at the behest of Shri B. S. Pati , an outside Trade Unionist for hisulterior motive .

The Government of India in the Ministry of Labour , in exercise ofpowers conferred by clause (d) of sub- section (1) and sub - section 2( A) of Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947) have referred the following dispute for adjudication vide their Order No. L -26012/37/ 2002IR-(M) , dated 16-12-2002.

"Whether the action of the Management of Baitarani Iron Mines of Dr. S. Pradhan, At/P.O . Barbil , Dist . Keonjhar, in terminating the services of Shri Sabai Chatter , S /o . Bike Chatter ; At./P.O . Kolho Hundula , Dist . Keonjhar , PRW with effect from 24-12-1999 without serving any notice and without following the provisions of Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 is justified? If not, what relief the workrnan is entitled to?"

4. From the record it transpires that, ever since the inception of the case Shri B. S. Pati , General Secretary, North Orissa Workers Union is alone appearing on behalf of the workman as his authorized representative . In one such case between the Management and its workers Shri B. S. Pati was declared incompetent to represent the piece rated workers of Baitarani Iron Mines for the reason that these workers were not belonging to the aforesaid Union . In O.J.C. 17216/2001 the Hon'ble Court in an alike manner has held that Shri B. S. Pati the General Secretary of the North OrissaWorkers Union is not competent to represent one Shri Madhusudhan Naik a worker ofthe Management- Company. In the present case also except Shri Pati the workman has never appeared . Though the workman was specifically asked to appear today; he has failed to appear . Rather Shri Pati as usual appeared though he has no locusstandi to represent the workman . As a result the workman was set ex parte and the evidence of the Management through affidavit was accepted.

2. It is alleged by the workman in his claim statement that he joined in the Baitarani Iron Mines of Dr. Sarojini Pradhan in June 1989 to work as a Miner . While he has worked as such continuously he all of a sudden was refused employment with effect from 24-12-1999 without any advance notice or any terminal benefits being paid to him. He was told that his termination was due to lack of mining activities and that once the production of minerals commences he would be intimated later . It is further alleged by the workman that thereafter he was never called to work and therefore he made a representation for his reinstatement with full back wages and then due to apathetic attitude of Management he raised an Industrial Disputes.

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 17 , 2009/ ASVINA 25 , 1931

[PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii) ]

ANNEXURE

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

Present : Shri N.K.R. Mohapatra ,

Presiding Officer, CGIT-CUM - LABOUR COURT , BHUBENESHWAR.

Industrial Dispute Case No. 118/2002

Date of Passing Award-8th May, 2009

(Rourkela Camp )

BETWEEN

The Management of the Agent,

Baitarini Iron Mines of Dr. Sarojini Pradhan , At. /P.O . Barbil , Keonjhar, Orissa- 758035

about his non - engagement he was told that for lack of mining activities he could not be engagement but he would be called upon again once the production of the materials is taken up . He further stated that when he was not intimated as to when such production would be taken up , he made a representation for his reinstatement with full back wages . These averments of the workman indirectly suggests that he was engaged as a piece rated worker as contended by the management . Besides the evidence of the management shows that the workman had voluntarily expressed his willingness to work under the 1st Party - Management on personal grounds and as such the allegations of the workman that he was terminated from 24-12-1999 appears to be un-believable for want of any evidence being adduced from his side .On the other hand the time to time participation of Shri B.S. Pati to represent the workman further strengthens the belief, as contended by the Management, that the case has been mooted at the behest of Shri Pati , an outsider Trade Unionist with whom the disputant has no legal connection.

1stParty-Management

AND

TheirWorkman

6. In view of the above and for lack of any evidence from the side of the workman it is held that there is no merit in the dispute and accordingly the reference is answered ex parte against the workman .

Sh . Bagun Munda,

S/ o Shri Sammu Munda,

N. K. R. MOHAPATRA, Presiding Officer

At./P.O. Dhobakuchida,

नई दिल्ली, 25 सितम्बर , 2009

Via-Champua , Dist. Keonjhar ,

Orissa .

2nd Party-Workman

APPEARANCES

Mr. R. N. Rath ,

For the Ist Party Management

Legal Advisor

None.

For the 2nd Party Workman. AWARD

का. आ. 2889 औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 (1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार बैतरनी आयरन माईन्स के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच , अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायायलय , भुवनेश्वर के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 118/2002 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 23-9-2009 को प्राप्त हुआ था।

[सं. एल-26012/30/2002- आईआर ( एम ) ] कमल बाखरू , डेस्क अधिकारी

New Delhi , the 25th September , 2009

The Government of India in the Ministry of Labour , in exercise ofpowers conferred by clause (d) ofsub -section (1) and sub - section 2 ( A) of Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947) have referred the following dispute for adjudication vide their Order No. L-26012/30/ 2002- IR ( M ) , dated 16-12-2002 .

S. O. 2889.- In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award ( Ref. No. 118/2002 ) of the Central Govemment Industrial Tribunal- cum- Labour Court , Bhubaneshwar now as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of Baitarani Iron Mines and their workman , which was received by the Central Govemment on 23-9-2009 .

[No. L -26012/30 /2002 - IR( M ) ]

"Whether the action of the Management of Baitarani Iron Mines of Dr. S. Pradhan , At/PO ,. Barbil , Dist . Keonjhar , in terminating the services of Shri Bagun Munda, S/o . Sammu Munda , At./PO . Dhobakuchida , Via: Champua, Dist . Keonjhar , PRW with effect from 1-10-1990 without serving any notice and without following the provisions of Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 is justified? If not , what relief the workman is entitled to ?"

KAMAL BAKHRU, Desk Officer 6339 [ भाग 11- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : अक्तूबर 17, 2009/आश्विन 25 , 1931

held that Shri B.S. Pati , the General Secretary of the North Orissa Workers Union is not competent to represent one Shri Madhusudhan Naik a worker of the Management-Company . In the present case also except Shri Pati the workman has never appeared, Though the workman was specifically asked to appear today , he has failed to appear . Rather Shri Pati as usual appeared though he has no locus standi to represent the workman . As a result the workman was set ex parte and the evidence of the Management through affidavit was accepted.

2. It isalleged by the workman in his claim statement thathe joined in the Baitarani Iron Mines of Dr. Sarojini Pradhan in June 1989 to work as a Miner . While he has worked as such continuously he all of a sudden was refused employment with effect from 1-10-1999 without any advancenotice or any terminal benefits being paid to him. He was told that his termination was due to lack of mining activities and that once the production of minerals commences he would be intimated later. It is further alleged by the workman that thereafter he was never called to work and therefore he made a representation for his reinstatement with full back wages and then due to apathetic attitude of Management he raised an Industrial Disputes.

3. In the written statement the 1st Party- Management alleged that the workman was never engaged on regular basis . Rather himself and few others were engaged in the mine on piece rated basis as and when necessary upon their offering to work and they were being paid depending upon the quantum of work performed by them each day .It is further alleged that during non -engagement period these piece rated workers used to work in other mines on daily rated basis . So far as the case of the workman is concerned it is further submitted by the management that the workman having worked for some days as a piece rated worker did not turn up for work voluntarily much before the alleged date of termination and as such the allegations of the workman that he was refused employment from 1-10-1999 without any advance notice or terminal benefits is nothing but a myth and fictitious, story. It is further contended by the management that the present reference is the brain child of one Shri B. S. Pati , the General Secretary of the so called North Orissa Workers Union with which the Management had got no connection .It is alleged that this and several other cases have been mooted against the Management at the behest of Shri B. S. Pati , an outside Trade Unionist for his ulterior motive .

6. In view of the above and for lack ofany evidence from the side of the workman it is held that there is no merit in the dispute and accordingly the reference is answered ex parte against the workman .

N. K. R. MOHAPATRA , Presiding Officer 6340

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 17, 2009 /ASVINA 25 , 1931

नई दिल्ली , 25 सितम्बर , 2009

का.आ. 2890. औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 (1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार कोटेश्वर लाईम स्टोन माईन्स के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालय , जबलपुर के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या सीजीआईटी/एलसी/आर /21 /05 एवं 40/2003 ) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 23-9-2009 को प्राप्त हुआ था । [सं. एल-29011/97/2002-आई. आर. ( एम) ] कमल बाखरू , डेस्क अधिकारी New Delhi , the 25th September , 2009 S.O. 2890. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award ( Ref. No. CGIT/ LC/R/ 21 /05 & 40/2003 ) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal / Labour Court, Jabalpur as shown in the Annexure , in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of Koteshwar Lime Stone Mines and their workmen , received by the Central Government on 23-9-2009.

[No. L - 29011 / 97/2002-1R (M ) ] KAMAL BAKHRU , Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

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

No. CGIT/LC/21 /05 & 40/03

Presiding Officer : Shri Mohd . Shakir Hasan

Workmen /Union Shri Bachchan Nayak President , Ispat Khadan Janta Mazdoor Union, 10, Sawarkar Road , New Basti Katni (MP)

Versus

Thedirector , Steel Authority of India Ltd. Ram Materials Division , Industry House , 10 , Camac Street, Kolkata

Management

AWARD

Passed on this 16th day of September , 2009 1. The Government of India , Ministry of Labour vide its Notification No. L-29011 /97 /2002- IR( M) dated 27-01-93 has referred the following dispute for adjudication by this tribunal :-

I. " Whether the action of the Mines Manager, Koteshwar Lime Stone Mines of Steel Authority of India Ltd. in terminating services of 3404 (3380+ 24 - as per list attached) mine workers in

[PART 11-SEC . 3 ( ii) ] March , 1996 who ceased to be contract labour after prohibition of employment of contract labour in Lime Stone Mines vide Notification No. S.O. 707 dated 17-3-93 was legal fair and justified ? If not , what relief the concerned workmen or heirs in case of deceased worker are entitled to ? " 11. " Whether the Action of the Mines Manager , Koteshwas Lime Stone Mines of Steel Authority of India Ltd. in denying terminal benefits of gratuity retrenchment compensation and exgratia applicable to VRS seeking employees is fair and justified. It not,to what relief these workers /heirs are entitled to ? "

111. "Whether the action of the management of the Mines Manager , Koteshwar Lime Stone Mines of Steel Authority of India Ltd. in disregarding Clause- 8 of Memorandum of Agreement singed between the Steel Authority of India , New Delhi and their Unions including HMS and employing workersthrough contractors on job of permanent and perenniel nature in Mines between 5-20 years even without ensuring statutory wages and service conditions was legal fair and justified ? If not , to what relief concerned workmen /heirs are entitiled ? ".

2. The above reference was registered as Case No. CGIT/LC/R/40/03 .

3. Thereafter a corrigendum dated 9-4-2003 was received from the Ministry that Ministry's order of even number dated 27-1-2003 , in the schedule thereof , the month and the years of termination appearing in the second sentence may be read as " April , 1996 " instead of"March , 1996".

4. Again the Government of India Ministry of Labour vide its Notification No. 29011 /97 /2002 - IR ( M ) dated 22-2-2005 referred the following dispute for adjudication by this Tribunal in compliance of the directions of the Honourable Supreme Court of India on special leave Petition No. 23288/2002 filed by the Ispat Khadan Janta Mazdoor Union-...

"Whether the employment of the workmen mentioned in this Ministry's order of even number dated 27-1-2003 through contractors is sham and bogus and whether in effect there is direct employment by the company ? If so , to what relief the workman concerned are entitled ? "

5. The said reference was registered by this Tribunal on 28-2-2005 as case No. CGIT/LC/R/ 21 /05 .

6. Both the references are taken up together in the ends ofjustice as both are inter- connected with each other which are on a common subject matter .

7. According to the Union/workmen , steel Authority of India Limited (hereinafter is short is referred as SAIL) [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

has owned a captive line stone and dolomite mine at Kuteshwar in Katni Distt . in Madhya Pradesh . The management of SAIL and the workmen have entered into number of settlements . An agreement also provides for abolition of Contract Labour . Relevant portion of the agreement dated 27-10-70 , 5-7-89 are reproduced below:-

"8. GENERAL;

8.1 Abolition of contract Labour .

8.1.1 Industry shall not employ labour through contractor or engage contractor's labour on jobs of permanent and perennial nature .

16-12-93- Jobs of permanent nature and perennial nature which are at present being done departmentally will continue to be done departmentally will continue to be done by regular employee . "

8. It is stated that about 5000 laborers had been employed by SAIL in violation of the above provision from May, 1979 at Kuteshwar and they were not paid similar wages as regular workers for similar work. The statutory right of the workers under Mines Act and under contract Labour (Regulation and Abolition) Act . 1970 ( in short CLRA Act , 1970 was violated and its benefit was also denied to the workers .

9. The so called contract labourers were working in the captive mine and the entire product was for the use of SAIL and nothing was sold outside : The management of Kuteshwar Lime Stone exercised supervisory powers over the workers employed by the contractors . Management used to issue direction with reference to disciplinary action and work and attendance was marked by the employees of SAIL. The wages of the workers were paid by the SAIL. The contractors were mere commission agent and contract ' f was sham and bogus . The work was of a perennial anti permanent nature . The workers employed through the allegedcontractors were in fact and in law workers of SAIL .

10. The Union is said to have raised the issue of workers for their regualrization and payment of regular wages . It is stated that even if they were employed through contractors , they are entitled similar wages for similar work as have been paid to the employees directly employed by SAll . under the provision of CLRA Act , 1970 .

11. It is further stated that when the management 1to regularize the workers , the Union took up the matter ... the labour department who referred the matter to Contract Labour Advisory Board. Thereafter the said Board recommended prohibition of Contract Labour after visiting Kuteshwar lime stone . The Central Government thereafter by notification dated 17-3-93 prohibited the employment of contract labour in respect of raising of mineral including breaking sizing , sorting of lime stone , dolomite and transportation of limestone and dolomite which includes loading and unloading from Trucks , dumpers , conveyers.and transportation form mine site to

6341

भारत का राजपत्र : अक्तूबर 17 , 2009/आश्विन 25 , 1931

Factory. All the contractor's labour were doing the same work prohibited under the notification. The workers who were in employment on 17-3-93 through the contractors continued to work on the same place and Same job without any break from 17-3-93 . The Union protested for regularization and for similar wages, then all of a sudden the workers were stopped from entering the work place and prevented from doing their duties since April , 1996 . Thought they were regularly reporting for duty but they were not permitted to enter into the premises .

12. It is stated that the management has neither issued any chargesheet nor any order of termination . All the workers have completed 240 days service in a calendar year. They are entitiled to reinstatement with full back wages, interest and compensation. The action of the management is also unfair labour practice This is also an act of victimization and action taken was not in good faith . It is further stated that during the pendency of dispute several workers have died. The Hon'ble Supreme Court appears to have directed the Central Government to make reference in SLP No. 23895/2002 vide order dated 8-12-2003 .

13. It is also stated that 2040 workers filed cases under Minimum wages Act before the Hon'ble High Court wherein W.A.34/2006 and W.A. 83/2006 the Hon'ble Court has held Minimum Wages is applicable and directed to pay the minimum wages . On the basis of above facts , It is submitted that the action of the management in terminating the services of 3404 minę workers in April 1996 who ceased to be contract labour after prohibition of the employment ofcontract labour in lime stone mine vide notification No. S.O. 707 dated 17-3-93 was illegal , unfair and unjustified andthey are entitiled for reinstatement with full back wages.

14. The contention of the management is that the reference is bad for non -application of mind because the issues which were not in dispute or covered in the minutes ofthe conciliation officer dated 12-8-2002 , are also referred in the reference and also its excess of jurisdiction which are to be adjudicated by other adjudicating authorities .

15. It is stated that the Union should produce copy ofits certificate of registration establish its true identity. The reference that they ceased to be contract labour after publication of notification dated 17-3-93 , shows non- application ofmind as certain disputed facts relating to the employment ofthe workmen appear to have been presumed .

