This Gazette may contains Multiple Subjects

REGD. NO. D. L. (N) 04/0007,200, 05

PUBLISHED BY AUTHORITY

t11ktlIii ch

WEEKLY

qc•cei srti q a 24- w-tatl 30, 2010, 1ni -mittrIPEf 4-177.1 10, 1931

7i. 5f No. 51

NEW DELHI, JANUARY 24—JANUARY 30, 2010, SATURDAY/NIACHA 4—MACHA 10, 1931 Separate Paging is given to this Part in order that it may be filed as a separate compilation

11¹T II—(gus 3-3 1T-737S ( ti PART II—Section 3—Sub-section (ii)

Statutory Orders and Notifications Issued by the Ministries of the Government of India (Other than the Ministry of Defence)

et), /9* ytchicirt.017

MINISTRY OF PERSONNEL, PUBLICCRIEVANCES

AND PENSIONS

(a 3frr evratto fTurT1)

(Department of Personnel and Training) f5c41, 18 2010 •

280.-1 w en It 1n1 Itf aTtRIN StrWiTI

ItkaT, 1973 ( 1974 TT 31fqi-izr4 4 2) ttRT 24 TT- Tir (8) TCff VfA7Rli Vzlin Ta a r0 If* Mtn ¹³ iffci4i q •⁴419( q177 3T7-Mff ( ³1Pi* 4-11 4-ic4), ci 1-tom rqc-c-ir *FT 11-o4 -mrtr9i (#A1311, ) -gru Tir-mr-crff 4rrml 34441- * tia1M i t "FF7 rfsbo-ii,

.11 ,=A --¹ fay cll .', 3444r-4w *R.71.f-411 .41 ,417i i 3176ff, c1(91-1,t) 1:11'q1.3Trl. ¹:117-jf 4110•r * ³71-Fiti-94k-roT Tfr Ttutrr L11 fqr4 rtr T-nrft-d 31t-o177 3T-qr-o-q Tff 144W 4 deop 4r=roY* 37-4914

44q 44-d1 c IwIMI73cart, ,saleg e. faxla

S.O. 280.—In exercise of the powers COIllured by sub-section (8) of Section 24 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 ( Act Not of 1974), the Central Government hereby appoints Shri Purnendu Chakravarty, Advocate as Special Public Prosecutors for conducting prosecution of cases instituted by the Delhi Special Police Establishment (CBI) in the State of Uttar Pradesh at Lucknow in the Court of Special Judge (Ayurveda Cases), Lucknow and Sint. Gazala Sultana, Advocate as Special Public Prosecutor for conducting CBI cases in the Court of Special Judicial Magistrate. Lucknow respectively and appeals/revisions or other matters arising out orthese cases in revisional or appellate courts established by law.

34¹-44q** yrt f-wr wT-'r

[ -14. 225/34/2009-74131-ii(

1No. 225/34/2009-AVD-111

31

CHANDRA PRAKASI I, Under Secy.

202 GI/2010

(619)620 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: JANUARY 30, 2010/MAGHA 10,1931 [PART 11—SEC. 3('Ci)] fGrrlt, 18 it, 201 0

OFFICE OF THE CHIEF COMMISSIONE R OF INCOME-TAX

Jaipur, the 18th January, 2010

No. 13/2009-10

S.O. 282.—In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-clause (vi) of clause (23C) of Section 10 of the Income- tax, Act, 1961 (43 of 1961) read with rule 2CA of the Income- Tax Rules, 1962 the Chief Commissioner of Income-tax, Jaipur hereby apporves " Shri Digamber Jain V idyalaya Society, Jaipur" for the purpose of said Section for the A.

Yrs. 2009-2010 & onwards.

3T5-1-t--At -FLT fi-s-aTt trt

AW[V1, 3-1-17 Afga

777, 1 8 9 , 2010

S.O. 281.—In exercise of the 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 Shri B. R. Bhosle, Advocate as Special Public Prosecutors for conducting trial of CC Nos. 975/2005 and 1137/2005 in the Court Chief Judicial Magistrate and CC No.1/2006 in the Court of Special Judge Nanded (Maharashtra) arising out of RC9/E/2003/BS&FC/MUM and appeals, revisions or other matter arising out of said case in revisional or appellate courts established by law.

TqTR Tftifd ³⁷:¹T⁷ f-i ,v4 ¹⁹⁶² {{^{{FOOTNOTE *}}}} f--7-¹1:^{1 2 1}:¹¹ fl-i(Au s _

t. 7R. fa-- If , Tai 3Trzr-*-{ witiT, 18$, 2010

fErA'

( diq fai-ITTO

7t '1-cc-c11, 15 -9-7t, 2010

284.- 1-14 aftTf9-44, 1955 (1955

the Reserve Bank of India, hereby declare that the provisions of sub-clause (i) of clause (c) of sub-section (1) of Section 10 of the said Act shall not apply to Punjab National Bank in so far as it relates to the nomination of Shri K.R. Kamath, Chairman & Managing Director of the Bank as a Director on Board of PNB Gilts Ltd.

[F. No. 20/9/2006-BO, I]

SUM ITA DAWRA, Director *1 23) 9T-7 21T *77 1%7 717 21 3777T (1) igus (7) RT Alf vrf*TzlY*T -sk , r wct,R, 47-tzr fr7-4 44) TR-rrpf wk-*, Tq--gm ;ft 7-1ff 144, f--a-r41- i:kfolgr 3T41g4z -Eh* V. 09, M17 3r-f, 63 174 77-1,,

fsn-i , 19 797ft, 2010

d-m¹ ml-qg

33-aft7*fff' 37W-a1 31-Tr

ift

fif:1 ,4,14 3-Tfvf7zr4, 1949 (1949 k)7 *T-P-781-tr *tip

I

WTt 31-f4F974 1() a-1 dwRi ( ) ( 1))* ,-Rgus(i)*TTcr47-4, 4,114 i7179 77 3.4 41Hr c¹⁴) c¹¹ ,1, -¹ • WI 7-0 1* 5-14>1 7:k74 -sr4q *.37{.*r424*1 -7179-1 frF7r fm.*4ri

TTIT§r afgerai t 34ra TICTI .144 3w-4r 31-riA aTtil uT, ITOc,i1K 44, if 1,144mon fiksr-t ri7 TR f97r*i -Cd1 F I

[ 11t1. N. 9/12/20094'311-H

IFT171 fik7T* New Delhi, the 22nd January, 2010

S.O. 287.—In exercise of the powers conferred by clause (a) of sub-section (3) of Section 9 of The Banking Companies (Acquisition and Transfer of Undertakings) Act, 1970/1980 read with sub-clause (1) of clause 3 and sub-clause (1) of clause 8 of The Nationalized Banks (Management and Miscellaneous Provisions) Scheme, 1970/1980, the Central Government, after consultation with the, Reserve Bank of India, hereby appoints Shri M.R. Nayak (DoB: 13-5-1952) presently General Manager, Corporation Banks as Executive Director, Allahabad Bank with effect from the date of his taking over charge of the post and upto 31-05-2012 i.e. the last day of month in which he would attain the age of superannuation or until further orders, whichever is earlier.

. [F.No.9/12/2009-B0.11

SUMITA DAWRA, Director ( antin wr4 fatim )

fccvril*, 21 2010

*taTT, 288.—f47 4-11(-14, 31TfiITa of f4I-TITT

-44 3iff114 rrft 5 79', 2009 •*1'1-1 4-1 fitsetal

aftt- vh(r1 V, fq7 1-1:41C14, 1114 farm

wrft d-lc *14 * 31CTIF(5d As11rT*.t7 1:07T "Fct -nit-Iti f*-71 shell :

Officer in respect of Division mentioned against his name:

relating to S. Name Designation Vice Matters No,

1. Sh. A. K. US(FIPB) Mrs. FIPB Shrivastava Monika in ( Infrastruc- Dhaini ture R Invest- ment Division)

I F. No. El 2005-R111 S. KANAKAMBARAN, Under Sec n . (M) kil'n tm T 3fIT 311EMTCTFT t.1 r5c,rif , 22 ,3-1-f clf , 2010

,311-1 t-ri 3T+77, HI Nch

3-Tf1-f9714, 2.TT a el chC•114 1c1( '41.4c-14f *

1999 ET171 3 ( 4 ) ;10 Ali YTf i 1 5141 , 1 -TR- 3'17 fTif-o 444- HTAH.SC{ 175717 Hka p-14, 7*-04-*, 1 F7Ich1qd "nr 1#7 1-111(l q , *rff=r- 37P ³1NTt,TIIT f ⁹•¹⁷¹ -¹¹c¹'-i 7"cri fiteg 4/14/2009-. 3t. (717-11) f- '91-* 3 -1 E1 4-* , 2009 * 39771 14, 'qeft ,1-1 44 neti,t-i, 3P-3W, (n 1,4 16-41, 31 ii ztic 31t.. 11'3i-q t -PR, 91 •km-ii-110060 *1 80,000 777f qi i ii f u f<91* 25-12-2009 *1 14 3 zrii aTafq 1,11-1k-clunh 3-trrEn, +(c6 4-ic t1 "ff 2n ,i0-cicnoinor aR-i

4.1111 I -44R4 3Tum*Ttr

[Ti. I -15/2008-t..=',UIV

c-st cf;'R, T67- MINISTRY OF SOCIAL JUSTICE AND

EMPOWERMENT

VS 11'4* TzTrff 1#tim lo4,4

"c7

311--ar174 3T-4T •a 51114-dl- 3m11t9•91

(7631rtcrlt)-0-f-iwr r4f-ea-vi

qpril 34TFT

t;9o3T1Vlail

[71. 'FL 1/1/2005-341e13-111]

cb-i qd +-A , 31-q7 Tf (3TR-t31r-) (Department of Economic Affairs) New Delhi, the 21st January, 2010

S.O. 288.—In partial modification of Ministry of Finance, Department of Economic Affairs' notification of even number dated 5th June, 2009, the following officer of the Ministry of Finance, Department of Economic Affairs, is designated as Central Public Information New Delhi, the 22nd January, 2010 S.O. 289.—In exercise of the powers conferred by Section 3(4) of the National Trust for Welfare for Persons with Autism, Cerebral Palsy, Mental Retardation and Multiple Disabilities Act, 1999 and in pursuance of Secretariat of the Appointment Committee of the Cabinet, Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances and Pensions, Department of Personnel and Training No. 4/14/2009-E0 (SM-II) dated 3rd November, 2009, Ms. Poonam Natarajan, Chairperson, National Trust, 16-B, Bada Bazar Road, Old Raj inder Nagar, New Delhi-1 10060 is reappointed as Chairperson, National Trust for welfare for Persons with Autism, Cerebral Palsy, Mental Retardation and Multiple Disabilities in the pay scale of Rs. 80,000 i-fixed \v.e.l. the forenoon of 25-12-2009 for a period of three years.

No.1-15,2008-DD IV]

11ARINDFR KAUR. D) Secy.

New Delhi, the 15th January, 2010

ti411 3TIT T11771:17 +-mot(

fc(-cil, 15 77qt, 2010

S. 0. 29I.—In continuation of this Ministry 's

Notification of even number, dated 10-11-2009 and in 3 •T. 290,-714-41d g 1q7lt 10-11-2009'4

exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section ( 1 ) of 344TIII4M iWR -ffzu a i1 f CsF-11.1-0

Section 5 of the Cinematograph Act, 1952 (37 of 1952) read 1983 * r-P.04 774 8 * #14 7 764 teleireil 31f4f9414, 1952

with rules 7 and 8 of the Cinematograph (Certification) ( 1952 *1 37) tIM 5 37- KRT ( 1 ) T'(1 sled Yl k141 Rules, 1983, the Central Government is pleased to appoint ix* ch(r t-Itchlt

the following persons as members of the Mumbai Advisory

Panel of the Central Board of Film Certification with 3 9-74 # 2 ci til 3T4f4 * rol; 3T 2T-4T a-Trr 3770T t4 cl41,

immediate effect for a period of two years or until further 5-14 A It 96(4 Fl, r 1r-h114 t I U t 1 4T3` 141(

orders, whichever is earlier :

4c11511H i1T.MZI f97jq4*-17di :

(I) Shri Nitin P. Mavani

( I ) 41'. 4 HR

Snit. Jay'shree Sopan K amb le

1.1-45r

Ms. Shweta R. Jadhav

133;g1

Shri Prashant A. Kamble

#. 809/5/2009- -i)(T=ft)

Shri Umesh Kumar Ram

I3TfiT7dI g T7TZ, f9t4T* (fIFFII4)

I F. No. 809'7 2009-F(C)C MINISTRY OF INFORMATION AND BROADCASTING

AMITABH KUMAR. Director ( Films) New Delhi, the 15th January, 2010

Recil, 15 2010

T. 341. 292. 10-11-2009 *1

3T{-.ni-q9i mu A w =4r1r-r4 fiZP4,

1983 * f97:(4 7 8 * TIVT trfaff a lra4 afT-Trwt, 1952

(1952 WI 37) *1 l--T77 5 *r 77-4TZT (1)

.b(f 4o Q {-R ch R Netl:rd1 1 ,4 4-11(1r *9 *1

cic chlcf Tr1-1T4 A t1 qt11 31-41P-11 *1. 31241q11 31 11cli stk.

¹ S. 0. 290.—In continuation of this Ministry's Notification of even number, dated 10-11-2009 and in exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (I) of Section 5 of the Cinematograph Act, 1952 (37 of 1952) read with rules 7 and 8 of the Cinematograph (Certification) Rules, 1983, the Central Government is pleased to appoint the following persons as members of the Bangalore Advisory Panel of the Central Board of Film Certification with immediate effect for a period of two years or until further orders, whichever is earlier :

if A 77 f4 soviN 4Li.* Shri H. V. Kumar

rdmvir CAM 111-Cf/T

IPITT4 # 3TaftT * Th7 379aar arrA 31ft*

A

Ala-al

³.TT. 293.-TA 44lc14 fq-9.1 10-11-2009 3Tfi-R1-491* *4 14 72.7 (S11739) 1r-z:(1:1, [ Af. 809/7/2009-L,4i(lt)]

1983 * f974 7 74 8 tTP,T ilt817 r4(11m01 -.37f1--Tf9-714, 1952 ( 1952 *7 37) *1 474 5 *) 37- 9--TF1 ( 1 ) 51(i624 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: JANUARY 30, 20 idiMAGHA 10, 1931 [PART 11—Sec.3(ii)] Sctirt , 19 77111, 2010

Th-17171ITT airs 1-14-1101(od octracti ATIT4 142 7TiT fa7 WWI 31⁷T-A aiiik7 04 -a*,

311. 295.-77 1-1.A1r14 Vi fcifw 10-11-2009 T94 7:1 ill , q Roc-4 NHl u l-f Att

37fgl:FiT 511 14 2iTT (17171Tr9 ) r-f q , ki(1164hlt l i TT tiQf 4 f977 410 * :

PR 809/3/2009-Rw(111)]

(2) *T A 7 7, wa-d4. gRt 311 tffttl 717T, t-31, 2018 r 1c 1f Tate I

of the Central Board of Film Certification with immediate effect for a period of two years or until further orders, whichever is earlier.

[F. No. 809/8/2009-F(C)] AMITABH KUMAR, Director (Films) .74 fkrx11, 19 2010

7T, 31T. 297.-71 1-IA1(14 IC-lich 10- 11 -2009 3Tr47FidaT W4 .4 .fftff artilx (;p41.110 fiz17, 1983 * t2:17 7 8 * #T2T TrfaU aM rax 31filf97171, 1952 (1952 Tr 37) NM 5 71:1- ⁴7ITI (1) 3177 71feiffzi 31*11 *74 tR, a1 w i( c4i ch1L1.

acchIci Thud t 7:11 3744 31241 3TTA 33rkW t11 oa, , T94 11 46c4

aY3` lm ii(-11Z4)1( 1 .1(1 VT-d1 :

W414. 7F1

(7)

( 8)

(9)

[ TR -cf. 809/7/2009-17A] 31#1714i 41t, frtEW (rch74- 4) New Delhi, the 19th January, 2010

S. 0. 297.—In continuation of this Ministry's Notification of even number, dated 10-11-2009 and in exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (1) of Section 5 of the Cinematograph Act, 1952 (37 of 1952)read with rules 7 and 8 of the Cinematograph (Certification) Rules, 1983, the Central Government is pleased to appoint the following persons as members of the Mumbai Advisory Panel of the Central Board of Film Certification with immediate effect for a period of,two years or until further orders, whichever is earlier :

(I) Dr. Kavita Rege

Smt. Milanjana Shah Smt. Nadeem Mitha Shri Narendramohan Singh

Ms. Nadeem Nusrath Shri Afzal Sidhiqui Smt. Rafia Maridia

Smt. Jayashree Sangitrao Shri Gopal Sharma

[ F. No. 809/7/2009-F(C)] AMITABH KUMAR, Director (Films) -grrwr afrt triTarrf isrErrur

for i1, 12 2010

Vr. 31T.

RTC& airek-erq 414c, adifiziR, 1956 (1956 102) NM 3 34- 47Th (1 ) * -grirg (V) * 3TVRIR AT fs liraci V-41 itt.t∎ it TRTRO *TA *Iirc31. (ill) 311 VP*, f9-01T, rara,rHr fmrr argitirff , r641aM W4 gr,furrer, TR 3Tr47ird-11* 7111. 1M Irt' zrEfTf 1-1TitE1 3TRINTi -crffErq,*TRTzr * -Fri 4441ti1n ict) ?-11 t

47, 3-4?1 31f17ft+7rl t TM 3 3Q 47TTT ( I ) * * 374%1 argf{uT 4 titqs) kn5gi0 71724 -1-1. 4 til* 9 sm-i cia, 1960 Th-l• 31f1117-1T 1,(LE7i1 ail. W. 13 8 14. RI Raiff 11711 ct) , aTtk :-

3171 3$17771 T1 "Tr 3 '*t 37- 4ITTT (1) * (T) * aitfri #9191"U" * at-07 Trr i-1. 9±4T 21 31T dt-r *FM 311-4 t1=219- irt fv-irmiwf TrreVzli Tif-dp-7rfc7 3124q,

"21. (sh-81) 7z7 st vrRt, k.1011(" RA,cRr 'PAR argitrm 1 I/Cr M T, frwrm

[4. 11013/1/2009-71 (*NA)]

3TR. i.ct)t-r, 3TqT H MINISTRY OF HEALTH AND FAMILY WELFARE New Delhi, the 12th January, 2010 S. 0. 298.—Whereas the Central Government, in pursuance of clause (a) of sub-section (1) of Section 3 of the Indian Medical Council Act, 1956 (102 of 1956) and in consultation with the Government of Himachal Pradesh have nominated Dr. (Smt.) Jaishree Sharma, Director, Medical Education and Research, Himachal Pradesh, Shimla to be a member of the Medical Council of India for five years with effect from the date of issue of this notification.

Now, therefore, in pursuance of the provision of sub- section (1) of Section 3 of the said Act, the Central Government hereby makes the following further amendment in the Notification of the Government of India in the then Minsistry of Health number S.O. 138 dated the 9th January, 1960, namely :-

In the said Notification, under the heading, "Nominated under clause (a) of sub-section (I) of Section 3", for serial number 21 and the entries thereto, the following entries shall be substituted, namely :—

"21. Dr. (Smt.) Jaishree Sharma Government of Director Himachal Pradesh" Medical Education and Research Himachal Pradesh, Shimala.

[No. V. I 1013/1/2009-ME (P-I)] R. SAN KARAN, Under Secy.

71.1)WaT TIPTR, (911 30 HI .T11 fait toi

( 3tritrom "ErrErA *grit )

-fi'sc.rit, 18 fcgrER, 2009

*T.311. 299,— -44 414,3 It fir, ferd1111-1-rant) 7R1314 717 ftR)4 tR N-411mt4 13-grit7 11TT t acrd .1131d itst-e tf Tit 3-Tr-ft #1) NT? at)r{ TIP1 3411fff414, 1976 (1976 *1 60) 2.1T .41Z 4rT T-Trq ( 1:11 313rk1) 1 i4 44, 1987* d ycliql* 39.€ 14 to 34)7 7T $1 14117T oitioR R 41141*1' 3TtsiftT-4 311 dcrcr His tPTT2-tffT (411 *fdifiT9 Iff*.2.-TfTi 14 3117j4 chOf

31M, 31,31, Yu wcw, dad 3Tfqfiz117*-1* 41R1 36 31- 4Tm (7) a-lig 7-9-- t1M (8) VITSR7 spilq -6(d ATF1

-511. fa, #166, tTRI 9614, klick9 974174 9 TR, t sw:6(-(41,*T4R-560 057 5141 I I iI ld 1:Pirri zr2uk ( 712/1 2k7rf 111 ) •qT7 " v,,He.14V1-3- 1*" 9.Pg7T*31*-*to-11:1r0 314 dlr,a dR cnk u f ("1•77 GI*4) Trt$7 *61 Trzrt aftt fq* 3T-1-477' f-r4 a 3111 7 * HT5ci ter, f viT "Tatar" (fq* w1:1'-{4* t/09/08/5091:11:11-kfr47 fch q r TnT 31-I4itq-ff 4t-iv/T- 7m 7it 7 * I

111 r{ , }11441rIi* 3144+1 rir ,t.11 git 1W 41 1-1150 31-11:1 31:71-7(q* atdr1ff far:it-Jot gi g w1:4 flzrdt, IS,0* 3T31-68 3111 dtil -Frrqt f7m4 37-fre-c-ff IFT-47 rqr.iiiio(t+47 TRIT t o fqr:igicf ,341 Ptaffr {{^{{FOOTNOTE 172*}}}} • TIPTOUT ³:¹

'-TT Y r [ aIPT 11--ti us 3(ti)]

ITR7 usTi Lof : -dt1 30, 2010/711 10, 1931

r 627 MINISTRY OF CONSUMER AFFAIRS, FOOD AND PUBLIC DISTRIBUTION

(Department of Consumer Affairs)

New Delhi, the 18th December, 2009

S.O. 299.—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 (Weighbridge Type) with digital indication of medium accuracy (Accuracy class-111) of series "STPL-WB" and with brand name "INNOVA" (hereinafter referred to as the said Model), manufactured by M/s. Senseinnova Technologies Pvt. Ltd., # 166, 3rd Cross, 7th Main, Bhuvaneswari Nagar, T. Dasarahalli, Bangalore- 560 057 and which is assigned the approval mark IND/09/08/509.

The said model is a strain guage type load cell based non-automatic weighing instrument (Weighbridge Type) with a maximum capacity of 40 tonne and minimum capacity of 200kg. The verification scale interval (e) is10.kg. It has a tare device with a 100 per cent subtractive retained tare effect. The Light Emitting Diode (LED) indicates the weighing results. The instrument operates on 230 Volts, 50 Hertz alternative current power supply.

- .

n WL11-.1.

Figure-2—Sealing provision of the indicator of the model

Seating can be aone by making holes in the indicator of the instrument, then a steel wire is passed through these doles and a lead seal is applied. The indicator cannot be opened without tampering the seal. A typical schematic diagram of sealing provision of the model is given above.

Further, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (12) of Section 36 of the said Act, the Central Government hereby declares that this certificate of approval of the said Model shall also cover the weighing instruments of similar make, accuracy and performance of same series with maximum capacity 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 5 g. or more and with 'e' value 1 x 10 k, 2 x 10' or 5 x10', 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 (182)/2008] R. MATHURBOOTHAM, Director of Legal Metrology 202 GI/10-2[PART 11---Skc 3(ii)] 628 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: JANUARY30, 2010/MAGHA 10,1931 .91 , 7T, 2010

New Delhi, the 7th January, 2010

S.O. 300.—Whereas the Central Government, after considering the report submitted to it by the prescribed authority, is satisfied that the model described in the said report (see the figure given below) is in conformity with the provisions of the Standards of Weights and Measures Act, 1976 (60 of 1976) and the Standards of Weights and Measures (Approval of Models) Rules, 1987 and the said Model is likely to maintain its accuracy over periods of sustained use and to render accurate service under varied conditions;

Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub-sections (7) and (8) of Section 36 of the said Act, the Central Government hereby issues and publishes the certificate of approval of the Model of non-automatic weighing instrument (Table top type) with digital indication of High accuracy (Accuracy class-II) of series "GSI" and with brand name "GLOBAL" (hereinafter referred to as the said Model), manufactured by M/s. Global Scale Industries, Tiraha Masj id Haji Munir, Parao Dubey, Agra Road, Aligarh-20200I, U.P. and which is assigned the approval mark 1ND/09/08/540;

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

Figure 2 Schematic diagram of the model

Lead seal is affixed on the stamping plate at the right side/back side of the scale for the security of circuit diagram and mechanical assembly to avoid the fraudulent use. The instrument cannot be opened without breaking the seals. A typical schematic diagram of sealing provision of the model is given above.

Further, in exercise of the power conferred by sub-section (12) of Section 36 of the said Act, the Central Government hereby declares that this certificate of approval of the said Model shall also cover the weighing instruments of similar make, accuracy and 'performance of same series with maximum capacity up to 50kg. with verification scale interval (n) in the range of 100 to 50,000 for 'e' value of lmg. 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 l e' value of I x 10k, 2 x 10' or 5 x 10k. where k is a positive or negative whole number or equal to zero, manufactured by the same manufacturer in accordance with the same principle, design and with the same materials with which, the said approved Model has been manufactured.

