This Gazette may contains Multiple Subjects

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

REGD . NO . D. L. ( N ) 04 /0007 /2003-05

सत्यमेव जयते भारत का राजपत्र The Gazette of India

प्राधिकार से प्रकाशित

PUBLISHED BY AUTHORITY

साप्ताहिक

WEEKLY

सं. 301

नई दिल्ली, जुलाई 18- जुलाई 24 , 2010 , शनिवार/आषाढ़ 27 - श्रावण 2 , 1932

No. 301

NEW DELHI , JULY 18-JULY 24 , 2010 , SATURDAY/ASADHA 27-SHRAVANA 2 , 1932

इस भाग में भिन्न पृष्ठ संख्या दी जाती है जिससे कि यह पृथक संकलन के रूप में रखा जा सके Separate Paging is given to this Part in order that it may be filed as a separate compilation

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

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

कार्मिक , लोक शिकायत तथा पेंशन मंत्रालय (कार्मिक और प्रशिक्षण विभाग )

नई दिल्ली, 14 जुलाई , 2010

अपराधों से संबंधित अथवा इससे जुड़े हुए प्रयासों , दुश्प्रेरणों एवं षडयन्त्रों की जांच करने के लिए दिल्ली विशेष पुलिस स्थापना के सदस्यों की शक्तियों एवं उनके क्षेत्राधिकार का समूचे उत्तर प्रदेश में विस्तार करती है ।

[सं. 228/46/2010 - एवीडी- II ] मुकेश चतुर्वेदी, अवर सचिव

MINISTRY OF PERSONNEL, PUBLIC GRIEVANCES AND PENSIONS (Department of Personnel and Training) New Delhi , the 14th July, 2010 .

का.आ. 1793. केन्द्रीय सरकार एतद्वारा दिल्ली विशेष पुलिस स्थापना अधिनियम , 1946 ( 1946 का अधिनियम सं. 25 ) की धारा 6 के साथ पठित धारा 5 की उप- धारा ( 1 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए , उत्तर प्रदेश राज्य सरकार , गृह ( पुलिस ) अनुभाग -11 , लखनऊ की सहमति से अधिसूचना सं. 1690/6- पी -11/2010-362 एम./2010 दिनांक 22 मई, 2010 के तहत आवश्यक वस्तुअधिनियम , 1955 ( 1955 का अधिनियम सं. 10 ) की धारा 3/7 एवं भारतीय दण्ड संहिता , 1860 ( 1860 की एक्ट सं. 45 ) की धारा 407 के अंतर्गत मामला अपराध सं. 182/10 , 183/10 एवं 184/10 तथा भारतीय द्रण्ड संहिता , 1860 की ( 1860 की एक्ट सं. 45 ) की धारा 457 एवं 380 के अंतर्गत मामला अपराध सं. 185/10 , जोकिअलीनगर पुलिस स्टेशन , जिला चन्दौली ( उत्तर प्रदेश ) में पंजीकृत हैं और उक्त अपराधों अथवा इस संव्यवहार के दौरान किए गए तथा इसी तरह के तथ्य से उभरने वाले अन्य अपराध/

S.O. 1793. In exercise of the powers conferred by sub - Section ( 1 ) of Section 5 read with Section 6 of the Delhi Special Police Establishment Act , 1946 ( Act No. 25 of 1946) , the Central Government with the consent of the State Government of Uttar Pradesh , Home ( Police) Section- II , Lucknow vide Notification No. 1690/6- P - 11/2010-362M/ 2010 dated 22nd May, 2010 , hereby extends the powers andjurisdiction of the members of the Delhi Special Police Establishment to the whole of the State of Uttar Pradesh 2639 Gl/2010

(4471) 4472

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 24 , 2010/ SHRAVANA 2 , 1932

[PART II -SEC. 3 ( ii)]

नई दिल्ली/सीबीआई ( बृज बिहारी प्रसाद की हत्या का मामला , पूर्व मंत्री) , तथा अपीलों, पुनरीक्षणों या उक्त वाद से उद्धृत अन्य मामलों का पुनरीक्षण या विधि द्वारा स्थापित संचालन करने के लिए श्री तेजिन्दर सिंह दोआबिया वरिष्ठ अधिवक्ता, भारतीय उच्चतम न्यायालय को स्पेशल कौन्सिल के रूप में नियुक्त करती है ।

[सं. 225/ 13/2010- एवीडी- II ] मुकेश चतुर्वेदी, अवर सचिव

New Delhi , the 16th July, 2010 for investigation of Case Crime Nos . 182/10 , 183/10 and 184/10 under sections 3/7 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 (Act No. 10 of 1955) and section 407 ofthe Indian Penal Code , 1860 (Act No. 45 of 1860) and Case Crime No. 185/10 under sections 457 and 380 ofthe Indian Penal Code , 1860 (Act No. 45 of 1860) all registered at Police Station Alinagar , District Chandauli (Uttar Pradesh ) and attempts , abetments and conspiracies in relation to or in connection with the above mentioned offences and any other offence/ offences committed in course of the same transaction or arising out of the same facts .

[No. 228/46/2010 -AVD - II ] MUKESH CHATURVEDI , Under Secy . नई दिल्ली, 15 जुलाई , 2010

S.O. 1795.--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 T. S. Doabia , Senior Advocate, Supreme Court of India as Special Counsel for conducting case No. RC . 4 ( S )/ 99/ SIC . IV /ND ( Brij Bihari Murder case) in Patna High Court in all appeals/ revisionsat Patna and any other matter conferred therewith or incidental thereto.

[No. 225/ 13 /2010-AVD- II ] MUKESH CHATURVEDI , Under Secy. नई दिल्ली , 19 जुलाई , 2010 का.आ. 1794.-केन्द्रीय सरकार एतद्वारा अपराध प्रक्रिया संहिता, 1973 ( 1974 का अधिनियम सं. 2 ) की धारा 24 कीउप- धारा ( 8 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए चारा घोटाला केस यथा आरसी 20 ( ए) /96- पीएटी , आरसी 47 ( ए) /96- पीएटी और आरसी 68 (ए) /96 - पीएटी और अन्य मामले , विशेष न्यायाधीश की अदालत में एसीबी रांची के अपीलीय न्यायालय में लंबित दिल्ली विशेष पुलिस स्थापना द्वारा स्थापित मामलों के संबंध में झारखंड राज्य , रांची में अथवा विधि द्वारा स्थापित पुनरीक्षण अथवा अन्य मामलों के अपील , पुनरीक्षण का संचालन करने के लिए श्री बी.एम.पी. सिंह , अधिवक्ता कोविशेष लोक अभियोजक के रूप में नियुक्त करती है ।

[सं. 225/25 /2009 -एवीडी- II ] मुकेश चतुर्वेदी, अवर सचिव

का.आ. 1796.-केंद्रीय सरकार एतद्वारा अपराध प्रक्रिया संहिता, 1973 ( 1974 का अधिनियम सं. 2 ) की धारा 24 की उप- धारा ( 8 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए नैनीताल में उत्तराखंड उच्च न्यायालय में दिल्ली विशेष पुलिस स्थापना द्वारा अन्वेषण किए जा रहे मामलों में अभियोजन , अपील , पुनरीक्षण या मामलों से उद्भूत अन्य प्रक्रियाओं का संचालन करने के लिए सर्वश्री अरविन्द वशिष्ठ तथा विवेक शुक्ला, एडवोकेट्स को केंद्रीय अन्वेषण ब्यूरो के विशेष लोक अभियोजक के रूप में नियुक्त करती है । New Delhi , the 15th July, 2010

[सं. 225/39/2009- एवीडी- II ] मुकेश चतुर्वेदी , अवर सचिव

New Delhi , the 19th July, 2010

S.O. 1796.-- In exercise of the powers conferredby sub - section ( 8 ) of Section 24 of the Code of Criminal Procedure , 1973 (Act No. 2 of 1974) , the Central Government hereby appoints S/Shri Arvind Vashist and Vivek Shukla, Advocates as Special Public Prosecutor of the Central Bureau of investigation in the Uttrakhand at Nainital for conducting prosecution , appeals , revisions or other matters arising out of the cases investigated by the Delhi Special Police Establishment .

S.O. 1794. 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.M.P. Singh , advocate as Special Public Prosecutor for conducting prosecution of Fodder Scam Cases viz . RC . 20( A) /96 - PAT , RC . 47( A) /96 - PAT and also other cases pertaining to ACB/ Ranchi pending trial in the court of Special Judge, Ranchi instituted by Delhi Special Police Establishment in the State of Jharkhand at Ranchi and appeals , revisions or other matters connected therewith or incidental thereto in the appellate /revision or any other court.

[No. 225/39 /2009 -AVD - II ] MUKESH CHATURVEDI , Under Secy.

[No. 225/ 25 /2009 -AVD - II ] MUKESH CHATURVEDI , Under Secy.

वित्त मंत्रालय

नई दिल्ली , 16 जुलाई , 2010

(वित्तीय सेवाएं विभाग )

नई दिल्ली, 14 जुलाई , 2010 का.आ. 1795.-केन्द्रीय सरकार एतद्वारा दण्ड प्रक्रिया संहिता, 1973 ( 1974 का अधिनियम सं. 2 ) की धारा 24 की उप- धारा ( 8 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए पटना उच्च न्यायालय , पटना , बिहार में आर.सी. 4 ( एस ) /99/एस.आई.सी-1V/

का. आ. 1797. राष्ट्रीयकृत बैंक ( प्रबंध एवं प्रकीर्ण उपबंध) स्कीम , 1970/1980 के खंड 3 के उप- खंड ( 1 ) के साथ पठित, बैंककारी कंपनी ( उपक्रमों का अर्जन एवं अंतरण ) अधिनियम, 4473 [भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii ) ]

भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई 24, 2010/ श्रावण 2 , 1932

director under Chartered Accountant category , on the Board ofDirectors ofAllahabad Bank for a period ofthree years from the date of notification and/or until further orders, whichever is earlier .

[F. No. 9/52/2009 -BO- I ] SUMITA DAWRA , Director 1970/1980 की धारा 9 की उप- धारा 3 ( ज ) और 3 ( क ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए , केन्द्रीय सरकार , एतद्वारा , मुहम्मद अखरूज्जमन ( जन्म तिथि : 24-11-1964) को अधिसूचना की तिथि से तीन वर्षों की अवधि के लिए अथवा अगले आदेशों तक, जो भी पहले हो, यूको बैंक के निदेशक मंडल में अंशकालिक गैर - सरकारी निदेशक के रूप में नामित करती है ।

नई दिल्ली, 19 जुलाई, 2010

[फा. सं. 9/46/2009- बीओ -1 ] सुमिता डावरा , निदेशक

MINISTRY OF FINANCE (Department of Financial Services) New Delhi , the 14th July, 2010

का. आ. 1799.-जीवन बीमा निगम अधिनियम , 1956 (1956 का 31 ) की धारा 4 द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए, केन्द्रीय सरकार , एतद्वारा , श्री अनूप प्रकाश गर्ग को अधिसूचना की तारीख से तीन वर्षों की अवधि के लिए अथवा अगले आदेशों तक , जो भी पहले हो , भारतीय जीवन बीमा निगम के निदेशक मण्डल में गैर- सरकारी सदस्य के रूप में नियुक्त करती है ।

[फा. सं. ए-15011 / 1/2007 - बीमा- III ] ललित कुमार , निदेशक, ( बीमा ) New Delhi , the 19th July , 2010

S.O. 1797. In exercise ofthe powers conferredby sub- section 3 (h ) and ( 3 -A) of Section 9 of The Banking Companies (Acquisition & Transfer of Undertakings) Act, 1970/1980 read with sub - clause ( 1 ) of clause 3 of The Nationalised Banks (Management & Miscellaneous Provisions) Scheme, 1970/1980, the Central Government hereby nominates Md . Akhruzzaman ( DoB : 24-11-1964) : part-time non - official director on the Board of Directors of UCO Bank for a period of three years from the date of notification or until further orders , whichever is earlier . as

S.O. 1799.-In exercise of the powers conferred by Section 4 of the Life Insurance Corporation Act, 1956 (31 of1956) , the Central Government hereby appoints Shri Anup Prakash Garg as Non -Official Member on the Board ofthe Life Insurance Corporation of India for a period of three years from the date of Notification or until further orders , whichever is earlier .

[F. No. 9/46/2009-BO. - I ] SUMITA DAWRA , Director

नई दिल्ली , 14 जुलाई , 2010

[ F. No. A-15011 / 1 /2007 - Ins . - III ] LALIT KUMAR, Director ( Insurance )

(राजस्व विभाग )

( केन्द्रीय प्रत्यक्ष कर बोर्ड ) (आयकर)

नई दिल्ली, 15 जुलाई , 2010

का.आ. 1798.-राष्ट्रीयकृत बैंक ( प्रबंध एवं प्रकीर्ण उपबंध ) स्कीम , 1970/1980 के खंड 9 ( 2 ) के उप - खंड ( ख ) के साथ पठित , बैंककारी कंपनी ( उपक्रमों का अर्जन एवं अंतरण ) अधिनियम , 1970/1980 की धारा 9 की उप- धारा 3 ( छ ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए , केन्द्रीय सरकार , भारतीय रिजर्व बैंक से परामर्श करने के पश्चात् एतद्वारा , श्री राजेश एम. चतुर्वेदी ( जन्म तिथि: 18-04-1959 ) को सनदी लेखाकार श्रेणी के अंतर्गत अधिसूचना की तिथि से तीन वर्षों की अवधि के लिए और/अथवा अगले आदेशों तक, जो भी पहले हो , इलाहाबाद बैंक के निदेशक मंडल में अंशकालिक गैर- सरकारी निदेशक के रूप में नामित करती है ।

[फा. सं. 9/52/2009-बीओ -1 ] सुमिता डावरा , निदेशक

का. आ. 1800.-जबकि केन्द्र सरकार ने आयकर अधिनियम , 1961 ( 1961 का 43 ) [ जिसे बाद में उक्त अधिनियम के रूप में संदर्भित किया गया ] की धारा 80 झक की उप- धारा ( 4 ) के खंड ( iii ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए , भारत सरकार, वित्त मंत्रालय, ( राजस्व विभाग , केन्द्रीय प्रत्यक्ष कर बोर्ड ) की अधिसूचना संख्या का.आ. 51 ( अ ) , दिनांक 8 जनवरी , 2008 के तहत औद्योगिक पार्क के लिए स्कीम निर्मित एवं अधिसूचित किया है;

New Delhi , the 14th July, 2010

और जबकि मैसर्स इनफिनिटी इंफोटेक पार्क लिमिटेड , जिसका पंजीकृत पता इनफिनिटी , प्लाट ए-3 , ब्लाक- जीपी , सेक्टर V , साल्ट लेक इलेक्ट्रॉनिक्स काम्प्लेक्स , कोलकाता-700091 में है , ने प्लाट सं. जी-1 , ब्लाक जीपी , सेक्टर V , साल्ट लेक इलेक्ट्रॉनिक्स काम्प्लेक्स, कोलकाता-700091 में एक औद्योगिक पार्क विकसित किया है ;

अतः अब आयकर नियमावली , 1962 के नियम 18 ग के साथ पठित उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 80 झक की उप- धारा ( 4 ) के खंड S.O. 1798.- In exercise of the powers conferred by sub - section 3 (g) of Section 9 of the Banking Companies (Acquisition & Transfer of Undertakings ) Act , 1970/1980 read with sub - clause (b ) of clause 9 (2 ) ofthe Nationalised Banks (Management & Miscellaneous Provisions ) Scheme, 1970/1980, the Central Government , after consultation with Reserve Bank of India, hereby nominates Shri Rajesh M. Chaturvedi (DoB : 18-04-1959 ) , as part - time non- official 4474

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 24 , 2010/ SHRAVANA 2 , 1932

[PART II-SEC. 3 (ii) ]

said Act read with rule 18 C ofthe Income Tax Rules , 1962 , and subject to the provisions of Industrial Park Scheme, 2008 , the Central Government hereby notifies M /s . Infinity Infotech Parks Limited , Kolkata as an undertaking and the project at Plot No. G - 1 , Block-GP , Sector V , Salt Lake Electronics Complex, Kolkata- 700091 , being developed and maintained and operated by the said undertaking , as an industrial park for the purposes of the said clause.

( iii ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए और औद्योगिक पार्क स्कीम, 2008 के उपबंधों के अधीन केन्द्र सरकार एतद्वारा मैसर्स इनफिनिटी इंफोटेक पार्क लिमिटेड , कोलकाता को एक उपक्रम तथा प्लाट सं. जी-1 , ब्लाक जीपी , सेक्टर V , साल्ट लेक इलेक्ट्रानिक्स काम्प्लेक्स, कोलकाता -700091 जिसे उक्त उपक्रम द्वारा विकसित तथा अनुरक्षित एवं प्रचालित किया जा रहा है, के रूप में उक्त खंड के प्रयोजनार्थ अधिसूचित करती है ।

2. The date of commencement of the aforesaid Industrial Park is 28th March , 2008 .

2. उपर्युक्त औद्योगिक पार्क के शुरू होने की तिथि 28 मार्च, 2008 है ।

3. The notification will be invalid and M/ s . Infinity Infotech Parks Limited shall be solely responsible for any repercussions of such invalidity, if-

3. अधिसूचना अवैध हो जाएगी तथा मैसर्स इनफिनिटी इंफोटेक पार्क्स लिमिटेड , ऐसी अवैधता की किन्हीं प्रतिक्रियाओं के लिए मात्र जिम्मेदार होगी , यदि--

(i) the application and subsequent documents furnished by it , on the basis of which the notification is issued by the Central Government contains wrong information/ misinformation or some material information has not been provided in it;

( 1 ) आवेदन तथा इसके द्वारा प्रस्तुत परवर्ती दस्तावेज जिनके आधार पर केन्द्र सरकार द्वारा अधिसूचना जारी की जाती है , में गलत सूचना/झूठी जानकारी होगी अथवा कुछ वस्तुगत सूचना इसमें नहीं दी गई होगी;

(ii) it is for the location of the industrial park for which notification has already been issued in the name of another undertaking .

(2 ) यह औद्योगिक पार्क की अवस्थिति के लिए है जिसके हेतु एक अन्य उपक्रम के नाम से अधिसूचना पहले ही जारी कर दी गई है ।

4. Any amendment of the project plan without the approval of the Central Government or detection in future, or failure on the part of the applicant to disclose any material fact, will invalidate the approval of the industrial park.

4. केन्द्र सरकार के अनुमोदन के बिना परियोजना प्लान में किसी संशोधन अथवा भविष्य में संसूचन अथवा आवेदक द्वारा किसी वस्तुगत तथ्य को उजागर न करने पर औद्योगिक पार्क का अनुमोदन अवैध हो जाएगा ।

[Notification No.54/2010/F . No. 178 /30/2009 - ITA - I ] [ अधिसूचना सं. 54/2010/फा.सं. 178/30/2009- आकानि-1 ]

PADAM SINGH , Under Secy.

पदम सिंह , अवर सचिव

(Department of Revenue)

CORRIGENDUM New Delhi , the 19th July, 2010 (CENTRAL BOARD OF DIRECT TAXES) (INCOME-TAX)

New Delhi , the 15th July, 2010

S.O. 1801. In respect of the Notification Number 28/2010 dated 22-4-2010 issued in the case of Institute of Bioinformatics , Bangalore following corrigendum is hereby issued :

The word mentioned in sub- paragraph ( i ) as research in social sciences may be read as scientific research .

The words mentioned in sub - paragraph ( ii ) research in social science or statistical research may be read as scientific research .

S.O. 1800.- Whereas the Central Government in exercise of the powers conferred by clause (iii ) of sub- section(4) of Section 80- IA ofthe Income - tax Act , 1961 (43 of 1961 ) ( hereinafter referred to as the said Act) , has framed and notified a scheme for industrial park, vide notification of the Government of India in the Ministry of Finance (Department of Revenue , Central Board of Direct Taxes) number S.O. 51 ( E) , dated the 8th January , 2008;

The words mentioned in sub -paragraph ( iv ) as research in social sciences may be read as scientific research.

The words mentioned in paragraph 2 sub- paragraph ( c) research in social sciences or statistical research may be read as scientific research .

And whereas M/ s . Infinity Infotech Parks Limited, having its registered address at Infinity , Plot A - 3 , Block-GP, Sector- V , Salt Lake Electronics Complex , Kolkata- 700091 , has developed an Industrial Park at Plot No. G - 1 , Block-GP, Sector V, Salt Lake Electronics Complex, Kolkata -700091 ;

Now, therefore , in exercise of the powers conferred by clause ( iii ) of sub-section (4) of Section 80 - IA of the

The word and figure mentioned in paragraph 2 sub - paragraph ( e ) as clause ( iii ) may be read as clause (ii) [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : जुलाई 24 , 2010/ श्रावण 2 , 1932

Other terms and condition of the said Notification remain unchanged .

[ F. No. 203/ 85/2009 -ITA ( II) ] AJAY GOYAL Director ( ITA II) स्वास्थ्यऔर परिवार कल्याण मंत्रालय नई दिल्ली , 26 मार्च, 2010

का. आ. 1802.-दंत चिकित्सक अधिनियम , 1948 ( 1948 का 16 ) की धारा 10 की उप - धारा ( 2 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए केन्द्र सरकार भारतीय दन्त चिकित्सा परिषद् से परामर्श करने के बाद एत‌द्वारा उक्त अधिनियम की अनुसूची के भाग -1 में निम्नलिखित संशोधन करती है ; अर्थात्:-

2. देवी आहिल्या विश्वविद्यिालय, इन्दौर द्वारा प्रदत्त दन्त चिकित्सा डिग्रियों की मान्यता के संबंध में दन्त चिकित्सक अधिनियम , 1948 (1948 का 16 ) की अनुसूची के भाग -1 में माडर्न डेंटल कालेज एवं अनुसंधान केन्द्र , इन्दौर के बारे में क्रम संख्या 26 के II के सामने स्तंभ 2 और 3 की मौजूदा प्रविष्टियों में निम्नलिखित प्रविष्टियाँ अन्तःस्थापित की जाएंगी :-

" दन्त शल्य चिकित्सा निष्णात

(i ) प्रोस्थोडोंटिक्स

एमडीएस (प्रोस्थो. ) देवी आहिल्या विश्वविद्यालय, इंदौर

( यदि यह 22-08-2009 को अथवा उसके बाद प्रदान की गई हो )

एमडीएस कन्ज. दंत चिकित्सा देवी आहिल्या विश्वविद्यालय , इंदौर

( ii ) कन्जरवेटिव दन्त चिकित्सा (यदि यह 21-08-2009 कोअथवा उसके बाद प्रदान की गई हो)

एमडीएस (ओरल मेडि. ) देवी आहिल्या विश्वविद्यालय , इंदौर

(iii ) ओरल मेडिसिन ( यदि यह 22-08-2009 को अथवा उसके बाद प्रदान की गई हो)

(iv

एमडीएस ( पेरियो. ) देवी आहिल्या विश्वविद्यालय, इंदौर

) पेरियोडोंटिक्स (यदि यह 27-08-2009 को अथवा उसके बाद प्रदान की गई हो )

एमडीएस ( मुख शल्य चिकित्सा) देवी आहिल्या विश्वविद्यालय , इंदौर

( v) मुख शल्य चिकित्सा को अथवा उसके बाद प्रदान की गई हो) (यदि यह 27-08-2009

4475

एमडीएस ( आर्थो. )

देवी आहिल्या विश्वविद्यालय, इंदौर"

(vi ) आर्थोडोंटिक्स (यदि यह 25-08-2009 को अथवा उसके बाद प्रदान की गई हो)

[फा.सं. वी. 12017/13/2005-डीई ]

आर. शंकरन , अवर सचिव MINISTRY OF HEALTH AND FAMILY WELFARE New Delhi , the 26th March , 2010

S.O. 1802. In exercise of the powers conferredby sub - section ( 2) of Section 10 of the Dentists Act, 1948 (16 of 1948) , the Central Government , after consultation with the Dental Council of India , hereby , makes the following amendments in Part - I of the Schedule to the said Act, namely :---

2. In the existing entries of column 2 & 3 against II of Serial No. 26 , in respect of Modern Dental College & Research Centre , Indore , in Part - I of the Schedule to the Dentists Act , 1948 ( 16 of 1948 ) pertaining to recognition of dental degrees awarded by Devi Ahilya Vishwavidyalaya , Indore , the following entries shall be inserted thereunder :-

"Master of Dental Surgery

(ifgranted on or after 22-08-2009) (i) Prosthodontics

MDS (Prostho), Devi Ahilya Vishwa- vidyalaya, Indore (ii) Conservative Dentistry (ifgranted on or after 21-08-2009)

MDS ( Cons . Dent) , Devi Ahilya Vishwa- vidyalaya , Indore ( iii) Oral Medicine (ifgranted on or after 22-08-2009)

MDS (OralMedicine) , Devi Ahilya Vishwa- vidyalaya, Indore (iv) Periodontics (ifgranted on or after 27-08-2009)

MDS ( Perio .), Devi Ahilya Vishwa- vidyalaya , Indore (v) Oral Surgery (ifgranted on or after 27-08-2009)

MDS ( Oral Surgery) , Devi Ahilya Vishwa- vidyalaya, Indore (vi) Orthodontics (ifgranted on or after 25-08-2009)

MDS (Ortho .), Devi Ahilya Vishwa- vidyalaya, Indore"

[F. No. V. 12017 / 13 /2005 - DE ]

R. SANKARAN , Under Secy.

4476

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 24 , 2010 /SHRAVANA 2, 1932

[PART II-SEC . 3( ii) ]

नई दिल्ली, 22 जून , 2010

का, आ. 1803 , केन्द्रीय सरकार , दंत चिकित्सक अधिनियम , 1948 ( 1948 का 16 ) के खण्ड 10 के उप - खण्ड( 2 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए भारतीय दंत परिषद् के परामर्श के बाद उक्त अधिनियम की अनुसूची के भाग -1 में निम्नलिखित संशोधन करती है अर्थात्:

2. दंत चिकित्सक अधिनियम , 1948 ( 1948 का 16 ) की अनुसूची के भाग -1 क्रम संख्या 86 के बाद निम्नलिखित प्रविष्टियां शामिल की जाएं अर्थात्: -

रूंगटा दंत विज्ञान एवं अनुसंधान महाविद्यालय ,

" 87. पंडित रविशंकर शुक्ला यूनिवर्सिटी, रायपुर

बीडीएस , पंडित रवि शंकर शुक्ला यूनिवर्सिटी , रायपुर"

भिलाई , छत्तीसगढ़ दंत शल्यक्रिया में स्नातक (यदि27-10-2009 कोया उसके बाद स्वीकृत)

[फा. सं. वी. 12017/28/2004 -डीई ]

आर. शंकरन्, अवर सचिव

New Delhi , the 22nd June , 2010

S. O. 1803. In exercise of the powers conferred by sub - section (2) of Section 10 of the Dentists Act , 1948 ( 16 of 1948) , the Central Government , after consultation with the Dental Council of India, hereby, makes the following amendments inPart - I of the Schedule to the said Act , namely :-

2. In Part -I ofthe Schedule to the Dentists Act , 1948 ( 16 of 1948) after Serial No. 86 , the following serial number and entries shall be inserted , namely :-

"87. Pt .

Ravishankar Rungta College of Dental Sciences

Shukla University, & Research, Bhilai , Chhattisgarh

Raipur

Bachelor of Dental Surgery (ifgranted on or after 27-10-2009 )

BDS , Pt. Ravishankar Shukla University , Raipur "

[ F. No. V. 12017/28/ 2004 -DE ] R. SANKARAN , Under Secy .

नई दिल्ली, 28 जून , 2010

का. आ. 1804. केन्द्रीय सरकार , दंत चिकित्सक अधिनियम , 1948 ( 1948 का 16 ) के खण्ड ( 10 ) के उप - खण्ड ( 2 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए भारतीय दंत परिषद् से परामर्श के बाद उक्त अधिनियम की अनुसूची के भाग -1 में निम्नलिखित संशोधन करती है अर्थात्: -

2. दंत चिकित्सक अधिनियम , 1948 ( 1948 का 16 ) की अनुसूची के भाग -1 क्रम संख्या 88 के बाद निम्नलिखित प्रविष्टियां शामिल की जाएं अर्थात्:-

के.एम. शाह दंत महाविद्यालय एवं

अस्पताल , बड़ोदरा

" 89. सुमनदीप विद्यापीठ यूनिवर्सिटी, बड़ोदरा

दंत शल्यूक्रिया में परा स्नातक

-पीडोडोन्टीस-

एमडीएस ( पेडो. ) , सुमनदीप

(यदि 24-12-2009 को या उसके बाद स्वीकृत )

विद्यापीठ यूनिवर्सिटी, वड़ोदरा

-ओरल पैथोलॉजी

एमडीएस ( ओरल पैथो ) , सुमनदीप [ भाग II- खण्ड 3( ii ) ]

(यदि23-12-2009 को या उसके बाद स्वीकृत )

-प्रोस्थोडान्टिस

सुमनदीप

(यदि24-12-2009 को या उसके बाद स्वीकृत )

-पेरियोडान्टिस

(यदि 24-12-2009 को या उसके बाद स्वीकृत)

-आध्रोडोन्टीस

(यदि 24-12-2009 को या उसके बाद स्वीकृत)

कम्यूनिटी डेन्टिसट्री

( यदि 22-12-2009 को या उसके बाद स्वीकृत)

-ओरल मेडिसिन

(यदि 23-12-2009 को या उसके बाद स्वीकृत )

-ओरल मेडिसिन

(यदि23-12-2009 को या उसके बाद स्वीकृत )

-ओरल एंड मैक्सील्लोफेसियल सर्जरी (यदि 24-12-2009 को या उसके बाद स्वीकृत )

-कंजरवेटिव डेन्टिसट्री

(यदि23-12-2009 को या उसके बाद स्वीकृत )

4477

भारत का राजपत्र : जुलाई 24 , 2010/ श्रावण 2, 1932

विद्यापीठ युनिवर्सिटी, वड़ोदरा

एमडीएस (प्रोस्थो. ) , विद्यापीठ युनिवर्सिटी, वड़ोदरा

एमडीएस ( पेरियो. ) , सुमनदीप विद्यापीठ युनिवर्सिटी, वड़ोदरा

एमडीएस ( आर्थो. ) , सुमनदीप विद्यापीठ युनिवर्सिटी, वड़ोदरा

एमडीएस ( कॉम. डे. ) , सुमनदीप विद्यापीठ युनिवर्सिटी, वड़ोदरा

एमडीएस (ओरल मेडि. ) , सुमनदीप विद्यापीठ युनिवर्सिटी, वड़ोदरा

एमडीएस ( ओरल मेडि. ) , सुमनदीप विद्यापीठ युनिवर्सिटी, वड़ोदरा

एमडीएस ( ओरल सर्जरी ) , सुमनदीप विद्यापीठ युनिवर्सिटी , वड़ोदरा

एमडीएस (कान्स. डें. ) , सुमनदीप विद्यापीठ युनिवर्सिटी , वड़ोदरा

[फाइल संख्या वी. 12017 /21 /2005 -डीई ]

आर. शंकरन , अवर सचिव

New Delhi , the 28th June , 2010

S. O. 1804. In exercise of the powers conferred by sub - section (2 ) of Section 10 of the Dentists Act, 1948 ( 16 of 1948 ), the Central Government, after consultation with the Dental Council of India, hereby, makes the following amendments in Part- 1 of the Schedule to the said Act , namely :-

2. In Part- I ofthe Schedule to the Dentists Act , 1948 ( 16 of 1948 ) after Serial No. 88 , the following serial number and entries shall be inserted, namely :-

K. M. Shah Dental College & " 89. Sumandeep

Hospital , Vadodara Vidyapeeth

University, Vadodara

Master of Dental Surgery

-Pedodontics (ifgranted on or after 24-12-2009 )

Oral Pathology (ifgranted on or after 23-12-2009 )

Prosthodontics

(ifgranted on or after 24-12-2009 )

Periodontics

(ifgranted on or after 24-12-2009 )

Orthodontics

(ifgranted on or after 24-12-2009 )

Community Destistry

(ifgranted on or after 22-12-2009 )

MDS ( Pedo . ) , Sumandeep VidyapeethUniversity, Vadodara

MDS (Oral Path . ) , Sumandeep Vidyapeeth University , Vadodara

MDS ( Prostho . ) , Sumandeep VidyapeethUniversity, Vadodara

MDS (Perio. ) , Sumandeep Vidyapeeth University, Vadodara

MDS (Ortho . ) , Sumandeep Vidyapeeth University , Vadodara

MDS (Com . Dent . ) , Sumandeep Vidyapeeth University , Vadodara 4478

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 24, 2010 /SHRAVANA 2 , 1932

OralMedicine

(ifgranted on or after 23-12-2009 )

Oral& Maxillofacial Surgery (if granted on or after 24-12-2009 )

Conservative Dentistry (ifgranted on or after 23-12-2009)

[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii) ] MDS (OralMed.) , Sumandeep Vidyapeeth University , Vadodara

MDS ( Oral Surgery. ) , Sumandeep Vidyapeeth University, Vadodara

MDS(Cons. Dent . ) , Sumandeep Vidyapeeth University , Vadodara

[ F. No. V. 12017 /21 /2005 -DE] R. SANKARAN , Under Secy.

नई दिल्ली, 29 जून , 2010

का. आ. 1805.- केन्द्रीय सरकार, दंत चिकित्सक अधिनियम , 1948 ( 1948 का 16 ) के खण्ड 10 के उप - खण्ड ( 2 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए भारतीय दंत परिषद् के परामर्श के बाद उक्त अधिनियम की अनुसूची के भाग -1 में निम्नलिखित संशोधन करती है अर्थात्:---

2. दंत चिकित्सक अधिनियम, 1948 ( 1948 का 16 ) की अनुसूची के भाग -1 क्रम संख्या 87 के बाद निम्नलिखित क्रम संख्या एवं प्रविष्टियां शामिल की जाएं अर्थात् :---

" 88. जीवाजी युनिवर्सिटी, ग्वालियर

महाराणा प्रताप दंत चिकित्सा एवं अनुसंधान केन्द्र , ग्वालियर

दंत शल्यक्रिया में स्नातक ( यदि 8-9-2007 को या उसके बाद स्वीकृत)

बीडीएस , जीवाजी यूनिवर्सिटी, ग्वालियर "

[फा. सं. वी. ! 2017/32/2002 -डीई ]

आर. शंकरन , अवर सचिव

New Delhi , the 29th June , 2010

S. O. 1805. In exercise of the powers conferred by sub - section ( 2 ) of Section 10 of the Dentists Act , 1948 (16 of 1948 ) , the Central Government , after consultation with the Dental Council of India , hereby , makes the following amendments in Part - 1 of the Schedule to the said Act , namely :-

2. In Part - 1 of the Schedule to the Dentists Act, 1948 ( 16 of 1948) after Serial No. 87 , the following Serial number and entries shall be inserted , namely :--

"88. Jiwaji University. Gwalior

Maharana Pratap College of Dentistry & Research Centre , Gwalior Bachelor of Dental Surgery (if granted on or after 8-9-2007)

BDS , Jiwaji University, Gwalior "

[ F. No. V. 12017/32/2002 -DE ] R. SANKARAN , Under Secy .

विदेश मंत्रालय

(सीपीवी प्रभाग )

नई दिल्ली , 15 जुलाई , 2010

का. आ. 1806.- राजनयिक और कोंसलोय ऑफिसर ( शपथ और फीस ) के अधिनियम, 1948 की धारा 2 के खंड ( क ) के अनुसरण 5-7-2009 से भारत के राजदूतावास , दोहा में सहायक कोंसुलर में , केंद्र सरकार एतद्वारा श्री शिवलाल मीना, सहायक को अधिकारी के कर्तव्यों का पालन करने के लिए प्राधिकृत करती है ।

[सं. टी -4330/1/2006 ] आर.के. पेरिनडिया , अवर सचिव ( कोंसुलर ) 4479 [ भाग II--खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : जुलाई 24, 2010/ श्रावण 2 , 1932

MINISTRY OF EXTERNAL AFFAIRS

(C. P.V. Division )

New Delhi , the 15th July , 2010

S. O. 1806. In pursuance of the clause (a) of the Section 2 of the Diplomatic and Consular Officers ( Oaths and Fees) Act, 1948 ( 41 of 1948 ) , the Central Government hereby authorise Shri Shiv Lal Meena , Assistant in the Embassy of India, Doha to perform the duties of Assistant Consular Officer with effect from 5th July, 2010 .

This issues in supersession of our gazette notification of even number dated 5th July , 2010 .

[No. T. 4330/1/2006]

R. K. PERINDIA, Under Secy . ( Consular )

नागर विमानन मंत्रालय

नई दिल्ली , 9 जुलाई , 2010

का. आ. 1807, केन्द्रीय सरकार , राजभाषा ( संघ के शासकीय प्रयोजनों के लिए प्रयोग ) नियम , 1976 के नियम 10 के उप - नियम (4) के अनुसरण में , नागर विमानन मंत्रालय के उपक्रम भारतीय विमानपत्तन प्राधिकरण के कोलकाता स्थित नेताजी सुभाष चन्द्र बोस अंतरराष्ट्रीय हवाई अड्‌डा, कोलकाता-700 052 जिसके 80 प्रतिशत से अधिक कर्मचारीवृन्द ने हिन्दी का कार्यसाधक ज्ञान प्राप्त कर लिया है, अधिसूचित करती है ।

[सं. ई -11011 /10/2010- रा.भा. ] चन्द्र भान नारनौली, निदेशक MINISTRY OF CIVIL AVIATION

New Delhi , the 9th July, 2010

S. O. 1807 .--In pursuance of sub -rule( 4) of Rule 10 of the Official Languages ( Use for the Official Purposes of the Union) Rules, 1976 , the Central Government , hereby notifies the Office of the Airport Authority of India , Netaji Subhast Chandra Bose International Airport , Kolkata - 700 052 of an under taking of Ministry of Civil Aviation , whereof, more than 80% stoff have acquired the working knowledge of Hindi .

[No. E - 11011 /10/2010-OL!

C. B. NARNAULI , Director भारी उद्योग और लोक उद्यम मंत्रालय

(भारी उद्योग विभाग )

नई दिल्ली , 6 जुलाई , 2010

का. आ. 1808.-- केन्द्र सरकार , राजभाषा ( संघ के शासकीय प्रयोजनों के लिए प्रयोग) नियम, 1976 के नियम 10 के उप- नियम ( 4) के अनुसरण में, निम्नलिखित कार्यालयों , जिनके 80 % से अधिक अधिकारियों/ कर्मचारियों ने हिंदी का कार्यसाधक ज्ञान प्राप्त कर लिया है, को वित करती है : --

त्रीएवईएल , क्षेत्रीय प्रचालन प्रभाग री-2 , आईसीयूपो भवन , प्रथम तल, विभूति खंड , गोमती नगर, लखनऊ-226010

2. वीएचईएल , क्षेत्रीय प्रचालन प्रभाग एससीओ -129-130, प्रथम शुल , सेक्टर-17 सी, चंडी

ई-11012 /3/2৯ ৮- সে 4480

[PART II -SEC. 3 ( ii) ] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 24 , 2010 /SHRAVANA 2 , 1932

MINISTRY OF HEAVY INDUSTRIES AND PUBLIC ENTERPRISES

(Department of Heavy Industry)

New Delhi , the 6th July, 2010

S. O. 1808. In pursuance of the sub - rule (4) of the Rule 10 of Official Language ( Use for Official Purposes of the Union) Rules, 1976 , the Central Government, hereby notifies the following offices whereof more than 80 % staff have acquired the working knowledge of Hindi :-

1. BHEL, Regional Operations Division, B - 2 , PICUP Bhavan , First Floor , Vibhuti Khand, Gomati Nagar , Lucknow- 226010

2. BHEL, Regional Operations Division,

SCO- 129-130, First Floor , Sector - 17C, Chandigarh - 160017

[No. E - 11012/2/2010-Hindi ]

AMBUJ SHARMA , Jt . Secy .

