REGD , NO . D. L. ( N) 04/0007 /2003-05 रजिस्ट्री सं. डी . एल. ( एन ) 04/ 0007 / 2003-05
32
40 2
भारतका राजपन्न The Gazette of India
प्राधिकार से प्रकाशित
PUBLISHED BY AUTHORITY
साप्ताहिक
WEEKLY
===
सं. 341
नई दिल्ली , अगस्त 15 अगस्त 21 , 2010 , शनिवार/ श्रावण 24 - श्रावण 30 , 1932 NEW DELHI , AUGUST 15- AUGUST 21 , 2010 , SATURDAY / SHRAVANA 24 SHRAVANA 30, 1932 No. 341
इस भाग में भिन्न पृष्ठ संख्या दी जाती है जिससे कि यह पृथक संकलन के रूप में रखा जा सके Separate Paging is given to this Part in order that it may be filed as a separate compilation भाग 11- खण्ड -उप- खण्ड ( ii) PART II -Section 3- Sub - section ( ii )
भारत सरकार के मंत्रालयों ( रक्षा मंत्रालय को छोड़कर ) द्वारा जारी किए गए सांविधिक आदेश और अधिसूचनाएं Statutory Orders and Notifications Issued by the Ministries of the Government of India (Other than the Ministry of Defence )
कार्मिक , लोक शिकायत तथा पेंशन मंत्रालय
MINISTRY OF PERSONNEL , PUBLIC GRIEVANCES AND PENSIONS ( कार्मिक और प्रशिक्षण विभाग )
(Department of Personnel and Training ) नई दिल्ली , ।। अगस्त , 2010
New Delhi , the 11th , August , 2010
S.O. 2031.- In exercise of the powers conferred by sub - section ( 8 ) of Section 24 of the Code of Criminal Procedure , 1971 ( Act No. 2 of 1974 ) , the Central Government hereby appoints S / Shri Dayan Krishnan and Gautam Narayanan , Adcates as Special Public prosecutor for appearing in th..Criminal Misc . Petition in Case RC 2 ( A ) / 06/ ACU - VI ! ( Disproportionate assets case ) against Shri Om Prakash Chautala and others and other related matters arising out of the case investigated by the Delhi Special Police Establishment in the High Court / Supreme Court .
का.आ. 2031 ,- केन्द्रीय 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 उच्छ न्यायालय/सर्वोच्च न्यायालय में दिल्ली विशेष पुलिस स्थापना दाव अन्वेषित किए जा रहे श्री ओमप्रकाश चौटाला तथा अन्यों के विरुद्र आरसी 2 ( ए ) /2006- एसीयू ( गैर - अनुपाती सम्पति मामला ) आपराधिक विविध याचिका का तथा इस मामले से उद्भुत अन्य मामलों का संचालन करने के लिए सर्वश्री दया कृष्णन तथा गौतम नारायणन , वकीलों को विशेष लोक अभियोजक के रूप में नियुक्त करती है ।
[No. 225 /23 /2010 - AVD - II ]
MUKESH CHATURVEDI , Under Secy .
[सं. 225/23/ 2010- एवीडी- II ] मुकेश चतुर्वेदी , अवर सचिव
3099 G1/ 2010
(5061) THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 21 , 2010/SHRAVANA 30 , 1932
नई दिल्ली , 12 अगस्त, 2010
का. आ. 2032. केन्द्रीय सरकार एतद्वारा अपराध प्रक्रिया सौदल, 1973 ( 1974 का अधिनियम सं. 2 ) की धारा 24 की उप - धारा ( 8 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए गांधीनगर के गुजरात उच्च न्यायालय सहित गांधीनगर के विभिन्न न्यायालयों में आसान ( एम ) / 2010- मुम्बई (सोहराबुद्दीन हत्या मामला ) में श्री ॐ एन. साल्वी , एडवोकेट को अपीलों/पुनरीक्षणों या इससे संबंधित अन्य मामलों तथा सम्बद्ध मामलों के संचालन के लिए विशेष लोक अभियोजक के रूप में नियुक्त करती है ।
[सं. 225/25/2010 - एवीडी- II ] मुकेश चतुर्वेदी , अवर सचिव New Delhi , the 12th , August , 2010 S. O. 2032.- In exercise of the powers conferred sub- section ( 8 ) of Section 24 of the Code of Criminal rocedure, 1973 ( Act No. 2 of 1974 ) , the Central Government bereby appoints Shri D. N. Salvi Advocate as Special Public Prosecutor for appearing in RC 4 ( S ) / 2010 -Mum. Sohrabuddin Murder Case ) , in various courts at Ganidhinagar including Hon'ble High Court of Gujarat at Gaindinagar and appeals / revisions or other matters connected therewith and incidental thereto .
[No. 225 / 25 / 2010 - AVD - II ] MUKESH CHATURVEDI , Under Secy .
वित्त मंत्रालय ( वित्तीय सेवाएं विभाग )
नई दिल्ली , 9 अगस्त , 2010
का.आ. 2033. राष्ट्रीयकृत बैंक ( प्रबन्ध एवं प्रकीर्ण उपबंध स्कीन 1970/1980 के खण्ड 9 के उप खण्ड ( 1 ) एवं 12 ) के साथ पठित बैंककारी कंपनी ( उपक्रमों का अर्जन एवं अंतरण अधिनियम , 1970/1980 की धारा 9 की उप - धारा ( 3 ) के अखण्ड ( ङ ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए , केन्द्रीय सरकार , " नद्वाग, श्री श्रीधर लाल लखोटिया ( जन्म तिथि - 11-10-1953 ) , विशेष सहायक, इंडियन ओवरसीज बैंक को अधिसूचना की तारीख से तीन वर्षों की अवधि के लिए अथवा इंडियन ओवरसीज बैंक के कार्यकार कर्मचारी बने रहने तक अथवा अगला आदेश होने तक , जो 1 पहलं हो, इंडियन ओवरसीज बैंक के निदेशक मंडल में कर्मकार कमचारो निदेशक के रूप में नामित करती है ।
[फा. सं. 9/32/2009 - बीओ -1 ]
सुमिता डावरा , निदेशक MINISTRY OF FINANCE Department of Financial Services ) New Delhi , the 9th , August , 2010
S. O. 2033. - In exercise of the powers conferred by clause ( e ) of Sub- section 3 of Section 9 of the Banking Companies (Acquisition and Transfer of Undertakings ) Act ,
[PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii) ] 1970/1980 read with Sub - clause ( 1 ) & ( 2 ) of Clause 9 of the Nationalised Banks ( Management and Miscellaneous Provisions ) Scheme , 1970/1980 the Central Government hereby appoints Shri Sridhar Lal Lakhotia ( DoB 11-10-1953 ) , Special Assistant , Indian Overseas Bank , as Workmen Employee Director on the Board of Directors of Indian Overseas Bank for a period of three years from the date of notification or until be ceases to be a workmen employee of the Indian Overseas Bank or until further orders , whichever is the earliest .
[ F. No. 9 / 32/2009 - BO - I ]
SUMITA DAWRA , Director नई दिल्ली , 16 अगस्त, 2010
का.आ. 2034.राष्ट्रीयकृत बैंक ( प्रबन्ध एवं प्रकीर्ण उपबंध ) स्कीम , 1970/1980 के खण्ड 9 के उप खण्ड ( 1 ) एवं ( 2 ) के साथ पठित बैंककारी कंपनी ( उपक्रमों का अर्जन एवं अंतरण ) अधिनियम, 1970/1980 की धारा 9 की उप- धारा ( 3 ) के खण्ड ( ङ ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए , केन्द्रीय सरकार, एतद्द्वारा , श्री गौर दास ( जन्म तिथि- 31-12-1953 ) , विशेष सहायक , इलाहाबाद बैंक को अधिसूचना की तारीख से तीन वर्षों की अवधि के लिए अथवा इलाहाबाद बैंक के कर्मकार कर्मचारी बने रहने तक अथवा अगला आदेश होने तक , जो भी पहले हो , इलाहाबाद बैंक के निदेशक मंडल में कर्मकार कर्मचारी निदेशक के रूप में नामित करती है ।
[फा. सं . 9 /22/2009 - बीओ -1 ]
सुमिता डावरा , निदेशक New Delhi , the 16th , August , 2010
S. O. 2034. In exercise of the powers conferred by clause ( e) of Sub- section 3 of Section 9 of the Banking Companies (Acquisition and Transfer of Undertakings ) Act , 1970/1980 read with Sub- clause ( 1 ) & ( 2 ) of Clause 9 of the Nationalised Banks ( Management and Miscellaneous Provisions) Scheme , 1970/1980 the Central Government hereby appoints Shri Gour Das ( DoB 31-12-1953 ) , Special Assistant , Allahabad Bank , as Workmen Employee Director onthe Board of Directors of Allahabad Bank for a period of three years from the date of nomination or till be ceases to be a workmen employee of the Allahabad Bank or until further orders , whichever is the earliest .
[ F. No. 9 /22 /2009 - BO - 1 ] SUMITA DAWRA , Director सूचना एवं प्रसारण मंत्रालय नई दिल्ली , 29 जुलाई , 2010
का.आ. 2035. इस मंत्रालय की दिनांक 11-11-2009 की समसंख्यक अधिसूचना के अनुक्रम में और चलचित्र ( प्रमाणन ) नियमावली , 1983 के नियम 7 और 8 के साथ पठित चलचित्र अधिनियम, 1952 ( 1952 का 37 ) की धारा 5 की उप - धारा ( 1 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए , केंद्र सरकार , श्री चन्द्र प्रकाश गिरि, मरचक घट्ट, पी. ओ. रानीपुल , पूर्वी सिक्किम-737135 को, तत्काल प्रभाव से दो वर्षों की अवधि के लिए या अगले आदेश होने तक , इनमें से जो भी पहले हो , केंद्रीय फिल्म प्रमाणन बोर्ड के गुवाहाटी सलाहकार पैनल के सदस्य के रूप में नियुक्त करती है ।
[फा. सं. 809/5 /2008- एफ ( सी ) ] अमिताभ कुमार , निदेशक ( फिल्म ) MINISTRY OF INFORMATION AND BROAD CASTING
New Delhi , the 29th , July , 2010
S. O. 2035. In continuation of Ministry's Notification of even number, dated 11-11-2009 and in exercise of the poweres conferred by sub - section ( 1 ) of Section 5 of the Cinematograph Act , 1952 ( 37 of 1952 ) read with rules 7 and 8 of the Cinematograph ( Certification) Rules , 1983 , the Central Government is pleased to appoint Shri Chandra Prakash Giri , Marchak Ghatte , P.O. Ranipul , East Sikkim - 737135 as a member of the Guwahati Advisory Panel of the Central Board of Film Certification with immediate effect for a period of two years or until further orders , whichever is earlier.
[ F. No. 809 /5 /2008 - F ( C ) ] AMITABH KUMAR , Director ( Films ) नई दिल्ली , 2 अगस्त , 2010
का.आ. 2036. इस मंत्रालय की दिनांक 11-11-2009की समसंख्यक अधिसूचना के अनुक्रम में और चलचित्र ( प्रमाणन ) नियमावली , 1983 के नियम 7 और 8 के साथ पठित चलचित्र अधिनियम , 1952 ( 1952 का 37 ) की धारा 5 की उप - धारा ( 1 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए , केंद्र सरकार , श्रीमती मानसी प्रधान , कॉन्वेंट स्कूल लेन , वीआईपी रोड, पुरी -752001 को, तत्काल प्रभाव से दो वर्षों की अवधि के लिए या अगले आदेश होने तक , इनमें से जो भी पहले हो , केंद्रीय फिल्म प्रमाणन बोर्ड के कटक सलाहकार पैनल के सदस्य के रूप में नियुक्त करती है ।
[फा. सं. 809/4/2008- एफ ( सी ) ] अमिताभ कुमार , निदेशक (फिल्म) New Delhi , the 2nd August , 2010
S. O. 2036. In continuation of this Ministry's Notification of even number , dated 11-11-2009 and in exercise of the poweres conferred by sub - section ( 1 ) of Section 5 of the Cinematograph Act , 1952 ( 37 of 1952 ) read with rules 7 and 8 of the Cinematograph ( Certification ) Rules , 1983 , the Central Government is pleased to appoint Smt . Manasi Pradhan, Convent School Lane , VIP Road , Puri - 752001 as a member of the Cuttak Advisory Panel of the Central Board ofFilm Certification with immediate effect for a period of two years or until further orders, whichever is earlier .
[ F. No. 809 / 4 / 2008 - F ( C ) ] AMITABH KUMAR , Director ( Films) नई दिल्ली, 2 अगस्त, 2010
का.आ. 2037 ,- इस मंत्रालय की दिनांक 10-11-2009 समसंख्यक अधिसूचना के अनुक्रम में और चलचित्र ( प्रगणन) नियमावली , 1983 के नियम 7 और 8 के साथ पठित चलचिः अधिनियम , 1952 ( 1952 का 37 ) की धारा 5 की उप- धारा ( द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए, केंद्र सरकार, निम्नलिखित व्यक्तियों को, तत्काल प्रभाव से दो वर्षों की अवधि के लिए या अगले आदेश होने तक , इनमें से जो भी पहले हो , केंद्रीय फिल्म प्रमाणन बोर्ड के मुंबई सलाहकार पैनल के सदस्यों के रूप में नियुक्त करती है । श्रीमती शकुन कुलश्रेष्ठ , फ्लैट सं. 504 , जीरोम अपॉर्टमेंट्स , सुंदरनगर , कलिना सांताक्रुज पूर्व , मुंबई -98 (i )
( ii ) श्री रोहित साहाजीराव पाटिल , श्रीराम थिएटर , अकलुज तालुका- मलसिरस , जिला- शोलापुर , महाराष्ट्र ।
[फा. सं. 809/7/2009- एफ ( सी ) ] अमिताभ कुमार , निदेशक ( फिल्म) New Delhi , the 2nd August , 2010
S. O. 2037.- In continuation of this Ministry's Notification of even number , dated 10-11-2009 and in exercise of the poweres conferred by sub - section ( 1 ) of Section 5 of the Cinematograph Act , 1952 (37 of 1952) rea with rules 7 and 8 of the Cinematograph ( Certification, Rules , 1983 , the Central Government is pleased to appoint the following persons as members of the Mumbai Advisory Panel of the Central Board of Film Certification with immediate effect for a period of two years or until further orders , whichever is earlier .
(i) Smt . Shakun Kulshreshta , Flat No. 504 , Jerome Apartments , Sundernagar . Kalina Santacruz East , Mumbai - 98
(ii) Shri Rohit Shahjirao Patil , Shriram Theatre. Akluj , Taluka- Malshiras , District - Solapur- Maharashtra .
[ F. No. 809 / 7 /2009 - F ( C AMITABH KUMAR , Director ( Film ) मानव संसाधन विकास मंत्रालय
( उच्चतर शिक्षा विभाग )
( राजभाषा प्रभाग )
नई दिल्ली , 10 अगस्त , 2010
का.आ. 2038. केन्द्रीय सरकार , राजभाषा ( संघ के शासकीय प्रयोजनों के लिए प्रयोग ) नियम 1976 के नियम 10 के उप-नियम 4 के अनुसरण में , मानव संसाधन त्रिकासः रात्रालय के अन्तर्गत केन्द्रीय माध्यमिक शिक्षा बोर्ड के निम्नलिखित 4 क्षेत्रीय कार्यालयों को , ऐसी संस्थाओं के रूप में , जिनमें 80 प्रतिशत से 5064
THE GAVE FIF OF INDU AUGUST 21, 2010/SHRA :
अधिक अधिकारी का कार्यसाधक ज्ञान भए कर लिगा है , अधिसूचित करती
1. प्रगतिय , केन्द्रीय माध्यमिक शिक्षा बोर्ड , दिल्ली 2. क्षेत्रीय कार्यालय , केन्द्रीय माध्यमिक शिक्षा बोर्ड , पंचकुला (हरियाणा ) ,
3. क्षेत्रीय कार्यालय , केन्द्रीय माध्यमिक शिक्षा बोर्ड, इलाहाबाद ( उ.प्र . ) .