[F. No. WM-2 I (203)/20081

R. MATHURBOOTHAM, Director of Legal Metrolog nTHE GAZETTE OF INDIA: JANUARY 30, 2010/MAGHA 10,1931 [PART II SEC. 3(11)] 630

c'T1 , 7 -1't1, 2010

N1cIIR T, feg-d ATfir+-Tft TIT 34 317 ft1:0 1:11 f7917 crit:t ''El1917, 711(1:171t1T7 77T * ft" -rft 3Tft-fff k') VIZ * 11T4 'in ch 3TfVf51114, 1976 (1976 60) 79-II VIZ * 17 HI 1a, .10E-f fitft "ef

VOI 317FI7 11 411 dad His ( .1-1kcil *r al-T*9 ) tztvf, 1987* 641t1Y* 311-Fq 3fti 71 V17 *.1 1i17-49T fang n grt fErriT trftRtra{{^{{FOOTNOTE *}}}} dli Ttd {{^{{FOOTNOTE *}}}}4T UCH ⁴,t ii Ttrrr;

31N, *t-14 117*-17, d ckf 3Tflifizrr1 t1TZT 36 37-9M (7) 3fR .34- q11-1 (8) VI 17feRfzli 8<4 4,1:t -44 Tor4F IzOF telT7, f*-74r Trza 313=117 770T-Trq =boil {{^{{FOOTNOTE *}}}} I

+-Ilse 7 Itterf .1-*4 -51-MIT9 Th-f 411141¹Z ⁵¹ t^{01 14} I

ftir 1*-e *rd-Fr a1 ⁶⁴+c¹f I His a,(4 * d'-pitf vr 7*. 3-krt 41.,-1144 svoli4 ztrerwr fcar Trzrr[ trPT 11—UO3 3(i)] 'tirrff tivP-14 : -9--qt 30, 2010/7st 10, 1931 631

New Delhi, the 7th January, 2010

S.O. 301.—Whereas the Central Government, after considering the report submitted to it by the prescribed authority, is satisfied that the model described in the said report (see the figure given below) is in conformity with the provisions of the Standards of Weights and Measures Act, 1976 (60 of 1976) and the Standards of Weights and Measures (Approval of Models) Rules, 1987 and the said Model is likely to maintain its accuracy over periods of sustained use and to render accurate service under varied conditions;

Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub-sections (7) and (8) of Section 36 of the said Act, the Central Government hereby issues and publishes the certificate of approval of the Model of non-automatic weighing instrument (Platform type) with digital indication of medium accuracy (Accuracy class-111) of series "G PS" and with brand name "GLOBAL" (hereinafter referred to as the said Model), manufactured by M/s. Global Scale Industries, Tiraha Masjid Haji Munir, Parao Dubey, Agra Road, Aligarh-202001, U.P. and which is assigned the approval mark 1ND/09/08/541;

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

Figure 2—Sealing provision of the indicator of model.

Lead seal is affixed on the stamping plate at the right side/back side of the indicator for the security of circuit diagram and mechanical assembly to avoid the fraudulent use. The indicator can not be opened without breaking the seals. A typical schematic diagram of sealing provision of the model is given above.

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

[F. No. WM-21 (203)/20081

R. MATHURBOOTHAM, Director of Legal MetrologyWAR] II—Si-v.3(10] 632 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: JANUARY 30, 2010/MAGHA 10,1931

Cc-ri , 7 7"-Td.t1,2010

71',34T, 302,-79

•

tfo sufw-rft Ttr d(.) TR7 tfttl7g vz f-d7R TITITNTi TRII •FT 61.d ftft -467 Hisci 11•1 3-4-t-fd k') 417 1:17:1 3f.41-9-414, 1976 (1976 77 60) 7 P-11 -qTa 417 79 HI-It (i1it9171 317ft7) fry , 1987 7 3 ,1 ,,,NI* 3T-1-Fzr 4TT Tt9 vru -⁴,-Tra9T* Fa, c-oliolk m q'or arlfq -14 3 cfci Hisci NNTOUT a 111 tt=) + 11 3t1"( faf 41-d-d 34144 Aqi 1;g17 7171 4,.c),111;

3Td:, titci-dt, $17 36 . 39- %ItiT (7) 3fft39-79 (8) gi g mscf "Tfill cht

( nAc.-W-17f7IT) 4-1TSCC f7:1* -Ais ar 9r "Tgi" (f=1 7, .4TO o+-r t1 u, 8/10, Utz 4 M77, Fsc4r-i to on .gm rAcr -a-ta Tr2TrOm (z[2-Tizifff arf ) A"37rt Pigrol 3iTrfo,

TTY 348 HYSM a-,zr +I41*) 417 fq74 4-11#9. r16 31T 1/09/08/192 f791 TrZir , 4114K9

41WFTI.

d cid 7:11-47 1 fad T77 M T

3-77-4rf-o7 ,6 ,-i.h u t* 71•• 37N ch H `A-TI:M1 30 34'7 1 1-9--dgf k4 -d1 100 7. 1 ..icq-ii kAd 4-1P-1 4-11 .-{ 4a77 ( ) 2 T. I 74477 3414707 I 1 iTr71 y id 7ItV7 tsicioh(111c-i=6 NIf7, 3-TT 19731%-117t1 SI `1',R1 61-(-11-4* 3' ft (CM t)Tq'14f c-ncid ltuTtrf 34act*T-dTi- I 39 c6of 230 alre. 4TT 50 5d, 4R1 fad SR-PZ 'T 7r-zi

Hisrf TrIF TI =m4 i mier7.-Triail q sl -4-114 I

7174. 7?=P1' cit ,41 -elf-471 1101Z s3115 =IA MIS -417 cl 11 sail fair 1-FT enverf1.--a-gr{rt4

I Tffr mat i 731101 7efIT T ti chtir I Hi5c4 'h't 644q W .CrW SrFt 4.41 ,4-11 q 4 51 +4914 341101- fq-zu ,1,{ wa,R dcfcr 3fq-1-974 t.Tru 36 74- q-Ri (12) 5Rt -srzftrr 1,('t q 6 '4707 wrd'r

ft4-4td, t5,11•-f 3471R 417 641 7R41 d ctcf Hiscd* 371,11•5-4*TI:r sodi u r-tri* atea• d41 ral-Hica

1 A 50 {A.-5T. n et) *"t" ¹79 *ft;r7 100 ⁵⁰,⁰⁰⁰ d on {{^{{FOOTNOTE *}}}}t⁷ T ⁴c⁴¹⁴d ⁴I^{9464 31}'⁷¹⁷ (⁷) ⁴({ ¹⁰⁰ #¹.⁷. NT ³F¹¹¹ 3-TrW * "1" TI17* .ki r 5000 71 50,000 7* *1 t7 -4 ³-f"--¹ (7) -^{977 50} f⁷.¹³¹. ³-TNI-Ko-f VITT

¹

3-1)-{ "1" 9 l x 10*, 2 x 103/4 , 5 x 10*,* t, -q¹ $-Tircgrw ZiT At u itcHal Tuft Tit

Tf. 3-- 3:CrIz1-21 (91)/2008]

37. 7 Yik-1211:1, f9=or-, f-qrqw TrTiq Rwri

• [ gTTTT 3(ti)]

tis314X : 774ft 30, 2010/141IT 10, 1931 • 633

New Delhi, the 7th January, 2010

S.O. 302.—Whereas the Central Government, after considering the report submitted to it by the prescribed authority, is satisfied that the model described in the said report (see the figure given below) is in conformity with the provisions of the Standards of Weights and Measures Act, 1976 (60 of 1976) and the Standards of Weights and Measures (Approval of Models) Rules, 1987 and the said Model is likely to maintain its accuracy over periods of sustained use and to render accurate service under varied conditions;

Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub-sections (7) and (8) of Section 36 of the said Act, the Central Government hereby issues and publishes the certificate of approval of the Model of non-automatic weighing instrument (Table top type) with digital indication of High accuracy (Accuracy Class-11) of series "RWJ" and with brand name "RAMAN" (hereinafter referred to as the said Model), manufactured by M/s. Raman Weightronics, 8/10, East Patel Nagar, New Delhi-I 10008 and which is assigned the approval mark IND/09/08/192;

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

Figure 2—Schematic diagram of the model.

Lead seal is affixed on the stamping plate attached with right side of the weighing scale to avoid the fraudulent use. Cover of the weighing scale can not be opened without breaking the seal. A typical schematic diagram of sealing provision of the model is given above.

Further, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (12) of Section 36 of the said Act, the Certtral 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. with verification scale interval (n) in the range of 100 to 50,000 fore' value of I mg to 50 mg. and with verification scale interval (n) in the range of 5000 to 50,000 or 1 e' value of 100 mg or more and with `e' value 1 x 10k, 2 x l0k or 5 x 10k, where k is a positive or negative whole number or equal to zero, manufactured by the same manufacturer in accordance with the same principle, design and with the same materials with which, the said approved Model has been manufactured.

[F. No. WM-21 (91)/2008]

R. MATHURBOOTHAM, Director of Le gal Metrology634 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: JANHARY30, 2010/MAGHA 10,1931 [PART 11--Skc . 3001

Cr(-1'1. , 7 179-qt, 2010

711.31T, 303,—Tzt Nta it a r, faf-6-a7NTRI gic ,4r ftd4 'TT td91F*T4* 11:17 trg. 1711111q7 7:1 (ILII

;

slid "ft-

317:, 374, *717:1 tit chR, d LK-¹ 3Tf91f arm 36'0. 37-TT (7) 3fr{ 1311- 1(TR1 (8) gR158;r1 LIc1 L11*-1 1q7. ATR4 T1=r9 8/10,tztr- -o -01*, r fcc-ciT-1 10 008 gr q Cara Ricr Trtzr4 742.1112-111a7( 74P-T141M 10 111) 70. " 3TR-g-T1"

,P41*, 3-1-14K9- SHikii-trq t§191* 3t-*7-* titti VC-67, 37Er---a-rfa c-1)0 .-f 84 ,;h u 1 (7'7'70 7rwrz) Trfr 9 m-r, fTh-* ft 7174 " (f-A74 7:1* -Tri ch-f et)t-11711*) 3fri f3 31-1.479. Fri6 3T 1 ti09/08/193

•

wrol

4-11,Sti L;c11 fad 1.'77 ATTi aTr 11-17 aliqt73-11777TF07*07

tr) u M alM r TTF71:71• 34K[ Id T-Cd1*

New Delhi, the 7th January, 2010

S.O. 303.—Whereas the Central Government, after considering the report submitted to it by the prescribed authority, is satisfied that the model described in the said report (see the figure given below) is in conformity with the provisions of the Standards of Weights and Measures Act, 1976 (60 of 1976) and the Standards of Weights and Measures (Approval of Models) Rules, 1987 and the said Model is likely to maintain its accuracy over periods of sustained use and to render accurate service under varied conditions;

Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub-sections (7) and (8) of Section 36 of the said Act, the Central Government hereby issues and publishes the certificate of approval of the Model of non-automatic weighing instrument (Platform type) with digital indication of medium accuracy (Accuracy class-Ill) of series "RWP" and with brand name "RAMAN" (hereinafter referred to as the said Model), manufactured by M/s. Raman Weightronics, 8/10, East Patel Nagar, New Delhi-110008 and which is assigned the approval mark IND/09/08/193;

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

Figure 2—Sealing provision of the indicator of model

Lead seal is affixed on the stamping plate attached with right side of the indicator of the weighing scale to avoid the fraudulent use. Indicator of the weighing scale can not be opened without breaking the seal. A typical schematic diagram of sealing provision of the model is given above.

Further, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (12) of Section 36 of the said Act, the Central Government hereby declares that this certificate of approval of the said Model shall also cover the weighing instruments of similar make, accuracy and performance of same series with maximum capacity above 50kg. and up to 5000 kg. with verification scale interval (n) in the range of 500 to 10,000 for 'e' value of 5 g. or more and with 'e' value I . 10", 2 x I 0" or 5 x10", 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. IF. No. WM-21 (9 I )/20081

R. MATHURBOOTHAM. Director of Legal Metrology 202 GI/10-3636 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: JANUARY 30, 2010/MAGNA 10,1931 II niti 11 Si( .3(01

fcc-c.41, 7 •-iNft, 2010

304.-**f tik.bR*T, fett7 31TRT*1a 51T1 34 179U tirg va fqrlIT*R-4* -97-4q 771111TNF 7.'t 14f* Ict) TEM fta1 q fsla 4Yrn ( .91-4* airt-fff N) NT?3-11T 117HI i i 311NfiNTi, 1976 (1976 x160) .M-IT 77 3-7 ITN HI-icb ( T¹W ³¹-¹¹:¹¹⁷) fizIrf, {{^{{FOOTNOTE 1987*}}}} ³⁴ fsM*39q t *TR NM -*141-TTN'iT*14. I{ 771*. 3-17IN 4 1ft 7-4f TINP-MT milt 4ITT 3111• flf1 Trrlftqf-dzilT si Ll chcf *IT sici-f -cIT

aTa:, aTRI, wa,R, 3-47 31ftTf9tM*1* NT 36 *13u- (7) ⁴¹⁷ 1=r-. 9m (8) g1N -,11;r4TIT cbc1 lit, tRI4 atc111cia* (titTTO, iN-47-717, 311T-d)-- ITTITTI =hid *Tim, Tftr ,- J 1 r6, fAc-11 ,41 4' ,11-7Tft-q- 47301 , 4,1;,1 rRT fqiirtm 112/10M ( zn2tur "* /Cr-0T * 3-f** -971-7- Trrg-a -1-7ra-rrm7; alM .1,(ur (2,40diq art) Trfrn , ?AT* slis*T 9TTT " crcurcia * (fA14 714 7ItvY aIc HT8c4 c'1 311 19709/08/524 fa,if TTirT *, 3T 11 51 4-11 u l- rfi ,314a*Cdi* 1

; 3,-11-,Jur dchi srf T fN77 117 sow *T t) 3iTqftd 3-117NTf07 110'i 341-4 11 1 ( sicia4 Ali) 1 T4T-14 .311-'1414-1 KR• 30 f- .31. kTriaT 100 V. iiNI4-f 4-114 Ti1-f 3-1:71-7 (1) 5 TX. 1 7Tif 3TP')-Tr-07 Nt171* ,f-31*1 kid AraVrff 044chrilltlicb tirr"M 317N7-07 •STITIN ti ga,Ri 31z1) Nc-1 44-0-aTT 230 cike *50 TO licifl eml "Niff :KW 7 WI chTd1*

%-trTff 0,1 141 : 75qt 30, 20107147110, 1931 63' [ II—' 3(i)]

New Delhi, the 7th January, 2010

S.O. 304.—Whereas the Central Government, after considering the report submitted to it b y the prescribed authority, is satisfied that the model described in the said report (see the figure given below) is in conformity with the provisions of the Standards of Weights and Measures Act, 1976 (60 of 1976) and the Standards of Weights and Measures (Approval of Models) Rules, 1987 and the said Model is likely to maintain its accuracy over periods of sustained use and to render accurate service under varied conditions;

Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by sob-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 "KWT-1 I" series of medium accuracy (Accuracy class-III) and with brand name "KWALITY WEIGH" (hereinafter referred to as the said Model), manufactured by M/s. Kwality Weigh (India), Village-Tooran, Amloh Road, Nr. Bhambri Kanta Mandi, Gobindgarh, Dist.-Fatehgarh-Sahib-147301, Punjab and which is assigned the approval mark IND/09/08/524.

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

Figure-2—Sealing diagram of the model.

For sealing holes are made in the base plate and top cover in the body of the indicator of the instrument and then a lead wire is passed through these holes and sealed by a lead seal. The instrument cannot be opened without tampering the seal. A typical schematic diagram of sealing provision of the model is given above.

Further, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (12) of Section 36 of the said Act, the Central Government hereby declares that this certificate of approval of the said Model shall also cover the weighing instruments of similar make, accuracy and performance of same series with maximum capacity up to 50 kg. with verification scale interval (n) in the range of 100 to 10,000 for `e' value of 100 mg. to 2 g. and with verification scale interval (n) in the range of 500 to 10,000 for 'e' value of 5 g. or more and with 'e' value 1 x 10 k, 2 x 101 or 5 x l0k, 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-2 I (193)/2008J

R. MATHURBOOTHAM, Director of Legal Metrology638 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: JANUARY 30, 2010/MAGHA 10,1931 [PART .3(ii)1

rc.1 , 7W1-111, 2010

*fafig-ilfthzTf-dzif T13q 7 TfidT sKi-r wrdi Tt111;

*T.34T. 305,- *t7 W obIL fir, fqitff Tftr*TLI 61tr 3A Itftt gt17 fq-7R cbt;f* T11477 zit 1,11,111419 ti rcb ftlitg Ti Ord Trft.9 Tr 3Tf ) llz 3fti TTN 4-1n 1* 315-ftEPI, 1976 (1976 *1 60) 9-1.1 77 417 414 441.1ch ( Ti 31-114M7 1":1 41 4-1, 1987* d44°,11* 39-Ftr * 341\ q17 fm imclR sm)ir aTqfiq if it391 r Hisri 7P-110711

apT, ti

iTTAT1 chid( 4vit-AifeN-147301, 4.,11 ,4 7LT „iLich 011 (1{Sid41174 AAA wcifrotzt 1-qf4 gicf ivam zwrztai (zrzutt-dr 1f Ill) cli Q4 Stp=r9TaimTTt7, 3.Wr9T1-0" WIT) 4-115C1 V1,171* 9118 '111 " gaircia Z1e * Tr*-trv--7'dcl-cr1-11(.4 Trzrr*) 4)7 IAA A-1AK-9 arr. 31/09/08/525 f*-7 7p71*, 3.17frcq

1-115Ci fdV7'rET mcbR wrt Trcd 31-1s'A1Rcf 3T i1( -07:714 mcbiL*11) nlrid d4mt ul * I •P=1*1 31-r9q-,11-1

31)177f citcpi

41 41.11614. sr q04

4-1(s r-i*i#Ift/1

*TR 717 *Ttri tq f-*-R Af( s 3ifT 1-, rr1s *fr+7 -)11:1174C 'fr(

Ito*

afrt TrTVR d chl afgf-97:1*-1. gnrr iô 371-NRT (12) 7LT 317a Irck141*-11;FlITT chtd 46 4171711*--Lt t 3711":1)•C7* so-ii u f-117* *Lit dtil fafi TinaI(1341 fkr4t, CSA1*-f 3-77117 * 31# iT LLLA1 u f*LL 1 f* .d etd 31--R1f-cd A1t91111 4-11,4 14)4r Trzrr*, Fari gici3LRI PPErfft*iL4t T1*, 71414-di * 06144101* C11(1-I cMul 1-t 5 T. *7174 3iftwt "1" zTFi * f77 500 A' 10,000 c1 *t-14 4c4144 4-114 1-11-i 3f7T7 (7) *50 f*.71. A 5000 6.*. 3ftwal3 grTrdT girl 3i) •L'T' T117 lx10 * , 2x10 * , 5x10 477F--gr zit At unc4-1cn 711** *

[ 711-21 ( 193 )/2008]

3-TR. iTrITT-m, fir*, f-afw ii fTifri639 tariff ITMTI : sTi-tia 30, 2010/1:171 10, 1931 [ 9TITT 11—(g s 3(ti)]

New Delhi, the 7th January, 2010

S.O. 305.—Whereas the Central Government, after considering the report submitted to it by the prescribed authority, is satisfied that the model described in the said report (see the figure given below) is in conformity with the provisions of the Standards of Weights and Measures Act, 1976 (60 of 1976) and the Standards of Weights and Measures (Approval of Models) Rules, 1987 and the said Model is likely to maintain its accuracy over periods of sustained use and to render accurate service under varied conditions;

Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub-sections (7) and (8) of Section 36 of the said Act, the Central Government hereby issues and publishes the certificate of approval of the Model of non-automatic weighing instrument (Platform type) with digital indication of medium accuracy (accuracy class-III) of series "KWP-5" and with brand name "KWALITY WEIGH" (hereinafter referred to as the said model), manufactured by M/s. Kwality Weigh (India), V il lage-Tooran, Amloh Road, Nr. Bhambri Kanta Mandi, Gobindgarh, Dist.-Fathegarh-Sahib-147301, Punjab and which is assigned the approval mark 1ND/09/08/525;

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

Figure-2—Sealing provision of the indicator of model

For sealing holes are made in the base plate and top cover in the body of the indicator of the instrument and then a lead wire is passed thrugh these holes and sealed by a lead seal. The indicator can not be opened without tampering the seal. A typical schematic diagram of sealing provision of the model is given above.

Further, in exercise of the power conferred by sub-section (12) of section 36 of the said Act, the Central Government hereby declares that this certificate of approval of the said model shall also cover the weighing instruments of similar make, accuracy and performance of same series with maximum capacity above 50 kg and upto 5000kg with verification scale interval (n) in the range of 500 to 10,000 for 'e' value of 5g or more and with `e' value of I x 10k, 2 x 10"or 5 s 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.

II'. No. W M-2 I (193)/20081

R. MATHURBOOTI IAM, Director ol Legal Metrology640 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: JANUARY30, 2010/MAGHA 10,1931 [PART II SEC. 3(i 0]

fcmi , 7 797(1., 2010

*T.31T, 306.- 72171, fegff SITFET*R1 TU374'117 f0:1)1 *1:1TNT9 TFIT * f(41J cats (t4 t 1-11 ailtrff *14) WE 3fti TIN 3iftlfITR, 1976 (1976 WI 60) 72T1 '1Z A7 ITN 1:17W 3137*ff) fit, 1987* dwi tli 3TI-Fq * 771 .4rd .(4131.1791 * riiI1c1R 514 4 1*1 ardft-T "4

7tu4ur a-1 ,(1.+11 31)T fei7 .vircr *-41 :1C1-1 =601 (JIT;

3T4,*- 14 titchlt,3Wfalfgr9711:1* NM 36 *1. 31:1- 11171 (7) *37- q171 (8) TKITC-1 7117Trzif a T SI4I fR:Ri hcilicia* (tf-471),"rd-4-77, 311:07 ft, 9-11 t1 chie.1 1:(t* .cfrg , CAM( relF77-17ft-q-147301,1#14 .gru far-rfAct Atzr7 Amatai (A 9-miN arf HI) 7A ' i t r t aiwwtjbd TrrO, 3i ii39cMu1 ACTT) * Hism a,, fATr* cTis 7r7 " a-itroa *" (rqA (.14 qtr ⁷-17Wf TITTF*TI =Frit) FAi4 31-1*-7 fag 3.11 7 31/09/08/526 f*-41T1711*, a-71)7 37:1Tu1-7 7R1 c , ":11* I

d chi HISCI fated Mchlt +Ici 37trth7 3471-7rf-o-7 ( 1T - ) alM .1 dLl'Il kui t I WTI 3IftWaTI kTITUI 30 33 t 37R c1 1 kTzTUT 100 "F- . T. I ticq-II Lii 4-64 4-¹¹-¹ atdiTF (1) 5 * I .-1 4) , 3-T0974 7f-0 * f7**-1 YTd 5(1747 cx-1 ,4.41M •11c4i eb trift3 a,74r7-177 lAWRI dm.ich Trih• (77 t) si qqf cr1M t 7fTurrg d4sFild cmort I 34cIlku1 230 glrt 3-T1T 50 TO Nc-91 0R-11 tTRT fq113 uci g 4T 4114 .11tc11* I

H15 *i *T T1 4,(4*Trratu7 st,a4

*77 A KT 717 dva,orr*tWz-T wr4*- fuR 7-t* agitirt**711-Ei 4,.1(

New Delhi, the 7th January, 2010

S.O. 306.—Whereas the Central Government, after considering the report submitted to it by the prescribed authority, is satisfied that the model described in the said report (see the figure given below) is in conformity with the provisions of the Standards of Weights and Measures Act, 1976 (60 of 1976) and the Standards of Weights and Measures (Approval of Models) Rules, 1987 and the said Model is likely to maintain its accuracy over periods of sustained use and to render accurate service under varied conditions;

Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub-sections (7) and (8) of Section 36 of the said Act, the Central Government hereby issues and publishes the certificate of approval of the Model of non-authomatic weighing instrument (Weighbridge type) with digital indication of medium accuracy (Accuracy class-Ill) of series "KW-4" and with brand name "KWALITY WEIGH" (hereinafter referred to as the said model), manufactured by M/s. Kwality Weigh (India), Village-Tooran, Amloh Road, Nr. Bhambri Kanta Mandi, Gobindgarh, Distt.-Fathegarh-Sahib- 14730 I, Punjab and which is assigned the approval mark IND/09/08/526;

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

'11117;1'N:0

Figure-2—Sealing provision of the indicator of the model

For sealing holes are made in the base plate and top cover in the body of the indicator of the instrument and then a lead wire is passed through these holes and sealed by a lead seal. The indicator can not be opened without tampering the seal. A typical schematic diagram of sealing provision of the model is given above.