16. It is admitted that SAIL is Government of India undertaking and is a State under the constitution of India and has steel plants in different parts of India. It is also admitted that SAIL has one of the captive Lime Stone and dolomite mine in Kuteshwar in the District of now Katni of Madhya Pradesh . It is also admitted that certain wage agreements were entered in to at the level of NJCS where representative of main steel producers and their Unions representing their workman were parties . The said 6342

[PART II-SEC. 3 (ii ) ] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 17 , 2009/ ASVINA 25 , 1931

agreement also provided that the parties to the agreement would review the progress made in these areas . Some of the relevant clause are reproduced below:-

"AGREEMENT PROVISIONS IN RELEVANT DATED CLAUSE

27-10-1970 : Clause 6.4. Abolition of contractor's Labour

and Abolition) Central Rules , 1971 to decide whether the type ofwork performed is same or similar in nature to the type of work done by the workmen directly employed by the management . However it is denied that the contract labour did same work as the rear workers . It stated that the dispute of wages being paid to the contract labour has been separately agitated by the union before Regional Labour Commissioner (C) under the Minimum Wages Act who happens to be competent authority under the Act .

It is an agreement in principle that the industry shall not employ labour through contract or sorengage contractors labour injobs of permanent and perennial nature . The progress of implementation of this clause will be reviewed by this Committee from time to time .

5-7-1989 : 8.0 : General .

8.1 :Abolition of Contract Labour .

8.1. : Industry shall not employ labour through contractor or engage contractor's labour on jobs of permanent and perennial nature .

19. It is stated that there in no violation ofthe rights of the Contract Labour , rather the management was ensuring that the contractors were complying the provision ofCLRA Act, 1970. It is denied that the contract of the contractors was sham and camouflage and they were mere commission against . The contractors were to produce lime stone of specified grades and specified size at specified rates of production . Penalties were also provided for deviation in the contract. The management of Kuteshwar Lime Stone Mine inspected and ensured that lime stone of agreed grade and size were being sent to the Steel Plants as itwas provided under the Mines Act . It is denied that the management of Kuteshwar Lime Stone Mine was exercising the power of supervision or were disciplinary authority. The contract labours were employed by the contractors and they were supervised and controlled by them for all purposes .

8.1.2 Jobs of permanent and perennial nature , which are at presant being done departmentally will continue to be done by regular employees .

8.1.3 : Implementation of this clause and the progress made thereon will be reviewed by NJCS every three months .

3.5 : General .

18-5-1995

3.5.1 : Abolition of Contract Labour

20. It is admitted that SAIL did blasting work as this work had been departmentalized by Notification No. S. 16025/88/ 77-LW/W dated 15-12-1979 w.e.f. 22-6-1980 . It is true that many of the activities of the mines have been going for long periods . Contractors were engaged who did some of the mining activities through contract labours where it was difficult to use machineries . It was done by invitingtenders.

3.5.1.1 Jobs of permanent and perennial nature , will continue to be done by regular employees .

21. It is stated that the notification was issued by the Government of India vide notification No. S.O. 707 dated 17-3-93 without proper application of mind in the light of Sec.- 10(2) of the CLRA Act by the Government and by the Committee specially constituted for the purpose . The said notification prohibited the employment of contract labours in the lime stone and doloimit mines in the following jobs- 3.5.1.2 : Industry shall not employ labour through contractors or engage contractors ' labours on jobs of permanent and perennial nature .

( 1 ) . Raising of mineral including breaking , sizing, sorting lime stone/dolomite , and

3.5.1.3 : limplementation of this clause and the progress made thereon will be reviewed by NJC periodically.

(2) Transportation of limestone and dolomite which includes loading into and unloading from trucks , dumpers , conveyors and transportation from Mine site to factory. "

17. It is stated that there is no violation of the above agreement and no right accrues to contract labour nor the alleged Union raised any dispute about the non- implementation of the said agreement . It is denied that at any time 5000 contract labourers were employed by the contractors engaged by SAIL at Kuteshwar Lime Stone Mine.

The said notification also includes transportation on public roads for which the Central Govt . is not the appropriate Government. The defect was sought to be amended or modified by notification dated 4-7-96 but the Govt. was not competent whenthe jobs for abolitions Contract Labour was notified.

18. The further contention is that the Chief Labour Commissioner (C) has exclusive jurisdiction under the provision of Rule 25 ( 2) ofthe Contract Labour ( Regulation [भाग- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

6343

भारत का राजपत्र: अबसूबर 17, 2009/आश्विन 25 , 1931

22.It is stated that M/s . Eastern Mineral Trading Agency (EMTA) working at Kuteshwar filed writ petition before the Hon'ble Calcutta High Court and similarwrits were also filed by other contractors wherein the Hon'ble Calcutta High Court passed interim order. The Union also had filed writ. Thereafter the contractor abandoned the work in 1997 and had closed its establishment at Kuteshwar. Having no interest in writs the Hon'ble Court dismissed on 1-4-1998 and the stay was vacated. However some other contractors had also filed writ before the Hon'ble CalcuttaHigh Court challenging the notification dated 17-3-1993 where in the Hon'ble Calcutta High Court also passed orders in 1994 restraining the respondents including theUnion of India and SAIL from giving affect to the said notification and the said stay orders a still in force .

23. It is denied that the workmen, who were in employment in 1993 are still in employment without any break from 17-3-1993 .It is stated that the services ofthe contract labourers were terminated by the contractors. some time in Manch 1996 who were their employers . It is stated that there was no relationship ofmaster and servant between the management of SAIL, and the contract labourers. The contracts with the contractors had also come to an end and therefore it is denied that the workers were prevented from enteringmines by SAIL from 1996 onwards . It is denied that the contract labourer had worked for 5 to 20 yearsat Kuteshwar Lime Stone Mines rather it was vague and general assertion . It is submitted that no dispute awardbe passed.

24. On thebasis of pleadings ofboth the parties , the following issues are re-cast for adjudication- 1. Whether the reference R/40/03 is maintainable?

II. Whether the employments of the workmen through contractors is sham and bogus and whether the employment is considered to be direct employment by the management ?

HI. Whether the Action of the Mines Manager, Kuteshwar Lime Stone Mines of the Steel AuthorityofIndia Ltd. in terminating the services of3404(3380+ 24 ) as per list attached mine workers inApril, 1996 who ceased to be contract labour after prohibition of employment of contractlabour in lime stone mine vide Notification No. S.O. 707 dated 17-3-1993 was legal , fair and justified?

IV. Whether the said contract workers/heirs are entitiled the terminal benefits of gratuity, retrenchment compensation and ex = gratia applicable toVRS from SAIL?

V. Whether Lime Stone Mines violated the provision ofClause- 8 of the memorandum of agreement singedbetween the SAIL, New Delhi and their Union and employing workers through contractors on job of Permanent and perennial naturewas justified legal and fair?

3633 G1 /00-25

VL Whether the workman/heirs are entitled to the wages to the post in which they were engaged with parity with that of regular employees ofthe management with all consequential benefits?

VIL Any other relief, the workmen/heirs are entitled to?

25. Before discussing on issues, it is proper to enumerate the admitted facts on the basis of the pleadings ofboth the parties. The following facts are admitted facts- 1. SAIL is Government of India undertaking and is State under the constitution of India and has steel plants in different parts of India.

2. SAIL has one of the captive lime stone and Dolomite Mines in Kuteshwar in the District of Katni ofMadhya Pradesh.

3. Lime stone and dolomite are necessary ingredients ofmanufacture of steels.

4. The Notification No. S.O. 707 dated 17-3-93 was issued and published by the Government of India whereby prohibited with effect from the date of publication of this notification the employments ofcontract Labour in the works specified in the following schedule in the Lime Stone and DolomiteMines in the country namely:

SCHEDULE

a. Raising ofminerals including breaking, sizing, sorting ofLimeStoneDolomite and, b. Transportation of limestone and dolomite which includes loading and unloading from trucks, dumpers , conveyors and transportation froms mine site to Factory.

5. The SAIL did blasting work as this had been departmentalized by Notification No. S. 16025/88/ 77-LW/Wdated 15-12-1979 w.e.f. 22-6-1980.

6. The Contract labours of the contractors at Kuteshwar Lime Stone Mines were doing the same jobs as enumerated in schedule ofthe Notification No. S.O. 707 Dated 17-3-1993.

26. IssueNo. -

The first and foremost point for consideration is the statues of the contract labours . It the contract is foundto besham and bogus, the so called contract labour will have tobe treated as employees of the Principal employer or if the contract is found to be genuine, the so called contract labour will have to be treated as employees of the contractors hefore the issuance of Notification dated 17-3-1993 Prohibiting the employment of contract Labour. It thereafterthe contract labours or contractors are engaged bythe principal employer or the contractors , the statue is further to be determined of these called contract labour.

27. To determine the statues of the contract labour , the factual aspects are to be examined . The Union and the management have examined oral and documentary evidence 6344

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 17 , 2009/ ASVINA 25 , 1931

[PART II-SEC. 3 (ii ) ]

labouer . The witness Kaushal Kishore Tiwari admitted that he worked on the direction of the officer of the contractor till the year 1996. He has fully supported the case of the management .

in the case . The definite case of the Union is that the management (SAIL) has employed 5000 labourers on permanent and perennial nature of work from May, 1979 onwards in their captive mines at kuteshwar . It is also stated that wages of the workers were paid by SAIL and the contractors were commission agent . All the workers who were in employment on 17-3-1993 continued to work with outbreak . The SAIL had economic contral as well as had power to terminate the services . The management supplied tools and had power to supervise the work.

31. In the reference Case No. CGIT/ LC/R/21 /05 the Union has examined 74 witnesses . Out of these witnesses 13 witnesses namely Phulchand Kewat , Ramvishal Kewat, Kallu Kewet, Kali Bai, Mira Kol , Jamuna Singh Gond, Namai Sahu , Saukhi Lal Kol, Daddi Vishwakarma, Kachedi Kol , Jagdish Vishwakarma, Lalla Patel and Mira Bai have stated in their cross examination that the lawyer has prepared the affidavits and they have only either signed or given L.T.1 . on it . The affidavits are the examination - in chief of the witnesses as provided under order 18 Rule 4 of the C.P.C. The another peculiar circumstances also show that all the evidence(exammation - in -chief) by affidavits except few in number are same even full stop and comma except names and year denoting the year of service. The clear inference is to be drawn that these evidences (examination - in chief) are not of the witnesses and it is a misuse of the process of law.

32. The two witnesses namely Shri Mangal Gadari and Shri Kodulal Kol are also examined in Case No. R/40/ 03. Their evidence has already been discussed earlier.

28. The oral evidence adduced by the union paints deferent pictures . In reference case No. CGIT/ LC/R/40/03 , the union has examined 16 witnesses as where in reference case No. CGIT/LC/R /21 /05 , 74 witnesses are examined . Two witnesses are common in both cases . The witness Nathulal Pandey is General Secretary of HMS Union . He is not worker of the said mines . He has visited only twice there. He has admitted that the labourers were engaged by the contractors . He has no personal knowledge . He came to know from the workers ofthe mines . He has not disclosed the name as towho had told him . He appears to be hear say witness . He has stated that he entered in to the mine without any permission . Mines Act prohibits entry into the mine without permission of the Mines Manager. His visit in the mines appears to be doubtful . The witness Jagdish Prasad Tiwari is president of Bokaro Steel Lime Stone Mines Workers Union. He is also not an employee of Kuteshwar mine.

33. Other witnesses in cross -examination have stated in his evidence that wage slips and Identity Cards were issued to them . The photocopies ofwage slips and Identity Cards show that it were issued by the respective contractors . This shows that the respective contractors paid wages to the contract labours and in evidence few of the witnesses have also supported payment by contractors. The Identity Cards further show that the contract labours were employees of the contractors . The Photocopies of Provident Fund slips are also filed by the witnesses of the Union but these slips do not disclose the name of the employer. It is difficult to say from these photocopies of P.F. Slips that the contritbutions ofthe P.F. of the workmen were deposited either by the contractor or by Principal employer . However few of the witnesses ofthe Union have stated that half of the provident fund amount was deposited by the contractors . This shows that the witnesses have supported the case of the management that the contractor labours were of the contractors .

29. The witnesses Mangal and Kodulal are also examined in Case No. R/21 /05 . Initially they have stated that the duties , were allotted by the SAIL officer. Attendance was taken by the SAIL, payment was made by SAIL but they were enrolled in the list of contractors . Subsequently in cross -examination , they have stated that before 17-3-1993 they were workers of the contractor and payment was done by the contractors . Wage slips are filed which show that the wages were being paid by the contractors . There is no such pleading of the Union and is a new case that before the notification , the workers were of the contractors and wages are being paid by them . The case of the management is that they were workers of the contractors from the very beginning and evidence of the union also supports the case of the management..

34. Now let us examine the documentary evidence adduced on behalf of the Union . The Union has filed the following documents in Case No. CGIT/LC/R/40 /03 . Exhibit W- 1 is the order of reference dated 14-5-97 ofthe Ministry of Labour . This is filed to show that the reference was made earlier to this Tribunal whereby a case was registered which was numbered as CGIT /LC/ R/ 120 /97 . This reference shows that the contract labours of Kuteshwar Lime Stone Mines raised issue for appointment in view of the Notification No. 707 dated 17-3-93 . This document appears to be not helpful to the Union rather it appears that they were not in the employment of SAIL . Exhibit W-2 is the 30. The other witnesses examined in R/ 40/03 have also supported the facts that they were appointed by the contractors and they worked under their supervision before notification dated 17-3-1993 . Thereafter they were employees of the SAIL. They have also supported this fact that half of the P. F. Amount of the workers were deposited by their respected contractors . This fact supports the case of the management . They have also admitted that wages slips and Identity cards were issued to them . These documents show that it were issued by the respective contractors . These facts clearly show that there was complete control of the contractors on the contract 6345 [भाग II-खण्ड 3 (ii ) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : अक्तूबर 17, 2009/आश्विन 25 , 1931

by the Union do not establish that they were employees of the SAIL and the contract was sham and bogus .

Notification dated 24-7-03 of Ministry of Labour whereby the Ministry published the award (Reference No. 120/97 of thisTribunal . The award ofthe above reference was passed inCase No. CGIT /LC/R/ 120/07 and in compliance ofthe order passed in LAP 326/97 in Steel Authority of India Ltd. Versus Ispat Khadan and another. This reference case was dismissed with no order as to cost. This award is also of no use to the Union .

37. In reference Case No. CGIT/LC/ R/21 /05 , the Union has also adduced documentary evidence . Exhibit W- 1 isthe order of reference dated 14-5-97 of the Govt . of India . This order is also filed in R.40/03 . Exhibit,W-2 is the order sheets ofCase No. R/ 120/97 . Exhibit W-4 is the award ofR/ 120/97. It is also filed in the earlier reference . The relevancy is also discussed earlier . Exhibit W-3 to Exhibit W-6 , Exhibit- 11 to Exhibit 18 are the different representations to the authorities and a complaint to the Human Rights Commission. These documents are common documents which were also filed in Case No. R/40/03 .

38 Exhibit W- 8 to W- 10 and Exhibit W-56 are the news published in daily news papers . These news items have no evidentiary value . Exhibit W- 19 is the Notification No. S.O. 707 dated 17-3-93 . It is an admitted document whereby under Sec . - 10 , Sub- Section ( 1 ) ofthe CLRA Act, 1970 , the Central Government , after consultation with the Central Advisory Contract Labour Board Prohibits with from the date of publication of this notification the employment of contract labour in the works specified in the schedule.

35. Exhibit W- 3 to W - 13 are the representations sent by Shri Bachan Nayak, President of the union to different authorities for regularization and payment of wages ofthe contract labours employed through the alleged contractors in Kuteshwar Lime Stone Mines . It is raised by the Union that the Central Government in exercise of powers under Sec . - 10 ( 1 ) of the CLRA Act, 1970 has prohibited the employment of contract labour in Lime Stone andDolomite mines by Notification dated 17-3-1973 . It is also raised in the representations that the Hon'ble Apex Court inthe case of Air India Statutory Corporation Versus United Labour Union and others ( 1997) 9 S.C.C. 377 has held that when Contract Labour is abolished the persons employed through the contractors will be employees of the management ( SAIL) . The above case ofthe Apex Court is over ruled by another judgement of the Apex Court reported in (2001 ) 7 SCC1 National Water Front Workers and others . Thus these representation to the different authorities simply show that the Union only raised the demand for regularization of the service.