उपभोक्ता मामले , खाद्य और सार्वजनिक वितरण मंत्रालय

( उपभोक्ता मामले विभाग )

भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो

नई दिल्ली, 28 जून, 2010

का. आ. 1809.- भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो नियम , 1987 के नियम 7 के उप - नियम ( 1 ) के खंड ( ख ) के अनुसरण में भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो एतद्वारा अधिसूचित करता है कि जिन भारतीय मानकों के विवरण नीचे अनुसूची में दिए गए हैं वे स्थापित हो गए हैं :-

अनुसूची

क्रम

स्थापित तिथि स्थापित भारतीय मानक( कों ) की संख्या ,

नये भारतीय मानक द्वारा अतिक्रमित

संख्या वर्ष और शीर्षक

भारतीय मानक अथवा मानकों , यदि

कोई हो , की संख्या और वर्ष

(1)

(2)

(3)

(4) 1.

31-05-2008 आईएस 15797 : 2008 छतों पर वर्षा जल

संग्रहणमार्गदर्शी सिद्धांत

इस भारतीय मानक की प्रतियाँ भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो , मानक भवन , 9 , बहादुर शाह जफर मार्ग , नई दिल्ली -110 002 , क्षेत्रीय कार्यालयों : नई दिल्ली, कोलकाता , चण्डीगढ़ , चेन्नई, मुम्बई तथा शाखा कार्यालयों : अहमदाबाद , बंगलौर, भोपाल , भुवनेश्वर , कोयम्बतूर , गुवाहाटी, हैदराबाद , जयपुर , कानपुर , नागपुर, पटना , पूणे तथा तिरूवन्नतापुरम में बिक्री हेतु उपलब्ध हैं ।

[संदर्भ : डब्ल्यू आर डी/जी -117 ]

जे. सी. अरोड़ा, वैज्ञा. एफ एवं प्रमुख जल संसाधन विभाग MINISTRY OF CONSUMER AFFAIRS , FOOD AND PUBLIC DISTRIBUTION

(Department of Consumer Affairs )

BUREAU OF INDIAN STANDARDS

New Delhi , the 28th June , 2010

S.O 1809.-In pursuance of clause (b) of sub - rule ( 1) of Rules ( 1 ) of Rule 7 of the Bureau of Indian Standards Rules , 1987, the Bureau of Indian Standards hereby notifies that the Indian Standards , particulars of which is given in the Schedule hereto annexed has been established on the date indicated against it :-

1481 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई 24, 2010/श्रावण 2, 1932

SCHEDULE

No. and year of Indian Standards ,

Sl . No. No. and Year of the Indian Standards Established

Date of Establishment

ifany, Superseded by the New Indian Standard

(3)

(2)

(1)

31-5-2008 1.

IS 15797 : 2008 Roop Top Harvesting Rainwater Guidelines

Copy of the Standards is available for sale with the Bureau of Indian Standards , Manak Bhavan , 9, Bahadur Shah Zafar Marg, New Delhi - 110 002 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: WRD/G- 117 ]

J. C. ARORA , Sc . F & Head Water Resorces Depit .

नई दिल्ली, 30 जून, 2010

का. आ. 1810.- भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो नियम, 1987 के नियम 7 के उप - नियम ( 1 ) के खंड ( ख ) के अनुसरण में भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो एतद्वारा अधिसूचित करता है कि जिन भारतीय मानकों के विवरण नीचे अनुसूची में दिए गए हैं वे स्थापित हो गए हैं :---

अनुसूची

स्थापित तिथि स्थापित भारतीय मानक की संख्या ,

वर्ष और शीर्षक

क्रम संख्या

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

(4)

(3)

(2)

(1)

सितम्बर , 2009

लागू नही

IS 14452 2009 /ISO 3758 : 2005 वस्त्रादि- प्रतीकों द्वारा केयर लेबल लगाने की संहिता-विशिष्टि ( पहला पुनरीक्षण )

अब यह भारतीय मानक बिक्री के लिये उपलब्ध होगा ।

इस भारतीय मानक की प्रतियाँ भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो , मानक भवन , 9 , बहादुर शाह जफर मार्ग , नई दिल्ली -110 002 , क्षेत्रीय कार्यालयों : नई दिल्ली, कोलकाता , चण्डीगढ़ , चेन्नई , मुम्बई तथा शाखा कार्यालयों : अहमदाबाद , बंगलौर, भोपाल , भुवनेश्वर , कोयम्बतूर , गुवाहाटी , हैदराबाद, जयपुर , कानपुर, नागपुर, पटना , पुणे तथा तिरूवन्नतापुरम में बिक्री हेतु उपलब्ध हैं ।

[संदर्भ : टीएक्सडी/जी-25 ]

पी. भटनागर , वैज्ञा. ' एफ ' एवं प्रमुख ( टीएक्सडी )

New Delhi , the 30th June , 2010

S.O. 1810. In pursuance of clause (b) of sub - rule ( 1 ) of Rules ( 1 ) of Rule 7 of the Bureau of Indian Standards Rules , 1987 , the Bureau of Indian Standards hereby notifies that the Indian Standards , particulars of which is given in the Schedule hereto annexed has been established on the date indicated against it :-

SCHEDULE

Date of Established Sl . No. No. and year of the Indian Standards Established

No. and year of Indian Standards , ifany, Superseded by the New Indian Standard

(4)

(3)

(2)

(1)

Nil

September 2009 IS 14452 : 2009 /ISO 3758 :

1 .

2005 Textiles Care Labelling Code using Symbols-Specification (First Revision)

Henceforth , this standard will be available for sale .

Copy of the Standards is available for sale with HQ at Bureau of Indian Standards , Manak Bhavan, 9 , Bahadur Shah Zafar Marg , New Delhi - 110 002 and its Regional Offices at New Delhi , Kolkata , Chandigarh , Chennai , Mumbai , 4483

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: JULY 24 , 2010/SHRAVAL

Hydr

mad al Husnich Offices at Ahmedabad, Bangalore , Bhopal , Bhubaneshieztore , Gum Kanpu , sagpur , Patna, Pune , Thiruvananthapuram .

Ref

MATNAGAR, St. 2

ws)

नई दिल्ली, 13 जुलाई , 2010

ब्यूरो नियम, 1987 के नियम 7 ( 1 ) के खंड ( अनु उद्द्वारा अधिसूचित करता है कि जिन भारतीय मानकों का विवरण नीचे अनुसूची में दिया गया है वे

क्रम

संख्क

मात भारतीय मानक की संख्या, और शीर्षक

(2)

आइएम/आई एस आं 15001 2003 निश्वेतक और श्वसन उपस्कर ऑक्सीजन से संगतता

आईएस/ आई एस ओ 13485 : 2003 कत्सा साधन गुणा प्रबंधतंत्र नियामिक दियों के लिये अपेक्षाएं

5. मानकों की प्रनियाँ फरतीय मानक ब्यूरो, मातक भवन, १ असे.

नये अनुसूची

स्थापिः नये भारतीय मानक द्वय अतिक्रमित भारतीय मानक अथवा मानकों, यदि कोई हो , की संग भौर वर्ष

(3)

कार्यालयाई दिल्ली , कोलकाता, पण्डीगढ़, चेन्नई , मुम्बई तथा शाखा कार्यालयोग . भुवने गुवाहटी , रामद , जयपुर, कानपुर गपर, घटना, पूणे तथा तिरूवन्नतापुरम में पलव्ध हैं ।

सदर्भ एभाः

साहेत आदेशनिक एफ एवं प्रमुख ।

New Delhi, the 13th July, 2019

( ty of sabule ( 1) of Ra

1811 --In pursuant 1984, the drum of todizn Staraands hereby notifier that the Indian Standard Shadate hero annexed have res established on the tale indicated Bureau of Indian Stor particulars of which are ch

31. Na . Ne and Year of age indon Sadanie Established

( 1 )

Medical Devices

Manageme Systarts-Reqram he th

gulatory

thest t

Shah Zwart Marg , New Delhi-

SCHEDULE

Dat Mo. and yea to za Standarda if any, Supere ind Le the New Indian Estal Standard

(5)

Mandards , Manak Bhavan

sair with the Bureasu

also

sad Regional Offices New Delhi , Kothala

Branch Offices : Ahmedabei , Bhopal , Ghubaneshwar, Combatos,

Nagpur Palta, Pune , Thirasaran

handigarh , Chennai , Mun

Guwahati , Hyderabad , Jaip

Refe WAL WAH KUMAR , Se F &

D 4483 भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई 24, 2010/ श्रावण 2 , 1932

कोयला मंत्रालय

नई दिल्ली, 14 जुलाई , 2010

का. आर. 1812. केन्द्रीय सरकार को प्रतीत होता है कि इससे उपाबद्ध अनुसूची में उल्लिखित अवस्थिति की भामयों में कोयला अभिधाप्त किये जाने की संभावना है,

अंतः अब, केंद्रीय सरकार, कोयला धारक क्षेत्र ( अर्जन और विकास ) अधिनियम , 1957 ( 1957 का 20 कयास की पारा प्रदत शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए , उस भूमि में कोयले का पूर्वेक्षण करने के अपने आशय की सूचना देती है;

इत अधिसूचना के अन्तर्गत आने वाले रेखांक संख्या ईसीएल आरजेएमएल/एमओयूजेडए/एनओटीआई/03 , तारीख 27 मार्च, 2009 निक्षण उपायुक्त, जिला गोड्डा ( इतरखण्ड ) के कार्यालय में था कोयला नियंत्रक , 1 , काउंसिल हाऊस स्ट्रॉर कोलकाता 700001 क कार्यालय में या निर्देशक तकयोका ( प्रचालन ) , ईस्टर्न कोलफील्ड्स लिमिटेड सांकटोरिया , डाकघर दिसेरगढ़ , जिला बर्दवान ( पश्चिमी बगाल) पिन कोड 71.133.3 के कार्यालय में किया जा सकता है ।

इस अधिसूचना के अन्तर्गत आने वाली भूमि में, हितबद्ध सभी व्यक्ति उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 13 को 1940 (7) में निर्दिषर भी जिणों, चाही पोर दातावजों का इस अधिसूचना के राजपत्र के प्रकाशन की तारीख से नब्बे दिन के भीतक तकनीकी (प्रचालन) , इसने कालकी लास लिमिटेड , सांकटोरिया , डाकघर- दिसंरगढ़, जिला बर्दवान ( पश्चिमी बंगाल ) , पिन कोड 713335 को भेजेंगे ।

अनुसूची

ललटिया कोयला खनन ब्लाक ( आठवाँ चरण )

जिला गोड्डा , झारखण्ड

रथाज संख्या ईसीएल/आरजेएमएल/एमओयूजेडए/एनओटीआई/03 , तारीख 27 मार्च 2009

जिला

क्षेत्र एक में ( लगभग

क्षेत्र हेक्टर में (लगभग)

ग्राम संख्या

210.40

85.17

गोड्डा

18.55

7.50

गोड्डा

2299

92.67

कुल क्षेत्र

कोयला धारक क्षेत्र ( अर्जन और विकास अधिनियम , 1957 द्वारा ललमटिया कोयला खनन ब्लॉक (आटयाँ यथा ) के अन्तर्गत अधिसूचित किए जाने वाले क्षेत्र का सीमा विवरण ।

रखा से मोहविडया स.- 45 अर्कता मांथा सं. 44 एवं लोहणिडया मौजा सं. 45 के प्लॉट संख्या 25 एवं बिन का से आधि होती है और पूर्ववती भारत के राजपत्र में अधिसूचित सं. का.आ. 784 तारीश्व 8-3 1995 रेखा के साथ पूजा है अर्थाद लाहणिडया मौजा सं. 45 के प्लॉट सं. 236 की उत्तरी सीमा तथा प्लॉट सं. 234, 232 के पश्चिमी एवं उतरी सीमा तथा प्लाट सं. 245 333 को उत्तरी सीमा तथा प्लॉट सं. 248 के पश्चिमी एव उत्तरी सीमा तथा प्लॉट स. 321 , 332 , 330. 329, 326 , 317 , 319 की पश्चिमी सीमा और प्लॉट सं. 342 के उत्तरी सीमा तथा प्लॉट सं. 344,352 351, 350 , 349 और 392 को पूर्वी सीमा से होकर लोहणिडया सं. 45 के प्लॉट सं. 348 , 392 और 397 ( सड़क ) के संगम बिन्दु क2. पर मिलती है जोकि पूर्ववती को अधिचित रेखाएँ भारत सरकार के राजपत्र में अधिसूचित सं. का.आ. 784 तारीख 8 4 1995 और का.आ. 1285 तारीख 30-5-2001 रेखाओंका सम्मिलित बिन्दु है ।

रखा, पूर्व वर्णित बिन्दु क2 से शुरू होकर अधिसूचना रेखा भारत सरकार के राजपत्र में अधिसूचित में का.अ. 1285 तारीख 20-5-2001 के साथ है , अधात् यह रेखा मौजा लोहणिडया सं. 45 के प्लॉट सं. 415 , 413 के उभरी सोभा तथा प्लॉट सं. 412 क. पश्चिमी एवं उत्तरी सीमा तथा प्लॉट सं. 410 , 409 की उत्तरी सीमा तथा प्लॉट सं. 408 की पश्चिमी सीमा एवं उत्तरी सीमा तथा प्लॉट सं. 407 , 443 , 460 , 461 , 467 , 468 , 454 के उत्तरी सीमा तथा प्लॉट सं. 800 के पश्चिमी एवं उत्तरी सीमा तथा प्लॉट सं. 801. 811 के उत्तरी सीमा होकर प्लॉट सं. 788 ( सड़क ) को पार करते हुए पुनः प्लॉट सं. 655 के उत्तरी सीमा के साथ जाती है एवं प्लॉट सं. 669 , 668 , 667 को पार करती है । पुनः यह रेखा प्लॉट सं. 665 , 663 की उत्तरी सीमा तथा प्लॉट सं. 681,682 , 683 की पश्चिमी सीमा के साथ होते हुए मौजा लोहणिडया सं. 45 के प्लॉट सं. 684,685 , 686 एवं 687 के सांझा बिन्दु पर स्थित क३ पर मिलती है । [PART II- SEC. 3 (ii) ] 4484

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 24 , 2010 / SHRAVANA 2, 1932

क3 -क4 देखा , पूर्व वर्णित बिन्दु कर से शुरू होकर पूर्ववर्ती अधिसूचना रेखा भारत सरकार के राजपत्र में अधिसूचित सं. का.आ. 1285 तारीख 30-5-2001 के साथ जाती है , अर्थात् मौजा लोहणिडया सं. 45 के प्लॉट सं. 684 की उत्तरी सीमा तथा प्लॉट सं. 758 कं पश्चिमी एवं उत्तरी सीमा तथा प्लॉट सं. 754 , 755 के उत्तरी सीमा तथा प्लॉट सं. 751 ( भाग ) के पश्चिमी सीमा के साथ आकर प्लॉट सं. 751 को पार करते हुए लोहणिडया मौजा सं. 45 के प्लॉट सं. 747 , 746 के उत्तरी सीमा तथा प्लॉट सं. 732 के उत्तरी एवं पश्चिमी सीमा तथा प्लॉट सं. 733 ( भाग ) के पश्चिमी सीमा एवं 715 के पश्चिमी सीमा एवं उत्तरी सीमा बराबर गुजरते हुए , लोहणिडया मौजा सं. 45 एवं बसडीहा मौजा सं. 47 की सम्मिलित सीमा के साथ जाती है, साथ ही पूर्ववर्ती अधिसूचित रेखा भारत सरकार के राजपत्र में अधिसूचित सं. का. आ. 1285 तारीख 30-5-2001 के साथ मौजा लोहणिडया सं. 45 एवं बसडीहा मौजा सं. 47 की सम्मिलित सीमा पर बिन्दु क4 पर मिलती है ।

क4-क5 रेखा , लोहणिडया मौजा सं. 45 एवं बसडीहा मौजा सं. 47 की सम्मिलित सीमा पर स्थित क4 से शुरू होकर लोहणिडया मोजा सं. 45 एवं बसडीहा मौजा सं. 47 की सम्मिलित सोमा से गुजरते हुए लोहणिडया मौजा सं. 45 , बसडीहा मौजा सं. 47 एवं हररखा मौजा सं. 50 के त्रिसंधि स्तंभ पर स्थित बिन्दु का पर मिलती है ।

क5-क6 रेखा , लोहणिडया मौजा सं. 45 बसडीहा मौजा सं. 47 एवं हररखा मौजा सं . 50 के त्रिसंधि स्तंभ पर स्थित बिन्दु क5 से शुरू होकर मौजा लोहणिडया सं. 45 एवं हररखा मौजा सं.50 के सम्मिलित सीमा से गुजरते हुए लोहणिडया मौजा सं. 45 , हररखा भोजा सं. 50 एवं रानीडीह मौजा सं. 53 के त्रिसंधि स्तंभ पर स्थित बिन्दु क6 पर मिलती है ।

क6-क7 यह रेखा लोहणिडया मौजा सं. 45 , हररखा मौजा सं. 50 एवं रानीडीह मौजा सं. 53 के त्रिसंधि स्तंभ पर बिन्दु क6 से शुरू होकर लोहणिडया मौजा सं. 45 एवं रानीडीह मौजा सं. 53 की सम्मिलित सीमा से गुजरते हुए लोहणिडया मौजा सं. 45 , रानीडीह मौजा सं. 53 एवं डकैता मौजा सं . 44 के त्रिसंधि स्तंभ पर स्थित बिन्दु का पर मिलती है ।

क7-क। रेखा मौजा लोहणिडया स. 45 , रानीडीह मांजा सं. 53 एवं डकैता मौजा सं. 44 के त्रिसंधि स्तंभ पर बिन्दु क7 से शुरू होकर लोहणिडया मौजा सं. 45 एवं डकैता मौजा सं. 44 की सम्मिलित सीमा से गुजरते हुए लोहणिडया मौजा सं. 45 , के प्लॉट सं. 218 (सड़क ) को पार करती है एवं पुनः प्लॉट सं. 223 , 224 के उतरी सीमा से गुजरते हुए लोहणिडया मौजा सं. 45 एवं डकैता मौजा सं. 44 के साथ जाती है एवं अंतिम में मौजा लोहणिडया सं. 45 एवं डकैता सं. 44 एवं लोहणिडया मोजा प्लॉट सं. 235 एवं 236 के सम्मिलित विन्दु पर स्थित बिन्दु का पर मिलती है , जोकि पूर्ववर्ती अधिसूचित रेखा भारत सरकार के राजपत्र में अधिसूचित सं. का.आ. 784 तारीख 8.3.1995 पर स्थित है ।

नोट : मौजा लोहणिडया बाजार सं. - 46 , पूर्ण रूप से मौजा लोहणिडया सं. 45 के भीतर है ।

[फा. सं. - 43015/3/2010- पीआरआईडब्ल्यू] एम. शहाबुद्दीन , अवर सचिव

MINISTRY OF COAL

New Delhi , the 14th July, 2010

S. O. 1812.-Whereas , it appears to the Central Government that coal is likely to be obtained from the lands in the locality mentioned in the Schedule hereto annexed;

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

The Plan bearing number ECL / RJML/ MOUZA/ NOTI /03 , dated the 27th March, 2009 , of the area covered by this notification can be inspected at the office of the Deputy Commissioner , District Godda (Jharkhand) , or at the office of the CoalController , 1 , Council House Street , Kolkata - 700 001 or at the office of the Director Technical ( Operation ) , Eastern Coalfields Limited, Sanctoria , P.O. Dishergarh , Dist . Burdwan ( West Bengal ) , Pin Code - 713 333 .

All persons interested in the land covered by this notification shall deliver all maps , charts and other documents referred in sub - section (7) of Section 13 of the said Act to the Director Technical (Operation ) , Eastern Coalfields Limited, Sanctoria , P.O. Dishergarh , Dist.- Burdwan ( West Bengal ) , Pin Code -713 333 within ninety days from the date of publication of this notification in the Official Gazette .

SCHEDULE

Lalmatia Coal Mining Block (Phase -VIII ) District : Godda ; Jharkhand .

Plannumber : ECL/RJML/MOUZA/NOTI/03 , dated the 27th March, 2009

Remarks

District

Thana

Mouza/Village

Village number

Sl . No.

Area in acres (Approxi- mately)

Area in Hectares (Approxi- mately)

Godda

Lalmatia

Lohandia

85.17 7.50

210.46 18.53

Part Full

Godda

Lalmatia

Lohandia Bazar

92.67

228.99

Total Area 4485 भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई 24, 2010/ श्रावण 2 , 1932

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii ) ]

Boundary Description of the area falling in Lalmatia Coal Mining Block ( Phase -VIII ) being notified under sub- section ( 1) of Section 4 of the Coal Bearing Area ( Acquisition & Development ) Act, 1957.

Boundary Description ( A1 to A 7)

A1 -A2 The line starts from the Point A 1 situated at the common point on the common boundary of Mouza Dakaita No. 44 andMouza Lohandia No. 45 and Plot Nos . 235 & 236 of Mouza Lohandia No. 45 and runs along the earlier Notification line Notified vide S. O. 784 dated 08-03-1995 in the Gazette of Govt . of India i.e. along Northern boundary of Plot No. 236 and Western &. Northern boundaries of Plot Nos . 234, 232 and Northern boundary of PlotNos . 245, 333 and Western & Northern boundaries of Plot No. 248 and Western boundary of Plot Nos . 321, 332, 330, 329, 328 , 327 , 339 and Northern boundary of Plot No. 342 and Eastern boundary of Plot Nos . 344 , 352, 351 , 350, 349 and 392 of Mouza Lohandia No. 45 and meets on the Point A2 situated at the junction of Plot No. 348, 392 and 397 (Road ) of the Mouza Lohandia No. 45, which is also the common point of the earlier two Notification line Notified vide S.O. 784 dated 08-03-1995 and S.O. 1285 dated 30-05-2001 in the Gazette of Government of India.

A2-A3 The line starts from the point A2 described above and runs along the earlier notification line notified vide S.O. 1285 dated 30-05-2001 in the Gazette of Govt . of India i.e. along Northern boundary of Plot Nos . 415, 413 Western & Northern boundaries of Plot Nos . 412 & Northern boundary of Plot Nos . 410 , 409, Western & Northern boundaries of Plot No. 408 , Northern boundary of Plot Nos . 407 , 443 , 460 , 461 , 467, 468 , 454 and Western & Northern boundaries of ' Plot No. 800, Northern boundary of Plot Nos . 801 ,. 811 and crosses over Plot No. 788 (Road) and again runs along the Northern boundary of Plot No. 655 and crosses over Plot Nos . 669 , 668 , 667 and runs along Northern boundary of Plot Nos . 665, 663 and Western boundaries of Plot Nos . 681 , 682, 683 of Mouza Lohandia No. 45 and meets on the Point A3 situated at the junction of Plot Nos . 684 , 685, 686 and 687 of Mouza Lohandia No. 45 .

A3 -A4 The line starts from the point A3 described above and runs along the earlier Notification line, notified vide S.O. 1285 dated 30.05.2001 in the Gazette of Govt of India i.e. along northern boundaries of the Plot No. 684, Western andNorthern boundaries of Plot No. 758 , Northern boundaries 754 , 755 and Western boundary of 751 (Part) of Mouza - Lohandia No. 45 and crosses over the Plot No. 751 and runs along the Northern boundary of Plot Nos . 747,746 and again runs along the Western & Northern boundaries of Plot No. 732, Western boundary ofPlot No. 733 (Part ), Western & Northern boundaries of Plot No. 715 ofMouza Lohandia No. 45 and again runs along the ' Common boundary of Mouza Lohandia No. 45 and Mouza Bansdiha No. 47 as well as earlier Notification line vide Notification No. S.O. 1285 dated 30-05-2001 and the line meets on the point A4 situated on the common boundary ofMouza Lohandia No. 45 and Bansdiha No. 47 .

A4-A5 The line start from the Point A4 situated on the Common boundary of the Mouza Lohandia No. 45 and Mouza Bansdiha No. 47 and runs along the Common boundary of the Mouza Lohandia No. 45 and Mouza Bansdiha No. 47 and meets on the Point A5 situated on the tri -junction pillar of the Mouza Lohandia No. 45 Bansdiha No. 47 and Harrakha No. 50 .

A5-A6 The line starts from the point A5 situated at the tri -junction pillar of the Mouza - Lohandia No. 45 , Bansdiha No.47 and Harrakha No. 50 and runs along the Common boundary of the Mouza - Lohandia No. 45 and Harrakha No. 50 and meets on the Point A6 situated on the tri -junction pillar of the Mouza Lohandia No. 45 , Harrakha No. 50 and Ranidih No. 53 .

A6-A7 The line starts from the Point A6 situated on the tri -junction Pillar of the Mouza Lohandia No. 45, Harrakha No. 50 and Ranidiha No. 53 and runs along the common boundary of Mouza Lohandia No. 45 and Ranidiha No. 53 and meets on the point A7 situated on the tri -junction pillar of the Mouza Lohandia No. 45 , Ranidiha No. 53 and Dakaita No. 44 .

A7 - A1 The line starts from the Point A7 situated on the tri -junction pillar of the Mouza - Lohandia No. 45 , Ranidiha No. 53 and Dakaita No. 44 and runs along the common boundary of the Mouza Lohandia No. 45 and Dakaita No. 44 and crosses over the Plot No. 218 ( Road) of Mouza Lohandia No. 45 and runs along the Northern boundaries ofthe Plot Nos . 223 , 224 and again runs along the common boundary of the Mouza Lohandia No. 45 and Dakaita No. 44 and eventually meets on Point Al situated and the common point on common boundary of Mouza - Lohandia No. 45 , Dakaita No. 44 and Plot Nos . 235 and 236 of Mouza Lohandia No. 45 and the Point is also situated on the earlier notification line vide notification No. 784 dated 08-03-1995 in the Gazette of India .

Note: Mouza Lohandia Bazaar No. 46 is fully within the Mouza Lohandia No. 45.

[F. No. 43015/3 /2010 - PRIW - I ]

M. SHAHABUDEEN , Under Secy पाद

1000

भारत

आशत

24-1

जाता है,

1140 [ भाग II-खण्ड 3(ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : जुलाई 24, 2010/ श्रावण 2 , 1932

नई दिल्ली, 12 जुलाई , 2010

का.आ. 1814.-केन्द्रीय सरकार ने , पेट्रोलियम और खनिज पाइपलाइन ( भूमि में उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन ) अधिनियम , 1962 ( 1962 का 50 ) ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त अधिनियम कहा गया है ) की धारा 3 की उप- धारा ( 1 ) के अधीन जारी की गई भारत सरकार के पेट्रोलियम और प्राकृतिक गैस मंत्रालय की अधिसूचना संख्या का. आ. 514 तारीख 16-02-2010 , जो भारत के राजपत्र, तारीख 20-02-2010 में प्रकाशित की गई थी , द्वारा उस अधिसूचना से संलग्न अनुसूची में विनिर्दिष्ट भूमि में मध्यप्रदेश राज्य में बीना संस्थापन से राजस्थान राज्य में कोटा तकं पेट्रोलियम उत्पादों के परिवहन के लिए बीना- कोटा पाइपलाइन परियोजना के माध्यम से भारत पेट्रोलियम कारपोरेशन लिमिटेड द्वारा एक पाइपलाइन बिछाने के प्रयोजन के लिए उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन करने के अपने आशय की घोषणा की थी;

और उक्त राजपत्र अधिसूचना की प्रतियां जनता को तारीख 24-04-2010 को उपलब्ध करा दी गई थी ;

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

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

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

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

अनुसूची

जिला : बारां राज्य- राजस्थान तहसील : अटरू

क्षेत्रफल हेक्टेयर में

सर्वे नंबर

क्र. सं. ग्राम का नाम

4 1

0.0558

302

1. अटरू

0.0270

303

0.1350 खेडली बांसला

528

0.0216

549

0.0828

550

[फा. सं. आर-31015/3/2008- ओआर- II ]

ए. गोस्वामी , अवर सचिव 2639GI /10-3

4487 New Delhi , the 12th July, 2010

S.O. 1814.-Whereas by the notification of the Government of India, in the Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Gas . S.O. No. 514 , dated the 16-2-2010 issued under sub-section ( 1 ) of Section 3 of the Petroleum and Minerals Pipelines(Acquisition of Right of User in Land) Act , 1962 (50 of 1962) ( hereinafter referred to as the said Act) published in the Gazette of India dated the 20-2-2010 , the Central Government declared its intention to acquire the right ofuser in the land specified in the Schedule appended to that notification for the purpose of laying a pipeline for transportation of Petroleum Products through Bina - Kota PipelineProject from Bina terminal in the State ofMadhya Pradesh to Kota in the State of Rajasthan by Bharat Petroleum Corporation Limited ;

And whereas , the copies of the said Gazette Notification were made available to the public on the 24-04-2010;

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

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

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

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

SCHEDULE

Tehsil: Atru

State : Rajasthan

District: Baran

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

1. Atru

0.0558 0.0270

302 303

0.1350 2. Khedli Bansla 528

0.0216

549

0.0828

550

[F. No. R-31015 / 3/2008 - OR - II ]

A. GOSWAMI , Under Secy .

4488

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 24 , 2010/ SHRAVANA 2 , 1932

नई दिल्ली , 12 जुलाई , 2010

का.आ. 1815. केन्द्रीय सरकार ने , पेट्रोलियम और खनिज पाइपलाइन ( भूमि में उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन ) अधिनियम , 1962 ( 1962 का 50 ) ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात उक्त अधिनियम कहा गया है ) की धारा 3 की उप - धारा ( 1 ) के अधीन जारी की गई भारत सरकार के पेट्रोलियम और प्राकृतिक गैस मंत्रालय की अधिसूचना संख्या का. आ. 1886 तारीख 8-7-2009 , जो भारत के राजपत्र, तारीख 11-7-2009 , में प्रकाशित की गई थी , द्वारा उस अधिसूचना से संलग्न अनुसूची में विनिर्दिष्ट भूमि में गुजरात राज्य में वाडीनार संस्थापन से मध्यप्रदेश राज्य में बीना तक कच्चे पेट्रोलियम उत्पादों के परिवहन के लिए वाडीनार- बीना पाइपलाइन परियोजना के माध्यम से भारत ओमान रिफाइनरीज लिमिटेड द्वारा एक पाइपलाइन बिछाने के प्रयोजन के लिए उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन करने के अपने आशय की घोषणा की थी;

और उक्त राजपत्र अधिसूचना की प्रतियां जनता को तारीख 15-9-2009 , से तारीख 17-12-2009 के दौरान उपलब्ध करा दी गई थी ;

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

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

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

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

अनुसूची

तहसील : चोटीला जिला : सुरेन्द्रनगर राज्य- गुजरात क्र. सं. ग्राम का नाम

सर्वे नंबर क्षेत्रफल हेक्टेयर में 1

4 1. लाखामांची

96/5 पैकी 00.4325 2. देवलीया

33/2पैकी 00.0130

31/2पैकी 00.2370

2/2पैकी 00.1535

2/2पैकी

00.2900

71/4पैकी 00.4500

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

4 3 .

थानगढ

225/1

00.1677

321/1

00.1013

227/2पैकी 00.1731

254/2

00.3769

233/3

00.1350

322/1 पैकी 00.3900 4. रावरानी

13पैकी

00.1100 [फा. सं. आर-31015/19/2009- ओआर- II ]

ए. गोस्वामी, अवर सचिव New Delhi , the 12th July, 2010

S.O. 1815. Whereasby a notification of the Government of India, in the Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Gas . No. S. O. 1886 , dated the 8-7-2009 issued under sub -section ( 1 ) of Section 3 ofthe Petroleum and Minerals Pipelines ( Acquisition of Right ofUser in Land ) Act , 1962 (50 of 1962) ( hereinafter referred to as the said Act) published in the Gazette of India dated the 11-7-2009 , the Central Government declared its intention to acquire the right of user in the land specified in the Schedule appended to that notification for the purpose of laying pipeline for thetransportation of Crude Oil through Vadinar -Bina Crude Pipeline Project from Vadinar in the State of Gujarat to Bina inthe State of Madhya Pradesh by Bharat Oman Refineries Limited;

And whereas , the copies of the said Gazette Notification were made available to the public during 15-9-2009 to 17-12-2009 ;

And whereas , the Competent Authority has , under sub- section ( 1 ) of Section 6 of the said Act, submitted report to the Central Government .

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

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

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

SCHEDULE

Tehsil : Chotila District : Surendra Nagar State : Gujarat S. No. Name ofVillage SurveyNo. Area in Hectare 2

4 1.

Lakhamachi

96/5 P

00.4325 2.

33/2 P

00.0130 Devaliya

31/2P

00.2370

2/2 P

00.1535

4489

भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई 24, 2010/ श्रावण 2 , 1932

करती है. कि अनुसूची में विनिर्दिष्ट भूमि में पाइपलाइन बिछाने के लिए उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन किया जाता है ।

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

अनुसूची

तहसील : गोधरा

2/2 P

00.2900

71/4P

00.4500

जिला पंचमहल राज्य- गुजरात

क्षेत्रफल हेक्टेयर में

सर्वे नंबर

क्र. सं. ग्राम का नाम

00.1677 3.

225/1

Thangadh

321/1

00.1013

227/2 P

00.1731

254/2

00.3769

00.1350

233/3

322/1 P

00.3900

4 1

भीमा

1/52

00.8695 1.

2. गवाची

1/78

00.0960 3. अंबाली

Raorani

13 P

00.1100

[F. No. R-31015/ 19/2009 -OR- II]

A. GOSWAMI , Under Secy .

नई दिल्ली, 12 जुलाई , 2010

का.आ. 1816.-केन्द्रीय सरकार ने , पेट्रोलियम और खनिज पाइपलाइन ( भूमि में उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन ) अधिनियम, 1962 ( 1962 का 50 ) ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात उक्त अधिनियम कहा गया है ) की धारा 3 की उप - धारा ( 1 ) के अधीन जारी की गई भारत सरकार के पेट्रोलियम और प्राकृतिक गैस मंत्रालय की अधिसूचना संख्या का. आ. 2169 तारीख 12-8-2009 , जो भारत के राजपत्र , तारीख 15-8-2009 , में प्रकाशित की गई थी , द्वारा उस अधिसूचना से संलग्न अनुसूची में विनिर्दिष्ट भूमि में गुजरात राज्य में वाडीनार संस्थापन से मध्यप्रदेश राज्य में बीना तक कच्चे पेट्रोलियम उत्पादों के परिवहन के लिए वाडीनार - बीना पाइपलाइन परियोजना के माध्यम से भारत ओमान रिफाइनरीज लिमिटेड द्वारा एक पाइपलाइन बिछाने के प्रयोजन के लिए उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन करने के अपने आशय की घोषणा की थी;

और उक्त राजपत्र अधिसूचना की प्रतियां जनता को तारीख 9-10-2009 , से 15-10-2009 के दौरान उपलब्ध करा दी गई थी ;

अतः , अब , केन्द्रीय सरकार उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 6 की उप- धारा ( 1 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए यह घोषणा

00.0175

00.1407

233 ए/4 233 ए/ 5

72/1

00.1012 भामैया

324

00.3300 5. गोधरा

674

00.1152

00.3642

996

1070

00.2910

188/पैकी 2

6. गोविंदी

00.3300

00.1950

188 पैकी

171/पैकी 1 00.1200

00.2250

176

जाफराबाद

269पैकी 00.4500

304

00.2000

269पैकी 00.0500

269पैकी 3 00.0200

16/2

00.0200 8. गढ़

केवडीया

113/पैकी

00.0471 10. ओरवाडा

377

00.0696

427/बी

11. सालीया

00.1500

140/2

00.0500 [फा. सं. आर-31015/ 29/2009- ओआर- II ]

ए. गोस्वामी , अवर सचिव New Delhi , the 12th July , 2010

S.O. 1816.- Whereas by a notification of the Government of India, in the Ministry of Petroleum and 4490

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 24, 2010/ SHRAVANA 2 , 1932

Natural Gas No. S. O. 2169 , dated the 12-08-2009 issued under sub - section ( 1 ) of Section 3 of the Petroleum and Minerals Pipelines (Acquisition of Right of User in Land) Act, 1962 (50 of 1962 ) ( hereinafter referred to as the said Act) published in the Gazette of India dated the 15-08-2009 , the Central Government declared its intention to acquire the right of user in the land specified in the Schedule appended to that notification for the purpose of laying pipeline for transportation of Crude Oil through Vadinar-Bina Crude Pipeline Project from Vadinar in the State ofGujarat to Bina in the State of Madhya Pradesh by Bharat Oman Refineries Limited;

And whereas , the copies of the said Gazette Notification were made available to the public during 09-10-2009 to 15-10-2009 ;

And whereas , the Competent Authority has, under sub -section ( 1) of Section 6 the said Act , submitted report to the Central Government .

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

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

SCHEDULE

Tehsil: Godhra District : Panchmahal State : Gujarat S. No. Name of Village Survey No. Area in Hectare 1

4. 1. Bhima

1/52

00.8695 2. Gavachi

1/78

00.0960 3. Ambali

00.0175

233/A/4 233 /A/5

00.1407 4. Bhamiya

72/1 324

00.1012 00.3300 5. Godhra

674

00.1152

996

00.3642

1070

00.2910

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

4 6. Govindi

188/P/2

00.3300

188/P

00.1950

171/P/ 1

00.1200

176

00.2250 7. Jafrabad

269/P

00.4500

304

00.2000

269/P

00.0500

269/P/3

00.0200 8. Gadh

16/2

00.0200 9.

113/P

00.0471 Kevadiya

10. Orvada

377

00.0696 11 .

00.1500 Saliya

427/B 140/2

00.0500

[F. No. R-31015/29/ 2009 -OR- II ] A. GOSWAMI , Under Secy.

नई दिल्ली, 12 जुलाई , 2010

का.आ. 1817.-केन्द्रीय सरकार ने , पेट्रोलियम और खनिज पाइपलाइन ( भूमि में उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन ) अधिनियम , 1962 ( 1962 का 50 ) ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात उक्त अधिनियम कहा गया है ) की धारा 3 की उप - धारा ( 1 ) के अधीन जारी की गई भारत सरकार के पेट्रोलियम और प्राकृतिक गैस मंत्रालय की अधिसूचना संख्या का. आ. 2487 तारीख 09-09-2009 , जो भारत के राजपत्र , तारीख 12-09-2009, में प्रकाशित की गई थी , द्वारा उस अधिसूचना से संलग्न अनुसूची में विनिर्दिष्ट भूमि में गुजरात राज्य में वाडीनार संस्थापन से मध्य प्रदेश राज्य में बीना तक कच्चे पेट्रोलियम उत्पादों के परिवहन के लिए वाडीनार - बीना पाइपलाइन परियोजना के माध्यम से भारत ओमान रिफाइनरीज लिमिटेड द्वारा एक पाइपलाइन बिछाने के प्रयोजन के लिए उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन के अपने आशय की घोषणा की थी;

और उक्त राजपत्र अधिसूचना की प्रतियां जनता को तारीख 16-11-2009, से 25-11-2009 के दौरान उपलब्ध करा दी गई थी ; और सक्षम प्राधिकारी ने उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 6 की उप - धारा ( 1 ) के अधीन केन्द्रीय सरकार को अपनी रिपोर्ट दे दी है;

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

अतः , अब , केन्द्रीय सरकार उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 6 की उप-धारा ( 1 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए यह घोषणा करती है कि अनुसूची में विनिर्दिष्ट भूमि में पाइपलाइन बिछाने के लिए उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन किया, जाता है । 4491 भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई 24 , 2010/श्रावण 2 , 1932

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii ) ]

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

अनुसूची

राज्य- गुजरात

जिला जामनगर

तहसील : लालपुर

क्षेत्रफल हेक्टेयर में

सर्वे नंबर

क्र. सं. गांव का नाम

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

1 2

SCHEDULE

00.0463

137/2

सींगच

1 .