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

[F. No. WM-21 (193)/2008]

R. MATHURBOOTHAM, Director of Legal Metrology642 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: JANUARY 30, 2010/MAGHA 10,1931 [PART ¹¹-SEC. 3(ii)1

gni , 7 2010

*T.37. 307.-- -Er titaIR ter, fqr-fff Alf wit -glA 3117ft10 17f4-47 cht {{^{{FOOTNOTE *}}}} zird7q z(*1177.Tri if 117* fT lzgf f arSict tifrg (AA t i31T-ft k') A1Z 3i7 1:¹ftf Htich 31N1-9714, 1976 (1976 Th7 60) 72..T1 4ra 3717 177 ( 131 r 3911*) feu, 1987*3•11iT1 *311F7**3111 ATU VIITERT* (1,11cilt Aztfil 3T4[11 u It .=h111[3-F Trrthaf-a*T1 d'iVci *al 3rm a t tr *TT;

zremitdr

317:, 3111, .I•134 d chi 3iiti V71 36 *1 311--t1T7 (7) 4R .37- q71 (8) V13174xlrao4r 7144 p t en(d

"Cff711, krc41-110035 Foir-gicrl:TuN

obii9A=M, (141

ff/14 lifFM

72.TIttaT zfrf 111) art.,1"z---At" AtuF1 * 31*--w to-r 7F10, 311zinri-6 alr t dv c6(u( "51*-7) *7, f-ATrt is T .9.rq "wr"t (f-A t.r4 744rd,dchi 4-115(4*-gr 1711*) *1-'4 (4 3T7fr<7 3TT 7/09/08/455 AN-Irma Calif t, 3T 51111u1-Tiq 7R1 qmit {{^{{FOOTNOTE *}}}} I

33d 4-1.15C4 f1dT7 s1' ' k f i-TR -(km alltTiftd 3-nzr-mr--ezi Arm r zrcrg*-7) i ITr*1 3Tf-q-*--614

3T7 9 *f77*1 ATT-⁰AlC⁷N .h(4 Ards Al lt4 ^{4 51}q,¹¹⁴⁴

Tcrto fctrr Trzu

New Delhi, the 7th January, 2010

S.O. 307.—Whereas the Central Government, after considering the report submitted to it by the prescribed authority, is satisfied that the model described m 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 the 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 "WQT" series of medium accuracy (Accuracy class-III) and with brand name "WOODS" (hereinafter referred to as the said model), manufactured by M/s. Sohil Enterprises, B-70/59, D.S.I.D.C. Complex, Lowrence Road Ind. Area, Delhi-I 10035 and which is assigned the approval mark IND/09/08/455;

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

Figure-2--Sealing diagram of the model

Sealing can be done by making holes in the base plate and top cover of the instrument, then a seal wire is passed through these holes and a lead seal.is applied. The instrument can not be opened without tampering the seal. A typical schematic diagram ofsealing provision of the model is given above:

Further, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (12) of Section 36 of the said Act, the Central Government hereby declares that this certificate of approval of the said model shall also cover the weighing instruments of similar make, accuracy and perforthance of same series with maximum capacity up to 50kg with verification scale interval (n) the rarige of 100 to 10,000 for 'e' value of 100mg to 2g arid with verificationscale interval(n):in the range of 500 to 10,000 for value of 5g ormore and with valueof 1 x 10', 2-x 10k or5 x 10", where k is a poSitiVeornegative whotenutnhr the same Principle, design and %% j t h the same or equal to zero, manufactured by the same •manufacturer Maccordance with materials with which, the said approved model has been manufactured.

[F. No WM-21 (149)2008] R. MATHURBOOTHAM, Director of Le gal Meti ologn - -

202 GI/10-4644 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: JANUARY 30, 2010/MAGHA 10,1931 [PART 11—SEC.3(ii)]

kffft, 7 79-e, 2010

tt)1441{, VITN il5 l'srtorf frat -110035 70 far-ff ilcf TTLI¹¹⁴ ( t1e0401'10 3t1 tft " vimor * atqw T4R Trfim, 3117¹⁷⁰'M c¹¹⁰¹ d'i chtuf (Orwrri 31*R) +iTs rf mil, IAA* -Ow Thl ETA "Iv!" CF774 1744 Iv* N4mr(z--4Tt HTse man Trzn t) *f7A 3914* fir¹F 3311 3'1/09/08/456 ti+134iicf ftzrf 1TEIT*, 391,1h7 soil u f-¹T% IT awn' {{^{{FOOTNOTE *}}}};

3-40 Atm 41g ferrt "47 !milt TT ⁴¹rt ³⁰k⁰ft^{0 3}Tizree¹⁰ TlYerl d'mt u r ({{^{{FOOTNOTE *}}}}ET{{^{{FOOTNOTE *}}}} ³¹¹⁸¹⁷) Vicil ³i ► fri MT 1000 kr. t 3 t -tin4 47161 2 ft .111. ¹¹ 1 tircoi-f 4-14+-n-f 33'80V1 (11) 100 T1T. I 17111 T 311 liVt* f7071 Trd 'tom aqq,ciimich tem 33Ittztr1 31 .4fel 1 NaIRI dMi s/ith TiAtx ('zkor {{^{{FOOTNOTE *}}}} -⁴.¹) mfi {{^{{FOOTNOTE *}}}}FR trform ³⁴Cf i iwzr {{^{{FOOTNOTE *}}}} avalt f 230 ten * 50 TO AMITECe X11 T few Wt¹ xr( wqrri

hire le 14:1t0 Tr4 * 7Tait0i W1419195 si44,04

d p:bcuf # es eA #1 *Z 3 t sitri *ERwr.4, *94 Iftm fay .;rt *4. Thi trzt .A17 .7t Awe * I #17f ***IT d4 ct-nu f Tiftra ticoof I Hiso 'Of {{^{{FOOTNOTE *}}}}Nit(! #(⁴ {{^{{FOOTNOTE *71}}}}:¹"⁴t¹ WI ⁷# ³¹⁷¹¹¹' W¹ iii Ttremi fkAr TiAt

fAi.K4 * *A 4 *item( 3-4ff a;ftfriAA WU 36 T^{1 7}":1- trri1 (12) 70 3g⁷⁷Tf-⁴⁷¹t -•T {{^{{FOOTNOTE 1*}}}}-¹ V ⁷⁴T {{^{{FOOTNOTE *}}}}FIT cotcf Arzor * arohl **A 74rErr-arlf * aftpfrr 3.41 farimior rrrr z-Tft ?two argn *

T 33-14rker Afar itEAt Trgr f, fitrifim z-Ai **Tk let*, tfe;TelaT AT ¹)¹⁴⁴¹c{{^{{FOOTNOTE 11**}}}}M⁷ d ,-l ent u f Oen ⁷) 5 P. /IT 71:0 # the zrri ltittN 500 13110,000 T17 * tictilTiVSTM ATM (⁷) it ⁵⁰ '{{^{{FOOTNOTE *}}}}.v. A ⁵⁰⁰⁰ {{^{{FOOTNOTE *}}}}.¹¹¹. ¹TW 3f9 7 krmr 'earl * "1" Am 1x lO {{^{{FOOTNOTE *}}}}, ² x¹⁰ A , ⁵ x ¹⁰ #, {{^{{FOOTNOTE *}}}}, "at TIMM' zfT u ⁷⁷¹i{{^{{FOOTNOTE *}}}} TfT ⁷F{{^{{FOOTNOTE 1*}}}}

[w.-4..g--.171-21 (149)/2008]

tr[T-vm, f9-OrT, fafp 1i TV fq-e7[NTTT 3(ii)] tiAki4 : 79-4'4 30, 2010/ 1st 10, 1931 645

New Delhi, the 7th January, 2010

S.O. 308.—Whereas the Central Government, after considering the report submitted to it by the prescribed authority, is satisfied that the model described in the said report (see the figure given below) is in conformity with the provisions of the Standards of Weights and Measures Act, 1976 (60 of 1976) and the Standards of Weights and Measures (Approval of Models) Rules, 1987 and the said Model is likely to maintain its accuracy over periods of sustained use and to render accurate service under varied conditions;

Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub-sections (7) and (8) of Section 36 of the said Act, the Central Government hereby issues and publishes the certificate of approval of the model of non-automatic weighing instrument (Platform type) with digital indication of medium accuracy (accuracy class-III) of series "WOP" and with brand name "WOODS" (hereinafter referred to as the said model), manufactured by M/s. Sohil Enterprises, B-70/59, D.S.I.D.C. Complex, Lowrence Road Ind. Area, Delhi-110035 and which is assigned the approval mark 1ND/09/08/456;

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

A3994

Figurer2—Segling provision of the indicator of model

Sealing can he done by making holes in the base plate and top cover of the indicator of the instrument, then a seal wire iS 04§4@litilf011$11 Ih8§8 PIMP and 4 I@KI§011§013131ied. The instrument can not be opened without tampering the seal. A typical seheinatic diagram of sealing provision of the model is given above.

FtlfIII8f; in @RHIN of the [313W@FOOlikff@dbY §1114.§Oction (12) of Section 36 of the said Act, the c,zeiltrol (lifiveninient hereby declares that thi§ eel jfiatg Of appfoval of the said model shall also cover the weighing Mont/new of §ipiliar make, geporgey and performange of same series with maximum capacity abcivc 50kg. and unto 30(01 with verification seals inteml rn) in the range of § ite to 10,000 for w vn!u of 5g. or inure and with 'e' value of I x 10', 2 44114040,t *mg k i§ g positive or negative whole number or equal to zero, manufactured by the same :r anufacturer in accordance with the we principle, design and with the same materials with which, the said approved el has Len manufactured.

(r No. WM-21049)120081

R. MATHURBOOTHAM, Director of Legal MetrologyTHE GAZETTE OF INDIA: JANUARY 30, 2010/MAGHA 10,1931 [PART 11----SEC.3(ii)] 646

f -•et, 14 t 9-1"il, 2010

*T.311, 309-,—*141 went( Tf, f#16-7-315.1*T8 Tit Z-I4 317 fit-1aT forci it 4)(4* 44mIi4Tigti1t,11NT9,Z)1141 tairf (*A t Irt 31rfftif) TITZ * TIN 1-11-11:6 31firrirgf, 1976 (1976 *1 60) M ATZ *TITtl

7414 3TErfn III ³⁴d ¹-flat⁴

.:bor ti-41;

( 74-4.91 391:k9) i-v44, 1987 *31:141,11 31-IFTI* 31'11 TR Al TfirdiT TIRPti-d1 faftr rifTIT²Trat 7trzi-o -4-4r

tfitrit*itrIT .t, )rap:t.t.i,tik4-e. 11, rsil'col4 TITMT, tusI, ft:RIT ct9i 1)3", tt64 311t11-4K-431001 foflf^d Tram-mTi -dt ({{^{{FOOTNOTE *94}}}}-di 'u "v1141" ⁷-¹¹⁷⁰-{{^{{FOOTNOTE 1*}}}} at{{^{{FOOTNOTE **}}}} ¹,⁴-r -Efo, 31-tzzmlf-o-d ( r 1-ech-Trf sotot) n1Mt dLi.bor * T, fmr* vfg *r "{{^{{FOOTNOTE 1115*7}}}}" {{^{{FOOTNOTE *}}}} (M TiT⁴ -Fr{{^{{FOOTNOTE *}}}} TrMrd dqd ch⁶[TRTI t) ³fR q{^{4 37}rit<⁷ '^{11 6 3}Trt 7 6=tcf Hisrf facer 1)--A slahit *10 MTir-Cd 6114r141ftiti dkM 394 ( u1 ( C4a1:614 St 4)10 '5171 31f4*-d4 krrrdi 1000 f .131 Ord! 2 1*.1¹¹. {{^{{FOOTNOTE *}}}} I i¹c⁴i⁴⁴ attaTM (i) ¹⁰⁰¹¹¹ I TT:T⁴ {{^{{FOOTNOTE 7*}}}} ³¹¹⁴t¹r¹ fit

-9(1114 * I si ctIR1 dctizial TrzItS Mel Tggi ctlrl i yfiull4 dyqNicf ch

, , •

V-41

1*-411 wchit 6ctct 3Tt ztgl ViT 36 cni 34--41171 (12) Tit 17;77T*0 T1 1171111*Ta; 17, zff ..1*WrIT *it * arB7T 3111 4t 7TriTit -F-Trt4 f*-VAtrto't-i'*,*1 Ott 71:⁴T4-TN*4-dera. zial. .7.17 1.--0-it--itl:ittrAitkir/kAirli.-fig⁴,,tf nit{{^{{FOOTNOTE *}}}}, :fuf-ifiku '-41- Pitgffr*iet t tr f{{^{{FOOTNOTE *}}}}, WOFT ^{3111 4}I⁴vlr¹ r{{^{{FOOTNOTE *}}}} diet-¹, ⁶-⁴⁴/⁰f ¹¹¹tM⁷)'

'7Tir9_1x10 2x to to

.

,

New Delhi, the 14th Jabuary, 2010

S.O. 309.—Whereas the. Central Government, after considering the report submitted to it by the prescribed authority, is satisfied that the model described in the said report (see the figure given below) is in conformity with the proviSionS of the Standards of Weights and Measures Act,`1976 (60 of 1976) and the Standards of Weights and Measures (Approval of Models) Rules, 1987 and the said Model is likely to maintain its accuracy over periods of sustained use and to render accurate service under varied conditions;

Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by the 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-authomatic weighing instrument (Platform type) with digital indication of med kiln accuracy (accuracy class-Ill) of series "SUP" and with brand name "SUNIKA" (hereinafter referred to as the said model), manufactured by M/s. Prerana Electronics, Flat No II, Digvijay Plaza, Shanur Wadi, Shanur Miya Dargah Road, Nr. Railway Crossing, Aurangabad-431001, Maharashtra and which is assigned the approval mark IND/09/08/445;

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

Figure-2--Sealing provision of the indicator of model

Sealing can-be done by making holes in the base plate and top cover of the indicator of the instrument, then a seal wire is passed through these holes and a lead seal is applied. The instrument can not by opened without tampering the seal. A typical schematic diagram of sealing provision of the model is given above.

Further, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (12) of Section 36 of the said Act, the Central Government hereby declares that this certificate of approval of the said model shall also cover the weighing instruments of similar make, accuracy and performance of same series with maximum Capacity above 50kg and 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 I x 10 k, 2 x 10' or 3? 10k, where k is a positive or negative whole number or equal, to zero manufactured by the same manufacturer in accordance with the same principle, design, and with the same materials with which, the said approved model has been manufactured.

[F. No. WM-21 (159)/2008]

R. MATHURBOOTHAM, Director of Legal Metrology648 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: JANUARY 30, 2010/MAGHA 10,1931 [PART 11—SEc.3(ii)]

fC- 11, 14 797ft, 2010

v1--e1 *4*T .5 ,mtu r ri g 47177 amctr I Hism *T4 * 31)=4fird 4 t.Rwk dad aftTfizrri 1 t/RT 36 71 3c1-771 (12) TZT kIRRI4f 7T 4717 ' '0:11311 dad His(-r * 31 id * -sp ro r-rm* at-drill 3441 RAHlor w 7E1 fu-eff,f8 ,-11-t * 4,111T T11 *mit * 111 PT' KT* Trrff[ %TT II —Vin 3(d)] 417 VT tiqi(⁴ : wti g il 30, 2010/3:171 10, 1931 649

New Delhi, the 14th January, 2010

S.O. 310.—Whereas the Central Government, after considering the report submitted to it by the prescribed authority, is satisfied that the model described in the said report (see the figure given below) is in conformity with the provisions of the Standards of Weights and Measures Act, 1976 (60 of 1976) and the Standards of Weights and Measures (Approval of Models) Rules, 1987 and the said Model is likely to maintain its accuracy over periods of sustained use and to render accurate service under varied conditions;

Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub-sections (7) and (8) of Section 36 of the said Act, the Central Government hereby issues and publishes the certificate of approval of the model of non-authomatic weighing instrument (Tabletop type) with digital indication of "SLIT" series of medium accuracy (accuracy class-III) and with brand name "SUNIKA" (hereinafter referred to as the said model), manufactured by M/s. Prerana Electronics, Flat No. 11, Digvijay Plaza, Shanur Wadi, Shanur Miya Dargah Road, Nr. Railway Crossing, Aurangabad-431001, Maharashtra and which is assigned the approval mark 1ND/09/08/446;

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

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

Sealing can be done by making holes in the base plate and top cover of the instrument, then a seal wire is passed through these holes and a lead seal is applied. The instrument can not be opened without tampering the seal. A typical schematic diagram of sealing provision of the model is given above.

Further, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (12) of section 36 of the said Act, the Central Government hereby declares that this certificate of approval of the said model shall also cover the weighing instruments of similar make, accuracy and performance of same series with maximum capacity upto 50kg with verification scale interval (n) in the range of 100 to 10,000 for `e' value of 100mg, to 2g. and with verification scale interval (n) in the range of 500 to 10,000 for 'e' value of 5g. or more and with 'e' value of lx 10 k, 2 x 10k or 5 x 10 k, 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 (1 9)/2008]

R. MATHURBOOTHAM, Director of Legal Metrology650 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: JANUARY ³⁰, 2010/MAGHA 10,1931 [PART ¹¹—SEE.³⁰⁰] f4c-ri , 14 eft, 2010 T.31T. waIR *1, fafo 3irfirwrft wit zi4 Tri faaTi {{^{{FOOTNOTE *}}}} ITrdr-q:Erg'1717m9 tt fttt 14 7iitd -c114WR(

) al'ITIPT 3Titt9714, 1976 (1976 *1 60) awe * Tr -arm ( Tfig9i 7,1 374(7) ri ci4, 1987* d *3-T-1.1* AK -41:t All *1 *TEM siti141*1 3TEff1/4 1:1 4thilift-0 72T121"al 777 1-d-rn 3frJ fafii trrifRitzff u d'iletcr tlal 54411 chOr -Ktrri;

3T4,*a1ti fitcbR, 3 chi 3T5ifiql4 arty 36'4' 37-471 (7) 3.*iZti- q17 (8) Va SIT1 /1fW1**131771*74 34,11(77*(1 4-474, ,31 g41 ciMf r i, f731)71 451, 34ERI-282004 TMT m qf gig FaFi gicr Trbati lletfttaT (71412.tal 74-111) ATA "141-175" liar * 3-1*"* t/71'{ "UFZU 31171-4Trff1 glo-f 34 chtuT CcfttUrri L1V) * 140 *T , f111:* Mgt "3Tizir (f4( 1141417-* Tfrdq d cef tte*-61 7PIT*) rs4i4 argitc fqg 31T 31/09/08/478 lzfrrefFU fear 1711 *, *Tft cbta *

dace +.1 se 7W ferfU lt VTR T girt 14-0 antlifiu aiiaarwd tem 34 chtu f .747774 zrzg ) aftrrall kiridr 150 * 3*TL9a rr VI,IdT 400 71.* I tic,-il4-f attrO (1) 20 11. * I T(714 34101719-i TrOtf71MI Tiff '51t7ff 'i11ft7'8:11k7reilP417 514)1k1 3c 1"i ZTztg (79' t) Tr f cilo-f 14Ruli4 3-crOm ⁴,⁰¹ I nir 'RV 14c14 cni4 4, ,wr * I

2.)0 alet zliri 50

owisR tf .rq 4 cw-r, -Rfotrt rlcviosiir17011 -rriI iiiim,irr*ixtrFizw,,

1-{alit( err ells kikr iri* 1 3vi,vg a1 Hari al4 fail (9411

fair

aril *it Heno11 4-iisriT1 ti1 cidiC*74* d Li ciq *T -Cr*

d etti 1-115(4* ai5r-firi * SP-¹¹.¹-{{^{{FOOTNOTE 17*}}}} ATTN 31t -gm sit fiir-4-t6,

500 A 10,000 Hici+-11-1 afffifF (7) ': tacf 50 r*,111.

alftt** "t 1' 179 *,

• - 5. 5000 f*T. T*1* 31fir+drf * *" t" TS 1 x10 *, 2x10. *, 5x10*,**,* Til-c7fW •*t ulic-4^{4 46} TELIWzg⁷F( *

[71. Zi. -,S-- 171:1-21 (166)/2008] fits-r47, fa R.rw iirrcr fa-JrqH—ice 3(d)] IITM a,T ustititt : 7741 30, 2010/111s1 10, 1931 651

New Delhi, the 14th January, 2010

S.O. 311.—Whereas the Central Government, after considering the report submitted to it , by the prescribed authority, is satisfied that the model described in the said report (see the figure given below) is in conformity with the provisions of the Standards of Weights and Measures Act, 1976 (60 of 1976) and the Standards of Weights and Measures (Approval of Models) Rules, 1987 and the said Model is likely to maintain its accuracy over periods of sustained use and to render accurate service under varied conditions;

Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub-sections (7) and (8) of Section 36 of the said Act, the Central Government hereby issues and publishes the certificate of approval of the Model of non-automatic weighing instrument (Platform Type) with digital indication of medium accuracy (Accuracy class-III) of series "AP-PF" and with brand name "APOLO" (hereinafter referred to as the said Model), manufactured by M/s. Apolo Scale Works, Jatni Wala Bagh, Jeoni Mandi, Agra-282004, U.P. and which is assigned the approval mark IND/09/08/478.

The said model is a strain guage type load cell based non-automatic weighing instrument (Platform Type) with a maximum capacity of 150 kg and minimum capacity of 400g. The verification scale interval (e) is 20g. It has a tare device with a 100 per cent substractive retained tare effect. The Light Emitting Diode (LED) indicates the weighing results. The instrument operates on 230 Volts, 50 Hertz alternative current power supply.

Figure-2—Sealing provision of the indicator of the model.

Lead sealing is affixed on the stamping plate to avoid fraudulent use at the right side of the indicator. Sealing wire is passed through the head whole screw and the cover of the weighing scale at the four corners of the base and then lead seal is applied. The instrument can not be opened without breaking the seals. A typical schematic diagram of sealing provision of the model is given above.

Further, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (12) of Section 36 of the said Act, the Central Government hereby declares that this certificate of approval of the said Model shall also cover the weighing instruments of similar make, accuracy and performance of same series with maximum capacity above 50kg and up to 5000kg with verification scale interval (n) in the range of 500 to 10,000 for 'e' value of 5 g or mote and with 'e' value of l x ¹⁰k, ² x 10k or 5 x l0k, 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 (166)/2008] R. MATHURBOOTHAM, Director of Legal Metrology 202 GI/10-5652 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: JANUARY30, 2010/MAGNA 10, 1931 [PART 11—SEC. 3(ii)]

fcm-fl, 14-4(1, 2010

*.alt 312.--**f (-R ew 7T, feg7 "SrTf77* 111. Tel MT fv41 71! f7717 774 *7797 -* 111:TRITIt 7717 * 3Wf 104 4 afsid ifter (71-4 t Tf 3-7-t-f7 k') 77 AT 7T7 34fiti7:04, 1976 (1976 71 60) 'd2.11 AT? * 1711 4-01.6 (T[U71 7T al ) fiTITI, 1987 * 347411 B'+ 3-171•F4 F 3T1t -0' 77* Tt779T t fa 1 4 11d1( 51 441, i ardfq Ti* 1-115rf varg-dr 7111 Rim *1-4111- 7ifthtf741 4 344'-1 1171 19 41(cti *IT;

atd:, 3T41, 4i-414 i-RcIIR,3-d?r 3T11(771,f T'f ETRT 36 TI37--tim (7) * 37- 4IRT (8) 'ITTA'Cn T-1 37117T cb,k z(24 31111 1:10 7171717, f73791 *1T-282004 3MT 77T T7 RI ri gid Tr47Fr 7itlitta1 (72TOdl 74-11) "-cre-aa" 1.13R41 * 31'77 it:14-1 Tiro 3T(Eraff-67 nice-f 344bt u1 0.40d19 di V) * 1-11-sci 71, ftg* 4is 7T TR " Witol" t (170 TET) kict1 ti-kr-q-q3c1cf Hisrf m t TP7 *) 3fR 1,314 argkff fay 341 -Crff 31/09/08/479 f`bir Trgi 31-111 Tgrrtrr-Tor -471 4,01 * I

34cf 14%71 77 fa epcf 717 4 .6R 71 %IF( t 311%1117 3T71-4TM 34chtut I Stigif a-Tr4m-711 wraT 30 7. 3lR WM 100 W. * I t1c414 i -H14 411'f aura (1) 2 7. I 71¹4 Ti 3iTt17-07 l'Fq71 f'FfTT •7I7 7ft7rd cogebrilltli ch %eel 371419-eff 31277 tI 51 .bl q 1 dctolcil371Yg ( .7131) 771 ci)cli dLICPicf TM* I d Li cwf 230 '417Z- * 50 zec,31 -711720 2MT ferg -SKITI TIT =1114 4)01* I

3Trfrff 2 : 771F-67 -51T741l9 95T ti ,311144 514,04 I

wrie 114 * fffq 1*-a *7417m .difi-4,t 7z 'ft 711.7 0 4 4 71 t reit T*F tr -g( AT 414( *We *le 777{1-4-*-rur 7r4T 74 rils Tift4 Inrt Tri 3,-IchtuT Tte *41441*-01 Te -7T eig6 I Hiscl Tftfl*774 * 37421 7T 77 3TFTII 441444 s14414 34C fit TrEff

afR 44 twilit 37c1 3Ti}I1477 27-{T 36 71 37- tirki (12) dgT(17n 7if74* 77 IV:117 u-6'.114UIf chol *747 4T-4. * argki*Tg 3r4rTF-7rq * 31a''f 1381 f-4114141 MITT ut fH4ict, argot 3711177* f7TR4 3T-17To Varr fqr-pi k Phqr Trott, iziFiffid 741 Alum* T1 t zremetur * 4444101 *7*4 344,(14 **-q1 1 11171. A ⁵⁰ fq..m. /⁷⁷- {{^{{FOOTNOTE *}}}}"t n 1⁷ff {{^{{FOOTNOTE *}}}} ¹⁰⁰ A 50,000 ⁴ tim pi TiP774' atm (1:11) AT 100 ITO. {{^{{FOOTNOTE 77*}}}} afErw * "1" TIN* f(97 5,000 A 50,000w*••N 71 tice414-f Tirpirff atm' (74) I1f1 50 ft.71. 7WX11 aftw74 aTird( tfr61 "t" TIT4 1 x 10 *, 2x10 5 x 10 * ,*t, triT0:fw 7iT ituume6 TEalft 71 77* TPTIFT I

[Vt. R. sK-1714-21 (166)/2008]

SIR. -4717V1T1, farw Trrq fa-Ti7

New Delhi, the 14th January, 2010

S.O. 312.—Whereas the Central Government, after considering the report submitted to it by the prescribed authority, is satisfied that the model described in the said report (see the figure given below) is in conformity with the provisions of the Standards of Weights and Measures Act, 1976 (60 of 1976) and the Standards of Weights and Measures (Approval of Models) Rules, 1987 and the said Model is likely to maintain its accuracy over periods of sustained use and to render accurate service under varied conditions;

Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub-sections (7) and (8) of Section 36 of the said Act, the Central Government hereby issues and publishes the certificate of approval of the Model of non-automatic weighing instrument (Table top type) with digital indication of high accuracy (Accuracy class-11) of serics''AP-TT" and with brand name "APOLO" (hereinafter referred to as the said Model), manufactured by M/s. Apolo Scale Works, Jinni Wala Bagh, Jeoni Mandi, Agra-282004, U.P. and which is assigned the approval mark IND/09/08/479.