4. क्षेत्रीय कार्यालय , केन्द्रीय माध्यमिक शिक्षा बोर्ड , अजमेर (राजस्थान).
[सं. 11011-1/2010 7.भा.ए. ]
डा. अनिता भटनागर जैन , संयुक्त सचिव MINISTRY OF HUMAN RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT
(Deptt . of Higher Education )
(O. L. Division ) New Delhi , the 10th , August , 2010
S. O. 2038. In pursuance of sub rule 4 of rule 10 of the Official Language ( Use for Official Purposes of the Union) Rules , 1976 , the Central Government hereby notifies the following 04 Regional Officees of Centraal Board of Secondary Education under the Ministry of Human Resource Development , whose more than 80 % members of the staff have acquired working knowledge of Hindi : - 1. Regional office , Central Board of Secondary Education , Delhi
2. Regional office , Central Board of Secondary Education , Panchkula , (Haryana)
3. Regional office , Central Board of Secondary Education , Allahabad (UP )
4. Regional office , Central Board of Secondary Education , Ajmer ( Rajsthan)
[No. 11011 1 /2010-O.L.U. ] Dr. ANITA BHATNAGAR JAIN , Jt . Secy .
स्वास्थ्यएवं परिवार कल्याण मंत्रालय ( स्वास्थ्य एवं परिवार कल्याण विभाग ) नई दिल्ली, 27 जुलाई , 2010
का.आ. 2039. भारतीय चिकित्सा परिषद अधिनियम , 1956 ( 1956 का 102 ) की धारा 11 की उप - धारा ( 2 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए केन्द्र सरकार, भारतीय चिकित्सा परिषद से परामर्श करके , संबद्ध विश्वविद्यालयों के नाम में परिवर्तन के कारण उक्त अधिनियम की प्रथम अनुसूची में निम्नलिखित और संशोधन करती है नामतः
उक्त अनुसूची में-
Sc.3 ( ii) ] (कप्राप्त भिकित्सा अहंता इसके २०६ कालम (2) के रूप दिष्ट के अन्तर्गन छत्रपति साहुजी महाराज चिकित्सा महाखनप्रति पंजीकरण के लिए संक्षिप्त रूप । इसके बारूप में निर्दिष्ट शीर्षक के अंतर्गत अंतिम प्रविष्टि २६ संवित प्रविष्टि के बाद निम्नलिखित को अंतर्विषर किया
(2)
डिप्लोमा इन एनेस्थीसि डीए
डिप्लोमा इन ओटो - इरिमालोजी
डॉक्टर ऑफ भेडिसिन ( एनेस्थिसिमेलोल
डॉक्टर ऑफ मेडिसिन ( जनरल मेसिन एसटील डॉक्टर ऑफ मेडिसिन ( डिि
डॉक्टर ऑफ मेडिसिन (पेथोनी:
डॉक्टर ऑफ मेडिसिन (कार्याकालाजा)
डॉक्टर ऑफ मेडिसिन ( फिजियोलोजी ) دا
डॉक्टर ऑफ मेडिसन ( सोशल एंट
प्रीवेन्टिव मेडिसिन कम्युनिटी मेडिसन ) कम्युनि
डॉक्टर ऑफ मेडिसिन मास्टर ऑफ सर्जरी ( एनाटामी ) एनडी/ एमपभ (एनाटामी)
एमडी एमएस डॉक्टर ऑफ मेडिसन/मास्टर ऑफ
सर्जरी ( ओब्सट्रेटिक्स एंड गायनोकोलाजी ) ( ओब्सट्रपिं
एमडी/एमएल (ऑप्थमोलोजी) डॉक्टर ऑफ मेडिसन/ मास्टर ऑफ सर्जरी ( ऑप्थमोलोजी )
मास्टर ऑफ सर्जरी ( ईएनटी ) एमएस ( ईएनटी ) मास्टर ऑफ सर्जरी ( जनरल सर्जरी ) एमएस (जारल सर्जरी ) मास्टर ऑफ सर्जरी ( ओर्थोपेडिक्स) एमएस ( ओर्थोपेडिक्स ) शैक्षिक सत्र 2008-09 से मोतीलाल नेहरु मेडिकल कालेज , इलाहाबाद , उत्तर प्रदेश में प्रशिक्षित किए जा रहे अत्रों के संबंध में " छत्रपति साहुजी महाराज मेडिकल विश्वविद्यालय " द्वारा प्रदान की गई चिकित्सा अर्हता मान्यताप्राप्त होगी ।
[सं. यू -12012/ 162/2010 - एमई ( पी.- II ) ]
अनिता त्रिपाठो, अवर सचिव MINISTRY OF HEALTH AND FAMILY WELFARE (Department of Health and Family Welfare) New Delhi , the 27th July , 2010
S. O. 2039 -In exercise of the powers conferred by sub - section (2 ) of the Section 11 of the Indian Medical [ भाग !! - खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]
Council Act , 1956 ( 102 of 1956 ) , the Central Government , after consulting the Medical Council of India , hereby makes the following further amendments in the First Schedule to the said Act . due to change in name of affiliating University namely:
In the said First Schedule against " Chhatrapati Shahuji Maharaj Medical University , Lucknow " under the heading ' Recognised Medical Qualification ' [ hereinafter referred to as column (2 ) ] , after the last entry and entery relating thereto under the heading ' Abbreviation for Registration ' [ hereinafter referred to as column ( 3 ) ] , the following shall be inserted , namely: ---
(2)
(3)
DA
"Diploma in Anaesthesia"
"Diprema in Oto - Rhino - Larynology " DLO
MD ( Anaesthesiology "Doctor of Medicine (Anaesthesiology ) "
MD (General Medicine) "Doctor of Medicine (General Medicine ) "
MD ( Paediatrics ) "Doctor of Medicine ( Paediatrics ) "
"Doctor of Medicine ( Pathology) " MD ( Pathology)
MD (Pharmacology) "Doctor of Medicine ( Pharma- cology)"
MD ( Phsiology) Doctor of Medicine ( Phsiology ) "
"Doctor of Medicine ( Soicial & Preventive Medicine / Community Medicine) "
MD SPM / Community Medicine)
MD/MS ( Anatonıy) "Doctor of Medicine ( Master of Surgery ( Anatomy ) "
MD/MS ( Obstetrics &Gynaecology "Doctor of Medicine/ Master of Surgery ( Obstetrics & Gynae- cology"
(Ophthalmology ) MD /MS
"Doctor of Medicine / Master of Surgery ( Ophthalmology) "
MS ( ENT) "Master of Surgery ( ENT) "
MS ( General Surgery) "Master of Surgery ( General Surgery) "
"Master of Surgery ( Orthopaedics ) " MS ( Orthopaedics ) (These shall be recognised medical qualification when granted by " Chhatrapati Shahuji Maharaj Medical University , Lucknow " in respect of students being trained at Moti Lal Nehru Medical College , Allahabad , Uttar Pradesh from the academic session 2008-09 ) .
[No. U. 12012 / 162 /2010 - ME ( P.II) ]
ANITA TRIPATHI , Under Secy .
5065
भारत का राजपत्र अगस्त 21 , 2010/ श्रावण 30 , 1932
CORRIGENDUM
New Delhi , the 9th August , 2010
S.O. 2040. In continuation to this Department's Notification No.U. 12012/25 / 2009 - ME ( P.II ) Vol.I dated 27-7-2009 , and in exercise of the powers conferred by sub- section ( 2 ) of the Section 11 of the Indian Medical Council Act , 1956 ( 102 of 1956 ) , the Central Govern- ment , after consulting the Medical Council of India , hereby makes the following further amendments in the First Schedule to the Said Act , namely : --
In the said Schedule-
" against " Mahatma Gandhi University , Kottayam " , under the heading Abbreviation for Registration ( column 3 ) , the DM ( Nephrology ) qualification shall be a recognised medical qualification when granted by Mahatma Gandhi University , Kottayam in respect of students being trained at Govt . Medical College , Kottayam . Kerala on or after January , 1998 instead of March , 2007 " .
[No. U.12012 /25 /2009 - ME ( P - II ) Vol.1 ]
ANITA TRIPATHI , Under Secy .
रसायन एवं उर्वरक मंत्रालय
( औषध निर्माण विभाग )
नई दिल्ली, 20 जुलाई , 2010
का. आ. 2041. केंद्र सरकार , राजभाषा ( संघ के शासकीय प्रयोजनों के लिए प्रयोग ) नियम , 1976 ( यथासंशोधित , 1987 ) के नियम 10 के उपनियम ( 4 ) के अनुसरण में औषध निर्माण विभाग , रसायन एवं उर्वरक मंत्रालय , को जिसके 80 % कर्मचारीवृन्द ने हिन्दी का कार्यसाधक ज्ञान प्राप्त कर लिया है , अधिसूचित करती है ।
[सं. ई -123011 /2/2010 - हिंदी ]
अरूण झा , संयुक्त सचिव MINISTRY OF CHEMICALS AND FERTILIZERS (Department of Pharmaceuticals )
New Delhi , the 20th July , 2010
S. O. 2041. In pursuance of sub - rule ( 4 ) of Rule 10 of the Official Languages ( Use for Official Purposes of the Union) Rules , 1976 (as amended , 1987 ) the Central Government hereby notifies the Department of Pharmaceuticals , Ministry of Chemicals and Fertilizers , whereof 80% of the staff have acquired the working knowledge of Hindi .
[No. E - 23011 /2 /2010 - Hindi ]
ARUN JHA , Jt . Secy .
5066
LAKI 11 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 21 , 2010/ SHRAVANA 20, 1932
उपभोक्ता मामले , खाद्य और सार्वजनिक वितरण मंत्रालय
( उपभोक्ता मामले विभाग )
भारतीय मानक ब्युरो
नई दिल्ली, 20 जुलाई , 2010
का.आ. 2042.- भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो नियम , 1987 के नियम 7 के उपनियम ( 1 ) के खण्ड ( ख ) के अनुसरण में भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो एतद्वारा अधिसूचित करता है कि अनुसूची में दिये गये मानक ( कों ) में संशोधन किया गया /किये गये है : -
अनुसूची
संशोधन की संख्या और तिथि संशोधन लागू होने की तिथि संशोधित भारतीय मानक ( कों ) की संख्या वर्ष और शीर्षक
क्रम संख्या
(3)
(2)
(4) (1)
1. आईएस 3110 : 1982 चाँदी का वर्क- विशिष्टि
संशोधन संख्या 1 जून , 2010 जून, 2010
संशोधन संख्या 1. जून , 2010 जून , 2010 2. आईएस 15766 ( भाग 1 ) : 2007 पालिश हीरों की ग्रेडिंग भाग । वर्गीकरण
संशोधन संख्या 1 जून , 2010 जून , 2010 3. आईएस 15766 ( भाग 2 ) : 2007 पालिश हीरों की ग्रेडिंग भाग 2 परीक्षण पद्धतियाँ
इस संशोधन की प्रति भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो , मानक भवन , 9 बहादुर शाह जफर मार्ग , नई दिल्ली -110002 , क्षेत्रीय कार्यालयों : नई दिल्ली , कोलकाता , चण्डीगढ़ , चेन्नई, मुम्बई तथा शाखा कार्यालयों अहमदाबाद , बंगलौर , भोपाल , भुवनेश्वर , कोयम्बतूर , गुवाहाटी , हैदराबाद , जयपुर, कानपुर , नागपुर , पटना , पूणे तथा तिरुवनन्तापुरम में बिक्री हेतु उपलब्ध हैं ।
[संदर्भ : एमटीडी 10/टी-58 एवं 73 ]
पी. घोष , वैज्ञानिक ' एफ ' एवं प्रमुख ( एमटीडी ) MINISTRY OF CONSUMER AFFAIRS , FOOD AND PUBLIC DISTRIBUTION
(Department of Consumer Affairs )
BUREAU OF INDIAN STANDARDS
New Delhi , the 20th July , 2010
S.O. 2042. In pursuance of clause (b ) of sub - rule ( 1 ) of Rule 7 of the Bureau of Indian Standards Rules , 1987 , the Bureau of Indian Standards hereby notifies that the Indian Standards , particulars of which are given in the Schedule hereto annexed have been established on the date indicated against each :
SCHEDULE
Sl . No. No. and Title of the standards ( s)
No. & year of the amendment Date from which the amendment shall have effect
(4)
(3)
(1) (2)
Amendment No. 1 June , 2010 June , 2010 1. IS 3110 : 1982 - Specification for silver leaf (firstrevision)
Amendment No. 1 June , 2010 June , 2010 2. IS 15766 ( Part 1 ) : 2007 --Grading of Polished Diamonds - Part 1 Classification
Amendment No. 1 June , 2010 June , 2010 3. IS 15766 ( Part 2 ) : 2007-Grading of Polished Diamonds Part 2 Test Method
Copy of this amendment is available for sale with the Bureau of Indian Standards , Manak Bhavan , 9 Bahadur Shah Zafar Marg . New Delhi - 110002 and Regional Offices : New Delhi , Kolkata , Chandigarh , Chennai , Mumbai and also Branch 5067
का राजपत्र अगस्त 21 , 2010/ श्रावण 30 , 1932
[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]
Offices : Ahmedabad , Bangalore , Bhop Bhubaneshwar , Coimbatore , Guwahati , Hyderabad , Jaipur , Kanpur , Nagpur , Patna , Pune and Thiruvananthapuram .
[Ref: MTD 10/ T - 58 &73 ]
P. GHOSH , Scientist ' F ' & Head ( Met Engg )
नई दिल्ली , 26 जुलाई , 2010
का.आ. 2043.- भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो नियम , 1987 के नियम 7 के उपनियम ( 1 ) के खण्ड ( ख ) के अनुसरण में भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो एतद्वारा अधिसूचित करता है कि नीचे अनुसूची में दिये गये मानकों में संशोधन किया गया है : -
अनुसूची
संशोधित भारतीय मानक की संख्या और वर्ष
संशोधनों की संख्या और तिथि संशोधन लागू होने की तिथि क्रम संख्या
(2)
(3)
(4) (1)
1 . 6932 ( भाग 7 ) : 1973
4, जुलाई 2010
31 जुलाई , 2010 2. 6932( भाग 9 ) : 1973
1,जुलाई 2010
31 जुलाई , 2010 3. 6932 ( भाग 11 ) : 1973
1, जुलाई 2010
31जुलाई , 2010 इन संशोधनों की प्रतियाँ भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो , मानक भवन , 9 बहादुर शाह जफर मार्ग, नई दिल्ली-110002 , क्षेत्रीय कार्यालयों नई दिल्ली , कोलकाता , चण्डीगढ़ , चेन्नई , मुम्बई तथा शाखा कार्यालयों अहमदाबाद , बंगलौर , भोपाल , भुवनेश्वर , कोयम्बतूर , गुवाहाटी , हैदराबाद , जयपुर , कानपुर , नागपुर, पटना , पूणे तथा तिरुवनन्तापुरम में बिक्री हेतु उपलब्ध हैं ।
[ संदर्भ : सीईडी/ राजपत्र ]
ए . क. सैनी , वैज्ञानिक ' एफ ' एवं प्रमुख ( सिविल इंजीनियरी )
New Delhi , the 26th July , 201
S.O. 2043. In pursuance of clause ( b ) of sub - rule ( 1 ) of Rule 7 of the Bureau of Indian Standards Rules , 1987 , the Bureau of Indian Standards hereby notifies that amendment to the Indian Standards , particulars of which are given in the Schedule hereto annexed have been issued :
SCHEDULE
Sl . No. No. and year of the Indian Standards
No. & year of the amendment Date from which the amendment shall have effect (2)
(3)
(4)
(1)
1. 6932 ( Part 7): 1973
4, July2010
31July, 2010 2. 6932 ( Part 9 ) : 1973
1 , July 2010
31 July, 2010 3 . 6932( Part 11 ) : 1973 .
31July , 2010
1, July 2010
Copies of the amendment are available for sale with the Bureau of Indian Standards , Manak Bhavan , 9 Bahadur Shah Zafar Marg , New Delhi - 110002 and Regional Offices : New Delhi , Kolkata, Chandigarh , Chennai , Mumbai and also Branch Offices : Ahmedabad , Bangalore , Bhopal , Bhubaneshwar , Coimbatore , Guwahati , Hyderabad , Jaipur , Kanpur , Nagpur , Patna , Pune , Tairuvananthapuram .