Tehsil: Lalpur District : Jamnagar State: Gujarat

00.0755

137/3

00.3600

Area in Hectare

Survey No.

Name ofVillage

283पैकी

S. No.

00.0225

502पैकी 1

जांखर

00.2242

146

00.0463

137/2

1. Singach

00.1631

145

00.0755

137/3

00.3600

00.4950

283 Paiki

77/1 पैकी

00.0225

502 Paiki 1

2. Jankhar

[फा. सं. आर-31015 /30/2009- ओआर- II ]

00.2242

00.1631

146 145

ए. गोस्वामी , अवर सचिव

00.4950

77/1 Paiki

[F. No. R-31015/30 /2009 -OR - II ] New Delhi , the 12th July, 2010

A. GOSWAMI , Under Secy .

नई दिल्ली , 13 जुलाई , 2010

S.O. 1817. Whereas by a notification of the Government of India, in the Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Gas . No. S. O. 2487 , dated the 9-9-2009 issued under sub - section ( 1 ) of Section 3 of the Petroleum and Minerals Pipelines (Acquisition of Right of User in Land) Act , 1962 (50 of 1962 ) (hereinafter referred to as the said Act ) published in the Gazette of India dated the 12-09-2009 , the Central Government declared its intention to acquire the right of user in the land specified in the Schedule appended to that notification for the purpose of laying pipeline for transportation of Crude Oil through Vadinar-Bina Crude Pipeline Project from Vadinar in the State ofGujarat to Bina in the State of Madhya Pradesh by Bharat Oman Refineries Limited;

And whereas , the copies of the said Gazette Notification were made available to the public during 16-11-2009 to 25-11-2009;

का.आ. 1818.-केन्द्रीय सरकार ने , पेट्रोलियम और खनिज पाइपलाइन ( भूमि में उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन ) अधिनियम, 1962 ( 1962 का 50 ) ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात उक्त अधिनियम कहा गया है ) की धारा 3 की उप- धारा ( 1 ) के अधीन जारी की गई भारत सरकार के पेट्रोलियम और प्राकृतिक गैस मंत्रालय की अधिसूचना संख्या का. आ. 2486 तारीख 09-09-2009, जो भारत के राजपत्र , तारीख 12-09-2009 , में प्रकाशित की गई थी , द्वारा उस अधिसूचना से संलग्न अनुसूची में विनिर्दिष्ट भूमि में गुजरात राज्य में वाडीनार संस्थापन से मध्यप्रदेश राज्य में बीना तक कच्चे पेट्रोलियम उत्पादों के परिवहन के लिए वाडीनार- बीना पाइपलाइन परियोजना के माध्यम से भारत ओमान रिफाइनरीज लिमिटेड द्वारा एक पाइपलाइन बिछाने के प्रयोजन के लिए उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन करने के अपने आशय की घोषणा की थी ;

और उक्त राजपत्र अधिसूचना की प्रतियां जनता को तारीख 16-11-2009, से 15-12-2009 के दौरान उपलब्ध करा दी गई थी ;

And whereas , the Competent Authority has , under sub-section ( 1 ) of Section 6 the said Act, submitted report to the Central Government .

और सक्षम प्राधिकारी ने उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 6 की उप- धारा ( 1 ) के अधीन केन्द्रीय सरकार को अपनी रिपोर्ट दे दी है:

4492

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: JULY 24, 2010/ SHRAVANA 2, 1932

[PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii)]

1 2

लालपर

56/पैकी

00.0342

8. केराला

00.0636 और केन्द्रीय सरकार ने , उक्त रिपोर्ट पर विचार करने के पश्चात् और यह समाधान हो जाने पर कि उक्त भूमि पाइपलाइन बिछाने के लिये अपेक्षित है , उसमें उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन करने का विनिश्चय किया है;

90/2 108/3

00.0822

9. रसीकगढ

00.1934

123/1 122/4

00.0914

10. पाज

00.0527 अतः , अब , केन्द्रीय सरकार उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 6 की उप - धारा ( 1 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए यह घोषणा करती है कि अनुसूची में विनिर्दिष्ट भूमि में पाइपलाइन बिछाने के लिए उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन किया जाता है ।

00.0117

34 83/पैकी 33/2पैकी

00.0300

11. दलडी

283/1पैकी 00.2055

[फा. सं. आर-31015/36/2009- ओआर- II ]

ए. गोस्वामी , अवर सचिव और केन्द्रीय सरकार उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 6 की उप - धारा ( 4 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए यह निर्देश देती है कि उक्त भूमि में उपयोग का अधिकार इस घोषणा के प्रकाशन की तारीख को केन्द्रीय सरकार में निहित होने के बजाए, सभी विल्लंगमों से मुक्त , भारत ओमान रिफाइनरीज लिमिटेड में निहित होगा ।

New Delhi , the 13th July, 2010 अनुसूची

तहसील : वांकानेर जिला राजकोट

राज्य- गुजरात

क्र. सं. ग्राम का नाम

सर्वे नंबर क्षेत्रफल हेक्टेयर में

1 . कोटडा नायाणी 541/1

00.2385

674/9

00.3125

674/10

00.2950

674/5

00.2200

674/20

00.1250

S.O. 1818.- Whereas by a notification of the Government of India , in the Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Gas . No. S. O. 2486 , dated the 09-09-2009 issued under sub - section ( 1 ) of Section 3 of the Petroleum and Minerals Pipelines ( Acquisition of Right of User in Land) Act , 1962 (50 of 1962 ) ( hereinafter referred to as the said Act) published in the Gazette of India dated the 12-09-2009 , the Central Government declared its intention to acquire the right of user in the land specified in the Schedule appended to that notification for the purpose of laying pipeline for transportation of Crude Oil through Vadinar-Bina Crude Pipeline Project from Vadinar in the State ofGujarat to Bina in the State of Madhya Pradesh by BharatOman Refineries Limited ;

2. पीपलीयाराज

00.1472

60/2 717/1 पैकी 00.2400

733/12

00.6060

And whereas , the copies of the said Gazette Notification were made available to the public during 16-11-2009 to 15-12-2009 ;

प्रतापगढ़

00.2000

76/3 80/2पैकी 00.3050

And whereas , the Competent Authority has , under sub- section ( 1 ) of Section 6 the said Act , submitted report to the Central Government .

4. सींधावदर

73/1

00.1041

73/2

00.0308

77/1/पैकी 00.0135

615/पैकी 00.1136

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

615/पैकी

00.1155

676

00.2010

4/2पैकी

00.2100

5. भोजपरा

36/2

00.3617

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

राजावडला

249/1

00.0177

251/4

00.1132

80/1

00.1713

77/2पैकी 00.0930

And further , in exercise of the powers conferred by sub- section (4) of Section 6 of the said Act , the Central Government hereby directs that the right of user in the said land for laying the pipeline shall , instead of vesting in the Central Government , vest on the date of the publication of 4493 भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई 24 , 2010/श्रावण 2, 1932

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

this declaration , in Bharat Oman Refineries Limited, free from all encumbrance .

SCHEDULE

District : Rajkot State : Gujarat

Tehsil : Wankaner

Survey No.

Name ofVillage

Area in Hectare

S. No.

00.2385

541/1

1. Kotda Nayani

भारत सरकार के पेट्रोलियम और प्राकृतिक गैस मंत्रालय की अधिसूचना संख्या का. आ. 2171 तारीख 13-08-2009 , जो भारत के राजपत्र , तारीख 15-08-2009 , में प्रकाशित की गई थी , द्वारा उस अधिसूचना से संलग्न अनुसूची में विनिर्दिष्ट भूमि में गुजरात राज्य में वाडीनार संस्थापन से मध्यप्रदेश राज्य में बीना तक कच्चे पेट्रोलियम उत्पादों के परिवहन के लिए वाडीनार - बीना पाइपलाइन परियोजना के माध्यम से भारत ओमान रिफाइनरीज लिमिटेड द्वारा एक पाइपलाइन बिछाने के प्रयोजन के लिए उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन करने के अपने आशय की घोषणा की थी;

00.3125

674/9

00.2950

674/10

00.2200

674/5

00.1250

674/20

00.1472

60/2

और उक्त राजपत्र अधिसूचना की प्रतियां जनता को तारीख 09-10-2009 , से 14-12-2009 के दौरान उपलब्ध करा दी गई थी; और सक्षम प्राधिकारी ने उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 6 की उप- धारा ( 1 ) के अधीन केन्द्रीय सरकार को अपनी रिपोर्ट दे दी है;

Pipaliyaraj

00.2400

717/1 Paiki

00.6060

733/12

00.2000

3. Pratapgadh

00.3050

76/3 80/2Paiki

00.1041

73/1

Sindhavadar

00.0308

73/2

00.0135

77/1 Paiki

00.1136

615/Paiki

00.1155

615/Paiki

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

00.2010

676

00.2100

4/2Paiki

00.3617

36/2

5. Bhojpara

00.0177

249/1

6. Rajavada

00.1132

251/4

और केन्द्रीय सरकार उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 6 की उप- धारा ( 4 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए यह निर्देश देती है कि उक्त भूमि में उपयोग का अधिकार इस घोषणा के प्रकाशन की तारीख को केन्द्रीय सरकार में निहित होने के बजाए , सभी विल्लंगमों से मुक्त, भारत ओमान रिफाइनरीज लिमिटेड में निहित होगा । 80/1

00.1713

00.0930

77/2 Paiki

अनुसूची

00.0342

56/Paiki

जिला : वडोदरा

तहसील : सावली

राज्य- गुजरात 7. Lalpar

00.0636

8. Kerala

क्षेत्रफल हेक्टेयर में

सर्वे नंबर

क्र. सं. गांव का नाम

00.0822

90/2 108/3

00.1934

9. Rasikgadh

00.0568

134/1

00.0914

123/1 122/4

वरसडा

00.0822

105/63ए

00.0527

10. Paj

00.0267

105/63बी

00.0117

83/Paiki

00.0300

33/2Paiki

00.0175

173

2 जांबुगोरल

00.2055

283/1 Paiki

11. Daldi

[फा. सं. आर-31015/ 22/2009- ओआर- II ] [F. No. R- 31015/36/2009 -OR- II ]

ए. गोस्वामी , अवर सचिव

New Delhi , the 14th July, 2010 A. GOSWAMI , Under Secy .

नई दिल्ली , 14 जुलाई , 2010

S.O. 1819. Whereas by the notification of the Government of India , in the Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Gas. No. S. O. 2171 , dated the 13-08-2009 issued under sub- section ( 1 ) of Section 3 of the Petroleum and Minerals Pipelines (Acquisition of Right of User in Land ) Act, 1962 (50 of 1962) (hereinafter referred to as the said Act) published in the Gazette of India dated the का.आ. 1819.-केन्द्रीय सरकार ने , पेट्रोलियम और खनिज पाइपलाइन ( भूमि में उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन ) अधिनियम, 1962 ( 1962 का 50 ) ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात उक्त अधिनियम कहा गया है ) की धारा 3 की उप - धारा ( 1 ) के अधीन जारी के गई 4494

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 24 , 2010/SHRAVANA 2 , 1932

15-08-2009 , the Central Government declared its intention to acquire the right of user in the land specified in the Schedule appended to that notification for the purpose of laying pipeline for transportation of Crude Oil through Vadinar-Bina Crude Pipeline Project from Vadinar in the State ofGujarat to Bina in the State of Madhya Pradesh by Bharat Oman Refineries Limited ;

And whereas , the copies of the said Gazette Notification were made available to the public during 09-10-2009 to 14-12-2009 ;

And whereas , the Competent Authority has , under sub-section ( 1 ) of Section 6 the said Act, submitted report to the Central Government .

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

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

SCHEDULE

Tehsil : Savli

State: Gujarat District: Vadodara

S. No. Name ofVillage Survey No. Area in Hectare 1 2

4 1. Varsada

134/1

00.0568

105/63A

00.0822

00.0267

105/63B

173

00.0175 Jambugoral

[F. No. R-31015/22/2009 -OR- II ]

A. GOSWAMI , Under Secy .

नई दिल्ली , 14 जुलाई , 2010

का.आ. 1820.-केन्द्रीय सरकार ने पेट्रोलियम और खनिज पाइपलाइन ( भूमि में उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन ) अधिनियम , 1962 ( 1962 का 50 ) ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त अधिनियम कहा गया है ) की धारा 3 की उप- धारा ( 1 ) के अधीन जारी की गई भारत सरकार के पेट्रोलियम और प्राकृतिक गैस मंत्रालय की अधिसूचना संख्या का. आ. 2167 तारीख 12-08-2009 , जो भारत के राजपत्र

[ PART Ii-Sec . 3 ( ii ) ] तारीख 15-08-2009 , में प्रकाशित की गई थी, द्वारा उस अधिसूचना से संलग्न अनुसूची में विनिर्दिष्ट भूमि में गुजरात राज्य में वाडीनार संस्थापन से मध्य प्रदेश राज्य में बीना तक कच्चे पेट्रोलियम उत्पादों के परिवहन के लिए वाडीनार- बीना पाइपलाइन परियोजना के माध्यम से भारत ओमान रिफाइनरीज लिमिटेड द्वारा एक पाइपलाइन बिछाने के प्रयोजन के लिए उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन करने के अपने आशय की घोषणा की थी;

और उक्त राजपत्र अधिसूचना की प्रतियां जनता को तारीख 08-10-2009 , के दौरान उपलब्ध करा दी गई थी ;

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

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

अनुसूची

जिला : दाहोद

तहसील: लीमखेड़ा

राज्य : गुजरात क्र. सं. गांव का नाम

सर्वे नंबर क्षेत्रफल हेक्टेयर में 1

1 .

परपाटा

44/8

00.1458 2. मानली

418

00.0343 3. अगारा

177/2

00.02400 4.

46/2पैकी 00.0540 प्रतापपुरा

9/पैकी 2

00.2355

46/पैकी 21 00.3510 5.

पटवान

00.1520

7/3 67

00.3778 6. टींबा

7/पैकी 3

00.5000

7/पैकी 14 00.2160

13/7

00.2560

7/पैकी

00.0900 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3( ii) ]

4495 भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई 24, 2010/ श्रावण 2 , 1932

7/4/पैकी 00.2850

7/पैकी

00.3200

7/पैकी

00.3000

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

7/7/पैकी

00.3060

7/पैकी

00.4150

7/4

00.3600

7/6/पैकी

00.3750

7/पैकी

00.6150

7/20पैकी 00.4200

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

7/पैकी

00.2850

SCHEDULE

7/पैकी

00.2400

Tehsil: Limkheda District : Dahod State : Gujarat 7/पैकी

00.2100

7/पैकी

00.2100

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

00.1000

7/पेकी

7. वीसलंगा

00.2000

44/8

00.1458

Parpata

82/13

00.5000

2. Manli

418

00.0343 8. जाडाखेरीया

92/पैकी

00.7800

177/2

00.0240

Agara

92/22/पैकी 1 00.3300

46/2Paiki 00.0540

Pratappura

9/Paiki 2

00.2355 [फा. सं. आर-31015/26/2009- ओ आर- II ]

46/Paiki 21 00.3510 ए. गोस्वामी , अवर सचिव

7/3

5. Patwan

00.1520

00.3778 New Delhi , the 14th July , 2010

7/Paiki 3

6. Timba

00.5000

7/Paiki 14 00.2100

13/7

00.2560

7/Paiki

00.0900

7/4/Paiki

00.2850

7/Paiki

00.3200

7/Paiki

00.3000

7/7/ Paiki

00.3060

7/Paiki

00.4150

7/4

00.3600

7/6/Paiki

00.3750

7/Paiki

00.6150

00.4200

7/20Paiki

7/Paiki

00.2850 S.O. 1820.- Whereas by a notification of the Government of India , in the Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Gas . No. S. O. 2167, dated the 12-08-2009 issued under sub - section ( 1 ) of Section 3 of the Petroleum and Minerals Pipelines (Acquisition of Right of User in Land) Act, 1962 (50 of 1962 ) , ( hereinafter referred to as the said Act), published in the Gazette of India dated the 15-8-2009 the Central Government declared its intention to acquire the right of user in the land , specified in the Schedule appended to that notification for the purpose of laying pipeline for the transportation of Crude Oil through Vadinar- Bina Crude Pipeline Project from Vadinar in the State of Gujarat to Bina in the State of Madhya Pradesh by Bharat Oman Refineries Limited ;

7/Paiki

00.2400

7/Paiki

00.2100

7/Paiki

00.2100 And whereas the copies of the said Gazette Notification were made available to the public during 08-10-2009;

7/Paiki

00.1000

00.2000

Vislanga

82/13

00.5000 And whereas, the Competent Authority has , under sub-section ( 1) of Section 6 the said Act, submitted report to the Central Government .

00.7800

92/Paiki

Jadakheriya

92/22/Paiki / 1 00.3300

[F. No. R-31015 /26/2009 -OR - II ] And whereas the Central Government , after considering the said report and on being satisfied that the said land is required for laying the pipeline , has decided to accquire the right of user therein ;

A. GOSWAMI , Under Secy .

2639GI /10-4 [PART II-SEC. 3 ( ii) ] 4496

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 24 , 2010 /SHRAVANA 2 , 1932

नई दिल्ली , 15 जुलाई , 2010

00 01 20

2279

सम्बलपुर टाउन ,

07 48

2281

यूनिट-1 , भतरा

00 02

2284

2285

00 01

00 01 69

2271

का.आ. 1821.-केन्द्रीय सरकार को लोकहित में यह आवश्यक प्रतीत होता है कि पारादीप ( उड़ीसा ) से रायपुर ( छत्तीसगढ़ ) एवं राँची ( झारखण्ड ) तक पेट्रोलियम उत्पादों के रिवहन के लिये इंडियन ऑयल कॉर्पोरेशन लिमिटेड ह " वरीय - सम्बलपुर रायपुर- राँचीं पाइपलाइन" बिछाई जानी चाहिये ,

2275

2274

2273

2272

2265

00 00 और कंन्द्रीय सरकार को उक्त पाइपलाइन बिछाने के प्रयोजन के लिए यह आवश्यक प्रतीत होता है कि ऐसी भूमि , जिसके नीचे पाइपलाइन बिछाई जाने का प्रस्ताव है और जो इस अधिसूचना से उपाबद्ध अनुसूची में वर्णित है, में उपयाय के अधिकार का अर्जन किया जाए;

2266

00 08

2267.

2240

04 63

2249

2242

00 00 अतः अब , केन्द्रीय सरकार , पेट्रोलियम और खनिज पाइपलाइन ( भूमि में उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन ) अधिनियम, 1962 (1962 का 50 ) की धारा 3 की उपधारा ( 1 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए , उनमें उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन करने के अपने आशय की घोषण करती है ;

00 02

2243

00 01

2246

2247

2244

00 ΟΙ

2245

2254

00 02

00 03 96

2253

04 41

2354

सम्बलपुर टाउन , यूनिट-2 , धनुपालि

2590

00 00 15 कोई व्यक्ति, जो उक्त अनुसूची में वर्णित भूमि में हितबद्ध है , उस तारीख से जिसको भारत के राजपत्र में यथा प्रकाशित इस अधिसूचना की प्रतियां साधारण जनता को उपलब्ध करा दी जाती हैं, इक्कीस दिन के भीतर , उसमें उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन करने या भूमि के नीचे पाइपलाइन बिछाए जाने के संबंध में श्री सुकांत कुमार प्रधान , सक्षम प्राधिकारी , इंडियन ऑयल कॉर्पोरेशन लिमिटेड, पारादीप-सम्बलपुर- रायपुर राँची पाइपलाइन परियोजना,. 1295 , फॉरेस्ट पार्क, भुवनेश्वर-751009 ( उड़ीसा ) को लिखित रूप में आक्षेप भेज सकेगा ।

2351

00 03 63 अनुसूची

00 01

2352

जिला- सम्बलपुर

राज्य-उड़ीसा

21 तहसील -सम्बलपुर

2350

00 01

2349

00 00 40 गांव का नाम

प्लाट नं.

क्षेत्रफल

00 20

2344

हेक्टयर एयर वर्ग मीटर

00 25

2345

2346

00 80 2340

सम्बलपुर टाउन ,

00 01 72

2347

2425

यूनिट । , भतरा

00 02 67

2348

2426

00 01

2365

00 66

2312

00 01

2366

00 00 21 2424

00 02 56

2370

00 05 59

2314

2338

2315

00 04 88

2694

2432

00 06 57

2369

00 10 2316

00 01 34

2373

2317

00 02 58

2374

2496

00 01

00 ΟΙ 20 2307

2384

00 01

01 2306

2375

00 08

2303

2383

60 2301

2381

03 47

2280

2380

00 01 40 2304

2382

00 40 भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई 24, 2010/श्रावण 2 , 1932

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

00 01 23

झरापालि 2376

2377

सम्बलपुर टाउन , यूनिट-2, धनुपालि

04 09

2379

00 00 10

2388

00 01

2378

2198

00 01

2197

04 80

2191

00 02

2192

2193

2632

54 21

महानदी' ख'

चौंरपुर

00 40

00 06

289

झरापालि

290

00 04

288

291

00 01

377

244

285

00 38

468

00 12 66

286

246

00 08

247

00 02

00 81

357

बडसिंहारि

239

233

10 36

234

232

00 00

231

235

00 04

00 02 32

00 08

19 36

00 05 20

391

4497

00 00 10 392

00 06 18 84

00 00

16 50 97

00 10

424

10 123

00 00

367

00 27

121

00 00 81 349

00 65

450

39 117

00 28

22 33 99

14 80

103

12 33

2337

2336

00 10

ΟΙ

89 2338

00 07

2332

2339

00 60 44 2349

00 03 92 2348

06 59

2346

2347

2345

00 10

2542

54 98 2523

00 02

2585

00 03 20 2524

2602

04 78

2525

00 02

2526

00 10

2527

41 2529

331

00 02

357

02 16

717

716

610

05 09

611

00 02

612

582

00 04

622

04 18

577

00 04

578

06 61

378

377

02 57

621

00 03

376 4498

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 24, 2010/ SHRAVANA 2 , 1932

1 बडसिंहारि

564

14 49

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

5 80

बडसिंहारि

387

00 01 90

529

25 22

528

00 07 56

533

00 94

514

515

00 00

655

10 91

683

00 04 50

715

00 01 42

बसन्तपुर 511

00 01 48

674

00 01 73

673

05 54

502

00 14 36

491

00 88

490

08 08

487

00 04 43

488

00 04 01

489

00 01 07

486

485

591

00 16 24

483

00 05 76

679

472

06 26

474

04 33

473

00 02 83

428

00 02 56

427

00 08 68

418

00 09 82

419

00 08 72

420

03 24

421

00 11

422

00 02 32

00 07 49

114

10 59

113

112

00 11 46

111

00 00

110

00 02

119

109

00 14 41

108

107

00 03 48 84

00 09 22 83

00 10 75 82

728

00 00 75 729

00 00 90 56

00 00 97 33

00 04 26 30

46 55

40 469

00 84 75 384

53 36 468

00 38 49

25 382

00 32

97 06 15

00 07 21 22

00 95

489

00 00 10 490

00 07 93 161

06 157

10 630

71 488

156

00 02 38 487

154

00 00 10 153

165

09 166

00 01 36 167

00 05 29 628

02 29 148

10 147

04 39 146

00 02 80 145

56 650

00 38 144

06 34 143

05 49

142

03 81 188

17 133

16 55 485

00 01 83 125

00 08 27 123

00 01 01 194

00 00 30

124

03 01 121

00 57 भारत का राजपाई 24, 2010/श्रावण 2 , 1932

[भाग-H- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

(4)

(2)

(5)

(3)

(1)

00 04 71

119

बसन्तपुर

118

117

00 21

484

206

207

00 01 67

113

00 10

112

00 02

00 13 38

00 01

01 22

5377

कलामाटी

19 27

5366

08 18 29

5368

5365

00 11 51

5363

00 06

5369

5370

02 46

5371

5372

00 03

00 04 02

5373

5345

00 01

00 51 98

5344

5346

5347

00 01 14

5342

5343

00 00

5338

14 56

5434

00 02 08

2344

04 91

2343

2342

00 25 47

00 02 17

2341

2340

2339

00 03

5629

03 32

2332

2333

00 07 33

2331

00 03 85

2330

10 ΟΙ

2270

2117

03 98

4499 (2)

(3) (4) (5)

कलामाटी

5684

00 06 70

00 00 62 2177

2185

02 56

00 12 92 2184

00 02

2182

64 2183

00 06 86 2196

00 17 99 2196

2160

00 02

2204

17 05 2203

2225

2221

00 05 34

62 2218

2219

00 10

00 04 75 2220

2217

2216

00 10

10 2224

[सं. आर-25011/14/2010- ओ. आर. - 1 ]

बी. के. दाता , अकर सचित्र New Delhi , the 15th July, 2010

S.O 1821. Whereas , it appears to the Central Government that it is necessary in the public interest that for the transportation of petroleum products from Paradip (Orissa) to Raipur ( Chhattisgarh ) & Ranchi ( Jharkhand), a "Paradip-Sambalpur-Raipur- Ranchi Pipeline " should be laidby Indian Oil Corporation Limited;

And whereas , it appears to the Central Government that for the purpose of laying the said pipeline , it is necessary to acquire the right of user in the land described in the schedule annexed to this notification ;

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

Any person interested in the land described in the said schedule may , within twenty - one days from the date on which the copies of this notification , as published in theGazette of India, are made available to the General Public, object in writing to the acquisition of the right of user therein for laying of the pipeline under the land to Sri Sukanta Kumar Pradhan , Competent Authority , Indian OilCorporation Limited , Paradip - Sambalpur-Raipur- Ranchi Pipeline Project, 1295 , Forest Park , Bhubaneswar- 751009 , (Orissa) .

4500

[ PART II- SEC. 3 ( ii) ] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 24 , 2010/ SHRAVANA 2 , 1932

SCHEDULE

(2)

(1)

(5)

(3) (4) Tehsil: Sambalpur District:Sambalpur State : Orissa

2353

00 03 %

Sambalpur Town,

Name ofthe

PlotNo.

Area

00 04 41

2354

Unit-2,

Hectare Are Sq . Mtr .

Village

2590

00 00 15

Dhanupali

(2)

(3) (4) (5)

(1)

2351

00 03 63 00 00 40

2340

2352

00 01 62 00

2425

01 70

Sambalpur Town, Unit- 1 , Bhatra

2350

00 01 21 2426

00 01

2349

00 00 40

2312

00 01

2344

00 20

2424

2345

00 25 2314

00 04 31

2346

00 80 00

2315

2347

00 01

06 57

2432

2348

00 02 67 00 01 34

2316

2365

00 00

2317

2366

00 21

2496

00 01

2370

00 05 59

2307

2338

10 2306

00 01

2694

04 88 00 08

2303

00 00

2369

10 00 00 10

2301

2373

00 01 21

2280

00 03

2374

02 2304

00 00 94

2384

01 20 2279

00 01 20

2375

00 01 82

2281

2383

00 01 60 2284

00 02 45

2381

00 00 38 00

2285

2380

00 01 40 2271

00 01 69

2382

00 40 2275

2376

00 어

01 23 2274

00 02 56

2377

00 00 35 2273

2379

04 09 00 00

2272

2388

00 00 10

2265

2378

76 2266

00 08 16

2198

00 06 55 2267

2197

06 2240

00 04 63

2191

80 2249

00 09 20

2192

00 02 65 2242

00 00 34

2193

50 2243

00 02 00

2632

54 2246

00 01 99

Mahanadhi

2247

00 00

' KHA'

72 71

00 01

2244

33 56 00

2245

01 81

40 66

2254

00 02 %

44 14 42 48 4501

60 10

16 33

44 92

17 98

(5)

2737

0616

14 25

0435

05 0235

0418

0459

0379

0041

02 00

0497

01 07

00 0010

00 00

00 ৪৪

009019

00 00

000487

000257

0002

001084

000216

00 00

5400

0060

0003

0012

(3)(4)

674

673

715

655

515 683

387

529

528 514

564

511

533

622

376

577

578

612

378 621

377

582

611

717

357 716

610

331

2525 2529

2526

2585

2524

2602 2527

2542

2348

2346 2345 2523

2347

2339

2336

2338 2349

2332

2337

(2)

Badsinghari

Chaunrpur

(1)

77 10

06 05

85 66 21

39 333 80

00 28

00 16

2781 81 65 8866

1936

09 00

0010

0618

01.10

00 12 0434

1036

2032

0038

06 1025

0014

भारतकाराजपत्र:जुलाई24,2010/श्रावण2,1932

000520

000832

000232

00 00

00 000450

000081

000448

005168

001266

000043

00 00 00

(3)(4)(5)

57 84

64 62

103

117

450

349

424 367 121

123

392

391

235

234

232

239

231

357 233

468

286

246

247

244

285

288

290

377

289

291

25 . 92 97

(2)

Jharapali

[भागII-खण्ड3(ii)]

(1) 4502

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: JULY 24 , 2010/ SHRAVANA 2, 1932

502

00 14 36

491

00 00 88

490

00 08 08

487

04 43

488

04 01

489

00 01 07

486

485

00 02 16

591

00 16 24

483

679

472

00 06 26

474

00 04 33

473

00 02 83

428

00 02

427

418

00 09 82

419

08 72

420

421

422

00 07 49

114

113

10 10

112

00 11 46

111

00 00 10

110

00 02

119

02 40

109

14 41

108

00 01 64

107

09 22

10 75

37 38

728

00 75

729

00 97

01 41 40

469

75 Basantpur

384

00 53 36

468

38 49

382

00 32 25

00 97

07 21

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

5 22

00 15 04 27

00 00 95 28

00 16 44

489

00 10 490

00 07 93 161

00 06 06 157

00 00 10 630

00 16 71 488

00 00 14 156

02 38 487

17 154

00 00 10 153

00 03 21 165

00 01

09 166

00 01

36 167

00 05 29 628

00 02 29 148

00 01

10 147

00 04 39 146

00 02 80 145

00 06 56 650

00 00 38 144

00 06 34 143

142

00 03 81 188

00 00

17 133

00 16 55 485

83 125

00 08 27 123

00 01 01 194

00 00 30 124

00 03 01 121

00 00 57 119

00 04 71 118

00 05 25 117

00 09 06 484

00 21 206

207

00 07 73 113

00 01

67 112

00 10 76 92

01 05 91

00 00 98 90

00 02 01 89

00 13 38 88

ΟΙ

72 87

00 10 92 86

46 4503 भारत का राजपत्र : जुलाई 24, 2010/ श्रावण 2 , 1932

नई दिल्ली , 15 जुलाई , 2010

01 22

5.377

19 21

306

536

का.आ. 1822. केन्द्रीय सरकार को लोकहित में यह आवश्यक प्रतीत होता है कि पारादीप ( उड़ीसा ) से रायपुर ( छत्तीसगढ़ ) एवं राँची ( झारखण्ड ) तक पेट्रोलियम उत्पादों के परिवहन के लिये इंडियन ऑयल कॉर्पोरेशन लिमिटेड द्वारा " पारादीप- सम्बलपुर-रायपुर- राँची पाइपलाइन " बिछाई जानी चाहिये;

び

5373

(1)

और केन्द्रीय सरकार को उक्त पाइपलाइन बिछाने के प्रयोजन के लिए यह आवश्यक प्रतीत होता है कि ऐसी भूमि , जिसके नीचे पाइपलाइन बिछाई जाने का प्रस्ताव है और जो इस अधिसूचना से उपाबद्ध अनुसूची में वर्णित है, में उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन किया जाए;

5345

5344

00 03

5346

100

02 72

5347

-76

5343

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

$338

ان

2341

2342

2341

3340

2319

कोई व्यक्ति, जो उक्त अनुसूची में वर्णित भूमि में हितबद्ध है, उस तारीख से जिसको भारत के राजपत्र में यथा प्रकाशित इस अधिसूचना को प्रतियां साधारण जनता को उपलब्ध करा दी जाती हैं, इक्कीस दिन के भीतर , उसमें उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन करने या भूमि के नीचे पाइपलाइन बिछाए जाने के संबंध में श्री सुकांत कुमार प्रधान , सक्षम प्राधिकारी , इंडियन ऑयल कॉर्पोरेशन लिमिटेड , पारादीप- सम्बलपुर- रायपुर राँची पाइपलाइन परियोजना, 1295 , फॉरेस्ट पार्क, भुवनेश्वर -751009 ( उड़ीसा ) को लिखित रूप में आक्षेप भेज सकेगा ।

2333

अनुसूची

राज्य- उड़ीसा

जिला-अनुगुल

तहसील-अनुगुल

03 8

2330

क्षेत्रफल

प्लाट नं.

गांव का नाम

हेक्टयर एयर वर्ग मीटर

00 06

5681

00 62

2177

856

रगुडीयापाडा

2185

02 12

857

12 90

2184

147

बड़केरा

2187

06 14

143

2183

07 20

144

2196

134

133

00 00

130

220

180

01 42

181

00 90

182

()

189

190

1219

191

2200

185

01 00

194

14 00

00 02 00

Ne. R-25011102910- OR-11

2 4504

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 24 , 2010/SHRAVANA 2, 1932

1 बडकेरा

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

-3

5 177

00 35 22

बालुआकटा

00 01 28

00 03 56

00 10 23

252

01 सबलभंगा

12 जंगल

251

08 27

249

00 03

214

00 06

216

00 00 36

217

13 82

222

221

223

476

00 03 56

153

123

01 20

122

00 01 16

121

02 01

00 11 06

105

00 05 97

00 02 80

00 08 62

496

00 03 61

495

00 07

00 03 28

1098

00 03 88 बालुआकटा

1097

11 76

1068

00 00 87

बलरामपुर

1063

00' 10 51

1062

00 01 78

1003

16 84

1061

08 68

1058

00 09 18

1052

00 10 02

1028

00 01

1029

00 21

1057

00 16 08

1010

00 10 99

1007

1002

04 93

998

00 03 54

185

00 05 91

184

00 02 36 176

173

02 42 174

172

171

00 01 18 169

12 81 179

00 00 30

168

44 155

00 01 87 144

00 05 10 143

00 08 99 138

00 08

14 136

00 13

134

135

00 03 13 117

00 21

01 119

00 08 37

02 6 23

1592

00 18 22

68 36

91 40

09 50 42

00 08 15 47

01 08 45

00 00 51 776

00 00 20 775

00 00 38 752

00 03

751

01 89 750

00 00 10 745

00 53

744

00 00 61 743

00 00 73 741

00 30 632

00 00 48 631

00 02 84 630

00 10 608

00 03 82 609

00 02 24 610

00 77 611

00 01 T भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई 24 , 2010/ श्रावण 2 , 1932

[ भाग II-खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

बलरामपुर

626

बलरामपुर

625

00 01

614

01 57

612

613

00 00

592

591

02 37

589

00 90

585

508

04 17

588

569

00 01

509

00 81

1268

587

526

00 02

525

527

00 50

528

00 45

4505

397

00 00

399

40 398

401

10 1266

385

278

279

1318

01 83 254

1316

1315

70 248

00 00

1314

253

252

251

212

211

1848

श्यामसुन्दरपुर

529

01 38

530

522

00 02

531

00 02

521

447

446

02 83

448

450

00 00

449

00 02

445

444

00 02

411

412

06 49

410

409

408

0100

407

533

406

389

390

391

393

00 81

394

00 00

405

00 16

395

396

1849

00 10

1826

00 01

1823

00 01

1820

1819

1816

1811

00 03

1810

00 00 52 1805

00 00

2126

2193

1794

00 01 51 1793

1792

1791

1789

1788

00 02 49 1790

1787

00 01 21 1784

1783

00 26

1781

1771

00 00

1773

00 00

1782

1777

1778 THE GALA

1775

179

1748

1750

1747

1743

1738

1732

$733

1734

1735

1736

1211

100

1212

603

036

634

630

357

218

21/

500

117

58%

569 12.

237

235

220

اق

396

00 05

467

4604

(A)

4666

907

05 A: JULY 24 , 2010/ SHRAVANA 2, 1932

PART II-SEC. 3( New Delh

5 1822 , W

Central

252

Sabalabhanga

12 cafhent that i indicerest that

251

Jangal

08 27

Paradip

249

03 79

fkhand) , a

Arissalto Raipur ( Chhattisgar

214

(2)

should

06 94 p Sambalpur Prias

216

00 Thy Indian tid hyd

00 36

217

And whereas , it appeaг

wemment

(0) 13 82

222

for the purpose of

Cipeline , it is

22 33 cessary to acquire the n

4.Ecribed

221

00 45 schedule arte.c

223

00 10 how, her stor

ferred

476

aand

153

00 01 20 dsPipelines (A

Land)

123

ΟΙ 20 (50 of 190 1

rereby

122

00 01 16 CBS cntentie

crein;

121

01 Any person inte

Oned in the

00 02 01

it dhe date

schedure may, within ist

00 23 86 lach the ecpies of

published in

00 01 35 wette of India, are tale at

eneral Public,

00 11 06

bi of user

won writing to s

04 04

to Sri

Merem for laying of tepel

105

Je Kumar Pra: Jhan, Comueris

IndianOil

97 ation Lunited. Paced be

Kanchi

00 02 80

151009,

celine Project, 1295, Forest Park

08 62

496

00 03 61

495

07 11

00 03 28 D

Teks Angul

Orissa

Baluakata

1098

03 88 Name of the

1097

Mtr .

1068

00 00 87 2

1063

10 51

1062

Kagarispara

1003

16 84

1061

00 08 68 Lacalura

1058

00 09 18

1052

10 02 144

1028

00 01 14

1029

1057

16 08 170

1010

10 99

1007

07 26 12:

1002

00 04 93 182

998

00 03 54 18)

185

00 05 91

184

00 02 36

177

22 IS

ویر

176

00 03 67 19、

173

00 02 42 fyt

174

172

00 18 60

171

00 01 18

169

(X) 12 81

179

00 30

168

00 04 44

155

00 01 87

23 भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई 24, 2010/श्रावण 2 , 1932

भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

05 10

4509

525

Balaramapur

144

Baluakata

143

138

136

134

135

117

119

00 02

07 30

1592

09 50

00 08

00 51

00 00

776

Balaramapur

775

03 81

752

01 89

751

750

745

744

743

741

00 48

632

631

630

608

00 02

609

610

611

626

625

00 01

614

612

613

00 00 21

592

0300

591

00 02

589

585

508

588

569

01 35

509

00 81

527

528

529

00 01

530

522

531

521

00 6

447

446

448

450

449

445

444

102

411

412

410

409

80 408

407

20 537

405

389

00 16

390

391

393

394

405

395

396

397

399

40 396

10 401

1266

13 39

385

29 26

278

00 06

279

1318

13:6

1515

8:0

00 00 62 1314

00 05

253

00 07 37 252

251

00 01

212

211

00 03

1848

Syamasundarpur

1268

587

526

1849

1826 4511

74.