39. Exhibit - 20 to Exhibit W-37 are the representations for regularization and its correspondence of the respective authorities . These documents do not establish the point in dispute, rather it simply shows that the matter was agitated bytheUnion.

40. ExhibitW/38 is the membership register of the Union . This register is of Ispat Khadan Janta Mazdoor Union, Kuteshwar Lime Mine Stone of the year 1997. This isnot ofthe relevant period . Exhibits W/39 to W/54 are the photocopies ofthe Identity Cards, Pay slips , PF slips etc. submitted by the contract labour which are filed as Articles containing contract labours from 1 to 3079. The original of these photocopies are not filed . It is supposed that it were in the possession of the workers . However on perusal of these wage slips and Identity Cards it is clear that it were issued by the respective contractors of the contract labours. The inference is to be drawn that wages were being paid by the contractors to the contract labour. The Identity Cards have also identified the contract labours of the respective contractors . These documents support the case of the management . These wage slips and Identity Cards do not show that all 3079 were also working after the notification dated 17-3-93 without break because number of these documents are also of prior to the notification . ExhibitW- 55 are the photocopies of death certificate of 65 deceased workmen .

41. On the other hand , the management has also adduced oral and documentary evidence in both reference cases. In caseNo. R/40/2003 , the management has examined two witnesses and in Case No. R/21 /2005, three witnesses are examined . Out of these witnesses , Shri T. K. Dhali and Shri R. K. Jha are common witnesses in both the reference 36. Exhibit W- 14 is the copy of the complaint case filedbefore the National Human Rights Commission , New Delhi . This is filed to show that the matter was raised before the Commission for compensation to the heirs of the deceased workmen or to give employment to them . Thiscomplaint before the Commission does not prove the point for consideration . Exhibit W- 15 is the contents of terms of agreement. This is filed to show that it is Bipartite agreement in NJCS . This agreement appears to be applicable to those employees who were employees of SAIL and TISCO . Contract labours were parties to the agreement. It is yet to be decided that as to whether the contract labours are deemed to be employees of the SAIL. Thisagreement does not substantiate the case ofthe union . W- 16 is the Memorandum of Agreement . This is a bipartite agreement . This appears to be for regular employees ofthe SAIL . Exhibit- 17 is a press release . It has no evidentiary value . Exhibit 18 is a circular of SAIL , Raw Materials Division with respect to the voluntary retirement Scheme- 1999. This is for regular/ permanent employees . Annexure- I is same which is Exhibit- 18 . Annexure A- 1 is Exhibit- 16 . Annexure -A-2 is Memorandum ofUnderstanding of NJC for the Steel Industry. This is also for employees of the SAIL and was not for contract labour. Annexure A-4 is so called list furnished ofthe workmen who expired out of3403 applicants . Annexure A -5 is the same Press Release who has no evidentiary value. Thus the documentary evidences adduced 6346

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 17, 2009 /ASVINA 25 , 1931

cases . Now let us examine the oral evidence adducedby the management. Management witness Shri T.K. Dhali was posted at Raw Materials division , Kolkata since 16-6-93 and was looking after the job of Personnel functions including the job of Industrial Relations in RMD Mines . Hehas stated in his evidence that as per contract agreement and as per Section - 12 of CLRA Act, the contractors were responsible for obtaining the contract labour licence from the labour authority and the same were obtained and also renewed from time to time. He has supported this fact that the contract agreements were singed between the SAIL and the contractors and the contractors as the employees were responsible for making payment of wages to the contract labours and to comply all the statutory obligations. Hehas stated that the management as a principal employer wasonly responsible to certify the payment of wages made by the contractors and to ensure that contract labours were being paid according to Minimum Wages Act . The contractors were exercising exclusive control over the contract labours and tools and equipments were supplied by the contractors as per term of the contract. He has further stated that the contract labours went on strike in the month ofApril - 1996 as such , the contractors terminated the services of the contract labour . The evidence shows that the contractors had full controls over the work and also on workers.

42. Shri P.S. Nair, the Learned Senior Counsel for the Union has drawn attention of the cross examination of Shri T.K. Dhali of the case No. R/40/2003 and also Paras- 31,35,36,37 & 38 of the case No. R/21 /2005 : This witness has stated in cross- examination that the management maintained records in respect of Kuteshwar as per the provision ofMinimum Wages Act, Mines Act, Mines Rules .The Kuteshwar Mine maintained the form B , C, D, E as per the MinesAct . Form B for about 1500 workers are maintained duringthe period of 1993 to 1995. He has further stated that the contractors were maintaining Form B up to 1995 under the supervisions of the Mines Manager . The work ofblasting was being supervised by the Mines Manager . It is an admitted fact that the blasting work was departmentalised.

43. Thiswitness has further stated that the original documents are available in Kuteshwar Mine . He has verified the original documents . He has stated that he has prepared affidavit based on information received from office records . He has seen wage sheets of 600-700 workers of 1993 and copies of2000 notices issued to the workers by the contractors . He has also seen wage sheets of contractors namely M.C.C. and Singhal Enterprises . There wereeight contractors and all of them were preparing wage sheets . He has stated that he has not filed those documents before the Tribunal . He has also admitted that he had not worked in Kuteshwar Lime Stone at any time . Inviting tender issue of work order /intent were not his work . He has stated that a copy of the wage sheet are kept in the

[PART II-SEC. 3(ii) ] office of SAIL and had seen the entire wage sheet . He has also admitted this fact that there is a wage settlement in SAILwhich is known as National Joint Committee for Steel Industry (NJCS ) . He has further stated that Form B was prepared by the contractors and countersigned by the MinesManager. One copy is kept by the contractor . He hadseenthose Form B registered before preparing affidavit ofabout 1500-1600 workers . No.worker can work without the permission of Mines Manager . Mining area is prohibited . The identities of the workers were being checked through Attendance Register . Management has filed photocopy of the wage sheet which were with the management . Exhibit M/10 at pages 1te 62 do not bear any singature . The original wage sheet (Para 13 to 61 ) do not bear signature ofany person The wage sheet (Para- 1to 12) do not bear the signature ofthe verifying officer but he has stated in his evidence that in the original wage sheet, the contractor had signed on each and every page and in the last page, the verifying officer had also signed over it , Shri R. Prasad, the then Junior Manager verified on the wage sheet .

44. In case No. R/21 /2005, this witness had stated in cross -examination that these contractors were also given contract before 1990 and the workers of the contractors were almost same as on 17-3-1993 : He has stated that the contractors and workers worked under the premises of SAILand materials produced by the contractors were used by the SAIL . About 2200 workers of the contractors were on strike on April- 1996. The contractors terminated their services when they did not join duty. He has stated that they had details of number of workers but they had not filed in Court. The management only verified that the contract is implemented or not . He has stated that the SAIL has not filed anypetition challenging the notification dated 17-3-1993. It appears that there is nothing in his evidence to show that the contract was sham and bogus . Shri P. S. Nair, Advocate, the Learned Senior Counsel submitted that the documents of Form B was in his possession but intentionally it is withheld and as such adverse inference is to be drawn . Shri R. C. Shrivastava, the learned counsel for the management stated that the burden is on the union to prove the contract as sham and bogus and as such , it is not incumbent upon the management to produce those documents .

45. Another management witness Shri R. K. Jha is also examined in both the reference cases . He was posted atKuteshwar Lime Stone Mines as AGM (M) w.e.f. January, 1996 till July , 2005 and was looking after the job of Mines Manager . He has stated that the SAIL KTR floated tender notices on different times for the job of raising of approved SMS grade Limestone from Kuteshwar Lime StoneMines and for transporting the same to the Railway siding at Khana banjari and loading the same into Railway wagons . Eight contractors . Whom he has named were awarded contracts and contract agreements were entered 6347 [ भाग 11- खण्ड 3(ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : अक्तूबर 17, 2009/आश्विन 25, 1931

ofthe management. The contractors kad full control over the contract labours and the work. The responsibility of the mangomont mas only to see fut dic cuteeds wore working aconding to the contract agreement and was also to ensure that contractors were complying the various provision ofthe labour laws andActs.

49. The management witness Shri Mishra has been cross examined at length by the Union . He has stated that he had seen the agresmont and wage sheets of eight contractors . He has stated that inviting tender, scrutiny, execution of agreements , issue of work orders etc. were not done by me . He has supported the fact that from 1992 to 1996 tender agreement was executed in his presence but hewas not involved . He has admitted that Form B register with these contractors which are marked as Exhibit M/ 1 to M78 He has further stated that contractors' workers worc never supervised by the employee of the SAIL management . The SAIL, management mod to discharge a statutory liability as envisaged in the CLRA Act, Mines Act and other labour laws . The managements has taken due care that the labour laws are strictly followed by the contractors and in this regard number of clauses in the contract agreement has been entered into . The SAIL management used to make payment as per terms of the contract . He has further stated that after notification dated 17-3-93 prohibited employment of contract labours , the contractors filed several writ petitions before the Hon'ble Calcutta High Court making SAIL as party and Hon'ble High Court granted stay order restraining the SAIL management from giving effect to the notification. The learned counsel for the management submits that the evidence of the management witness has established the stand of the SAIL that the contract is genuine.

46. In reference Case No. R/40/2003 , he has been cross-examine at length by the Union. He has stated that he did not execute any agreement prior to 1996. He has stated thatthe contract labour were abolished w.e. f. 17-3-1993which came intoeffect on the same date . There was no stay against thenotification for the period 17-3-1993 to 15-4-1994. He has further stated that the materials produced by the contract labours were used by the SAIL and the contractors were given advance payment to the tune of Rs . 25 lakhs . He has also stated that blasting work was carried out by SAIL employees and there was arbitration cases during his tenure.

was maintained by contractor as well as the manageenent Hewas unable to say as towhether the agreement in respect ofM/s Singhal was finalized in his presence but he was givencontract in the year 1991.He had seen wage sheet of oneweek ofM/s Singhal Enterprises ofAugust, 1994. The said document was singed by the Welfare Officer, representative of the management. He has stated that500- 600 labourswere working in Railway siding and 1500-1600 labours wereworking in the mines. He cannot say that the labour licence was produced by the contractor and the samewas ofwhich period . He had not seen the documents to be kept by the principal employer in Form XII under Rule-74. He had seen muster roll and identity Cards at the officer oftheSAIL which were submitted by the contractors . He has stated that the contribution with regard to the P. F. werebeing deducted by the SAIL and when the contractors deposited the same , the same amount was released to the contractors . He has also stated that the contractors were not paidadvance payment only mobiliation payment were beingpaid. Hehas stated that there was no stay from 1993 to 1994, till the stay erder. This witness appears to have stood the test of cross-examination. He appears to be competentwitness as the contract took place in his presence and he was in the mine in the relevant period.

47. He was also been cross- examined in the Case No.R/21/2005 . He has not posted during the period of1992 to 1996. He does not know that how many tender papers were received by the management. He came to know from contract agreement that the equipments were supplied by the contractors . He has not seen any document that the contractor had engaged any incharge but when he joined, he had seen the representative of the contractors has stated thathe had seenwage sheet for the period from 1992 to1995 and the same was certified by Shri R.Prasad, Welcare Officer on behalf of the management . He had also seen Form-B register maintained of the employees of this case . The stay order was produced by contractors in the year 1994. The contractors had labour licence as such they were continuing thework. He has stated that as far as the safety of mines and work isconcerned , the management used to give directions . There is nothing in his evidence to impeach the credit ofthe witness . There is minor contradictions with other witness which is bound to occur. However , the evidence of this witness supports the case of the management .

50. The management has also adduced documentary evidence in both the reference cases . Eight contract documents (M/1 to M/8) are filed in Case No. R/40/2003 and the same six contract documents (M/1 to M/6) are also filed inR/21 /05 . Copy oflicence granted to contractors (M/ 9), copyofwage sheets ( 4/10 ) , copy ofMotification dated 4-7-96(M- 11 ), copy of the order of the Hon'bie High Court dated 11-4-94and 15-4-94 (M/ 12), copy of notices (M/13) issued to contract labours by the contractors, copy of termination letter (M/ 14) , issued by contractors in R/40/ 2003,Register ofwages ofM/s Singhal Enterprises (M/7in R/21/2005 ) and letter ofthe contractor to the Sr. Manager , SAIL (M/s in R/21/2005) relating to dismissal/transfer of the contract labours are filed and adduced in evidence.

48. The management witness Shri A.K. Mishra is examined in case No. R/21 /05 . Hewas posted at Kuteshwar Lime Stone Mines as Junior Manager during the period from 1983 to 1997. Similarly he has also supported the case

51. Now let us examine the contract documents filed bythe management which are marked as M/ 1 to M/8 in R/ 40/03 and M/ 1 to M/6 in R/21 /03 . Shri P.S. Nair , the learned 6348

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 17 , 2009/ ASVINA 25 , 1931

[PART II-SEC. 3 ( ii)]

remained the same although the contractors were changing from one to another . The terms and conditions of contract referred by the Union are reproduced below:--

"The contractors is prohibited from bringing any labour force from outside . He should engage the same labour force already working in the mines and whose names are entered in Form-B relating to contract labour, the Mines Act. "

Terms and conditions of contract [ clause 6.8 (2 ) ] senior counsel for the Union submitted that no original/ carbon copy of the documents were produced till the case is closed for arguments . I don't agree with this view of the learned senior counsel for the Union because the order dated 12-8-09 passed in R/ 21 /05 shows that the original contract documents were filed while the evidence of the managements was going on . Another objection raisedby Shri Nair, the Learned Senior Counsel that the documents have not been produced in accordance with the evidence Act and contract doucments ( M/ 1to M/ 6) are photocopy of the agreement executed between the management and the contractors .

" TheEngineer /Mines Manager shall be at liberty to object to and require the contractor to remove forthwith the works any person employed by the contractor in or about the execution or maintenance of the works who in the opinion oftheEngineer/ Mines Manager misconducts himself or is incompetent or negligent in the proper performance of his duties of whose employment is otherwise considered by the Engineer/ Mines Manager to be undesriable and such person shall not be given employed upon the works without the written permission of the Engineer/Mines Manager."

54. The management has referred the terms and conditions of the contract to establish the fact that the contract is genuine . The management referred the relevant portion of terms and conditions which are reproduced below-

"General conditions of contract-

52. Shri R. C. Shrivastava , Learned counsel for the management submitted that the Union in its statement of claim filed in reference Case No. R/21 /2005 has reproduced the terms and conditions of the contract and has relied on the said terms and conditions whereas during the course of argument , the Union questioned the validity of the contracts saying that the said contracts are not genuine and are sham contracts . Therefore the Union cannot be allowed to take inconsistent pleas and cannot approbate and reprobate the said contract. That on behalf of the management, all the contract documents have been filed and are duly proved . Shri R.C. Shrivastava , the learned Counsel for the management submitted that the Union witnesses have also not taken a definite stand with regard to their appointment . The Union's wintesses sometimes stated that they were appointed by SAIL management and sometimes say that they are the employers of the contractors . It is submitted that the Union cannot be permitted to take inconsistent plea. The management has placed reliance on ajudgment reported in JT 2006 ( 12 ) S.C. 294 Steel Authority of India Ltd. Versus Union of India and others where the Hon'ble Apex Court has held that

Clause 4 provides the extent , scope and period of contract . It provides in detail how the work is to be executed by the contractor and further provides that the contractor has to make his arrangement at his own cost for lighting , ladders , tools , buckets , spades etc. , trucks, dumpers labours , and all other equipments , power , water which may be required to carry out the work .