[ Ref: CED /Gazette]
A. K. SAINI , Scientist ' F' & Head ( Civil Engg .) 5068
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 21 , 2010 / SHRAVANA 30 , 1932
[PART 11- Sec . 3 ( ii) ]
नई दिल्ली , 4 अगस्त, 2010
का.आ. 2044.- भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो नियम , 1987 के नियम 7 के उपनियम ( 1 ) के खण्ड ( ख) के अनुसरण में भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो एतद्वारा अधिसूचित करता है कि जिन भारतीय मानकों के विवरण नीचे अनुसूची में दिये गये भानक ( कों ) में संशोधन किया गया/किये गये हैं :-
अनुसूची
संशोधित भारतीय मानक की संख्या और वर्ष
क्रम संख्या
(2)
(1)
1 . आईएस 3224 : 2002 द्रवित पेट्रोलियम गैस ( एलपीजी) सिलेंडरों को छोडकर संपीडित गैस सिलेन्डरों के लिए वाल्व फिटिंग - विशिष्टि ( तीसरा पुनरीक्षण )
2. आईएस 11592 : 2000 पट्टा वाहकों का चयन और डिजाइन रीति संहिता ( पहला पुनरीक्षण )
3 आईएस 13429 ( भाग 3 ) : 2000 सौर कुकर - बॉक्स टाइप-विशिष्टि भाग 3 परीक्षण पद्धति ( पहला पुनरीक्षण ) संशोधन की संख्या और तिथि संशोधन लागू होने की तिथि
(4)
(3)
01 अगस्त, 2010 संशोधन नं. 2 जनवरी , 2009
31 जुलाई, 2010 संशोधन नं. 1 जुलाई , 2010
30 जून , 2010 संशोधन नं. 2 जून , 2010
इस संशोधन की प्रतियाँ भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो , मानक भवन , 9 , बहादुर शाह जफर मार्ग , नई दिल्ली -110002 , क्षेत्रीय कार्यालयों : नई दिल्ली, कोलकाता , चण्डीगढ़ , चेन्नई , मुम्बई तथा शाखा कार्यालयों अहमदाबाद , बंगलौर , भोपाल , भुवनेश्वर , कोयम्बतूर , गुवाहाटी , हैदराबाद , जयपुर , कानपुर , नागपुर , पटना , पूर्ण तथा तिरुवनन्तापुरम में बिक्री हेतु उपलब्ध हैं ।
[संदर्भ : एम.ई.डी./जी -2 : 11 सी. के. वेदा , वैज्ञानिक ' एफ ' एवं प्रमुख ( यांत्रिक इंजीनियरिंग )
New Delhi , the 4th August , 2010
S.O. 2044.In pursuance of clause ( b) of sub - rule ( 1 ) of Rule 7 of the Bureau of Indian Standards Rules , 1987 , the Bureau of Indian Standards hereby notifies that amendments to the Indian Standards , particulars of which are given in the Schedule hereto annexed have been issued :
Sl . No. No and year of the Indian Standards
(2)
(1)
1. IS 3224: 2002 Valve fittings for compressed gas cylinders excluding liquefied petroleum gas ( 1 PG ) cylinders Specification (Third Revision )
2. IS 11592 : 2000---Selection and design of belt conveyers-Code of Practice ( First Revision ) 3. IS 13429 ( Part 3 ) : 2000-- Solar cooker - Box type Specification Part 3 Test Method ( First Revision )
SCHEDULE
No. & year of the amendment
Date from which the aunendment have effect shall (3)
(4)
Amendment No. 2 January , 2009
01 August , 2010
Amendment No. 1 July , 2010
31 July , 2010
Amendment No. 2 June , 2010
30 June , 2010 Copy of this standards is available for sale with the Bureau of Indian Standards , Manak Bhavan , 9 Bahadur Shah Zafar Mary. New Delhi - 110002 and Regional Offices : New Delhi , Kolkata , Chandigarh , Chennai , Mumbai and also Branch भारत का पत्र अगस्त 21 2010/ श्रावय 30.1932
[भाग 11- खण्ड 3( 11) ]
Offices: Ahmedabad , Bangalore , Bhopal , Bhuba..cshwarcbator , Guwahati , Hyderabad, jaipur , Kanpur , Nagpur, Patna , Pune and Tairuvananthapuram.
[Ref: MED/G -2: 1 ]
C. K. VEDA , Scientist 'F' & Head ( Mechanical Engg . )
नई दिल्ली, 4 अगस्त, 2010
का.आ. 2045. भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो नियम , 1987 के नियम 7 के उपनियम ( 1 ) के खण्ड ( ख ) के अनुसरण में भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो एतद्वारा अधिसूचित करता है कि जिन भारतीय मानकों के विवरण नीचे अनुसूची में दिये गये हैं वे स्थापित हो गये हैं :-
अनुसूची
स्थापित तिथि क्रम संशोधित भारतीय भानक ( कों ) की संख्या वर्ष
संख्या और शीर्षक
नये भारतीय मानक द्वारा अतिक्रमित भारतीय मानक अथवा मानकों, यदि कोई हो , की संख्या और वर्ष
(4) (1)
(3)
(2)
28फरवरी , 2010
आईएस 14259 : 1995/आईएसओ 2017 : 1982 कंपन और प्रधात- विलग्नक- निर्दिष्ट लक्षणों की प्रक्रिया
1 . आईएस / आईएसओ 2017-2 : 2007 यांत्रिक कंपन और प्रधात- प्रति स्कंदी आरोपण पद्धतियाँ भाग 2 रेलवे तंत्र के साथ जुड़े कंपन विलग्नक के अनुप्रयोग के लिए तकनीकी जानकारी का आदान-प्रदान
28 फरवरी , 2010 आईएस/ आईएसओ 14963 2003 यांत्रिक कंपन और
2. प्रधात- पुलों और वायाडक्ट पर गत्यात्मक परीक्षण और जांच
कीमार्गदर्शिका
इस भारतीय मानक की प्रतियाँ भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो , मानक भवन , 9 बहादुर शाह जफर मार्ग , नई दिल्ली-110002 , क्षेत्रीय कार्यालयों: नई दिल्ली , कोलकाता , चण्डीगढ़ , चेन्नई, मुम्बई तथा शाखा कार्यालयों अहमदाबाद, बंगलौर , भोपाल , भुवनेश्वर , कोयम्बतूर , गुवाहाटी, हैदराबाद , जयपुर , कानपुर , नागपुर , पटना , पूणे तथा तिरुवनन्तापुरम में बिक्री हेतु उपलब्ध हैं ।
[संदर्भ: एमईडी/जी -2: 1 ]
सी. के. वेदा , वैज्ञानिक ' एफ' एवं प्रमुख ( यांत्रिक इंजीनियरिंग )
New Delhi . the 4th August, 2010
S.O. 2045. In pursuance of clause ( b) of sub - rule ( 1) of Rule 7 of the Bureau of Indian Standards Rules , 1987 , the Bureau of Indian Standards hereby notifies that the Indian Standards , particulars of which are given in the Schedule hereto annexed have been established on the date indicated against each :
SCHEDULE
Date of Established No. and year of the indian Standards
SI . No. Established
No. & year of Indian Standards, if any, Superseded by the New Indian Standard
(3)
(2)
(4) (1)
i.
28 February, 2010
IS 14259: 1995/ISO 2017 : 1982 Vibration and shock-Isolators- Procedures for specifying characteristics .
IS/ ISO 2017-2 : 2007 Mechanical Vibration and shock-Resilient mounting systems Part 2 Technical information to be exchanged for the application of vibration isolation associated with railway systems
28 February, 2010 2. IS/ISO 14963 :2003 Mechanical Vibration and shock-Guidelines for dynamic tests and investigations on bridges and viaducts
3099GI/10-2 PART 11-- SEC . 3 ( ii ) ] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 21 , 2010/ SHRAVANA 30 , 1932
Copy of these standards are available for sale with the Bureau of Indian Standards , Manak Bhavan . 9 , Bahadur Shah Zafar Marg , New Delhi - 110002 and Regional Offices : New Delhi , Kolkata, Chandigarh , Chennai , Mumbai and also Panch Offices : Ahmedabad , Bangalore , Bhopal , Bhubaneshwar , Coimbatore , Guwahati , Hyderabad , Jaipur , Kanpur, Nagpur, Patna, Pune , Tairuvananthapuram.
[ Ref: MED /G - 2 : 1 ]
C. K. VEDA , Scientist ' F ' & Head ( Mechanical Engg . )
नई दिल्ली , 3 अगस्त, 2010
का.आ. 2046.- भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो नियम , 1987 के नियम 7 के उपनियम ( 1 ) के खण्ड ( ख ) के अनुसरण में भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो एतद्वारा अधिसूचित करता है कि नीचे अनुसूची में दिये गये मानक में संशोधन किया गया है : --
अनुसूची
संशोधन की संख्या और तिथि
संशोधित भारतीय मानक की संख्या और वर्ष
संशोधन लागू होने की तिथि क्रम संख्या
(4) (2)
(3)
(1)
1 . आई एस 2556 ( भाग 2 ) : 2004
2अगस्त, 2010
2, जुलाई 2010
इस संशोधन की प्रतियाँ भारतीय..क 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 तिरुवनन्तापुरम में बिक्री हेतु उपलब्ध हैं ।
[संदर्भ : सीईडी/राजपत्र ]
ए. के. सैनी , वैज्ञानिक ' एफ ' एवं प्रमुख ( सिविल इंजीनियरी )
New Delhi , the 3rd August , 2010
S.O. 2046.-In pursuance of clause (b ) of sub - rule ( 1 ) of Rule 7 of the Bureau of Indian Standards Rules , 1987 , the Bureau of Indian Standards hereby notifies the amendment to the Indian Standards , particulars of which is given in the Schedule hereto annexed have been issued :
SCHEDULE
Date from which the
No. & year of the amendment
No. and year of the Indian Standards
SI. No.
amendment shall have effect
(4) (2)
(i)
(3)
IS2556 ( Part 2) : 2004
2, July 2010
2August , 2010 Copy of the amendment is available for sale with the Bureau of Indian Standards , Manak Bhavan , 9. Bahadur Shah Zafar Marg , New Delhi - 110002 and Regional Offices: New Delhi , Kolkata , Chandigarh , Chennai , Mumbai and also Branch Offices Ahmedabad , Bangalore , Bhopal , Bhubaneshwar , Coimbatore , Guwahati , Hyderabad , Jaipur , Kanpur , Nagpur , Pana, Fine and Thiruvananthapuram .
Ref: CED / Gazette]
A. K. SAINI , Scientist 'F ' & Head ( Civil Engg . ) भारत का राजपत्र अगस्त 21 , 2010/ श्रावण 30 , 1932
| भाग 11 - खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]
नई दिल्ली, 3 अगस्त, 2010
का.आ. 2047. भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो नियम , 1987 के नियम 7 के उपनियम ( 1 ) के खण्ड ( ख ) के अनुसरण में भारतीय मानका ब्यूरो एतद्वारा अधिसूचित करता है कि जिन भारतीय मानकों के विवरण नीचे अनुसूची में दिये गये हैं वे स्थापित हो गये हैं : -
अनुसूची
स्थापित तिथि स्थापित भारतीय मानक ( कों ) की संख्या वर्ष और शीर्षक
क्रम संख्या
नये भारतीय मानक द्वारा अतिक्रमित भारतीय मानक अथवा मानकों , यदि कोई हो , की संख्या और वर्ष
(4) (2)
(3)
(1)
1 .
31 दिसम्बर 2009
आई एस 3951 ( भाग 1 ) : 1975
आई एस 3951 ( भाग 1 ) खोखली मिट्टी की टाइलें प्रकार ( दूसरा पुनरीक्षण ) 2009 फर्श व छतों के लिए विशिष्टि भाग । फिलर
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 , हैद्राबाद , जयपुर , कानपुर, नागपुर , पटना , पूणे तथा तिरुवनन्तापुरम में बिक्री हेतु उपलब्ध हैं ।
[संदर्भ : सीईडी/राजपत्र ]
ए. के. सैनी , वैज्ञानिक ' एफ ' एवं प्रमुख ( सिविल इंजीनियरी )
New Delhi , the 3rd August , 2010
S.O. 2047. 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 are given hereto annexed have been established on the date indicated against each :
SCHEDULE
Date of Established SI. No. No. and year of the Indian Standards Established
No. & year of Indian Standards , if any , Superseded by the New Indian Standard
(3)
(4) (1)
(2)
31 December 2009
IS 3951 ( Part 1 ) : 1975
1 . IS 3951 ( Part 1 ) : 2009 Hollow Clay Tiles for Floors and Roofs Specification : Part 1 FillerType ( Second Revision )
Copy of this standard 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: CED / Gazette]
A. K. SAINI , Scientist ' F' & Head ( Civil Engg . )
नई दिल्ली , 4 अगस्त , 2010
का. आ. 2048.- भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो ( प्रमाणन ) विनियम 1988 के नियम 5 के उपनियम ( 6 ) के अनुसरण में भरती अनक ब्यूरो एतद्वारा अधिसूचित करता है कि वे लाइसेंस जिनके विवरण नीचे अनुसूची में दिए गए हैं को उनको आगे दर्शाए गई तिथि से दिया गया हैं :-
5072
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 21 , 2010/ SHRAVANA 30, 195
लाइसेंसधारी का नाम एवं पता (1) (2)
(3)
1. 5369275 मैसर्स मा तारा फाउन्डरी , 35/1/4 , जे. रोड , बेलगाछिया , हावड़ा 711105 पश्चिम बंगाल
2. 5437165 मैसर्स अलकानन्दा स्पन्ज आयरन प्राइवेट लिमिटेड , बामुनारा इंडस्ट्रियल एरिया डुर्गापुर ,
जिला- वर्धमान-713 212 पश्चिम बगाल 3. 54-12865 मैसर्स श्याम स्टील इंडस्ट्रिीज लिमिटेड , 7/2/1 , गोपाल घोष लेन , सालकिया, जिला- हावड़ा -711106 पश्चिम बंगाल
[PART 11 SEC. 3 (ii ) ]
अनुसूची
आई एकः
उत्पाद
रह काने की तिथि
पं/ भाग/ खण्ड वर्ष
(4)
(5)
266-2009
8794 : 1988
एसबेस्टस सीमेंट दाज पाइप के साथ प्रयुक्त ढलवां लोहे के अलग हो सकने वाले जोड़
1786 2008 30-7-209
कंक्रीट प्रबलन के लिए उच्च सामर्थ्ययुक्त विरुपति इस्पात के सरिए एवं तार
18-1
1786 : 2008
कंक्रीट प्रबलन के लिए उच्च सामर्थ्ययुक्त विरुपति इस्पात के सरिए एवं तार
सं. सी एम टर 3:31 सी. के. महेश्वरी, वैज्ञानिक ' प्रमा লনা
New Delhi , the 4th August , 2010
S.O. 2048.-In pursuance of suo - regulation ( 6 ) of the regulation 5 ofthe Bureau of Indian Standards ( Location ) Regulations 1988 , the Bureau of Indian Standards , hereby notifies that the licences particulars of which are give c following Schedule have been cancelled with effect from the date indicated against each :
Licence Name and address ( facte v) SI . No. No.
of the Party
(2)
(3)
( 1)
1. 530275 M / s . Ma Tara Foundary , 35/1/4 . J. Road Belgocha , Howrah - 711105 W. B.