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

Figure 2 : Schematic diagram of the model.

Lead sealing is affixed on the stamping plate to avoid fraudulent use at the right side , of the weighing scale. Sealing wire is passed through the head whole screw and the cover of the weighing scale at the four corners of the base and then lead seal is applied. The instrument can not be opened without breaking the seals. A typical schematic diagram of scaling 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 Cel 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 50,000 for 'e' value of I mg to 50 mg and with verification scale interval (n) in the range of 5,000 to 50,000 for 'e' value of 100 mg. or more and with 'e' value 1 x 10', 2 x 10' or 5 x 10k, where k is a positive or negative whole number or equal to zero, manufactured by the same manufacturer in accordance with the same principle, design and with the same materials with which, the said approved model has been manufactured.

[F. No. WM-2 I.( I 66)2008]

R. MATHURBOOTI 1AM, Director of Legal Metrology654 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: JANUARY 30, 2010/MAGHA 10, 1931 [PART ll SEC. 3(ii)1

Cc-c1 , 14 7-44ft, 2010

wr.arr. 313.- 71 leo ,;nftr*41 77T 371 Triv fT414 fq*-{ *74 *zrK 4471q14 l 44r

amfq Tl 41 dcrcr 74R1 ii41 ri NfaTff T (11. Z1 TT 377-ft tgi) * TITIT 41144 3TriTr9TPT, 1976 (1976 *T 60) *17M 1-11-1al ( T1 31-14/Tff ) ric04, 1987 *74441* 31177* *117W *1 "e*Trefil* Wirdit 4tatiffr q-utt 4771* .raftr Tif(fr-4F-141 T d ylctcf 14-41 -57 cnol t +if;

317:, 374, *-4-4 Newt, dad 37fift4rl *1 ¶U 36 *1 74-4M (7) *TR-NM (8) g1(1 '71f4Trzli T AMT1*-7t m/s. Datalogic Scanning Inc., 959 Terry Street, Eugene, OR 97404, USA gGfir:i[Acr 4 %214 71241*M (44km ) 71"0 "8405" sI(4rI* 3f** ttad 17f0 3Tizr97fm c4-11 dvaltuf ( $c)al)I al e124 *97 -14 411 14- ) simc4 NutsiI aT 7Trt "MAGELLAN 8400" * (fq71 *Tictti"4-41-d74TITITTM %77717*) AT f--4.4 M/s. Essae Suhagraja Industrial Estate, 62/3, Begur Hobli Road, Bommanahalli, Bangalore-560 06877T NR-d# fqe• 1411 3144INK# f749T f+111 .4fra-44*feiuNf fwzrr 7747 *1.14 aTpIcifa- 3171 1 31/09/08/141 wi laNIcf 1-1,

'140elq 77 f 1( WR I -Th") 74TI N se fq"-fff it7 514) 1 ( TT *0 3Titiftff aTizmf—d7 (*

34141 u f e I *T.114 37f4W-d14 kiTIM 15 f*. T,fT. * 1H k..177-dT 100 M. * I tic414-1 71.141117 AdTTF (t) 5 T. I sit 7, 3TINNv7I-4?1* f4/7-*T Yid "Sif-dvm co-14:110-110-Ich NIft7 3174477 "SPIT4 *1 forq-q s f5hri-do .grzih (To R1 t) 1.ifiun4 dvsNici 441 11 * I tiii-u-e44 alri f afem, ITT 7*- *-1 don< NT 4 .4 ,4 *I 7-4 t1 4 TR 4NT ,yuctr Tzbt4TT 141 4i14 1 * (11417TaTi. 1-art*IA arc i.Act I*37L-et, fra, 4i< 3iTfq 370— 11,-1 .4 fcnqf /MT I d Licmu i 230 3177 50 TO 3TrqThrdl fa-g sr-g4 4K1,14 mor * I

41.st41-rtir * .11114 siqqp-r

*07 .34 chtu f 14Y SKR "F*7 TR aqi* .qr-TTI MIS AT NI -gitT *-1.771-q4-c f*41 ARV* 1 dLichTut 41 ti1t7 t-114 fall( 7g1919-6 q11 ti cbcif I 41s(4 a1 4 t1 *-34-ET wr sR, Lil ,41,4-11 ,44 smi4 3 q44ti 1,41 Tr711 ct(r 31-Ttfo 41.sei fe 7i 4-Ifu r f+-T11 117*, l'41-1141d 7771 sigr9T* iT4 , 1T2T12i-d1 41-7 d444tur eit 100 I4m 71 2 In 'a"W*"f TIM Frw, 100 io,00o (Ian tq- 4 tTrly i HI4 I i 3f-d-rr (c9) 44 5 m. TTr 741 37fi1* TIN* fff 500 14 10,000 a ct" tic4,114-1 4-114 4-11i 3fd77 I (79) 1:1f0 50 ich.m. 3-1fN4m4 ?Awn blrf :417 ".f'

Mi 1 x 10 *, 2 x 10 5 x 10 *,**, 1 WriP⁴WC

aTR. 4N-9,q4, frk**, [4(%r* 4-114 1-43friPIN II— s 3(ii)] 655

New Delhi, the 14th January, 2010

S.O. 313.—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 (electronic tabletop type scanner-cum-weighing scale) with digital indication of "8405" series of medium accuracy (Accuracy Class-III) and with brand name "MAGELLAN 8400" (hereinafter referred to as the said Model), manufactured by M/s. Datalogic Scanning Inc., 959 Terry Street, Eugene, OR 97404, USA and marketed in India without any alteration before or after sale by M/s. Essae Technologys Pvt. Ltd., C-3, Eaase Suhagraja Industrial Estate, 62/3, Begur Hob I i Road, Bommanahalli, Bangalore-560 068 and which is assigned the approval mark IND/09/08/141;

type sca

The said model is a strain guage type load cell based non-automatic weighing instrument (electronic tabletop nner-cum-weighing scale) with a maximum capacity of 15 kg and minimum capacity of 100 g. The verification scale interval (e) is 5 g. It has a tare device with a 100 per cent subtractive retained tare effect. The Liquid Crystal Diode (LCD) display indicates the weighing result. Apart from normal weighing, the weighing scale can be used for scanning of the product or package when placed on the platen. The scale can be interfaced with computer, printer, scanner etc., as per the requirement of the customer. The instrument operates on 230 Volts, 50 Hertz alternative current power supply.

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

The weigh pan is sealed by means of lead and wire fastened through the holes provided in the instrument. The instrument can not be opened without breaking the seals. 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 simi lar make, accuracy and performance of same series with maximum capacity upto 50 kg with verification scale interval (n) in the range of 100 to 10,000 for 'e' value of 100 mg to 2 g and with verification scale interval (n) in the range of 500 to 10,000 for `e' value of 5 g or more and with `e' value 1 x 10', 2 x 10k or 5 x l0k, 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.

[1:. No. WM-21 (69)/2008] R. MATHURBOOTHAM. Director of Legal Meorology656 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: JANUARY 30, 2010/MAGHA 10,1931 [PART II—SK.3(ii)]

9-4 fcmil • 14 7-4-dt, 2010

314.—f-47 tit34cf +115M fa-F17 Trit{-21fd41 31:17-4* i) cif sKi-f alto( (01;

•2.T1ztar ATR

318:, 3k, *4 2; titmrt, 6*-1 31141=1V1 NM 36 37-*R1 (7) 3ti 37- 4IRT (8) 711 3** 7i1 1W ³¹⁷⁰¹ 4/*

--h r. -0 '41.11 3irt em,04 -01Z 14 n-6-110 -017. 370, 14 F-¹⁰¹ n jrs 771,74 T4i .41#1`1 11*-1 `5¹¹(-¹¹ * I filr,1 1:14-11 34 '41 iichif I TiHS3 ⁴⁷¹-I HIH'ST 74 fT-A777.7 31-HIS-( 774 so-n u t-7-1* 3fTiu

¹

TTT9 I ', 10 2/10 5 , 10 1,1-nc4-1,4) 741 4zu lic046 trl

[ T-Ff. T. -*- 1041-21 (113)120081

New Delhi, the 14th January, 2010

S.O. 314.—Whereas the Central Government, after considering the report submitted to it by the prescribed authority, is satisfied that the Model described in the said report (see the figure given below) is in conformity with the provisions of the Standards of Weights and Measures Act, 1976 (60 of 1976) and the Standards of Weights and Measures (Approval of Models) Rules, 1987 and the said Model is likely to maintain its accuracy over periods of sustained use and to render accurate service under varied conditions:

Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub-sections (7) and (8) of Section 36 of the said Act, the Central Government hereby issues and publishes the certificate of approval of the Model of non-automatic weighing instrument (Platform Type) with digital indication of medium accuracy (Accuracy class-111) of series "ESP" and with brand name "ESAE" (hereinafter referred to as the said Model), manufactured by M/s. Saish Marketing, CTS No. 5780, Shop No. 4, Congress Road, Tilakwadi, Belgaum-590006, Karnatka and which is assigned the approval mark IND/09/08/266.

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

Figure-2—Sealing provision of the indicator of Model.

Sealing is done by the sealing wire passing through the holes made in the bottom plate and body of the indicator of the scale with the lead seal. The indicator can not be opened without breaking the seals. A typical schematic diagram of sealing provision of the Model is given above.

Further, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (12) of Section 36 of the said Act. the Central Government hereby declares that this certificate of approval of the said Model shall also cover the weighing instruments of similar make, accuracy and performance of same series with maximum capacity above 50 kg. and up to 5000 kg. with verification scale interval (n) in the range of 500 to 10,000 for 'e' value of 5 g. or more and with •e' value of I x 2 x 10k or 5 x 10", where k is a positive or negative whole number or equal to zero, manufactured by the same manufacturer in accordance with the same principle, design and with the same materials with which, the said approved Model has been manufactured.

[F. No. WM-2 I ( I 13)/20081

R. MATHURBOOTHAM, Director of Legal MetrologyTHE GAZETTE OF INDIA: JANUARY 30, 2010/MAGHA 10,1931 [PART 11—SEc. 3(ii)] 658

fcza, 14 siicit , 2010

*Olt 315.—**1 titchit *1, iqi5t1 .31TRT*R1 'gra STRiff ft TR(g ala *74 * 4kvit'VET6117:1141ff TIM** 19RIThlti t¹¹6¹⁷¹⁷⁸li ('4 711 311-ft ti) 1Z *1:111 "RriW 31RIA711:1, 1976 (1976 *1 60) W2T1 117 * T H114) ( RITOIW 31-ghri ) fT4R, 1987 *37101* 3TIFTI *T1:1A7*t Vivermff* cimoR 1;0177 V' meat ill da-f titiftidT ATR larti *fart- TritP-Tratil 343cld *MT SKR 4101171T;

wit *A"[ZR7kel:1 ⁶¹¹¹¹{⁷¹⁷⁴C¹⁴ it -tMiT arER 19*-m *7 as t-o*TrItT IfirMiT{{^{{FOOTNOTE *1}}}} 1741-a nls 1491 *err 7t1 whor I Trre-,F *-I-d* 4,44 *vi-01*-T tcw TTF91"z,N7TTZ siqui q WcTT kit TM* I fAtik)(WI 3(ii)] kigff IFifkr4 : Wettl 30, 2010/11111 10, 1931 659

New Delhi, the 14th January, 2010

S.O. 315.—Whereas the Central Government, after considering the report submitted to it by the prescribed authority, is satisfied that the model described in the said report (see the figure given below) is in conformity with the provisions of the Standards of Weights and Measures Act, 1976 (60 of 1976) and the Standards of Weights and Measures (Approval of Models) Rules, 1987 and the said Model is likely to maintain its accuracy over periods of sustained use and to render accurate service under varied conditions;

Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub-sections (7) and (8) of Section 36 of the said Act, the Central Government hereby issues and publishes the certificate of approval of the Model of non-automatic weighing instrument (Tabletop Type) with digital indication of "EST" series of medium accuracy (Accuracy class-111) and with brand name "ESAE" (hereinafter referred to as the said Model), manufactured by M/s. Saish Marketing, CTS No. 5780, Shop No. 4, Congress Road, Tilakwadi, Belgaum-590006, Karnataka and which is assigned the approval mark 1ND/09/08/267.

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

A3495

Figure-2—Sealing diagram of the model.

Sealing is done by the sealing wire passing through the holes made in the bottam plate and body of the scale with the lead seal. The indicator can not be opened without breaking the seals. A typical schematic diagram of sealing provision of the model is given above.

Further, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (12) of Section 36 of the said Act, the Central Government hereby declares that this certificate of approval of the said Model shall also cover the weighing instruments of similar make, accuracy and performance of same series with maximum capacity up to 50 kg with verification scale interval (n) in the range of 100 to 10,000 for 'e' value of 100 mg to 2 g and with verification scale interval (n) in the range of 500 to 10,000 for 'e' value of 5 g or more and with 'e' value 1 x Itr, 2 x l0k 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 (113)/2008]

R. MATHURBOOTHAM, Director of Legal Metrology 202 GI/10-6660 THE GAZE ► TE OF INDIA: JANUARY 30, 2010/MAGHA 10,1931 [PART I1—SEC. 3(0]

rcrt-a, 14 Wier?, 2010

wr.aTt. 316.—T 14 titchlt mil, fefff 3utir+-R1 'gm z43wejn fr y TR fq ,⁴R{{^{{FOOTNOTE *}}}}tivxblQ tr6 wuttr9 * fiq1J 4 NOM Nfur (7.1.4 3Trffff ATI) NTE * 1117 Hilch 3Tfilf-97:1, 1976 (1976 *7 60) /MT NTZ 3 T1TV 1119-W Ali *1 aititil 4 NI Wf HisO ('R1 f1 31-11:kff) fiNN, 1987 * 374711* 3T-IftIt A( Sri NM *-1 TiNT-47* 7407 mill -417 a farriT- '43ercf T dr T4Ti*Tdr It;

fag 3Trl Tit/09/08/531 ii 3-(3441cr Rhqr Trzu*, 3T-14r -ci spip t-trq t TI ult {{^{{FOOTNOTE *}}}}

cl)rli T*7* 3-113ZT *-1k ch ellt r crbre.cbt

"tffi W4 *1 o ,s 4T at A -q-in F777 477 ti1rT ai t-INIF4cf faAr Alcif I Jic-r -0)t f-49i l{{^{{FOOTNOTE *}}}}r {{^{{FOOTNOTE *}}}}Fr ⁷-e "qi amnr I ⁴-¹i⁸rf X¹¹ a-,(4* ³(-¹⁴⁴ {{^{{FOOTNOTE *}}}}r "{{^{{FOOTNOTE 9*}}}} ⁵R.,⁹¹" 41kk-fl 51 44104 3741i fc-za 7R:flt I

z71 (-Whit d cfti 3Tfqfp44 9171 36 74- 317--- .4771 (12) 7U mS.717fN7771 *T .77.11 *-74 V, 74?; q173Ti 7-ra fTi Sad Hisci* 3rlit<9. * smiu r-tri* 3f-dtd 3i.11 ftiZtff, fg-ATTa' * 33-1FR *3* 41 Prth A f-44/4 arlTitroH1sri fal-ml ut f*zrr , Nr*, fakrAd d411 um* t Trantiar 4r-{ ctloq 34 cIlt uf *ell* too #17. A 2 7. "ffW *"t" 7417 * f 100 .74 10,000 NW *1 4 tit-4114'f 1311:11:19 3fffiT7 (7) AK 5 7. 7 3t-R-1 "t" *fe9 500 74 10,000 c7/ NT). tN 4X1//4 .7+719HO 317-7-0 (7) 50 1*-.7. 3fIT*74 kilMT N.T.A f 3t7"t"NPT11-1374 3(fi)) +1R7 tisTrof : WI44 30, 2010/177 10, 1931 661

New Delhi, the 14th January, 2010

S.O. 316.--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 not y.autontatic weighing instrument (Tabletop Type) with digital indication of"MWS-TB" series of medium accuracy (Aecurat;:y class t) and with brand name "MODERN" (hereinafter referred to as the said Model), manufactured by M/s. New Modern Weighing System, 12-B, Maruthi Complex, Post Box No. 463, Omalur Road, Opp. New Bus Stand, Salem-636004, "Ditrid Nadu and which is assigned the approval mark IND/09/08/531.

The said Model is a strain gauge type load cell based non-automatic weighing instrument (Tibietor Type) with a maximum capacity of 30 kg. and minimum capacity of 100 g. The verification scale interval (&) N 5 g. It h a tse ofiNicewith a 100 per cent subtractive retained tare effect. The Light Emitting Diode (LED) display indieetes the weighing result, The instrument operates on 230 Volts, 50 Hertz alternative current power supply.

Figure 2—Sealing diagram of the Model.

By the either side of the weighing scale 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 instrument cannot be opened without tampering the seal. A typical schematic diagram of sealing provision of the Model is given above.

Further, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (12) of Section 36 of the said Act, the Central Government hereby declares that this certificate of approval of the said Model shall also cover the weighing instruments of similar make, accuracy and performance of same series with maximum capacity up to 50 kg. with verification scale interval (n) in the range of 100 to 10,000 for 'e' value of 100 mg. to 2 g. and with verification scale interval (n) the range of 500 to 10,000 for 'e' value of 5 g. or more and with `e' value of 1 x 10k, 2 Y 10k or 5 x lOk, where k is a positive or nee alive whole number or equal to zero, manufactured by the same manufacturer in accordance with the same principle, des iee and with the same materials with which, the said approved Model has been manufactured.

[F. No. WM-2 I (205)/20081

R. MATHURBOOTHAM, Director of Legal Metrology[PART 11—SEC. 3(ii)] 662 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: JANUARY 30, 2010/MAGHA 10, 1931

7t kat 14 79ERI, 2010

WAIT. 317.— How WT, fafscr ITIf1MT# Mt 3147 f(*i lam( *IA * 4ra1c1,1161*311/19*711* RICI't g*tv * aramt 311(*--4K gAdcht fwg ma 3111*9144 *R4 { mgc/43Ttr i /TR sitt *PAN *tit artu **R fq-qi yttut NI-er Tsl`art vim' Iffm*4 149.-4g w(4*z-c/4+4 vrcrw 3r/rgl *arifirg zignEs1 Intget *Tr Trzrt it

**3(1tt /Mg 3a1r aiffifiErri 1 tiTTI ^{36 3}r¹- ¹¹¹¹¹ (¹²) '&¹¹¹³¹ qiNcita WT A{{^{{FOOTNOTE *7}}}} We V, zr-f i uI¹ vrdl {{^{{FOOTNOTE *}}}} Trff #3x711* # T413M111-¹:ff * al-dft 3Al fqi-Niar gra 1-(41 frwo {{^{{FOOTNOTE *}}}} argrg afR T(T¹ {{^{{FOOTNOTE *}}}}vita {{^{{FOOTNOTE *}}}}[ sIPT II—i 3(ii)] sigff tiwy X : WT⁴' 30, 2010/111it 10, 1931 663

New Delhi, the 14th January, 2010

S.O. 317.—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-III) of series "M WS-PT" and with brand name "MODERN" (hereinafter referred to as the said Model), manufactured by M/s. New Modern Weighing System, 12-B, Maruthi Complex, Post Box No. 463, Omalur Road, Opp. New Bus Stand, Salem-636004, Tamil Nadu and which is assigned the approval mark IND/09/08/532.

The said model is a strain guagd 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 200 g. It has a tare device with a 100 per cent subtractive retained tare effect. The Light Emitting Diode (LED) indicates the weighing results. The instrument operates on 230 Volts, 50 Hertz alternative current power supply.

Figure-2—Sealing provision of the indicator 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 cannot be opened without tampering the seal. A typical schematic diagram of sealing provision of the model is given above.

Further, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (12) of Section 36 of the said Act, the Central Government hereby declares that this certificate of approval of the said Model shall also cover the weighing instruments of similar make, accuracy and performance of same series with maximum capacity above 50 kg and up to 5000 kg with verification scale interval (n) in the range of 500 to 10,000 for ke' value of 5 g. or more and with ke' value of I x 10k, 2 x 10" or 5 x l0k, 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-2 I (205)/2008] R. MATHURBOOTHAM, Director of Legal MetrologyTHE GAZETTE OF INDIA: JANUARY 30, 2010/MAGHA 10,1931 [PART II—Sec. 3(ii)] 664

icrcil, 14 74711, 2010

icRrarq,7wt w611T411..) fswzi 40 Z9 3fti k-T471 200 ?CM. F I ticWi4 i 4-¹¹⁴ 1-¹¹¹' 3-1.7(M. 10 ff.M. 1 *(-1 34 73' ³¹¹t{{^{{FOOTNOTE *}}}}Ceff ¹-0 f4ATT "TU Mtd 34i4409 A4Tl4 Si ctoq f dc-t-1 ,314) 371ff ( 7t t) *Ff7 4Ruip4 ct,o( F 134

iiism .0 *rug t .sfrattri W1 11 1.1.5 sitiq114

100 Z aftr*--d7 kicidf "1" 7ti9 lx {{^{{FOOTNOTE 2810*}}}}, ⁵⁸¹⁰* , {{^{{FOOTNOTE **}}}}, '⁴⁹TTI{{^{{FOOTNOTE *}}}}c- TIT Itu nc-Ha, Tptl{{^{{FOOTNOTE *}}}} ZIT Yk-Ef{{^{{FOOTNOTE *}}}}

New Delhi, the 14th January, 2010

S.O. 318,—Whereas the Centrai Government, after considering the report submitted to it by the prescribed authority, is satisfied that the model described in the said report (see the figure given below) is in conformity with the provisions of the Standards of Weights and Measures Act, 1976 (60 of 1976) and the Standards of Weights and Measures (Approval of Models) Rules, 1987 and the said Model is likely to maintain its accuracy over periods of sustained use and to render accurate service under varied conditions;

Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub-sections (7) and (8) of Section 36 of the said Act, the Central Government hereby issues and publishes the certificate of approval of the Model of non-automatic weighing instrument (Weighbridge Type) with digital indication of medium accuracy (Accuracy class-III) of series "MWS-WB" and with brand name "MODERN" (hereinafter referred to as the said Model), manufactured by M/s. New Modern Weighing System, 12-B, Maruthi Complex, Post Box No. 463, Omalur Road, Opp. New Bus stand, Salem-636 004, Tamil Nadu and which is assigned the approval mark 1ND/09/08/533.

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

Figure-2—Sealing provision of the indicator 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 cannot be opened without tampering the seal. A typical schematic diagram of sealing provision of the model is given above.

Further, in exercise of the power conferred by sub-section (12) of Section 36 of the said Act, the Central Government hereby declares that this certificate of approval of the said Model shall also cover the weighing instruments of similar make, accuracy and performance of same series with maximum capacity above 5 tonne and up to 100 tonne with verification scale interval (n) in the range of 500 to 10,000 for 'e' value of 5 g. or more and with 'e' value I x 10 k, 2 x l0k or 5 x10", 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 (205)/2008]

R. MATHURBOOTHAM, Director of Legal MetrologyTHE GAZETTE OF INDIA: JANUARY 30, 2010/MAGHA 10, 1931 [PART 11—SEC. 3(ii)] 666 ITR*4 TIT-1W WO.

c•ri , 11 A-mil, 2010

Trcgru 3Tf4fird Tot * fdi fsR ngaln vaggeur *4 3T-1114i 4 fCrit nnt *Trg Parnff Trnl*

'FR t.ni mct 1¹Tiltzi nr4w(1) 44 nroln nri-w vt ³Tf-dTfiiU Tnifcrd fen Tigzrt A 4a4t irt afR Yi a) ngaln Ill WRIT lilloa,

arlunin A 1ipf `f ten

L*14 : Ll 1621 - 58)

BUREAU OF INDIAN STANDARDS

New Delhi, the 11th January, 2010

S.O. 319—In pursuance of clause (b) of sub-rule (1) of Rule 7 of the Bureau of Indian Standards Rules, 1987, the Bureau of Indian Standards hereby notifies that the Indian Standards, particulars of which is given in the Schedule hereto annexed have been established on the indicated against each :—

SCHEDULE

St. No. No. & Year of the Indian Standard No. and Year of the Indian Standards,

Date of Established

if any, Superseded by the New Indian Standard

{{^{{FOOTNOTE (4)}}}} (1)

31 March, 2009 Transformers Part 8 Application Guide Copy of this Standard is available for sale with the Bureau of Indian Standards, Manak Bhavan, 9, Bahadur Shah Zafar Marg, New Delhi-110002 and Regional Offices : New Delhi, Kolkata, Chandigarh, Chennai, Mumbai and also Branch Offices : Ahmedabad, Bangalore, Bhopal, Bhubaneshwar, Coimbatore, Guwahati, Hyderabad, Jaipur, Kanpur, Nagpur, Patna, Pune, Thiruvananthapuram.