Ciause 6.4 provides for security deposits which is kept for due and faithful performance of the contract .

Clause 6.8 provides for the employment of labour by the contractor.

Clause 7 provides that the contractor will be responsible for compliance for statutory rules and regulations for payment ofwages etc. , for the labours employed by him . Clause7.3.1 provides for minimum wages by the contractor to his labours .

Clause 7.3.2 provides the amenities to be provided by the contractors to this labours .

" The workman whether before the Labour Court or in writ proceedings were represented by the same Union . A trade union registered under the Grade Unions Act is entitled to espouse the cause of the workmen . A definite stand was taken by the employees that they had been working under the contractors .It would thus, in our opinion not lie in their mouth to take a contradictory and inconsistent plea that they were also the workmen ofthe principal employer . To raise such a mutually destructive plea is impermissible in law . Such mutually destructive plea , in our opinion , should not be allowed to be raised even in an industrial adjudication. Common law principles of estopple , waiver and acquiescence are applicable in an industrial adjudication ."

Clause 9.3.1 provides for levey of demurrage in case of delay in loading the wagons .

Clause 10 provides for the measurement of the quantity of limestone executed by the contractor .

I find force in the arugment of Shri R. C. Shrivastava, the learned cousel for the management . I find that there is inconsistent plea of the Union and common law principles ofestoppel ,waiver and acquiescence are applicable in the case.

Clause 11 provides for the terms of payment

Clause 12 provides for remedies and powers and the right of SAIL to terminate the contract in case of failure of the 53. However , Shri Nair , the learned senior counsel for the union submitted that the workers were under the contract of the SAIL management and the workers 6349 [भाग 11- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : अक्तूबर 17, 2009/आश्विन 25 , 1931

contractor to perform in accordance to the terms and conditions of the contract .

Clause 15 provides for settlement of disputes and appointment of arbitrator.

Special conditions ofContract-

Clause 1 to 6 provides the object of the contract and the location and nature ofdeposit .

Clause 17 &21 provides for all tools and tackles were tobe arranged by the contractor for proper execution of work.

56. Shri P.S. Nair learned senior counsel for the Union referred wage sheets maintained by M/ s . Singhal Enterprises which is marked as Exhibit M/7 . It is for the period from 9-1-94 to 22-1-94 in respect of253 workers . It is submitted thatthere is no siginature ofeither the contractor or the representative of the principal employer. The singature on the back of the last page is not proved by the management witness . It is submitted that admittedly there is no certification by the Principal Employer . It is further submitted that the sheets of register of wages , which is so called maintained by 1.S.S. Company for about 120 workers , have neither been proved not admitted by the Union .

Clause 25V11 provides for different forms/ registers to be maintained by the contractor .

Clause 29 provides for payment of all statutory dues like wages , provident fund etc. to his labours ."

57. Shri R. C. Shrivastava, learned counsel for the management submitted that it is incorrect to say that there is no singature of the contractors or his representative . It is clear from perusal of the wage sheets that the representative of the contractor had done initials with seal on each and every sheet . It also appears from perusals of the original that the representative ofthe management had certified with seal but it was erased. The wage sheets maintainedby I.S.S. Company had also been initialed on each and every page by the representative of the I.S.S. Companyand signed on the back of last page. It is submitted thatthe representative of the mangement had certified on the back of last page . It is further submitted that in cross examination , the management witnesses have supported that Shri R. Prasad had certified on behalf of the management.

Onthe submission of both the parties, it is clear that the agreement of contract is to be seen as a whole and it will not be seen in piece meal . I do not fine any defect on the contract agreement and some riders are there . It appears that somewhere supervision power is given to the Mines Manager only to ensure the safety and to know that the provisions of Labour laws are being implemented . It also appears that the Mines Manager had also right to ensure that the agreement of contract is being properly implemented. It is evident that the agreement of contract is not sham and bogus rather the contractors had full controls over the contract labours and work. He had power of payment of wages to the contract labours and also disciplinary powers .

58. It is clear that the wage sheets was duly singed and certified . Moreover the Union has himself filed photocopies of the wage slips of contract labours which appeared to be the basis of the wage sheets . All the photocopies of the wage slips filed by the Union in the case appear to have been issued by the respective contractors . This itself establishes that the payment was being made to the contract labours by the respective contractors and not by the principal employer.

55. Shri P.S. Nair, Senior Counsel for the union had referred Exhibit M/ 1 clause at Page 17, Para 32 ofthe contract agreement whereby there was a clause to retain as far as possible old employees . It is submitted that it amounts to contral on engagement of workers by the management. The management submitted that the same is being done with an interest to protect the source of livelihood of the contract labours . The management has relied ajudgement reported in ( 1994) 5 SCC 304 R.K. Panda versus SAIL and others wherein the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that :-

" It is true that with the passage of time and purely with a view to safeguards the interests of workers , many principal employers while renewing the contracts have been insisting that the contractor or the new contractor retains the old employees. In fact such a condition is incorporated in the contract itself. However, such a clause in the contract which isbenevolently inserted in the contract to protect the continuance of the source of livelihood of the contract labour cannot by itself give rise to a right toregularization in the employment ofthe principal

employer ."

59. The union raised a point that photocopies of so called licence issued by the licensing authority are filed which ismarked as Exhibit M/9 in case No. R/21 /2005 . It is submitted that the management failed to prove those documents byadducing evidence and neither certified copy nor carbon copy nor the originals were filed before the Tribunal . It is submitted that renewal of the licence in some cases were done with delay and the managements has stated that the work were being continued without any break.Meaning thereby the contractors were permitted to workwithout there being valid licence . It is also submitted that no licence have been filed for the contractor M/s. Krishna Mehrotra. The management had simply filed letters dated 10-3-92 and 17-4-94 in connection with the licence of the said contractor. Those letters cannot be treated as licence issued by the licensing authority.

Thus it is clear that it cannot be said that the contract labours were employees of the SAIL and the contract was sham and bogus .

60. The Union submitted that Sec -7 and 9 of the CLRA Act require registration of employer and effect of 6350

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 17 , 2009/ASVINA 25 , 1931

[PART 11-SEC . 3 ( ii )] non-registration. In this case no certificate of registration has been filed or proved by the management . There is no contract without certificate . The Union has placed reliance inthe case ofHaryana State Electricity Board versus Suresh and others reported in 1993 (3 ) SCC 601 wherein the Hon'ble ApexCourt has held as follows:--

proceedings under Article 226 of the Constitution couldn't issue any mandamus for deeming the contract labour as having become the employees of the principal employer. This Court thus resolved theconflict ofopinions on the said question among variousHigh Courts. It was further held that neither the Act nor the Rules framed by the Central Government or any appropriate Government provided that upon abolition of the contract labour, the labourers would be directly absorbed by the principal employer."

Thus it is clear from the above submission that the contract will not be treated as sham and bogus and the contract labour will have not to be treated as employees of the SAIL and only consequence was the penal provisions under Sections 23 to 25 ofthe CLRAAct .

" It is also pertinent to note that nothing wasbrought onrecord to indicate that even the Board at the relevant timewas registered as the principal employer under the Contract Labour Regulation and Abolition Act . OncetheBoard was not a principal employer and the so-called contractor Kashmir Singh was not a licensed contractor under the Act, the inevitable conclusion thathad to be reached was to the effect that the so- called contractor system was a mere camouflage , smoke and a screen and disguised in almost a transparent veil which could easily be pierced and the real contractural relationship between the Board , in the one hand , and the employees on the other could be clearly visualized."

It issubmitted that there is no compliance with legal requirement . Onthis ground also, the contract is sham and bogus.

61. The learned counsel for the management submitted that Rule-29(2&3 ) ofCLRA Rules, 1971 provides that ifthe date of renewal expires and application is made, the licence shall be deemed to have been renewed until such date but even if it is true that there is vilation of provision of law, this may amount to violation of lawwhich may attract penal consequences but will neither confer any legal right on the contract labour for absorption any status higher than which they held. The management has placed reliance in Deva Nath and others National Fertilizers Ltd.Reported in (1992) 1 SCC 695 and the same is approved bythe Constitution Vench in Para 96 of SAIL and others Versus National Union Water Front Workers and others reported in (2001 ) 7-SCC- 1 . The Para 96 - is reproduced below-

62. It is urged on behalf of the union that Exhibit M/13 are so-called photocopies of notices issued by the contractorsto the contract labours . The management witnesses have stated that they have knowledge about the mode of services of these notices on the workers . Exhibit M/ 14 are the photocopies of alleged termination orders issued by the contractors . It is submitted that the signatures on those documents were not proved and the management witnesses was unable to say the mode of service of those orders on the workers . Therefore no cognizance can be taken on the documentary evidence led by management . The management submitted that when theworkers ofthe contractors went on strike, the services ofthe contract labours were terminated by the contractors. The management wintesses Mr. Dhali DGM ( Personnel ) inhis evidence at para- 16 of R/40/2003 has stated that whenthe contract labours ofthe contractors went on illegal strikes for which the contractors issued several notices to the labours tojoin their duties within 7 days failing which itwillbe presumed that they are not interested to work and their nameswill be struck offfrom the rolls of the company. Initially the contract labours joined their duties but after working for about one and half months, most ofthe contract labourswent on illegal strike and did not resume their duties and the contractors to that effected terminated their services and issued termination letters . The copies ofthe notices and termination letters were exhibited with the affidavitofMr. Dhali which are marked as Exhibit M/ 13 and M/ 14 . It also appears from the record that there is a specific case of the management that contractors terminated the service of the contract labours on their illegal strike. The witnesses of the union have not specifically denied that no notice was received and no termination letters were issued by the respective contractors rather they have stated that the principal employer had not terminated them from the service. Since there is no specific denial , I find that no prejudiced is caused to them.

"In Deva Nath case, a twoJudges Bench of this court considered the question , whether as a consequence of non-compliance with Sections 7 and 12 of the CLRA Act by the Principal employer and the licensee respectively the contract labour employed by the principal employer would become the employees of the principal employer . Having noticed the observation ofthe three-Judges Bench ofthis Court in Standard Vacuum case and having pointed out that guidelines enumerated in sub-section (2) of section 10 of the Act are practically based on the guidelines given by the Tribunal in the said case, it was held that the only consequence was the penal provisions under sections 23 and 25 as envisaged under the CLRA Act and that merely because the contractor or the employer had violated any provision of the Act or the Rules , the High Court in 6351 [भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र: अक्तूबर 17, 2009/आश्विन 25 , 1931

judgement of the Hon'ble Supreme Court reported in 1984 (3) SCC 161 wherein the Apex Court has held as follows:-

" Now it is obvious that the poor and is advantaged cannot possibly produce relevant materials before the court in support oftheir case and equally where an action is brought ontheir behalfby a citizen acting probono public, it would bealmost impossible for him to gather the relevant material andplace it before the Court. "

63. Management has also filed photocopy of letter addressed to the Senior Manager Mines , Kuteshwar , SAIL whereby it is informed that four workers were transferred and a worker was dismissed by the Contractor . This is filed to show that the cotractors had disciplinary powers against the contract labours . The management has also filed photocopies of the Hon'ble Calcutta High Court orders which are marked as Exhibit M/9 in Case No. R/21 /2005 and order dated 15-4-94 and 11-4-94 marked as Exhibit 12 in Case No. R/40/03 . These orders are filed to show that the operation ofthe notification dated 17-3-1993 was stayed in 1994 by the Hon'ble Calcutta High Court.

66. It is clear the that Learned Senior Counsel for the Union has not placed the entire facts . The Union preferred writ appeal No.34/2008 before the Hob'ble High Court of M.P, Jabalpur where the Hon'ble passed an order dated 4-3-08 . It was held as follows :-

"We accordingly set aside the order of the Tribunal and direct the Tribunal to record the oral evidence of those witnesses produced before him who are illiterate and are unable to understand the facts stated in the affidavit. This appeals is allowed . No. Cost . "

Itisevident that opportunity was given to the Union to adduce oral evidence but from the order dated 8-12-08 passed in R/21 /2005 , it appears that till date no witness was produced by the union for evidence . Thereafter the matter was pending for examination of witnesses on commission . The Union, thereafter, filed Review Petition No. 313 of 2009 before the Hon'ble High Court of M.P. Jabalpurwhereby the Hon'ble Court passed an order dated 17-2-2009 as follows :-

64. It is pertinent to note that the contract agreements entered between the SAIL and the contractors before the notification dated 17-3-1993 prohibited engagement of contract labours in specified works . M/s . Singhal Enterprises entered into agreement on 18-7-91 for three years and contract was extended for two years from 16-5-94 . M/s . EMTA was semi - mechanized contractors who entered into agreement on 6-4-1992 for four years . M/s. Power United entered into agreement on 29-7-1991 for three years and the contract agreement was extended for two years from 16-5-94 . M/s . I.S.S. Construction Companyentered into agreement on 18-7-91 for three years and contract agreement was extended on 16-5-94 for two years M / s . S.K. Mehrotra entered into agreement on 29-7-91 for three years and contract agreement was extended on 16-5-94 for two years M/s . R. H. Reddy was also semi- mechanized contractor who entered in to agreement on 10-4-90 for four years . Thereafter the contractor entered into supplementary contract agreement on 1-2-94 for three years . M /s . M. C.C. Entered into a contract on 7-12-83 . Thus all the agreements between the management and the contractors entered into prior to the notification dated 17-3-1993 prohibiting employment of contract labour and subsequently it was only extended . This shows that there was no fresh contract thereafter and there was no notification to restrict the contract of the contractors .

"Mr. Nair submitted that the applicant has already examined all the witnesses in reference No. 40/2003 and has also examined as many as 74 witnesses in Refeence No.21 /2005 . He submitted that if large number of witnesses as per the list furnished by the petitioner before the Tribunal are examined in Reference No. 21/2005 , there may be a delay ofone more year in disposal of the case by the Tribunals as stated by Mr. Dharmendra Sharma, learned ASG, on instructions from the Tribunal . Mr. Nair submitted that in the circumstances the applicant doesn't want to examine any furthe witness in Reference No. 21/2005 and that the evidence on behalf ofthe applicant may be treated as closed.

Mr. R.P. Agrawal learned Senior Counsel with Mr. R.C. Shrivastava, Advocate , submitted that four witnesses are proposed to be examined on behalf ofthe respondents before the Tribunal in Reference No 21/2005. These four witnesses may be examined before the Tribunal on behalf of the respondent within a month and the aforesaid two References will be answered by the Tribunal within two months from today."

67. Thus it is clear that Mr. Nair the senior counsel for the Union has himself conceded that he does not want 65. It is not out of place to mention that Shri P.S. Nair, Learned Senior Counsel for the Union has stated that vide order dated 24-10-2005 passed in case No. R/40/03 this Tribunal directed the Union to adduce evidence by way of affidavits . The union filed affidavit of the workers by way of evidence . Therefore their Advocates drafted affidavits as per instructions given by the workers . The Union then filed an application in Case No. R/21 /2005 praying therein that the Union be permitted to examine the workers orally instead of filing affidavits of the workers on the ground that the workers are extremely poor physically handicapped, illiterate . Advises and Harijans and recording their evidence by affidavit may not be appropriate . However the management opposed the prayer made by the Union . Hence this Tribunal vide order dated 31-10-2007 passed in Case No. R/21 /2005 dismissed the application . The learned senior counsel for the Union has placed reliance on

3633G1 /09-26 6352

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 17, 2009 /ASVINA 25 , 1931

[PART 11-SEC . 3(ii) ]

of the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court reported in 2004 ( 101 ( FLR) 137 Workmen of Nilgiri Cooperative Marketing Society Ltd. Versus State ofTamil Nadu & others The Hon'ble Apex Court has held that-

toexamine any further witness in Reference Case. No. R/ 21/2005 and the evidence is closed . Thus it is clear that the opportunity was given about one and half year to the Union to examine the witness but has not examined a single witness thereafter and on his request , the evidence of the union is closed.