2. 5437165 M/ s . Alakananda Sponge - tron Pvt . Ltd. , Bamunara Industrial Area , Durgapur , Dist . Burdw: n - 713 212 W. B.
3. 5442865 M/ s . Shyam Steel Industries- Limited. 7/2/1 , Gopal Ghosh Lane , Salkia , Dist. Howrah - 711106 W. B.
SCHEDULE
Product
IS No.
Date of cancell..no .:
(4)
(5)
8794 : 1988
26-06-09
Cast Iron detachable joints for use with asbestos cement pressure pipes
30-07-09
1768 : 2008
High Strength deformed steel bars and wires for concrete reinforcement
13-1-2010
1786:2008
High Strength deformed steel bars and wires for concrete reinforcement
[ No. CMD 13 : 131 C. K. MAHESHWARI, Sciemist " G " ( Certification ) [ भाग II - खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]
5073
भारत का राजपत्र अगस्त 21 , 2010 / श्रावण 30 , 1932
नई दिल्ली , 9 अगस्त, 2010
का. आ. 2049.- भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो ( प्रमाणन ) विनियम , 1988 के नियम 4 के उपनियम ( 5 ) के अनुसरण में भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो एतद्वारा अधिसूचित करता है कि जिन लाइसेंसों के विवरण नीचे अनुसूची में दिए गए हैं , वे स्वीकृत कर दिए गए हैं : --
स्वीकृत करने की लाइसेंसधारी का नाम व पता तिथि वर्ष/माह
क्रम लाइसेंस सं. संख्या
( 2 ) (3)
(4)
( 1 )
30-10-2009
6982704
01 .
मंगल्या ज्वेल सिटी जेवल जंगषन , के.के. रोड , वण्पपेरियार , इडुक्की , केरल -685533
31-10-2009
02. 6982603
पी.ए.के. गोल्ड गालरी सेन्ट्रल बाजार , वन्णूर पी.ओ. , मलप्पुरम, केरल 679328 31-10-2009
03 . 6982805
कूर्तिवलयिल ज्वलेर्स , कूटिविलयिल बिलिर्डस, के.पो. रोड , चारुमूड , मावेलिक्कारा , आलप्पुणा केरल-698505 31-10-2009
04. 6982906
तोट्टियन ज्वलेर्स ओल्ड रोड , पट्टिक्काड , तृशूर, केरल -680652
05. 6983706 06-11-2009 रेजी अग्रो पोडक्टस मिनी इन्ट्रस्ट्रियल एस्टेट , वेन्डुत्ताइ , पिनराइ , केरल-670741 06-11-2009
06. 6983807
रेजी अग्रो पोडक्टस मिनी इन्ट्रस्ट्रियल एस्टेट, वेन्द्दत्ताइ, पिनराइ, केरल -670741 16-11 2009
07. 6980005
अइन्नु माच एन्ड पैलवुड्स इरिनगोल पी.ओ. , पेरुम्बावूर , एणाकुलम, करल-683548
शबरीजलम
08. 698661 ] 16-11 2009
पेय जल यूनिट , शबरीजलम , गृर्षिवकलम , पी.वी.एम. 1/397 , एफ , कुरुतोड पी.ओ. निलम्पूर वया , मलप्पुरम , केरल 16-11-2009
(9. 6986712
एम.टी. गोल्डलान्ट , 7/97 , टी , मेइन रोड , इडक्करा पी.ओ. , निलम्पूर वया, मलप्पुरम , केरल
16-11 2009
10. 6986813
तेजस जेवलरी ,
के. कै. रोड़ , अम्पाडी बिल्डिंग , पी.ओ. पावराट्टी , तृशूर , केरल -680507
अनुसूची
भारतीय मानक का शीर्षक
भाग अनु वर्ष
भामा संख्या
( 8 ) ( 9 ) (5)
(6 )
( 7)
1999
आई एस 1417
स्वर्ण एवं स्वर्ण मिश्रधातुएं आभूषण/शिल्पकारी- शुद्धता एवं मुहरांकन
1999
आई एस 1417
स्वर्ण एवं स्वर्ण मिश्रधातुएं आभूषण/शिल्पकारी - शुद्धता एवं मुहरांक्न
आई एस 1417 1999 स्वर्ण एवं स्वर्ण मिश्रधातुएं आभूषण/शिल्पकारी- शुद्धता एवं मुहरांकन
1999
आई एस 1417
स्वर्ण एवं स्वर्ण निश्रधातुएं आभूषण/शिल्पकारी - शुद्धता एवं मुहरांकन
आई एस 3062 1995 फसल संरक्षण यंन्त्र-रॉकर छिड़काव यंन्त्र-
1995
आई एस 1970
फसल संरक्षण यंन्त्र- हस्त चालित संपीडन नैपसैक छिडकाव यंन्त्र-
1989
आई एस 303
सामान्य प्रयोजनों के लिए प्लैवुड
2004
आई एस 14543
पैकेजबंद पेय जल (पैकेजबंद प्राकृतिक मिनरल जल के अलावा )
1999
आई एस 1417
स्वर्ण एवं स्वर्ण मिश्रधातुएं आभूषण/शिल्पकारी- शुद्धता एवं मुहरांकन
1999
आई एस 1417
स्वर्ण एवं स्वर्ण मिश्रधातुएं आभूषण/शिल्पकारी- शुद्धता एवं मुहरांकन 5074
PART 11 St. 3 ( 1 ) ] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: AUGUST 21 , 2010 / SHRAVANA 30 , 1932
:
(6) ( 7) ( 8 ) ( 9 )
(5)
(3)
(4)
(2)
(1 )
1999
आई एस 1417 16-11-2009
11. 6986914
स्वर्ण एवं स्वर्ण मिश्रधातुएं आभूषण/ शिल्पकारी- शुद्धता एवं मुहरांकन
मुत्तुतावलत्तिल जेवलरी , पी.बी. रोड़, ईराटुपेट्टा पी. ओ. , कोट्टायम , केरल
1990
आई एस 1417 12.
16-11-2009
6987007
एन. कुज़िरामन जेवलरी, मेइन रोड़ , तलशेरी , कण्णूर , केरल-670101
स्वर्ण एवं स्वर्ण मिश्रधातुएं आभूषण/शिल्पकारी-शुद्धता एवं मुहरांकन
1909
आई एम 1417 13. 6987108 16 11 2009
स्वर्ण एवं स्वर्ण मिश्रधातुएं आभूषण /शिल्पकारी शुद्धता एवं गुहरांकन
न्यूगोल्ड सूक , के.पी. 2/142. 143 , 144, 145 , 146 , फस्ट फालर, अयनाड रोड , कुट्टियाडी , कोधिकवकांड, केर4-685533
1999
आई एस 1417 14.
16-11-2009
6987209
स्वर्ण एवं स्वर्ण मिश्रधातुएं आभूषण/शिल्पकारी - शुद्धता एवं मुहरांकन
कोयिलाट्टु ज्वेलरी , एसबीपी 6/424 , 425 , मेइन रोड़ , सुल्तान बत्तेरी, वयनाड , केरल 673592
1999
आई एस 1417 16-11-2009
15. 6987310
स्वर्ण एवं स्वर्ण मिश्रधातुएं आभूषण/शिल्पकारी शुद्धता एवं मुहराकर
कलत्तिल ज्वलंर्स , नियर बस स्टान्ट, चक्करक्कल , पी.ओ. मौवानचेरी , कण्णूर , केरल-670613
1999
आई एस 1417 16. 6987411 16-11-2009
स्वर्ण एवं स्वर्ण मिश्रधातुएं आभूषण/ शिल्पकारी शुद्धता एवं मुहरांकन
मेट्रो गोल्ड, 13/188 , कम्मत लेन , पालयम , पी.ओ. कल्लाई , कोषिक्कोड , केरल -573003
1992
आई एस 28310 24 11-2009
17. 6993507
संतेन इस्पात एन्ड एनर्जी लिमिटेड , करियनकोड़ , कोट्टई , पालक्काड , केरल -678572
सामान्य संरचना इस्पात में पुनर्वेल्लन के लिए कार्बन ढलवाँ इस्पात बिलेट इंगट , बिलेट, ब्लूम और स्लैब
1999
आई एस 1417 25-11-2009
18. 6990295
मुहरांकन स्वर्ण एवं स्वर्ण मिश्रधातुएं आभूषण/ शिल्पकारी शुद्धता एवं
गोल्ड पालस फाषन ज्वेलरी , एम.सी. रोड , कूत्ताट्टुकुलम पी.ओ. , एर्णाकुलम , केरल-686662 कोषिकक्कोड , केरल 685533
1999 25-11-2009
19. 6990396
आई एस 1417 अजय एन्ड कंपनी,
स्वर्ण एवं स्वर्ण मिश्रधातुएं आभूषण/शिल्पकारी शुद्धता एवं मुहरांकन
डोर नं. 12/227/1 , गोसाई कुन्नु , कुरिथचिरा , नृशूर , केरल -680006
आई एस 1417
1999 03-12-2009 नम्बियापरम्पिल
20. 6993204
स्वर्ण एवं स्वर्ण मिश्रधातुएं आभूषण/शिल्पकारी - शुद्धता एवं मुहरांकन
टी जय ज्वलेर्स , पल्लित्ताषम , मुलनतुरुत्ति पी.ओ. , एर्णाकुलम , केरल-682314
1999
आई एस 1417 03-12-2009
21. 6993608
स्वर्ण एवं स्वर्ण मिश्रधातुएं आभूषण/ शिल्पकारी - शुद्धता एवं मुहरांकन
गोल्डन ज्वेलर्स पीषक्कापल्ली, नूवादुपुषा , एर्णाकुलम , केरल 686674 5075 त का राजपत्र अगस्त 21 , 2010/ श्रावण 30 , 1932
[भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]
(6) (4)
(5)
( 7) ( 8) ( 9 ) (3)
(1) ( 2)
1992
आई एस 2830 03-12-2009
22. 6993406
पपैमियर अलोर्टस , निडा कज़िक्कोड , पालक्काड , केरल -678621
सामान्य संरचना इस्पात में पुनर्वेल्लन के लिए कार्बन ढलवाँ इस्पात बिलेट इंगट , बिलेट, ब्लूम और स्लैब
1999 03-12-2009
आई एस 1417 23. 6993709
स्वर्ण एवं स्वर्ण मिश्रधातुएं आभूषण/ शिल्पकारी - शुद्धता एवं मुहरांकन
परवकाट ज्वेलरी रोजन्ट प्लाज्जा सो.एम.एस. कालेज रो कोट्टायम , केरल-6860
आई एस 1417
1999 07-12-2009
24. 6993810
राबिया ज्वेलरी ,
स्वर्ण एवं स्वर्ण मिश्रधातुएं आभूषण/ शिल्पकारी - शुद्धता एवं मुहरांकन
वी.पी. 3/922 , कुट्टिप्पुरम वालानचेरी पी.ओ. , मलप्पुरम , केरल-676552
1999
आई एस 1417 25. 6994408 07-12-2009
स्वर्ण एवं स्वर्ण मिश्रधातुएं आभूषण/ शिल्पकारी - शुद्धता एवं गुहरांकन
चिन्ना ज्वेलरी , कंच्चेरी जगजन , अम्बलप्पुषा , पी.ओ. , आलप्पुषा, केरल -688561
1999 07-12-2009
आई एस 417 6994509
26 .
अलंकार ज्वेलरी , 1/554 , मेईन रोड , कुट्टीप्पुरम, मलप्परम , केरल-679571
र में एवं स्वर्ण मिश्रधातुएं । मुहरांकन आभूषण/शिल्पकारी- शुद्धता एवं
1999
आई एस 1417 27. 6994711 07-12-2009
स्वर्णवं स्वर्ण मिश्रधातुएं आभूषण शिल्पकारी- शुद्धता एवं मुहरांकन
ऐशर्या फाषन ज्वेलरी, ताषविलाकम कॉम्बल्क्स , कल्लिक्काड़ , मैलक्करा पी.ओ. , काट्टाक्कड़ा पी.ओ. , तिरुवन्नत- पुरम , केरल-695572
आई एस 1417
1999 28 .
07-12-2009
6994812
स्वर्ण एवं स्वर्ण मिश्रधातुएं आभूषण/शिल्पकारी- शुद्धता एवं मुहरांकन
विरक्कोटु फाषन ज्वेलरी , हाईरेन्जं जंगषन , कोतमंगलम , एर्णाकुलम , केरल-686691
आई एस 1417
1999 07-12-2009
29. 6993305
स्वर्ण एवं स्वर्ण मिश्रधातुएं आभूषण/शिल्पकारी शुद्धता एवं मुहरांकन
के.पी. चाक्को एन्ड संगणस ज्वेलरी , काक्कानाट्टु बिल्डिंग, मार्केट रोड़ , तोड्पुष्षा, इडुक्की, केरल-685584
1999 30.
आई एस 1417 07-12-2009
6993103
स्वर्ण एवं स्वर्ण मिश्रधातुएं आभूषण/ शिल्पकारी शुद्धता एवं मुहरांकन
पी.एन. मणी एन्ड संणस , गोल्ड कल्कंषन्स, हाईरेन्ज़ जंगषन , कोतमंगलम, एर्णाकुलम , केरल
1999
आई एस 1417 31 .