15 49

555 56

90 90

0732

18-

00 07

0010

01 1102

60 80 60

03 00

18 09

03 03

80542165630

3 00

00 00 0004

0003

0004

0001

0018

0003

00 00 8888888888888888888888888888888888888 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 0004 0090 0003 00

[No.R-25011/15/2010-OR-1]

B.K.DUTTA,UnderSecy.

906

785

2 900

907

782

904

779

667

242

901

903 905

875 874 870

250

877

869

249

176

868

911

916

780

247

177

235 225

261 248

206 182

781

237 232

186

185

224

239

216

181

183

4674

4673

4664 4666

4787

4788

4672

4670 4665

4671 4661

Chheliapara

Tumuni

.96

56 60

38 25

0851

18 4

0010

02 2211

0010

0251

05 0455

02 00

0336

0018

05 01

00 10

04 02 05

भारतकाराजपत्र:जुलाई24,2010/श्रावण2,1932

00 00

000516

00 00

00 00 00

00 00

0013

129

117

114

122

116

119

125

218

220

118

112

977

976

127

111

104

985 984 980 978

935

968 121

115

979

975

969

968

945 898

982

974

970 936

217

897

938

939

940

947

946

Syamasundarpur

2639GI/10-6

Tumuni

[भागII-खण्ड-3(ii)] 4512

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 24, 2010/SHRAVANA. 2, 1932

1 नई दिल्ली, 15 जुलाई , 2010

तस्मातलि का. आ. 1823.-केन्द्रीय सरकार को लोकहित में यह आवश्यक प्रतीत होता है कि पारादीप ( उड़ीसा ) से रायपुर (छत्तीसगढ़ ) एवं राँची ( झारखण्ड) तक पेट्रोलियम उत्पादों के परिवहन के लिये इंडियन ऑयल कॉर्पोरेशन लिमिटेड द्वारा " पारादीप-सम्बलपुर- रायपुर- राँची पाइपलाइन " बिछाई जानी चाहिये;

और केन्द्रीय सरकार को उक्त पाइपलाइन बिछाने के प्रयोजन के लिए यह आवश्यक प्रतीत होता है कि ऐसी भूमि , जिसके नीचे पाइपलाइन बिछाई जाने का प्रस्ताव है और जो इस अधिसूचना से उपाबद्ध अनुसूची में वर्णित है , में उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन किया जाए;

पुरुकीया कोई व्यक्ति, जो उक्त अनुसूची में वर्णित भूमि में हितबद्ध है, उस तारीख से जिसको भारत के राजपत्र में यथा प्रकाशित इस अधिसूचना की प्रतियां साधारण जनता को उपलब्ध करा दी जाती हैं, इक्कीस दिन के भीतर , उसमें उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन करने या भूमि के नीचे पाइपलाइन बिछाए जाने के संबंध में श्री सुकांत कुमार प्रधान , सक्षम प्राधिकारी , इंडियन ऑयल कॉर्पोरेशन लिमिटेड, पारादीप- सम्बलपुर - रायपुर- राँची पाइपलाइन परियोजना , 1295 , फॉरेस्ट पार्क, भुवनेश्वर -751009 ( उड़ीसा ) को लिखित रूप में आक्षेप भेज सकेगा।

अनुसूची

राज्य-उड़ीसा

तहसील- बँरपाल जिला-अनुगुल

प्लाट नं.

क्षेत्रफल

गांव का नाम

हेक्टयर एयर वर्ग मीटर

61 789

गलातलि

788

475

00 11

01 477

00 01

81 476

00 01

00 05

43 478

479

484

33 483

14 480

481

62 482

[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii) ]

5 2

466

467

00 08

465

464

00 03

459

79 460

00 03

461

00 00

462

38 463

00 04

00 38

340

00 00

85 339

00 01

00 338

72 337

00 01

39 658

657

00 04

50 659

653

35 654

00 03

00 08

45 648

00 11

643

14 647

00 05

23 646

36 635

00 13

74 631

00 09

00 04

48 630

629

00 04

628

627

571

36 478

00 14

57 480

26 479

00 01

53 482

55 456

00 13

00 06

430

89 429

432

434

435

00 05

00 00

46 405

01 824

404

00 28

92 4513

भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई 24, 2010/श्रावण 2, 1932

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3( ii) ]

1 2

बारासिंगा

388

पुरूकिया

00 03

382

00 13

00 17

00 10

577

अराहाट

578

572

1969

1970

571

00 08

570

566

00 05

569

00 04

568

00 01

591

628

627

00 10

621

00 09

620

595

596

00 14

23 597

अंगारंबंध

598

600

599

00 01

750

432

00 04

752

10 751

00 04

753

00 05

53 754

46 755

00 11

138

00 05

1942

759

00 01

11 136

00 01

48 135

945

946

00 01:

950

00 13

50 948

947

00 06

960

961

00 00

1058

1059

1061

1062

00 02

1253

00 12

81 1255

45 1256

1254

00 07

1252

20 1246

80 1245

00 00

1244

1208

1211

1213

1214

44 1215

79 1217

00 04

03 1224

1318

00 06

30 1886

00 00

3301

00 00

98 3304

3303

3302

3348

00 04

3341

3343

3462

3461

16 3424

4102

71 3425

00 01

4101

79 3427

0003

10 3428 4514

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 24 , 2010/ SHRAVANA 2 , 1932

अंगारबंध

3429

00 01

अंगारबंध

00 02

3431

3927

3432

00 02

3928

00 00

3926

3433

00 01

3434

2971

2970

2969

2968

00 00

3922

3924

00 00

2959

00 00

3558

2944

2958

00 02

2943

3921

00 00

00 01

3557

2942

00 00

2940

00 02

2938

00 00

2941

00 00

2890

2736

00 01

2737

00 01

2735

00 01

2734

00 00

2738

2740

2739

00 03

2741

00 01

2742

00 01

2732

2743

00 01

2746

2745

00 00

2747

00 02

00 01

2751

2749

00 01

00 03

2750

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

5 2716

67 2761

65 2715

2714

00 02

28 2762

00 01

84 2713

00 02

69 2767

00 01

38 2712

00 03

30 2765

00 04

94 2620

00 01

21 2438

77 2437

00 02

67 2436

00 04

05 2434

00 02

2431

48 2430

00 03

54 4071

00 00

10 2427

00 03

65 2425

00 00

10 2424

00 00

10 2423

00 00

29 2422

00 00

33 3651

08 3650

3649

00 00

79 2421

00 04

74 3652

15 2366

00 05

74 2385

92 2378

19 2382

00 00

99 2381

00 03

88 2380

00 06

32 3969

33 2379

76 2184

00 00

10 4175

00 00

22 2181

32 2182

00 03

46 2185

00 03

13 2186

00 06

23 2193

38 2197

00 02

31 भारत का राजपत्र : बाई 24, 2017 श्रवण 2 , 1932

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

अंगारबंध

2198

अंगारबंध

00 02

53 2199

00 01

2156

2155

2153

00 02

2154

1021

1022

00 04

1020

10 976

17 1019

00 04

3839

00 01

987

00 03

4146

988

991

992

993

996

994

00 11

995

03 1008

00 11

1007

00 00

1006

1031

00 01

1030

00 05

1032

00 02

926

916

00 07

65 917

28 912

00 02

4114

00 05

913

00 07

53 4179

00 01

910

00 12

911

00 13

907

906

905

370

00 01

3901

10 368

00 23

369

4515

00 12

331

00 08

358

00 03

334

02 341

00 12

340

336

00 00

339

00 00

337

288

00 05

54 287

00 12

286

11447

00 07

11446

00 01

11448

13287

00 01

13478

13479

13473

00 00

13472

13471

13291

00 01

13292

00 07

51 13293

00 00

13306

00 01

13310

13311

00 01

13314

00 00

13315

13312

13313

10 13316

13317

13318

00 12

13272

00 09

15 12840

54 12839

12838

12837

00 04

12834

00 04

11 12833

27 12860

12861

00 00

14599 4516

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 24, 2010 / SHRAVANA 2 , 1932

1 14600

कंगुला

कंगुला 14601

00 02

13 12862

00 00

87 12817

00 07

14698

07 12816

12818

00 04

73 12815

45 14686

00 01

32 12814

00 11

33 12813

00 03

71 14356

00 06

94 12807

00 04

96 12806

94 13822

00 00

जुकुब 12808

00 37

78 12602

10 12601

29 12598

12597

00 09

76 12590

10 12592

00 02

96 12593

00 05

43 12595

97 12594

00 04

37 12624

00 00

50 12625

10 12499

00 03

16 12500

00 02

12495

00 07

12496

00 08

12497

12399

12398

00 04

12397

00 04

12396

00 04

12395

12394

12242

00 01

12243

00 08

12244

00 01

12245

12315

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

5 12246

00 06

30 12247

07 12250

00 02

68 13665

00 22

93 12285

: 00

73 12276

00 01

73 12277

00 03

19 12275

00 03

83 12269

00 00

10 12270

00 04

45 12268

00 00

34 12260

00 09

68 12263

00 07

24 12262

00 03

54 706

00 01

24 700

00 02

10 701

702

67 703

698

00 01

90 697

00 ΟΣ

92 696

20 695

00 03

20 694

67 646

97 677

00 02

98 678

93 679

00 04

89 673

00 00

10 671

00 01

25 680

00 00

19 670

00 03

75 669

00 03

68 668

00 00

10 666

667

00 00

98 665

65 661

00 03

53 660

00 00

14 662

61 622

00 04

43 621

00 00

22 614

00 01

93 78

20 49

140 31 05

4517

10 00

00 03 04

01 01 00

05 88858යි8882B

01 01 222

01 000

00 00

0002

00 00

00 00 00

88888888

00

0005

0003

0002

00 00 00

04 02 03 0000000000

00 00 888888 00 00

1622

1522

1526

1521

1621

2294

2290

1527

1623

1523

1524 1525

2293

2292

2291

120

117

162

121

118

174

116

176 164 163 119

177 175

2 187

मरातिरा

82 86

37डेरजंग

43 41

55 18 68 44

10 02

00 02

01 00

भारतकाराजपत्र:जुलाई24,2010/श्रावण2,1932

0010

00 00 00 00 00 00

00 00

0003

00 00

888 0002 00

0001

0002

00 00

0001

1612

222

185

224

392

203

407

389 223

225

434

390 391

435

408 436 406

221

432

437

447

458

448

449

446

462 459

433

431

468

460

461

466

467

609 607

612

610

615

613

611

जुकुब

[भागII-खण्ड3(ii) 4518

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 24 , 2010/SHRAVANA 2, 1932

1 मरातिश

1624

00 00

92 मरातिरा 1625

00 01

38 1617

00 03

1629

01 1632

00 01

44 1628

00 02

39 1633

80 1634

1635

00 02

68 1636

00 01

73 1492

00 02

38 1637

00 02

74 1638

00 08

32 1639

1640

10 1645

00 02

51 1643

66 1644

00 04

1646

99 1816

00 00

10 1769

00 02

73 1768

00 00

18 1767

00 02

81 1762

00 03

1763

00 01

1764

00 03

98 1664

00 01

74 1745

00 00

1744

40 1742

54 1741

1740

1799

00 01

1798

1729

00 01

1728

1766

00 00

1727

संतरापुर 1726

1725

1723

1722

00 00

1721

00 00

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

5 1720

00 01

02 1719

00 01

58 1718

1714

00 00

10 1717

20 1716

00 01

1715

22 1713

00 02

76 1712

00 04

74 1705

00 00

10 1703

00 05

78 1700

00 00

10 2072

00 01

71 2071

00 01

28 2070

00 03

79 2065

00 00

10 2064

00 02

88 2063

26 2060

00 00

20 2078

00 03

16 2079

00 05

00 2080

71 2081

00 03

44 2082

00 02

59 2086

00 00

84 2084

00 00

10 2085

00 01

18 2134

00 04

30 445

00 00

10 444

94 443

09 442

00 00

10 441

00 06

85 439

00 00

10 2135

00 12

64 2136

00 02

58 2141

00 52

32 636

71 637

10 609

00 18

09 617

13 618

81 619

00 01

09 4519

भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई 24, 2010/ श्रावण 2 , 1932

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

संतरापुर 616

संतरापुर

615

614

612

1329

613

507

620

जरडा

621

00 01

622

506

623

208

00 00

207

502

211

00 03

212

216

00 01

215

217

00 01

218

224

223

229

228

93 232

231

233

00 01

270

234

269

268

267

00 02

235

00 02

266

00 02

236

00 03

237

63 45

239

00 04

238

49 240

00 09

243

00 00

242

2639GI /10-7

00 02

245

00 00

251

250

249

247

248

00 00

3414

00 02

3419

3420

3421

3423

00 04

95 3424

3426

3398

00 02

3397

00 03

3427

3396

3123

3121

00 01

3124

3115

00 01

3120

00 03

3116

3118

00 01

3117

00 01

3108

00 03

59 3104

00 11

3099

3097

3098

00 03

3092

00 03

3091

3090

3093

3055

00 04

3066

3067

3141

3151

00 01

3150

3143

3144 4520

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 24 , 2010/SHRAVANA 2 , 1932

1 जरडा

2217

जरडा 2216

00 00

10 2214

13 2215

00 00

30 2213

2204

00 05

93 2202

00 04

50 2201

00 00

77 2207

88 2206

00 03

97 2043

00 07

80 2044

00 00

10 1946

00 03

20 1947

00 02

38 1945

00 00

86 1944

10 2040

00 02

64 2039

00 00

74 2041

23 1948

00 02

50 1951

00 01

10 1952

00 04

19 1953

08 1954

1922

1923

00 00

1911

00 03

1912

00 03

1913

00 03

1914

00 02

1916

00 03

1917

00 00

बडहिंसर 1893

00 02

1892

00 02

1891

00 01

1888

00 05

1887

00 06

1894

00 02

1895

00 01

1896

00 01

1879

00 ΟΙ

1704

1705

00 02

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

5 1706

56 1707

27 1716

00 03

36 1717

00 06

80 1718

00 00

10 1694

00 01

33 1695

96 1696

00 01

36 1725

00 04

49 1726

00 04

39 1689

00 00

68 1687

00 08

34 1691

00 00

85 1693

00 01

99 1686

98 1685

00 02

54 1690

00 00

53 1670

00 00

11 1671

00 00

36 1672

00 01

37 1679

00 01

81 1640

00 03

78 1641

00 03

73 1642

00 03

26 1643

00 00

10 1645

00 02

76 1646

00 03

19 1647

00 03

57 1650

00 04

06 1651

97 1657

00 17

96 184

00 00

10 185

00 07

56 186

00 00

10 188

00 02

55 189

37 199

00 00

10 200

00 02

95 201

00 03

31 202

00 06

62 254

00 00

29 204

00 01

15 253

00 02

60 भारत का राजपत्र : जुलाई 24, 2010/श्रावण 2 , 1932

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

1 2

00 00

30 बडसिंहर

4501

5 2

206

बिमलाबेड़ा

205

00 03

11 252

206

22 212

10 213

211

214

210

97 215

00 04

00 03

00 04

53 55

69 57

00 04

44 50

कंजरा

22 20

00 00

96 25

15 131

बिमलाबेड़ा

692

96 160

133

132

00 03

135

00 04

136

09 150

00 03

00 04

151

149

20 190

00 00

191

148

194

195

00 01

196

00 01

197

00 03

198

00 02

61 199

00 02

200

00 03

03 201

205

10 50

00 00

10 53

207

00 01

208

209

227

228

00 02

691

214

211

00 07

213

00 00

3770

-3769

00 00

91 3768

3757

3829

3830

00 00

3833

00 04

3832

00 00

81 3831

13 4154

00 00

4155

00 04

75 4157

00 00

4153

52 4152

00 04

4158

00 01

4151

00 01

4150

29 4149

4148

00 02

4147

00 02

4146

00 00

4144

00 02

4145

4143

4142

00 03

4141

00 01

67 4140

4137

00 00

66 4136 4522

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 24 , 2010/SHRAVANA 2 , 1932

कंजरा

कंजरा 4138

00 00

10 4078

4079

4080

24 4071

00 00

00 4068

00 04

00 02

68 4066

07 4067

4018

00 04

64 4019

00 01

23 4010

00 09

3956

00 3957

00 01

00 02

10 3958

4007

00 00

तुकुडा

83 3959

3960

13 3961

3962

20 4005

3964

3965

00 3967

00 00

3966

3968

3969

00 01

50 3974

07 3975

3985

3981

3984

3982

00 02

29 3979

3978

17 3983

00 01

3569

91 3543

00 04

3566

00 05

66 3565

3564

71 3568

3567

00 05

51 3573

[PART II-SEC . 3( ii)]

5 3560

3559

95 3558

00 04

3479

3557

00 3574

00 02

3477

58 3575

00 00

14 3476

00 24

70 3475

3474

00 04

00 05

96 3471

3470

83 3472

73 4317

00 02

78 4310

70 4309

00 04

00 01

4308

22 4305

00 06

55 4338

00 02

30 4306

11 4304

00 15

26 4303

00 03

67 4297

4298

00 00

4300

10 4299

00 20

4288

96 4283

00 04

61 4282

00 15

34 4237

4280

11 4278

4370

00 09

61 4276

00 00

40 4275

00 01

63 4277

4387

00 06

4274

95 4272

00 00

93 4273

43 4268

97 4267

81 भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई 24, 2010/श्रावण 2 , 1932

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

पड़ा

1102

मालिसाहि

1104

1124

1125

1126

906

896

905

899

897

कुमुरसिंगि

901

902

868

00 01

867

860

00 02

859

818

00 05

817

316

812

814

813

728

4523

2184

2183

2181

2182

2155

590

589

588

00 08

587

569

568

567

00 05

566

565

561

001

584

00 14

-560

559

558

00 00

556

557

587

00 19

554

552

गोपिनाथपुर

723

722

751

721

720

00 03

715

00 35

460

00 01

454

00 08

453

00 27

431

2190

पडा

2189

2188

2187

00 10

2180

2186

00 07

00 04

00 14

00 03

7 4524

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 24 , 2010/ SHRAVANA 2, 1932

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

5 पडा

00 03

सौरिया

00 03

07 86

00 03

10 12

00 02

51 91

00 06

00 00

10 4

00 03

00 01

03 6

00 16

29 95

00 09

10 5

00 06

03 1

27 2

00 00

00 04

15 3

00 02

465

गोबिन्दपाणासाहि

78 सौरिया

165

00 01

401

00 15

18 164

00 02

405

00 00

95 186

00 08

399

58 163

00 09

406

00 00

76 126

00 06

408

00 06

70 190

409

00 06

94 125

396

56 118

00 02

395

00 18

90 127

385

60 182

386

00 08

90 129

387

00 01

03 130

378

45 117

379

00 01

69 110

00 00

366

43 108

367

00 01

12 187

00 02

365

00 01

43 106

00 07

364

00 01

74 107

363

78 101

00 00

29.

362

00 02

06 135

00 00

329

00 02

92 100

00 02

360

33 99

361

00 01

50 00

179

328

00 03

15 85

00 06

322

00 00

85 63

323

10 64

00 04

327

00 03

85 62

00 00

326

00 06

60 00

317

65 00

315

00 06

92 59

00 00

00 04

75 66

00 03

76 58

00 05

17 54

70 42 10

32 65

79 46

29 36

49 53

98 41

4525

2576 77

15 15

00 08 09 02

00 01 04

04 05

07 10 80

03 01

01 03 02

00 00

03 04

00 00

00 00 00 00

00 00

00 00 00 00

00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00

00 00

00 00 00

00 00

0002

2550

2276

2274

2562

2552

2450

2456 2430 2428

2427

2275

2272

2264 2765 2540

2544

2554

2551

2454

2426

2413

2270 2548

2555 2553

2455 2457

2282 2542

2543

2556

2487 2451

2273

2589

2588

2541

2876 2557

2277

2271 2587

2591

जरपडा

48 90

37 05 65 15

57 04 41

27 98

81 01

07 10

00 20

05 14 23

03 11

05 02

00 ৪৪ 09

भारतकाराजपत्र:जुलाई24,2010/श्रावण2,1932

00 00

00 00 00

00 00

00 00 00

00 00

0031

00 00 00

00 00 00 00

00 00 88

2705

2584

2704

2582

2586

2585

2696

2695

2732

2706

2730

2733

2583

2720

2707

2721 2726 2731

2697

2727

122

162

110

123

106 107 111 118

55 54

53 39

19 13

38 20

गोबिन्दपाणासाहि

जरपडा

[भागII-खण्ड3(ii)] 4526

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 24 , 2010/ SHRAVANA 2 , 1932

1 1

जरपडा

26 2257

जरपडा 2256

00 01

22 2266

2223

37 2224

34 2222

2225

00 05

00 00

2226

00 01

75 2144

2227

00 03

57 2143

2145

2148

59 2142

2137

00 03

15 2136

10 2138

00 01

2135

54 2139

00 02

2140

00 00

10 2134

00 02

2019

06 2020

00 01

00 00

2018

27 2022

00 03

40 2027

00 01

2026

00 02

2025

00 00

10 2029

00 03

67 2028

01 2030

00 00

75 2032

00 01

2033

00 02

00 04

2051

08 2052

00 06

95 2053

67 1960

56 1959

10 1952

00 10

88 1953

43 1942

1949

00 02

74 1947

00 04

[PART II-SEC. 3( ii) ]

74 1948

1758

27 1946

00 00

14 1759

00 05

10 1851

1762

23 1763

00 01

31 1764

00 03

00 00

1765

97 1767

00 02

55 1766

00 04

19 1769

00 05

51 1728

10 1770

00 01

37 1784

00 00

10 1781

00 03

83 1782

1780

1805

00 02

53 1806

00 00

1808

37 1807

00 02

71 1811

00 00

10 1809

00 04

36 1810

1562

87 1548

00 06

86 1538

00 02

92 1539

00 02

1537

59 1540

1536

17 1535

00 00

1314

54 1315

00 03

26 1318

1312

29 1311

00 02

45 1302

00 03

03 1310

00 00

11 1301

00 00

1303

1304

72 4527

भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई 24, 2010/श्रावण 2, 1932

[भाग II-खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

00 02

तुबे 1309

जरपडा

1305

1227

1226

1225

1236

1238

1239

80 1252

00 01

1251

00 03

1254

1255

00 04

1253

1261

00 03

1259

00 03

1263

45 1264

1262

1267

1265

80 1266

1275

1286

38 1282

1284

4832

तुबे

4831

4829

00 20

4828

4843

00 11

4827

00 04

4820

4819

10 4817

71 4816

4815

00 04

4814

4813

00 01

55 4812

00 01

4803

00 02

4804

00 00

4802

10 4801

2639GI/ 10-8

5 2

4740

00 02

4741

4742

00 02

79 4745

00 03

4746

4788

00 03

4787

85 4784

00 06

4783

4782

00 01

4780

00 01

4781

4758

4757

00 00

99 4756

00 02

4529

4530

60 4535

00 01-

4536

4537

00 02

4538

4539

4541

4542

4545

4546

4549

00 01

4550

00 02

4551

4556

4559

4203

00 01

3897

3898

3896

3894

3895

3899

3845

00 02

3846

3844

3843

3841 4523

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: JULY 24 , 2010/ SHRAVANA 2, 1932

1 नत्र

3840

तुबे 3839

00 08

09 3834

00 00

3838

14 3835

10 3837

00 02

07 3836

00 00

40 3830

00 06

57 3831

00 00

30 3829

00 02

3828

72 3827

3808

38 3809

00 03

02 3810

00 02

3811

88 3804

00 07

04 3803

00 04

87 3798

00 07

53 3797

12 3763

00 00

52 3794

00 04

82 3789

00 08

05 3768

86 3788

00 04

23 3787

00 02

81 3786

00 01

49 3785

00 01

99 3784

00 00

10 3778

00 02

91 3779

00 02

21 3777

00 00

13 3439

00 01

60 3356

76 3355

17 3354

00 01

50 3353

00 00

10 3352

00 04

61 1730

00 04

72 1731

10 1734

25 1729

00 04

54 1735

1681

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

5 1728

00 04

1682

00 05

1683

39 1684

00 04

29 1725

1723

1724

68 1722

00 02

9 1721

00 00

1692

76 1693

1568

00 07

97 1567

00 00

83 1569

40 1570

1572

00 02

48 1571

00 00

84 1497

00 11

30 1553

1549

00 01

39 1550

00 05

12 1544

00 11

11 1543

00 03

23 1541

00 03

1540

40 1288

00 11

47 1287

13 1291

00 00

23 1286

00 04

1285

1284

00 00

29 1280

21 1278

00 11

04 1277

. 01

1276

27 1279

15 1275

72 1274

10 1095

00 02

18 978

00 06

46 972

00 27

40 976

00 00

62 975

00 04

69 974

00 14

81 866

00 10

14 4529 भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई 24, 2010/ श्रावण 2 , 1932

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii ) ]

864

तुबे

863

862

00 02

870

861

859

Any person interested in the land described in tasc said schedule may , within twenty- one days from the date on which the copies of this notification , as published in the Gazette of India , are made available to the General Public , object in writing to the acquisition of the right of user therein for laying of the pipeline under the land o Sri Sukanta Kumar Pradhan , Competent Authority , Indian Oil Corporation Limited, Paradip Sambalpur - Raipur Ranchi Pipeline Project , 1295 , Forest Park , Bhubaneswar- 751009 , (Orissa) .

860

00 00

878

SCHEDULE

858

State : Orissa

857

Distt.: Angul

Tehsil: Banarpal

855

Area

PlotNo.

856

Hect. Are Sq. Mtr .

Nameof the

Village

768

757

00 09

758

789

Talatali

94 756

788

64 752

475

00 01

759

477

00 02

760

476

751

478

486

जेरंग

479

00 00

487

484

351

483

00 02

349

480

491

481

00 28

341

482

340

00 04

466

342

467

[सं. आर-25011/16/2010-ओ.आर. - 1 ]

465

बी. के. दत्ता , अवर सचिव

464

459

New Delhi , the 15th July, 2010

460

461

462

463

340

S.O 1823. Whereas , it appears to the Central Government that it is necessary in the public interest that for the transportation of petroleum products from Paradip (Orissa) to Raipur ( Chhattisgarh) & Ranchi (Jharkhand) , a "Paradip- Sambalpur - Raipur - Ranchi Pipeline" should be laidby Indian Oil Corporation Limited;

334

338

00 00

337

00 01

658

Purukia

657

00 04

659

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

4530

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 24 , 2010/SHRAVANA 2, 1932

1 Purukia

653

00 03

Arahat 654

00 03

648

00 08

643

00 06

647

646

635

631

00 09

630

00 04

629

00 04

628

00 02

627

571

478

480

479

00 01

482

00 11

456

00 13

430

00 06

429

432

434

435

405

00 00

824

00 04

404

388

382

00 03

Barasinga 20

00 02

00 13

00 01

00 17

00 10

Arahat

577

00 33

578

00 10

572

00 16

1969

1970

00 15

571

[PART II-SEC . 3( ii) ]

5 570

10 566

569

00 05

91 568

00 04

44 591

00 01

72 628

00 16

61 627

00 02

59 621

620

595

14 596

00 09

34 597

00 14

598

20 600

00 03

76 599

750

00 01

12 432

83 752

00 07

32 751

00 00

10 753

00 04

55 754

00 05

53 755

00 00

46 138

00 11

1942

16 759

00 03

02 136

00 01

11 135

945

00 00

10 946

00 07

85 950

44 948

50 947

00 00

10 960

65 961

00 05

22 1058

00 00

52 1059

44 1061

00 03

94 1062

00 05

64 1253

23 1255

00 12

81 1256

00 03

45 1254

00 00

31 1252

00 07

27 भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई 24, 2010/ श्रावण 2 , 1932

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

1 2

4531

27 3558

Angarabandh

1246

Barasinga

1245

00 00

90 1244

00 01

1208

00 05

1211

1213

00 05

1214

1215

1217

1224

00 05

1318

30 1886

Angarabandh

3301

00 00

3304

3303

3302

3348

00 04

39 3341

3343

3462

3461

00 03

3424

4102

3425

4101

00 03

3427

3428

01 .

00 01

3429

3431

77 3927

00 02

12 3432

77 3928

3926

00 01

3433

24 3434

00 01

2971

00 03

2970

00 02

2969

10 2968

3922

50 3924

10 2959

00 00

50 2944

2958

00 01

2943

00 00

3921

00 01

3557

00 00

2942

00 02

2940

2938

92 2941

00 01

2890

2736

2737

2735

2734

2738

00 00

2740

00 03

2739

90 2741

2742

2732

2743

2746

2745

2747

00 01

2751

00 01

2749

2750

2716

2761

2715

2714

2762

2713

2763

00 03

2712

00 04

94 2765

2620

00 00

2438

00 02

2437

00 04

05 2436

00 02

80 2434

00 02

48 2431 4532

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 24, 2010/ SHRAVANA 2, 1932

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

5 2430

Angarabandh

00 03

Angarabandh 991

00 00

69 4071

00 00

992

00 05

72 2427

00 03

993

00 00

17 2425

996

00 08

76 2424

00 00

994

00 00

10 2423

995

68 2422

00 00

1008

00 01

03 3651

00 01

1007

00 11

87 3650

1006

00 00

19 3649

00 00

1031

89 2421

00 04

1030

23 3652

00 03

1032

00 05

01 2366

00 05

926

00 02

07 2385

00 11

916

00 00

2378

917

00 07

65 2382

00 00

912

00 07

28 2381

00 03

4114

00 02

2380

913

83 3969

00 08

4179

53 2379

910

00 01

77 2184

00 00

911

4175

22 .

907

00 13

33 2181

00 00

906

26 2182

00 03

905

00 72

83 2185

370

00 00

13 2186

00 06

3901

00 01

2193

368

00 2197

00 02

369

00 23

2198

331

00 12

44 2199

00 02

358

00 08

30 2156

00 01

334

00 03

88 2155

00 04

341

00 04

02 2153

00 00

340

62 2154

00 02

336

00 09

92 1021

00 02

339

00 00

38 1022

00 01

337

40 1020

288

00 02

06 976

287

00 05

54 1019

286

27 3839

00 04

11447

Kangula

987

00 01

11446

00 07

54 4146

00 03

11448

00 01

62 988

00 00

13287

34 भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई 24, 2010/श्रावण 2 , 1932

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

42 Kangula

13478

Kangula

00 00

13479

13473

00 00

13472

13471

13291

13292

00 07

13293

13306.

00 01

13310

13311

00 01

13314

13315

13312

00 01

13313

00 00

10 13316

13317

13318

00 12

13272

00 09

12840

12839

12838

00 15

12837

00 04

12834

12833

00 01

12860

00 14

12861

12 14599

71 14600

00 02

14601

87 12862

00 07

88 12817

00 03

14698

00 01

12816

00 04

12818

45 12815

00 01

14686

00 11

12814

12813

00 06

14356

00 04

12807

00 07

12806

Jukub

20 13822

4533

00 37

12808

12602

00 02

12601

12598

00 09

12597

12590

12592

12593

12595

00 04

12594

12624

12625

12499

00 02

83 12500

12495

12496

00 10

12497

12399

12398

00 04

12397

00 04

47 12396

00 01

12395

12394

00 01

12242

12243

12244

00 07

12245

12315

12246

12247

00 02

12250

00 22

13665

12285

12276

12277

12275

12269

12270

34 12268

00 09

12260

12263

12262

706

00 4534

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 24 , 2010/ SHRAVANA 2 , 1932

1 Jukub

700

Jukub

00 02

10 701

00 02

69 702

00 01

67 703

00 00

10 698

00 01

697

92 696

00 03

20 695

694

00 01

646

00 00

97 677

00 02

98 678

00 02

93 679

00 04

89 673

00 00

10 671

00 01

25 680

00 00

670

00 03

75 669

00 03

68 668

10 666

00 01

19 667

00 00

98 665

65 661

00 03

53 660

00 00

14 662

00 02

622

621

614

00 01

613

00 01

615

00 00

612

00 02

611

00 01

609

00 00

610

00 01

607

466

00 00

467

468

461

00 01

462

00 00

460

00 02

459

00 01

447

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

5 458

00 00

10 448

00 02

61 449

26 446

00 00

10 431

00 02

33 432

00 01

433

82 434

00 05

71 435

40 408

00 00

31 437

00 00

24 436

00 01

43 407

406

00 01

37 1612

00 02

87 390

00 03

82 392

00 00

42 391

98 389

00 00

77 223

00 03

50 225

00 05

94 222

00 00

26 224

221

00 00

10 203

00 01

09 185

00 02

44 184

00 04

12 186

75 187

00 01

52 177

00 00

66 174

97 175

00 02

07 176

52 164

00 05

31 162

20 163

00 01

05 119

00 03

49 120

08 116

73 118

78 121

00 00

10 117

00 02

13 65

60 भारत का रांजपत्र: जुलाई 24 , 2010/ श्रावण 2 , 1932

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

Maratira

10 Jukub

00 00

33 66

00 10

00 00

00 05

00 01

00 03

2294

Derjang

2293

2292

2291

2290

1552

Maratira

1523

1524

00 02

1521

1525

1527

00 03

1526

1621

00 02

1622

1623

1624

00 01

1625

00 03

1617

00 03

1629

00 01

1632

00 02

1628

1633

1634

1635

00 01

1636

00 02

1492

00 02

1637

1638

2639GI /10-9

4535

5 2

00 00

10 1639

1640

00 02

51 1645

00 00

1643

1644

1646

1816

00 02

73 1769

00 00

1768

00 02

1767

00 03

1762

00 01

1763

1764

00 01

1664

00 00

1745

00 00

40 1744

1742

1741

00 01

1740

1739

1738

15 1729

1728

1766

1727

1726

00 02

1725

1723

1722

1721

00 01

1720

00 01

1719

1718

1714

1717

1716

1715

1713

00 04

1712

1705

1703

1700

00 01

2072 4536

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 24, 2010/SHRAVANA 2, 1932

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

5 Maratira

2071

00 01

28 Santrapur

207

00 00

14 2070

00 03

502

00 00

10 2065

00 00

211

00 02

41 2064

00 02.