[Ref: ET i6/T-58]

R. K. TREHAN, Scientist E and Head Hydrochemical)

Ti l Wet , 18 ,31-icit1, 2010

31 V IC 2009 ( I ) (2) 1. 314 VI 15837 : 2009 105I§i

ZIPIN ¹;Tg³¹TWM-fc⁴⁵¹ 1tT illrjrzr TII t 3tfat 117617 11114) 111-4W ir4-4, 9, fcrol, "EPIrt¹⁷, '¹³TArt ¹⁹⁴¹¹⁹P§IT

I667 417 tis3144 : 7-4-at 30, 2010/41E1 10, 1931 DIM s 3(fi)]

New Delhi, the 18th January, 2010

S.O. 320.—In pursuance of clause (b) of sub-rule (1) of Rule 7 of the Bureau of Indian Standards Rules, 1987, the Bureau of Indian Standards hereby notifies that the Indian Standards, particulars of which are given in the Schedule hereto annexed have been established on the date indicated against each :-

SCHEDULE

No. and Year of the Indian Standards. Date of SI. No. No. & Year of the Indian Standard

Established Established

if any, superseded by the New Indian Standard

(4)

(3)

(2)

(1)

31 July, 2009 I. IS 15837: 2009 Anhydrous Diboron

Trioxide—Specification

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

[Ref: CHD 30/1S 15837]

E. DEVENDAR, Scientist F and Head (Chemical)

, 18 'T-111*, 2010

i:-N+4, 1987 *1-N4 7 *77-1-1 ,144 (I)

W.311'. 321.- TITitzt

iTrraltr H114) 7{1 3Tr-d-Wrqff TPTifEru tfiT 1:k7TI Tftsz /44 AT 4;

(1) (2)

411717 urn A 9491 TITTO, zlf11 3fru4ti (3) (4) 30 7, 2009 1. all "CrWaTit17311 14025 : 2006 Li g eR clti

N gum( ZTP-III 4 4114tot Nl qu ilq--t-stu 3111 3r1"-z1T

rniaki i :

11 zv-ht 110002, P,45 771 VO,1-11-1,11 1-7-4ff, 9,

TRW let

64.4 141, 11717.7. Np*7-41, ajl qs,olt. 71-117t.

ts1 ZTtffa.T f1

en)ricnoTt, vt u il+14, '517ft TITEIT : cci cit‹, ,4 4.411, 114111, 4e-1t, TO 'ffaTT inta-i-cay g f40-

[1474 ;f1;. -it 34:- 3,fi 717131T.1 11:,FT 41-14025]

'CrT '5171 (ttilq-f)

New Delhi. the 18th January, 2010

S.O. 321.—In pursuance of clause (b) of sub-rule (1) of Rule 7 of the Bureau oi Indian Standards Rules. 1987, the Bureau of Indian Standards hereby notifies that the Indian Standards, particulars of cc l ,..eh are given in the Schedule hereto annexed have been established on the date indicated against each :-

SCHEDULE

SI. No. No. & Year of the Intdian Standard

Date of Established Established

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

(4)

(3)

(2)

30 June. 2000 IS/ISO 14025: 2006 Environmental Labels and Declarations—Type III Environmental Declarations—Principles and Procedures

202 GI/10-7668 TIIE GAZET I E OF INDIA: JANUARY 30, 2010/MAGHA 10, !931 [PART II—Sec. 3(1)] Copy of this Standard is available for sale with the Bureau of Indian Standards, Manak Bhavan, 9, Bahadur Shah Zafar Marg, New Delhi-110002 and Regional Offices : New Delhi, Koikata, Chandigarh, Chennai, Mumbai and also Branch Offices : Ahmedabad, Bangalore, Bhopal, Bhubaneshwar, Coimbatore, Guwahati, Hyderabad, Jaipur, Kanpur, Nagpur, Patna, Pune, Thiruvananthapuram.

[Ref: CHD 34/IS/ISO-14025]

E. DEVENDAR, Scientist F and Head (Chemical)

Crv-1 , 1811, 2010

*T3TT, 322.— 1-1(71)=1 fiv4+4, 1987 * ri 7 * 37- -ito-f (1) * 4§I u (TS) 3917171 ta1,gltt 3Timi=b 44r 1 *f Fat -I 341.717 * ft-47141 ,4 39117-ft fq 1 I -e4 4 4t , 2008 7*tfgnC 3frt zirm A fffR

ari

fatrrEth

*71. 4 ,1 Tr4 Tfc-if ii.tqa 40 T1

³⁴R-ff ⁰,⁴⁹⁴ 1-IPT II, gg s 3, 37- +pis (ii) T .3i(. Hl -4I f-df4

(1) (2)

( 3 )

(4)

40. 4 7m-ft 13r4 q131i 4 aifiTim

1. 37T- 74 8089 : 1976 4171ifT-* - {{^{{FOOTNOTE *17}}}} ⁸⁰⁹¹ : 2008 *el* t4 ,44 31;i4-4TM .4. f--TrcK 4F-6-dr 0-16or 7-NiTTT: 4 f9TITR tfff 711-rdi

alt t 8089 : 1976 * 3v 4* 7.73=t 711-'04

7-0 T91-1fuff f--zrr Trm % I

[4c%i : 8/341 ttt4-8089]

i-4T1 75. 74 71-u

New Delhi, the 18th January, 2010

S.O. 322.—In pursuance of clause (b) of sub-rule (I) of Rule 7 of the Bureau of Indian Standards Rules, it is hereby notifies that the Indian Standards, particulars of which are mentioned in the Schedule give hereafter, have been cancelled and stand withdrawn w.e.f, 11 November, 2008.

SCHEDULE.

SI. No. No. & Year of the Indian Standard

Remarks Cancelled

S.O. No. & Date published in the Gazette of India. Part II, Section 3, Sub-section (ii)

(2)

{{^{{FOOTNOTE (3)}}}}

(4)

IS 8089: 1976 Code of Safe Practice for layout of out- side Facilities in an industrial Plant

IS : 8091: 2008 "Industrial Plant Layout- Code of Safety (First Rev is ion) - has been Revised to include the Provisions of 1S 8089: 1976

- I Ree CHD8/1S. 8089] E. DEVENDAR, Scientist Fand I lead (Chemical)DIM H—igus 3(u)] %TM (b4 ⁴⁴⁴ : ⁷⁹-qt 30, 2010:171 10, 1931 669

fcmil, 18 79-4#, 2010

323,—I-117ft alfiafau fffizrt 7rdf f7ff ATtru fml Trzi

arikr

W¹:1l Trel iii c1.n t-ItV41 ur 3R

¹. 3T71 3025 : 1964 ddi4

³rziwtrrt *974 A--4 trfturrt

.fiL,¹-A arr-⁴¹ fro-⁴r fT. fit I -11 ⁴-^4{, 2008 * 3-1T- 71 3025 s'-jrdT fat 'TTR 4ici. - 771r-4-4f )4chiY1-1

't.1 ft I

⁷³⁷⁷; ⁷.¹⁷⁴ 3025 *1 IN⁷:11 Ci⁵Ct .(1;-a 74) ³² * 7,w-11i,Y1 3-7? 7* 9-fr,-,st

(⁷,' T 3311 T 302s

SCHEDULE

(4)

T.³lT. ³²⁴.-¹-¹M-¹⁷ {{^{{FOOTNOTE 179**}}}}F) f-BP-f, ¹⁹⁸⁷ {{^{{FOOTNOTE *}}}} f-t e-o-f ⁷ {{^{{FOOTNOTE *714}}}}-¹-⁴⁴¹⁴ (I) -ct urrg- (u) aivt 9117.717t 1,14.1 ti,cisql(f ³-,;¹¹⁷³.{{^{{FOOTNOTE *}}}} ft *-4 fu Tt ¹¹¹¹¹ ( . 1) TMT fffizrr Tr4670 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: JANUARY 30, 2010/MAGHA 10, 1931 [PART II—SEC. 3(11)] TfOtri Itgrr *fee; 7171t fdlv4 Tivrifird irrehr ,ima, err

m-rf

34'17

{{^{{FOOTNOTE (4)}}}}

(3)

( I ) (2)

all 71 1680: 1982 3171 TitzR -crq "ft 1 ftlmti, 2008 31 sio-sR, 2008 ass tzTFTY

3^1.aqtri)

*OR Ti. 1 snit4 2009 31 what, 2009 ami 8188 :1999 cit

d'411(--ft Tirdi ("Agrl 19-tvin)

t.iki *19' 74. 1 cti l-ett, 2008 31 twER, 2008 31T 71 10392: 1982 31• 1 "4 TITt7114 tzruti* fuR 7-1.r.7-

4,10( `a1 11

R. 2 f- 1 ..1‹, 2008 31 fq417R, 2008 31rt .crcr 11970 : 1987 TN-d•W trietT1

7fiZ)

4-11-I ch1 5f171 147-4ZT +11111 T1 4-¹¹¹⁴) 1-Taff, 9, TEAS( yTTtt WFT xTrrf icret -110002, ⁴-41zi .bi zt evil : i4, M--11 Yii(41 4191M4i : 3171:174K, 3-1)7M, ITIAVER, 7Tgra, A-4T, 7197, Tait, 21T fitc,c1-f .-iir4 NstIrt 7:19-44 I

[ 7474 : 17¹¹⁷-At I3/37It 7Ff 1680, 8188, 103921 )1970]

q). 7F 74 siTg§r ("ilq-r)

New Delhi, the 18th January, 2010

S.O. 324.—In pursuance of clause (b) of sub-rule (1) of Rule 7 of the Bureau of Indian Standards Rules, 1987, the Bureau of Indian Standards hereby notifies that amendments to the Indian Standards, particulars of which are given in the Schedule hereto annexed have been issued :—

SCHEDULE

No. and year of the amendment Date from which the amend- S1, No. No, and year of the Indian Standards

ment shall have effect

{{^{{FOOTNOTE (4)}}}}

(I) (2)

(3)

IS 1680: 1982 Code of Practice for Amendment No. I December, 2008 31 December, 2008 Treatment of Water for low and medium Pressure Land Boilers (Third Revision)

IS 8188: 1999 Treatment of Water for Amendment No. 1 January, 2009 31 January, 2009 Coolin 1! Towers-Code of Practice (First Revision)

IS 10392 1982 Specification for feed Amendment No. I December, 2008 31 December, 2008 Water and Boiler water for low and Medium Pressure Land Boilers

d. IS 11 970 : 1987 Guide for Condensate Amendment No. 2 December, 2008 31 December, 2008 Polishing (Power Plant).

Copy of these Standards are available for sale with the Bureau of Indian Standards, Manak Bhavan, 9, Bahadur Shah Zafar Macg. New Delhi-I 10002 and Regional Offices : New Delhi, Kolkatta Chandigarh, Chennai, Mumbai and also Branch Offices : Ahmedabad, Bangalore, Bhopal, Bhubaneshwar, Coimbatore, Guwahati, Hyderabad, Jaipur, Kanpur, Nagpur, Patna, Pune, Thiruvananthapuram.

[Ref CHD 13/1S 1680,8188, 10392 and 11970]

E. DEVENDAR, Scientist F and Head (Chemical)[ 3(ri)] slifff : 30, 2010/7E1 10, 1931 671

VIZ Tit t ut 'Dnriti

tMl, 3 iciv-GR, 2009

Versus

The Director, Central Institute for Research on Buffaloes, Hissar Road, Hissar- 125001.

Respondent

APPEARANCES

/fit.31T. 325.—tylvicf, glaA 5TTITRI4 *I 26-11-2009 14*AT4 *Whit grew :irzirkftWPT-176-*Ii -Eagle-14, TAM {{^{{FOOTNOTE *}}}} TIT⁸⁴⁹- aTfircft * vEr 4 65 aTri Tzl 1 r4 314-d, 9-3-2014 WW 3Ter4T 3Ft-a 3TrOlY WW, * /TO lerkleut * I

For the Workman : Shri Sandeep Bhardwaj For the Management : Shri R. K. Sharma

AWARD

Passed on : 17-12-2009

[14. '1I-11016/8/200841ZOTT-11]

* IW1 K, 3141 tirrict

MINISTRY OF LABOUR AND EMPLOYMENT

New Delhi, the 3rd December, 2009

S.O. 325.—The President is pleased to appoint Sh. Jitendra Srivastava as Presiding Officer of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, Bhubaneswar w.e.f. 26-11-2009 till he attains the age of 65 years i.e. upto 9-3-2014 or until further orders, whichever is earlier.

Government of India, vide Notification No. L -42012/ 200/2001-IR (C.M.-II) dated 8-8-2002, referred the following industrial dispute under Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (the Act in short) for adjudication to this Tribunal :-

"Whether the action of the management of Central Institute for Research on Buffaloes in terminating the services of Shri. Raghubir Singh w.e.f 28-3-98 is legal and justified? If not, to what relief the workman is entitled to ?"

[No. A-11016/82008-CLS-II]

P. K. TAMRAKAR, Under Secy.

TirCrx1, 31 RNA-sit, 2009

MAT. 326.-31helW fePE117 alftlfizR, 1947 (1947 14) EMI 17 * argRul cg44 Noll( 74 "r41KIL VI{ ffIT# 31/ff GM rtl * 3r4gel *14-4-4 1 41 Act, afr( 414414***g, 374'4 4 .1-ate aildfrw twb g aftmur, 1, ,gu51 ,[6 * TtITE (7k4 WWII 169/2002) ehIPIcr Wft*, .M1 '1'•1`1 *1 30-12-2009 V/ VT7I

[It ¹7-42012/200/2001-3d 3117.(471:1-11)] 31-A-4 et2;-IR Th, it-ch 31fir*R1 New Delhi, the 31st December, 2009

S.O. 326.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ret: No.169/2002) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, No. 1, Chandigarh as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the management of Central Institute for Research on Buffaloes, and their workmen, received by the Central Government on 31-12-2009.

[No. L-42012/200/2001-1R(CM-I1)]

AJAY KUMAR GAUR, Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

After receiving the reference, parties were informed. Parties appeared and filed their respective pleadings. The contention of the workman in nut shell is that he was appointed as DPL on 1-7-98 in security department of respondent. He worked up to 31-7-1990 regularly and his services were terminated on 1-12-1990 without notice or one month wages in lieu of the notice and lawful terminal dues. The workman raised an industrial dispute which was pending as ID No. 100/92 in CG IT- 1 -Chd. On account of the oral agreement between the workers union and the management, the management passed the order dated 18-9-97 regarding the reinstatement of the services of the workman on withdrawal of the cases pending adjudication before the Tribunal. The workman withdrew the industrial dispute and his services were reinstated on 18-9-97. Once again on 27-3-98 the services of the workman were terminated without notice or one month wages in lieu of the notice and legal terminal dues. The workman has worked more than 240 days after reinstatement of his services on 18-9-97. The management has shown 190 days of work, but the days of rest and holidays have not been counted by the management. If the Sundays and other holidays are counted, the workman has completed 240 days of work. His termination is against the provisions of the Act, as no retrenchment compensation was paid to him and no notice or one month wages in lieu of the notice were given. On the basis of the above facts, the workman has prayed for setting aside the termination order and for reinstatement of the workman into the services with full back wages and other benefits.

BEFORE SHRIGYANENDRA KUMAR SHARMA,

PRESIDING OFFICER, CENTRAL GOVERNMENT

INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL -CUM-LABOUR COURT,

NO. 1, CHANDIGARH

Case No. I.D. 169 of 2002

Shri Raghubir Singh S/o Shri Paras Ram, Vill. & P.O. Lohari Ragho, Teh. Namod, Distt. Hissar, Hissar.

Applicant The management appeared and denied the contention of the workman. The preliminary objection which was raised by the management is that management is not an industry. Apart from it, it was also contended by the management that services of the workman were trerminated vide order dated 27-3-98 on account of non-availability of work in the institute.

Rest of the facts regarding the previous services tenure of the workman, the termination of his services and reinstatement by the management on account of the oral agreement between the workers union and the management are admitted. Order dated 11-7-97 passed on the basis of an agreement between the workers union and the management is also on record.

On the basis of the above facts, I am of the view that the main issues for adjudication before this Tribunal are :—

Whether the respondent is an 'industry'?

Whether the workman has completed 240 days of work in the preceding year from the date of his termination?

(3) Relief, if any.

Both of the parties were afforded the opportunity for adducing evidence. The evidence of the workman was recorded. On behalf of the management Shri Rajesh Kumar Sharma filed his affidavit and he was cross-examined by learned counsel for the workman. All the documents filed and relied upon by the parties in their pleadings are on record. I have heard learned counsel for the parties at length. I have also perused the entire materials on record.

I am answering the issues one by one.

On issue No.1, the term 'industry' has been defined in Section 2(j) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, to mean any business, trade, undertaking, manufacturing or calling upon employers and includes any calling, services, employment, handicraft or industrial occuption or avocation of workmen. In Bangalore Water Supply and Sewerage Board Vs. A. Rajappa and others AIR, 1978 Supreme Court 548, seven Judges Bench of Hon'ble the Apex Court has defined the word 'industry'. As per the above mentioned law laid down by the Apex Court, industry has defined in Sub-section 2(j) as a wide term and import as:—

Where there is (i) systematic activity, (ii) organized by co-operation between employer and employee (the direct and substantial element is chimerical), and (iii) for the production and/or distribution of goods and services calculated to satisfy human wants and wishes (not spiritual or religious but inclusive of material things or services geared to celestial bliss), prima facie, there is an industry in the enterprise.

Absence of profit motive or gainful objective is irrelevant, be the venture in the public, joint. private or other sector.

The true focus is functional and the decisive test is the nature of the activity with special emphasis on the employer-employee relations.

If the organization is a trade or business it does not cease to be one because of philanthropy animating the undertaking.

Thus the test (specially triple test) referred by Hon'ble the Apex Court in Bangalore Water Supply Case (supra), are necessary to qualify any institution to be an industry.

Regarding the sovereign functions, Hon'ble the Apex Court in Bangalore Water Supply Case (supra), has held sovereign functions strictly understood cannot alone qualify the exemption, nor the.welfare activities or economic advantage undertaken by Government or statutory bodies. Even in departments dischargim; sovereign functions, if there are units which qualified to be the industry and they are substantially several then, *hey can be considered to come within Section 2(J) in the definitions of Industry.

On the basis of the nature of work carried on by the management of respondent, the respondent is an industry. As per the law laid down by the Supreme Court in Bangalore Water Supply Case every research institute cannot seek exemption from the term industry.

Moreover, if any research institute have number of units, as per the law laid down by the Apex Court in Bangalore Water Supply Case (supra), one unit may come within the definition of Industry, whereas, another unit on the basis of the functions discharge and activities carried on can seek exemption. Thus, on the basis of the functioning of the respondent and the work which was discharged by the workman assigned to him by the management, I am of the view that as per the ratio of the judgment of the Supreme Court in Bangalore Water Supply Case (supra), the management is an industry.

On issue no.2 it is the contention of the workman that he had worked for 240 days, if the Sundays and other holidays are also counted. The management of respondent has admitted that days of rest, Sundays and holidays have not been counted while calculating the working days of the workman. As per the management the workman had worked only for 190 days in the preceding year from the date of his termination.

It is admitted that workman was engaged as D.P.L and as per the law of service jurisprudence. the day of rest, Sundays and holidays are to be counted while calculating the working days of the workman. I f days of rest, Sunday and other holidays are counted for calculating the working days of the workman, it comes more than 240 days ofwork in the preceding year from the date of his termination.

It is also the contention of the manauement that services of the workman were terminated on account of the non-availability of work with the management. The opening sentence of the management witness MW I is that another man was employed for work because the workman was not coming on work. No notice or letter was send to the workman informing him to join the duties. It is not the case of the management in its pleadings that workman had voluntarily abandoned the work. In para No. 6 of the written statement it is only mentioned that his services wer,..

ii

I I II 11 II: I673

ANNEXURE

CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL

TRIBUNAL CUM-LABOUR COURT, JAIPUR

PRESENT

Dr. Manju Nigam

AWARD

as 1 * 3r4tra'q

ar-¹-⁴n Tlf⁹fttz 3¹WITW 111,41

ATM 31T 2111

on the permanent basis from the enclosed list of existing temporary sweepers. The claim was filed along with an interim application accordingly with an affidavit to restrain the non-applicant from appointing candidate from open market instead of regulerising the services of existing 199 sweepers. It is stated that the non-applicant i.e. Bank of Baroda management is going to recruit fresh sweepers from the market for their newly open branches at Vidyadhamagar and Malviyanagar while not recruiting the sweepers name in the enclosed list who are working for last ten/fifteen years on temporary basis in the bank service. Thus they are doing injustice to the existing temporary sweepers causing harassment to them by not making them on permanent basis. It was also stated that petitioner union being an affiliate union of All India Bank of Baroda Employees Federation, Mumbai has arrived to represent to such temporary sweepers who are their members also.

Further the clause 2.7, 20.7, and 20.8 of bi-partite settlement dated 19 October, 1966 have been quoted. It is requested that the non applicant should be directed to fill up these vacancies from the person who are working in the bank for last ten/fifteen years from the enclosed list rather to fill up the vacancies from the open market. In the past also the bank had regularised the services of such temporary/part time sweeper by signing settlement dated 6 February, 1990 before the ALC (C), Jaipur, copy of which is on the record as Annex-1. Thus while not regularising/ absorbing the existing temporary sweeper gainst various permanent vacancies and recruiting fresh sweepers from open market is an attempt to deprive the legitimate right of existing sweepers to be regularised/perm anent in the service. Therefore, non applicant bank be directed to regularise the services of all the existing temporary sweepers in Vidyadharnagar as Malviyanagar Branch, Jaipur on permanent basis in time scale of pay of permanent of sub ordinate staff with all the consequentional benefits.

Reply was filed denying the contents of Statement of Claim. It was stated that petitioner union has not place any documents on record or any resolution showing that 199 temporary sweeper whose list enclosed with the reference are the members of petitioner union and hence petitioner union is not the spouse in case of such employees. The petitioner has not place material/documents on record to show that the employee have authorise or have passed any resolution in favour of the petitioner union to spouse their case. The petitioner deserves to be dismissed on this ground alone. It was alleged that the reference which has been referred to this court for adjudication is bad in law as there exist no Industrial Dispute between the petitioner union or bank u/s 2A or 2K of the Act.

It has been further stated that respondent bank being a public sector organisation is governed by statutory rules/Regulation of appointment. In the respondent bank General Manager (HRM) is the competent authority to authorize sanction of vacancy in sub ordinate cadre in either case whether for temporary engagement or for permanent employment. Sanction has been granted by the competent authority to appoint sweepers for newly open branch in the city by following the recruitment process through the employment exchange. Employment exchange and District welfare department have given their names as per eligibility criteria for initiating the recruitment process for recruiting sweepers for newly open branches. Branch manager is not the competent authority to appoint, or engage any person in sub ordinate cadre even on temporary basis without the sanction of General manger (HRM) and any person who has been appointed on ad-hoc basis without sanction of proper authority, has no right on the post. Respondent has not engaged any temporary/daily wager for sweeping purpose. The sweeper who have been engaged by the concerned Branch Manager in exigency of the work are illegal appointments. Mere continuance of such illegal appointments, does not create any right in favour of such person. The absorption or regularization or recruitment has to be made as per prescribed procedure laid down by the higher authorities as per guideline issued by the Central Government and none of the persons fulfill the eligibility criteria for engagement/appoin tment in sub staff cadre.

Rejoinder denying the contents of the reply and reiterating the contention made in the claim has been filed. It is denied that the Branch Manager is not the competent authority to engage sweeper in the bank. It is for the Bank to decide as to whether it would like to initiate action against the Branch Manager who have appointed part time sweepers without any authority.

In evidence, the affidavit of Shri R. S. Chawhan, Secretary, Bank of Baroda Karamchari union has been filed on 10-3-2006. Memorandum of letter 12(3) of Act arrived during conciliation proceeding of the Bank of Baroda Karamchari Union and Bank of Baroda (Management) on 6-2-1990 before Assistant Labour Commissioner (Central) as W.D.I, Memorandum of understanding arrived at the conciliation proceeding as Annex-A, Extract of clause 20.7, 20.8 and 20.12 of the Bi- partite settlement dated 19th of October, 2009 as Annex. WD-2, Chapter-I I part time workmen Annex. WD-3 has been filed.