68. Shri Nair, the Learned Senior Counsel for the Union submitted that the test of relationship between the employer and employee is laid down in the leading case of Hussian Bhai Versus Alat Factory reported in 1978 S.C. 1410 which is holding the court for the last 31 years . The Hon'ble Supreme Court has held as follows:-

"Determination ofthe vexed questions as towhether a contract is a contract of service or contract for service and whether the concerned employees are employees of the contractors has never been an easy task . No decision ofthis Court has laid down any hard and fast rule nor it is possible to do so . The question in each case has to be answered having regard to the fact involved therein . No single test be it controlled test , be it organization or any other test has been held to be the determinative factor for determining the jural relationship of employer and employees ."

"Thecontrol test and the organization test, therefore, are not the only factors which can be said to decisive . With a view of elicit the answer , the court is required to consider several factors which would have a bearing on the result (a) who is appointing authority; (b) who is the pay master, (c) who can dismiss , (d) how long alternative serviee lasts; ( e) the extent of control and supervision; (f) the nature of the job , e.g whether , it is professional or skilledwork; (g ) nature ofestablishment; (h) the right to reject."

71.Nowlet us sum up the evidence ofboth the parties inthe light of above tests-

( 1 ) The evidence shows that the respective contractors employed the contract labours for their own and they were the appointing authority.

"The true test may with brevity be indicated once again . Where a worker or group of workers labours to produce goods or services and these goods or services are for the business of another , that other is infact , the employer. He has economic control over the worker's subsistence , skill , and continued employment . If he , for anyreason. chokes off, the worker is virtually, laid off. The presence of intermediate contractors with whom alone the workers have immediate or direct relationship ex -contract isof no consequence when , on lifting the veil or looking at the consepectus of factors governing employment we discern the naked truth , though draped in different perfect paper arrangement , that the real employer is the Management not the immediate contractor. Myriad devices, half-hidden in fold after fold of legal from depending on the degree of concealment needed , the type of industry, the local conditions and the like , may be resorted to when labour legislation casts welfare obligations on the real employers , based on Arts . 38,39,42,43 , and 43 - A of the Constitution . The court must be astute to avoid the mischief and achieve the purpose of the law and note misleed by the maya of legal appearances ."

(2) Wage slips , wagesheets and the evidence of the witnesses elearly show that the contractors were paying wages to the contract labours.

(3) Exhibit M/ 8 filed in R/21 /05 and the evidence of the witnesses show that the contractor dismissed the employee and also transferred some of the employees from the place ofwork and had disciplinary authority .

" If the livelihood of the workmen substantially depends on labour rendered to produce goods and services forthe benefit and satisfaction of an enterprise, the absence of direct relationship or the presence of dubious intermediaries or the make -believe trappings of detachment from the Management cannot snap the real -life bond. The story man vary but the inference defies ingenuity. The liability cannot be shaken off. "

69. It is also submitted that the above referred case hasbeen followed amongst others in the following cases:---

(4) The contract papers entered into between the management and the contractors and the evidence of the witnesses clearly show that contractors had full eontrol and supervision over the work . The management had only to see that the labour laws were being implemented and specified approved grade of lime stone was being supplied.

2009 AIR SCW 317 , AIR 1995 S.C. 1666 , AIR 1995 S.C. 1893 , AIR 1999 S.C. 1160 , AIR 2000 S.C. 15:18 AIR 2001S.C. 3348 , AIR 2001 S.C. 3527, AIR 2003 S.C. 3024 , AIR 2004 S.C. 969 , AIR 2004 S.C. 1639 and AIR 2006 S.C. 845.

(5) The contract papers and the evidence show that the contractors had full control over the skilled and professional work .

(6) It is further clear from the contract papers that the SAIL had right to reject the limestone, ifit 70. Shri R. C. Shrivastava , the learned counsel for the management submitted that there is no hard and fast rule to determined the relationship of the employer and employee and also there is no single test for determining the relationship . The learned counsel has placed reliance 6353 [भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii ) ]

भारत का राजपत्र: अक्तूबर 17, 2009/आश्विन 25 , 1931

was not within the specified approved grade as per terms and conditions of the agreement .

(7) The contract agreements further show that therewas penal clause, if there was any breach ofcontract.

challenged by the SAIL by filing LPA No. 632/1997. The said LPA was transferred to the Apex Court on application ofSAIL. The Hon'ble Supreme Court decided the case on 30-8-01 in the case of SAIL versus National Union Water Frontworkers reported in 2001 (7) SCC 1. The Apex Court transferred back the LPA 326/1997 to the Hon'ble High Courtto bedecided in the light of main judgment which wasdecided by order dated 16-7-2002.

Thus I find on the basis of the entire evidence either oral or documentary adduced in both the reference cases that the contract between the Management ( SAIL) and the contractors was genuine and not sham and bogus .

75. Shri R.C. Shrivastava, Learned Counsel forthe SAIL submitted that the reliance placed by the Union in Air India's Case (Supra) is not tenable as the Air India case has been over ruled in the judgment given by the Apex Court in SAIL versus National Water Front Workers Union's case ( Supra).

72. Now the question arises is as to whether the contract, which existed prior to Notification No. S.O. 707 dated 17-3-1993 prohibiting contract labours, in specified workthrough contractors, remained same or changed after notification:

76. Now the question is as to whether the prohibitory notification dated 17-3-1993 is enforced from the date of publication or not. To determine this point , the factual aspects are tobe considered first which are either admitted orproved by evidence on record.

1. It is admitted that notification dated 17-3-1993 was published in the Official Gazette on 3-4-1993 .

73. Shri P.S. Nair , Senior Counsel for the Union submitted that Union of India in exercise of powers under Section 10 ofthe CLRA Act prohibited the employment of contract labours by Notification dated 17-3-1993 . The learned Senior Counsel has placed reliance in the case of Air India Statutory Corporation versus United Labour Union reported in 1997 (9) SCC . 377 wherein the Hon'ble Apex Court has finally held as follows-

2 There was no stay order against the notification for the period from 17-3-1993 to 15-4-1994.

3. Theworkerswhich were working prior to the dateofnotification were also continuing their worktillApril, 1996.

4. The evidence further establishes that the wageswere being paid to worker till April 1996 by the so called contractors .

5. The management has a copy of Form -B register oftheworkers who worked till April , 1996.

"I , therefore , respectfully concur with the view taken byBrotherRamaswamy, Jon the scope and ambit of Section 10 of the Act and hold that on abolition of contract labour system from any establishment under Section 10 of the Act by the appropriate Government the logical and legitimate consequences thereof will be that the erstwhile regulated contract labour covered the sweep of such abolition for the activities concerned would be entitled to be treated as direct employees of the employer on whose. establishment they were earlier working and they would be entitiled tobe treated as regular employees at least from the day on which the contract labour system in the establishment for the work which they were doing gets abolished."

The learned Senior counsel has further placed reliance regarding the effect of notification dated 17-3-1993 and referred the following cases-

6. The contracts of the contractors were with respect of the jobs in the lime stone and dolomite mines at Kuteshwar for which prohibited notification dated 17-3-1993 was issued but even then contract labours were engaged continuously by the said contractors .

( 1) 1990 ( 1 ) LLN 656 United Labour Union & others versus UOI & others .

(2) 1993 LIC 1277 Air India versus United Labour Union.

Thus from the enumerated established facts, it is clearthat therewas no impediment onthe notification dated 17-3-1993 prohibiting the employment ofcontract labours onspecifiedworks in- line stone and dolomite mines.

(3) 1990 ( suppl . ) S.C.C. 668, Shanker Mukherjee versus UOI .

(4) 1993 (3 ) SCC 601 , Haryana State Electricity Board versus Suresh.

77. The ariother objection raised by the management is that the notification was stayed by the Hon'ble Calcutta High Court and is no more applicable in the case . The Hon'ble High Court of MP at Jabalpur appears to have dealttheabove point in LPA 326/97 at para. -22. The extract ofwhich are reproduced below:-

"Ifthe aforesaid paragraph is understood in the tenor, it is couched. It becomes unequivocally clear that a contract labour working in the 74. It is submitted that the employees mentioned in the referenceworked regularly from 17-3-1993 to April 1993 but thereafter they were prevented from entering at the workplace. The Union challenged the termination ofservice by SAIL by filing W. P. No. 921/1997 . The Hon'ble High Court of MP passed order dated 23-10-1997 which was 6354

[PART II-SEC. 3 (ii) ] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 17, 2009 /ASVINA 25 , 1931

say so as we are of the opinion that clause ( 1 ) to(3) are to be read in conjunction and not in isolation or separation . In view of the aforesaid a different scenario emerges in the instant case . We may not be understood to have said that the person who were working as contract labours worked for the period that they have claimed but there ispleading in that regard in the writ petition and what has been stated in oppugnation done not totally spurn that no one was engaged. What has been stated that the payments have been made up to 1996. On what foundation or on what basis, the payments had been made to the persons who worked in the establishment requires to be enquired into . We cannot acceded to the ab- initio prayer made by Mr. Nair and Mr. Jain that as there has been no denial in the counter affidavit in the proper manner and therefore , this Court should issue a mandamus . In our considered view, this

has to be adjudicated by the appropriate forum . "

78. Shri Shrivastava further argued that the Civil

Appeal No. 9656 of 2003 was filed before the Apex Court

against the judgment passed in LPA- 326/97 dated 16-7-

2002 in which some observations were made in Para 23 and

24, but these were only observation and no relief was

granted and to the contract labours based on the

observations . The Union challenged this judgment before

the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the Special Leave Petition,

in which leave was granted and the order for making

referencewas made . In law, therefore, thejudgment of the

Hon'bleHigh Court dated 16-07-2002 merged in the order

oftheApex Court dated 8-12-2005 and it is this last order of

theHighest court between the parties which shall prevail.

The said order of the Apex Court is reproduced below :-

" One of the question for decision is whether or not the employment through contract labour is sham and bogus. These are questions which will require adjudication before an appropriate forum. The Writ court may not be the appropriate forums to decide this question . We therefore , direct the appropriate Govemment to refer this question to Industrial Tribunal who will decide whether or not the alleged employment through contractor is sham and bogus andwhether in effect is direct employment by the company.

We clarify that we have not expressed any opinion on merits either way. Undoubtedly , it will be open to both the parties to raise all contentions available to them before the Industrial Tribunal .

The appeal stands disposed off accordingly. There will be no order as to costs . "

79. Shri Nair submitted that the validity of the Notification was challenged before the Hon'ble High Court of MP by filing W.P. No. 4268/1993 wherein a division Bench vide order dated 16-12-1993 upheld the validity of the Notification .

establishment concerned at the time of issue of notification will cease to function and the contract betweenthe principal employer and the contractor in regard to the contract labour snapped . It becomes extinct . As a logical collorary as has been put forth by their Lordships no contract labour can be employed by the principal employer in any process or operation or other work in the establishment to which the notification relates . We are not concemed what is the relationship between the contractor and the contract labour . That has been dealt with in separate sub-paras , namely, sub paragraphs 4,5 , and 6. In the present case the notification was issued on 17-3-1993 and was published in the official gazette on 3-4-1993 . This court gave the stamp of approval to the notification on 16-12-1993 . Mr. Shrivastava, learned senior counsel has submitted that the High Court ofCalcutta by order dated 14-1-1994 restrained the management to give effect to the notification and then passed an order not to give further effect to the same . Mr. Nair as well as Mr. Jainreiterated the argument which was canvassed before the learned single Jedge with regard to the territorial jurisdiction ofthe Calcutta High Court. We are not inclined to address ourselves in that regard. We are only inclined to state that by the time, the Calcutta High Court passed the order on 16-1-1994 the notification had alreadytaken effect. Itwas not as order of stay which could be passed as it nothing had worked out Mr. Shrivastava, pyramided his submission by putting it with vehemence that the court directed the management not to give further effect and thus themanagement had no option . In our considered view, the said order of stay does not render much assistance to the management , appellant in as much as the notification had come into existence on 3-4-1993 and any interaduction or injunction that followed from the court in the mid ofJanuary 1994, almost after expiry of 10 months . What remains to be seen if the labours who worked under the contractors by virtue of the contract been the principal employer and the contractor were allowed to work after the notification , and whether entitled in law to be allowed to work by the principal employer. We will be failing in our duty if we do not notice a submission of Mr. Shrivastave that clause ( 1 ) of paragraph 68 has been held by the Apex Court deals with abolition of the system . We have read with toughtfull anxiety and consideration the said paragraph to appreciate the submission of learned senior counsel. In our humble view sub -clause (1 ) deals with contract labour which is a person as per the definition under 2 ( 1 ) (b ) of the Act . We 6355 [भाग II- खण्ड 3( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : अक्तूबर 17, 2009/आश्विन 25 , 1931

(2) The contract of principal employer with the contractor in regard to the contract labour comes to anend;

80. It is apparent that the notification was come into forceand there was no impediment at the relevant time by any order of stay by any Court.

81. Another question arises for decision in the case is as to whether or not by enforcement of the Notification dated 17-3-1993 the alleged employment of the workers through contractors is subsequently sham and bogus .

(3) No contract labour can be employed by the Principal Employer in any process , operation or other work in the establishment to which the notification relates at any time thereafter;

(4) The contract labour is not rendered unemployed as is generally assumed but continues in the employment of the contractor as the notification does not server the relationship of master and servant between the contractor and the contract labour;

82. Mr. Nair argued that in view of the Notification dated 17-3-1993 prohibiting the specified work in the lime stone mines and in view of the judgement of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Water Front Case (Supra) , the contract comes to an end and contract ceases to exist . The Union referred to para-68 of the aforesaid judgment . It is submitted that as SAIL management continued to employ the contract labours during the period from 1993 to 1996, the contract has become sham and camouflaged .

(5) The contractor can utilize the services of the contract labour in any other establishment in respect ofwhich no notification under Section 10 ( 1 ) has been issued where all the benefits under the CLRA Actwhich were being enjoyed by it, will be available;

(6) If a contractor intends to retrench his contract labour, he can do so only in conformity with the provisions of the I.D. Act .

The point now under consideration is : whether automatic absorption of contract labour working in an establishment, is implied in Section 10 of the CLRA Act and follows as a consequence on issuance of the prohibition notification thereunder. We shall revert to this aspect shortly . " 83. Shri Shrivastava submitted that the said notification is stayed by the Hon'ble Calcutta High Court bywhich SAIL and the Union of India has been restrained togive any effect to the said notification dated 17-3-93 and further the Labour licence was continued to be grantedby the appropriate authority from time to time by which the contract continued. The said contract was entered into as per law and according to the said terms of the contract, contractor usedto produce the specified goods and the management used to pay the contractors for the goods produced as per the terms and conditions of the contract. It is further submitted that even if it is assumed that the facts are so , the situation does not confer any right to relief ofstatus on the contract labours . At best , this may amount to violation of law which may attract penal consequences . The management has placed reliance on Dina Nath Case (Supra) .

84. Before discussing the point , it is better to reproduce the judgment of Para 68. of the SAIL versus National Water Fronts Workers & Others (Supra)-

"We have extracted above Section 10 ofthe CLRA Actwhich empowers the appropriate Governmentto prohibit employment of contract labour in any process , operation or other work in any establishment, lays down the procedure and specified the relevant factors which shall be taken into consideration for issuing notification under sub- section (1 ) of Section 10. It is a common ground that the consequence of prohibition notification under Section 10 ( 1 ) of the CLRA Act , prohibiting employment ofcontract labour, is neither spelt out in Section 10 nor indicated anywhere in the Act . In our view, the following consequences follow on issuing a notification under Section 10 ( 1 ) ofthe CLRA Act:

85. It is an established fact that the notification dated 17-3-93 came to the effect prohibiting the employment of contract labours from the date of its publication . As such , inthe light of the constitutional bench judgment in SAIL versus National Water Front Workers Union & others (Supra) the contract of Principal employer with contractor in regard to the contract labour comes to an end beyond shadow of doubts and the contract with regard to the contract labour subsequently after the notification dated 17-3-1993 becomes not genuine . The Principal employer was prohibited to employ any contract labour in any process, operation or other work in the establishment to which the notification relates at any time thereafter . It is evident that when the contract of the contractors after notification became itself void and not genuine, the extension of the period of contract of the respective contractors would be ab-initio void and sham and bogus . Thus it is establised that the contract of Principal employer with contractors in regard to the contract labours became subsequently sham and bogus after the notification No. S. O. 707 dated 17-3-1993 coming intothe effect from the date of its publication .