212

00 03

81 2063

00 01

216

00 01

50 2060

00 00

215

00 01

60 2078

00 03

217

00 13

79 2079

00 05

218

00 01

06 2080

00 01

224

00 01

43 2081

00 03

223

00 01

06 2082

00 02

229

64 2086

228

00 02

80 2084

00 00

232

00 00

93 2085

00 01

231

00 02

12 2134

00 04

233

00 01

98 445

00 00

270

00 01

28 444

00 05

234

00 02

12 443

00 02

269

00 02

20 442

268

00 00

10 441

00 06

267

00 03

20 439

235

02 2135

266

00 02

32 2136

00 02

236

00 02

57 2141

237

00 03

88 636

Santrapur

00 00

63 637

239

00 00

10 609

238

00 04

91 617

240

00 00

49 618

243

51 619

242

00 01

48 616

245

57 615

251

00 02

36 614

250

40 612

249

13 1329

247

00 01

53 613

248

00 01

54 507

20 620

Jarara

3414

67 621

3419

94 622

00 01

3420

02 506

00 00

3421

00 00

63 623

00 00

3423

00 04

23 208

3424

00 04

95 39

10 33

36 80

82 27

6 55

50 10 08 31

74 23

86 64

5 38

4537

68345

00 04

70 02 01

10 00

02 03 2B

03 යියියි8

02 00

4 B

00 00 00

0004

৪৪

00 0006

0010

00 00

8.8 00 00

00 00 888

8888 0010 0002 00 00

00 8888888 00 00 00 00 00 00

1726

1725

1696

1689 1691

1687

1718

1717 1694

1695

1706

1707

1716

1705

1896

1879

1704

1887

1894

1895

1888

1892

1891

1917

1893

1916

1922

1913

1914

1911

1912

1954 1923

1952

1953

1948

1951

1944 2039

1945 2040 2041

1947

Jarara

72 10 30 29

77 44

28 23

54 45

46 21

81 19

80 80

8 8 50 7 8 78000 10

00 05 04

02 00

02 03 00

11 00

01 01

08 10

10 03

00 00

00 00 0007

00 ৪৪

00 03

00 00 00

0007

00 00

भारतकाराजपत्र:जुलाई24,2010/श्रावण2,1932

00 00

0005

0001

00 00 00

00 00

00 0004

00 00

1946

2044

2202 2206

2043

2204 2201

2207

2215

2214

3144 2216

3143

2213

3150

2217

3141

3151

3066

3067

3093

3055

3090

3098

3099

3097 3091

3104

3092

3108

3116

3120 3118

3117

3124

3115

3426

3123

3396

3398

3121

3427

3397

Jarara

[भागII-खण्ड3(ii)] 4538

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 24, 2010/ SHRAVANA 2, 1932

1 Jarara

1693

Barahinsar

00 01

1686

00 00

1685

00 02

1690

00 00

1670

00 00

1671

00 00

1672

00 01

1679

00 01

1640

00 03

Bimalabera 1641

00 03

1642

00 03

1643

00 00

1645

00 02

1646

00 03

1647

00 03

1650

00 04

1651

00 03

1657

00 17

Barahinsar

184

00 00

185

00 07

186

188

00 02

189

00 04

199

200

00 02

201

00 03

202

00 06

254

00 00

204

00 01

253

00 02

205

00 00

252

00 03

206

212

00 07

213

00 00

211

00 00

214

00 02

210

215

00 04

00 03

00 01

00 04

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

5 56

00 03

14 50

00 04

44 16

00 22

59 18

00 02

00 19

00 03

72 20

00 07

22 25

00 00

96 24

53 131

00 04

15 692

00 01

05 160

00 01

96 133

00 00

10 132

00 04

92 135

00 03

44 136

00 04

25 150

09 151

00 04

33 149

00 08

21 190

00 00

20 191

00 00

34 148

00 05

32 194

00 00

26 195

00 02

29 196

00 01

69 197

00 01

24 198

00 03

08 199

00 02

61 200

00 02

53 201

00 03

03 205

00 03

89 206

00 00

08 50

00 00

10 51

00 01

36 52

00 00

71 53

*00 00

10 207

00 04

95 208

00 01

40 209

00 06

30 227

10 228

00 00

45 691

00 02

04 214

00 03

76 211

00 00

10 भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई 24, 2010/ श्रावण 2, 1932

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

5 2

Kanjara

95 Bimalabera

213

00 07

00 00

3770

Kanjara

3769

3768

71 3757

00 04

3829

00 00

3830

68 3833

3832

00 00

3831

00 03

4154

10 4155

4157

51 4153

4152

00 04

00 4158

4151

4150

00 02

4149

4148

00 02

4147

65 4146

00 02

00 00

35 4144

00 02

4145

00 02

16 4143

28 4142

4141

00 01

4140

68 4137

4136

4138

10 4078

4079

00 06

68 4080

24 4071

00 04

4068

00 02

4066

07 4067

00 05

00 04

64 4018

00 01

4019

23 4010

00 09

00 02

93 3956

00 01

3957

4539

3958

4007

3959

00 03

3960

3961

3962

4005

00 04

3964

3965

3967

00 01

53 3966

32 3968

00 00

3969

00 01

3974

00 04

3975

00 01

3985

3981

00 00

3984

00 02

73 3982

3979

00 00

3978

00 01

3983

3569

3543

3566

00 00

3565

00 00

3564

00 00

3568

3567

3573

00 03

3560

00 03

3559

00 04

90 3558

3479

3557

00 02

3574

00 00

58 3477

00 00

14 3575

70 3476

3475

00 04

00 3474

3471

00 05

83 3470 4540

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 24 , 2010/SHRAVANA 2, 1932

1 3472

Malisahi

00 02

Kanjara

Tukura

4317

00 02

4310

00 10

4309

00 04

4308

00 01

4305

00 06

4338

00 02

4306

00 00

4304

00 15

4303

00 03

4297

00 03

4298

00 00

4300

00 00

4299

00 20

4288

00 03

4283

00 04

4282

00 15

4237

4280

00 05

4278

00 05

4370

00 09

Para 4276

00 00

4275

00 01

4277

4387

00 06

4274

4272

4273

00 20

4268

4267

00 01

Malisahi

1102

00 15

1104

00 12

1124

00 01

1125

00 01

1126

00 00

906

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

5 867

00 01

78 860

00 11

76 859

00 02

82 818

00 05

60 817

00 05

70 816

00 16

58 812

00 17

87- 814

00 01

40 813

00 15

54 728

00 05

38 723

20 722

00 00

66 751

00 64

72 721

00 08

37 720

00 03

64 715

00 03

99 460

00 35

32 454

00 01

48 453

00 08

83 431

00 27

89 2190

00 00

26 2189

97 2188

81 2187

32 2180

00 10

88 2186

00 00

10 2184

00 05

49 2183

00 00

10 2181

10 2182

00 00

25 2155

00 00

30 590

00 00

12 589

00 09

71 588

00 05

98 587

00 08

53 569

Kumurasingi

896

00 00

905

899

897

00 01

901

00 06

902

00 01

868

79 568

00 07

24 567

00 05

57 566

00 05

54 565

00 04

64 561

60 584

01 02

82 560

52 78

46 97 10

62 44

08 66

4541

16 04 09

00 04 03 00 60 8888888888888888 00 00 01 03 00

02 00

91 10 697560540 10

00 00 00

00 00

888

00 0001

0007

00 00 00 00

00 00

0001

12 25050066 15 15

409

399

406

408

405

401

106

135 100

110 108

107

12 465

182

187

129 130

101

117

118 127

57 28

65 59

Gobindapanasahi

00 00 8888888888888888 00 00 00 00 00 00

Sauria

82 05

13 90

78 07

23 33

87 50

10 24

75 95

88566 92 69 82 04202

05 00

14 02 01 00 00

19 01

भारतकाराजपत्र:जुलाई24,2010/श्रावण2,1932

0090

0060

00 00

00 0001

0002

00 00

888 00 0090

00 0002

00 00

0015

0005

0007 00 58

0002

8888888

00

126

186

190

163

164

165

125 552

554

87 12

556

557

559

558 587

50 44 42 94

49 45

47 48

95 55 123

Gopinathapur85

Kumurasingi

Sauria

[भागII-खण्ड3(ii)] 4542

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 24 , 2010/SHRAVANA 2 , 1932

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

00 08

Gobindapanasahi 396

00 14

Gobindapanasahi 20

395

00 18

385

00 07

17 386

00 08

00 19

21 387

00 01

98 378

00 08

63 379

00 01

2720

00 06

Jarapara

63 366

00 02

2721

00 00

87 367

00 01

2727

00 20

37 365

00 01

2726

00 00

91 364

00 01

2730

00 03

05 363

2731

00 11

32 362

00 02

2732

00 01

65 329

2733

00 03

15 360

.00

2707

00 04

48 361

00 01

2706

00 11

90 328

00 03

2705

00 04

22 322

00 00

2704

00 00

82 323

00 00

2697

00 01

44 327

00 03

2696

00 00

10 326

2695

00 06

25 317

00 13

2583

00 08

11 315

00 06

2584

00 01

75 87

00 04

2582

00 09

51 00

2586

00 00

25 92

00 05

2585

02 95

00 05

2587

01 96

00 03

2589

36 00

102

2588

00 06

46 106

00 04

2562

00 04

41 107

00 01

2591

00 00

35 110

00 03

2540

15 00

111

2541

00 01

32 118

2542

00 01

53 123

00 23

2543

00 01

97 00

122

2544

00 05

55 57

00 07

2876

00 03

65 55

00 00

2548

00 03

15 53

00 25

2557

00 01

24 54

00 31

2556

00 03

39 39

00 09

2555

00 02

20 38

00 00

2554

00 02

25 36

00 44

2553

00 02

77 भारत का राजपत्र : जुलाई 24 , 2010/ श्रावण 2, 1932

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

Jarapara

00 01

2552

Jarapara

10 2551

00 00

2550

00 08

2487

2450

00 02

2451

00 15

15 2454

00 02

2455

2456

2457

2430

00 07

2426

00 02

2428

00 10

2427

2413

00 01

2277

2275

2276

2274

2273

2272

00 00

2282

00 04

2271

00 02

2264

2270

2265

2257

00 01

2256

2266

00 04

2223

2224

2222

00 05

2225

2226

2144

00 01

2227

00 03

2143

10 2145

2148

29 2142

2137

10 2136

00 01

2138

2639GI /10-10

4543

00 03

2135

00 02

2139

2140

2134

2019

00 01

2020

27 2018

2022

00 01

2027

00 02

2026

00 00

10 2025

2029

2028

2030

00 01

2032

2033

2051

00 06

2052

2053

1960

1959

00 10

1952

1953

1942

00 02

1949

1947

1948

00 00

1758

00 00

1946

1759

1851

00 03

1762

00 01

1763

1764

1765

00 02

1767

1766

1769

1728

1770

1784

00 03

1781

1782 4544

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 24 , 2010/ SHRAVANA 2 , 1932

1 Jarapara

1780

00 03

73 Jarapara 1805

00 02

1806

00 00

1808

00 01

1807

00 02

1811

1809

00 04

1810

00 03

1562

Tube 1548

00 06

1538

00 02

1539

00 02

1537

00 03

1540

00 00

1536

00 02

1535

00 00

1314

00 05

1315

00 03

1318

00 00

1312

00 03

1311

00 02

1302

00 03

1310

00 00

1301

00 00

1303

00 01

1304

00 02

1309

00 02

1305

00 02

1227

00 02

1226

00 03

1225

00 01

1236

1238

1239

00 02

1252

00 00

1251

00 01

1254

00 03

1255

00 00

1253

00 04

1261

1259

00 03

1263

00 03

1264

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

1262

72 1267

1265

00 01

11 1266

80 1275

00 01

69 1286

26 1282

00 00

38 1284

00 03

50 4832

00 08

58 4831

00 11

71 4829

00 06

43 4828

00 20

24 4843

00 02

79 4827

32 4820

00 04

25 4819

00 03

36 4817

00 00

10 4816

00 00

71 4815

00 01

97 4814

00 04

21 4813

00 04

38 4812

55 4803

00 01

86 4804

00 02

41 4802

00 00

83 4801

10 4740

00 02

30 4741

28 4742

00 02

06 4745

4746

00 03

23 4788

00 03

65 4787

00 03

89 4784

00 00

85 4783

00 06

82 4782

00 02

87 4780

90 4781

18 4758

00 02

71 4757

42 4756

99 4529

00 02

87 4530

00 02

82 भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई 24, 2010/श्रावण 2 , 1932

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

Tube

4535

00 01

4536

00 00

4537

00 02

4538

4539

00 02

4541

00 02

4542

00 02

4545

00 01

4546

00 01

4549

00 01

4550

00 02

4551

4556

00 04

4559

4203

3897

00 01

3898

00 06

3896

3894

00 03

3895

3899

00 03

3845

00 02

3846

00 02

3844

00 03

3843

00 04

3841

3840

00 08

3839

3834

3838

00 00

3835

00 02

3837

3836

3830

3831

00 02

3829

00 03

3828

3827

00 05

3808

00 03

3809

00 02

3810

00 02

3811

00 07

3804

4545

3803

00 07

3798

3797

3763

82 3794

00 08

3789

3768

3788

00 02

3787

3786

00 01

3785

3784

00 02

3778

00 02

3779

00 00

3777

00 01

3439

76 3356

00 02

3355

3354

00 00

3353

3352

72 1730

00 00

10 1731

00 00

1734

1729

1735

1681

1728

00 00

1682

1683

00 04

1684

1725

00 03

1723

1724

00 02

1722

1721

00 03

1692

00 03

1693

00 07

1568

1567

1569

1570

1572 4546

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 24 , 2010/SHRAVANA 2, 1932

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

5 Tube

Tube

1571

00 00

758

00 09

53 1497

756

00 00

40 1553

00 03

752

00 00

54 1549

00 01

759

00 01

69 1550

00 05

760

00 02

59 1544

00 11

751

00 05

92 1543

00 03

486

Jerang

00 04

11 1541

00 03

487

00 00

83 1540

00 03

351

00 03

15 1288

00 11

349

00 02

90 1287

00 05

491

17 1291

341

00 28

17 1286

340

00 00

10 1285

00 01

342

20 1284

00 00

[No. R-25011/16/2010 -OR- 1 ] 1280

00 02

1278

B. K. DATTA, Under Secy.

1277

नई दिल्ली , 15 जुलाई , 2010

1276

1279

00 00

1275

1274

00 00

1095

00 02

का.आ. 1824. केन्द्रीय सरकार को लोकहित में यह आवश्यक प्रतीत होता है कि पारादीप ( उड़ीसा ) से रायपुर ( छत्तीसगढ़ ) एवं राँची ( झारखण्ड) तक पेट्रोलियम उत्पादों के परिवहन के लिये इंडियन ऑयल कॉर्पोरेशन लिमिटेड द्वारा " पारादीप- सम्बलपुर- रायपुर- राँची पाइपलाइन " बिछाई जानी चाहिये;

978

972

00 27

976

00 00

975

974

और केन्द्रीय सरकार को उक्त पाइपलाइन बिछाने के प्रयोजन के लिए यह आवश्यक प्रतीत होता है कि ऐसी भूमि, जिसके नीचे पाइपलाइन बिछाई जाने का प्रस्ताव है और जो इस अधिसूचना से उपाबद्ध अनुसूची में वर्णित है , में उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन किया जाए;

866

864

863

00 04

862

870

00 02

861

00 08

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

859

860

00 00

878

00 00

858

857

855

856

768

00 00

757

कोई व्यक्ति, जो उक्त अनुसूची में वर्णित भूमि में हितबद्ध है, उस तारीख से जिसको भारत के राजपत्र में यथा प्रकाशित इस अधिसूचना की प्रतियां साधारण जनता को उपलब्ध करा दी जाती हैं , इक्कीस दिन के भीतर , उसमें उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन करने या भूमि के नीचे पाइपलाइन बिछाए जाने के संबंध में श्री सुकान्त कुमार प्रधान , सक्षम प्राधिकारी , इंडियन ऑयल कॉर्पोरेशन लिमिटेड, पारादीप- सम्बलपुर - रायपुर - राँची पाइपलाइन परियोजना , 1295 , फॉरेस्ट पार्क, भुवनेश्वर-751009 ( उड़ीसा ) को लिखित रूप में आक्षेप भेज सकेगा । भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई 24, 2010/ श्रावण 2, 1932

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

अनुसूची

करडा तहसील-छेंडिपदा

राज्य-उड़ीसा जिला-अनुगुल

क्षेत्रफल

प्लाट नं.

गांव का नाम

हेक्टेयर

वर्ग मीटर

एयर

5 2

1548

कटडा

00 27

1544

31 1543

1531

00 03

1628

00 00

1529

00 05

31 1528

00 01

1527

1524

00 07

1525

1556

00 08

1514

00 09

1515

1489

10 1487

1490

00 03

1491

00 03

34 1492

00 03

1493

00 03

1494

00 03

1495

1496

1497

1498

00 03

1499

1577

49 1483

1564

00 05

1481

1482

00 09

59 1602

00 04

1474

00 05

1468

00 20

1457

0 01

59 1458

1611

00 11

1446

1445

4547

1447

1448

1449

1417

00 05

1416

1418

00 00

1422

00 04

1402

1401

00 01

59 1403

40 1404

00 03

1405

00 04

83 1407

00 02

1408

00 03

15 1340

1339

00 01

13 1338

00 00

35 1337

1335

00 08

1344

1343

00 05

27 1321

00 05

88 1320

00 01

1315

1314

00 02

92 1313

00 03

19 1353

10 721

668

48 667

00 03

665

77 666

664

04 662

00 01

661

00 07

593

00 01

592

594

00 06

91 598

601

602

00 03

17 600

00 01

40 599 4548

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 24 , 2010/ SHRAVANA 2, 1932

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

5 00

591

कटड़ा

10 615

00 00

04 590

00 02

15 589

00 14

00 66

07 570

00 50

31 00

572

00 63

62 571

00 13

00 02

14 408

[सं. आर-25011/17/2010-ओ.आर. -1 ] 565

00 00

बी. के. दत्ता , अवर सचिव 410

00 02

New Delhi , the 15th July, 2010 411

412

413

399

00 02

409

S.O. 1824. Whereas , it appears to the Centra ! Government that it is necessary in the public interest that for the transportation of petroleum products from Paradip (Orissa) to Raipur (Chhattisgarh) and Ranchi (Jharkhand), a "Paradip - Sambalpur - Raipur - Ranchi Pipeline " should be laid by Indian Oil Corporation Limited;

398

418

00 22

417

427

00 05

And whereas , it appears to the Central Goverament that for the purpose of laying the said pipeline , it is necessary to acquire the right of user in the land desersbed in the schedule annexed to this notification ;

428

00 03

516

00 07

514

515

00 00

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

512

00 07

513

517

00 00

448

00 04

498

496

00 05

493

465

00 09

484

00 01

Any person interested in the land described in the said schedule may , within twenty - one days from the date on which the copies of this notification , as published in the Gazette of India , are made available to the General Public, object in writing to the acquisition of the right of user therein for laying of the pipeline under the land to Sri Sukanta Kumar Pradhan , Competent Authority , Indian Oil Corporation Limited, Paradip - Sambalpur Raipur - Ranchi Pipeline Project , 1295 , Forest Park , Bhubaneswar - 751009, (Orissa) .

483

SCHEDULE

479

00 09

477

State :Orissa

Tehsil: Chhendipada Distt . Angul

480

Name ofthe

PlotNo.

Area 475

00 25

Village

Hect. Are So. Mir.

474

5 37

Katara

1548

00 07 36

1544

00 27 35

11 00 05

1543

00 09 30

00 43

1531

00 01 19

76 00

1628

75 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii ) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : जुलाई 24, 2010/ श्रावण 2 , 1932

1 2

Katara

Katara 1529

00 00

00 05

1528

1527

00 01

1524

1525

1556

1514

1515

00 01

1489

1487

1490

1491

1492

00 03

1493

00 03

1494

1495

00 03

1496

1497

1498

00 03

1499

1577

1483

00 01

1564

00 05

1481

1482

1602

00 09

1474

00 04

1468

00 20

1457

1458

0 01

1611

1446

1445

1447

00 06

1448

00 04

1449

1417

00 08

1416

00 05

1418

1422

1402

00 04

1401

1403

00 01

1404

00 01

1405

00 03

00 04

1407

1408

00 03

1340

00 04

1339

1338

00 01

1337

1335

4549

1344

00 00

1343

1321

27 1320

00 05

1315

00 02

39 1314

1313

00 03

1353

721

79 668

00 02

667

665

666

77 664

00 00

64 662

00 01

63 661

00 07

593

40 592

594

598

07 601

602

600

599

00 03

591

615

00 00

74 590

589

00 00

570

00 04

22 572

25 571

00 13

08 408

565

00 00

20 410

00 02

52 411

412

00 00

10 413

00 01

00 399

04 409

00 09

56 398

418

417

81 427

00 05

32 428

00 03

00 07

32 516

514

10 515

55 512

04 513

10 517

448

00 00

10 498 4550

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 24, 2010/ SHRAVANA 2 , 1932

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

अनुसूची

Katara

496

00 05

जिला-बारां

तहसील- छबड़ा

राज्य-राजस्थान 493

465

क्र.सं. ग्राम का नाम

सर्वे नंबर क्षेत्रफल हैक्टेयर में

484

00 01

1 2

483

00 13

479

00 09

1. दीलोद

120

0.2000

00 07

477

125

0.0700 480

475

281

0.3600

2. बीलखेड़ा

474

[फा. सं. आर-31015/10/2008- ओ.आर.- II ]

ए. गोस्वामी , अवर सचिव 35

New Delhi , the 19th July, 2010 30

00 43

00 02

00 66

S.O. 1825. Whereas , it appears to the Central Government that it is necessary in the public interest that for the transportation of petroleum products Pipeline from Bina terminal in the State of Madhya Pradesh to Kota in the State of Rajasthan should be laid by Bharat Petroleum Corporation Limited;

[No. R-25011 / 17/2010 -OR- 1 ]

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

B. K. DATTA , Under Secy .

नई दिल्ली, 19 जुलाई , 2010

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

का.आ. 1825.-केन्द्रीय सरकार को लोकहित में यह आवश्यक प्रतीत होता है कि मध्य प्रदेश राज्य में बीना संस्थापन से राजस्थान राज्य में कोटा तक पेट्रोलियम उत्पादों के परिवहन के लिए पेट्रोलियम कॉर्पोरेशन लिमिटेड द्वारा एक पाइपलाइन बिछाई जानी चाहिए;

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

Any person , interested in the land described in the said schedule may within twenty- one days from the date onwhich the copies of the Gazette of India containing this notification are made available to the public , object in writing to the acquisition of the right of user therein for laying ofthe pipeline under the land to Shri Kishore Kumar Sharma, Competent Authority , Bina - Kota Pipeline Project, Bharat Petroleum Corporation Limted, B- 105 , Indra Vihar Talwandi , Kota -324005 ( Rajasthan) .

SCHEDULE

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

Survey No.

Sl. Name ofVillage

Area in Hectare

2 1

1. Dilod

120

0.2000

125

0.0700

2. Bilkheda

281

0.3600

[F. No. R-31015/10/2008 -OR- II ] कोई व्यक्ति, जो उक्त अनुसूची में वर्णित भूमि में हितबद्ध है, उस तारीख से जिसको इस अधिसूचना से युक्त भारत के राजपत्र की प्रतियां साधारण जनता को उपलब्ध करा दी जाती है , इक्कीस दिन के 'भीतर भूमि के नीचे पाइपलाइन बिछाए जाने के लिये उसमें उपयोग के अधिकार के अर्जन के संबंध में श्री किशोर कुमार शर्मा , सक्षम प्राधिकारी , बीना-कोटा पाइपलाइन परियोजना , भारत पेट्रोलियम कार्पोरेशन लिमिटेड , बी-105 , इन्द्रा विहार तलवण्डी, कोटा-324005 (राजस्थान ) को लिखित रूप में आक्षेप भेज सकेगा ।

A. GOSWAMI , Under Secy .

भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई 24, 2010/ श्रावण 2 , 1932

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii ) ]

श्रम एवं रोजगार मंत्रालय नई दिल्ली , 23 जून , 2010

का. आ. 1826. औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 (1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार मैसर्स बी.सी.सी. एल .के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच , अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालय , सं. 1 , धनबाद के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 195/89 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 23-6-2010 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल -20012/86/ 1989- आई आर ( सी-1 ) ]

4551 2. The case of the concerned workman as disclosed in- hisW.S. is that Durga Kumhar, permanent Banksman at Katras Chaitudih Colliery had submitted his Voluntary resignation under the Voluntary Retirement Scheme on 1-3-1980 for providing employment to his dependent son Shri Mukteshwar Kumhar . It has been alleged that the management illegally and arbitrarily did not provide employment to the dependent son of Durga Kumhar on the ground that he failed to fulfil the condition under the VRS.

अजय कुमार गौड़ , डेस्क अधिकारी

MINISTRY OF LABOUR AND EMPLOYMENT New Delhi , the 23rd June, 2010

S.O. 1826. In pursuancersuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 195/89) ofthe Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum- Labour Court - 1 , Dhanbad as shown in the annexure , in the industrial dispute between the employers in relation to the management of M / s . B.C.C.L. and their workman , which was receivedby the Central Government on 23-6-2010 .

[No. L- 20012/86/1989 - IR (C- I ) ] AJAY KUMAR GAUR, Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL NO. 1 , DHANBAD Present : Shri H. M. SINGH , Presiding Officer . In the matter of an Industrial Dispute under Section 10 ( 1 )( d ) ofthe I.D. Act , 1947 .

REFERENCE NO. 195 OF 1989

Parties : Employers in relation to the management of Katras Chaitudih Colliery of M / s . BCCL and their workman.

APPEARANCES :

Onbehalf ofthe workman : Mr.D. Mukherjee , Authorised

representative.

On behalf ofthe employers : Mr. D. K. Verma, Advocate .

State : Jharkhand

Industry : Coal

Dated , Dhanbad, the 14th June , 2010

AWARD

TheGovt. of India Ministry of Labour in exercise of the powers conferred on them under Section 10( 1 ) (d ) of the I.D. Act. , 1947 has referred the following dispute to this Tribunal for for adjudication vide their Order No.L - 20012/ 86/89 - D- 3 (A) , dated, 27th November, 1989 .

SCHEDULE

"Whether the action of the management of Katras Chaitudih Colliery of M / s . BCCL in denying employment to Sh . Mukteshwar Kumhar, dependent son of Shri Durga Kumhar , Banksman under the Voluntary Retirement Scheme during the year 1980 wasjustified ? If not , to what relief the concerned workman entitled to ? " .

2639 GI /10-11

3. The concerned workman immediately protested against the illegal and arbitrary vague reasoning of the management and demanded specific ground for not providing employment to the dependent son . At that time the management orally informed the concerned workman that as per Voluntary retirement Scheme only for those persons dependents will be provided employment who had not attained the age of 56 years i.e. application for V.R.S. should be filed atleast 4 years before the date of actual retirement.

4. The concerned workman immediately submitted tothe management that his age is much below 56 years and he has challanged the management contention that the age of the concerned workman is more than 56 years . However , the management appreciating the legal position referred the concerned workman to medical board and the medical board determined the age of the concerned workman as 55 years as on 18-2-81 . Appreciating the facts theAgent of the Colliery written a letter to the P.M. Katras Area vide reference No. KC/PD/82 - F/ 847 dated 15-4-82 wherein and whereby he has requested the management to provide employment to the dependent son of the concerned workman.

5. It has been stated on behalf of the concerned workman that inspite of the aforesaid facts the anti - labour management did not provide employment to the dependent son of the concerned workman . The union of the workman thereafter raised the industrial dispute before the ALC( C ), Dhanbad which ultimately resulted reference to this Tribunal for adjudication before this Tribunal . It has been prayed on behalf of the workman to pass an Award directing the management to provide employment to the dependent son of the concerned workman w.e.f. 1980 with all arrears of wages consequential benefits .

6. In the W.S. filed on behalf of the management it has been stated by them that the present reference is not legally maintainable . No employer - employee relationship exists between the management and the concerned persons on the date of reference and as such the present reference is out right the preview of industrialdispute Act , 1947, Shri Durga Kumhar was the workman of Katras Choitudih Colliery and he was superannuated with effect from 18-2-86 on attending the age of sixty years . He did not raise any dispute through any Union during his employment under the management .

4552

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 24 , 2010/ SHRAVANA 2 , 1932

[PART II-SEC . 3( ii) ] 7. With a view to increase productivity by inducting young person on piece rated jobs of Miner /Loaders in place of surplus time rated workers the management introduced a voluntary retirement scheme by Circular dated 29-1-79/9-2-79 which remained in force for a short duration . Under that scheme a workman could apply for his premature retirement if he was above the age of 48 years and below the age of 56 years on the date of filling the application for voluntary retirement subject to the condition stipulated in the circular . One of the important conditions was that the vacancy to be created by such retirement would not be required to be filled up from any piece rated workman , which necessarily means the vacancy should be filled up out of surplus time rated workers . Further , the scheme was not intended to cover up productivity workers like Electricians , Fitters , Welders and Moulders who are competent persons under the Coal Mines Regulation 1957. The Banksman and Onsetters are competent persons and areproductivity workers as per the conditions of V.R.S.

Kumhar, Banksman under VRS Scheme 1980. In this respect the representative of the management argued that the employee Durga Kumhar has retired from service on superannuation . So the question of providing employment to his son does not arise . He was superannuated witheffect from 18-2-86 . It has also been argued by the management that VRS was not enforceable as regard the Banksman because they are the productive workers as per the conditions of VRS . The concerned workman was productive workers and a competent person under Coal MinesRegulation 1957 and as such he was not covered within the scheme . All productive workers have not come under VRS . So no question of employment of his son can arise after his retirement. In this respect the Award of Ref. No. 69/89 passed by this Tribunal has also been referred which shows that the action of the management of Katras Chaitdudih Colliery of M/ s . BCCL in allowing the concerned workman to continue in service till superannuation was held justified and that its action in denying employment to hisdependent son under voluntary Retirement Scheme was also held justified . No evidence has been adduced on behalf of the concerned workman to show that the dependent of productive workers has been provided employment by the management. In view of the facts , evidence and circumstances discussed above I find no merit in the claim of the concerned workman and accordingly the following Award is rendered :-

8. The concerned workman was a productive worker and a commpetent persons under Coal Mines Regulation 1957 and as such he was not covered within the scheme . There was no possibility of declaring him surplus as he was holding statutory post which is compulsory under the CoalMines Act, 1947 and he could not be retired without a substitute. To relive such a person a trained and competent Banksman was required to be appointed in his place and there was no surplus time rated workers to shoulder his responsibility.

"The action of the management of Katras Chaitudih Colliery of M / s . BCCL in denying employment to Shri Mukteshwar Kumhar dependent son of Shri Durga Kumhar , Banksman under the Voluntary Retirement Scheme during the year 1980 was justified . Consequently, Mukteshwar Kumhar is not entitled to get any relief. "

H. M. SINGH, Presiding Officer नई दिल्ली, 28 जून , 2010

का. आ. 1827.-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 (1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार एवं एम.सी.एल. के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच , अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण , भुवनेश्वर के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 292/2001 ) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 28-6-2010 को प्राप्त हुआ था । 9. It has been further stated by the management that VRS was not intended to confer any right on the workman to apply for premature retirement. The management was not bound to accept all persons under VRS and permit them to permanently retire . It was purely at the discretion ofthemanagement to permit some one to retire permanently and not to permit others to retire permanently . The concerned workman accepted the decision of the management is not permitting him to retire permanently under VRS and did not raise any dispute over the decision ofthe management . He continued in his employment to the full terms and retired peacefully after completion of60 years of age . The present issue raised after the superannuation is nothing but gambling in litigation . Accordingly it has been prayed on behalf of the management to pass an Award rejecting the claim of the concerned workman.

[सं. एल-22012/166/1999- आई आर( सी- II ) ] अजय कुमार गौड़ , डेस्क अधिकारी New Delhi, the 28th June , 2010 10. Both the sides have filed their respective rejoinders admitting and denying the contents of some of the paras of each other's Written Statement.

11. Management in order to substantiate their case has produced Shambhu Nath Verma who has been examined asMW- 1 . IHe has proved documents marked as Ext . M- 1 , M-2 , M - 3 , M - 4 , M - 5 , M - 6 . On behalf of the workman no oral evidence has been adduced but only one documents has been marked as Ext . W- 1 .

S.O. 1827. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) , the Central Government hereby publishes the Award ( Ref . No. 292/ 2001) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal - cum- Labour Court, Bhubaneshwar as shown in the annexure , in the industrial dispute between the employers in relation to the management of M.C.L. and their workman , which was received by the Central Government on 28-6-2010.

12. Main argument advanced on behalf of the workman is that management has not given employment to Shri Mukteshwar Kumhar , dependent son of Shri Durga

[No. L- 22012/ 166/ 1999 - IR ( C - II ) ] AJAY KUMAR GAUR , Desk Officer 4553 भारत का राजपत्र : जुलाई 24, 2010/श्रावण 2, 1932

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii ) ]

ANNEXURE

CENTRALGOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM - LABOUR COURT

BHUBANESHWAR

Present :

Shri J. Srivastava ,

PresidingOfficer , C.G.I.T. - cum- Labour Court, Bhubaneshwar .

Tr . INDUSTRIAL DISPUTE CASE NO . 292/2001 Date of Passing Award 18th June , 2010

Between:

TheProject Officer ,

Nandira Colliery ofMCL,

P.O. Balanda , Distt . Angul, Orissa .

1stPartyManagement

AND

Shri Narottam Naik ,

Ex- Loader , S /o . Jaya Naik,

Vill . Janhapada , Po. Daloma , P.S. Parajang ,

Dist. Dhenkanal , Orissa.

2nd Party-Workman

APPEARANCES :

None

For the 1st Party - Management.

None

For the 2nd Party- Workman .

AWARD

treatment he was found fit to resume duty from 25-11-1995. He submitted his fitness certificate through registered post to theMedical Officer, Nandira Colliery who referred to the Deputy C.M.O (RH) , Regional Hospital at Dera Colliery on 27-11-1995 for an opinion regarding fitness . While the papers were under consideration he again fell ill and reported his illness to the Medical Officer , Nandira Colliery. He refused anddenied any help . Finding no other alternative and being seriously ill he got himself admitted in Kamakhyanagar Hospital and remained there from 1-12-1995 to 17-10-1996. He intimated about his illness to the 1 st Party - Management by registered post on 30-3-1996 which was duly acknowledged .After being relieved from Kamakhyanagar Government Hospital and found fit he submitted medical fitness certificate to the Project Officer , Nandira Colliery who forwarded the same to the Medical Superintendent of Deulbera Colliery . He was called on 19-3-1997 to appear before the Medical Board which he attended and met the officers several times to join the service , but surprisingly on 23-5-1997 the order of removal from service was served on him by registered post . He applied for the review ofthe removal order , But on finding no hope of consideration , he moved the Asst . Labour Commissioner - I (Central ) for conciliation and made out his case . But the 1st Party- Management did not act upon the advice of the Asst. Labour Commissioner - 1 ( Central ) whereupon thedispute wasforwarded to the Central Government for reference to this Tribunal . His absence from the work due to illness was neither intentional nor within his control . Hence his removal from service is illegal , unjustified and he may be reinstated into service with full back wages and other service benefits .

The Government of India in the Ministry of labour in exercise of the powers conferred by clause (d) of sub- section ( 1 ) and sub- section 2(A) of Section 10 of the I.D. Act . , 1947 has referred the following dispute existing between the employers in relation to the Management of M.C.L. and their workman vide their letter No. L - 22012/166/ 99 / IR ( CM - II ) , dated 31-8-1999 :

"Whether the action of the management of MCL (Nandira Colliery) in terminating the services of Shri Narottam Naik , Ex - Loader due to sickness and resultant long absenteeism justified ? If not, to what reliefthe concerned workman is entitled ? "

The 1st Party-Management in reply to the allegations ofthedisputant- workman has stated that Shri Naik was in the habit of remaining unauthorizedly absent without leave or without sufficient cause . He had been warned several times to improve his attendance . He worked 130 days , 141 days, 92 days , 132 days , 74 and half days and 10 days in the years 1988 , 1991, 1992, 1993 , 1994 and 1995 respectively outof306 working days . He did not work for a single day in the years 1989 and 1990 out of 306 working days . Shri Naik inspite of several warnings has not mended his ways and remained unauthorizedly absent from duty with effect from 1-3-1995 without any intimation to the 1st Party- Management . As such specific charges were framed by the competent authority for his un - authorized and continuous absence without sufficient cause and without permission which construed misconduct on his part under clause 26.24 and 26.30 of the certified Standing Orders in force. The disputant -workman was asked to submit his written explanation after serving charges vide letter dated 27-2-1996 which was duly received by the disputant- workman. The explanation submitted by the disputant- workman was not found satisfactory . Hence one man enquiry committee was constituted by the competent authority under intimation to the 2nd Party- workman who participated in the enquiry . He was given adequate Thedisputant -workman in his statement of claim has stated that he was appointed and posted as piece rated loader at Nandira Colliery on 29-12-1984 . He rendered unblemished service without any adverse remark. He fell ill on 1-3-1995 and was hospitalized in Parajanga Govt . Hospital from 2-3-1995 to 24-11-1995 for his treatment . Because of his serious illness and unconsciousness he could not take permission from his Authority for hospitalization nor could intimate the Management . On regaining sense and becoming conscious on6-3-1995 he intimated his Authority about his illness and hospitalization through registered post which was duly received and acknowledged by the Project Officer . After 4554

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 24, 2010 / SHRAVANA 2, 1932

[PART II - SFC . 3 (ii) ]

any irregularity or illegality. Resultantly he found that the disputant- workman Shri Naik is not entitled for any relief.

The disputant-workman went in Writ jurisdiction before the Hon'ble High Court of Orissa and the Hon'ble High Court ofOrissa in W.P. (C) No. 17492/2006 vide order dated 22-9-2008 set aside the impugned award dated 1-10-2002 and remitted back the matter to this Tribunal for reconsideration of the same afresh, after giving reasonable opportunity of hearing to the parties .

ThisTribunal after receipt of the order of the Hon'ble High Court of Orissa issued notices to the parties on 30-12-2008 . Thereafter parties appeared but no witness was produced on five dates of their appearance . Subsequently parties remained absent for four consecutive dates . On 10-12-2009 this Tribunal ordered issuance of fresh notice to the parties . After that the Ist Party - Management appeared on one date , but the 2nd Party- workman did not appear. Thus both the parties absented themselves on the 1st four consecutive dates . Ultimately a last opportunity was afforded to the parties to appear and adduce evidence on 14-6-2010 . But on that date also , parties were absent . Hence the case was fixed for passing of award on the basis ofthe evidence on record.

It is also worth mentioning that the Hon'ble High Court of Orissa has directed this Tribunal to dispose of the matter as expeditiously as possible , preferably within a period of four months . But inspite of giving more than sufficient opportunity to the parties to lead evidence and submit their case , the parties did not act positively and produce any evidence.

FINDINGS

opportunity in accordance with the principles of natural justice to defend himself. After conclusion of the enquiry the enquiry report was submitted in which the disputant- workman was found guilty of the charges levelled against him. Taking into consideration the enquiry report , the evidence on record and the proceedings , the disciplinary authority vide his letter dated 3-5-1997 has removed Shri Naik from the service of Mahanadi Coalfields Limited . It is incorrect to allege that the 2nd Party - workman has rendered unblemished service . Shri Naik was a habitual absentee and never put in attendance of more than 150 days in any ofthe years from 1988 to 1995. It is also incorrect to allege that he had intimated about his so - called illness to the Management. He did not submit his treatment papers except two medical certificates, one from Parjang Hospital for a period from 2-3-1995 to 24-11-1995 and the other from Kamakhyanagar Hospital for the period from 1-12-1995 to 17-10-1996. The reason stated for his absence is an after- thought to cover up the period of unauthorized absence and is far from truth . The so called certificate mentioning him as an outdoor patient is arranged as a cover up . It is also incorrect to allege that he was not allowed to resume duty. On the contrary Shri Naik did not report for duty evenafter producing fitness certificate. As per the existing company rules Shri Naik was referred to Regional Hospital for a specialized examination to ascertain his fitness for the job he is to perform . But Shri Naik instead of reporting to Regional Hospital for specialized examination again absented himself and did not report to Dy . Chief Medical Officer of Regional Hospital along with treatment papers as advised. As such he was rightly terminated from service and he is not entitled for any relief.

Issue No. 1

Onthe above pleadings following issues were settled:

ISSUES

1. Whether the action of the Management of MCL (Nandira Colliery) in terminating the services of Shri Narottam Naik , Ex - Loader due to sickness and due to long absenteeism is justified?

2. To what relief the workman is entitled?

Atthe very outset it has to be mentioned that this reference was set exparte against the 2nd Party - workman as he failed to adduce any oral evidence . He simply filed the photocopies of certain documents which have not been proved by any oral evidence. The Ist Party- Management has filed affidavit of one Shri Dilip Kumar Behera who was then Senior Personnel Officer of Talcher Colliery, MCL, Talcher Area in exparte evidence to prove the case of the 1st Party-Management . The Ist Party -Management has also filed certain documents which were exhibited from Ext. -A to Ext.-F. On the strength of the affidavit and documents filedby the Ist Party - Management the then Presiding Officer by his exparte award came to the conclusion that the order of removal from service passed by the 1st Party- Management against the 2nd party workman is proper and justified and does not suffer from

Itis an undisputed fact that the disputant -workman remained absent from duty from 1-3-1995 to 24-11-1995 and thereafter from 1-12-1995 to 17-10-1996 which was according to the disputant - workman was due to illness and hospitalization . But as per the version of the Ist Party- Management the disputant -workman was in the habit of remaining unauthorizedly absent without sufficient cause and without leave. He never rendered service of more than 150 days in any year out of 306 working days . Remaining absent unauthorizedly without any intimation to the Management construes misconduct under clause 26.24 and 26.30 of the certified Standing Orders in force . The 2nd Party-workman remained absent unauthorizedly and continuously with effect from 1-3-1995 without any intimation to the 1st Party- Management as such he was issued charge - sheet to submit his explanation . The explanation submitted by the 2nd Party- Workman being found unsatisfactory, one man enquiry committee was constituted by the competent Authority . The disputant- workman fully participated in the enquiry proceedings and was given sufficient opportunity to defend himself. In the enquiry the 2nd Party- Workman was found guilty of the charges . The affidavit of Shri Dilip Kumar Behera , Senior भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई 24, 2010/ श्रावण 2, 1932

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii ) ]

Personnel Officer of the Talcher Colliery, MCL , Talcher Area and the documents filed on behalf of the 1st Party- Management clearly prove that the disputant- workman adopted the habit of remaining unauthorizedly absent from dutywithout leave or without sufficient cause continuously for several months which construed misconduct under the Certified Standing Orders in force . The disputant- workman has not been successful in proving that he was really incapable of joining duty due to his so called illness and hospitalization . He also could not prove that he intimated the fact of his illness and hospitalization to the 1st Party- Management . As such the contention of the 1st Party- Management that the disputant- workman's procurement of medical certificate is after- thought act to cover up his misconduct of remaining unauthorizedly absent for such a long period . There is no allegation of bias against the enquiry officer . The propriety of the domestic enquiry by one-man committee has been challenged by the 2nd Party- Workman. But no material has been placed before this Tribunal to go against its propriety and the findings recorded by the enquiry officer .

In a recently reported case of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court between Subhash Ramchandra Dumbre -And- Maharashtra State Co- operative Agricultural & Rural Develoment Bank Ltd. and Others [2010-11 - LLJ - 632 (Born .) ] it has been held that " termination of service for long absence on the ground of illness without enquiry and without getting him examined by a doctor from the panel of the Bank before termination is not necessary. The bank wasjustified in issuing notice of termination by paying compensation of discharge simplicitor" .

Inthe present case the disputant- workman was asked to appear before the Medical Board but he did not report nor submitted any reason for his inability to appear before the Medical Board . Therefore , a gross misconduct was caused by the disputant - workman by remaining unauthorizedly absent from duty for several months altogether without any intimation or grant of leave . Therefore, his termination from service cannot be held unjustified and illegal and the action of the 1st Party-Management in terminating his services due to long absenteeism is held justified and proper . This issue is answered accordingly against the disputant - workman . ISSUE NO . 2

Inview ofthe findings given under Issue No. I above the 2nd Party - workman is not entitled to any relief. The reference is answered accordingly. Dictated and Corrected by me . J. SRIVASTAVA, Presiding Officer नई दिल्ली , 28 जून , 2010

का. आ. 1828. औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 (1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार मैसर्स एफ.सी.