On 22-10-2009 the applicant union filed an application to withdraw the case on the ground that a tri-partite settlement dated 18-3-2008 u/s 12 (3) of the Act has been signed between the management of Bank of Baroda and All India Bank of Baroda Employees Federation before the Deputy Chief Labour Commissioner (C), Mumbai in the matter of absorption of casual/temporar y persons/ sweepers. The bank has accordingly issued a Circular No. BCC. BR/100/76, dated 24-3-2008 copy of which has been annexed as Annex.1 which contained detail guidelines and modalities for absorbing and regularizing of casual675 IITC8 /fT tisTrig : A-rail 30, 2010/1:117 10, 1931 ['1rrI 3(d)] Versus

The Zonal Manager, Punjab & Sind Bank, Zonal Office, Passey Road, Patiala (Punjab)

Respondent APPEARANCES

temporary peons and sweepers in the bank. One of the condition of the said settlement stipulates that all the pending litigations/court cases shall be withdrawn in view of the formulation of the scheme for regularisation/ absorption of the casual/temporary peons and sweepers working in the bank.

For the workman : Shri H. S. Bath

For the management : Shri Sapan Dhir

AWARD

Subsequently thereafter a mutual application by the petitioner union and the bank have been filed. It is stated that since both the parties have entered into settlement hence they do not want to continue this dispute. Therefore, an award in terms of settlement may kindly passed. Since the settlement have been arrived between the parties and the copy of the settlement is on record. The award is passed in terms of the settlement which will be the part of this award.

Let a copy of the award be sent to the Central Government for publication under Section 17( I ) of the Act. DR. MANJU NIGAM, Presiding Officer cmit, 31 trnzr{, 2009

W1.311*. 328.-3341e V+ Nal< atfitfizni, 1947 (1947 7T 14) UM 17 74 317RuT 41(4+i( fw-tt 4

[11.'7M-12012/5/2006-371311qt-11)]

-zL T. trrutzr, aiTcur altirwt New Delhi, the 31st December, 2009 S.O. 328.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No.28 /2006) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, No. I, Chandigarh as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employees in relation to the management of Punjab and Sind Bank and their workmen, which was received by the Central Government on 31-12-2009.

[No. L-12012/5/2006-1R(B-11)]

U. S. PANDEY, Section Officer Passed on : 17-12-2009

Government of India vide notification No. L -12012/ 5/20064R (B-II) dated 2-6-2006, referred the following industrial dispute under Section 10 of Industrial Disputes Act 1947 (the Act in short) for adjudication to this Tribunal :-

"Whether the action of the management of Punjab and Sind Bank, in dismissing of the services of Smt. Chotti, Ex-Sweeper without complying with the provisions of the I.D. Act, 1947 is just and legal? If not, to what relief the workman is entitled to?" After receiving the reference, parties were informed. Parties appeared and filed their respective pleadings. Smt. Chotti, the workman has challenged the dismissal order on the ground that enquiry was not conducted in a proper and fair manner. She never confess for stealing Rs. 10,000 and never deposited the same. On the day, the incident take place (20-6-02) he left the office at 1.30 PM after doing her duty. The bank officials approached her at her residence at about 5.30 PM on the same day. She was told that there was a loss of cash of Rs.10,000. She accompained the bank officials and on instructions of the employees she use broom under the counter of cashier. When applied broom under the counter of cashier, a bundle of Rs.10.000 came out. The cashier collected the same, thanks her, and thereafter, she came to the house.

ANNEXURE

The management contested the claim of the workman. It has been stated by the management that she steal Rs.10,000 from the bank. She confessed the same and deposited Rs.10,000 on the same day. Apart from the confessional statement, the management conducted an enquiry and the workman again confessed in the persence of the defence representative before the enquiry officer. Enquiry Officer apart from the confessional statement also conducted a fair enquiry and gave a report to prove the charge against the workman. Disciplinary authority after affording the opportunity of being heard dismissed the workman from the services.

BEFORE SHRI GYANENDRA KUMAR SHARMA,

PRESIDING OFFICER, CENTRAL GOVERNMENT

INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL CUM-LABOUR COURT-I,

CHANDIGARH

Case No. I.D. 28 of 2006

Smt. Chhoti W/o Shri Prakash Singh, Ghumaran Wali Gali, Jandan Wala Road, Barnala-Sangrur

Applicant 202 GI/10-8 '

This Tribunal vide order dated 4-8-2009 held the enquiry to be fair and proper after hearing the parties on genuineness of enquiry at length. Thus, order dated 4-8-09 shall be the part of this award.

After order dated 4-8-09, opportunity for adducing evidence to the parties was given on perversity in decision making by enquiry officer and on any biased act in awarding676 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: JANUARY 30,2010/MAGHA 10,1931 [PART ¹¹—SFE. 3001 to the management of Union Bank of India and their workmen, which was received by the Central Government

on 31-12-2009.

[No. L- I 20 I 2/160/99-IR (B-II)]

U. S. PANDEY, Section Officer

ANNEXURE

the punishment by the disciplinary authority. Number of opportunities was given to the parties but no one turn up to adduce the evidence. Accordingly, vide order dated 4-11-09 opportunity for adducing evidence on decision making and preversity in decision making of the enquiry officer was closed. Opportunity for arguments was given to the parties. Order dated 23-11-09 makes it clear that no one turn up to argue the matter. Hence, the file was reserved for award.

BEFORE SRI RAM PARKASII, PRESIDING

OFFICER, HJS. CENTRAL GOVERNMENT

INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT,

SHRAM BHAWAN, ATI CAMPUS, UDYOG NAGAR,

KANPUR

Industrial Dispute No. 273 of 1999

In the matter of dispute between

Union Bank Staff Association, Secretary, UB Staff Association, C/o Union Bank of India, 14/53 Birhana Road Kanpur- 280001 And

The workman has failed to prove any perversity, biasedness in decision making of enquiry officer and disciplinary authority. I have gone through the enquiry report and enquiry proceedings once again. The workman has not only confessed just after the incident in presence of other bank employees but also confessed before the enquiry officer that she has stole Rs.10,000. She also deposited Rs.10,000 in the bank. Apart from the confessional statement, the act of the workman stealing Rs.10,000 and depositing the same in the bank, on the same day, was proved by independent witness. Accordingly, I am of the view that enquiry officer has rightly given the findings on the charge well proved against the workman.

The General Manager, Union Bank of India, Zonal Office, Sharda Tower, Ilnd Floor, Kapoorthala Complex, Lucknow

AWARD

I. Central Government, MOL, New Delhi, vide notification No. L-12012/160/99-1R (B-II) dated 5-10-99, has referred the following dispute for adjudication to this tribunal-

Likewise, the disciplinary authority after affording the opportunity of being has rightly awarded the punishment of dismissal of workman from the services because on such misconduct no workman deserved to be in services of the bank. On such misconduct, the workman was rightly shown the way out from the services of the bank. Accordingly, the workman is not entitled for any relief. Let Central Government be informed for publication of award, and thereafter, file be consigned to record room.

G. K. SHARMA, Presiding Officer

tft, 31 f

f.aTf. 329-3.11Vtfita5 fqqg alf⁴¹-⁹⁷⁴, 1947 (1947

Whether the action of the appellate authority in not disposing of the appeal of Sh. Rakesh Kumar against the punishment order of the disciplinary authority even after lapse of one year is justified or not? whether the action of the management in imposing the penalty of stoppage of 3 increments for the acts of omission and commission of Sri Rakesh Kumar is justified and legal? If not what relief Sh. Rakesh Kumar is entitled for?

14) 0 VriT 17 * 3T-ggui Web ⁷⁰⁷:¹⁷ airc" F. 'from * 3r4trebr4*A a'

Brief facts are-

3TRTT17/331R -twnev.4,

tv, zrOtt filtz atteriTw fgag ⁴⁰,¹( at TIFTrw (i#9 Tirft 273

all* 1999) 0 3raFTTRI eb(cl kitchIT

31-12-2009 0 TT VT MI

Vf-12012/160/99-31131R(t-11)] 1. vj U. 4, aTT:IFT 31fq-0ft

New Delhi, the 31st December, 2009

4. Applicant claimant Sri Rakesh Kumar through its union allegaed that he had been employed as clerk/cashier in Union Bank of India (hereafter referred as U B I for the sake of brevity). When he was posted as Jaunpur (M) branch of the bank he was placed under suspension and later on he was served with a charge sheet dated 5-9-96 some authority of the bank signing as disciplinary authority without mentioning his designation. nothing was done after serving the charge sheet until 8-3-97, when the Assistant General Manager, Central Office, Mumbai issued a later dated 8-3-97 addressed to Sri Mehra, wherein Sri S.N. Mehra was advised to hold an inquiry against Sri Rakesh Kumar and as disciplinary authority may also inflict the appropriate punishment. In the letter referred above it was S.O. 329.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No.273 of 1999) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum- Labour Court, Kanpur now as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employees in relation[slpr 300] im.EFT TiTtri : ssm eia 30, 2010/7P1 10, 1931 677 myself. Evidence of these two witnesses is not worthy to be believed, Witness M. W 1 whatever stated when he was not posted at Jaunpur (M) Branch is conjecture and no evidence. Finding of the enquiry officer are perverse and punishment inflicted deserves to be set aside.

Opposite party has filed the written statement it is stated that the reference is bad in law and deserves to he rejected. There is no cause of action on the facts and law.

Claim application is bad in law for misjoinder of not stated as under what authority he entrusted inquiry to Sri S.N. Mehra. Sh. Mehra as inquiry officer commenced the inquiry on 28-7-97 and concluded the same on 8-8-97. In the course of the inquiry the bank produced 8 documents which are Ext. M-5 to M-12 and two witnesses. In defence the workman produced two witnesses and one document Ext.D-2. Enquiry Officer prepared his finding and send a copy of the same to the workman and proposed the punishment and granted a personal hearing to the workman. Personal hearing took place on 7-11-97 at Zonal Office Lucknow. Where after said Sri Mehra enquiry officer was transferred to Regional Office bangalore. While posted at Regional Office at Bangalore Sri Mehra inflicted the punishment of stoppage of three increments upon the workman. Claimant filed an appeal dated 4-2-98, appeal was not disposed off by the appellate authority in two months time as prescribed in Para 19.14 of the Bipartite Settlement dated 19-10-66. Appeal was decided on 10-9-99 much after the union raised the dispute. As the appeal was not decided he raised an industrial dispute through union.

parties. This tribunal has no jurisdiction. It is stated that the appellate authority has already decided the appeal by order dated 10-9-99, much before the reference which is dated 30-9-99, 5-10-99. It is stated that a valid charge sheet fully legal and justify was issued to Sri Rakesh Kumar. It is stated that Sri S. N. Mehra, Dy Manager Personnel at the Zonal Office Lucknow, at that time (now in Bangalore) was validly appointed to hold inquiry. Inquiry was full legal and valid observing the principles and rules of natural justice. Copy of the enquiry report was sent to Sri Rakesh kumar affording him a personal opportunity of hearing. After giving personal hearing the punishment of stoppage of three increments was inflicted for the misconduct commuted by him as per proves of the charges. Appeal had no merit and was accordingly rejected. Charges in the inquiry was fully proved and there were no biases giving or not giving of designation in the hierarchy of the bank of the signatory of the charge sheet, in no way affects the merit of the case. Similarly not giving designation of the appellate authority, in no way affects the merit of the case. opposite party has also filed and relied a circular No.2309 dated 28-5-81 and the relevant provisions of the BPS. The refore opposite party has prayed that the claim be rejected as the claimant is not entitled to any relief.

Claimant has filed the rejoinder reiterating the

versions of the claim petition.

Claimant has not filed any oral or documentary

evidence.

Opposite party has filed certain documents vide list paper No.17/1. These are order dated 10-9-99 passed by the appellate authority (photocopy), reply of the UBI dated 19-12-98 to ALC(photocopy) along with certain annexure.

Opposite party has also filed the enquiry proceedings and the appellate proceeding conducted by the opposite party, though it is photocopies but being relied by both the parties.

I heard the arguments and perused the record 5. It is stated that in terms of Paragraph 3 (b) of Bipartite settlement (hereafter referred as BPS) dated 1-849, the disciplinary authority is to be appointed by delegation but on the charge sheet no designation of the inquiry officer is mentioned, therefore the charge sheet is invalid and illegal and no punishment can be inflicted. Identically the appellate authority is also to be appointed by designation as per BPS and the order of the appellate authority, dated 10-9-99 there is no designation of the appellate authority, therefore the order is illegal and invalid. As per Paragraph 19.14 of BPS, the appeal should be disposed off within two months but it was not disposed off Claimant raised an industrial dispute and the order of the appellate authority is illegal as it has caused prejudice to the other party. There is no provsion in back circular No. 2309 dated 28-5-81 authorizing the Assistant General manager to issue a letter dated 8-3-97 wherein he has entrusted the inquiry and inflictment of punishment to Sri Mehra. Sh. Mehra after his transfer to Bangalore was not his disciplinary authority but he imposed the punishment. There is a flagrant denial of natural justice. Reference is made to the inquiry proceedings and documents marked as Ext. M-5 to M-12, whereas only copies of Exts M-7 to M- 12 were provided due to which effective defence could not be prepared. Inquiry stands vitiated. Bank produced only two witnesses Sri Anurag Chaturvedi Dy. Manager and Sri S. P. Gupta Hand Writing Expert. Sri Anurag Chaturvedi stated- I can say that the alteration made in ext. M-7 done by. Sri Rakesh Kumar on the basis of the report of Hand Writing Expert and from the circumstances in which premature close of the account was done.

and the documentary evidence adduced by the parties.

6.Witness M-2 hand writing expert replied in his statement-I do not have personal knowledge that the speciman hand writing are of which person whatever was told-I admitted. I did not procure the-specimen handwriting

A R. of the claimant through its union has raised ceijain legal objections and the legal flaws committed during the inquiry proceedings which goes to the root of the inquiry. He invited my attention towards paper no. 44 ofTHE GAZETTE OF INDIA: JANUARY 30, 2010/MAGHA 10, 1931 [Pau 11—Sec. 3(ii)] 678 upon Sri Rakesh Kumar is not legal and justified as the disciplinary authority is not duly authorized to impose the penalty as per circular of the bank dated 28-5-81.

When the initial imposition of the punishment is not found justified then the question of examining the issue of appeal as contended by the claimant does not arise. Therefore, award is decided in favour of the claimant and aganist the Management of Union Bank of India.

Reference is therefore answered in above terms.

Dated. 22-12-09

the inquiry proceedings which Ext.M-1 of the inquiry. This letter dated 8-3-97 issued by Assistant General Manager of the UBI asking Sri S. N. Mehra, Dy Manager Personnel and appointing him as as disciplinary authority and also appointing him inquiry officer. He stated that in this letter the concerned AGM has relied the circular no.2309 dated 28-5-81 while apponting Sri. Mehra as Disciplinary Authority. Claimant has filed the copy of schedule of this circular dated 28-5-81. This schedule provides who can be the disciplinary authority and the appellate authority of which office and establishment in which the member of the award staff is working. It is mention and provided in this circular that branch manager under whom the employee is working authority above the branch manager/ Asstt. Superintendent in Zonal Office, Authority above Asstt. Suptd. in Zonal Office, Personnel Officer/ Suptds in the department of Personnel at Central Office authority above suptd. in the department of personnel at Central Office and in the case of appellate it is provided Asstt. General Manager of the Concerned Zone/authority above the AGM. 15, It is contended that not below the rank of branch nta,tacer can be appointed as disciplinary authority as per circular. Opposite party has argued that Dy. Manager can also be the appointing authority. I have gone through these facts in detail. When in their written statement and in the oral arguments opposite party is relying itself on their circular dated 28-5-81 and this circular specifically provides that the branch manager or authority above the branch manager and other authorities can be the disciplinary authority, then how can be a Dy. Ma Lager who is junior to branch ma gager can be a disciplinary authority. I also put a question to the opposite party but he could not explain.

Claimant has also raised another issues like that the charge sheet served upon the claimant does not show the designation of the inquiry officer as well as the disciplinary authority.

RAM PARKASH, Presiding Officer 1- 1, 31 fcta lit, ²⁰⁰⁹

34AFTrw vtaTr, 330,-31*FITW FatliC 31ft-Ti7zN, 1947 ( 1947 TT 14) 1 tam 17 3171717 14, g -)4 wchit 41, aft 7-4* *31-4t*i* ⁴¹⁴ f¹⁴⁷¹.^{411 310}?n WrtWR¹ tq , 3TTINT f⁹itZ 3:fteirrW {{^{{FOOTNOTE *}}}}Erg aifir+-Turpgri T117*1:1"dTE (74-0 titsql 17 311TF 2005) TiFftd ⁷)• {{^{{FOOTNOTE *31}}}}71 31-12-2009 1"1;rriTill31t

[ti. tsat.-12011/18/2005- 31 3-17-(t-H)] 7(4. mum, 3T-T-Trrt aftwt New Delhi, the 31st December, 2009 S.O. 330.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947) the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 17 of 2005) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal/ Labour Court, Kanpur now as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employees in relation to the management of Bank of Baroda and their workmen, which was received by the Central Government on 31-12-2009

[ No. L-12011/18/2005-1R(B-11)]

U. S. PAN DEY, Section Officer

ANNEXURE

It is also contended that there is also no designation of the appellate authority. It is also contended that the inquiry is also bias, findings of the inquiry officer has been passed without appreciating the evidence.

BEFORE SRI RAM PARKASH, PRESIDING

OFFICER, H. J. S. CENTRALGOVERNMENT

INDUSTRIALTRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT,

KANPUR

1.jA. Opposite party contended that mentioning or not mentioning the designation does not affect the merit of the case of the decision.

Industrial Dispute No. 17 of 2005

BETWEEN

19. 1 have gone though the each and every contention of both :lie parties, I find there is a major legal flaw committed by the Union Bank of India in appointing Sri S. N. Mehra, Dy Manager as the disciplinary authority whereas he could not be appointed as per provisions of the bank and the circular no. 2309 dated 28-5-81. In my view it goes to the root of the matter, therefore the punishment inflicted by Sri S. N. Mehra who is not the discipl i nary authority is not sustainable in the eye of law. Therefore. the action of the management in imposing penalty The General Secretary, Bank of Baroda Staff Association, 15/222, Madhav Bhawan, Civil Lines, Kanpur

AND

The Regional Manager, Bank of Baroda, 177, Regional Office, Lanka, Varanasi,

11. 111 it 111 1

AWARD

Central Government, MOL, New Delhi, vide Notification No. L-12011/18/2005 -1R(B-11) dated 17-06-2005, has referred the following dispute to this tribunal for adjudication.

Whether the action of the management of Bank of Baroda in fixing the scale of pay of Sri Ram Charitra to one third of the wage scale and not giving him the benefit to annual increments granted from the year 2000 is justified and legal? If not what relief is the disputant concern entitled to?

engagement was for more than three hours but less than six hours per week. In any case his engagement has not been for more than 6 hours daily. Applicant was engaged on consolidated wages for a fixed monthly wages of Rs. 175 per month and he was required to work up to six hours in a week and he was paid accordingly. He was not entitled to any other benefits like LFC, leave, uniform and annual increments etc. Applicant was engaged for Motiganj Branch which has actual floor area 1089 sq. ft. and he is eligible for payment on the basis of aforesaid area on prorata basis. It is stated that after representing wrong facts by the petitioner regarding sweeping area and hours of work he was allowed 1/3rd wages of scale wage, however, it was subsequently detected and the mistake rectified by the bank. It is also stated that the employee's code number is allotted to only permanent staff members. Claimant is not entitled to that. He is also not entitlted to any annual increment or deduction of provident fund. After making collusion with the staff of the branch he was wrongly paid cylcle and festival advance for which he was not entitled. Opposite party has contradicted the aversions made by the claimant and prayed rejection of the claim.

When both the parties filed the pleadings, then an application paper no. 20/1 was moved by the claimant through authorized representative for with drawal of the case.

I have gone though the facts and persued the records. At the time of arguments opposite party was present.

I have gone through the application moved by the claimant through his authorized representative. It is stated by the claimant that a settlement have been arrived between the union and the bank and in the aforsaid circumstances, there in no need proceed with the persent industrial dispute and he wants to withdraw the dispute.

Opposite party has not raised any objection.

Claimant filed his claim statement through the General Secretary praying that he be awarded 3/4th scale wages from the date of appointment and he should be awarded all the benefits of a permanent employees. It is alleged that Sri Ram Charitra was interviewed on 19-8-91 by Regional Manager, Faizabad Region and was appointed as part time sweeper on 6th month's probation on consolidated wages. After appointment the bank has informed the Employment Exchange for regular absorption at the post of sweeer. Regional Manager, Faizabad Region being a competent/appointing authority has given 1/3rd scale wages to the workman with effect from 01-05-99. Annual increment from the year 2000 was allowed regularly to the workman up to the year 2004. Annual increment is granted only to the permanent employees. PF was deducted from the wages of the applicant with effect from the year 2000 to 2004 which was arbitrarily without any reason was stopped with effect.= July 2004 AGM Varanasi Region has arbitrarily directed the branch manager to force the workman to sign the muster roll from 9-00 A.M. to 11.00 A. M. instead of 9 A.M. to 1P.M. Workman had been working 4 hours daily means 24 hours in a week. As per rule those who worked than 19 hours in a week is entitled for 3/4th scale wages instead of 1/3rd scale wages. Bank has been giving the cycle and festival advances to Sri Ram Charitra which prove that the workman is a permanent employee of the bank. Aforesaid acts of the bank authorities amount to unfair labour practice, therefore, he has made a prayer for ganting the relief.

10. Therefore, in the given facts and circumstances of the case the applicant has been permitted to withdraw his case. Therefore, the case is dismissed as withdrawn. Hence reference is disposed off accordingly against the claimant.

Dated 26-11-09 RAM PARKASH, Presiding Officer

gc-ci , 31 stii-aR, 2009

Th7,3T1. 331,-31 Tai 3ttlf-47Tr, 1947 (1947

14) VI LTRT 17 3TVRTT - HOW €510 He has also made an amendment application. In amendment he has alleged that the date of confirmantion of the workman is 01-05-99. Workman was a permanent PTS and was supplied with three sets of cotton uniform and one set of woolen uniform was given in the year 1999 and onwards. He has also made a prayer to direct the bank to allot employee code number etc.

•

lOtciliH4 fic., z 7r07 *31Altr* Htti4 f-N1A4; *7-4.1.4414 **a, ard-4v 1 f-,14. afrerrw ferirc wchi( 3iferrw aftWitrIP3T14 -44191m41, "tg"

(*14 IttFIT 52/2009) 4 WIFTM cMcit

twhit Ti 31-12-2009 "Sfita "pm Rif I

[14. -CT .-11012/20/2009-31311 -(1#-I)] 5. Opposite party has filed a written statement. It is alleged that the reference is vague as no date is mentioned as to from which date the 3/4 scale wage is denied. It is stated that the applicant was appointed as a part time sweeper on consolidated wages on 27-01-92. The service conditions are governed by provisions of Sashtry Award and Desai Award. As per his appointment letter his

*6 7-di i(-Gn adirmt[PART 11—SEc. 3(ii)] 680 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: JANUARY 30, 2010/MAGHA 10, 1931

AWARD

New Delhi, the 31st December, 2009

S.O. 331.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947) the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 52/ 2009) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal/ Labour Court, Chennai now as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employees in relation to the management of M/s. Sahara Air Lines Ltd. Jet Airways Ltd. and their workman, which was received by the Central Government on 31-12-2009

The Central Government, Ministry of Labour vide its Order No. L-11012/20/2009-IR (CM-I) dated 19-06-2009 referred the following Industrial Distpute to this Tribunal for adjudication.

The schedule mentioned in that order is :

No. L-11012/20/2009-IR(C-1)]

SNEH LATA JAWAS, Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

" Whether the demand of Shri G. S. Ramesh for his absorption in Jet Lite by the Managemen t sf Jet Airways with reference to the Share Puuhase agreement of dated 1-4-2007 entered by the Management of Jet Airways (India) Limited, Sahara India Commercial Corporation Limited and Others and Sahara Airlines Limited is justified and legal? (ii) To what relief is the workman concerned entitled ?" BEFORE THE CENTRALGOVER; iMENT INDUSTRIALTRIBUNAL-CU M -LABOUR COURT, CHENNAI

Friday, the 18th December, 2009

Present : A.N. Janardanan, Presiding Officer Industrial Dispute No. 52/2009

( In the matter of the dispute for adjudication under clause (d) of sub-section (1) and sub-section 2(A) of Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act,I 947 (14 of 1947), between the Management of M/s. Sahara Airlines Ltd.and their Workman)

After the receipt of Industiral Dispute,this Tribunal has numbered it as ID 52/2009 and issued notices to both sides. First Party entered appearance in person the Second Party though their advocates.

When the matter stood posted for filing Claim Statement, the petitioner filed a petition to withdraw the dispute submitting that the matter has been settled with the Management under which he has received his claims in full and final settlement of the dues whereby he himself has reciprocated by foregoing any right for reinstatment. He prayed for persmission to withdrfr the dispute and to

BETWEEN

pass and award accordingly.

1 Party/Petitioner

Sri G.S. Ramesh

Vs.

4. Points for consideration are:

Whether the demand of the petitioner for absorption in Jet Lite by Jet Airways (India) is justified and

2nd Respondent/

1st Party

I. M/s. Sahara Airlines Limited : L-70/329, Mahipalpur Extension New Dehli- 110037

legal ?