(1) Contract labour working in the establishment concerned at the time of issue of notification will cease to function;

86. Now the another very important question is as to whether in effect there is direct employment of the 6356

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 17 , 2009 /ASVINA 25, 1931

contract labours by the company (SAIL) and if so , what reliefthe workman concerned are entitled .

87. It is clear from the aforesaid question that it is necessary to decide the status of the contract labours after the notification dated 17-3-1993 became effective . Before deciding the point , it appears to be extremely necessaryto reproduce the para 125 Sub- paras 2 ( 1 ) , ( b) , 3 to 6 ofthe constitutional bench judgment passed in National Union Water Front Workers (supra) :-

" (2)(a) A notification under Section 10 ( 1 ) of the CLRA Act prohibiting employment of contract labour in any process , operation or other work in any establishment has to be issued by the appropriate Government:

( 1 ) After consulting with the Central Advisory Board or the State Advisory Board, as the case may beand

(2) Having regard to

(i) Conditions ofwork and benefits provided for the contract labour in the establishment in question , and

(ii) Other relevant factors including those mentioned insub- section (2) of Section 10;

(2)(b) In asmuch as the impugned notification issued by the Central Government on 9-12-1976 does not satisfy the aforesaid requirements of Section 10 , it is quashed but we do so prospectively. i.e. from the dateof this judgment and subject to the clarification that on the basis of this judgment no order passed or no action taken giving effect to the said notification on or before the date of this judgment, shall be called in question in any tribunal or court including a High Court if it has otherwise attained finality and/ or it hasbeen implemented.

(3) Neither Section 10 of the CLRA Act nor any other provision in the Act , whether expressly or by necessary implication , provides for automatic absorption of contract labour on issuing a notification by the appropriate Government under sub- section ( 1 ) of section 10 , prohibiting the employment of contract labour , in any process , operation or other work in any establishment . Consequently the principal employer cannot be required to order absorption of the contract labour working in the establishment concerned.

(4) We overrule the judgment of this Court in Air India case prospectively and declare that any direction issued by any industrial adjudietor /any court including the High Court , for absorption of contract labour following the judgment in Air India case shall hold good and that the same shall not be set aside, altered or modified on the basis of this

[PART II-SEC . 3( ii) ] judgment in cases where such a direction has been giveneffect to and it has become final .

A (5) On issuance of prohibition notification under Section 10 ( 1 ) of the CLRA Act prohibiting employment of contract labour or otherwise , in an industrial dispute brought before it by any contract labour in regard to conditions of service , the industrial adjudicator will have to consider the question whether the contractor has been interposed either on the ground of having undertaken to produce any given result for the establishment or for supply ofcontract labour for work ofthe establishment under a genuine contract or is a mere ruse/camouflage to evade compliance with various thereunder . If the contract is found to be not genuine but a mere camouflage , the so-called contract labour will have to be treated as ermployees ofthe principal employer who shall be directed to regularize the services of thecontract labour in the establishment concerned subject to the conditions as may be specified by it for that purpose in the light of para 6 hereunder .

(6) If the contract is found to be genuine and prohibition notification under Section 10 ( 1 ) of the CLRA Act in respect of the establishment concerned has been issued by the appropriate Government, prohibiting employment of contract labour in any process, operation or other work ofany establishment and where in such process , operaiton or other work ofthe establishment the principal employer intends to employ regular workmen , he shall give preference to the erstwhile contract labour , if otherwise found suitable and , if necessary, by relaxing the condition as to maximurn age appropriately, taking into consideration the age of the workers at the time of their initial employment by the contractor and also relaxing the condition as to academic qualifications other than technical qualifications ."

To determine the status of the workers after Notification dated 17-3-1993 , it is necessary to recapitulate the established and proved facts-

1. The contract labour after notification cease to function.

2. The contract labours were still working in the establishment from 1993 to April 1996 under the umbrella of the contractors who may be called as agent ofthe Principal employer or were intermediary between the contract labours and the Principal Employer after the publication of notification .

3. The contract between the Principal Employer and the contractors after publication of the notification ceases to exist and became not genuine .

4.Thewages were being paid to the contract labourby theso-called contractors in the same way as from before .

6357 [भाग II- खण्ड 3( ii )]

भारत का राजपत्र: अक्तूबर 17, 2009/आश्विन 25 , 1931

5.The principal Employer was in need oftheworkers for the specified works even after the publication of the notification as same workers were continuing in work tillApril , 1996.

6. There is no evidence on the record to show that the principal employer adopted the procedure of regularization and had intended to employ regular workers as has been directed by the Hon'ble Apex Court at Para 125 sub -para- 6 in the Constitution Bench Judgment in the case of SAIL versus National Union Water Front Workers (Supra ) after the contract was found genuine before the notification.

7. There was no automatic absorption of contract labour on issuing the notification prohibiting the employment of contract labours .

8. Contract labours were found employees. of the respective contractors before notification .

National Union Water Front Workers Case (Supra). It appears that sub para 1 to 6 of para 68 of the Front Workers Case is to be taken together and not one by one orseparately. It is clear that the contract labour working in the establishment concerned ceased to function on publication of the notification prohibiting employment in the specified work. Meaning thereby the status of the employer was not changed. Sub- para- 4 further shows that the status of the contract labours was not changed rather they continued in the employment of the contractors.as the relationship of master and servant between the contractors and the contract labours did not ended by issuing the notification. It is evident that there cannot be two masters. Sub-para- 5 further deals that the contractor can utilize the service of those contract labours in other establishment where the notification prohibiting the employment of contract labour is not applicable . This aspect also shows that relationship of contract labours and contractors was not changed . If the contract labour was engaged directly by the principal employer in spite the notification , the status of the contract labours would be definitely different . In the present case , the contract labours were engaged in the establishment by the intermediary who are so-called contractors , the status of the workers is to be adjudged.

91. It is clear that the relationship of master and servant between the Principal employer and the contract labours was not created even ifthe workers were illegally engaged. Para 125 sub- para 3 of National Union Water FrontWorkers case deals that there is no automatic absorption of the contract labours and no process to regularize the services of contract labours was started in the light of the direction as given in sub- para -6. As such, the contract labours cannot be said to be in the employment ofthePrincipal employer (SAIL) .

88. Shri Nair urged that the workers will be deemed employee ofthe Principal Employer stood implemented by very act of SAIL in keeping them in service in the same place which was prohibited in the same place from 17-3-1993 to April , 1996 which shows the order of the Hon'ble Supreme Court is fully implemented. It is further submitted that overruling of AIR India Statutory case will, therefore , have no effect in the present case and the judgement of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of AIR India Statutory Authority 1997 (7) SCC 377 and Secretary HSEB versus Suresh 1999 (3 ) SCC 601 will be onlyapplicable. It is submitted that para 125 , sub para 4 of National Union Water Front Workers case (Supra) states that the Apex Court over ruled the judgment of AIR India statutory case prospectively and any direction issued by any industrial adjudicator/ any court for absorption of contract labour following the judgment in AIR India case shall hold good and that the same shall not be set aside . if effect is given and it has become final .

89. Shri Shrivastava submitted that the AIR India judgment has already been reversed by the National Union WaterFrontWorkersjudgment and the Union has nobasis. It issubmitted that the single bench judgment in W.P. (C) 921/97 has been quashed by the Division Bench in LPA 326/97 after remand by the Hon'ble Supreme Court and the saidjudgment of Single Bench was never coming into effect and had not reached the finality . It is also submitted that there is no automatic absorption of contract labours and therefore continuation of employment of the workers in the establishment through contractors after notification would not amount to automatic regularization in the service.

92. It is evident from the above discussion that the relationship of master and servant between the contractors and contract labours was not ended by issuance of the notification . It is a matter of consideration that if the contractors or the Principal employer violated the notification or any other provision of law and used the employment of the contract labour in the establishment without absorbing them in the manner stated in sub -para 5 &6 of Para 125 in the judgement ofNational Union Water FrontWorkers case, then what would be the remedy to the union. The only remedy appears to be penal consequences as has been provided under Section 23 to 25 ofCLRA Act . It is, thus, established that the workers , who were working from 1993 to April 1996, had not acquired the status ofthe employees of the principal employer by virtue of notification dated 17-3-1993.1 , therefore , find and hold that the employment of workmen through contractors was not sham and bogus before notification dated 17-3-1993 but after publication of the said notification, the said contract through contractors was not genuine as the contract ended.

90.Now for coming to the conclusion of the status ofthe workers who were continuing in the service after notification , it is necessary to peruse the law laid down in [PART II-SEC. 3 (ii )] 6358

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 17 , 2009/ASVINA 25 , 1931

the publication of notification . Moreover it is also clear from the foregoing papers that there was no automatic absorption in the service , as such the relationship was not created between the workers and the principal employer (SAIL) . Since there was no relationship the question of termination does not arise . Hence this issue is decided the Union and in favour of the management (SAIL) .

I further find and hold that the contract labours did not acquire the status of the employees of the principal employer simply on continuation of his employment in the establishment . I further find and hold that the workmen are only entitled to take the recourse of penal consequences under the provision of law. On the basis of above findings , this issue as in reference Case No.21 /05 is accordingly, answered.

96. Issue No. IV

93. Issue No. III-

Shri Nair , the learned Senior counsel submitted that ifthe relief is given in issue No. 3 as claimed, further action may not be necessary. It is pertinent to note , that it is held that the relationship of master and servant between the principal employer and the workers was not created as such they were not entitled for relief in issue No. 3 .

97. Shri Shrivastava , the learned counsel for the management of SAIL submitted that even if there was violation of law neither the contract labours conferred any right of automatic absorption nor any status higher than which they held. It is further submitted that the Union has not filed a single document nor adduced any evidence that the terminal benefits like gratuity , retrenchment , compensation and ex- gratia has been denied by the Mines Manager to VRS seeking employees . Even otherwise the contract labours are not the employees of the management so question of granting the aforesaid benefits does not arise . Moreover the Union has also not given any details as to what amount of the benefits were to be paid .

Shri Nair argued that the facts mentioned in this issue have to be taken as correct. Correctness of the facts mentioned in the order of reference is not open to question . It issubmitted that the onus of proving whether the action of Mines Manager in terminating the services of 3404 workmen was legal , fair and justified vest with the management . It is submitted that the argument of the management was that the services were terminating by the contractors is beyond the purview of the reference and after issue of notification, there is neither contractor nor contractor's employees . It is submitted that it is clear from the evidence on record that the workers had continuously worked from 17-3-1993 to April 1996 and Manager ofMines can only terminate the services of the workers and the contractors had no role to play in terminating the workers . Admititedly these workmen were working for more than three years in continuous service and they had been retrenched without any termination letter by the management.

98. It appears that is has been established from aforesaid discussion that the alleged contract labours were not the employees of the SAIL management as no absorption process of the contract labours took place by the management of SAIL as such the question to grant any terminal benefits does not arise . This issue is decided against the Union and in favour of the management .

99. Issues No. V & VI

94. Shri Shrivastava submitted that by making the reference that Mines Manager had terminated the services oftheworkmen , the appropriate government had prejudged the issue without any basis and on this ground alone, the said reference R/40/03 should be answered in negative . It is submitted that this Tribunal has to decide the references inview ofthe law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case ofNational Union Water Front Workers Union's case (Supra ) as to whether the contract entered into by SAIL is genuine or sham contract. It is submitted that the contractors ' workers went on strike , the services of the contract labours were terminated by the contractors . It is submitted that the burden was on the Union to prove that contract was sham and bogus and Union has failed to prove the same .

It isargued on behalf of the Union that in the light of the clause 8 of memorandum of agreement signed between the SAIL and the workers , management should have implemented the agreement , which was binding on them under Section 18 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947. The Workers ' Union is affiliated to HMS . HMS was party to the agreement . Therefore , the settlement is applicable to the members ofthe Union . The workers were not paid wages as per the tripartite settlement and Minimum Wages was statutory that has also not been paid.

95. Considering the dicussion made above and the evidence on the record , it has come to the conclusion that the relationship of master and servant was not created between the Principal employer ( SAIL ) and the workers. The reason has already been given above that Para 68 (4 ) ofthe National Union Water Front Case (Supra) is implicit clear that the relationship of master and servant between the contractor and the contract labour continued even on

100. The management submitted that the NJCS agreement is not applicable to the contract labours and clause 8 of the said agreement and the said agreement is only for the regular employees of SAIL . Clause 8 of the said agreement provides for the review before the same 6359 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र: अक्तूबर 17, 2009/आश्विन 25 , 1931

forum and at no point of time, the Union has made any complaints as regards the violation of clause 8. Even if assuming for the sake of argument that the agreement is applicable the remedy lies under Section 29 of the ID Act .

employment of contract labours whereas the third part of the reference speaks about employment of contract labour in the job of perennial nature without ensuring statutory wages. The said two parts of the reference are contradictory one. It is submitted that on one hand the appropriate Government assumed that the contract labours ceases to exists after prohibition in question which is contrary to the law laiddownby the Apex Court in SAIL Versus National Water Front Workers Union case (Supra) . On the other hand in point no . 3 ofthe reference speaks about what kind ofreliefbe given to contract labour. The management prays tohold that the reference is bad in law and vague and need not answer the reference on merit .

101. It is evident that it is not established that the alleged contract labours were the employees of the SAIL , as such they were not entitled to any wages as per the agreement . Moreover they were not regular employees of the management and the said agreement appears to be for the regular employees of the management . Thus these issues are also decided against the Union and in favour of themanagement.

102. Issues No. I & VII

104. Section 10 (4) of the I. D. Act is reproduced below:

"Where in an order referring an industrial dispute to a Labour Court , Tribunal or National Tribunal under this section, or in a subsequent order , the appropriate Government has specified the points of dispute for adjudication, the Labour Court of the Tribunal or the National Tribunal , as the case may be , shall confine its adjudication to those point and matters incidental thereto. "

The Union has vehemently argued that the reference case No. R/40/03 is maintainable . Shri Nair submitted that the Tribunal cannot scrutinize the order of the Government in making reference and the power of Tribunal is limited to the points mentioned in Section 10(4) of the I.D. Act . It is submitted that the Tribunal has no authority to invalidate the reference . The Union has placed reliance on the decisions referred below:

1. AIR 1953 SC . 53 State of Madras Versus C.P. Sonathy.

2. AIR 1979 SC 170 Avon Services Versus Industrial Tribunal

3. AIR 1979 SC 1356 Pottery Mazdoor Panchayat Versus Perfect PotteryCo.

This itself shows that the Tribunal has to answer the reference and the matters incidental thereto . If all the three points referred in Reference Case No. R/40/03 are taken into isolation for answering the reference . I am also of the view that the reference , if submitted by the appropriate Government to the Tribunal , it is to be answered in accordance with law . Accordingly, this issue is answered. Onthe basis of above findings in aforesaid paras , the reference Case No. R/ 40/03 is answered.

4. 1983 (4) SCC 491 Shamboo NathGoel VersusBank ofBaroda

105. In the result in both the references , common award is passed . The parties are to bear their own costs .

5. 2007 ( 14 ) SCC 291 Karan Singh Versus EE , Haryana State

6. 2006 ( 13 ) SCC 28 Bhogpur Cooperative Sugar Mills Ltd. Versus Harmesh Kumar

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

7. 2007 (2) SCC ( L& S) 264 National Engineering Industries Versus State of Rajasthan .