4555 आई. के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच , अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण , जबलपुर के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 106/92 ) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 28-6-2010 को प्राप्त हुआ था । [सं. एल-22012 /23 /एफ/ 1992 - आई आर ( सी- II ) ] अजय कुमार गौड़ , डेस्क अधिकारी New Delhi , the 28th June , 2010

S.O. 1828. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) , the Central Government hereby publishes the Award ( Ref. No. 106/ 92) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal - cum- Labour Court , Jabalpur as shown in the Annexure , in the industrial dispute between the employers in relation to the management of FCI and their workmen , which was received by the Central Government on 28-6-2010 .

[No. L-22012/23/F/ 1992- IR ( C- II ) ] AJAY KUMAR GAUR , Desk Officer ANNEXURE

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

NO . CGIT/LC/ R/ 106/92

PRESIDING OFFICER: SHRI MOHD.SHAKIR HASAN Shri Moharman Singh ,

S/o Shri Devi Singh ,

A. G.I (Depot) ,

Food Corporation of India ,

Workman/Union Moti Tabela, Gwalior (MP)

Versus

1. Managing Director , FoodCorporation of India, HeadOffice, 16-20 Barakhambalane , NewDelhi .

2. Sr.Regional Manager, FoodCorporation of India, ChetakBuilding, Maharana Pratap Nagar , Habibganj , Bhopal .

3. Zonal Manager (West ) , Food Corporation of India , Zonal Office , Mistry Bhavan , D.W.Road ,

Managements Churchgate, Bombay-20 AWARD

Passed on this 7th day of June- 2010 1. The Government of India , Ministry of Labour vide its Notification No.L - 22012 /23/F / 92 - IR ( Coal - II ) dated 9-6-92 has referred the following dispute for adjudication by this tribunal :--

"Whether the action of the management of Zonal Manager (West) Food Corporation of India, Bombay vide order dated 18-5-90 in modifying the punishment 4556

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 24 , 2010/SHRAVANA 2 , 1932

[PART II-SEC. 3 ( ii ) ] and thereafter imposing on the applicant fixing his pay at the minimum of the time scale ofpay ofAsstt . Grade- I (D) and intervening period from the date of his compulsory retirement from the service to the date of the reinstatement his service not treated as leave of any kind due , is justified or not, if not what reliefthe applicant is entitled for? "

Disciplinary Authority disagreed with the enquiry report and awarded the penalty of compulsory retirement vide orderdated 3-8-89 and the period of suspension was treated as " not on duty" . The Appellate Authority, Zonal Manager (W) FCI , Bombay after considering the appeal modified the order of compulsory retirement by fixing his pay at the minimum of the time scale and the compulsory retirement to the date of reinstatement shall be treated as leave of any kind . Vide order dated 21-3-1990 . Hence the workman is not entitled to any relief.

4.The workman after filing statement of claim did not produced any evidence and became absent . Lastly the then Tribunal proceeded the reference exparte against the workman on 12-10-2007 .

5. The point for issue is as to whether the action of the management is justified or not as has been referred by the reference ?

6. To prove the case , the management has adduced evidence in the case . The management witness Shri D.N.P. Sinha is Sr. Regional Manager , FCI , Raipur . He has supported the case of the management . He has stated that he was reinstated as per direction ofthe Hon'ble Court and theworkman had been paid a sum of Rs . 84,583.40 . He has further stated that again the Disciplinary Authority passed order on 3-8-89 and imposed a penalty of compulsory retirement and also directed that the period of suspension shall be treated as period not spent on duty . On appeal before the Appellate authority , the punishment of compulsory retirement was reduced and modified to place the workman on the minimum of the time scale of pay of AG- I ( D) and the intervening period from the date of compulsory retirement to the date of reinstatement shall be treated as on leave of any kind due in pursuance to the Regulation 66 of FCI ( Staff) Regulation , 1971. There is no other evidence to contradict or rebut the evidence of this witness . There is no reason to disbelieve the evidence of thiswitness .

2. The case of the workman , in short , is that the workman Moharman Singh is an employee of Food Corporation of India ( in short FCI ) and was posted at Rajnandangaon depot under Distt . Manager , FCI Raipur on transfer . He was charge sheeted on 1-2-83 and after departmental enquiry, he was dismissed vide order dated 8-7-83 . The appellate authority also rejected his appeal . He preferred a writ petition No. 685/1985 before the Hon'ble High Court of MP. The Hon'ble High Court passed the order dated 1-7-1988 and set aside the dismissal order with the direction to reinstate the workman and to pay emoluments in accordance with condition of service and regulations . It is also directed that the management shall be at liberty to pass fresh order by directing the Enquiry Officer ( in short E.O ) to submit fresh enquiry report on the materials on record . A fresh enquiry report was submitted by the E.O holding the charges as not proved . The Disciplinary authority Sr. Regional Manager , FCI , Bhopal disagreed with the finding of the E.O and passed the order dated 3-8-1989 of punishment of compulsory retirement and the period of suspension was to be treated as non- duty for all the purposes. The workman preferred appeal before the Zonal Manager ( West) , FCI , Bombay who after considering the materials on record passed order dated 18-5-90 and set aside the dismissal order and reinstate the workman but passed the order to fix his pay at the minimum of time scale . It is stated that the Zonal Manager ( W) , FCI Bombay found the enquiry report in accordance with the procedure and therefore illegally passed the order to place the workman on minimum time scale . Under the circumstances , the reference be answered in favour of the workman.

3. The management appeared and filed the Written Statement in the case . The case of the management , interalia, is that admittedly the workman was chargesheeted and he was punished by the order of dismissal after departmental enquiry. The appeal was admittedly rejected. Thereafter admittedly a Writ petition was filed before the Hon'ble High Court of MP. The Hon'ble Court set aside the dismissal order and directed to reinstate the workman. Admittedly it is directed by the Hon'ble Court that the management is at liberty to pass a fresh order after fresh enquiry report on the same materials by the E.O. The workman was reinstated vide order dated 29-9-88 and simultaneously placed under deemed suspension under Regulation 66 (6 ) of FCI (Staff) Regulation , 1971. The fresh enquiry report dated 12-5-89 was submitted by Shri N.S.Sastry, E.O holding the charges stood not proved . The

7. Another witness Shri Rakesh Kumar Chaturvedi is General Manager , FCI , Chhattisgarh Region , Raipur. He has also supported the case of the management and corroborated the evidence of Shri D.N.P.Sinha . He has stated that the punishment of compulsory retirement was modified by the Appellate authority vide order dated 18-5- 90. Exhibit M/9 is the order dated 18-5-90 of the Appellate Authority whereby the punishment order was modified. The said order clearly shows that the Disciplinary authority dis-agreed with the report of the Enquiry Officer and relied the statement of delinquent workman which was Exhibit - 7 and considered that the charges were proved and imposed the penalty of compulsory retirement. The order of the Appellate Authority further shows that the Appellate Authority simply found in appeal that the punishment imposed on the workman was not appropriate to the gravity ofthe charges proved and as such modified the punishment accordingly. In absence of any other evidence in rebuttal , 4557 भारत का राजपत्र : जुलाई 24, 2010/श्रावण 2 , 1932

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

AWARD

Passed on this 8th day of June , 2010

1. TheGovernment of India, Ministry of Labour vide its Notification No.L-22012/343/97 - IR(CM - II) dated 9-6-98 has referred the following dispute for adjudication by this tribunal:

I do not find it proper to interfere in the punishment imposed by the Appellate Authority . However I find that the part reference order is that the question , whether the action of the management vide order dated 18-5-90 of intervening period from the date of his compulsory retirement from the service to the date ofthe reinstatement ofhis service not treated as leave of any kind due is justified or not appears to be not correct . The order dated 18-5-90 (ExhibitM/9 ) is itself clear that the intervening period shall be treated as leave of any kind due . With above observation, the reference is , accordingly, answered.

8. In the result, the award is passed without any order to costs .

" Whether the promotion of Sh.Mohanlal , S/o Sh. Shivratanlal Sahu, Driver from Cat . V to Driver- Cum-Mechanic Category next at Category VI vide office order No. SECL/CGM/GA/PER/DPC/97/ 15 , dated 1-1-97 of the Chief General Manager , SECL, Gevra Area, Distt . Bilaspur (MP ) without giving back effect is justified ? If not, to what relief is the workman entitled?"

9. Let the copies of the award be sent to the Government of India, Ministry ofLabour and Employment as perrules.

MOHD. SHAKIR HASAN, Presiding Officer

नई दिल्ली , 28 जून , 2010

का. आ. 1829, औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 (1947 का 14) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में , केन्द्रीय सरकार एवं एस.ई.सी. एल. के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच , अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालय , जबलपुर के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 100/98 ) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 28-6-2010 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल-22012/343/1997- आई आर ( सीएम- II ) ] अजय कुमार गौड़ , डेस्क अधिकारी

2. The case ofthe Union/workman , in short , is that the workman Mohanlal was initially appointed as Labour inKobraGeora Project of N.T.P.C. In 1971 he was promoted to Mazdoor Cadre Class II . In 1978 he was asked to work as Mechanical helper . Later in 1982 his Junior was promoted toMechanical Fitter Grade IV but he was not promoted. In 1983 he was transferred as Driver and on 1984 he was working as Driver Grade V at Kusmunda Geora Project . In 1994, other employees namely Khik Ram, Govind Das , N.G.R.Nair and H.P.Gupta were promoted to Driver -cum- Mechanical Grade V but the workman was denied promotion . On enquiry, it was informed that his service sheet was missing. He had a very good service record but thenjuniors were promoted causing great injustice to the workman. It is submitted that the workman be accordingly promotedwith all monetary benefits from due date .

New Delhi , the 28th June, 2010

S.O. 1829. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947) , the Central Government here by published the Award (Ref. No. 100/ 98) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal - cum- Labour Court , Jabalpur as shown in the annexure, in the industrial dispute between the employers in relation to the management ofSECL and their workman , which was received by the Central Government on 28-6-2010 .

[No. L- 22012/343/ 1997- IR (CM- II)] AJAY KUMAR GAUR, Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT

INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM- LABOUR COURT, JABALPUR

3.The management appeared and filed statement of claim. The case of the management, interalia , is that the workman was initially appointed as General Mazdoor Cat- Iby the National Coal Development Corporation ( in short NCDC) instead of N.T.P.C at Kobra Colliery. Thereafter he was promoted to General Mazdoor Cat - II and had never worked as mechanical helper . In 1994 DPC was constituted to consider the promotion to the post of Driver- cum Mechanic but he failed to obtain the required minimum mark and therefore his case was not found fit for promotion . Later after successful completion of training , he alongwith other were promoted to the post of Driver Category V. Subsequently in partial correction to the office order No. 97.13 dated 1-1-1997 he alongwith other employees were promoted to the post of Driver- cum- Mechanic CatVI vide order No. 15 dated 1-1-1997 . As such there is no merit in the present reference . The reference be answered in favour ofthe management.

No. CGIT/LC/R/ 100 /98

PRESIDING OFFICER : SHRI MOHD.SHAKIR HASAN The Secretary,

CSMU, Gevra Project, Qtr.MD395 ,

4.The Union/workman subsequently became absent and had not adduced any evidence . Lastly the then Tribunal proceeded the reference exparte against the Union/ workman on 7-7-2008 .

Deepika Colony, Distt . Bilaspur ,

Workman /Union

Gevra Project

Versus

5. The point for consideration is as to whether the workman is entitled to claim in view of the reference or not .

The Chief General Manager ,

SECL, Gevra Area, PO Gevra Project,

6. To prove the case , the management has adduced oral and documentary evidence . The management witness Distt . Bilaspur (MP)

....Management

Gevra Project.

4558

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 24, 2010/SHRAVANA 2, 1932

[PART II-SEC . 3( ii) ]

ANNEXURE

CENTRALGOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM- LABOUR COURT, JAIPUR

Present : N. K. PUROHIT, PresidingOfficer I. D. 56/06

Reference No. L -42012/ 19 /06 - IR (DU) dated: 24-8-2006 BETWEEN

Shri Girdhari Lal, S/o Shri Munshi Ram R/o Dev Nagar Purani Asbadi , Sri Ganganagar . AND

1. Commissioner ,

2. The Superintendent,

CentralExcise and Custom Department Near Statute Circle, Jaipur. Central Excise and Custom Department, SriGanganagar.

AWARD

Mr. Syed Vilayatullah is superintending Engineer ( Civil ) SECL , Chirimiri Area . He has stated that in 1994, the workman failed to obtain the required minimum mark in the DPC and was not considered for promotion. The management has filed the recommendation of DPC ofthe year 1994which is marked as Exhibit M/3 . This shows that the workman had not obtained the required marks for promotion and only 9 employees out of33 employees were found fit for promotion . He has further stated that he was promotedto Driver- cum- Mechanic Cat- VI vide order No. 15 dated 1-1-97 . The said order is filed which is Exhibit M/5 . This document clearly shows that the workman was promoted to the post of Driver - cum- Mechanic Cat- VI vide order No. 15 dated 1-1-1997 but he was not entitled from back date as the evidence discussed above shows that he was not found fit earlier by the DPC . There is no other evidence to disbelieve the evidence of the management. I find and hold that the action of the management was justified for not giving the order in operation with back effect . Accordingly the reference is answered .

15-6-2010 7. In the result, the award is passed without any order to costs .

The Central Government in exercise of the powers conferredunder clause D of sub - section 1 & 2(A) of Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 has referred the following Industrial Dispute to this tribunal for adjudication which is as under :-

8. Let the copies of the award be sent to the Government of India, Ministry of Labour & Employment as per rules .

MOHD. SHAKIR HASAN , Presiding Officer

नई दिल्ली , 28 जून , 2010

"Whether the action of the management of Central Excise and Custom Deptt. Sri Ganganagar through Superintendent in terminating the services of claimant Shri Girdhari Lal S/ o Shri Munshi Ram w.e.f. 1-10-2000 legal and justified ? If not, what relief the claimant is entitled to and from which date ? " का. आ. 1830. औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 (1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में , केन्द्रीय सरकार सेन्ट्रल एक्साईज एण्ड कस्टम डिर्पाटमेंट के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालय, जयपुर के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या56/06 ) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 28-6-2010 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

2. Pursuant to the receipt of the reference, the registered, notices were issue to both the parties. It is evident from the record that Shri Sitaram Chaudhary, Advocate put his appearance before the Tribunal on 5-5-2010 and sought adjournment to file his authority letter to appear on behalf of non -applicant but he did not appears on next date i.e. 14-6-2010 . It is also evident that despite service of notice on the claimant Shri Girdhari Lal, he has not appeared before the Tribunal to file his claim statement. It shows that the claimant is not willing to plead his claim.

[सं. एल-42012/19/2006- आई आर( डी.यू. ) ] जोहन तोपनो, अवर सचिव

New Delhi , the 28th June , 2010

3. Inreference under adjudication, the question under consideration is whether the alleged action of the management of Central Excise and Custom Deptt . Sri Ganganagar through Superintendent in terminating the services of Shri Girdhari Lal w.e.f. 1-10-2000 is justified. Initial burden to prove this was on the claimant, but he has failed to file his claim before the Tribunal. Resultantly, there is no material on the record to adjudicate the matter on the merit . It appears that the claimant is not willing to contest the case further . Thus , under these circumstances "No Claim Award" is passed in this matter .

4. Award as above .

S.O. 1830. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947), the Central Government here by published the Award (Ref. No. 56/ 2006) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal - cum- Labour Court , Jaipur as shown in the annexure , in the industrial dispute between the employers in relation to the management ofCentral Excise and Custom Department and their workman , which was received by the Central Government on 28-6-2010 .

Let a copy of the award be sent to the Central Government for publication u/ s 17( 1 ) of the Industrial Disputes Act .

N. K. PUROHIT, Presiding Officer [No. L-42012/ 19/2006- IR (DU) ] JOHAN TOPNO , Under Secy .

4559 भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई 24 , 2010/ श्रावण 2 , 1932

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

AWARD

नई दिल्ली, 28 जून , 2010

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

"(i ) Whether the demand of South Malabar Gramin Bank Deposit Collectors Union ( Regd . ) to absorb Nithya Nidhi Deposit Collectors as bank employees in South Malabar Gramin Bank isjustified ? If so , to what reliefthey are entitled to ?

का, आ. 1831.-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 (1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में , केन्द्रीय सरकार साऊथ मालाबार ग्रामीण बैंक के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालय , एरनाकुलम के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 13/2010 ) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 28-6-2010 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल -12012/ 151/1992- आई आर ( बी -1 ) ]

जोहन तोपनो , अवर सचिव

New Delhi , the 28th June , 2010

(ii) Whether the action of the management of South Malabar Gramin Bank in reducing the commission from 3.5 % to 3 % in the year 1976 and from 3 % to 2.5% w.e.f. 2-5-78 to N.N.D. Collectors is justified ? If not , to what relief they are entitled to ?"

S.O. 1831. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) , the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 13/ 2010) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal- cum- Labour Court , Eranakulam as shown in the annexure, in the industrial dispute between the management of South Malabar Gramin Bank and their workmen , received by the Central Government on 28-06-2010 .

[No. L- 12012/ 151 / 1992- IR (B-I) ] JOHAN TOPNO, Under Secy.

ANNEXURE

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

Present:

Shri P. L. NORBERT, B.A. , LLB. , Presiding Officer (Friday the 18th day of June , 2010/28th jashttam , 1932 )

I.D. 13/2010

(I.D. 2/93 of labour Court , Kozhikode)

Union :

TheGeneral Secretary,

South Malabar Gramin Bank Deposit

Collectors union ,

C/o . South Malabar Gramin Bank ,

Kizhissery Branch, P.O. Kuzhimanna, Malappuram, District, kerala-673 641 .

By Adv . Shri . C. Anil Kumar.

The Chairman,

Manangement

South Malabar Gramin Bank, HeadOffice, Malappuram ,

Kerala-676565.

ByAdv. Sri . Devan Ramachandran .

2. The facts of the case in brief are as follows :- The management South Malabar Gramin Bank engaged Deposit Collectors for canvassing and collecting fixed deposits, loan instalments and for various other banking activities . The Agents were given commission according to the amount they collected. The rate of commission prevailing prior to 01-02-1978 was 3.5%. But it was reduced to 3% from 01-02-1978 . Again the commission was reduced to 2.5% w.e.f. 02-05-1978 . This was challenged by the union ofDeposit collectors . Union also claimed regularisation of depositcollectors in the service of the management bank . As perreference Labour Court , Kozhikode passed an award in ID 2/1993 on 24-01-1998 finding that the deposit collectors are not workmen within the definition of S.2(s ) of Industrial Disputes Act and hence they are not entitled forregularisation . Regarding reduction of commission rate the Labour Court found that since the deposit collectors are not workmen that issue did not arise for consideration and hence no relief was granted . The matter was challenged inOP 18978/1998 by judgment dated 22-08-2005 it was held that the issue whether deposit collectors are workmen or not is covered by the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in Indian Bank's Association v . Workmen of Syndicate Bank and Ors . (2001 ) 3 SCC 36. In the said decision it is heldby Hon'ble Supreme Court that the deposit collectors are workmen within the definition of S.2( s) of ID Act, but they are not entitled for regularisation . In the light of this decision High Court modified the award of Labour Court holding that the deposit collectors are worken , but they are not entitled for regularisation . The judgment in O.P. waschallenged in appeal as WA 2537/2005 . By judgment dated 15-12-2005 it was held in appeal that since the question of reduction of commission was not considered either by Labour Court or by High Court in OP , the Labour Court was directed to reconsider that question. Thereafter a revised award was passed in ID 2/1993 by Labour Court , Kozhikode on 13-03-2006 finding that the reduction of commissionfrom 3 % to 2.5% w.e.f. 02-05-1978 is unjustified. Thiswas challenged again in WPs (C) 18025 & 25275/2006 .

Thiscase coming up for hearing on 17-06-2010, this Tribunal-cum-Labour Court on 18-06-2010 passed the following.

2639GI/10-12 4560

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 24 , 2010/SHRAVANA 2 , 1932

[PART II- SEC . 3 ( ii) ]

"How many deposit collectors were there in service of the bank at the time of Exts . W - 10 and 11 ?" Byjudgment dated 28-05-2009 the Hon'ble High Court held that the Labour Court had not gone into the aspect as to how many deposit collectors were in service of bank either onthedate ofExt . W- 10 or W- 11 circulars (marked in award) . The Hon'ble High Court however confirmed the finding of Labour Court that the reduction of commission is bad , but directed the Labour Court to reconsider the matter to the limited extent of determining the number of workmen in service during the period of Ext . W- 10 and 11. Thereafter Labour Court , Kozhikode wrote to High Court requesting to transfer the case to this court in view ofthe establishment ofCentral Government Industrial Tribunal . The High Court by order dated 17-12-2009 directed the Labour Court , Kozhikode to transfer the case to this court and to dispose ofthe reference within a period of six months from the date ofreceipt of the file from Labour Court , Kozhikode . The file was received by this court on 15-01-2010. Notices were issued to both sides and provided opportunity to adduce further evidence , if any . The union produced four documents initially, out or which they wanted to rely on only two documents and they alone were received in evidence and marked on consent as Exts . W-43 and 44. Thereafter one more document was produced and was marked as Ext . W-45 . The management produced three documents and they too were marked on consent as Exts.M3 to M5 . The remaining documents were already marked by Labour Court, Kozhikode . The relevant portion ofremand order of Hon'ble High Court in OP 18025/2006 and 25275/2006 dated 28-05-2009 is contained in paragraph 11 and 12 of the judgment . It reads :

" 11. Thus , while affirming the award to the extent to which the Labour Court has found that there should not have been a reduction of the commission payable to the deposit collectors / workmen unilaterally without notice , I am of the view that the Labour Court should again consider how many deposit collectors were in the service of the Bank on the date of W10 and W11 . Award should therefore, be passed with specific reference to the said aspect .

4. The Point :-Ext . W - 10 circular is dated 13-02-1978 . As per Ext . W- 10 commission was reduced from 3.5% to 3 % w.e.f. 01-02-1978 . Ext . W- 11 circular is dated 03-05-1978 . As per Ext .W- 11 commission was reduced from 3% to 22% w.e.f. 02-05-1978 . The management filed a list of deposit collectors engaged by the management on or before 03-05-1978 . As per the list thirteen worken were in service on or before 01-02-1978. The union produced three agreements , Exts . W- 43 to 45. They were executed by Sri P. Ummer , P.P. Balakrishnan and M.P. Jayaraj on 26-05-1977 , 08-10-1977 and 28-6-1977 respectively. They were thus working prior to the date mentioned in Ext .W- 10. Thus there were 16 deposit collectors on the date mentioned in Ext. W - 10 i.e. 01-02-1978 . They continued to work even thereafter. Ext . W - 11 is dated 03-05-1978 . As per list of management two persons had joined the service on 07-02-1978 and 25-03-1978 prior to the date mentioned in Ext .W- 11 (i.e. 02-05-1978 ). Therefore altogether 18 persons were in service on the date of Ext . W- 11 circular. The Labour Courtpassed a revised award holding that the reduction of commission from 3 % to 2.5 % as per Ext . W- 11 is illegal and unjustified and it was upheld by the Hon'ble High Court in OP 18025/2006 and 25275/2006 dated 28-05-2009 . It was also observed by High Court that on a parity of reasoning Ext.W- 10 circular also cannot be justified . Reduction of commission as per Ext . W - 10 and 11 circulars cannot affect these 18 deposit collectors as it is already found to be illegal and unjustified due to want of notice under Section 9-A of ID Act . Hence they are entitled to get commission at the old rate of 3.5% (the rate of commission prior to Ext. W-10 is notdisputed ) . Though Ext.W- 10 is dated 13-02-1978 the reduction of commission made effective from 01-02-1978 . If so the persons engaged prior to 01-02-1978 would be 16 ( 13 as per list of management and 3 as per documents of union i.e. Exts . W43 to 45) and persons engaged at thetime of Ext . W - 11 would be 18 (2 as per list of management and 16 already in service ) . Since reduction of commission is found to be illegal Exts . W- 10 & 11 circulars cannot affect these 18 workmen .

In the result an award is passed in the light of the remand order in OP 18025/2006 and 25275/2006 finding that there are 18 deposit collectors (16 as per Ext .W- 10 and 2 as per Ext. W - 11 ) falling within the period of Exts . W- 10 and 11 and they are entitled to get commission at the old rate or 3.5%.

The award will come into force one month after its publication in the official gazette .

12. Accordingly, ID. No.2/93 shallbe reconsidered by the Labour Court , Kozhikode , to the limited extent as indicated above . The management and the union shall be entitled to adduce evidence to show how many deposit collectors were in the service of the bank on the date of W10 and W11 . Labour Court shall pass an award with specific reference to the said workmen, taking note of the observations already made above . Such revised award shall be passed within six months from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment".

Dictated to the Personal Assistant , transcribed and typed by her , corrected and passed by me on this the 18thday of June , 2010.

P.L. NORBERT, Presiding Officer 3. In view of the remand order the only point that requires consideration is :

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : जुलाई 24, 2010/ श्रावण 2 , 1932

W16

Appendix

Witness for the Union

Viswanadhan

S/o . Sankara Pillai .

WW1

W17 WW2

S/ o . Alavi .

Kunhimuhammad

W18 Witness for the Management

S/o . Damodaran .

MWI

R.P. Raveendran

W19 MW2

P.N. Gopalakrishna Pillai S/o . Narayana Panicker.

W20 Exhibits for the Union

W21 True copy of the leaf- let issued by the Management (series ) Establishment.

W22 True copy of the circuler issued by the Management establishment in the year 1976 .

W23 True attested Photostat copy ofthe Identity card issued to Shri . P. Vishwanathan on 21-08-1978 by the Branch Manager , S.M.G.B , Chulliyoda Branch.

True copy of Regional Rural Bank proceedings ofthe management bank.

W24 True attested photo copy of the RD/NND application -cum - specimen signature card .

NND Application-cum - Specimen signature card.

W25 W7

True copy of agreementdt . 16-07-1997 executed between Sreedharan . T.K. and South Malabar Gramin Bank, Karuvarakund.

W26 W8

True copy of Circular No. 79/77 dated 01-08-1997 of the Management.

True copy of Circular No. 106/77 dated 08-11-1997 of the Management.

W27 W10

True copy of Circular No. 19/78 dated 13-02-1998 of the Management .

W11

W28 True copy of Circular No. 48/78 dated 03-05-1998 of the Management .

W12

True copy of Circular No. 59/78 dated 08-07-1998 of the Management .

W29 W13

Letter No. AM(ML) ORG /CHOD/ 325/89-90 dt. 06-07-1989 issued to Mr. Viswanathan by the Area Manager , SMGB , Malappuram .

W14

W30

Letter No. 9 SMGB.EF. 4315/88 P & D dt. 21-12-1988 issued to P.Viswanathan , Chulliyode Branch by the Senior Manager, SMGB , Malappuram.

W31 W15

True attested photo copy of the Award of the Industrial Tribunal , Hyderabad, in I.D. No. 14/1980 .

4561 True copy of Appointment Order No. RN.PD.3/3197 dt. 02-12-1983 issued by the Management ofBank ofBaroda.

True copy of the Circular No. 46/78 dt . 29-04-78 of the Management .

True copy of the Circular No. 11/79 dt . 21-02-79 of theManagement .

True copy ofCircular No. 28/79dt . 27-03-79 of the Management .

True copy ofCircular No. 49/79dt . 18-06-79 ofthe Management.

True copy of the Annual Report 91-92 of South Malabar Gramin Bank.

True copy ofletter No. 9 SMGB.0095.92-93 IR dt . 08-06-92 issuedby the Senior Manager , SMGB to the General Secretary, SMGB .

True copy of the letter No. 9 /SMGB/610/ 92-93 / IN dt . 25-11-1992 issued to Mr. P. Velayudhan by the Management .

True copy ofthe letter No. 9/SMGB.664/92- 93 IR dt . 14-12-1992 issued by the Management to the General Secretary , South Malabar Gramin Bank .

True copy ofthe letter No. 719 /92-93 /IN dt . 22-12-1992 issued to Mr. P.Kunhu Mohammed, General Secretary , SMGB by the General Manager .

True copy of the letter No. 266/92-93 dt . 28-01-93 issued to Sri . Kunhu Mohammad, General Secretary , SMGB by the Sr.Manager , SMGB .

N.N.D. Pass Book No. 2448 issued to P.Abbas , by the Manager , Chulliyods Branch.

Notice No. 9 /SMGB /NND/ 1186/91-92 /IR dt . 27-08-1991 issued to Shri P.Damodaran by the Management (True copy).

True copy of Memorandum of settlement dt. 21-10-1991 between the Management of Bank of India and their workman represented by Federation of Bank of India staff union .

True copy of termination order issued to Mr. A.K. Chinnan dt . 27-12-1985by SMGB , Velam Branch .

True copy ofletter No. SMGB.NND.104488 IRdt . 30-09-1988 issued to M.K. Alavi by the Management .

4562

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 24, 2010/SHRAVANA 2, 1932

[PART II-SEC . 3( ii) ] W32

True copy of Circular No. 98 /91-92 dt . 15-01-92 .

W33

अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालय , दिल्ली के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 41/2002 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 29-6-2010 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

True copy of Form No. 16A under the Income Tax Act .

[सं. एल-12012/37/2002- आई आर( बी -1 ) ] W34

जोहन तोपनो , अवर सचिव True copy of letter No. CWLRS.343295 SUG. 90dt. 10-02-90 issued by the General Manager, SMGB .

New Delhi , the 29th June , 2010 W35

True copy of Circular No. 105/90-91 dt . 05-02-1991 issued by the Management .

W36

True copy of Circular No. 33 /90-91 dt . 20-07-1990 issuedby the Management .

W37

True copy ofCircular No.51 /79dt. 03-07-79 of the Management .

S.O. 1832. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby published the Award (Ref. No. 41/ 2002) ofthe Central Government Industrial Tribunal - cum- Labour Court , Delhi as shown in the annexure , in the industrial dispute between the management of State Bank ofSaurashtra of and their workmen, received by the Central Government on 29-06-2010 .

W38

[No. L- 12012/37 /2002 - IR(B - I) ] JOHAN TOPNO, Under Secy .

True copy of letter No. 141.DM:4755.90-91 P& D dt . 9-10-1990 issued to Shri.P.Kunhu Mohammed , NND Agent , Kizhissery Branch by the General Manager , SMGB .

ANNEXURE

W39

Letter dt . 07-06-79 issued by the Management to Shri.P.P.Moideenkunhi .

W40

CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL CUM - LABOUR COURT- II , KARKARDOOMACOURT COMPLEX ROOM NO. 33 (GF), A- BLOCK, DELHI Letter dt . 22-05-79 issued by the Management to one Shri.P.P.Moideenkunhi .

I.D. No. 41/2002

Dated: 21-06-2010 W41

In the matter of dispute between:

Copy of the letter No. 11 / SMGB/A1 dt . 22-08-1996.

W42

Copy of the letter No. 11 /SMGB/A1 dt . 22-08-1996 .

W43

Copy ofAgreement dated 26-05-1977.

Shri Sunil Kumar S/ o Shri Sohan Lal Through: U.P.L.F. Regd. 8/440Trilokpuri Delhi- 110091

...Workman W44

08-10-1977 .

Versus

W45

do 28-06-1977.

Exhibits for the Management

Receipt No. 166093 of South Malabar GraminBank .

The Branch Manager, State Bank of Saurashtra A- 16 , Acharya Niketan Mayur Vihar , Phase - I , Patparganj Delhi -110092

...Management M2

AWARD

South Malabar Gramin Bank Nithya Nidhi Collection Sheet .

Copy of Agreement dated 01-09-1978 .

20-09-1994 .

The Central Government , Ministry of Labour vide Order No. L- 12012/37 /2002 - IR( B - 1 ) dated 19-06-2002 has referred the following industrial dispute to this Tribunal foradjudication:

W5 do

26-07-1978 .

नई दिल्ली , 29 जून , 2010

"Whether the action of the management of State Bank ofSaurashtra in terminating the services of Shri Sunil Kumar, Ex - Temporary Peon w.e.f. 02-10-2001 is justified? If not , what relief the applicant is entitled and from which date ? "

का. आ. 1832.-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार स्टेट बैंक ऑफ सौराष्ट्रा के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक

The statement of claim was filed by the workman on 16-10-2002 . Written statement to the same was filed by the 4563 भारत का राजपत्र : जुलाई 24, 2010/ श्रावण 2 , 1932

[भाग II-खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

Versus

Respondent/Party No.2 The ChiefGeneral Manager , Telecom (Railway Electrifica- tion), 46, Bajaj Nagar , Nagpur.

AWARD

(Dated21st June, 2010.)

management on 12-06-2003 . Thereafter , the workman filed a rejoinder on 16-09-2003 . None is present from the side of the workman for the last so many dates of hearing . In fact, ever since the case was transferred to this Tribunal from CGIT-cum -LC - I vide order no . Z-22019 /6 /2007 - IR-C- II dated 11-02-2008 ; the workman has never attended this Court . Evenbefore CGIT - cum- LC - I , the workman had not been attending the Court . It is thus evident that the workman is no longer interested in the outcome of this reference . In this situation , there is no way out except to pass a no- dispute award , which is passed accordingly . File be consigned to the record room.

Further , it is ordered that the requisite number of copies of this award be forwarded to the Central Government for necessary action at their end.

Dated: 21-06-2010

SATNAM SINGH , Presiding Officer

1. The Central Government after satisfying the existence of dispute between Shri Ravindra Shankarrao Wankhede , Amravati (Party No.1 ) and the Chief General Manager, Telecom (Railway Electrification), Nagpur (Party No.2) referred the same for adjudication to this Tribunal vide its letter No.L-40012/ 166 / 95 - IR(DU) dated 15/22-7-1997 under clause (d) of sub Section (1 ) and sub Section (2A) of Section 10 of Industrial Dispute Act , 1947 [ 14 of 1947 ] with the following schedule :

नई दिल्ली, 29 जून , 2010

2. "Whether the action of the management of C.G.M. , Telecom (Railway Electrification), 46, Bajaj Nagar , Nagpur in allegedly terminating the services of their workman , Shri Ravindra Shankar Rao Wankhede , a casual mazdoor w.e.f. 31-10-88 is legal , proper and justified? If not , what relief the workman is entitled for ? "

का. आ. 1833. औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 (1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में , केन्द्रीय सरकार दूर संचार विभाग के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच अनुबंध मेंनिर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालय , नागपुर के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या सीजीआईटी/एनजीपी/ 86/ 2002 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 29-6-2010 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल -40012/ 166/95- आई आर( डी.यू. ) ] जोहन तोपनो , अवर सचिव

New Delhi , the 29th June , 2010

3. It appears that initially the case was referred to the CGIT, Jabalpur from the Ministry in the month of August, 1997 and on consequent upon establishment of this Tribunal at Nagpur it came to be transferred to this office and issued notices to both the parties on 13-8-2002 . The next date was fixed for appearing before the Court on 20-9- 2002, on which both the parties were present .

S.O. 1833. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) , the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. CGIT/ NGP/ 86/2002 ) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal - cum - Labour Court , Nagpur as shown in the annexure , in the industrial dispute between the employers in relation to the management of Department of Telecom and their workmen , which was received by the Central Government on 29-6-2010 .

[No. L-40012/ 166/95 - IR (DU)]

4. In response to the notice , the petitioner appeared before this Tribunal and has filed Statement of Claim on 1-11-2002. The same was replied by the management . After filing the statement of claim and notice to produce original documents , the petitioner and his counsel never appeared inthe Court and prosecuted the reference from 16-8-2004 . Except filing of the statement of claim , he has not cared to attend the Court . He also did not take any interest in the proceeding.

JOHAN TOPNO, Under Secy.

ANNEXURE

BEFORE SHRI A.N. YADAV , PRESIDING OFFICER, CGIT-CUM - LABOUR COURT, NAGPUR

Date: 21-6-2010.

Case No.CGIT/NGP / 86 /2002

Shri Ravindra Shankarrao

Petitioner/Party No.1

Wankhede ,

AtPO: Yerandgaon ,

5. On 14-7-2008 the petitioner and his counsel were also absent . Counsel for Respondent filed pursis on 24-1-2007 to close the case . Petitioner and his counsel both are not attending the Court for more than 4 years . It seems thatthe Petitioner is not interested in prosecuting the case . 1 do not think it proper to continue it on the same stage for years together. In the circumstances , no purpose will be served in continuing the case , hence it dismissed for the default of the Petitioner and I pass the negative award that heisnot entitled for any relief. Hence this Award .

Tah . Nandgaon , Khandeshwar , Distt. Amravati .

A.N YADAV, Presiding Officer 4564

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 24 , 2010/SHRAVANA 2, 1932

[PART II-SEC. 3 ( ii) ] नई दिल्ली , 29 जून , 2010

का. आ. 1834.-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 (1947 का 14) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में , केन्द्रीय सरकार सी.पी.डब्ल्यू.डी के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/श्रम न्यायालय , नं. 2 नई दिल्ली के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 48/93 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 29-6-2010 प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल-42012/48/92- आई आर( डी.यू. ) ]

जोहन तोपनो , अवर सचिव

New Delhi , the 29th June , 2010

S.O. 1834. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) , the Central Government here by publishes the Award (Ref. No. 48/93 ) ofthe Central Government Industrial Tribunal - cum -Labour Court, No. II New Delhi as shown in the annexure, in the industrial dispute between the employers in relation to the management ofC.P.W.D. and their workmen , which was received by the Central Government on 29-6-2010 .

[No. L-42012/48 /92 - IR ( DU) ]

2. The applicant workman has filed his statement of claim in which he has submitted that he was engaged as daily rated Frash/ Chowkidar by Executive Engineer K. Division , CPWD , IP Bhavan , New Delhi w.e.f. 13-04-1987 and was retained in service upto, 09-10-1991 and from 10-10-1991 his services have been dispensed with and even during the period he was allowed to work, his pay and allowances for 20 (twenty ) days earned by him have not been paid to him till date . That the management after the judgment ofHon'ble Supreme Court dated 17-1-1986 in the matter of Surinder Singh & Others v/s Engineer - in Chief, CPWD, have been paying the time scale plus all allowances to the daily rated workers in CPWD . That the daily rated Frash/ Chowkidar in CPWD have been getting the wages in the time scale of Rs . 750-940 w.e.f. 1-1-1986 . That the work on which the workman was engaged is available but under the garb of management policy, his services have been terminated without following the procedure of law. Hehas completed more than 240 days of service , as defined under Section 25( b) of the Industrial Disputes Act . That before the termination of his services , the management has not given one month notice , or pay in lieu of that , nor paid the gratuity and other compensation , and, as such, his termination is illegal and unjustified .

JOHAN TOPNO , Under Secy.

ANNEXURE

CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL CUM LABOUR COURT- II, KARKARDOOMA COURT COMPLEX

ROOM NO . 33 ( GF), A - BLOCK,

I.D. No. 48/1993

Dated: 21-01-2010

In the matter of dispute between:

Shri M.G.R. Swami

3. Thatjuniors to the workmen are still working in the various Divisions of the management . That the workman personally and CPWD Mazdoor Union , of which he is a member , vide letter dated 12-11-1991 , requested the management for payment of earned wages and reinstatement with retrospective date but the same was not conceded by the management vide letter dated 19-11- 1991. That the management has wrongly and illegally terminated his services as he has approached the Labour Court for payment of equal pay for equal work . The workman, therefore , has prayed for reinstatement in service with full back wages and continuity in service and all consequential benefits as Frash/Chowkidar in the time scale ofRs.750-940.