To what rel ief the concerned workman is entitled?

2nd Respondent/

M/s.Sahara India Commercial : Corpn. Ltd.Sahara India Centre, 2nd Party 8th floor No. 2, Kapoorthala Complex, Aliganj, Lucknow-226024

Point No. I &2

2nd Respondent/

3rd Party

M/s. Jet Airways Ltd. SM Centre, Andheri-Kurla Road, Andheri East Mumbai-400059

APPEARANCE

In perosn

•

For the Petitioner

5. The composition of the dispute under the settlement is recorded and the petitioner is permitted to withdraw the dispute. Hence the question as to whether the demand of the petitioner for absorption under the Respondent is legal and justified no more survives for a specific answer in terms of the reference. Since the matter has been otherwise settled between the parties interse by satisfying the claim of the petitioner with the payment of money withdrawal is only to be sanctioned and I do so.

M/s Gupta & Ravi

For the 2nd Respondent/

1st Party

6. The reference is answered accordingly.

M/s V. Devraj (AR)

For the 2nd Respondent/

2nd Party

(Dictated to the P. A. transcribed and typed by him, connected and pronounced by me in the open court on this day the 18th December, 2009)

M/s. Gupta & Ravi

For the 2nd Respondent/

3rd Party

A. N. JANARDANAN, Presiding Officer III I • I II i. 1,11.17U*T tiqn-pf wtiati 30, 2010/11114 10, 1931 681 Witnesses Examined:—

AWARD

None None For the I Party/ Petitioner For the II Party/ Petitioner Documents Marked: On the Petitioner's side Ex. No. Date

The Central Govenment, MOL, New Delhi, vide Notification No L- 40012/49/99/IR(DU) dated 26-7-99 has referred the following dispute for adjudication to this tribunal-

Description

Nil

On the Management's side Ex. No. Date

Description

Nil

kffll, 4 ,31-iciit, 2010

TOT-47 Itzrz fi,41.1.4 dleti Ertl 332.--a/ren* "Rico< aft/fluff, 1947 (1947 Vf 14) NRI 17 * argriuT **T Ht

aftr+7171, .6113( * T1' 91Z (*4 44.sql 195/99) '0 u.ni xi titc6it *f 4-1-2010 31114 pit %TT I *Td/ t,

Eli. 7t . 40012/49/99-0 31rq t zp]

fug it.r, New Delhi, the 4th January , 2010

S.O. 332.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 195/99) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal/Labour Court, Kanpur now as shown in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of Department of Telecom and their workman, which was received by the Central Government on 4-1-2010

[ No. L-40012/49/99-IR (D U)]

SURENDRA SINGH, Desk Officer Whether the action of the management of the General Manager, Telecom Department, Kanpur in not regularizing and terminating the services of Sri Raj Kumar is legal and justified? If not, what relief the workman is entitled?

Brief facts are-

ANNEXURE

Applicant claimant Raj Kumar has filed this claim statement that he be reinstatd with effect from 1-4-98 and he be provided with all consequential benefits. He stated that he had been working since 1998 on the post of Safai Karmchari under Account Officer, PRA, Birhana Road Kanpur in the office of Door Sanchar. He had been working for the whole day but half day wages were paid to him and he demanded full wages number of times. He was asked to work not only as a Safai Karamchari, but work of Farrash and peon was also ta'-An from him. He had been working for the last 10 year but he has not been regularized. He moved a representation to ALC(C) for regularization with the case no. K-8 (2-1)/98-E-2. Being getting aggrieved due the case, the opposite party removed him from service on 1-4-98. This act of the opposite party is illegal and unjustified. His nature of work was of permanent nature. After removing him from the job the employer had employed the workers from labour supplier which is unjustified. During the period 88 to 1-4-98, he had worked without any break. He had worked for more than 240 days in each year. When the claimant was removed he was not served with any notice, he was not paid notice pay, he was not paid the retrenchment compensation, therefore, the opposite party has committed the breach of Section 25F and H of the I.D. Act. Therefore, he is entitled to be reinstated. It is also stated that he belong to S.C. category.

BEFORE SRI RAM PARKASH, PRESIDING

OFFICER, HJS CENTRAL GOVERNMENT

INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL- CUM- LABOUR COURT,

SHRAM BHAWAN A. T. I. CAMPUS, UDYOG, NAGAR,

KANPUR

Industrial Dispute No. 195 of 1999 In the matter of dispute between

Sh. G. C. Singhal, Distt. (Adm), Bahujan Employees Telecom Asso., C/o O. P. Mathur, 117/K-36, Sarvodaya Nagar, Kanpur,

AND

The General Manager, Department of Telecome, Kanpur,

5. Opposite party has filed the written statement. It is stated that it is wrong to say that the claimant was working with the opposite party department since 1988 as a regular Safai Karamchari. But he used to work some times and not regularly. It is stated that the claimant was engaged some times for two two hours and sometimes for four four hours, according to the exigency of the work, as the work was required to be done only two three days in a week, as the TRA Office Birhana Road Kanpur was also divided in two parts. It also there he was not engaged some times for ,aonths together. Whatever the work was taken from him he was paid accordingly and no victimization was committed. Now as per the department policy there has been no necessity of part time workers, therefore, there is no question of regularizing him. It is stated that there areTHE GAZETTE OF INDIA: JANUARY 30, 2010/MAGHA 10, 1931 [PART 11—Sec. 3(ii)] 682 7-4 Csevil, 5 41-mt , 2010 only 25 post of Safai Karamchari cum Farrash and on all these posts candidates of scheduled caste are working. There was no post vacant and no new post has been create. Other contentions of the claim statement have been denied and it is prayed that the claim is liable to be rejected.

Claimant has also filed the rejoinder reiterating his own versions.

Claimant has filed 16 documents vide list paper no 3/1. Documents are Description of work 1988-89, Description of work in between 1988-1996, Description of work of the year 1996-1997, Application dated 13-2-89, 31-8-95, 13-10-95, departmental letter dated 29-3-06, copy of application, copy of application dated 13-5-96, 15-7-96, 7-11-96, 14-2-97, 7-11-96, 11-7-97, Removal order dated 31-3-98, order of Thekeddari.

Opposite party has not filed any documents.

Claimant has not adduced any oral evidence despite sufficient opportunity. Opposite has adduced in oral evidence witness MW-1 Sri Santosh Kumar Mishra who is Account Officer BSNL.

I heard the arguments perused the records and the evidence carefully.

Claimant has not adduced any evidence on oath. Documentary evidence which has been filed, all are photocopies. It requires some proof to be proved.

12. Opposite witness MW-1 Sri Mishra stated on oath that the claimant was not working as an employee. He was not issued any appointment letter. It is wrong to say that he worked regularly in between 1988 to 1-4-98 without break. There was no contract in between the claimant and the opposite party. Claimant used to come as part time for two hours for cleaning purposes and he used to go after two hours. He never worked full time. He was paid the wages from contingency bill and not from salary bill. Now per departmental policy this work is not being taken. Now the work is taken through the contractor. There is no other sanctioned post of safai karamchari or any other post he was not issued any Th1.311. 333,-401f-1'W ferelg 31ftTfiErTI, 1947 ( 1947

tit4,1( 4fTIT 14) *TM 17 * 31T1inT

11(.4 kl usu .tFir( (⁴ .-Ct ImetTei

dlq>) 10-+71 ta, 31-104 ifekuz Aufrrw katc .4-14 urcK 3freuw aftwurt q9ug OM *ENT 154/2000) ReflINId *, eitqa 5-1-2010 "Sfil7 tIT 1

vi.-42012/287/1999- 3 37.{(t

fug , tuF 31ft1TRI New Delhi, the 5th January, 2010

S.O. 333.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947(14 of 1947) the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No.1 54/ 2000) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum- Labour Court No.1, Dhanbad as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of Basic Seed Multiplication and Training Centre and their workmen, which was received by the Central Government on 5--1-2010.

[ No. L-42012/287/1999-IR (D U)]

SURENDRA SINGH, Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL NO. I, DIIAN BAD In the matter of a reference U/s 10(I) (d) (2A) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947.

Reference No. 154 of 2000

Parties : Employers in relation to the management of Asstt. Director, Central Silk Board.

AND

Their Workmen

Present : Shri H. M. SINGH, Presiding Officer

APPEARANCES

termination order.

His statement has not been cross examined by the claimant. Therefore, after going through the statement and the record I find the statement believable. There is no appointment letter issued to the claimant. Claimant has not adduced any evidence.

For the Employers : Dr. Ram Kishore, Scientist 'C' For the Workman : None

State : Jharkhand Industry : Textile

dated, the 22nd December, 2009

AWARD

Therefore, the claimant has filed to prove his case. Therefore, reference is decided against the claimant and in favour of the management.

Dt. 22-12-09 RAM PARKASH, Presiding Officer

By Order No.L-42012/287/99-IR(DU) dated 3-3-2000 the Central Government in the Ministry of Labour has, in exercise of the powers conferred by clause (d) of IL I HI[ II—Vlug 3(ti)] 11Rff : glicia 30, 2010/1171 10, 1931 683 Reference No. 177 of 2000

sub-section (1) and sub-section (2A) of Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, referred the following dispute for adjudication to this Tribunal :

Parties : Employers in relation to the management of Assn. Director, Central Silk Board.

AND

Their Workmen

Present : Shri H. M. SINGH, Presiding Officer

"Whether the action of the management of Basic Seed Multiplication and Training Centre at Kharsawan in terminating the services of Sh. Manjura Bakria workman w.e.f. 17-10-98 from the roll of BSM & TC is justified? If not, to what relief the workman is entitled?"

APPEARANCES

For the Employers : Shri Ram Kishore, Scientist 'C'

For the Workman : None

State : Jharkhand Industry : Textile

2. This reference case was received in this Tribunal on 20-4-2000. But till 30-9-2009 none appeared on behalf of the workman nor written statement has been filed on behalf of the workman in spite of notice being sent by speed post. It, therefore, appears that neither the concerned workman nor the sponsoring union is interested to contest the case.

Dated, the 21st December, 2009

In such circumstances, I render a 'No Dispute'

AWARD

Award in the present case.

H. M. SINGH, Presiding Officer

f 1, 5 7-1-411', 2010

By Order No.L-42012/29/2000-1R(DU) dated 30-5-2000 the Central Government in the Ministry of Labour has, in exercise of the powers conferred by clause (d) of sub-section (1) and sub-section (2A) of Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, referred the following dispute for adjudication to this Tribunal :

'Whether the action of the management of Basic Seed Multiplication and Training Centre at Kharsawan in terminating the services of Sh. Sursingh Hombrom w.e.f. 17-10-98 from the roll of B.S.M.T.0 is justified? If not, to what relief the workman is entitled?"

(itc4 Ilium 177/2000) •0 ItchiPtcf q>kcil El0 5-1-2010 pit vIT I

[1:i. 'RR-42012/29/2000-311f alTi(T/ /1)]

titcr.•it T1 5-1-2010 311 1 E 31r 217

ttz5 aftwrzi 202 GI/10-9684 THE GAZE 11E OF INDIA: JANUARY 30, 2010/MAGHA 10, 1931 [PART 11—SEc.3(ii)] New Delhi, the 5th January, 2010

"Whether the demand of the Bharatiya Postal Employees Union from the Management of Deptt. of Posts that the penalty imposed on Sh. D.R: Halwai vide letter M11/PM/DISC-56/97-98 dated August, 26, 1997 and MTUP ADISC-60/97-98 dated 8-11-1997 be set aside and the 10:155 suffered by the workman due to these punishments made good by payment of arrears is just and fair? if so, what relief the workman concerned is entitled to ?"

S. 0. .335.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Gov t,mment hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. CGIT-2/ 49 of 2002) ofthe central Government Industrial Tribunal- atm-Labour Utz No, 2 Mumbai as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Di pate between the employers in relation to the management of Sr. Supdt. of Post Offices and their workman, which was received by the Central Government

on 05-01-2010.

[No. L-40011/34,2001-IR (DU)]

SURENDRA SINGH, Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT

INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL NO.2, MUMBAI

PRESENT : A.A. LAD, Presiding Officer

Reference No. CGIT-2/49 of 2002

Employers in relation to the Management of

Department of Posts

...1st Party

The Sr, Sepdt. of Post Offices, City 'West Division, Dadar, H.O. Building, Dadar, Muiabai 400 014

And 1

The President, Bharatiya Postai Employees Union, 32-33 Ibrahim Mansion, 1)r. Ambedkar Read,

...2nd Party

Parei, Mumbai-400 012

APPEARANCES

: or the y Mr. Narayanan, Advocate

Mr. S. Z. Chowdhary, Advocate.

Dut ecerving Award: 17-09-2009.

L,a( ,:, of Passing ofA ward: 26-11-2009.

To s p it the subject matter in the . n=ee the Statement of .--.1airn is filed by the Secretary of the Union at Exhibit 6 stating and contending ft,:tr, the employee involved in the Reference was sent fov Trainirig at Postal Training Centre at Vadpdara from 23-17-1996 to 28-12-1996. The training course was "Spe.?(.4 Post Supervisor". After completing said training it is stated by the Secretary that, the concerned workman was supposed to be posted as a Supervisor in "Speed Post Section" on a supervisory post. It is stated that, though he was qualified he was not posted on that post and was asked to work in cash department as Assistant Post Master (Treasury). It is stated that, this decision of Senior Post Master was totally a gainst the oriented policy of the Department. It is stated that, the said training provided to the concerned workman was not utilized by the Senior Post Master. It is stated that, he was purposely posted in cash Section and is not just and proper. This Is as brought to th y. notice the concerned workman to which his superior taket, otherwise. Even concerned workman pointed out the irregularities in the working of the Senior Post Master. However, instead of taking any hint from the said advise and making improvement in the working, action was taken against the concerned workman on the alleged charge of insubordination. According to the Secretary of the Union, said decision is illegal and was taken with an intention to harass the concerned workman. Even punishment awarded to the concerned workman is not just and proper and finding given by the Enquiry Officer was bias finding as well as was not based on the evidence placed before him. So is it is submitted that, the decision taken by the Postal Department against the concerned workman be set aside with directions to the concerned department to post him on the proper post and reimburse him whatever loss he received as a result of the decision taken by Senior Post Master.

AWARD

The matri p f the facts as culled out from the

-procet dings are as under:.

. The Government of India, Ministry of Labour by its Order No.1,40011/34/2001-1R(DU) dated 28th May, 2002 in exe.'o,:ise the powers conferred by clause (d) of sub- sectio:i 11) and sub-section :2(A) of Section 10 of the Disputes Act, 1947 have referred the following

dispum to hT7-iTunat for adjudication

This is disputed by the I st Party by filing written statement at Exhibit 9 stating and contending that, this Tribunal has no jurisdiction to consider the prayer of this type. It is submitted that, Bharatiya Postal Employees Union is not a recognized Union under CCF (RSA) Rules, 1993, as communicated vide letter dated 5th December, 1997. It is stated that, the Senior Post Master has right to utilize the services of the official as per the requirements. It is stated that, it is not the business of the concerned(unT II -13¹5 ³(d)] ITRTI aiT ⁷¹⁴⁴⁴ : wti g t? 30, 2010/1:M10, 1931 685 to raise the dispute. It is not shown by the Union that it is fighting for the benefit of its members working in the establishment of the 1st Party. Nothing of any type is stated by the Union on that point. So I conclude that, Union has no locus standi. Hince, 1 answer this issue in the negative.

ISSUE NOS. 2 & 3:

workman to point out the faults in the order of the senior officer like Senior Post Master and cannot look into the working system of the senior officer like Post Master. It is stated that, he has committed fault by interfering in the administration of the Senior Post Master which require to consider. It is stated that, whatever decision was taken was just and proper and pray that, nothing happened against the interest of the concerned workmen. So it is stated that, the case made out by the Second Party be rejected.

Rejoinder is filed by the 2nd Party at Exhibit 12 repeating the same story as made out by it in the Statement of Claim.

In view of the above pleadings Issues were framed by my Ld. Predecessor at Exhibit 14 which I answer as under :

ISSUES FINDINGS

Whether the Bharatiya Postal Employees Union has locus standi to espouse the cause? No

G. Whether the domestic inquiry

conducted against the work- man was as per the Principles of Natural Justice?

Yes

Whether the findings of the inquiry. Officer are perverse? No

7. As far as quantum of punishment and finding of enquiry are concerned it is to be noted that, Union has led evidence of the concerned workman by filing his affidavit at Exhibit 22 in lieu of his examination-in-chief. Said witness narrates the same story as narrated in the statement of claim and pray that, the relief which is stated by the concerned workman in the Claims Statement be granted. In the cross he admits his signatures on Exhibits 10/3, 10/4 and 10/7. He admits that, order passed against him was challenged by him. He did not know whether his appeal is allowed or not. On that, 2nd Party closed evidence and filed closing purshis at Exhibit 23. Against that, 1st Party claims that, decision taken by it is just and proper. To prove that, Management filed affidavit of its witness P. Vishwakarma at Exhibit 24 on which he was not cross-examined by the Union. Said witness states that, whatever action was taken by 1st Party was just and proper and enquiry was conducted and action was taken. Evidence of 1st Party led in the form of affidavit at Exhibit 24 remained unchallenged. So all this reveals that, enquiry was conducted and finding was given on the basis of the facts before the Enquiry Officer. In this premises it cannot be said that, said finding is perverse. Besides, appeal preferred by 2nd Party was turned down. It reveals that, opportunity was given to the concerned workman. So I conclude that, finding is not perverse.

Whether the penalty imposed on the workman vide letter dated 26-8-97 and 8-11-97 is justified? Yes

ISSUES NOS. 4 & 5:

If yes, whether the workman suffered loss due to the penalty as above imposed by the Management?

Does not arise

6. What relief the workman is

entitled to? Does not arise.

REASONS:

It is to be noted that, the penalty was imposed on the concerned workman by letter dated 26th August, 1997 and 8th November, 1997 and the said is challenged by Reference of 2002. No case is made out and nothing is stated as to why he was so late. Evidence led by 1st Party is not challenged. All this reveals that, Reference is made just only to harass the Department which is a Government of India undertaking.

ISSUE NO.1:

Considering all this coupled with the case made out by both I conclude that, the reference require to be rejected.

ORDER

Reference is rejected.

Bombay,

26th November, 2009

6. 1st Party has challenged the locus standi of the 2nd Party Union who espouse the dispute of the concerned workman. But on that point nothing is stated by the Union to show that, it has locus standi to raise this dispute. According to 1st Party said Union is not recognized Union as per letter dated-5-12-1997. Said is not disputed by the Union. On the contrary Union and the concerned workman are silent on it and nothing is stated on that, I conclude that, Union has no lous standi

A. A. LAD, Presiding Officer[ PART 11—Src. 3(ii)] 686 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: JANUARY 30, 2010/MAGHA 10, 1931 7If *Kt, 7 "flail, 2010

3T1. 336.-3 TT Nal< aftIfitic1, 1947 (1947

¹ET 14) tIRI 17 * 3.1771 -4 *.•.z1-47167

TITETT IT4t rdl * *RIZ 1-¹⁴ ,⁴Q' afrtz" -{{^{{FOOTNOTE *}}}} 11,4.1a * {{^{{FOOTNOTE *}}}}a,

aTVIT afferwicial< = ,- . 4"1:1'rEFfi AckiTrw afircur 1, ftett * 'ta g (*4 *FT 4/2007) 31Thlfrd W7d1 j , lb"417 tit erlit 'er 7-1-2010 5(Ft

11371 ITT I

[II. 71-12012/87/2006- 34W (t -1)]

3T3T1 %mit, aitirwit

New Delhi, the 7th January, 2010

cases against them, departmental actions were kept in abeyance. On 13-5-2004, the bank issued a circular detailing therein that Disciplinary Authority may review the cases and pass orders for starting the departmental enquiry and complete the process expeditiously, without waiting for the trial to be over . All India State bank of India Staff Federation (hereinafter referred to as the Federation) raised a dispute before the Conciliation Officer, claiming that the management bank wants to re-open the departmental enquiries, in utter violation of law , which were kept irs abeyance due to pendency of criminal trials. The management bank filed its reply before the Conciliation Officer. Since conciliation proceedings failed tnt- appropriate Government referred the dispute to this Tribunal for adjudication vide order No. L-I2012/87/2006- IR (B-I) , New Delhi dated 15-1-2007 with the following

terms:

S. 0. 336.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No.4/2007) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court No. 1, Delhi as shown in the annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the management of State Bank of India and their workman, received by the Central Government

on 07-01-2010.

"Whether the action of the management of State bank of India in starting the parallel proceedingS against the workman i.e. S/Shri A. K. Malhotra, G. N. Parashar, G. Sharma , M. C. Sharma, Gopal Lal Meena, Ved Parkash Sharma, Tej Singh Ram, Vikram Singh, Parkash Bharti and B. L. Kanojia is legal and justified ? If not to what relief the workmen are entitled to ?"

[ No. L-12012/87/2006-IR (B-I)]

AJAY KUMAR, Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

BEFORE DR. ILK YADAV, PRESIDING OFFICER,

CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL

NO.1, KARKARDOOMA COURT COMPLEX, DELHI

I.D. NO. 4/2007

...Workman

The Sr. Vice President, All India State Bank of India Staff Federation, 1st floor, State Bank of India , Local Head Office, Pt. Jawarhar Lal Marg, Bhubaneshwar-751001 Bhubaneshwar (Orissa)

Versus

.Management

The Dy. Managing Director-cum-Corporate Development Officer, State Bank of India, Corporate Office, Mandadme Came Road, Mumbai

AWARD

2, Claim statement was filed by the Federation pleading therein that service conditions of the bank employees, including the management bank are governed by Sastry Award, Desai Award and subsequent Bipartite Settlements. Disciplinary actions are to be initiated as per para 520 and 521 of Sastry Award read with subsequent Bipartite agreements. It has been provided therein that if the bank had taken steps to prosecute an employee or to get him prosecuted for an offence and he is not put on trial within a year of commission of the offence. The management may then deal with him as if he had committed an act of gross misconduct or of minor misconduct. In case the authority which was to start prosecution, refuses to do so or comes to a conclusion that there is no case for prosecution, it shall be open to the management bank to proceed against the employee as per provisions detailed therein in the settlements. Therefore, it is emerging that an enquiry can be initiated in case employee is not put on trial within a period of one year from the date of commission of the offence or the investigating agency decides not to proceed with the prosecution. In case any departmental proceedings are initiated pending the criminal trial, the same shall be stayed till conclusion of the trial. Despite the aforesaid clear provisions the management bank issued a circular dated 13-5-04 and instructed local head offices of the bank to reopen all departmental proceedings which were on hold, in view of the provisions of Sastry Award, Desai Award and subsequent Bipartite agreements. The instructions so issued by the management bank are arbitrary and illegal. It has been claimed that the management may be directed to abide by the provisions of State Bank of India is a statutory body constituted under the State Bank of India Act, 1955. It carries on its banking business. Shri A.K.Malhotra, G.N.Parashar, K.G.Sharma , M.C. Sharma, Gopal Lal Meena, Ved Prakash Sharma, Tej Singh Ram, Vikram Singh, Prakash Bharti and B.L.Kanojia, employees/officers of the management bank, are involved in embezzlement falsification of record and criminal breech of trust. Cases were lodged against them in the various States, where they were posted in various branches of the bank. During the pendency of those criminal

I I, 1 i t . III 111ITTM thritt : [ An 30, 20101174 10, 1 C1 s 3(d)] 687 Sastry Award read with para 4 of the settlement dated 10-4-2002 and its action of issuance of that circular may be I;eid inoperative.

7. Since the -Federation had opted not to give contest to the disitote it .is evident that the Federation had given up its stand against circular dated 13-5-04, issued by the management riank. Consequently it is evident that the management bank is_ to review the castit: for proceeding with the departihentai eramiry against the erring official and to complete process expeditiously without waiting for criminal trials to be owe. It is well established position of law that critrnani -h,:tcsecution as well as departmental action can proceed simultaneously. There Core, an award is accordingly passed It be sent to the appropriate Government for publication.

Dated :24-12-2009.

Dr. R. K. YADAV, Presiding Officer rr fq71, 7 7-71' 20 i 0

I. 3dC 337.-41 -afrrw laqic aftlf9-4¹4, 1947 (1947 WI 14) 1gt tIRT 17 t 371:1711 *41 (Rsisit nsmisi 31#11 frz11 114'0i 4q...s1-1 ,41.1 q4 417 79* .hi-i.rwl* 47, 39.0.1 fiftte aftErTrw fegrg *tzr kik.tot aTiTitmF aftwt'ut- I tR9/* 4⁷11e (* if *FIT 5/2004) 1;1••+IF1171 The management demurred the claim pleading that on 10-4-2002 a memorandum of settlement was arrived at between the management of 52 banks wherein it was agreed that para 521 of the Sastry Award shall stand superseded. The President of India promulgated Central Vigilance Ordinance on 25-8-98 and the commission notified "Special Chapter on Vigilance management in public sector banks" on 29th of December, 98. It was laid therein that law of land permits prosecution as well as regular departmental action simultaneously, where the suspect official is primarily accountable for conduct which legitimately lends itself to both criminal prosecution in a court of law as well as regular departmental action, as a general rule, both should be lanched simultaneously after consultation with C.B.I. or other investigating agencies charged with conducting the prosecution. No Bipartite agreement should stand in the way of disciplinary action continuing parallely with criminal investigation/trial. This is necessary in the interest of speedy action in vigilance cases. Consequently circular dated 13-5-04 was issued , which has been challenged by the Federation . It has been claimed that plea raised by the Federation is contrary to law and is liable to be dismissed.