MOHD. SHAKIR HASAN, Presiding Officer नई दिल्ली, 25 सितम्बर, 2009

It is also urged that the reference order was issued by the Union of India. If the order is to be challenged naturaljustice is required that the Union of India shouldbe heard . Union of India is not a party before this Tribunal and no order can be passed against the reference.

का. आ. 2891.-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 (1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में , केन्द्रीय सरकार बैतरनी आयरन माईन्स के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच , अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण / श्रम न्यायालय , भुवनेश्वर के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 121/2002 ) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 23-9-09 को प्राप्त हुआ था।

[ सं. एल-26012/33/2002- आई आर( एम) ]

कमल बाखरू, डेस्क अधिकारी 103. The learned counsel for the management urged that the reference made herein is contradictory and while making the reference , the appropriate Government has not applied its mind . For example , the part - I of the reference deals with the alleged termination of mines workers who ceases to be contract labours after prohibition of

3633 01/ 09-27 6360

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 17 , 2009/ ASVINA 25 , 1931

New Delhi , the 25th September , 2009 S. O. 2891. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 121/2002) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal / Labour Court, Bhubaneswar now as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of Baitarani Iron Mines and their workman , which was received by the Central Government on 23-9-09 .

[PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii) ] with effectt from 12-11-1999 without serving any notice and without following the provisions of Industrial Disputes Act 1947 is justified ? If not , what relief the workman is entitled to ? י

[No. L-26012/33/2002- IR (M)]

KAMAL BAKHRU , Desk Officer

ANNEXURE ,

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIALTRIBUNAL -CUM -LABOUR COURT, BHUBANESWAR

PRESENT:

Shri N. K.R. Mohapatra Presiding Officer , C.G.I.T. Cum -Labour Court, Bhubaneswar .

Industrial Dispute Case No. 121/2002 Date of Passing Award- 8th May, 2009 (Rourkela Camp)

BETWEEN

The Management of the Agent, Baitarini Iron Mines of Dr. Sarojini Pradhan , At./Po . Barbil , Dist. Keonjhar , Orissa- 758 035

2. It is alleged by the workman in his claim statement that he joined in the Baitarani Iron Mines of Dr. Sarojini Pradhan in June 1989 to work as a Miner. While he has worked such continuously he all of a sudden was refused employment with effect from 12-11-1999 without any advance notice or any terminal benefits being paid to him. He was told that, his termination was due to lack of mining activities and that once the production of minerals commences he wouldbe intimated later. It is further alleged by the workman thatthereafter he was never called to work and therefore he made a representation for his reinstatement with full back wages and then due to apathetic attitude of Management he raised an Industrial disputes .

.... 1st Party-management

And

Their Workman Sh . Dilip Khuntia, S/o . Shri Juria Khuntia, At . /Po-Birkela , Via- Joda, Dist . Keonjhar , Orissa .

....2nd Party- Workman

APPEARANCES

Mr. R.N. Rath , LegalAdviser

3. In the written statement the 1st Party-Management alleged that the workman was never engaged on regular basis . Rather himself and few others were engaged in the mine on piece rated basis as and when necessary upon their offering to work and they were being paid depending uponthe quantum of work performed by them each day. It isfurther alleged that during non- engagement period these piece rated workers used to work in other mines on daily rated basis . So far as the case of the workman is concerned it isfurther submitted by the Management that the workman having worked for days as a piece rated worker did not turn up for work voluntarily much before the alleged date oftermination and as such the allegations of the workman thathe was refused employment from 12-11-1999 without any advance notice or terminal benefits is nothing but a myth and fictitious story . It is further contended by the Management that the present reference is the brain child of one Shri B.S. Pati , the General Secretary of the so called North Orissa Workers Union with which the Management had got no connecton . It is alleged that this and several other cases have been mooted against the Management at the behest of Shri B.S. Pati , an outside Trade Unionist for his ulterior motive .

Forthe 1st Party-

Management

None.

Forthe 2nd Party-

Workman

AWARD

The Government of India in the Ministry of Laour , in exercise ofpowers conferred by Clause (d) of sub - section (1) and sub -section 2 (A) of Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947) have referred the following dispute for adjudication vide their Order No. L- 26012/33 / 2002- IR(M), dated 20-11-2002.

"Whether the action of the management of Baiatarani Iron Mines of Dr. S. Pradhan , At . /Po . Barbil , Dist. Keonjhar , in terminating the services of Shri Dilip Khuntia, S/o Juria Khuntia , At./Po . Birkela , Via- Joda , Dist. Keonjhar , PRW 4. From the record it transpires that, ever since the inception ofthe case Shri B.S. Pati , General Secretary, North Orissa Workers Union is alone appearing on behalf ofthe workman as his authorized representative . In one such case between the Management and its workers Shri Pati was declared incompetent to represent. the piece rated workers ofBaitarani Iron Mines for the reason that these workers were not belonging to the aforesaid Union . In O.J.C. 17216/ 2001 the Hon'ble Court in an alike manner has held that Shri B.S. Pati the General Secretary of the North Orissa Workers Union is not competent to represent one Shri Madhusudhan Naik a worker of the Management- Company. In the present case also except Shri Pati the workman has never appeared . Though the workman was [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii ) ]

6361

भारत का राजपत्र : अक्तूबर 17, 2009/आश्विन 25 , 1931

specifically asked to appear today, he has failed to appear. Rather Shri Pati as usual appeared though he has no locustandi to represent the workman . As a result the workman was set exparte and the evidence of the Management through affidavit was accepted .

N. K. R. MOHAPATRA, Presiding Officer नई दिल्ली, 25 सितम्बर , 2009

New Delhi, the 25th September, 2009 S. O. 2892.- In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 119/2002) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal /Labour Court, Bhubaneswar now as shown in the Annexure inthe Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of Baitarani Iron Mines and their workman, which was received by the Central Government on 23-9-09.

[No. L- 26012/31 /2002 - IR (M)] KAMAL BAKHRU, Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT . INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL -CUM - LABOUR COURT, BHUBANESWAR PRESENT:

Shri N. K.R. Mohapatra PresidingOfficer , C.G.I.T. Cum -Labour Court, Bhubaneswar .

Industrial Dispute Case No. 119/2002 Date ofPassing Award- 8th May, 2009 (Rourkela Camp)

BETWEEN

The Management of the Agent, Baitarini iron Mines of Dr. Sarojini Pradhan, At./Po . Barbil, Dist. Keonjhar, Orissa-758 035

.... 1st Party-management

And

Their Workman Sh . Ram Singh Pingua, S/o . Shri Suren Pingua, At. /Po- Birkela, Via- Joda, Dist . Keonjhar , Orissa.

.... 2nd Party-Workman

APPEARANCES

For the Ist Party- Management Mr. R.N. Rath , LegalAdviser

का. आ. 2892.-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 (1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में , केन्द्रीय सरकार बैतरनी आयरन माईन्स के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच , अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण / श्रम न्यायालय भुवनेश्वर के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 119/2002 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 23-9-09 को प्राप्त हुआ था।

[ सं. एल-26012/31/2002- आई आर. ( एम) ]

कमल बाखरू , डेस्क अधिकारी 3633G1 /09-28

None.

Forthe 2nd Party- Workman

AWARD

The Government of India Line Ministry of Laour , in exercise ofpowers conferred by Clause (d) of sub-section ( 1) and sub - section 2 ( A) of Section 10 of the Industria 6362

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 17 , 2009/ ASVINA 25 , 1931

[PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii)] Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947) have referred the following dispute for adjudication vide their Order No. L- 26012/31 / 2002 -IR(M) , dated 27-11-2002:

"Whether the action of the management of Baitarani IronMines of Dr. S. Pradhan , At. /PO . Barbil , Dist . Keonjhar, in terminating the services of Shri Ram Singh Pingua , S/ o Suren Pingua, At./PO . Birkela, Via- Joda , Dist . Keonjhar , PRW with effect from 1-10-1999 without serving any notice and without following the provisions of Industrial Disputes Act 1947 is justified ? If not, what relief the workman is entitled to ?"

of the workman as his authorized representative . In one such case between th Management and its workers Shri Patiwas declared incompetent to represent the piece rated workers of Baitarani Iron Mines for the reason that these workers were not belonging to the aforesaid Union . In O.J.C. 17216/2001 the Hon'ble Court in an alike manner has held that Shri B.S. Pati the General secretary of the North Orissa Workers Union is not competent to represent one Shri Madhusudhan Naik a worker of the Management- Company. In the present case also except Shri Pati the workman has never appeared. Though the workman was specifically asked to appear today, he has failed to appear . Rather Shri Pati as usual appeared though he has no locus standi to represent the workman . As a result the workman was set ex parte and the evidence of the Management through affidavit was accepted .

2. It is alleged by the workman in his claim statement thathe joined in the Baitarani Iron Mines of Dr. Sarojini Pradhan in August 1993 to work as a Miner . While he has worked as such continuously he all of a sudden was refused employmentwith effect from 1-10-1999 without any advance notice or any terminal benefits being paid to him. He was told that, his termination was due to lack of mining activities and that once the production of minerals commences he would be intimated later . It is further alleged by the workman that thereafter he was never called to work and therefore he made a representation for his reinstatement with full back wages and then due to apathetic attitude of Management he raised an Industrial dispute .

5. From the aforesaid evidence as adduced by the Management it transpires that the disputant - workman and few others were engaged as and when required as piece rated worker and they were being paid on the basis of quantum of work performed by them whenever engaged . In the claim statement the workman has of course stated that he was taken to employment in August 1993 and was refused employment on 1-10-1999 . But there is no mention that he was given such employment on regular basis and that he was issued with any letter of appointment . At Para-4 of the claim statement he further averred that when heapproached the Management to know about his non- engagement he was told that for lack of mining activities he could not be engaged but he would be called upon again once the production of the materials is taken up. He further stated that when he was not intimated as to when such production would be taken up , he made a representation for his reinstatement with full back wages . These averments of the workman indirectly suggests that he was engaged as a piece rated worker as contended by theManagement . Besides the evidence of the Mangement shows that the workman had voluntarily expressed his unwillingness to work under the 1st Party- Management on personal grounds and as such the allegations of the workman that he was terminated on 1-10-1999 appe be un-believable for want of any evidence being from his side. On the other hand the time to time par of Shri B. S. Pati to represent the workman strengthens the belief, as contended by the Management, thatthe case has been mooted at the behest of Shri Pati , an outsider Trade Unionist with whom the disputant has no legal connection . 0 3. In the written statement the I st Party -Management alleged that the workman was never engaged on regular basis . Rather himself and few others were engaged in the mine on piece rated basis as and when necessary upon their offering to work and they were being paid depending upon the quantum of work performed by them each day. It isfurther alleged that during non -engagement period these piece rated workers used to work in other mines on daily rated basis . So far as the case of the workman is concerned it is further submitted by the Management that the workman having worked for some days as a piece rated worker did not turn up for work voluntarily much before the alleged date of termination and as such the allegations of the workman that he was refused employment from 1-10-1999 without any advance notice or terminal benefits is nothing but a myth and fictitious story . It is further contended by the Management that the present reference is the brain child of one Shri B.S. Pati , the General Secretary of the so called North Orissa Workers Union with which the Management had got no connecton . It is alleged that this and several other cases have been mooted against the Management at the behest of Shri B.S. Pati , an outside Trade Unionist for his ulterior motive .

N. K. R. MOHAPATRA , Presiding Officer 4. From the record it transpires that, ever since the inception of the case Shri B.S. Pati , General Secretary , North Orissa Workers Union is alone appearing on behalf [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

6363

भारत का राजपत्र: अक्तूबर 17, 2009/आश्विन 25, 1931

नई दिल्ली, 25 सितम्बर , 2009

का. आ. 2893.-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 (1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में , केन्द्रीय सरकार आई.ओ.सी. एल. के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच , अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालय सं. - 1 , चंडीगढ़ के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 27/01 एवं 28/01 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 23-9-09 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[ सं. एल-30012/105/2000- आई आर ( एम) ] [ सं. एल-30012/ 104/2000- आई आर. ( एम) ]

कमल बाखरू , डेस्क अधिकारी New Delhi , the 25th September, 2009 S. O. 2893. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 27/01 and 28/01 ) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal / Labour Court, No. 1 , Chandigarh as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation tothemanagement of IOCL and their workman, which was received by the Central Government on 23-9-09 .

[No. L- 30012/ 105/2002 - IR (M) ]

[No. L-30012/104/2002 - IR (M) ]

KAMAL BAKHRU, Desk Officer No. I. D. No.

ReferenceNo.

97/03

L-30012/27/2002 IR(M) Dated 2-4-2003

103/03

L-30012/28/2002 IR(M) Dated 2-4-2003

101/03

L-30012/24/2002 IR (M) Dated 2-4-2003

99/03

L-30012/19/2002 IR (M) Dated 2-4-2003

21/05

L-30012/46/2002 IR (M) Dated 4-5-2005

27/01

L-30012/ 105/2002 IR (M) Dated 8-1-2001

28/01

L-30012/ 104/2002 IR (M) Dated 24-1-2001

87/01

L-30012/ 131/1997 IR(C- 1) Dated4-3-1999

30/2000

L-30012/74/1999 IR (M) Dated 24-1-2000

10. 31/2000

L-30012/73 / 1999 IR(M) Dated 24-1-2000

26/05

11.

L-30012/10/2002 IR M) Dated 8-6-2005

46/04

12.

L-30012/21 /2004 IR(M) Dated 2-11-2004

13. 568/05

L-30012/26/2002 IR (M) Dated 2-4-2003

567/05

14.

L-30012/25 /2002 IR(M) Dated 2-4-2003

15. 98/03

L-30012/23/2002 IR (M) Dated 2-4-2003

566/05

16.

L-30012/20/2002 IR (M) Dated 2-4-2003

17.

11/07

L-30012/40 /2006 IR (M) Dated 15-1-2007

18.

14/07

L-30012/39/2002 IR(M) Dated 15-1-2007

1/03

19.

L-30012/2/2002 IR (M) Dated 10-12-2002

29/01

20.

L-30012/103/2000 IR(M) Dated24-1-2001

21 .

27/05

L-30012/9/2002 IR (M) Dated 8-6-2005

22. 28/05

L-30012/8/2002 IR (M) Dated 8-6-2005

69/99

23.

L-30012/132/1997 IR (C- 1 ) Dated 23-1-1999

ANNEXURE

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

Case No. I. D. No. 97/2003 and 22 others ( as mentioned inthe list below)

Shri Anil Kumar & 22 Others ( as mentioned in the list below)

....Applicants

Versus

TheExecutive Director , Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. , Panipat Refinery, Panipat- 132140.

....Respondent APPEARANCES

Forthe workman

Shri Karan Singh, AR For the Management

Shri Vivek Kaushal , Advocate

AWARD

Passed on 11-8-09

This award shall dispose off 23 references ofdifferent workmen referred by the Central Government by different Notifications . The references which are being disposed of by this award are as follows :-

PartiesName

Anil Kumar Vs. I.O.C.L.

Tejbir Vs. I.O.C.L.

Rajbir Vs. I.O.C.L.

Dilbag Vs. I.O.C.L.

Rajesh Kumar Vs. I.O.C.L.

Naresh Vs. I.O.C.L.

Raj Pal Vs. I.O.C.L.

Rohtas Vs. I.O.C.L.

Vishnu Dutt Vs. I.O.C.L.

Sitender Vs. I.O.C.L.

Karamvir Vs. I.O.C.L.

Randhir Singh Vs. I.O.C.L.

Subhash Vs. 1.O.C.L.

SatPal Vs. I.O.C.L.

Krishan Vs. I.O.C.L.

Suresh Kumar Vs. I.O.C.L.

Sat Pal Vs. I.O.C.L.

Surinder Singh Vs. I.O.C.L.

Jaibir Vs. I.O.C.L.

Inder Vs. I.O.C.L.

Ishwar Singh Vs. I.O.C.L.

Jasbir Singh Vs. I.O.C.L.

Joginder Singh Vs. I.O.C.L.