Through: CPWD Mazdoor Union E-26 (Old Quarters ) Raja Bazar, Baba Kharag Singh Marg ,

New Delhi 110001

Workman

Versus

TheDirector General- Works

CPWD

Nirman Bhawan,

Delhi 110001

....Management

AWARD

The Central Government , Ministry of Labour vide Order No. L-42012 /48 /92 - IR ( DU) dated 21-07-1993 has referred the following industrial dispute to this Tribunal foradjudication :

4. The management has contested the claim of the workman and in its Written Statement has submitted that the claim of the workman is prima facie baseless anddevoid of justification . That the appropriate Government has referred the dispute in a stereotyped and mechanical manner, without considering and appreciating the facts . It is submitted that the respondent is nogt an industry within the meaning of Industrial Disputes Act , 1947. According to the management , the petitioner was appointed as part time Frash w.e.f. 13-4-1987 and he worked on the same position till 31-12-1988 on hand receipt basis on daily rate wages system . Later on , he was engaged as full time Frash w.e.f. 11-1-1989 and he was retained in service upto 20-9- 1991. That the terms of reference say that the alleged date oftermination is 10-10-1991 but the petitioner worked upto 20-9-1991 .

"Whether the action of the management of C.P.W.D. in terminating the services of Shri M.G.R. Swamy, Frash w.e.f. 10-10-1991 isjustified ? Ifnot , whatrelief is the workman entitled to ?" 4565 भारत का राजपत्र : जुलाई 24, 2010/ श्रावण 2, 1932

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

11. Inhis cross - examination , workman MGR Swamy, after seeing the hand receipt dated 20-9-1991 , photocopy ofwhich is Exb . M - 1 , admitted that the same was bearing hissignatures . He admitted having not written any letter regarding non -payment of money to him after 20-9-1991 . Healso admitted that he was working on work order basis .

12. Though the workman has been cross - examined at length in this case but no challenge was made to his claim that he was engaged as daily rated Frash /Chowkidar w.e.f. 13-4-1987 and he worked up till 9-10-1991 , and that hisservices have been terminated without any notice /notice pay or gratuity, etc.

5. That the petitioner was paid daily wages according to the rates prescribed by the Delhi Administration . It is denied that Section 25(b) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 is applicable . That the services ofthe petitioner were dispensed with as the work being carried out by him could bedoneby the labour already appointed by the Department, and no fresh appointment has been made thereafter . That no one -month notice or pay in lieu of that or gratuity or other compensation was applicable to the petitioner as he was engaged on hand receipt basis , having no lien or right on the post. That no junior person to the petitioner is working with the respondent . Regarding claim of the petitioner for 20 (twenty) days earned wages , it is submitted thathe should contact the respondent for settlement ofhis dues, ifany.

13. In rebuttal to the above evidence , the witness of the management , Mr. D.M. Maurya , Executive Engineer , 'K' Division, CPWD , in his evidence on affidavit , has stated thatthe workman was engaged as part - time Frash on daily wages basis on hand receipt system w.e.f. 13-4-1987 and heworked upto 20-9-1991 . He asserted that the workman was paid wages according to the rates prescribed by the Delhi Administration and no person junior to the petitioner is working in the management . Accordingly , the services ofthe petitioner were dispensed w.e.f. 21-9-1991 and not w.e.f. 10-10-1991 .

6.That the services of the petitioner were dispensed withw.e.f. 21-9-1991 and not w.e.f. 10-10-1991 , as alleged, and no action of the respondent is unfair, or unjust . The respondent has emphatically denied that the petitioner has any claim for reinstatement or back wages , or continuity in services in the time scale of Rs . 750-940 . The workman has , therefore , prayed for the dismissal of the case of the petitioner.

7. By filing a rejoinder , the workman has reiterated hisclaim made in the statement of claim and has refuted the pleas of the management .

In his cross - examination , Mr. Maurya , MWI , has admittedthat attendance of the workman was being marked in the register . It may be noted here that no register from the side of the management has been produced in this case.

8. In order to prove his case , the workman has filed hisevidence on affidavit which Exb . WW1/ 1 . He has been subjected to a detailed cross - examination . In rebuttal to that, management has examined its witness , Mr. D.M. Maurya, Executive Engineer , ' K ' Division, CPWD, New Delhi , and he has filed his affidavit, which is marked Exb . MWI/ 1 . He has been cross - examined from the side of the workman.

9. I have gone through the written submissions placed on record by both the parties . I have also heard the AR of the workman . None came to orally address the arguments from the side of the management .

14. From the above discussed evidence led by the parties, it is hardly in dispute in this case that the workman worked as a daily rated Frash/Chowkidar from 13-4-1987 andhe remained in service up till 9-10-1991 . Workman MGR Swamy, in his evidence , has asserted that he worked up till 9-10-1991 and his services were terminated w.e.f. 10-10- 1991. Though he has been cross - examined at length, this assertion of his that he worked till 9-10-1991 has not been specifically refuted by the management in his cross- examination . As workman has asserted that he had worked upto 9-10-1991, the burden of proof thereupon had shifted to the management to prove that he did not work till that date . The attendance of the workman used to be marked in the register , as has been admittedby MW- 1 , the Executive Engineer of the management. That being the position, the attendance register could have been produced by the management to disprove the claim ofthe workman that he hadworked till 20-09-1991 and not up till 09-10-1991 . The workman clearly was working regularly from 13-04-1987 to 09-10-1991 and thus he had completed 240 days in a calendar year before his services were terminated by the management.

The services of the workman have been terminated without complying with the provisions of Section 25F of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. One- month's notice in 10. In order to prove his case , the workman in his evidence on affidavit Exb . WWI/ 1 has asserted that he was engaged as daily rated Frash/Chowkidar by the Executive Engineer , 'K ' Division , CPWD, New Delhi w.e.f. 13-4-1987 and worked up till 9-10-1991 and his services were terminated w.e.f. 10-10-1991 , without any notice , notice pay, or gratuity , etc. According to him, all the daily rated workmenin the CPWD were getting their wages in the time scale of Rs . 750-940, with all allowances , but he was paid only minimum wages . That hundreds of workmen were recruited after his termination and even juniors to him were retained by the management and his services were arbitrarily terminated, without following the principles of natural justice, and he is entitled to reinstatement w.e.f. 10-10-1991 , with all consequential benefits .

4566

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 24 , 2010/SHRAVANA 2, 1932

[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii)]

Further, it is ordered that the requisite number of copies of this award be forwarded to the Central Government for necessary action at their end.

Dated: 21-6-2010

SATNAM SINGH , Presiding Officer नई दिल्ली, 30 जून , 2010

writing, indicating the reasons for retrenchment , or wages in lieu of such notice, has admittedly not been given to the workman before his services were terminated. The workman has not been paid retrenchment compensation as required by Section 25F of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. The conditions enumerated in Section 25F are conditions precedent for retrenchment and these are couched in a mandatory form , and the non - compliance there of has the result of rendering the order of retrenchment void abinitio, or non -est .

का. आ. 1835.-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार सी.पी.डब्ल्यू.डी. के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण, नं. 2 , नई दिल्ली के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 99/2004 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 30-6-2010 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल-42012/61/2003 - आई आर( सीएम- II ) ] अजय कुमार गौड़ , डेस्क अधिकारी NewDelhi , the 30th June , 2010 15 is no longer in dispute that even casual or season orkmen , who have rendered continuous service for one year or more , cannot be retrenched , without complying with the provisions of Section 25F of the Act. Provisions of Section 25F are applicable even in the case ofdaily rated workmen . Reference in this connection can be made with advantage to the cases reported as ( i ) Rattan Singh v. Union of India, 1997 , 11 SCC 396 ; (ii ) Municipal Corporation ofDelhi v . Praveen Kumar Jain , ( 1998 ), 9 SCC 468: 1999 Lab IC 619 ; and ( iii ) Samistha Dubey v. Etawah , 1999 Lab LR 460: 1999 Lab IC 1125 (SC) and ( iv) 2000 LAB I.C.613 and (v) 2010 LAB IC 1089 .

16. In view of the above discussion , I hold that the action of the management of CPWD in terminating the services of Shri MGR Swamy , Frash , w.e.f. 10-10-1991 is unjustified and illegal . The workman , thus , is entitled to reinstatement in service with continuity in service .

S.O. 1835. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) , the Central Government here by published the Award (Ref. No. 99/ 2004) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal - cum- Labour Court , No. 2, New Delhi as shown in the annexure , inthe industrial dispute between the management of Central PublicWorks Department, and their workmen, received by the Central Government on 30-6-2010 .

[No. L-42012/61 /2003 - IR ( CM- II ) ] AJAY KUMAR GAUR, Under Secy. ANNEXURE

17. As regards payment of back wages , it may be noted that the workman in his cross - examination , has stated that he is a married person , having three children , and he spends Rs. 800 (Rupees eight hundred only) on the whole family in a month . He otherwise was also only a daily rated Frash and his services were terminated about 18½ years before . Keeping all this in view, he is held entitled to back wages at the rate of 25 % ( twenty five per cent only) of the wages which he was last drawing before his termination by theCPWD.

CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM - LABOUR COURT- II , KARKARDOOMA COURT COMPLEX ROOM NO. 33 ( GF) , A- BLOCK

ORDER

Dated: 15-06-2010

I.D. No. 99/2004 Inthe matter of dispute between:

The Deputy General Secretary , All India CPWD ( MRM) Karamchari Sangathan , (ForShri Jai Prakash , Generator Operator) , 4823, Balbir Nagar Extension , Gali No. 13 , Shahdara , Delhi-110032 Workman

Versus

In view of my above findings , I hold that the action ofthe management of CPWD in terminating the services of Shri MGR Swamy, Frash , w.e.f. 10-10-1991 is not justified and isillegal .He is entitled to reinstatement in service with 25% back wages and continuity of service . Regarding his claim for wages for 20 days the workman is directed to contact the management in this regard and the management will consider his claim and settle it . The Management will give effect to this order within two months from the date of publication ofthis Award.

TheAward is passed accordingly . Filebe consigned to the record room.

The Executive Engineer, ACD Division- IV, Central Public Works Department , Vidyut Bhawan , भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई 24 , 2010/ श्रावण 2 , 1932

[ भाग II-खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

....Management NewDelhi- 110001

AWARD

The Central Government, Ministry of Labour vide Order No. L-42012/61 /2003 - IR( CM - II) dated 27-5-2002 and its corrigendum dated 14-6-2004 has referred the following industrial dispute to this Tribunal for adjudication:

4567 ANNEXURE

CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM - LABOUR COURT- II , KARKARDOOMA COURT COMPLEX ROOM NO . 33 (GF) , A- BLOCK KARKARDOOMA , DELHI - 110032

Dated: 15-06-2010 I.D. No. 170/2004

"Whether the demand of the union that Sh . Jai Prakash, Generator Operator should be regularized in view of the Ministry ofLabour NotificationNo. SO 813 (E) dated 31-7-2002 is justified ? Ifyes , to what relief the workman is entitled to and from what date ?"

The statement of claim was filed by the workman 24-8-2004 . None is present from the side ofthe workman. He has not attended the Court for the last so many dates ofhearing. It is thus evident that the workman is no longer interested in the outcome of this reference . In this situation , there is no way out except to pass a no - dispute award which is passed accordingly .

File be consigned to the record room.

Further, it is ordered that the requisite number of copies of this award be forwarded to the Central Government for necessary action at their end .

Dated: 15-6-2010

SATNAM SINGH, Presiding Officer नई दिल्ली , 30 जून , 2010

का. आ. 1836. औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 (1947 का 14) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार एवं सी.पी.डब्ल्यू. डी. के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण , नं. 2 , नई दिल्ली के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 170/2004 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 30-6-2010 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल-42012/191/2003 - आई आर( सीएम- II ) ]

अजय कुमार गौड़ , डेस्क अधिकारी New Delhi , the 30th June , 2010

S.O. 1836. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 170/ 2004) ofthe Central Government Industrial Tribunal -cum- Labour Court , No. 2, New Delhi as shown in the annexure , in the industrial dispute between the management of Central Public Works Department , and their workmen , received by the Central Government on 30-6-2010 .

In the matter of dispute between:

The All India CPWD (MRM)

....Workman Karamchari Sangathan, (For Shri Naresh Kumar , Wireman ), 4823, Balbir Nagar Extension , Gali no . 13, Shahdara, Delhi -110032

Versus

...........Manageme The Executive Engineer, ACD- IV, Central Public Works Department , Vidyut Bhawan, ShankerMarket , New Delhi- 110001

AWARD

TheCentral Government , Ministry of Labour vide OrderNo. L -42012/ 191 /2003 - IR (CM- II ) dated 3-11-2004 has referred the following industrial dispute to this Tribunal for adjudication:

"Whether the demand of All India CPWD (MRM) Karamchari Sangathan for reinstatement and regularization of Shri Naresh Kumar , Wireman in the organization of CPWD is legal and justified ? Ifyes , to what relief the workman is entitled and from what date ?"

The statement of claim was filed by the workman 5-5-2005 . He further filed amended claim on 10-7-2006 . None ispresent from the side of the workman . He has not attended the Court for the last so many dates of hearing . It is thus evident that the workman is no longer interested in the outcome of this reference . In this situation , there is no way out except to pass a no - dispute award which is passed accordingly.

File be consigned to the record room.

Further, it is ordered that the requisite number of copies of this award be forwarded to the Central Government for necessary action at their end.

Dated: 15-6-2010

No. L-42012/ 191 /2003 - IR (CM - II ) )

AJAY KUMAR GAUR, Desk Officer 2639GI / 10-13

SATNAM SINGH , Presiding Officer THE GA/FTTE OF INDIA : JULY 24 , 2010/ SHRAVANA 2, 1932

नई दिल्ली , 30 जून . 2010

1837. औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 (1947 क114 ) की भाग 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार एवं डब्ल्यू. सी. श्धतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच , अनबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरमः, नागपुर के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 26/2008 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 30-6-2010 को प्राप्त हुआ था । [मं. एल-22012/56/2008- आई आर ( सीएम- II ) ] अजय कुमार गौड़ , डेस्क अधिकारी New Delhi , the 30th June , 2010 S.O. 1837. In pursuanceof Section 17 of the industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 26/2008 ) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal - cum- Labour Coud Nagpur as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Diqit ber-veen the management of Western Coalfields I mited, and their workman , which was received by the Centerovernment on 30-06-2010,

[No. 1-22012/56/2008 - IR (CM - II ) ] AJAY KUMAR GAUR , Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

BEFORE SHRI A. N. YADAV, PRESIDING OFFICER, CGIT-CUM-LABOUR COURT, NAGPUR No. CGIT /NGP /26/ 2008

Dated 18-6-2010 Petitioner.Party No.1: The General Secretary, Koyala Shramik Sabha (HMS) , Near Mahakali Mandir , Chandrapur (Maharashtra).

Versus

Respondent/ Party No. 2: The Chief General Manager,

WCL , Chandrapur Area Chandrapur.

AWARD (Dated: 18th June , 2010)

1. The Central Government after satisfying the existence ofdispute between the General Secretary , Koyala Shramik Sabha ( HMS ), Near Mahakali Mandir , Chandrapur (Party No.1 ) and the Chief General Manager , WCL , Chandrapur Area Chandrapur ( Party No.2) referred the same for adjudication to this Tribunal vide its letter No.L - 22012/ 56/2008- IR( CM- II ) dated 13.08.2008 under clause (d) of sub section ) and sub- sction (2A) of Section 10 of Industrial DisputeAct, 1947 ( 14 of 1947) with the following schedule.

2. Whether the action of the management of M/s . WCI , in denying promotion to Shri R.N. Ankar , Lab Technician to higher grade , is legal and justified ? To what relief is the workman concerned entitled ? "

[PART 11-SEC. 3 ( ii) ] 3. The Petitioner Union on behalf of Shri R.N.Ankar has approached to the Court with the prayer that the workman has since superannuated from 1-3-2010 after attaining the age of 60 years . He does not want to pursue the case further and prayedto close the case and accordingly he has filed the pursis on 19.3.2010 . He was allowed to withdraw the case and accordingly no dispute award has been passed . Hence this award . Date: 18.06.2010 .

A.N. YADAV, Presiding Officer नई दिल्ली , 30 जून , 2010

का.आ. 1838 औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 (1947 का 14) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में , केन्द्रीय सरकार एवं एफ.सी.आई. के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच , अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण , नं. 2 , चण्डीगढ़ के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 1151 /2K5 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 30-6-2010 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल-22012/319/2002- आई आर ( सीएम- II ) ] अजय कुमार गौड़ , डेस्क अधिकारी New Delhi , the 30th June , 2010

S.O. 1838.- In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ), the Central Government hereby publishes the award ( Ref. No. 1151/ 2K5) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal- cum- Labour Court, No. 2, Chandigarh as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the management of Food Corporation of India and their workman , received by the Central Government on 30-6-2010 .

[No. L-22012/319/ 2002- IR (CM -II) ] AJAY KUMAR GAUR , Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

IN THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL CUM - LABOUR COURT- II, CHANDIGARH Present: Sri A.K. Rastogi , Presiding Officer .

Case No. I. D. 1151 /2K5 (Old 112/2K3 ) Instituted on 18-06-2003

Sh . S.P. Singh , 37, Khadi Colony, Panipat .

Applicant

Versus

The Senior Regional Manager , Haryana , Food Corporation of India, Regional Office , SCO No. 120-122 , Sector 17 , Chandigarh .

Respondent APPEARANCES

For the workman

Sh . G.S. Bal & Bipin Sharma , ARs .

For the Management

Sh. Parmod Kumar, Advocate .

4569 भारत का राजपत्र : जुलाई 24, 2010 / श्रावण 2 , 1932

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

AWARD

Passed on 23 June , 2010

System ( P.D.S. ) . There was no financial loss Food Corporation of India. The procedure ar determining the loss and preparing final i oss Assessment Statement ( L.A.S. ) was not legal .

(d) The claimant was not provided proper opportunity to defend himself.

The Central Government vide Notification No. L- 22012/319/2002- IR(CM - II)) Dated 9-5-2003 , by exercising its powers under Section 10 sub- section ( 1 ) and sub- section 2(A) Clause ( d) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 has referred the following Industrial dispute for adjudication to this Tribunal:

"Whether the action of the management of Food Corporation of India , Karnal in terminating the services of Sh . S.P. Singh , Technical Assistant Grade- III w.e.f. 30-8-99 is legal and justified ? If not, to what relief he is entitled to ? "

The claimant has also stated that the punishment awarded to the claimant is too harsh . R.D. Singla who hed also been charge- sheeted for the same charge and who had also been dismissed ultimately got the relief from the appellate authority and his penalty was reduced from dismissal to that of reduction in rank . The claimant has prayed for setting aside the impugned order of dismissal dated 30-8-1999 and the order dated 5 / 9-7-2001 in appea ! and for a direction for his reinstatement with all consequential benefits including full back wages , seniority and further promotion in the next higher post to which his immediate juniors have been promoted in the meantime .

Atthe relevant time the claimant was posted as Technical Assistant Grade - II at Safidon , District Jind (Haryana) in Food Corporation of India (hereinafter called as Corporation) . During July to October 1995 two Raw Rice Specials were loaded at Safidon for Kohlapur (Maharashtra) . From the destination a complaint was received that the stocks were Beyond Rejection Limit (B.R.L. ). A Loss Assessment Statement ( LAS ) was prepared by the Corporation . According to which the Corporation suffered a loss of Rs . 1,08,29,435-06. Claimant along with three others R.D. Singla, R.P. Singh and D. S. Chauhan were charge- sheeted and after inquiry, the delinquent officials were dismissed by respondent , Senior Regional Manager , Haryana vide order dated 30-8-1999. Anappeal preferred by the claimant also failed .

The claimant's case is that he was not provided the opportunity of visiting destination . The impugned dismissal order has not been passed by a competent authority as he was holding a promotional post under the orders of Zonal Manager (North ) , which is the higher authority than the Senior Regional Manager who passed the Dismissal Order . The dismissal order as well as the order in appeal is illegal , arbitrary, without jurisdiction and against the natural justice for the following reasons:

(a) Language employed in the charge - sheet indicates as if the charge is already proved. It prejudiced the mind ofthe Inquiry Officer and vitiated the inquiry .

(b) At the unloading station nobody on behalf of F.C.I. was present and complaint was made at a later stage from the godowns , where the stocks had been dumped.

The claim was contested on behalf of the respondent. In the written statement he has challenged the jurisdiction of this Tribunal . It has been stated that Food Corporation of India is a statutory organization having been established under the Food Corporations Act . 1964 and under Section 45 of the said Act , the Corporation is competent to frame its own regulations for governing the service conditions of its employees . It has been disputed that Senior Regional Manager was not competent to pass the impugned order . According to the respondent the opportunity was provided to the claimant to visit the destination by means of registered letter to concerned Assistant Manager ( Q.C. ) for service upon the claiment. The punishment was inflicted on the complainant after proper inquiry and after giving him full opportunity to defend himself. The loading and unloading was from F.C.I. to F.C.I. and the complaint made by the destination in itself isenough to prove that the stocks were B.R.L. The fact that the priority had been given by the Assistant Manager (Q.C.) in dispatching the stock is no ground to absolve the claimant. The violation of the norms prescribed by the Corporation in itself is sufficient to charge the claimant with dereliction of duty and the amount of loss is not a relevant factor for determination of dereliction of duty. The claimant cannot equate his case with that of R.D. Singla . who was holding a different rank and was discharging different duties . The claimant at the relevant time was discharging the duties of Technical Assistant , which were primarily directed towards the quality control of the food grains .The L.A.S. had been prepared according to the guidelines .His petition deserves dismissal .

Onthe pleadings of the parties , the following issues are framed for decision:

(i) Whether this Tribunal has no jurisdiction to adjudicate the reference ?

(ii) Whether the dismissal order dated 30-8-99 and the order dated 5 /9-7-2001 in appeal is illegal .

(c) Monthly Inspection Report prepared by Assistant Manager (Q.C. ). 5 % Inspection Report of District Manager , 15% Inspection Report ofD.M. (Q.C. ) do not indicate that the dispatched stock was B.R.L. Assistant Manager ( Q.C. ) had given " priority " for removing the stocks . Disposal of entire stocks except 51 M.Ts was made by sale or through tender and not through Public Distribution THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 24 , 2010/SHRAVANA 2 , 1932

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

"Thus, it is proved that while you recommended for issuance of license of coal after site inspection, that act on your part was wrong" .

arbitrary , without jurisdiction and against natural justice for the reasons given in para 7 ofthe claim statement and whether the Senior Regional Manager was not competent to pass it?

"From the above , it is proved that he is careless , irresponsible and not trustworthy Officer." ( iii) To what relief is the claimant entitled?

Here it is not the case .Article of charges are contained inthe Inquiry report Ex . M -4. It simply mentioned the facts necessary to constitute the lapses on the part of the claimant . It nowhere says that the allegations against the claimant stand proved. I do not subscribe to the view of the learned counsel for the claimant that the language employed in the charge has prejudiced the mind of the Inquiry Officer and vitiated the inquiry.

In evidence the claimant filed his own affidavitwhile on behalf of respondents affidavit of Shri S.D. Dani , sistant General Manager , Food Corporation of India , Rugiueal Office, Haryana , Sector 4 , Panchkula was filed. Parties have filed certain papers also, which will be referred Beat the relevant and proper place . In the papers filed by respondents complete inquiry report with all relevant documents and the order of the appellate authority in appeal of R.D. Singla are important.

have heard the learned counsel of the parties and 4. v gone through the evidence on record. My findings on the various issues are as under :

The claimant has challenged his dismissal on this ground also that he was not provided the opportunity of jointinspection at the unloading station . Nobody on behalf ofF.C.I. was present and the complaint was made at a later stage from the godown where the stocks had been dumped.

IseNo. 1 .

The respondent in the written statement stated that this Tribunal has no jurisdiction to adjudicate the matter as the Food Corporation of India; is a statutory organization having been established under the Food Corporations Act , 1964 and under Section 45 of the said Act , the Corporation is competent to frame its own regulations for governing the service conditions of its employees .

However, in his arguments the learned counsel for the respondentdid not press this plea nor any authority was cited in support of the plea . The statutory status of The Corporation and the right to frame its own regulations for governing the service conditions of its employees does 1not take away the jurisdiction of this Tribunal to decide an inchustrial dispute . I , therefore , hold that this Tribunal has jurisdictionto adjudicate upon the matter . Issue no . 1 is decided against the respondents.

Issue No. 2 .

So far as the opportunity of joint inspection is concerned , S.C. Dani , Assistant General Manager (General), Food Corporation of India, in his affidavit has stated that opportunityto visit the destination was provided by means of a registered letter Ex. M -2 to the concerned Assistant Manager (Quality Control ) for service upon the delinquent/ officials .A letter dated 19-12-1995 from the District Office ofFood Corporation of India to Assistant Manager (Q.C. ), Safidon has been filed, but there is nothing on record that theAssistant Manager ( Q.C. ) informed the claimant about thejoint inspection . During cross -examination Shri Dani has accepted that he has no record to show that the claimant was given the instructions in view of this letter for compliance .On the other hand , the claimant in his affidavit has stated that he was not provided the said opportunity and during the cross - examination he stated that he has no knowledge of any letter received from the District Manager with regard to joint inspection nor he was informed about the said letter .

So there is nothing on record to show that the claimant was informed about the joint inspection and it is true that the claimant was deprived of his right of joint inspection as provided under the relevant regulations . The learned counsel for the workman argued that the claimant was prejudiced in his defence on this count . The learned counsel has submitted a copy of judgment (uncertified) Dated 6th May 1994 of Punjab and Haryana High Court in CivilWritPetition No. 13008 of 1993 Dalip Singh Versus Food Corporation of India & another . But that was a case ofpilferage and the Hon'ble High Court observed that the petitioner in that case was deprived of his right to claim the joint inspection of the stocks .

The claimant has challenged the order of his dismissal Hom service, firstly on the grounds that the language employed in the charge sheet indicates as if the charge is already proved . It prejudices the mind ofthe Inquiry Officer and vitiates the inquiry. In support of this argument , the learned counsel for the workman cited the case law laid down in Hans Raj Gupta Vs State of Punjab 1992 ( 1 ) SCT 258 wherein it was held by the Hon'ble Punjab and Haryana High Court that where the charge- sheet itself contains the language that the charge against the delinquent stand proved, there is hardly any scope for the Inquiry Officerto Jissent such findings . Inquiry Officer in such circumstances cannot keep an open mind and Inquiry report vitiated and cannot be said to be fair and impartial .

Itwould be noted that in the said case the language employed in the charge- sheet was as follows:

Butit is not a case of shortage in stocks . The charge against the claimant is that he accepted B.R.L. (Beyond rejection limit ) stocks and a complaint in this regard was received from the destination . From the inquiry report भारत का राजपत्र : जुलाई 24 , 2010/श्रावण 2 , 1932

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

Ex . M-4 (page 14) it appears that the complaint was about excess percentage of discolored rice rendering it of 'C ' category, with dull appearance , mixture of old and new crop rice , heavily infested and non-homogeneous . The inspection of the destination by the claimant would not have changed the position . Further it is not the case of the claimant that the dispatched stock was not discolored or dull in appearance and not a mixture of old and new crop rice, was not infested and was homogeneous . I am of the view that in the present case it cannot be said that by not providing opportunity of joint inspection to the claimant, his defence was , not prejudiced in any way.

Though it is not in written arguments of the workman/ claimant but in his written statement he has challenged his dismissal order on this ground also that at the unloading station nobody on behalf ofF.C.I. was present and complaint was made at a later stage from the godown where the stock had been dumped. It is important to note that J.G. Thote, Manager of Central Warehouse Corporation , Kohlapur had appeared in the inquiry as PW - I . His statement finds mention at page 2 of the inquiry report (Ex . M-4) . He stated that the technical staff of the Central Warehouse Corporation , Kohlapur, took samples of stocks received ex-Safidon both from the wagon at goods - shed as well as from the stocks in the godown and these samples were analyzed by the Technical Assistants of Central Warehouse Corporation , Kohlapur. The Inquiry Report has amention of the statement of Gushaik at page 3 and 4. He was Assistant Manager ( Q. C.) at District Office Pune . He admitted that no F.C.I. staff is posted at C. W.C. Kohlapur and the same is exclusivlely managed by CWC staff and that no F.C.1 . staff was posted at Kohlapur for supervision of the said stock received at CWC Kohlapur during unloading . The statement of these two witnesses support. the plea of the claimant that at the unloading station nobody on behalf of F.C.I. was present and complaint was made from the godowns where the stock have been dumped. But I do not think that it in any way prejudiced the defence ofthe claimant and the dismissal order can be assailed on this ground . The fact that the analysis of the sample was made by an independent agency; the Central Warehouse Corporation makes the charges strong against the claimant .

The fact that monthly inspection report 5 % inspection report and 15% inspection report did not indicate that the fresh stock was B.R.L. or Assistant Manager (Q.C. ) had given priority for removing the stock does not provide any certificate about the fitness of the stock . The inspection reports relate to a sample of the stock only and cannot be said to be the representative of the entire stock. It is in the written arguments of the claimant that the stock in question had been procured during the year - 1995-96 . It is important to note that it was dispatched to Kohlapur from July to October1995. It cannot be said that it deteriorated in quality in such a short time .

4571 It cannot be a ground to assail the dismissal that the FoodCorporation of India did not suffer any financial loss onaccount ofthe conduct ofthe claimant . The acceptance ofB.R.L. stock, which was infested, discolored and non- homogeneous , is non- excusable irrespective of the financial loss .

According to the claimant , the procedure for determining the loss and preparing final Loss Assessment Statement ( L.A.S. ) was not legal . But the plea has not been elaborated.

However, the appellate authority while deciding the appeal of R.D. Singla who also had been charged for the same misconduct in the same enquiry , has observed that the L.A.S. have not been prepared as per Headquarters instructions , the consignee has claimed 50% value of the stock on the basis of issue price as loss whereas as per H.Q. instructions loss has to be worked on double value cuts in refractions exceeding the rejection limit on 15% of issue price during the relevant period. It is also in the order of the authority that in the final L.A.S. submitted before him by appellant (R.D. Singla) the final L.A.S. came down to Rs . 4,60,895-60 against the L.A.S. of Rs . 1,08,29,435.

The aforesaid appeal order substantiates the plea of the claimant in this regard .

The claimant has further pleaded that he was not given the proper opportunity to defend. But I am not impressed with this plea. The enquiry report shows that the enquiry was conducted according to rules of natural justice in a fair manner and it cannot be said that the claimant was not given proper opportunity to defend himself.

It was vehemently argued on behalf of the claimant that he had been promoted to the post of Technical Assistarnt' Grade - II under the orders of Zonal Manager, who is the higher authority than the Senior Regional Manager, who passed the dismissal order . Senior Regional Manager was not competent to pass impugned order.

Inthis regard it is important that the Dismissal Order is dated 30-08-1999 and on that date the claimant was not holding promotional post . He had already been reverted to his original post of Technical Assistant Grade - III w.e.f. December 1998 in another case . The claimant himself has made necessary disclosure in this regard in his claim statement, though quietly .

Moreover, fault cannot be found with the impugned order on this ground in view of law laid down in Food Corporation of India and others Versus Sone Lal AIR 2006 S.C. 264 cited by the learned counsel for the management . In that case also the respondent had been promoted to category III post of Technical Assistant Grade by Zonal Promotion Committee . Penalty of compulsory retirement was passed by the Senior Regional Manager , which was the appointing authority . It was held that the punishment order is not without jurisdiction . The Senior Regional 4572

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 24 , 2010/SHRAVANA 2, 1932

[PART II-SEC. 3 (ii)]

facts that as per final L.A.S. the loss to the Food Corporation ofIndia has come down to Rs . 4,60,895-60 against the L.A.S. ofRs . 1,08,29,435 ( as per appeal order in case of R.D. Singla) and co-delinquent R.D. Singla has got relief in appeal , I am ofthe view that the order of dismissal may be modifiedto compulsory retirement , The penalty of dismissal awarded to the claimant by the disciplinary authority and the appellate authority is accordingly modified to compulsory retirement . The claimant will be entitled to all terminal benefits . The reference is answered accordingly. Let a copy of the award be sent to the Central Government for further necessary action and record be consigned after duecompliance.

Manager, Food Corporation of India is competent to impose the penalty of compulsory retirement on the respondent under Regulation 56 of the Regulations . The Hon'ble Apex Court observed that the Senior Regional Manager/Regional Manager/Zonal Manager are each competent to impose any ofthe penalties i.e. minor as well as major penalties. It is evident that the Senior Regional Manager is not only the appointing authority for the post held by the respondent but also he is competent to act as disciplinary authority for the purpose of regulations 56, 57 , 58 and 59 of the Regulations and impose major penalties . As per regulation 56 and Appendix 2 of the Regulation , the appointing authority of category ( III ) posts is Senior Regional Manager/Regional Manager and the Zonal Manager is not the appointing authority.

ASHOK KUMAR RASTOGI , Presiding Officer नई दिल्ली, 30 जून, 2010

It is thus clear that Senior Regional Manager is competent to pass the impugned order .

In view of the above going discussion , I am of the opinion that the dismissal order cannot be assailed on the aforesaid grounds . Issue : No.2 is decided against the claimant.

Issue No. 3 .

का.आ. 1839 औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार एवं एफ.सी. आई. के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण , नं. 1 , चण्डीगढ़ के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 41/2002 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 30-6-2010 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल-22012/2172001 / आई आर ( सीएम -11 ) ] अजय कुमार गौड़ , डेस्क अधिकारी New Delhi , the 30th June , 2010

S.O. 1839. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award ( Ref. No. 41/2002) 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 Food Corporation of India and their workman , which was received bythe Central Government on 30-06-2010 .

[ No. L-22012/21 /2001 - IR ( CM - I ! ) ] AJAY KUMAR GAUR , Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

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

Case I.D. No. 41/2002

Shri Paramjit Singh S/ o Shri Tara Ram , Village Arjanwal , P.O. Adampur, Jalandhar (Punjab) .

Itwas vehemently argued on behalf of the claimant that the order of dismissal is extremely harsh on the claimant particularly in view of the punishment imposed by the appellate authority to R.D. Singla, who had been charge- sheeted along with the claimant for the same misconduct . According to the management , the case of R.D. Singlawas different . The claimant and R.D. Singla are from different cadres and had different duties . As it is clear from the order passed by appellate authority in the appeal of R.D. Singla that he had accepted the stock and was not able to rebut the charge of acceptance of B.R.L. rice . It is important note that R.D. Singla was holding the post of Assistant Grade- II (PP) while the claimant was holding the post of Technical AssistantGrade- II and the claimant in his cross - examination had admitted that it was his duty to maintain quality ofthe foodgrains . He however , has further stated that the duty of Technical Assistant Grade - II and Technical Assistant (P.P. ) is the same . Both are responsible for the quality control . I am of the view that while the persons holding the post of Technical Assistant Grade - II and Technical Assistant (P.P. ) both were responsible for the quality control but primarily it was the duty of Technical Assistant Grade- II to ascertain the quality. The Enquiry Officer at page 2 in his report Ex . M - 4 has indicated that the job and responsibility of the Technical Assistant is to ensure that the stocks are accepted by him in the depot from the millers as per the specifications laid down by the Corporation.

Applicant

Versus

The District Manager , Food Corporation of India, Distt . Office , 569 - L, Model Town , Jalandhar City.

While considering the punishment it is important to note that the claimant in another case has already been reverted from the post of Technical Assistant Grade - II to Technical Assistant Grade- III . The penalty of reduction in rank cannot be imposed on him . However , considering the

Respondent 4573 भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई 24 , 2010/श्रावण 2 , 1932

[भाग II-खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

APPEARANCES

months from the date of receiving the order of Hon'ble HighCourt.

For the Management

Forthe Workman:

Shri N.K.Zakhmi .

Shri Vijay Kumar Chopra.

AWARD

Inreplication the workman denied to go abroad. It is stated in replication that workman was very well présent in India as he was under treatment of the Doctor whose Certificates he has provided with to the management .

Passed on : 17-6-2010

Bothof the parties were afforded the opportunity for adducing evidence . As more as three witnesses wère produced by the workman , whereas , on behalf of the management Shri Ravinder Pal Singh General Manager , Food Curporation of India was cross - examined.

Government of India vide notification no . L-22012/ 21 /2001 -IR(CM - II ) , dated 7-3-2002 by exercising its powers under Section 10 ofthe Industrial Disputes Act, (the Act in short) has referred the following industrial dispute for adjudication to this Tribunal :

I have heard the parties at length and perused the entire materials on record. The main issues for adjudication before this Tribunal are :

"Whether the action of the management of FCI in terminating the services of Shri Paramjit Singh S/o Shri Tara Ram is legal and justified? If not, to what relief he is entitled to ?"

Afterreceiving the reference parties were informed.

(1) Whether the workman has visited abroad (Dubai) without prior permission of the management ? If yes , its effects .

(2) Whether the management while conducting the enquiry has violated the rights of the workman relating to principle of natural justice?

(3) Whether the workman was justified in passing the order of dismissal of the workman from the services ?

(4) Relief, ifany.

Parties appeared and filed their respective pleadings . As per the contention of the workman, he was not conferred any opportunity of being heard before dismissing from the services . This act of the management, as per the contention of the workman , is against the principle of natural justice as no enquiry has been conducted and opportunity of being heard given . The factual position which is clear from the statement of claim of the workman is that the workman was engaged as labour and he was conferred ancillary labour status . He lastly worked with the management on 01.11.99 and on the same day his services Were terminated without conducting any enquiry and without affording any opportunity of being heard to him . On the basis of the above contentions , the workman has prayed for setting aside the dismissal order and for consequential order reinstating him into the services along with consequential benefits.

Before answering the issue no . 1, it is important to mention that proceedings before this Tribunal runs on the basis ofjustice, equity and good conscious . This Tribunal isanadjudicatory body having quasi judiciary powers and supposed to decide the cases on the basis of equity, justice andgood conscious . The proceedings before . this Tribunal and before the authority conducting the department enquires are altogether different . In these proceedings it is not necessary to comply with the provisions of enactments as such .

The workman in his statement of claim has contended that the period of his absence should be treated as leave without pay but has add nothing about his foreign visit . Later on , he denied any foreign visit. On perusal of the evidence documentary and oral , it is evident that following evidence was on record before the person conducting enquiry against the workman on these issues :-

( 1) The statement of concern Gram Panchyat that the workman has visited Dubai twice and remain there for the period mentioned by the management in its written statement meaning thereby, w.e.f. 1-4-94 to 23-4-95 and thereafter , 14-11-95 to 26-3-96 .

(2) The statement of co - workers working in the FCI regarding his visit to abroad for the period mentioned above .