¹,¹⁷⁷⁹.- /1-0121252/2003- 3¹¹⁷ 137 (*-1)]

,1TZF 3#11-*71 New Delhi, the 7th January, 2010

Parties were called upon to adduced its evidence. Shri V. K. Malhotra, Vice President , All India State Bank of India Staff Federation, tendered his affidavit in evidence. He was cross examined in part on behalf of the management. During the course of his cross examination Shri P. K. Sharma, Assistant Secretary, All India State Bank of India Staff Federation had unfolded that the Federation had decided not to prosecute the present dispute.

S. 0. 337.-lr, pursuar et of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, :947 (14 of i 947). the Central Government hereby publishes the A word (Ref No. 5,12004) of the Central Government Industrial 'I riirdnal-c wit-Labour Court-1, Delhi as shown in the annexbre in the Industrial dispute between the management of Reserve Bank of India and their workmen, received by the Central Government on 7-1-2010.

e.1,120121252/2003-1R (B-1)]

MAY KUMAR. Desk Officer

ANNIADRE

Statement of Shri P. K. Sharma was recorded wherein he stated on oath that he was Assistant Secretary, All India State Bank of India Staff Federation and was authorised by the secretary of the Federation to make a statement in the matter. He proved his authority as Ex. W-1. He went on to narrate that the employees, on whose behalf the industrial dispute was raised by the Federation, were not cooperating with them. Employees have not advised the Federation about the latest position of the criminal cases pending against them. The Federation was not in a position to continue with the present claim. In view of the changed circumstances, the Federation does not want to prosecute the claim. Federation had taken a decision not to press the reference or espouse the grievance of the aforesaid employees.

BEFORE DR. It K. YADAV, PRESIDING OFFICER CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSIRIALTRIBUNAL- CUM-LABOUR COURT NO.1, NEW DELII KARKARDOOMA COURT CON1PLEX,

1. D. No. 512104

Shri Dharam Pal-1 Sio Sh. Hargyan, Rio Jhuggi No. 435, Anna Nagar,

.. Workman Tilak Bridge, Delhi

Versus

In view of the statement made by Shri P. K. Sharma, evidence of the Federation was closed. The management also opted not to adduce any evidence in the matter. Submissions were also advanced by the parties claiming that the dispute may be answered in view of the circumstances , detailed by Shri Sharma, in his statement made on oath.

202 G110--10

The Assistant GenferalNlanagef (P) Reserve Bank of India. 6, Parliament Street,

New Delhi-110001

.Nianagement688 THE GAZET1E OF INDIA: JANUARY 30, 2010/MAGNA 10, 1931 [PART 11—SEC. 3(11)1

AWARD

him. Appeal was also dismissed by the Appellate Authority without application of his mind. He presents that since dismissal is illegal, hence he is entitiled for reinstateme nt in service with full back wages..

Ws claim was demurred pleading that he remained absent for 13 months and 27 days on 28 occasions from 1-8-97 to 30-9-99. He was ^b ,..nt on nee- ,,eous occasions for reasons other than his own fllness. During the pe riod of his absence, he had not furnished his address in leave applications. Accordingly, a charge sheet dated 13-1-2000 was issued to him for violation of regulation No.39 and 81 of the Regulations. A domestic enquiry was conducted against him, in T.,cr-lance with the principles of natural justice. Adequate opportunity was given to him to defend himself in the domestic enquiry. He was not discriminated in any manner and punishment was proportionate to his misconduct. He is not entitled to any relief, not to talk of reinstatement with continuity of service and full back wages.

4. On the basis of the pleadings of the parties, the

following issues were settled :

Whether the enquiry conducted against the Frequent leave applications moved by Dharam Pal irked his employer. He remained on Nave for 13 months and 27 days, on 28 occasions w.e.f. 1-8-97 to 30-9-99. It led the management to issue a charge sheet dated 13th of January, 2000 for violation of regulation No. 39 of Reserve Bank of India (Staff) Regulation 1948 (hereinafter referred to as the Regulations). He had not furnished his leave address in leave applications moved by him and as suci he was also charged for violation of regulation No. 81 of the Regulations. A domestic enquiry was conducted by Shri H. P. Nautial, who submitted his report dated 6-6-2000, concluding therein :kat Dharam Pal had taken leave in extra- ordinary circumstances. However, he has violated regulation No. 39 as well as 81 of the Regulations. A show cause notice was served upon him by the Disciplinary Authority and his services were dismissed vide order dated 25-10-2000. Appeal preferred by Dharam Pal could not evoke any response. He raised an industrial dispute before the Conciliation Officer. Since conciliation proceeding failed, the appropriate Government had referred the dispute to this Tribunal for adjudication vide Order No. L-12012/252/ 2003-IR (B-I) dated 2-1-2004, with following terms :

workman was fair? If so its effects.

As in terms of reference?

"Whether the action of the management of Reserve Bank of India in imposing the penalty of dismissal from service of Shri Dharam Pal-I S/o Shri Har Gyan (Sweeper Part Time) is just, fair and legal? If not, what relief the applicant is entitled to and from which date?"

5' Issue No.1 was treated as preliminary issue and parties were called upon to lead its evidence. Shri G.C.Talukdar tendered his affidavit on behalf of the management. He was cross examined on behalf of the . workman. Dharam Pal tendered his affidavit in support of his case, who too was cross examined at length by the management.

Preliminary issue was answered in favour of the workman and against the management, vide order dated 1-9-09.

The management examined Arvind Kumar to prove acts of misconduct against him. Workman opted not to adduce any evidence in rebuttal.

Arguments were heard at the bar. Shri M.Hussain, authorized representative, raised his submissions on behalf of the workman. Shri R. Mehandiratta, authorized representative, advanced arguments on behalf of the management. Written submissions were filed by the workman. I have given my careful considerations to the arguments advanced at the bar and cautiously perused the record. My findings on the issues involved in the controversy are as follows:

With a view to establish misconduct of the workman, Shri Arvind Kumar testified that the workman was employed as part time sweeper with Reserve Bank of India, New Delhi. From 1997 till 30-9-99 he remained absent on 28 occasions for total period of 13 months and 27 days. He was charge sheeted for unauthorized absence and for not furnishing his leave addresses in leave applications, 2. Claim statement was filed by the workman, pleading therein that he was appointed at part time Safai Karamchari with the bank on 14-5-90. He worked in sites allotted to him by his employer very diligently and efficiently. In 1997 his health stated deteriorating. He used to fell ill very frequently, since he was allotted job of opening chocked drains and as such used to face dangerous gases, which created adverse effect on his helath. On account of ill health, he had to avail leaves during the period of his illness, Since he is uneducated and lives in a Jhuggi clusters, he used to submit his leave applications supported by a medical certificate, after getting it drafted from his colleagues. An action was initiated against him by the management alleging that he had availed unauthorized leaves for 13 months and 27 days from 1-8-97 to 30-9-99, without getting those leaves sanctioned. A show cause notice was served on him. He had satisfied his employer that leaves were taken on account of his sickness as well as sickness of his wife. Allegations were leavelled against him that he has not submitted his address in leave applications. He presents that there was no need to mention his address every time on leave application, since his address was already available with his employer. Management acted in a prejudicial manner, since he belongs to scheduled caste community. A sham domestic enquiry was conducted and penalty of dismissal was imposed on

Dharam Pal availed leave for 13 months and 27 days from 1997 till 30-9-99 on 28 occasions. In response to facts presented by Shri Arvind Kumar the workman confronted the witness with certain medical certificate during the course of his cross examination. When these documents were pursed it came to light that medical certificate Ex.MW2/5 relates to the period from 31st of January, 95 till 7th of February 95. Certificate Ex.MW2/6 relates to the period from 30-1-06 to 8-3-06 . Certificate Ex.iviW2/7 relates to the period upto 20-12-96. Therefore, these certificates are in respect of the period which is not relevant for the present controversy. These documents nowhere espouse the cause of the workman.

which were moved by him belatedly. He had also not submitted any medical prescription in support of his leave applications. He was very irregular in the matter of his service. In 1993 advisory memos were issued to him thrice, calling upon him to mend his ways. On 21.6.99 a memo was issued to the workman calling upon him to submit his medical prescription and investigation reports etc. immediately, to support his leave application. Despite the said memo the workman opted not to tender any document which situation compelled the management bank to issue a charge sheet. He was also verbally advised to submit documents in support of his leave application, but to no avail. He was appointed in 1990 and for last 7 years his leave record was very bad. On 15-4-93 a letter was written to the workman when he remained absent on 37 occasions for a total period of 149 days from 7-1-92 to 11-2-93 , copy of which letter is Ex.M W2/I . On 29-4-99 a memo was issued to the workman copy of which is Ex. MW2/2. On 21-6-99 he was called upon to produce supporting documents to substantiate his leave application, copy of which letter is Ex.MWI/3. On 29-6-2000 he submitted his reply to show cause notice which is Ex.MW2/4. He annexed medical certificates with his reply, which are Ex.MW2/5 to Ex.MW2/ 17. During the course of his cross examination, he testified that memos dated 20-4-99 and 21-6-99 were personally served on the workman. Memo dated 15-4-93 was also served upon the workman. He explains that as and when workman. moved an application for leave, he sought leave on medical grounds. He tried to support his leave applications with medical and fitness certificates. The doctors, who gave medical as well as fitness certificates, were doing practice far away from his residential address. Under these circumstances he was required to give his residential address, during the period of his leave.

Certificate Ex.MW2/8, Ex.M W2/9, Ex.M W2/10, Ex.MW2/1 I and Ex.MW2/15 were issued by Dr.S.P.Singh and Dr.Mukund Lal Munjal. Dr.S.P.Singh is practicing at Brahm Puri, Delhi while Dr.Munjal is practicing at Chuna Mandl, Pahar Ganj, Delhi. The workman resides at .No.43.5 Anna Nagar, Tilak Bridge, I.T,O., New Delhi. It was argued by Shri R.Mehndiratta that neither any relation of the workman nor his friend resides in Brahmpuri as well as Chuna Mandl Pahar Ganj Delhi. The workman had not been able to explain as to how he obtained medical prescription from Dr.S.P.Singh as well as Dr. Mukand Lai Munjal. It was argued that these certificates were procured by workman from the aforesaid doctors by using unfair means. According to him with a view to ascertain genuineness of these certificates there is an obligation on the workman to provide his address to the management bank during the period of leave of absence. Neither that obligation was fulfilled nor he could explain as to how he got medical treatment from Dr.S.P.Singh and Dr. M. L. Munjal who were having their clinic in far flung area from his residence. Shri Hussain could not controvert the facts presented by management in that regard. Therefore, it is emerging over the record that the certificates referred above, were procured by the workman by using his influence on aforesaid doctors. He could not point out any reason justifying the fact that he went to Brehm Puri or Chuna Mandi Pahar Ganj Delhi, for medical treatment from the aforesaid doctors. It is not the case that the aforesaid doctors are having special knowledge and experience in a particular discipline of medical science and he went to their clinics to obtain specialized treatments. Consequently it is evident that the aforesaid certificates wherein ailment such as influenza and pain in joints are mentioned, were procured by the workman, with a view to substantiate his leave applications. Resultantly these medical certificates nowhere bring accolades to the workman.

10. When testimony of Shri. Arvind Kumar was closely scanned, it came to light that workman was irregular in attending his duties. Though he was employed with the bank as part time sweeper on 14-5-90, yet he was given a memp on 15-4-93 when he remained absent for 129 days for 37 occasions from 7th of January, 92 till 11-2-93. Memos dated 29-4-99 and 21-6-99 were also served upon him when he was irregular in . attending his duties. Vide letter dated 21-6-99 he was called upon to produce supporting documents to substantiate his leave application. In reply to that memo he presented that he obtained leave on account of his ailment. He had presented records in respect of his leave applications before the Enquiry Officer. He assured the bank that in future he will be regular and one opportunity may be given to him to reform himself. Therefore, it is emerging over the record that the workman was irregular in joining his official duties since 1992. No explanation has been offered by the workman as to why he availed 129 days leave on 37 occasions from 7-1-92 till 11th of February, 93. It is obvious that he is slack and casual, in performance of his official duties.

13. Certificate Ex.MW2/12 was issued by Dr.Sumitra Pal of RAM L. Hospital, when 8 days medical rest was advised to him by Dr.Sangeeta of that hospital. This certificate was issued for absence from duty w.e.f 31-7-98, on account of recurring fistula in anus. A certificate Ex.MW2/13 was issued for one day by medial officer of the[PART 11—SEC. 3(ii); 690 7.11-12, GAZETTE OF INDIA: JANUARY 30, 2010/MAGHA 10, 1931 71t 'FC¹¹- 1, 12 , 2010

338..- -3-IT6ItIW'ref g 31t¹Tritill, 1947 i 947 AiRt .:14 How -0_ 4 --:,{Txr r-v-41,1.4,1 dicii 114:4 47 .47, ;.41,,f (-1( <1-4( afrtfrPIT

arsrzt

, ANNEXURE

BEFORE is RAM PARK,ASH, H. J. S., PRESIDING FwyR, CIeNTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBE'11-iAleCi "M-TABOUR COURT, KANPUR

16 . 111 II 1 HI691 ( %TT 3(10) 41T7 zfiT usgrot : Ana( 30, 2010/1:7110, 1931 the State Bank of India, Regional Office in the personnel department on the post of Daftari and died in harness in the course of his employment on 09-01-95, leaving behind him the applicant his wife Razia Khatoon and five daughters, the name of the family members has been disclosed in the claim petition, who are claimant and others are the daughters of the deceased. She is getting family pension from the opposite bank amounting to Rs.1600 and she has to fed three daughters along with her in this meager amount. Opposite party bank had made final settlement amounting to Rs.1,78,600 in the year 1996-97. She has no other source of income except this meager amount of pension as such her appointment La class IV employee as dying in harness is most essential and her case should be considered on priority on human basis. Opposite party bank has provided employment to-

Rageshwari, water boy at the place of late husband

Indrä Bahadur.

Shyam, as Farrash cum Water boy in the D.G.M , Section

Sri Sadhu

Ganesh as messenger

Smt. Baby Safai Karamchari,

Late Indra Bahadur wife of Rajeshwari

Shyam Kumar Verma at the place of Sadhu

Smt. Pootutm Sharma at the place of Ramesh Chandra Sharma

appointment on compassionate ground, whereas, the 001 declined the appointment on compassionate ground of Smt. Razia Khatoon. It is stated that the present union which has filed the ease has no locus standi and not recognized by the bank and late Ali Akaram and his wife was also not the member of this union. It is also stated that Smt.Razia Khatoon is not a workman under the Industrial Disputes Act and the matter is also not covered within the definition of Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, as defined under section 2(k) of I.D; Act. It is stated that there is no relationship of employee and employer between Smt. Razia Khatoon and State Bank of India therefore, the claim is not maintainable. It is stated that there is inordinate delay in raising, the dispute. It is stated that mere death of an employee in harness does not entitle his family to such a compassionate appointment. There is a scheme behind it under which compassionate appointments are govern, the details are mentioned in Para 9 of the w. s. and it is stated that as per clause 6(d) of the scheme it is material that in case where disciplinary actions and proceedings were pending against the deceased employee, appointment of dependant on compassionate grounds may be considered only after obtaining prior Government concurrence and late Ali Akaram was charge sheeted by the bank regarding unauthorized occupation of bank's 'quarter. In Para 13 and 14 the opposite party bank has stated that terminal dues have been paid to the dependants of the deceased, employee. Therefore, they have prayed that the claim be rejected and other contentions of the claim petition have been denied.

9. Rama M:shra at the place of late Samir Mishra

Claimant has not filed any oral or documentary evidence in support of their, claim despite giving sufficient opportunities.

But the opposite party bank has singled her out and did not pros ide employment. She has already filed her application before the management well within time on 4-2-95 for compassionate appointment, but she was denied without passing an speaking order. Opposite bank vide their letter dated 24-;-98, had refused her appointment without giving any cogent reasons. She had made representation thereafter, but she has not been given any relief. Thereafter she approached to Dy.General Secretary of SBI Staff Association and through that Association she has filed the applLation.

Opposite party has adduced oral as well as documentary evidence. They have filed 9 documents vide list paper no. 6/1. Documents are Letter of Chief Manager (P) dated 12-1-95, Letter of Chief Manager dated 4-3-95, letter dated 18-4-95, dated 24-1-98, letter dated 19-11-98,Ietter dated 25-5-2000, Scheme for compassionate appointment, letter of GO1 dated December 1997, Assistant Labour Commissioner Claim and no other papers have been filed.

In oral evidence M.W. I Sri Utpal Kumar Banerjee has been produced, who is Assistant Manager SBI Kanpur.

I have gone through the whole record perused the

oral as well as, documentary evidence.

It is true that the claimant has not filed any documentary evidence, she did not adduce any oral evidence. It is contended by the oppposite party that her pleadings are also not verified.

5. Opposite pa- ty has filed written statement. It is admitted that All Ain ram was an employee of the bank. It is stated that his wife Smt. Razia Khatoon is drawing family pension of Rs.1778 per month and Rs.200 per month under the mutual welfare scheme. It is stated that Rs.201520 was paid to Smt. Razia Khatoon as terminal dues, It is stated that domestic inquiry proceedings were going on against the.deceased employee late Ali Akaram and she was informed that her appointment could only be considered as per guidelines regarding appointment on compassionate ground i.e. after obtaining prior concurrence of Government of India, Ministry of Finance New Delhi, hence the bank had sought concurrence from GOI regarding her

It is also contended that there is no relationship of employee and employer as she is not worker or employee in State Bank of India. It is also stated that the deceased employee or his wife were never been the member of this692 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA. JANUARY 30, 2010/MAGHA 10, 1931 [PART II—SEC. 3(01 Association and this Association has no locus standi. Applicant union is a minority union and also not recognized by the bank. Opposite party bank has filed the scheme for filling the appointment on the basis of compassionate appointment which is vide paper no.6/8 6/10 and M.W.1 stated that there was a departmental inquiry pending against the deceased employee Ali Akaram who is the husband of the applicant Razia Khatoon. She has applied before the bank claiming appointment on compassionate ground. Opposite Bank has sent the proposal to the GOI for seeking its concurrence, but the GOI declined and did not concur as per letter paper no. 6/11. Opposite party bank has informed the applicant vide paper no.6/5 dated 24-01-98, copy of which has been filed before the court. Letter dated 14-11-98 and 25-5-2000 has been sent to applicant Razia Khatoon which are paper no. 6/6 and 6/7. Therefore, opposite party contended that on this basis she is not entitled for seeking appointment on compassionate ground.

12. I have perused and heard the argurments adduced by the opposite party as claimant has not adduced any evidence in contradicting the opposite parties contentions and arguments. I find force in the arguments and the evidence adduced by the opposite party. Therefore In such circumstances the claim of the claimant is not acceptable. Hence reference is decided against the claimant and in favour of opposite party.

Dated : 6-1-2010 RAM PARKASH, Presiding Officer 17;(91, 14t, 2010

dad alitig i finTIFT la Act) 3i4 3TIN ttte4c1 fqq* 1u-4 311 all(cal4fRil99l 30 3Trq r:v-P-f ( -Fi4 Wit PI* 4YbId dad 317.14 7Fic1 Tray *) .9A-47F gr fora,krulqi, 4 *1;41 FA Fq iiwif Trfrer km 71 t4lia 7T-Al *TIT (14TNT77) 14-N 44,1950 * 31tfm {{^{{FOOTNOTE 3743*1}}}} FEffq m1 t apifkrd tal Al;

[vi4 gi0 3-47 ctr +4111 7177711T 3314f---171.- NM 45 71 72-1?-trtil (1 ) 31*9 -F7.174-4 Trzn *111i 7T 1974 VT Trf tAlfiq:! *rt 3TP:r tr-wrft;

NM 44 371-NRI (I) ait117,

111W t Tr( f*741 f-4-171 Y. tdi • iir4i1r4d at1 ;441'41r#:

3-11MT

Tom, 31fifrif7-47 V74 * 37:117-9-r4 =n4,1147174417 (TriwuT) Far-F44, 1950

345-T4U siqd 7-Tr3Ttlikfd

arafq *Th7 Tqk TrA 7r1 161; TTT 77 atifirran wr4 -5r711--9-P1 44.114, figlAt .gru Tt7 31 tiqc.

*1, f-47* /ocitateN 37g1-9. t -rch T * aid ytr 4 4i4 1 /1*-7(-4-4r 311 * 11'9"e; TIT Az- 3-Tf41-ir3 c wr4 *N17-ir 2#l 14 37-qrtT 40-r, 7;r1Wf a,f(Cai .4 * 774V 3114F9717* wcrlm Ti7 0, t4 ft-if d44tif i 3r34atll f*-Ar Trzrr tu ZIr 9t, F-o-iror(wr vfff *-r4 * f-67 tl Yr ad 311i ITTITtt 1kt9114 ;

t ?Taw 71 3T- 1 * *R1**), z[r 0,4 fti4 "ikot*171-k-4 chRup:r, r u. 11 1 II I III I III11--(o us ³(ri)) 1T tr,71 14 : Ai ctit 30, 20101rlItt 10, 1931 693 PiT971, chici ei cl" lu a.TP:r lifTTR 4 1/Tzrf zit re:iv:m.1 1E14 "irWRIWI enrol * 'ETF 71f-dr4 t, xtftur /551-9T; Trr

( 121) Ttef Ibittsi14, PTirriT, cbitrirrk( 3Tml Till fint 1-r-4/zt, trr ar4T -/Trr-d-7 7-167 tzifi Vi9T /11 d.stut #qt;

) 72TINOtt 31- 1 171--471-zri wrsrzfrrt vrir 6. feri-ic)kt/i-iii'n etAu f .srctr T z lzfIT: tt R 41 'fftt Veird titchlt aTT:rfn #91- -et

[-ftINIT'CIF-38014/48/2008-7.71-1]

VI. It 7113m, areg i-1114 other official of the Corporation authorized in this behalf by it, shall, for the purpose of:—

Verifying the particulars contained in any returned submitted under sub-section (1) of Section 44 for said period ; or

Ascertaining whether registers and records were maintained as required by the Employees' State Insurance (General) Regulations, 1950 for the said period ; or Ascertaining whether the employees continue to be entitled to benefits provided by the employer in cash and kind being benefits in consideration of which exemption is being granted under this notification ; or Ascertaining whether any of the provisions of rtcdt mtet 7rzir

-ztrwel ikvg T d-e0 31%1T4 374-Frwi1Trgr aTre/ ITT et) 4e10 WT4 TY 7Tgzr IT i ci2iffi, 11- Tar mmluicc fir Irrm t f s z wk.T1 A k4 7:1 .4) wrfo *le 'tr.{Trrav 7tei Trtin

New Delhi, the 14th January, 2010

S. 0. 339.—In exercise of the powers conferred by Section 88 read with Section 91-A of the Employee's State Insurance Act, 1948 (34 of 1948) the Central Government hereby exempts the regular employees of Oil and Natural Gas Corporation Ltd., Dehradun (Establishments at Vadodara, Ahmedabad , Cambay, Dehradun, Uran, Hazira and Tatipaka ) from the operation of the said Act for a period from 1-10-2004 to 30-09-2010.

2. The above exemption is subject to the following conditions namely:—

The aforesaid establishment wherein the employees are employed shall maintain a register showing the name and designations of the exempted employees' .

Not withstanding this exemption, the employees shall continue to receive such benefits under the said Act to which they might have become entitled to on the basis of the contributions paid prior to the date from which exemption granted by this notification operates;

The contributions for the exempted period , if already paid, shall not be refundable;

The employer of the said factory/establishment shall submit in respect of the period during which that factory was subject to the operation of the said Act (hereinafter referred as the said period), such returns in such forms and containing such particulars as were due from it in respect of the said period under the Employees' State Insurance (General) Regulations, 1950;

(5) Any inspector appointed by the Corporation under sub-section (1) of Section 45 of the said ESI Act or the Act had been complied with during the period when such provisions were in force in relation to the said factory to be empowered to:

require the principal or immediate employer to him such information as he may consider necessary for the purpose of this Act; or

At any reasonable time enter any factory, establishment , office or other premises occupied by such principal or immediate employer at any reasonble time and require any person found in charge thereof to produce to such inspector or other official and allow him to examine accounts, books and other documents relating to the employment of personal and payment of wages or to furnish to him such information as he may consider necessary; or examine the principal or immediate employer, his agent or servant, or any person found in such factory, estabilshment, office or other premises or any person whom the said inspector or other official has reasonable cause to believe to have been an employee; or

make copies of or take extracts from any register, account book or other document maitained in such factory, establishment, office or other premises,

(e) exercise such other powers as may be prescribed.

6. In case of disinvestment/corporatization, the exemption granted shall become automatically cancelled and then the new entity will have to approach the appropriate Government for exemption.

[No. S-380 I 4/48/2008-SS-I]

S. D. XAVIER, Under Secy.

Explanatory Memorandum:

It has become necessary to give retrospective effect to the exemption in this case as processing of the applications for exemption took time. However, it is certified that the grant of exemption with retrospective effect will not affect the interest of any body adversely.

Printed by the Manager, Government of India Press, Ring Road, Mayapuri, New Delhi-110064 and Published by the Controller of Publications, Delhi-110054.