14-12-2009
6996816
स्वर्ण एवं स्वर्ण मिश्रधातुएं आभूषण/ शिल्पकारी - शुद्धतः एवं मुहरांकन
एम.ए. फाषन , ज्वेलरी , वालयाल चेट्टी स्ट्रीट , टी.सी. 38/1258 , चालै बजार , तिरुवन्नतपुरम , केरल -695036
1999 14-12-2009
आई एस 1417 32. 6996917
पूज़ा ज्वेलरी ,
स्वर्ण एवं स्वर्ण मिश्रधातुएं आभूषण/ शिल्पकारी शुद्धता एवं मुहरांकन
टी.सी. 32/2744 , पषंयचालै , पषंयचालै , चालै पी.ओ. , तिरुवनन्तपुरम , केरल -695036 5076
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 21 , 2010/ SHRAVANA 30 , 1952
(2) (3)
(4)
(1)
14-12-2009
33. 699 310
तेक्कुपुरत्तु फाषन ज्वेलरी , चिट्टार , चिट्टार पी.ओ. , पत्तनमतिट्टा, केरल -689663 14-12-2009
34. 6997111
लवन्तिक्कल ज्वेलरी, 4/832सी, मेईन रोड , बालुशेरी , कोषिक्कोड़ , केरन्न-673613 17-12-2009
33. 6997212
पी.पी. स्टील्स ( केरल ) , पैवट , लिमिटड , 7/864 , 865 एफ नं. 405/2 , निड़ा , मेनोनपारा रोड़ , कजिक्कोड , पालक्काड़, केरल -678621 36. 3301332 23-12-2009 जे.के.जे. इन्डस्ट्रीस , सेट नं. 1482/3/2 , चिनप्पाड़ी, कोतमंगलम , एर्णाकुलम , केरल -686673
37. 3302475 29-12-2009 न्यूपूर्णिमा ज्वेलरी , सरकार अस्पताल जगषन , वेस्ट नड़ा , कोड्डुल्लूर , तृशूर , केरल -680664
38. 3302334 30-12-2009 कोड़िमुटिल ज्वेलर्स , के.पी. 12/388/दी9 , न्यू पंजायत षोप्पिंग कॉग्लिक्स, पारिपल्ली, पारिपल्ली पोस्ट, कोल्लम, केरल
3:1
30-12-2009
234253
पय्यप्पिल्लीस ज्वेलरी , ओप . प्रैवट बस उटान्ट, माला, तृशूर केरल -680732 41) 3302556 30-12-2009 के.पी. वकी, एन्ड संणस, काक्कनाट ज्वेलर्स, 26/750 , 751 , ए. एम. रोड़ , कोत मंगलम , एणांकुलम, केरल-686691 41 . 3306241 30 12-2009 स्किन गौल्स, प्रवट लिमिटड , प्लोट नं. 14- सी. कोचिन , स्पेषल इकनोमिक सोन, काक्कनाड , कोचिन, एर्णाकुलम, केरल -682037
01-01-2010
3303942
फात्तिमा ज्वेलरी , सीपी/4/ 313 ई, वलियकड़ा, चिरयिनकीष , तिरुवनन्तपुरम , केरल 695304
02-01 2010
43. 3314644
अल मंशनास ज्वेलरी , मुल्लम्बलम षोप्पिंग कॉम्प्लेक्स, कोडुवल्ली, कोषिक्कोड़ , केरल-673572
PARI
(5)
(6) ( 7) ( 8 ) ( 9 )
1999
आई एस 1417
स्वर्ण एवं स्वर्ण मिश्रधातुएं आभूषण/शिल्पकारी- शुद्धता एवं मुहरांकन
आई एस 1417
स्वर्ण एवं स्वर्ण मिश्रधातुएं आभूषण/ शिल्पकारी- शुद्धता एवं मुहरांकन
आई एस 1417
सामान्य संरचना इस्पात में पुनर्वेल्लन के लिए कार्बन ढलवाँ इस्पात बिलेट इंगट , बिलेट , ब्लूम और स्लैब
2004
आई एस 14543
पैकेजबंद पेय जल (पैकेजबंद प्राकृतिक मिनरल जल के अलावा )
आई एस 1417
1999 स्वर्ण एवं स्वर्ण मिश्रधातुएं आभूषण/शिल्पकारी- शुद्धता एवं मुहरांकन
1999
आई एस 1417
स्वर्ण एवं स्वर्ण मिश्रधातुएं आभूषण/शिल्पकारी- शुद्धता एवं मुहरांकन
6601
आई एम 1417
स्वर्ण एवं स्वर्ण मिश्रधातुएं आभूषण शिल्पकारी-शुद्धता गुत्र मुहरांकन
1099
आई एस 1417
स्वर्ण एवं स्वर्ण मिश्रधातुएं आभूषण/शिल्पकारी - शुद्धता एवं मुहरांकन
1999
आई एस 1417
चीरा फाड़ी के लिए , रबड़ के दस्ताने
आई एस 141 "
स्वर्ण एवं स्वर्ण मिश्रधाएं आभूषण/शिल्पकारी- शुद्धनः एवं मुहरांकन
आई एम 117
स्वर्ण एवं स्वर्ण मिश्रधातुएं आभूषणों/शिल्पकारी- शुद्धता एवं मुहरांकन (4)
(2) (3)
(1)
44.
05-01-2010
3303235
बेस्ट प्लास्ट पी.वी.सी. पाईप्स मेईन रोड़ , पारशेरी , कोकंड , पालक्काड़ , केरल -678631 45. 3305441 08 01-2010 यु. एम. एन्र्णार्रप्रसस , के.एम. नं. 15 /334 ए, वड़क्कोड़ , पी.ओ. , कंगरप्पाड़ी, एर्णाकुलम , केरल-682021 18-01-2010
46. 3308750
गारनट गोल्ड पार्क प्रा.लि. , 17 /2275 ए , साई बिल्डिंग , एम.एम. अली रोड़ , कोत्रिक्कोड़ केरल -673001 18-01-2010
47. 3308851
वुड्ड लान्णट गोल्ड, ईपी/763 बी सी-, मेईन रोड़ , इड़क्करा, पी.ओ. निलम्बूर , मलप्पुरम , केरल
18-01-2010
48. 3308952
हरीश्री ज्वेलर्स , कोट्टियम , कोल्लम , केरल -691571
20-01-2010
3309449
49.
जीक्के हाईजीनिक्स प्रा.लि. पी.बी. नं. 3 , पुन्नायम, आशमणूर पी.ओ. पेरुम्बावूर , एर्णाकुलम , केरल -683549 25-01-2010
3312135
50 .
मैसर्स राजेष ज्वेलर्स, एम.सी. रोड़ , पन्तलम , पत्तनमतिट्टा केरल -680501 25 01-2010
13542
श्रीवल्यम ज्वेलर्स, ईष्टयभ , कोल्लम , कोरल-691571
25-01-2010
52. 17: 2943
श्रीवल्सम ज्वेलर्स , कल्लरकुट्टी रोड़ , अड़िमाली पी.ओ. इडुक्की,
केरल -685561
53. 3313036 25-01-2010 अरफा ज्वलेर्स, मार्केट रोड़ , पुतियतेरु , चिरक्कल , पी.ओ. , कणातूर केरल -670011 25-01-2010
54 . 33131
अच्चाकोट्टिल ज्वेलर्स, एम.वी.एम. मडपरम्पिल प्लाया, कंच्चेरित्ताषम , एर्णाकुलम , केरल -686661
55. 3313238 25-01-2010 मलनाड़ गोल्ड , बी.पी. 4/ 822 ए, पार्क कोर्णर , बालुशेरी , कोषिनकोड़ , कंरल -673612
3099 GI /10-3
( 6) ( 7) ( 8 ) ( 9 ) (5)
2000
आई एस 4985
पेय जल की पूर्ती के लिए असुघाटियत पी.वी.सी. पाइप
2004
आई एस 14543
पैकेजबंद पेय जल (पैकेजबंद प्राकृतिक मिनरल जल के अलावा)
1909
आई एस 1417
स्वर्ण एवं स्वर्ण मिश्रधातुएं आभूषण /शिल्पकारी - शुद्धता एवं मुहरांकन
1999
आई एस 1417
स्वर्ण एवं स्वर्ण मिश्रधातुएं आभूषण/शिल्पकारी - शुद्धता एवं मुहरांकन
आई एम 1417 1999 स्वर्ण एवं स्वर्ण मिश्रधातुएं आभूषण /शिल्पकारी- शुद्धता एवं मुहरांकन
7003
आई एस 14543
पैकेजबंद पेय जल (पैकेजबंद प्राकृतिक मिनरल जल के अलावा )
1990
आई एस 1417
स्वर्ण एवं स्वर्ण मिश्रधातुएं आभूषण/शिल्पकारी- शुद्धता एवं मुहरांकन
1999
आई एस 1417
स्वर्ण एवं मिश्रधातुएं आभूषण शिल्पकारी - सदाता एवं मुहरांकन
आई एस 1417 1999 स्वर्ण एवं स्वर्ण मिश्रधातुएं आभूषण/शिल्पकारी शुद्धता एवं मुहरांकन
आई एस 14 : 2
199 स्वर्ण एवं स्वर्ण मिश्रधातुए
लाई एस 141 "
मुहदान
1990
आई एस 1417
स्वर्ण एवं स्वर्ण मिश्रधातुए आभूषण/शिल्पकारी-शुद्धतः एवं मुहरांकन 00001 21 , 201WSMRAVANA 30 , 1932
[ PART 11- SEC . 3 ( 11 ) ] (1) (2) (3)
(4)
(5)
(6) ( 7) ( 8 ) ( 9 ) 56. 3313339 25-01-2010
आई एस 1417
1999
स्वर्ण एवं स्वर्ण मिश्रधातुएं आभूषण/शिल्पकारी - शुद्धता एवं मुहरांकन
लिल्ला गोल्ड, कोप्पम, पी.ओ. पुलशेरी , पालक्काड़ , केरल -679307
57. 3313440 25-01-2010
1999
आई एस 1417
स्वर्ण एवं स्वर्ण मिश्रधातुएं आभूषण/शिल्पकारी- शुद्धता एवं मुहरांकन
गिल्स्टन गोल्ड, कलंक्षन्स प्रा . लि. , के. पी. 3 2561 से 2564 , ओप. बोईस हाई स्कूल नागप्पली , कोल्लम , केरल -690518
58. 3315646 27-01-2010
आई एस 2052
1979
पशु के लिए मिश्रित आहार
कोयिन्को फीड्स प्रैवट लिमिट्ट कोयान्को हौस , वेस्ट हिल पी.ओ. , कोषिक्कोड़ , केरल-673005
59. 3315747 27-01-2010
1992
आई एस 2830 कृष्णास्टील , रोलिंग मिल्स , बिल्डिंग नं 7/1041 , निड़ा, कज़िकोक्ड , पालक्काड्, केरल -678621
सामान्य संरचना इस्पात में पुनर्वेल्लन के लिए कार्बन ढलवाँ इस्पात बिलेट इंगट , बिलेट , ब्लूम और स्लैब
आई एस 1417 1999 60. 33144846 01-02-2010
स्वर्ण एवं स्वर्ण मिश्रधातुएं आभूषण/शिल्पकारी- शुद्धता एवं मुहरांकन
सी.एच. जेवेलरी मेईन रोड़ , चेम्माड़ , तिरूरंगाड़ी पी.ओ. , मलप्पुरम , केरल -676306
61. 3314543 01-02-2010
आई एस 1417 1999 जोस्कोजवेलरी एम.ओ. रोड़ , तृशूर , केरल-680001
स्वर्ण एवं स्वर्ण मिश्रधातुएं आभूषण/शिल्पकारी- शुद्धता एवं मुहरांकन
62. 33144745 01-02-2010
आई एस 1417 1999
स्वर्ण एवं स्वर्ण मिश्रधातुएं आभूषण/शिल्पकारी- शुद्धता एवं मुहरांकन
चानलव्यूज्वेलर्स पंजायत न्यू, षोप्पिंग कॉम्बल्क्स , पारिपल्ली , कोल्लम , केरल-691574
63. 3319149 02-02-2010
2004
आई एस 14543 --
पैकेजबंद पेय जल (पैकेजबंद प्राकृतिक मिनरल जल के अलावा )
गंगा प्रोडक्टस , सैंट नं . 15/10 , बोल्क नं. 29 , वालयानचिरानात पी.ओ. , ऐरप्पुरम विल्लेज , एर्णाकुलम , केरल -683556
64.
आई एस 1417
1999 33: 7448 04-02-2010
स्वर्ण एवं स्वर्ण मिश्रधातुएं आभूषण/शिल्पकारी- शुद्धता एवं मुहरांकन
तृमूर्ती ज्वलेरी टी.सी. 18/551 , मेईन रोड़ , कोथिलाणड़ी , कोषिक्कोड़ , केरल -673002
65 . 3318652 04-02-2010
आई एस। 786 1985
कंक्रीट प्रबलन के लिए उच्च शक्ति विरूपित इस्पात सरिए एवं तार
मसकोम स्टील ( इणडिया) प्रैवट लिमिटेड , 1 / 117 -ई , इंडस्ट्रियल डवलेप्मेन्ट एरिया , एरुम्मत्तला पी.ओ. , आलुवा, एर्णाकुलम , केरल-683112 भारत का राजपत्र अगस्त 21 , 2010/ श्रावण 30 , 1932
[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]
(3)
(4)
( 1 ) ( 2)
04-02-2010
66. 3317044
स्वर्ण कमल ज्वलेर्स इणिडिया प्रै. लि. , टी.सी. 17/417 वीटीओजे बेकर जगषन , मोडेण डायजोनिक सेंटर , कोट्टयम , केरल -686001 67. 3317246 04-02-2010 विन्स ज्वलेरी , माटुपेट्टी रोड़ , मून्नार पी . ओ. , इडुक्की , केरल -685 612
04-02-2010
3317347
68.
सूप्पर ज्वलेरी , रूम नं. एन पी . 9/385 , वक्कयाड़ रोड़ , नडुवन्नूर , कोषिक्कोड़ , केरल -6736: 4 69 . 3316143 04-02-2010 ट्रावनकूर गोल्ड, इण्डिया प्रा.लि. , टी.सी. 28/2222 ( 6 ) , ओप. बिग बजार , एम.जी. रोड़ , तिरुवनन्तपुरम , केरल -695 004
70.
04-02-2010
3316244
चिरियनकंन्डत्त ज्वलेरी , माटुपेट्टी रोड़, मून्नार पी.ओ. , इडुक्की, केरल -685 612 04-02-2010
71. 3316345
शक्तिं ज्वलेर्स मुल्लक्कल , आलुप्पुषा, केरल -688 011
04-02-2010
72. 3316446
बोम्बें पैल्वुड् इन्णस्ट्रीस , पनिप्प्रा पी.ओ. , कोतमंगलम, एर्णाकुलम , केरल-686 692 04-02-2010
73. 3316547
शक्तिज्वलेरी , नियर मुत्तुमारी अम्मन टेम्पिल , कैतमुक्कु जंगषन , पेट्टा पी.ओ. , तिरुवनन्तपुरम , केरल -695 024 74.
04-02-2010
3316648
सना गोल्ड डी. /नं. एक्स/490 , नियर केनरा बैंक , नादापुरम रोड़ , पारेक्कडवु पी.ओ. काषिक्कोड़ , केरल-673 509 75. 3316749 04-02-2010 पंकज ज्वेलर्स पी.पी. रोड़ , पाला , कोट्टयम , केरल-686 575 76.
04-02-2010
3316850
कैरली जुवलेरी वडुतला जंगषन , अरूकुट्टी , आलप्पुषा , केरल-688 535 77 .
04-02-2010
3316951
वी.पी. तोमस एन्ड संणस करुत्तेडत जुवेलरी , मेईन रोड़ तृप्पूणित्तुरा , एर्णाकुलम , केरल-682 301
5079 (5)
( 7 ) ( 8 ) ( 9 )
(6)
1999
आई एस 1417
स्वर्ण एवं स्वर्ण मिश्रधातुएं आभूषण/शिल्पकारी - शुद्धता एवं मुहरांकन
1999
आई एस 1417
स्वर्ण एवं स्वर्ण मिश्रधातुएं आभूषण/शिल्पकारी- शुद्धता एवं मुहरांकन
1999
आई एस 1417
स्वर्ण एवं स्वर्ण मिश्रधातुएं आभूषण /शिल्पकारी - शुद्धता एवं मुहरांकन
1999
आई एस 1417
स्वर्ण एवं स्वर्ण मिश्रधातुएं आभूषण/शिल्पकारी शुद्धता एवं मुहरांकन
1999
आई एस 1417
स्वर्ण एवं स्वर्ण मिश्रधातुएं आभूषण / शिल्पकारी- शुद्धता एवं मुहरांकन
1999
आई एस 1417
स्वर्ण एवं स्वर्ण मिश्रधातुएं आभूषण / शिल्पकारी - शुद्धता एवं मुहरांकन
1989
आई एस 303
सामान्य प्रयोजनों के लिए प्लैवुड
1999
आई एस 1417
स्वर्ण एवं स्वर्ण मिश्रधातुएं आभूषण/शिल्पकारी - शुद्धता एवं मुहरांकन
1999
आई एस 1417
स्वर्ण एवं स्वर्ण मिश्रधातुएं आभूषण/शिल्पकारी - शुद्धता एवं मुहरांकन
1999
आई एस 1417
स्वर्ण एवं स्वर्ण मिश्रधातुएं आभूषण /शिल्पकारी - शुद्धता एवं मुहरांकन
1999
आई एस 1417
स्वर्ण एवं स्वर्ण मिश्रधातुएं आभूषण/शिल्पकारी- शुद्धता एवं मुहरांकन
आई एस 1417
1999 स्वर्ण एवं स्वर्ण मिश्रधातुएं आभूषण /शिल्पकारी- शुद्धता एवं मुहरांकन 5080
THE GAZEITE OF INDIA : AUGUST 21 , 2010 / SHRAVANA 30. 1932
(1)
(4)
(2 )
(3)
08-02-2010
3317145
78.