The management appeared and contested the claim by filing written statement . In short, the contention of the management is that the workman remained absent from 1-1-94 to 23-4-95 and thereafter, from 14-11-95 to 26-3-96 . He has not only remained absent but during the above mentioned period he was not in India and working in Dubai for monetary gain. His brother being member of Three Member Committee , managed to get the wages for the workman for the period in question fraudulently . On disclosure of this fact , an enquiry was conducted by the management in which it came to the notice of the enquiry officer that workman remained absent for the period in question and he was gainfully working in Dubai . It is further contended by the management that workman initially filed awrit petition before Hon'ble the High Court of Punjab & Haryana and Hon'ble Punjab & Haryana directed the management to dispose of the representation and issued a legal notice to workman within two months from the date of receiving the order . The management passed the speaking order after conducting a enquiry within two 4574

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 24 , 2010/SHRAVANA 2, 1932

[ PART II-SEC . 3 (ii) ] Nodoubt, the reports from the co- workers are both- sided . Some workers given the report that he has continuously worked with the FCI whereas , other set of employees have given in writing as well as oral statement before the enquiry officer that he had visited Dubai twice .

front of the name of the workman , figured at serial no. 2, serial no . 4 , serial no . 5 , serial no . 6 and serial no . 8 were adjusted. This correction is visible by naked eyes. No expert opinion is required to be taken in this regard . Likewise, on every date on which the workman has said to approach the Doctor, the name of the workman is recorded at bottom and to be in different ink . This is the continuous process that name of the workman was record at bottom on every page.The circumstances speak itself. In the ordinary course ofthe nature; it is not possible for the workman that every time which he visited the Doctor he was the last patient . The possibility of being the last patient cannot be denied in normal circumstance . Under such circumstances , where there are cuttings in the certificate, writing is in different ink, this possibility is doubtful . Thus, the register relied upon and placed by the workman of the Doctor concern who was cross - examined by this Tribunal cannot be relied because the same is doubtful .

There is a letter written by so called Paramjit Singh to his friend Amrik Singh S/o Shri Rulda Ram . This letter reveals that Paramjit was working on Card No. 687 at Post Box No. 5135, BEAM ENG. CO . LTD . SHARJAH, U.A.E. It isadmitted by the workman that workers named Balwant Singh , Harbanslal , Amarjeet and others had worked with him in FCI and they have given in writing that he had gone toDubai twice. It is true that letter was not properly proved by the Management. It is also true that there is no record from Embassy, concern for visiting the workman to Dubai . Butif a fact before the departmental proceedings can be proved without such documentary evidence from Embassy the decision cannot be disputed on the ground that letter from the Embassy regarding conformation of his visit to Dubai was not available to the enquiry officer . The workman hasdenied for conducting any enquiry or any enquiry report.

Thus , the evidence of Sarpanch and co -workers remain unrebutted . There is no reason before this Tribunal to doubt the findings of the committee that workman has visited to Dubai twice for employment . Thus , the issue is decided with the finding that workman visited unauthorizedly without permission Dubai twice for the period mentioned above and in that period he was not present in India.

Undoubtedly, the wages for the period when the workman was not in India were claimed. Sufficient material was before the committee that wages were claimed in connivance of the brother of the workman who was the member ofthe TMC.

As stated earlier this enquiry was conducted by the management on the order of the Hon'ble High Courtto pass the speaking order within two months . A high level committee was constituted by the management which enquire the matter and came to the conclusion that workman has visited Dubai twice and he was not present in India for the wages he claimed . The committee also comes to the conclusion that wages were fraudulently claimed in connivance with the brother of the workman who was the memher of Three Member Committee . The committee should not have seen that all the evidence was to be produced before it. It is to be seen whether the evidence before the committee was sufficient to prove the fact that workman has visited abroad. As stated earlier , proceedings in departmental enquiry and before the Administrative Tribunals are altogether different then the civil proceedings . Before the Administrative Tribunals and in departmental proceedings , there should be no allergy even to here say evidence , if it has credibility . Evidence of Sarpanch and Co- worker is sufficient to prove that workman has visited abroad twice for the period in question.

It has also come before this Tribunal that the workman was not entitled for appointment of handling labour because he has not completed the days as required inpara no . 3 ofthe statement signed on 5-4-95 . As per para no. 3 ofthe said circular, only those workers who had been paidwages for 9 months during the last 12 months before April, 1995 will be allowed to continue under the prevalent direct payment system for providing linked price rate basis on no work no pay through TMC . The workman was not paid nine months wages during last 12 months before April , 1995 because he was in Dubai during this period and the wages if any , claimed in the name of the workman were fraudulently drawn. How it is possible that workman was working In Dubai as well as in FCI .

To rebut this fact the workman has produced two witnesses Dr. Kishan Kumar and Dr. Indu R.Singh . Workman has also provided with a medical certificate which is marked as Ex . MM- 2 containing the cuttings in every entry where the name of the workman Ranjit is record on 28-11-95, the name of Ranjit is recorded at serial no. 11 which is last patient for that day. It is clear from the perusal ofthis document that this name was added thereafter and adjustments were made in amounts received and recorded by the Doctor concern . The Doctor concern has admitted that there are cuttings on this page . The calculation of total amount was 185 and to justified Rs . 40 writeen in the

Principle of natural justice requires that fair and proper opportunity should be given to every person against the order is passed. As stated earlier, that proceedings before this Tribunal runs on the basis of equity, justice and good conscious . There is one more principle that he who pleads equity mustdo equity. If the workman was not present in India and he unauthorizedly absented from FCI and went abroad and during his absence the wages on his name were claimed fraudulently , whether he is entitled to 4575 भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई 24 , 2010/ श्रावण 2 , 1932

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

two months from the date of order . For the reasons mentioned in the body of this award , it is not open to the workman under the circumstance prevailing in this case to plead for the violation of the principle of natural justice by enquiry officer . The reference is accordingly answered. LetCentral Government be approached for publication of award and thereafter , file be consigned to record room .

G. K. SHARMA, Presiding Officer नई दिल्ली , 30 जून , 2010

का. आ. 1840.-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार डब्ल्यू. सी.एल. के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच , अनुबंध मेंनिर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालय , जबलपुर के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 258/89 ) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 30-06-2010 को प्राप्त हुआ था।

[सं. एल-22012/ 188/ 1989- आई आर ( सी- II ) ] अजय कुमार गौड़ , डेस्क अधिकारी

New Delhi , the 30th June , 2010

claim any relief on the ground of violation of the principle ofnatural justice . Where the very foundation of any claim is fraudulent and illegal , whether the law permits to subsidize the illegality on the ground of principle of natural justice? It is true that the committee constituted for passing a speaking order on application and notice of the workman has not given opportunity of being heard to the workman . But in my view, it was a fair enquiry conducted by the management on the application of the workman and the legal notice of the workman . In such type of cases , if the workman is provided relief on the ground of violation of principle of natural justice , the very purpose of law will be frustrated. The persons who commit illegality should not allow to claim the violation of principle of natural justice. This claim is available to the workman in ordinary course of nature but in case of fraudulent act he should not be permit to raise this plea. Moreover , management has also proved before this Tribunal that workman has visited abroad twice and was not present in India as mentioned by management. The management has also proved that the salary of period workman was in Dubai were fraudulently taken in convince of his brother who was the member of T.M.C,. All possible opportunity of being heard was given to the workman by the Tribunal .

S. O. 1840. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No.258/89 ) ofthe Central Government Industrial Tribunal -cum- Labour Court , Jabalpur as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of WCL and their workman , which was received bythe Central Government on 30-06-2010.

[No. L- 22012/188 / 1989 - IR(C - II) ] AJAY KUMAR GAUR, Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

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

No. CGIT/LC /R/258/ 89

Presiding Officer : Shri Mohd . Shakir Hasan

...Workman/Union

The General Secretary , Rashtriya Koyla Khadan Mazdoor Sangh ( INTUC ) , Post Chandametta Distt. Chhindwara (MP)

The committee appointed by the management, conducted the enquiry had come to know that workman has visited Dubai twice unauthorizedly without consent . Even his presence was illegally shown and wages received fraudulently . Under such circumstances this Tribunal should not permit the workman to raise the plea of violation ofprinciple of natural justice , whereas , in the opinion of this Tribunal the committee conducted a fair enquiry except to ask the workman regarding his step . At the cost of repetition , the person who commits illegality should not be benefited for his illegal acts and designed on the ground of principle of natural justice . Thus , it is not open for the workman to plead for the violation of principle of natural justice as he has illegally visited Dubai during the period in question and has claimed to be present and get wages from, FCI . Moreover , workman in his evidence has himself admitted that he has not completed 240 days of work in any of the calendar year before his dismissal . Under such circumstances , he was not entitled for the status of ancillary labour and the same was illegally/afforded on him . Thus , the management has rightly dismissed the workman from the services . It is not the case of inaction and laxity on the part of the workman but it is the case of illegally and committing fraud with the organization who has been providing the food and shelter to the workman .

Versus

General Manager ,

Management

Western Coalfields Ltd. , Kanhan Area, Post Dungaria , Distt. Chhindwara (MP)

On the basis of the above observation , I am of the view that workman is not entitled for any relief. He was rightly dismissed from the services by the management by conducting the enquiry in compliance of the order passed by the Hon'ble High Court to disposed ofthe representation of the workman and the legal notice given by him within

2639 GI/ 10-14 4576

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 24, 2010/ SHRAVANA 2, 1932

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

II. Ifso , what relief the workman is entitled to?

5. Issue No. I

Passed on this 16th day of June , 2010

1. The Government of India, Ministry of Labour vide its Notification No. L-22012 ( 188)/89 - IR (Coal -II) dated 30-11-89 has referred the following dispute for adjudication bythis tribunal:-

"Whether the action of the General Manager , Western Coalfields Ltd. , Kanhan Area, PO Dungaria, Distt. Chhindwara (MP) in relation to their Regional Workshop, in retiring Shri Lallan Pandey, Mechanical Fitterw.e.f.6-7-1988 without considering their own records of service is justified? If not what reliefthe concerned workman is entitled? "

The Union has examined one witness , the workman in the case . He has stated that he was transferred to RegionalWorkshop, Kanhan Area and the L.P.C. was issed. The L.P.C. shows that his date ofbirth is 16-7-1928 . He has admitted that service record was received by him which is marked as Exhibit M/ 1 . The said service bears the signature of the workman and the date of birth was recorded as 16-7-1928 . He has also admitted the signature on Form B which are marked as Exhibits M/2 and M/3 . The document ExhibitM/2 is the Form -B ofGhorawari Colliery. This Form B shows that the date of birth is 16-7-28 . There is no allegation that the management ofGhorawari Colliery had obtainedhis signature on blank papers . This was the place from the where the workman was transferred. Thus the evidence of the workman also supports the fact that his date of birth is 16-7-1928 . Moreover the evidence of the work does not corroborate the fact that before 1988 , the workman had raised any objection regarding his age.

6. On the other hand, the management has also adduced oral and documentary evidence . Mr. Gulam Hussain was Personnel Manager , Kanhan Area . He has supported the case of the management . He has stated Shri Lallan Pandey was appointed in the year 1954 and his date ofbirth was recorded as 16-7-1928 in the Delta Colliery . He has further supported that in the statutory his age was recorded as 16-7-1928 . The documents further support the case ofthe management that the date ofbirth is 16-7-1928 . Thus I find and hold that the date of birth of the workman was 16-7-1928 .

2. The case of the Union/ workman in short is that the workman was appointed on 1-7-1951 in the Ravanwara Khas Collierywhere his age was recorded as 16-7-1930 and the same was also recorded in CMPF records . After nationalization, he was transferred to Regional Workshop , Kanhan . On 24-6-81 , the management of Kanhan Area issued a circular notice to the workers to confirm the date of birth within 90 days . The workman is said to have immediately represented to rectify his date of birth from 16-7-1928 to 16-7-1930 . It is alleged that the management had taken his signatures on different blank forms including Form B on the pretext to be sent to CMPF Commissioner . Whenhis date ofbirth was not corrected he had again filed representation . Later the matter was taken up by the Union under I.R. System on 15-7-88 but the management refused tocorrect the date ofbirth and the workman was prematurely superannuated on 16-7-1988 instead of 16-7-1990 causing monetary loss of two years . The Union/workman claims monetary benefit till 16-7-90 with costs of the suit.

7. It is not out of place to say that during the course of proceeding the workman died and his leagl representatives are substituted as party in the proceeding. However I find and hold that the workman superannuated rightly on his date of retirement . This issue is decided in favour of the management.

8. Issue No. II

Onthe basis of the discussion made above , it is clear that the workman was rightly retired and the management isjustified in retiring him w.e.f. 16-7-1988. Accordingly the reference is answered.

costs. 9. In the result, the award is passed without any

10. Let the copies of the award be sent to the Government of India , Ministry of Labour & Employment as per rules .

3. The management appeared and filed written statement . The case of the management in short is that the workman was initially appointed on 22-6-1959 in Delta Collierywherein the record ofhis date of birth was recorded as 16-7-1928 . Thereafter he was transferred to Ghorawari Colliery and there his same date of birth was recorded . In L.P.C. and Form B the same date of birth was recorded and the workman had put his signature on the record in token ofacceptance ofhis age . It is an admitted fact that a notice was displayed in the Regional Workshop Kanhan to raise dispute , if any , with regard to the date of birth but the workman did not raise any objection. In 1987, the service details was circulated but the workman signed the service excerpts without any objection . The workman had not submitted any representation before 1988. It is submitted that the action of the management in retiring the workman w.e.f. 16-7-1928 is justified.

MOHD. SHAKIR HASAN , Presiding Officer नई दिल्ली, 30 जून , 2010

4. On the basis of the pleading of both the parties , the following issues are framed for adjudication-

I. Whether the date of birth of the workman is 16-7-1930 instead of 16-7-1928 ?

का. आ. 1841.-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में , केन्द्रीय सरकार बैंक ऑफ 4577 भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई 24, 2010/ श्रावण 2 , 1932

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3( ii) ]

AWARD

1. Reference is answered in the negative .

2. The second party is not entitled for any relief as prayed.

महाराष्ट्र के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में औद्योगिक अधिकरण , पुणे के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 14/2008 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 29-06-2010 को प्राप्त हुआ था।

3. No order as to costs.

[सं. एल-12011 / 114/2007- आई आर( बी- II ) ] कमल बाखरू, डेस्क अधिकारी

Copies be sent to the appropriate authorities . 4.

Pune:

New Delhi , the 30th June , 2010

Date:29-04-2010

SHRIKANT K. DESHPANDE , Industrial Tribunal

नई दिल्ली, 30 जून , 2010

का. आ. 1842. औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 ( 1947 S. O. 1841.-In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 14/2008 ) of the Industrial Tribunal, Pune now as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employees in relation to the management of Bank of Maharashtra and theirworkman, which was received by the Central Government on29-06-2010.

[No. L- 12011 /114/2007- IR(B- II)] KAMAL BAKHRU, Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार बैंक ऑफ महाराष्ट्र के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच , अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालय-2, मुम्बई के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 93/2005 ) कोप्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 29-06-2010 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

BEFORE SHRIS. K. DESHPANDE, INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL MAHARASHTRA AT PUNE

[सं. एल-12012/43/2005- आई आर( बी- II ) ] कमल बाखरू , डेस्क अधिकारी Reference (IT) No. 14 of2008

New Delhi , the 30th June , 2010

...FirstParty

The Assistant General Manager, Bank ofMaharashtra , Pune Rular Region , Kesariwada , Narayan Peth , Pune .

AND

...Second Party

TheGeneral Secretary, Bank ofMaharashtra Karmchari Sangh, 185 , Shaniwar Peth, Pune-30

In the matter ofreinstatement.

S. O. 1842.-In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Governmenthereby publishes the award (Ref. No.93/2005 ) ofthe Central Government Industrial Tribunal/Labour Court- 2,Mumbai now as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employees in relation to the management ofBank of Maharashtra and their workman, whichwas received by the Central Government on 29-06-2010.

[No. L- 12012/43/2005 -IR (B - II) ] APPEARANCES Both parties present.

AWARD

KAMAL BAKHRU, Desk Officer ANNEXURE

(Deliveredon29-04-2010)

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL NO. 2, MUMBAI

PRESENT

A.A. LAD PRESIDING OFFICER

This is a Reference made by the Commissioner of Labour Pune, vide order dtd. 29-08-07 in exercise ofpower conferredby Sec . 12(5) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 in respect of dispute between Bank of Maharashtra and Bank of Maharashtra Karmchari Sangh over the demand as mentioned in the Schedule appended to the order of reference, for adjudication to this Tribual .

Reference No. CGIT-2/93 of 2005

Employers in relation to the management ofBank of Maharashtra

..... First Party Itappears that the parties have settled their dispute out of court, therefore he does not want to proceed with the Reference further . The contents ofpursis are explained to the second party and he has accepted the same as true &correct. This fact is also corroborated by the Dy. General Secretary ofthe union present before the court . In view of this the Reference is disposed off for want ofprosecution. No order as to costs .

TheDy.General Manager , Bank ofMaharashtra, Regional Office, Mahabank Bhawan, B , 37, Wagle Ind. Estate , Thane400604.

Inthe result I proceed to pass the following Award.

4578

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: JULY 24, 2010/SHRAVANA 2 , 1932

(PART II -SEC. 3 (ii) ] V/ s.

that, before that no recruitment process was adopted by Theirworkman

theHeadOffice ofthe 1st Party . According to 1st Partythe

age of the candidate to recruit should be between 18 and

28 years for General Category and there was relaxation of5 Shri Ladkya Chintaman Matera, At& Post: Kasa, Tal. Dahanu , Thane-401 607.

years in the case of SC/ ST candidates . It is stated bat, the

.... Second Party

more concerned workman was of SC category but he APPEARANCE:

than 33 years when last interview was condited on Forthe Employer : Shri A.B. Anchan, Advocate

10-12-2002 . It is stated that, he is not qualified toчие.

For the Workman :

It is stated that, when he was not appointed on propanent Shri V.J. Amberkar , Advocate

Date ofreserving the Award: 23-4-2010

basis and he worked purely on temporary basis hemmot claim permanency and pray for reinstatement.

Date ofpassing the Award : 04-6-2010

4.Rejoinder is filed by the 2nd Party at Exhibit 9 AWARD

stating and contending that, the stand taken by the Ist

Party is not admitted to him and pray to reinstate him with

benefit of back wages and continuity of service .

The matrix of the facts as culled out from the proceedings are as under :

5. Inview of the above Issues are framed at shabit 16which I answer as follows:

ISSUES

FINDIN

1. Does second party prove that, he worked more than 240 days?

1. The Government of India, Ministry of Labourby its Order No. L- 12012/43/ 2005 - IR (B - II) dated 18th July, 2005 in exercise of the powers conferred by clause (d) of sub-section ( 1 ) and sub-section 2 ( A) of section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 have referred the following dispute to this Tribunal for adjudication:

2. Is he entitled to claim permanency?

3. Isworkman entitled for reinstatement? No

4. What order?

As per the "Whether the action of the management ofBank of Maharashtra , Thane Region office , in terminating the services of Shri Ladakya Chintataman Matera, PTS, on 13-03-2003 is proper, legal and justified? Ifnot, what relief the workman is entitled to? "

order pas

below.

REASONS:

ISSUES NOS . 1T03 :

6.By these proceedings 2nd Party pray to rerate

him with benefit of back wages and continuity of vice stating and contending that, he worked continuously fer

more than 240 days from 1-8-2000 to 12-3-2003 . Accerling

to him artificial break was shown but he worked

continuously . According to him he is a qualified perтов .

His services were terminated without following due process

oflaw . It is denied by the 1st Party stating and contending

that2nd Party is not qualified . It is stated that, he was over

agewhen last interview was conducted on 10-12-2002. fis

denied that, he is a qualified perosn to contnuc in the employment ofthe 1st Party.

2.Claim Statement is filed by the 2nd Party concerned workmanat Exhibit 6 stating and contending that , he worked with 1st Party at Charoti Naka Kasa Branch, Post : Kasa, Taluka Dahanu , District Thane , with effect from 1-8-2000 . Accordingto him he worked continuously with 1st Party Branch. He states that, though he worked contnuously, though by various letters artificail break was shown in his employment between 1-8-2000 to 12-3-2003 , he worked continuously . According to him though he worked during the above period continuously artificail breaks were shown . He states that , he worked for more than 240 days and acquired permanency still he was terminated without following due process of law . According to 2nd Party he ought to have been continued in the employment of the 1st Party Branch , however, he was not considered. So he pray to direct 1st Party to reinstate him with benefits of backwages and continuity of service as he is its permanent employee.

7. To prove that, 2nd Party placed reliance on his affidavitfiled in lieu of his examinaton- in- chief, at Eshibit 18 where he narrated above story of his employment as stated in the Claims Statement . In the cross he states at . appointment letter was issued to him for a particular period He admits that , last appointment letter was dated 23-1-2002 for50days . He admits that , he never worked for 240 days contnuously. He admit that, each appointment was on contract basis . He admits his date of birth is 10-6-1969. He admitsthat, interview was taken on 10-12-2002 and he was 3.This is disputed by the 1st Party by filing Written Statement at Exhiba 7 stating and contending that, the 2nd Party was never appointed on permanent basis . It is stated that, he was appointed as a casual worker. It is admitted that, he worked during the above period but worked with break. It is denied that, artificial break was shown in the employment of the 2nd Party. It is stated that, he was over age when he was interviewed on 10-12-2002 . it is stated

over age at that time . He admit that, at that time he was six भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई 24 , 2010/ श्रावण 2, 1932

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

months ' over age . On that, he closed his evidence and filed closing purshis at Exhibit 20. Against that , 1st Party led evidence by filing affidavit of Mukund Narayan Joshi , in lieu ofhis examination- in -chief, at Exhibit 21 , where claim ofthe 2nd Party is denied making out the case that , he was over age and cannot be reinstated. In the cross he admit that, he is deposing on the basis of the record. He admit the correspondence issued to the concerned workman produced from Serial Nos . 1 to 5, 14-16 Exhibit 10, pages 6- 7of Exhibit 11 as well as pages 1 to 5 and 14-16 of Exhibit 10 in . He admit that, 2nd Party was recruited through Employment Exchange still he was not considered for permanency since he was over age . On that 1st Party closed its evidence and filed closing purshis at Exhibit 23 .

8. Written arguments are filed by the 2nd Party at Exhibit 24 and the same are replied by 1st Party by filing its writtenarguments at Exhibit 26.

9. Perused those and the evidence referred above . Here 2nd Party admit that, he did not work for 240 days continuously. Even he admit that, he was appointed on contract basis .He admit that, he was not considered because he was over age .

10. When qualifications like age , education etc. required for recruitment and it is not there with him . In this premises question arises whether he can be exempted from all these tests .

11. Here 2nd Party claims that, he must be reinstated since he worked from 2000 to 2003 , more precisely from 1-8-2000 to 12-3-2003 . At the same time documents produced by the bank with Exhibit 7 reveals that, various appointment letters were given to him during that period. Even2nd Party admit those . The documents at Serial Nos . 9to 19 ofExhibit 7 reveals that , various appointment letters were issued without interviews just to break period which means that, he was not appointed by following due process and he did not work continuously for 240 days in a year to claim permanency.

12. Besides when he was not taken on permanent basis and when he worked on contract basis , in my considered view , such an employee connot be regularized unless and until he comes through proper channel and passes required tests which are made applicable to other employees and if some exemptions or some concession is given to such type ofemployees , which will affect on others , who are in the queue of recruit. Moreover ratio laid down by various courts including in the case of Umadevi v/ s Karnataka State does not permit such type of employee to claimpermanency.

13. In view of the discussions made above and considering all these appointments of the concerned workman with the 1st Party, and the nature of work and nature ofhis appointments , I conclude that, the concerned workman is not entitled for reinstatement as prayed. So I answer the above Issues accordingly and pass the following order:

4579

ORDER

Reference is rejected with no order as its costs .

A. A. LAD , Presiding Officer

Mumbai,

4thJune, 2010

नई दिल्ली , 30 जून , 2010

का. आ. 1843.-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 (1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में , केन्द्रीय सरकार बैंक ऑफ महाराष्ट्रके प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच , अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालय-2, मुम्बई के पंचाट पार्ट- I ( संदर्भ संख्या 92 ऑफ 2005 ) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 29-06-2010 को प्राप्त हुआ था।

[सं. एल-12012/42/2005- आई आर( बी- II ) ] कमल बाखरू, डेस्क अधिकारी New Delhi , the 30th June , 2010

S. O. 1843 -In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947) the Central Government hereby publishes the award Part - I (Ref. No.92 of 2005 ) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal/ Labour Court - 2, Mumbai now as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employees in relation to the management ofBank ofMaharashtra and their workman , whichwas received by the Central Government on 29-06-2010.

[No. L- 12012/42/2005 - IR (B - II) ] KAMAL BAKHRU, Desk Officer ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL NO . 2 , MUMBAI

PRESENT A.A. LAD PRESIDING OFFICER Reference No. CGIT- 2/92 of 2005

Employers in relation to the management ofBank of Maharashtra

TheDy. General Manager,

Bank ofMaharashtra , Regional Office , Mahabank Bhawan , B - 37 , Wagle Ind . Estate , Thane 400604 ... First Party V/s.

Their workmen

...Second Party Shri S.J. Kamdi , C/o Sukarya Jaru Kamdi , LatishGothengnar , Taluka Shahpur, P.O. Khutgher , District Thane 4580

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 24 , 2010/ SHRAVANA 2, 1932

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

Forthe Employer : Shri A.B. Anchan , Advocate

For the Workman : Shri V.J. Amberkar , Advocate

Date ofreserving the Award: 23-4-2010

Date ofpassingthe Award : 2-6-2010

AWARD- PART I

The matrix of the facts as called out from the proceedings are as under :

referred the withdrawal slips to the hand writing expert and relied on the report of the hand writing expert . It is stated that, when Jogale had no complaint and when he did not complained with any point of time against the concerned workınan either with the Bank nor with any authority it is stated that, Bank unnecessarily prosecuted the concerned workman, held enquiry and took action with the help ofthe Enquiry Officer who purposely supported Bank just to oblige the Bank . So it is prayed that , the finding given by the Enquiry Officer be declared as perverse and action taken by the 1st Party on the basis of the said findings be quashed and set aside with directions to 1st Party to reinstate him with benefits ofback wages and continuity ofservice .

1. The Government of India , Ministry of Labourby its Order No. L- 12012 /42/2005 - IR ( B - II) dated 18th July , 2005 in exercise of the powers conferred by clause ( d) of sub -section ( 1 ) and sub - section 2 (A) of Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 have referred the following dispute to this Tribunal for adjudication:

"Whether the action of the management of Bank of Maharashtra , Thane Region in discharing the services of Shri S.J. Kamdi , Ex - Sub- staff, Shahpur Branch , Bank of Maharashtra vide order dated 16-11-1995 is just, proper and proportionate? Ifnot, to what relief the workman is entitled to ? "

4.Thisis disputed by the 1st Party by filing Written Statement at Exhibit 7 stating and contending that, the enquiry was conducted against the concerned workman by issuing charge sheet and it is stated that, there was ample evidence against the concerned workman . It is alleged that, the concerned workman forged the signature ofaccount holder, deprived the Bank as well as said Jogale . It is statedthat, hand writing expert opined about signature referred for his opinion in which hand writing expert observed that , said signature was not of Jogale and was forged one . It is stated that , since Enquiry Officer was having evidence , the finding given by him holding concerned workman guilty of the charges levelled against him isjust and proper and it is stated that , relying on the said finding action taken by 1st Party is just and proper and does not require any interference . It is stated that , since there was ample evidence before the Enquiry Officer it is prayed that, the enquiry be declared just and proper and finding not perverse.

5.Rejoinder is filed by 2nd Party at Exhibit 9 denying the stand taken by Ist Party and requesting to consider hisprayer.

2. Claim Statement is filed by the 2nd Party concerned workman at Exhibit 6 stating and contending that , he is the employee of the 1st Party. He contends that there is one account holder by name Jogale having Savings Bank Account No. 4889. According to 2nd Party said Jogale is his friend . He contends that , he introduced Jogale to open the Account with the Branch of the 1st Party and on his recommendation Jogale became account holder of the said Branch .He contends that, Jogale is his childhood friend as well as neighbourer . It is alleged that, he was having good relations with said Jogale . He states that, as and when said Jagale was in need of money he was taking services of the 2nd Party and asking 2nd Party to withdraw or deposit the amount from his account . He contends that, even Jogale was asking 2nd Party to withdraw and deposit the amount inhis account by signing necessary withdrawal or pay - in- slips.

6.Insupport ofhis case 2nd Party filed his affidavit at Exhibit 17 in lieu of his examination - in - chiefdenying the stand taken by the ist Party in the written statement and requesting to accept his case .

7. In view ofthe above Issues were framed at Exhibit 5. Out of those Issues Nos.land 2 were treated as preliminary issues which I answer as follows :

ISSUES

FINDINGS

Yes

1. Is enquiry fair and proper?

Yes

2. Is findings perverse?

REASONS:

ISSUES NOS . 1 & 2:

3. He contends that , Bank charge sheeted him alleging that , he forged signatures of Jogale and fraudulently withdrawn the amount from the S.B. Account No.4889 and thus deprived the Bank as well as Jogale and that,he committed misconduct . After issuing charge sheet enquirywas conducted. According to 2nd Party there was no evidence before the Enquiry Officer to conclude that, the charges levelled against him are proved against him . It is stated that, even Jogale did not complaint with Bank nor hewas examined by the Bank to prove the charges levelled against the concerned workman. On the contrary 2nd Party examined Jogale as his defence witness who admitted signature of the various withdrawal slips and denied the signature. It is stated that , enquiry officer unnecessarilly

8. As far as Enquiry is concerned 2nd Party admit that, the enquiry was fair and proper. Even 2nd Party is happy with the procedure followed by the Enquriy Officer 4581 भारत का राजपत्र: जुलाई 24, 2010/ श्रावण 2 , 1932

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

workman has forged the signature of the concerned account holder Jogale and committed misconduct as alleged. Even there was no complaint of Jogale about his signature fabricated by the concerned workman , except evidence of handwriting expert there was no evidence of any type against the concerned workman with the Bank. Concerned workman deposited the amount which was givento him by Jogale . Even Jogale admit that , he handed over the amount to the concerned workman to deposit it in hisaccount when he heard about the prosecution initiated against the concerned workman.

in conducting the enquiry. Even 2nd Party is happy with the documents produced by the 1st Party. He admit that, documentsproduced were supplied to him. Even he admit that, charge sheet was served on him. He admit that, he attended enquiry. He admit that, he was representedby his representative Ashok Gore . He admit that , witnesses examined by Bank were made available for his cross . He admit that, opportunity was given to him to lead evidence in support of his defence. Even he admit that, he was permittedto defend his case . As far as enquriy is concerned there is no much quarrel about fairness of the enquiry. So relying on the admissions given by the concerned workman about the enquiry I conclude that , enquriy is fair andproper.

12. However , when enquiry is fair and proper but finding appears perverse as Enquriy Officer does not have any evidence to hold the concerned workman guilty ofthe charges leveled against him .

9. There is dispute about the finding of the Enquiry Officer . 2nd Party contends that , finding is perverse . Whereas 1st Party contends that, finding is not perverse .

13. In view of the above discussions I conclude that, the enquriy was fair and proper but finding perverse. So I answer the above Issues accordingly and pass the following order:

ORDER

a. I observe enquiry is fair and proper. I also observe finding is perverse ;

b. I direct 1st Party to justify its action to termination.

A. A. LAD , Presiding Officer

Mumbai,

2nd June , 2010

नई दिल्ली , 2 जुलाई , 2010

का. आ. 1844. कर्मचारी राज्य बीमा अधिनियम , 1948 (1948 का 34) की धारा-1 की उप धारा ( 3 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए केन्द्रीय सरकार एतद्वारा 01 अगस्त, 2010 को उस तारीख के रूप में नियत करती है, जिसको उक्त अधिनियम के अध्याय -4 ( 44 व 45 धारा के सिवाय जो पहले से प्रवृत्त हो चुकी है) अध्याय -5 और 6 ( धारा-76 की उपधारा ( 1 ) और धारा-77 , 78, 79 और 81 के सिवाय जो पहले ही प्रवृत्त की जा चुकी है ) के उपबंध महाराष्ट्र राज्य के निम्नलिखित क्षेत्रों में प्रवृत्त होंगे , अर्थात्:

"जिला नागपुर के बूटीबोरी ग्राम पंचायत के महाराष्ट्र औद्योगिक विकास महामंण्डल का औद्योगिक क्षेत्र ( एम.आई.डी.सी ) व जिला व तालुका नागपुर के राजस्व ग्राम रेंगापार , बोरी तथा नागपुर जिला के हिंगणा तालुका की ग्राम पंचायत व राजस्व सीमा के ऐसे क्षेत्र जिन में इस अधिनियम के संदर्भित उपलब्ध पहले से ही लागू हैं, के साथ- साथ , गांव तुरकमारी , सुकली , किन्ही, बीडगणेशवपूर , उमरी , आमगाव , वटेघाट , टेंभरी , पोही , किरमिटी , भारकस , सालईदाभा , गंगापुर, खापा , मांडवा, टाकलघाट में आने वाले क्षेत्र । "

[सं. एस -38013/23/2010- एस.एस. Ⅰ ]

एस.डी. जेवियर , अवर सचिव 10. Admittedly concerned customer Jogale who is the account holder of the 1st Party against whom it is alleged by the 1st Party that , the 2nd Party forged his signature . As far as point of forging of signature is concernedby the concerned workman there is evidence of the hand writing expert . However , Jogale who is account holder of the Account No. 4889 is not examined by the Bank . Even it is admitted position that , he did not lodge any complaint with the Bank or anywhere . It is alleged that, said Jogale orally complained. However , no proof is produced by the Bank to show that , there was such a complaint filed by Jogale about the act of the 2nd Party of withdrawing the amount from his account . Even 1st Party examined its witness , Sr. Manager, Mukurid Narayan Joshi, at Exhibit 20 who , in the cross , admit number of things . He admit that , there was no written complaint against 2nd Party made by the concerned customer . Even he admit that, no Police complaint was filed . He admit that , Jogale was not examined as witness of the Bank . Even he admit that, Jogale was examined as defence witness of concerned workman who admitted in evidence whenever he was in need of money he was asking the 2nd Party to withdraw the amount and was issuing signed withdrawals slips and giving it to the 2nd Party , the concerned workman to withdraw the amount from his account . Even said witness admit that, concerned workman is his neighbour. Even he admit that, the withdrawal slips and his signature on all those withdrawal slips . When that is the situation and when there is no complaint of the Jogale about the amount withdrawn andby the concerned workman from his account, in my considered view, no business was with the Bank to proceed against the concerned workman and prosecute him on the charge ofmisconduct under Clause 19 (5 ) (j ) ofthe Bipartiate Settlement, 1966.

New Delhi, the 2nd July, 2010

S. O. 1844.- In exercise of the powers conferred by sub -section (3 ) of Section 1 of the Employees State 11. Ifwe peruse the enquiry proceedings and findings ofthe Enquriy Officer we find that, there was no evidence before the Enquiry Officer to conclude that , the concerned 4582

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 24, 2010/ SHRAVANA 2, 1932

[PART II-SEC. 3 (ii) ]

New Delhi , the 5th July, 2010 Insurance Act, 1948 (34 of 1948 ) the Central Government hereby appoints the 1st August, 2010 as the date on which the provisions of Chapter IV ( except Sections 44 and 45 which have already been brought into force) and Chapter- V and VI (except sub - section ( 1 ) of Section 76 and Sections 77, 78, 79 and 81 which have already been brougth into force) ofthe said Act shall come into force in the following areas in the State of Maharashtra namely: -

S. O. 1845. In exercise of the powers conferred by sub - section (3 ) of Section 1 of the Employees State Insurance Act , 1948 (34 of 1948) the Central Government hereby appoints the 1st August , 2010 as the date on which the provisions of Chapter IV ( except Sections 44 and 45 which have already been brought into force) and Chapter- Vand VI (except sub-section ( 1 ) of Section 76 and Sections 77, 78 , 79 and 81 which have already been brougth inte force) ofthe said Act shall come into force in the following areas in the State of Andhra Pradesh, namely : -

"All the areas falling in the revenue Villages of Bhupalpally, Jangedu , Kasimpally, Kompelli , Kundurupally, and Polluramaiahpally in Bhupalpally Mandal and Chelpur in Ghanpur Mandal in Warangal District of Andhra Pradesh ."

"The areas comprising of Maharashtra Industrial Development corporation, Industrial area , Butiborigram Panchayats and revenue limits of Villages of Rengapar , Bori in Taluka and District Nagpur and Gram Panchayat and revenue limits of Villages ofTurakmari , Sukali , Kinhi, Bidganeshpur , Umari ,Amgaon , Vateghat , Tembhari , Pohi , Kirmiti , Bharkas , Salaidabha , Gangapur , Khapa , Mandwa, and Takalghat in Taluka Hingna , District Nagpur in Addition to the areas in which the said Provisions of the Acthave already been brought into force" .

[No. S- 38013 /24/ 2010-S.S.I] S.D. XAVIER, Under Secy.

[No. S - 38013 / 23/2010- S.S.I ] S.D. XAVIER, Under Secy.

शुद्धि पत्र नई दिल्ली, 14 जुलाई , 2010 नई दिल्ली , 5 जुलाई, 2010

का. आ. 1846. भारत के राजपत्र के भाग II , खण्ड 3 ( ii ) में 20 मार्च , 2010 को प्रकाशित सां. आ. संख्या 766 में केन्द्र सरकार की संदर्भ संख्या उस पर प्रकाशित अनुबंध से ठीक पहले एल -22012/39 / 2008- आईआर ( सीएम- II ) की बजाय एल-22012/63/ 2008- आईआर ( सीएम- II ) पढ़ी जाए ।

[फा.सं. एल-22012/63/2008 - आईआर ( सीएम- II ) अजय कुमार गौड़ , डेस्क अधिकारी CORRIGENDUM

का. आ. 1845.-कर्मचारी राज्य बीमा अधिनियम , 1948 (1948 का 34 ) की धारा -1 की उप धारा ( 3 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए केन्द्रीय सरकार एतद्वारा 01 अगस्त , 2010 को उस तारीख के रूप में नियत करती है , जिसको उक्त अधिनियम के अध्याय -4 (44 व 45 धारा के सिवाय जो पहले से प्रवृत्त हो चुकी है ) अध्याय -5 और 6 ( धारा 76 की उपधारा ( 1 ) और धारा -77 , 78 , 79 और 81 के सिवाय जो पहले ही प्रवृत्त की जा चुकी है ) के उपबंध आन्ध्र प्रदेश राज्य के निम्नलिखित क्षेत्रों में प्रवृत्त होंगे , अर्थात्:

" आन्ध्र प्रदेश राज्य के वरंगल जिले के भूपालपल्ली मण्डल के, भूपालपल्ली , जंगेडु, कासिमपल्ली , कोंपेल्ली , कुंडूरूपल्ली एवं पोल्लुरामय्यपल्ली राजस्व गांव में स्थित सभी क्षेत्र तथा घनपूर मण्डल के चेलपूर राजस्व गांव में स्थित सभी क्षेत्र " ।

New Delhi , the 14th July , 2010 S. O. 1846. In S.O. No. 766 published in Part II section 3 (ii) of Gazette of India dated 20th March 2010 , the Central Government reference number may be read as L- 22012 /63/ 2008 - IR ( CM - II) instead of L - 22012 /39/ 2008 - IR (CM- II ) just before the Annexure published thercat.

[सं. एस-38013/24/2010- एस.एस. 1 ] एस.डी. जेवियर , अवर सचिव

[F.No. L -22012/ 63/ 2008 - IR (CM- II) ] AJAY KUMAR GAUR , Desk Officer Printed by the Manager , Government of India Press , Ring Road , Mayapuri , New Delhi - 110064 and Published by the Controller of Publications , Delhi - 110054 .