6364

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 17, 2009/ASVINA 25 , 1931

Common questions of law and facts are involved in these references ; hence, all the references are hereby disposed ofby this award . No doubt the nature of work of few set of workmen was different . Few workmen alleged that they worked as Sweepers , whereas , the others contended that they worked as Mechanic or other some types of similar work . But as stated earlier, the common question for adjudication is same and that is whether there existed any employer - employee relationship between the management of Indian Oil Corporation and the workmen? The relative issue is to what relief the workmen are entitled?

Onperusal of the pleadings of the parties , it is evidently clear that workmen have challenged their termination order being violative of the provisions of Industrial Disputes Act . It was contended by the workmen that they were engaged by the management of Indian Oil Corporation directly. They were under the administrative control of the management of the Indian Oil Corporation and they were paid wages by the Indian Oil Corporation . On the other hand , the management Indian Oil Corporation has alleged that all the workmen were engaged on contract and they were the employees of the contractor and not of the Indian Oil Corporation.

Opportunity for adducing evidence was given to the workmen and the management . Evidence was accordingly recorded. Documentary evidence was also filed in some cases by the workmen and almost in all the cases by the management as well . No doubt, the contention in some of the references is different ; accordingly , the same shall be dealtwith in this award separately . At the cost of repetition, the main issue is the same , i.e. employer- employee relationship.

The evidence of the workman was recorded and in different sets of references , different officer of management was examined . I have gone through the pleadings and evidence of the parties in all the references . It is evidently clear that the matter involved in all the references . is almost similar and the grievances can be redressed by a single award . No doubt, in few references there are some additional pleas taken by the workmen . The pleas so taken shall be discussed and dealt with separately in this very award . Thus , for the purpose of adjudication of all the references , considering similar nature of reference , I am consolidating the files and answering all the references by this award.

I have heard the parties at length . The main arguments of the workmen and their learned legal representative/counsel are that all the workmen were engaged / appointed by the management of Indian Oil Corporation directly and if their appointments have been shown through contractor by the management , it is illegal being against the provisions of the Contract Labour (Regulation and Abolition ) Act, 1970. It was further argued

[PART II-SEC. 3 (ii) ] that all the workmen were directly under the administrative control of the management and they were paid wages by the management of Indian Oil Corporation and in fact, they were the employees of Indian Oil Corporation and not of the contractor .

On the other hand , learned counsel for the management of Indian Oil Corporation submitted that there existed no relationship of employer- employee between the management of Indian Oil Corporation and the workmen . The services of the workmen were provided by the different contractors . The consolidated contracted amount was paid to the contractor by the management of Indian Oil Corporation , and thereafter , the wages of the workmen were paid by the contractor and not by the management of Indian Oil Corporation. It was further argued by the learned counsel of the management that there has been no violation of any provisions of the Contract Labour (Regulation and Abolition ) Act, 1970. If there is a violation of any provisions of the said Act , the workmen were not to be treated as direct employee of the Indian Oil Corporation but it will resulted into criminal action against the concerned authorities under the penal provisions of the said Act .

The issue of employer - employee relationship between the management of Indian Oil Corporation and the workman is a mixed question of facts and law, and accordingly, shall be adjudicated on the basis of evidence and pleadings of the parties .

In all the references , it is admitted fact that no appointment letter was issued by the management . It is denied by the workmen that the payment of wages were made good by the contractors but on perusal of the documents filed by the management, it is evidently clear that the payment to the workmen were made good by the respective contractors and not by the management of Indian OilCorporation . Hon'ble Supreme Court in 2008 LLR- 801 , GM, ONGC , Silchur Vs ONGC Contractual Workers Union had laid down the criteria to establish the direct employee- employer relationship between the workmen and the management of any organization . If we apply the ratio of GM, ONGC, Silchur's case (Supra) , the workmen have to prove the following facts to establish the employee- employer relationship:-

1. That there exited a relationship of master and servant .

2. That there was no contractor appointed by the management of Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. 3. The management of Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. , used to supervise the alleged work assigned to individual workers .

4. That the management of Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. took disciplinary action and called for explanations from the workers .

6365 [भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

भारत का राजपत्र: अक्तूबर 17, 2009/आश्विन 25, 1931

that they were under the administrative control of the management of Indian Oil Corporation.

5. That the workers were paid wages by the management of Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. , directly and not through the contractor.

6. At the cost of repetition , the wages were paid directly to the workers by the management of Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. , and the acquaintance rollwere prepared by the management of Indian OilCorporation Ltd. , to make the payment to the workers.

Onthe payment of wages, the management of Indian OilCorporation has filed the documentary evidence , which proves that consolidated amount on the basis of number of days worked by the workmen were given to the contractor and the contractor on the other hand used to paywages to the workmen . The management has filed all the relevant documents , such as , attendance sheet signed bythe officers of Indian Oil Corporation , order of payment passed on attendence of the workmen to the contractor, and thereafter, the payment of wages by the contractor to the workmen . Moreover, the management has also filed the detailed description of pay rolls containing all the details of payment of wages made good to its workmen , employees and officers . The name of workmen did not find place in these pay rolls .

Ifthe above mentioned ratio ofGM, ONGC, Silchur's case (supra) is applied in all the references , it is clear that workmen have failed to prove that they were appointed/ engaged by the management of Indian Oil Corporation. There is no iota of evidence on record to prove that they were directly under the administrative control of the management of Indian Oil Corporation . No doubt , it is contended by the workmen that their attendance were marked by the officers/officials of management of Indian OilCorporation, but it will not be sufficient to prove the administrative control over them .

The management of Indian Oil Corporation has also apprised this Tribunal that there is the procedure for recruitment ofworkmen for a particular work. No workman wasrecruited/appointed as per the rules ofthe department . Their services were provided by a contractor on outsourcing.

Onperusal ofall the evidence , oral and documentary, given by the workmen/officer of the management of the Indian Oil Corporation, I am of the view that payment of wages to all the workmen were made good by the contractor and not by the management of Indian Oil Corporation .

In I.D. Nos . 1/2003 , 97/2003 , 98/2003 , 99/2003 , 101 / 2003, 103/2003 , 566/2005, 567/2005 and 568 of2005 the workmen who alleged to work as the sweepers in the office of management of Indian Oil Corporation , contended that there is a difference in the nature of documents filed by them and provided by the management of Indian Oil Corporation . When I perused the documents in detail during the course of arguments , it came to my notice that at the top of the attendance sheet there is a sign of a small piece ofpaper and after getting the zerox something was written on zerox paper and it was further zeroxed and filed by the workmen in these references . This event was accepted by the learned counsel for the workmen that it seems to be zeroxed by putting some small piece ofpaper at the space where the name of principal employer was written. Thus, under such.circumstances this piece ofpaper (attendance sheet) cannot be considered in creating the master - servant relationship between the workmen and the management of Indian Oil Corporation .

All the workmenwere supposed to file/adduce some cogent evidence like sanction of leave application , disciplinary action taken by the management of Indian Oil Corporation , if any , etc. Few instances have been shown by the workman in their cross - examination . When they were examined by the Tribunal , they stated that they used to apply leave to the officer of Indian Oil Corporation . But there is no piece of document provided to this Tribunal to prove that leave were ever sanctioned to any workmen by the management of Indian Oil Corporation . Thus , the instances enumerated by the workmen in the references are not sufficient to constitute the administrative control bythe management of Indian Oil Corporation over all the workmen. Accordingly, the workmen have failed to prove

The above discussion proves that neither the workmen were appointed/ engaged by the management of the Indian Oil Corporation nor they were under the administrative control of the Indian Oil Corporation . They were also not paid the wages by Indian Oil Corporation . Hence, there existed no master- servant relationship between the management of Indian Oil Corporation and the workmen . In few of the references , it is contended by the workmen that the contractor , if any, shown by the managementement of Indian Oil Corporation was camouflage and shame . In ONGC Silchur's case ( supra) , the conditions underwhich a contractor can be treated as camouflage and shame are mentioned . Hon'ble Supreme Court in this case has relied upon the law laid down in Steel Authority of India Ltd. and others Vs National Union Water Workers and Others AIR 2001 SC- 3527 . The question before this Tribunal is under what circumstances the contract between management of Indian Oil Corporation and the workmen can be held to be shame and comouflage? In case the contract has been held to be shame and camouflage, the contract labour working under the management of pricnipal employer are held to be the employees of the Indian Oil Corporation . It depends on the facts and circumstances of each case , whether the contract executed inbetween management and the contractor is camouflage and shame? It is also an issue of facts and has to be decided 6366

[PART II-SEC. 3 ( ii) ] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 17, 2009 /ASVINA 25 , 1931

The issue to be decided is whether in the case of violation of any of the provisions mentioned under Section 10 ( 1 ) , Section 7 and Section 12 of the Contract Labour ( Regulation and Abolition) Act 1970, the contract labour shall be deemed to be an employee of the Principal employer?

on the facts and circumstances of the case . Whether there is a genuine contractor, and whether there is a proper master -servant relationship in between the management of theIndian Oil Corporation and the workmen also depends on the facts and circumstances of each reference . The Court/Tribunal has to apprise whether these facts emerged inrealty or there was some paper arrangement to make the payment good to the workmen through contractor.

In few of the references , the nature of contractor is challenged by the workmen . No doubt , almost in all the references it is not mentioned in the pleadings that there was a contract between the contractor and the management of Indian Oil Corporation . But the documents provided and filed by the management of Indian Oil Corporation proved that the workmen were having the notice and knowledge that their services are being taken through a contractor . On the basis of the documents , I am ofthe view that prior to raising the Industrial dispute the workmen were having the knowledge and notice that their services were provided to the management of Indian Oil Corporation through contractor , but there is no mention of this fact in pleadings almost in all the references barring few. It is contended by the workmen that the contract is shame and camouflage and void being against the provisions of Contract Labour ( Regulation and Abolition ) Act, 1970 . Unless and until the terms and conditions as laid down in GM, ONGC's case (supra ) are not fulfilled , no workman can be treated as the direct employee of Indian Oil Corporation.

This issue has been settled by Hon'ble the Apex Court in Steel Authority of India Ltd.'s case (supra) . Moreover , Punjab and Haryana High Court in Food Corporation of India and others Vs. Presiding Officer , Central Government Industrial Tribunal - cum- Labour Court- 1 , Chandigarh and others 2008 LLR 391 , has decided this issue after relying the ratio of Steel Authority of India Ltd. , case ( supra) . Without mentioning the relevant paras of Steel Authority of India Ltd's case (supra) and ofFood Corporation of India and others Vs. Presiding Officer , Central Government Industrial Tribunal -cum- Labour Court - 1's case ( supra) , I am relying the ratio of both of the judgments , and the ratio of both of the judgement, is that if there is any violation of Section 7 , Section 10 and Section 12 of The Contact Labour (Regulation and Abolition ) Act , then only penal provisions of Section 23 and Section 25 of the said Act are attracted . Hence , it is nowhere provided that such employees , employed through the contractor would become employees of the principal employer. I have gone through the facts and circumstances of the case . Almost in all the references the registration and the license have been produced by the management of Indian Oil Corporation . It may only resulted in penal actions under Section 23 and Section 25 of the Contract Labour (Regulation and Abolition) Act , 1970, if there is - any violation of any provisions of the Contract Labour (Regulation and Abolition) Act .

The next issue for the disposal before this Tribunal iswhether the workmen will be deemed to be in the services ofthe management of Indian Oil Corporation on account of violation of any of the provisions of Contract Labour (Regulation and Abolition ), Act 1970. It is issue of law and has limited concern with the facts . On the issue of facts , I have already given my view that the workmen are not employees of the management of Indian Oil Corporation but their services were provided by the different contractors to the management . As this issue of law is also raised by the parties , it is the duty ofthis Tribunal to decide itaswell . On this issue , I am of the view that there may be three circumstances :-

Accordingly , I am of the view that none of the workmenwas the employee of the management . There was no relationship of master - servant and employer and employee between the workmen and the management of Indian Oil Corporation . Thus , no question for termination ofthe services of the workmen by Indian Oil Corporation arises . All the references are answered accordingly and the workmen are not entitled for any relief . Let the Central Government be informed, and thereafter , file be consigned to record room.

1. There may be a case where the practice of contract labour is prohibited by the appropriate Government under Section 10 ( 1 ) of the Contract Labour (Regulation and Abolition ) Act, 1970 .

G. K. SHARMA, Presiding Officer नई दिल्ली, 30 सितम्बर , 2009

2. There maybe an issue regarding the registration ofestablishment of principal employer under Section 7 of the Contract Labour ( Regulation and Abolition ) Act, 1970.

का. आ. 2894.-जबकि मैसर्स गोदरेज कंस्यूमर प्रोडक्ट्स लि. , [ मुंबई -11 क्षेत्र में कोड संख्या एमएच/ 45339 के अंतर्गत ] ( एतंदुपरान्त प्रतिष्ठान के रूप में संदर्भित ) ने कर्मचारी भविष्य निधि और प्रकीर्ण उपबंध अधिनियम, 1952 ( 1952 का 19 ) ( एतदुपरान्त अधिनियम के रूप में संदर्भित ) की धारा 17 की उप- धारा ( 1 ) के खण्ड ( क) के अंतर्गत छूट के लिए आवेदन दिया है । 3. There maybe an issue regarding the license by the contractor under Section 12 of the Contract Labour ( Regulation and Abolition ) Act, 1970 .

6367 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : अक्तूबर 17, 2009/आश्विन 25 , 1931

applied for exemption under clause ( a) of sub -section ( 10) of Section 17 of the Employees' Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 ( 19 of 1952) (hereinafter referred to as the Act) .

2. और जबकि, केन्द्र सरकार के विचार में अंशदान दर के मामले में उक्त प्रतिष्ठान के भविष्य निधि के नियम उसके कर्मचारियों के लिए उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 6 में विनिर्दिष्ट की तुलना में कम हितकर नहीं हैं और कर्मचारी भी समान प्रकृति के किसी अन्य प्रतिष्ठान के कर्मचारियों के संबंध में उक्त अधिनियम या कर्मचारी भविष्य निधि योजना, 1952 ( एतदुपरान्त उक्त प्रतिष्ठान के रूप में संदर्भित ) के अंतर्गत अन्य भविष्य निधि लाभ भी प्राप्तकर रहे हैं ।

2. And whereas in the opinion of the Central Government, the rules of the provident fund of the said establishment with respect to the rates of contribution are not less favourable to employees therein than those specified in Section 6 of the said Act and the employees are also in enjoyment of other provident fund benefits provided under the said Act or under the Employees ' ProvidentFunds Scheme , 1952 ( hereinafter referred to as the Scheme) in relation to the employees in any other establishment of similar character .

3. केन्द्र सरकार एतद्वारा , अब उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 17 की उप - धारा ( 1 ) के खण्ड ( क ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए तथा इस संबंध में समय समय पर विनिर्दिष्ट शर्तों को ध्याच रखते हुए , उक्त प्रतिष्ठान को उक्त योजना के समस्त उपबंधों के प्रचालन से 01-05-2001 से अगली अधिसूचना तक के लिए छूट प्रदान करती है ।

[सं. एस-35015/90/2009- एस. एस- II ] एस. डी. जेवियर, अवर सचिव

3. Now, therefore , in exercise of the powers conferred by clause (a) of sub - section ( 1 ) of Section 17 of the said Act and subject to the conditions specified in this regard from time to time, the Central Government, hereby, exempts the said establishment from the operation of all the provisions of the said Scheme with effect from 01-05-2001 until further notification.

New Delhi , the 30th September , 2009 S. O. 2894.-Whereas M/ s . Godrej Consumer Products Ltd. [ under Code No. MH/45339 in Mumbai - II Region ] ( hereinafter referred to as the establishment ) has

[No. S- 35015/90/2009-SS- II] S. D. XAVIER, Under Secy.

Printed by the Manager , Govt . of India Press , Ring Road, Mayapuri , New Delhi - 110064 and Published by the Controller of Publications , Delhi - 110054 .