मरैनइँव , एर्णाकुलम, केरल 682 031 पड़िकला जुवेलरी , जी.सी.डी.ए. - षोप्पिंग कॉम्प्ल्क्स, 08-02-2010
79. 3318753
अट्लस गोल्ड 7/962, 963 , ओप . कैनरा बैंक, पोन्नानी , पी.ओ. मल्लपुरम , केरल-
15-02-2010
80. 3320235
स्पीसणं प्लेबोर्डस , कन्णंनतरा , आलप्प्रा पी.ओ. , पेरुम्बावूर एर्णाकुलम, केरल -683 553
81 .
16-02-2010
3321338
वाषेमड़त्तिहा ज्वलेर्स, बिल्डिंग नं. 703/6 , मेईन रोड़ , तलयोलपरम्बु , कोट्टयम , केरल-686 605
82 .
16-02 2010
3321439
मुनवरा ज्वलेर्स, टी.सी. 12/823 ए, मुनवरा बिल्डिंग , मर्णारक्काड़ , पलक्काड़ , केरल-- 83 .
16-02 2010
3321540
सूर्या ज्वलेर्स , पूर्वात्तूर बिल्डिंग , चंगंन्नूर पी.ओ. , आलप्पुषा , केरल -689 121
16-02-2010
84. 3321641
इंन्णियन ज्वलेरी , सादिक मन्सिल , ओयूर पी.ओ. , कोल्लम , केरल 691 510 85 .
16 02-2010
3321843
कल्याण ज्वलेर्स , इन्णिया प्रै.लि. , कालिक्कट रोड़ , पेरिन्तल मन्णा ,मलप्पुरम केरल 679 322
16-02-2010
3321944
कल्याण ज्वलेर्स , इन्णिया प्रै . लि., वार्ड नं. 27 , बी . नं. 55/1 , रौन्ट नोर्त , तृशूर , केरल-680 001
322037 16 02-2010 कल्याण ज्वलंर्म, कोल्लम एन्ड ईरोड़, वार्ड नं. 18 , बी. नं. एमसी 17/3749, 3750 , 3751 , सेन टोवर , बीच रोड़ , कोल्लम केरल 3323241 17 02-2010 फोनिक्स एजन्सीम 7/303 , कल्लोक्करन , विल्डिंग , तुगवूर विल्लेज , किड़न्गुर, पी.ओ. एर्णाकुलम्.. केरल -683572
PARE 11 SIC. 3 (ii ) |
(6)
(5)
1999
आई एस ।। "
स्वर्ण एवं स्वर्ण मिश्रधातुएं आभूषण/शिल्पकारी शुद्धता एवं मुहरांकन
1999
आई एस ।
स्वर्ण एवं स्वर्ण मिश्रधातुएं आभूषण/शिल्पकारी- शुद्धता एवं मुहरांकन
आई एम सा ३
सामान्य प्रयोजनों के लिए प्लैवुड
आइ एग
स्वर्ण एवं स्वर्ण मिश्रधातुएं आभूषण/शिल्पकारी- शुद्धता एवं मुहरांकन
1999
आई एस 141
स्वर्ण एवं स्वर्ण मिश्रधातुएं आभूषण /शिल्पकारी - शुद्धता एवं मुहरांकन
आई एस !
स्वर्ण एवं स्वर्ण मिश्रधातुए आभूषण/शिल्पकारी - शुद्धता एव मुहरांकन
आई म
स्वर्ण एवं स्वर्ण मिश्रधातुए आभूषण / शिल्पकारी शुद्धता एवं मुहरांकन
: زاراد
आई एम 4: "
आभूषण/ शिल्पकारी शुद्धत्य एवं स्वर्ण एवं स्वर्ण मिश्रधातुएं मुहरांकन
आई एस म
स्वर्ण एवं स्वर्ण मिश्रधातुएं आभूषण/शिल्पकारी- शुद्धता एवं मुहरांकन
आई एस 14: "
स्वर्ण एवं स्वर्ण मिश्रधातुएं आभूषण/शिल्पकारी- शुद्धता एवं मुहरांकन
1999
आई एम 14:
पैकेजबंद पेय जल ( पैकेजबंद प्राकृतिक मिनरल जल के अलावा ) 5081 [ र्भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]
भारत का राजपत्र अगस्त 21 , 2010/ श्रावण 30 , 1932
(5)
(3)
(4)
( 1) ( 2)
( 6) ( 7) ( 8 ) ( 9 ) 89.
17-02-2010
3323242
1989
आई एस 303
सामान्य प्रयोजनों के लिए प्लैवुड
प्लैकोनं लामिनेटेर्स, कुट्टिप्पाड़म , आलप्प्रा. पी.ओ. , पेरुम्बावूर , एर्णाकुलम , केरल-683553
1989 17-02-2010
90. 3330440
आई एस 303 षेरो प्लैवुड्स
सामान्य प्रयोजनों के लिए प्लैवुड
डोर नं. एपी 7 585 एम , इनेणस्ट्रियल डेवलपमेन्ट प्लोट , अन्दूर , परशिनीक्कडवु. पी.ओ. , कण्णूर , केरल -670563
1992 91 .
आई एस 2830 17-02-2010
3333345
सामान्य संरचना इस्पात में पुनर्वेल्लन के लिए कार्बन ढलवाँ इस्पात बिलेट इंगट , बिलेट, ब्लूम और स्लैब
कुटटिप्पुलन अयेण एन्ड स्टील कंपनी ( प्रै ) लिमिटट , 7/1018 , किन्फ्रा वैस पार्क , मेनोनपारा रोड़ , कंज़िक्कोड़ , पालक्काड्, केरल -678621
1999 23-02-2010
92. 3323948
आई एस 1417
स्वर्ण तथा स्वर्ण मिश्रधातुएं, आभूषण/शिल्पकारी- शुद्धता एवं मुहरांकन
कल्याण ज्वलेर्स , इन्णिया प्रै . लि. , मावूर रोड़, कोषिक्कोड़ , केरल-
93.
23-02-2010
1999 3324041
आई एस 1417
स्वर्ण एवं स्वर्ण मिश्रधातुएं आभूषण /शिल्पकारी- शुद्धता एवं मुहरांकन
बेनीस ज्वलेरी , बेन्नीस टौवर , बस स्टान्ट जगषन , राज़क्काड़ , इडुक्की, केरल -685566
44.
23-02-2010
1999 3324142
आई एसः 1417
स्वर्ण एवं स्वर्ण मिश्रधातुएं के आभूषण/शिल्पकारी शुद्धता एवं मुहरांकन
स्वर्ण महल , मेलत्तिल बिल्डिंग , चुल्लियोड़ रोड़, पूक्कोट्टुप्पाडम पी.ओ. , मलप्पुरम , केरल-679332
1999 3324647 23-02-2010
आई एस 1417
स्वर्ण एवं स्वर्ण मिश्रधातुएं आभूषण/ शिल्पकारी शुद्धता एवं मुहरांकन
ओल्ड पवीस ज्वेलरी , के. आर. विजयन-मेम्मोरियल , षोप्पिंगकोम्प्लक्स, ओल्ड के.एस. आर.टी.सी. स्टान्ट , नोर्त परवूर , एर्णाकुलम, केरल -683513
1999 りか 。 3324748 23-02-2010
आई एस 1417
स्वर्ण एवं स्वर्ण मिश्रधातुएं आभूषण/शिल्पकारी - शुद्धता एवं मुहरांकन
कल्याण ज्वलेर्स , इंन्णिया ( प्रै. ) लि. , कंन्णत कोम्प्लक्स, जी.बी. रोड़, पालक्काड़ , केरल -678001
1999 3325548 25-02 2010
आई एस 1-417
स्वर्ण एवं स्वर्ण मिश्रधातुएं आभूषण/शिल्पकारी- शुद्धता एवं मुहरांकन
षालिमार गोल्ड , षालिमार बिल्डिंग , कालेज रोड़, चंगनाशेरी , कोट्टायम , केरल -686101
ON
1999
आई एस 1417 3325649 25 02-2010
स्वर्ण एवं स्वर्ण मिश्रधातुएं आभूषण/शिल्पकारी शुद्धता एवं मुहरांकन
तडत्तिल ज्वलेरी , नियर प्रैवट बस स्टान्ट , इंराट्टुपेट्टा पी.ओ. , कोट्टायम , करल 686121 5082
[ PART II-- SEC . 3 ( ii ) ] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 21 , 2010/ SHRAVAΝΑ 30 , 1932
( 6) ( 7 ) ( 8 ) ( 9 ) (4)
(5)
(3)
(2)
(1)
1999 25-02-2010
आई एस 1417 3325750
99.
स्वर्ण एवं स्वर्ण मिश्रधातुएं आभूषण /शिल्पकारी- शुद्धता एवं मुहरांकन
स्वर्णगिरी फाफन ज्वलेरी , नं. 7/385 , 386 , टी.बी. रोड़ , पेराम्ब्रा, कोषिक्कोड़ , केरल-673525
1999
आई एस 1417 25-02-2010
3325851
100.
पणिक्कशरी ज्वलेर्स , मुककड़ा, कुन्णरा , कोल्लम , केरल -691501
स्वर्ण एवं स्वर्ण मिश्रधातुएं आभूषण/ शिल्पकारी शुद्धता एवं मुहरांकन
1999
आई एस 1417 25-02-2010
3325952
101.
पद्मा ज्वलेर्स , मय्यनाडु रोड़ , कोट्यिम पी.ओ. , कोल्लम , केरल-691571
स्वर्ण एवं स्वर्ण मिश्रधातुएं आभूषण /शिल्पकारी- शुद्धता एवं मुहरांकन
1989
आई एस 303 33262-47 26-02 2010
102.
सामान्य प्रयोजनों के लिए प्लैवुड
मारस प्लैवुड् इन्डस्ट्रीस (प्रा. ) लिमिटेड डोर नं. एमजीपी 1/133 , 1 / 129 ए, 1/129 , 1 / 132बी , कुञ्जत्तूर पी.ओ. , तलप्पाड़ी , कासरगोड़ , केरल 671323
2004
ब्लोक बोर्डस
3326348 26-02-2010
आई एस 1659 103
मार्स प्लैवुड् इन्डस्ट्रीस (प्रा. ) लिमिटेड , डोर नं. एमजीपी , 1/133 , 1 /129 ए , 1/129 , 1 / 132बी , कुञ्जत्तूर पी.ओ. , तलप्पाड़ी, कासरगोड़ , केरल -671323
1976
आई एस 710 02 2010
104. 33266449 26
मरैन प्लैवुड
मार्स प्लैवुड् इन्डस्ट्रीस ( प्रा . ) लिमिटेड , डोर नं. एमजीपी, 1/133 , 1 / 129 ए , 1/129 , 1 / 132बी , कुञ्जत्तूर पी.ओ. , तलप्पाड़ी , कासरगोड़, केरल -671323
1993
आई एस 4990 3326550 (01-03 2010
105.
कंक्रीट के राटरिंग कार्य के लिए प्लाईवुड
मार्स प्लैवुङ् इन्डस्ट्रीस (प्रा. ) लिमिटेड , डोर नं. एमजीपी , 1/133 , 1 / 129 ए , 1/129 , 1 / 132बी , कुञ्जत्तूर पी.ओ. , तलप्पाड़ी , कासरगोड़ , केरल -671323
2004
आई एस 1659
ब्लोक बोर्डस
3333648 02-03-2010
106.
पेरियार वुड्ड प्रोड्क्टस तुरुत्ती रोड़ , चुङ्गम , पाप्पिनिशेरी , कण्णूर , केरल-670561
1999
आई एस 1417 3330743 02 03 2010
107.
स्वर्ण एवं स्वर्ण मिश्रधातुएं आभूषण /शिल्पकारी- शुद्धता एवं मुहरांकन
चिन्नन सणंस ज्वलेर्स , कोगंड , पालक्कड़ , केरल -678631 नं. 9/803 , चेरप्पुलशेरी रोड़ ,
1999
आई एस 1417 3330844 02-03 2010
108.
चिन्नन सणंस ज्वलेर्स , 15/63 , चिटूर रोड़ , कोषिन्त्रान पारा , पालक्कड़ केरल -678555
स्वर्ण एवं स्वर्ण मिश्रधातुएं आभूषण/ शिल्पकारी शुद्धता एवं मुहरांकन
1999
आई एस 1417 3331038 09-03 2010
109.
पुलिमूट्टिल ज्वलेरी , करवान्टे कुर्सी , पिरवम , एर्णाकुलम , केरल 686664
स्वर्ण एवं स्वर्ण मिश्रधातुएं आभूषण/शिल्पकारी- शुद्धता एवं मुहरांकन
आई एस 1417
1999 333113 09-03 2010
110.
स्वर्ण एवं स्वर्ण मिश्रधातुएं आभूषण / शिल्पकारी - शुद्धता एवं मुहरांकन
विदायत्तिल ज्वलेर्स , चिरक्काक्कम ओप. चर्च , नगर चर्च, वारापुषा . पी.ओ. , एर्णाकुलम , केरल 683517 5083 [ भाग II - खण्ड 3 ( ii )]
भारत का राजपत्र अगस्त 21 , 2010/ श्रावण 30 , 1932
(3)
(1) ( 2)
(4)
(5)
(6) ( 7 ) ( 8 ) ( 9 ) 111. 3331240 09-03-2010
आई एस 1417
1999 सोप्ना फाषन ज्वलेरी , मिचेल जंगषन , मावेलिक्करा , आलप्पुषा , केरल-690101
स्वर्ण एवं स्वर्ण मिश्रधातुएं आभूषण/शिल्पकारी- शुद्धता एवं मुहरांकन
112. 3331341 10-03-2010
1999
आई एस 1417
स्वर्ण एवं स्वर्ण मिश्रधातुएं आभूषण/शिल्पकारी- शुद्धता एवं मुहरांकन
आनन्दाज्वलेरी , पुलमण जंगषन , कोट्टारक्करा पी.ओ. , कोल्लम , केरल-691506
113. 3331745 10-03-2010
आई एस 2062
2006
सामान्य संरचना कार्यों के लिए इस्पात
वेल्ड वैड अयेण एन्ड स्टीलस ( प्रा. ) लिमिटेड , 8/862 , वैस पार्क पेट्रोनेट रोड़ , निड़ा, कंजिक्कोड़ , पालक्काड्, केरल -678621
3332040 10-03-2010
114.
आई एस 1417
1999 फाषन ज्वलेरी , पुनलूर रोड़ , अंन्जल, कोल्लम , केरल ।
स्वर्ण एवं स्वर्ण मिश्रधातुएं आभूषण/शिल्पकारी- शुद्धता एवं मुहरांकन
115. 3334044 10-03-2010
आई एस 5430
1981
अमोनिया में परिरक्षित प्राकृतिक रबड़ लेटैव सांद्र की विशिष्टि ।
कंपनी लिमिटेड , तामरप्पल्ली रब्बर कालिक्कट एस्टेट , तेक्कुमकुट्टी , पी.ओ. अल्ली मुक्कम, कोषिक्कोड़ , केरल -673602
116. 3334751 16-03-2010
1993
आई एस 4990
कंक्रीट के शटरिंग कार्य के लिए प्लाईवुड
षेरो प्लैवुड्स डोर नं. एपी 8/585 एम इंन्डस्ट्रियल डेवल्पमेन्ट प्लोट , अन्दूर, परशिनिक्कडवु. पी.ओ. , कण्णूर , केरल-671323
3333850 16-03-2010
117.
आई एस 1417 1999 कण्णत ज्वेलरी , कण्णत हौस , वेन्गीताङगु. पी.ओ. , तृश्शूर , केरल-680510
स्वर्ण एवं स्वर्ण मिश्रधातुएं आभूषण/शिल्पकारी - शुद्धता एवं मुहरांकन
118. 3333951 16-03-2010
आई एस 2830
1992
सामान्य संरचना इस्पात में पुनर्वेल्लन के लिए कार्बन ढलवाँ इस्पात बिलेट इंगट , बिलेट , ब्लूम और स्लैब
वेल्ड वैड़ अयेण एन्ड स्टील ( प्राइवेट ) लिमिटेड , 8/862 , वैस पार्क , पेट्रोनेट रोड़ , निड़ा, कंजिक्कोड़, पालक्काड़ , केरल -678621
3333749 16-03-2010
119.
आई एस 1417 1999
स्वर्ण एवं स्वर्ण मिश्रधातुएं आभूषण/शिल्पकारी- शुद्धता एवं मुहरांकन
रिषाद ज्वलेरी , डिलषाद मन्सिल , कण्न्नल्लूर पी.ओ. , कोल्लम , केरल-691576 ।
120. 3336452 23-03-2010
1992
आई एस 28.30
सामान्य संरचना इस्पात में पुनर्वेल्लन के लिए कार्बन ढलवाँ इस्पात बिलेट इंगट, बिलेट , ब्लूम और स्लैब
मण्णरक्काड स्टीलस (प्राइवेट) लिमिटेड , 8/960 , वैस पार्क , मेनोनपारा रोड़ , कंजिक्कोड़ , पालक्काड्, केरल -678621
121. 3336553 23-03-2010
1992
आई एस 2830 मारुताम स्टील इन्डस्ट्रीस प्राइवेट लिमिटेड , 8/885 , निड़ा , कजिक्कोड़ पोस्ट , पालक्काड्, केरल -678621
सामान्य संरचना इस्पात में पुनर्वेल्लन के लिए कार्बन ढलवाँ इस्पात बिलेट इंगट , बिलेट , ब्लूम और स्लैब
[सं. सी एम डी/ 13 : 13 ]
सी. के. महेश्वरी , वैज्ञानिक-जी ( प्रमाणन ) PART 11 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 21 , 2010/ SHRAVANA 30 , 1932
5084
=
New Delhi , the 9th August , 2010
S. O. 2049. In pursuance of sub - regula Regulat.. 88. of the Bureau of Indian Standards the following schedule: of the regulation 4 of the Bureau of Indian Standards ( Certific. reby notifies the grant of licences particulars of which are giver in
SCHEDULE
Cirant Date
Licences
Name & address of the Sl. No. No
Party
(4)
(3)
(1)
30-10-2009
1. 6982700
Mangalya Jewel City Jewel Junction K. K. Road , Vandiperiyar Idukki , Kerala- 685533 31-10-2009
2. 6982603
P.A.K. Gold Gallery Central Bazar , Wandoor (P. O. ) Malappuram Kerala - 679328 31-10-2009
3. 6982805
Kuttivilayil Jewellers Kuttivilayil Buildings K.P. Road , Charummood Mavelikkara Alappuzha Kerala - 698505 4. 6982906 31-10-2009 Thottian Jewellers Old Road , Pattikad Thrissur , Kerala - 680652 5. 6983706 6-11-2009
Reji Agro Products Mini Industrial Estate Venduttayi . Kannur , Pinarayi , Kerala - 670741 6. 6983807 6-11-2009
Reji Agro Products Mini Industrial Estate Venduttavi , Pinarayi Kannur , Kerala - 670741 7. 6986005 16-11-2009 Anju Match & Frywoods Iringole P. O. , Perumbavoor Ernakulam , Kerala - 683548 16-11-2009
8. 6986611
Sabarijalam Drinking Water Unit Sabarijalam, Moozhikal PVM 1 / 397F . Koruthode P. O. (VIA ) Mindkkayam Idukki , Kerala - 686510 16-11-2009
9 6986712
M. T. Gold Land VII/ 97 - T Main Road . Edakkara P. O. VIA Nilambur Malappura , Kerala 10. 6986813 16-11-2009 Thejus Jewellery K. K. Road . Ambadi Building P.O. Pavaratty . Thrissur Kerala - 680507
Part Sec
IS No.
Yo Title of the Standard
(6) (7) ( 8) (5)
IS 1417
Gold and gold alloys . jewellery/ artefacts- Fineness and marking
IS1-417
Gold and gold alloys . jewellery/artefacts- Fineness and marking
IS 1-417
Gold and gold alloys , jewellery/ artefacts- Fineness and marking
IS 1417
Gold and gold alloys , jewellery/ artefacts- Fineness and marking
IS 3062
Crop protection equipment- rocker sprayer-
IS 1970
Crop protection equipment- hand - operated compression knapsack sprayer-
IS303
Plywood for general purposes
IS 14543
Packaged drinking water (Other than packaged natural mineral water )
IS1417
Gold and gold alloys . jewellery/ artefacts- Fineness and marking-
IS THE
Gold and gold alloys . jewellery/ artefacts- Fineness and marking 5085 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]
भारत का राजपत्र अगस्त 21 , 2010/ श्रावण 30 , 1932
(3)
(4)
(5)
(1) (2)
(6)
(9)
(7) (8) 16-11-2009
11. 6986914
IS 1417
1999 Muthuthavalathil Jewellery P.B. Road , Erattupetta P. O. Kottayam , Kerala
Gold and gold alloys , jewellery/ artefacts- Fineness and marking
16-11-2009
12. 6987007
IS 1417
1990 N Kunhiraman Jewellery Main Road , Thalassery Kannur , Kerala
Gold and gold alloys . jewellery /artefacts- Fineness and marking
13. 6987108 16-11-2009
IS 1417
Gold and gold alloys , jewellery / artefacts- Fineness and marking
New Gold Souk Κ.Ρ. ΙΙ/ 142,143 , 144 , 145 , 146 1 Floor , Wayanad Road Kuttiadi , Kozhikode Kerala 673 508
14. 6987209 16-11-2009
IS 1417
1000
Gold and gold alloys , jewellery / artefacts- Fineness and marking
Koyilattu Jewellery SBP VI / 424 , 425 , Main Road , Sulthan Batheri , Wayanad Kerala-673592
15. 6987310 16-11-2009
IS 1417
Gold and gold alloys , jewellery/ artefacts- Fineness and marking
Kalathil Jewellers Near Bus Stand Chakkarakkal P.O. Mowanchery Kannur , Kerala - 673613
16-11-2009
16. 6987411
IS 1417
Gold and gold alloys , jewellery/ artefacts- Fineness and marking
Metro Gold 13/188 , Kammath Lane Palayam P. O. Kallai , Kozhikode , Kerala - 673003
17. 6993507 24-11-2009
IS 2830 Southern Ispat & Energy Ltd. 1992Kriyankode Kottayi , Palakkad , Kerala -678572
Carbon steel cast billet ingots , billets , blooms and slabs for re - rolling into steel for general structural purposes
18. 6990295 25-11-2009
IS 1417
1977
Gold and guld alloys , jewellery/ artefacts- Fineness and marking
Gold Palace Fashion Jewellery M.C. Road , Koothattukulam P.O. Ernakulam , Kerala- 686662
900 19. 6990396 25-11-2009
IS 1417
Gold and gold alleys . jewellery/ artefacts- Fineness and marking
Ajay & Co. Door No. XII / 227/ 1 , Gosaikunnu , Kuriachira , Thrissur, Kerala -680006
20. 6993204 03-12-2009
1099
IS 141
Gold and gold alloys . jewellery artefacts Freness andishing
Nambiaparambil Tee Jay Jewellers , Pallithazham. Mulanthuruthy P. O. Ernakulam , Kerala-682314
IS 1417 21. 6993608 03-12-2009 GoldenJewellers Pezhakkapilly , Muvattupuzha Ernakulam, Kerala- 686674
Croid and gold autoys , jewellery artefacts- Fineness and marking,
IS 2830 22. 6993406 03-12-2009 PremierAlloys Nida , Kanjikode , Plakkad , Kerala - 678621
Carbon steel cast billet ingots , billets , blooms and slabs for re - rolling into steel for general structural purposes
3099GI /10-4 5086
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 21 , 2010 / SHRAVANA 30 , 1932
[ PART II- SEC. 3 ( ii) ]
(5)
(6)
(2)
(3)
(4)
(1)
(7) ( 8) ( 9) 6993709 03-12-2009
IS 1417 23.
1999
Gold and gold alloys , jewellery/ artefacts- Fineness and marking
PrakkatJewellery Regent Plaza, C. M.S. College Road , Kottayam Kerala - 686001
6993810 07-12-2009
24.
IS 1417
1999
Gold and gold alloys , jewellery/ artefacts- Fineness and marking
Rabiya Jewellery VP III / 922 , Kuttippuram Road , Valanchery P. O. Malappuram Kerala-676552
25. 6994408 07-12-2009
IS 1417
1999
Gold and gold alloys , jewellery/ artefacts- Fineness and marking
Chinna Jewellery Kacherry Junction Ambalapuzha P. О. Alappuzha , Kerala - 688561
IS 1417 26. 6994509 07-12-2009
1999 GoldenJewellery 1/554, Main Road , Kuttipuram Malappuram Kerala - 679571
Gold and gold alloys , jewellery/ artefacts- Fineness and marking
27. 6994711 07-12-2009
IS 1417
1999
Gold and gold alloys , jewellery/ artefacts- Fineness and marking
Aiswarya Fashion Jewellery Thazhavilacom Complex , Kallikadu, Mylakkara P. O. , Kattakkada Thiruvanantha- puram , Kerala - 695572
07-12-2009
28. 6994812
IS 1417
1999
Gold and gold alloys , jewellery/ artefacts- Fineness and marking
Cherkottu Fashion Jewellery High Range Junction Kothamangalam Ernakulam , Kerala- 686691
07-12-2009
29. 6993305
IS 1417
1999
Gold and gold alloys , jewellery/ artefacts- Fineness and marking
K. P. Chacko & Sons , Jewellers Kakkanattu Building Market Road Thodupuzha Idukki , Kerala- 685584
IS 1417 30. 6993103 07-12-2009
1999
Gold and gold alloys , jewellery/ artefacts- Fineness and marking
P. N. Mani & Sons Gold Collections High Range Junction Kothamangalam Ernakulam Kerala
31. 6996816 14-12-2009
IS 1417
1990
Gold and gold alloys , jewellery/ artefacts- Fineness and marking
M.I. Fashion Jewellery Valayal Chetty Street , T.C. 38/1258 , Chalai Bazar , Thiruvananthapuram Kerala- 695036
32. 6996917 14-12-2009
IS 1417
Gold and gold alloys , jewellery/ artefacts- Fineness and marking
Pooja Jewellery T.C. 38/2744 , Pazhayachalai , Chalaí P. O. Thiruvanantha- puram - Kerala 695036
33. 6997010 14-12-2009
IS 1417
1909
Gold and gold alloys , jewellery / artefacts- Fineness and marking
Thekkupurathu Fashion Jewellery, Chittar Chittar P. O. , Pathanamthitta Kerala- 689663 5087 भारत का राजपत्र अगस्त 21 , 2010/ श्रावण 30 , 1932
[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]
(3)
(4)
(5)
(6) (7) (8) (9) ( 1) (2)
1999 34. 6997111 14-12-2009
IS 1417
Gold and gold alloys , jewellery/ artefacts- Fineness and marking
Elevanthikkal Jewellery , 4/832 , C , Main Road , Balussery , Kozhikode , Kerala -673613
IS 2830
1992 35. 6997212 17-12-2009
Carbon steel cast billet ingots , billets , blooms and slabs for re - rolling into steel for general structural purposes
PPS Steels , ( Kerala ) Private Limited VIII 864 , 865 S.F. No. 405/2 , NIDA , Menonparara Road , Palakkad , Kanjikode Kerala- 678621
2004
IS 14543 36. 3301332 23-12-2009
Packaged drinking water (other than packaged natural mineral water )
JKJ Industries , Sy . No. 1482/3/2 , Puthupaddy Post , Chirapady Kothamangalam , Ernakulam , Kerala - 686673
IS 1417
1999 37. 3302435 29-12-2009
Gold and gold alloys , jewellery/ artefacts- Fineness and marking
New Poornima Jewellery , Govt. Hospital Junction , West Nada Kodungallur , Thrissur Kerala - 680664
1999
IS 1417 38. 3302334 30-12-2009
Gold and gold alloys , jewellery/ artefacts- Fineness and marking
Kodimoottil Jewellers , Κ.Ρ. ΧΙΙ /388 /B 9 , New Panchayath Shopping Complex , Parippally Parippally Post , Kollam , Kerala
IS 1417
1999 39. 3302233 30-12-2009
Gold and gold alloys , jewellery / artefacts- Fineness and marking
Payyappilly's Jewellery , Opp. Private Bus Stand, Mala , Thrissur , Kerala- 680732
IS 1417
1999 40. 3302536 30-12-2009
Gold and gold alloys , jewellery/ artefacts- Fineness and marking
K.P. Varkey & Sons , Kakkanatt Jewellers , XXVI / 750 , 751 , A.M. Road , Kothamangalam , Ernakulam , Kerala - 686691
IS4148
1989 41. 3306241 30-12-2009
Gold and gold alloys , jewellery / artefacts- Fineness and marking
Truskin Gloves Private Ltd. Plot No. 14 - C , Cochin , Special Economic Zone , Kakkanad Ernakulam , Cochin , Kerala - 682037
IS 1417
1999 42. 3303942 01-01-2010
Gold and gold alloys , jewellery/ artefacts- Fineness.and marking
Fathima Jewellery, CP / IV 313 E , Valiyakada, Chirayinkil , Thiruvanantha- puram , Kerala -695304
1999
IS 1417 43. 3314644 02-01-2010
Gold and gold alloys , jewellery/ artefacts- Fineness and marking
AL Majnas Jewellery, Mullambalam Shopping Complex , Koduvally , Kozhikode , Kerala- 673572 700
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 21 , 2010/ SHRAVANA 30 , 1932
[ PART II SEC . 3 ( ii ) ] ハ (2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
(6) (7) ( 8) ( 9) 4 3303235 05-01-2010
2000
IS 4985
Un plasticized pvc pipes for potable water supplies
Best Plast PVC Pipes , Main Road , Parassery, Kongad, Palakkad , Kerala- 678631
45. 3305441 08-01-2010
IS 14543
2004
Packaged drinking water (Other than packaged natural mineral water )
UM Enterpreses , KM No. XV /334A , Vadacode P. O. Kangarapady Ernakulam , Kerala - 682021
46. 3308750 18-01-2010
IS 1417
1999
Gold and gold alloys . jewellery/ artefacts- Fineness and marking
Garnet Gold Park Pvt . Ltd. , 17/2275 A , Sai Building , M.M. Ali Road , Kozhikode , Kerala - 673001
47. 3308851 18-01-2010
IS 1417
1009
Gold and gold alloys , jewellery/ artefacts- Fineness and marking
Wood Land Gold , E. P/ 763 B. C -Main Road, Edakkara , P. O. Nilambur , Malappuram Dist . Kerala
48. 3308952 18-01-2010
IS 1417 Harisri Jewellery , Kottiyam Kollam Kerala -691571
Gold and gold alloys . jewellery/ artefacts- Fineness and marking
49. 33094+ 20-01-2010
2004
IS 145-43
Packaged drinking water (Other than packaged natural mineral water )
Geekay Hygienics Private Limited , P.B. No. 3 , Punnayam Asamannur P. O. Perumbavoor. Ernakulam , Kerala - 683549
50. 3312135 25-01-2010
0000
IS 1417
Gold and gold alloys , jewellery/ artefacts- Fineness and marking
M/ s . Rajesh Jewellers , M.C. Road , Pandalam , Pathanamthitta Kerala- 689501
51. 3312842 25-01-2010
IS 1417
Gold and gold alloys . jewellery / artefacts- Fineness and marking
Sreevalsam Jewellers , Kodumon P. Ο . Pathanamthitta Kerala- 691555
IS 1417 52. 3312943 25-01-2010
(א)
Gold and gold alloys . jewellery/ artefacts- Fineness and marking
Sreevalsam Jewellers . Kallarkutty Road Adimali P. O. Idukki , Kerala- 685561
3313036 25-01-2010
IS 1-117
Gold and gold alloys , jewellery /artefacts- Fineness and marking
Arafa Jewellery. Market Road . Puthiyatheru , Chirakkal P. O. Kannur , Kerala - 670011
54 3313137 25-01-2010
IS 1417
jewellery/ artefacts- Gold and gold alloys , Fineness and marking
Achakottil Jewels , Kacherithazham , MVM , Madaparambil Plaza, Muvattupuzha, Ernakulam, Kerala - 686661
55 3313238 25-01-2010
IS 1-417
Gold and gold alloys . jewellery / artefacts- Fineness and marking
Malanad Gold , Β . Ρ . 4/822 A. Park Corner Balussery . Kozhikode Kerala - 673612 5089 [ भाग II - खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]
भारत का राजपत्र अगस्त 21 , 2010/ श्रावण 30 , 1932
(6)
(3)
(4)
(1) (2)
(5)
(7) (8) (9)
IS 1417
1999 56. 3313339 25-01-2010 Lillah Gold, Koppam , P. O. Pulassery Palakkad , Kerala - 679307
Gold and gold alloys , jewellery/ artefacts- Fineness and marking
57. 3313440 25-01-2010
IS 1417
1999
Gold and gold alloys , jewellery/ artefacts- Fineness and marking
Glisten Gold Collections Pvt. Ltd. , K. P. III 2561 to 2564 , Opp . Boys H. S. School , Karunagapally , Kollam , Kerala - 690518
1979 58. 3315646 27-01-2010
IS 2052
Compounded feeds for cattle
Koyenco Feeds Pvt . Ltd. , Koyenco House West Hill P. O. Kozhikode Kerala -673005
59. 3315747 27-01-2010
IS 2830
1992 Krishna Steel Rolling Mills , Building No. VIII / 1041 , NIDA , Kanjikode Palakkad , Kerala - 678621
Carbon steel cast billet ingots , billets , blooms and slabs for re - rolling into steel for general structural purposes
60. 3314886 01-02-2010
IS 1417
1999
Gold and gold alloys , jewellery / artefacts- Fineness and marking
C.H. Jewellery, Main Road , Chemmad , Tirurangadi P. O. Malapuram , Kerala - 676306
61. 3314543 01-02-2010
1999
IS 1417 Josco Jewellery, M. O. Road , Thrissur , Kerala - 680001
Gold and gold alloys , jewellery / artefacts- Fineness and marking
62. 3314745 01-02-2010
IS 1417
1999
Gold and gold alloys , jewellery/ artefacts- Fineness and marking
Channel View Jewellers . Panchayat New Shopping Complex, Parippally Kollam , Kerala -691574
63. 3319149 02-02-2010
2004
IS 14543
Packaged drinking water ( Other than packaged natural mineral water)
Ganga Products , Sy. No. 15/10 , Block No. 29 , Valayanchirangar A. P.O. Airapuram Village Eranakulam Kerala- 683556
64. 3317448 04-02-2010
IS 1417
1999
Gold and gold alloys , jewellery/ artefacts- Fineness and marking
Trimurthi Jewellery , T.C. 18/551 , Main Road , Koyilandy , Kozhikode , Kerala- 673002
65. 3318652 04-02-2010
IS 1786
1985
High strength deformed steel bars and wires for concrete reinforcement
Mascom Steel ( India) , Private Limited , I / II 7 - E , Industrial Development Area , Erumathala P. O. Aluva , Eranakulam Kerala - 683112
66. 3317044 04-02-2010
1999
IS 1417
Gold and gold alloys , jewellery/ artefacts- Fineness and marking
Swarna Kamal Jewels , ( India) Pvt . Ltd. , T.C. 17/417 B to J , Baker Junction , Near Modern Diagnostic Centre , Kottayam , Kerala - 686001 5090
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 21 , 2010 / SHRAVANA 30, 1932
[ PART II SEC . 3 ( ii ) ] (1) (2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
(6)
(7) (8) (9) 67. 3317246 04-02-2010
IS 1417
1999
Gold and gold alloys , jewellery/ artefacts- Fineness and marking
VinsJewellery. Mattupetty Road , Munnar P. O. Idukki , Kerala- 685612
68. 3317347 04-02-2010
IS 1417
1999
Gold and gold alloys , jewellery/ artefacts- Fineness and marking
SuperJewellery , Room No. NP . 9/386 , Vakayad Road, Naduvannur , Kozhikode , Kerala- 673614
69. 3316143 04-02-2010
IS 1417
1999
Gold and gold alloys , jewellery/ artefacts- Fineness and marking
Travancore Gold India Pvt . Ltd. , T.C. 28/2222 ( 6 ), Opp . Big Bazar , M.G. Road , Thiruvananthapuram , Kerala - 695004
70. 3316244 04-02-2010
1999
IS 1417 Chiriankandath Jewel Palace , Palace Road , Thrissur , Kerala - 680020
Gold and gold alloys , jewellery/ artefacts- Fineness and marking
71. 3316345 04-02-2010
IS 1417
1999 Sakthi Jewellers . Mullakkal , Alappuzha , Kerala - 688011
Gold and gold alloys , jewellery/ artefacts- Fineness and marking
72. 3316446 04-02-2010
IS 303
1989
Plywood for general purposes
Bombay Plywood Industries , Panipra , P.O. Kothamangalam , Ernakulam , Kerala - 686692
73. 3316547 04-02-2010
IS 1417
1999
Gold and gold alloys , jewellery/ artefacts- Fineness and marking
Sivasakthy Jewellery , Near Muthumari , Amman Temple , Kaithamukku Junction , Pettah , P. O. Thiruvanantha- puram , Kerala - 695024
74. 3316648 04-02-2010
IS 1417
1999
Gold and gold alloys , jewellery/ artefacts- Fineness and marking
Sana Gold , D/No : X/490, Near Canara Bank , Nadapuram Road , Parakkadavu , P.O. Kozhikode , Kerala- 673509
75. 3316749 04-02-2010
1999
IS 1417 Pankaj Jewellers , P.P. Road , Pala , Kottayam , Kerala- 686575
Gold and gold alloys , jewellery/ artefacts- Fineness and marking
76. 3316850 04-02-2010
IS 1417
1999
Gold and gold alloys , jewellery/ artefacts- Fineness and marking
Kairali Jewellery, Vaduthala Junction , Arookutty , Alappuzha Kerala-688535
77. 3316951 04-02-2010
IS 1417
1999
Gold and gold alloys , jewellery/ artefacts- Fineness and marking
V. P. Thomas & Sons , Karthedath Jewellery, Main Road , Tripunithura , Ernakulam , Kerala - 682301
78. 3317145 08-02-2010
IS 1417
1999
Gold and gold alloys , jewellery/ artefacts- Fineness and marking
Padikala Jewellery . G.C.D.A. Shopping Complex , Marinedrive . Ernakulam , Kerala - 682031 5091 भारत का राजपत्र अगस्त 21 , 2010/ श्रावण 30 , 1932
[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]
(6)
(4)
(5)
(3)
(7) (8) (9) (2)
(1)
1999
IS 1417 08-02-2010
79. 3318753
Gold and gold alloys , jewellery/ artefacts- Fineness and marking
Atlas Gold 7/962 , 963 , Opp . Canara Bank , Ponnani P. O. Malappuram Distt. , Kerala
1989
'S 303 15-02-2010
80. 3320235
Plywood for general purposes
Seepison Plyboard Kandanthara , Allapra P.O. Perumbavoor , Eranakulam , Kerala-683553
IS 1417
1999 16-02-2010
81. 3321338
Gold and gold alloys , jewellery/ artefacts- Fineness and marking
Vazhemadathil Jewellers Building Number 703 /VI , Main Road , Thalayola- parambu , Kottayam, Kerala- 686605
IS 1417
1999 16-02-2010
3321439
82.
Gold and gold alloys , jewellery/ artefacts- Fineness and marking
Munavara Jewellers T.C. 12/823 A , Munavara Building , Mannarkkad, Palakkad , Kerala
IS 1417
1999 16-02-2010
83. 3321540
Gold and gold alloys , jewellery/ artefacts- Fineness and marking
Surya Jewellers Poovathoor Building , Chengannur P. O. Alappuzha Kerala-689121
IS 1417
1999 16-02-2010
84. 3321641
Indian Jewellery Sadik Manzil Oyoor P. O. Kollam , Kerala -691510
Gold and gold alloys , jewellery/ artefacts- Fineness and marking
IS 1417 .
1999 3321843 16-02-2010
85.
Gold and gold alloys , jewellery/ artefacts- Fineness and marking
Kalyan Jewellers India ( P ) Ltd. Calicut Road , Perinthalmanna , Malappuram , Kerala - 679322
IS 1417 16-02-2010
1999 86. 3321944
Gold and gold alloys , jewellery/ artefacts- Fineness and marking
Kalyan Jewellers India ( P ) Ltd. , Ward No. 27 , B. No. 55/1 , Round North , Thrissur , Kerala - 680001
1000
IS 1417 16-02-2010
87. 3322037
Gold and gold alloys , jewellery/ artefacts- Fineness and marking
Kalyan Jewellers Kollam & Erod , Ward No. 18B , No. MC . 17 /3749,3750,3751 , Zain Tower , Beach Road , Kollam , Kerala
2004
IS 14543 17-02-2010
88. 3323241
Packaged drinking water ( Other than packaged natural mineral water)
Phoenix Agencies VII/ 303 , Kallokkaran Building , Turavoor Village , Kidangoor P. O. Ernakulam . Kerala- 683572
1989
IS 303 17-02-2010
89. 3323342
Plywood for general purposes
Plycon Laminates Kuttipadam , Allapra ( P. O. ) , Perumbavoor Ernakulam , Kerala- 683553 5092
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 21 , 2010/ SHRAVANA 30 , 1932
[ PART 11 SEC. 3 ( ii ) ] (3)
( 1) (2)
(4)
(5)
(6)
(8 ) ( 9)
(7) 90. 3330440 17-02-2010
IS 303
1089
Plywood for general purposes
Shero Plywoo 15 Door No. AP VII ! 585M Industrial Development Plot , Andoor Parassini- Kadavu P. C. Kannur , Kerala -67055
91. 3533345 17-02-2010
IS 2830
1992
Carbon steel cast billet ingots , billets , blooms and slabs for re - rolling into steel for general structural purposes
Kuttippulan Iron & Steel Co. (P) Limited , VIII/ 1018 , Kinfra Wise Park, Menonpara Road , Kanjikode , Palakkad , Kerala - 678621
92. 3323948 23-02-2010
IS 1417
1999 Kalyan Jewellers India ( P) Ltd. , Mavoor Road , Kozhikode , Kerala
Gold and gold alloys , Fineness and marking jewellery / artefacts-
93. 3324041 23-02-2010
IS 1417
1999
Gold and gold alloys , jewellery / artefacts- Fineness and marking
Bennys Jewellery Bennys Tower, Bus Stand Junction , Rajakkad , Idukki , Kerala - 685566
94. 3324142 23-02-2010
IS 1417
1999
Gold and gold alloys , jewellery/ artefacts- Fineness and marking
Swarna Mahal Melethil Building Chulliyode Road , Pookkottumpadam P.O. Malappuram, Kerala - 679332
95. 3324647 23-02-2010
IS 1417
1909
Gold and gold alloys . jewellery/ artefacts- Fineness and marking
Old Pavees Jewellery, K.R. Vijayan Memmorial Shopping Complex , Old K.S.R.T.C. Stand . N. Paravoor , Eranakulam Kerala - 683513
96. 3324748 23-02-2010
IS 1417
1900
Gold and gold alloys , jewellery/ artefacts- Fineness and marking
Kalyan Jewellers India ( P) Ltd. Kandath Complex , G. B. Road, Palakkad , Kerala - 678001
97. 3325548 25-02-2010
IS 1417
1909
Gold and gold alloys . jewellery/ artefacts- Fineness and marking
Shalimar Gold Shalimar Building , College Road . Changancherry, Kottayam , Kerala - 686101
98. 33256-19 20-02-2010
IS 1417
1999
Gold and gold alloys . jewellery/ artefacts- Fineness and marking
Thadathil Jewellery Near Private Bus Stand , Erattupetta P. O. Kottayam , Kerala - 686121
99. 3325750 25-02-2010
IS 1417
1999
Gold and gold alloys , jewellery / artefacts- Fineness and marking
Swarnagiri Fashion Jewellery No. VII / 385 , 386 , TB Road, Perambra , Kozhikode , Kerala - 673525 5093 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3( ii) ]
भारत का राजपत्र अगस्त 21 , 2010/ श्रावण 30 , 1932
(3)
(4)
(1) (2)
(5)
(6)
(9)
(7) (8) 100. 3325851 25-02-2010
IS 1417
1999 Panikkasseri Jewellers Mukkada , Kundara , Kollam , Kerala- 691501
Gold and gold alloys , jewellery/ artefacts- Fineness and marking
101. 3325952 25-02-2010
IS 1417
1999
Gold and gold alloys , jewellery/ artefacts- Fineness and marking
Padma Jewellers Mayyanadu Road , Kottiyam P. O. , Kollam , Kerala-691571
102. 3326247 26-02-2010
IS303
1989
Plywood for general purposes
MarsPlywood Industries (Private) Limited , Door No. MGP 1/133 , 1 / 129A , 1/129 , 1 / 132B Kunjathur P. O. Thalapady , Kasaragod . Kerala- 671323
103. 3326348 26-02-2010
Blockboards
IS 1659
2004 Mars Plywood Industries (Private) Limited, Door No. MGP 1/133 , 1 / 129A , 1/129 , 1/1328 Kunjathur P. O. Thalapady, Kasaragod , Kerala-671323
104. 3326449 26-02-2010
IS 710
1976
Marine plywood
MarsPlywood Industris ( Private) Limited , Door No. MGP 1/133 , 129A , 1/129 , 1/1328 , Kunjathur P. O. Thalapady Kasaragod . , Kerala-671323
105. 3326550 01-03-2010
IS4990
1993
Plywood for concrete shuttering work
Mars Plywood Industries (PrivateLimited , Door No. MGP 1/133 , 1 / 129A , 1/129 , 1/1328 Kunjathur P. O. Thalapady , Kasaragod, Kerala- 671323
Blockboards
2004 106. 3333648 02-03-2010
IS 1659 Periyar Wood Products Thuruthi Road, Chungam Pappinisseri , Kannur , Kerala - 670561
107.3330743 02-03-2010
IS 1417
1999
Gold and gold alloys , jewellery/ artefacts- Fineness and marking
Chinnan Sons Jewellers No. IX/ 803 , Cherpulassery Road, Kongad, Palakkad, Kerala- 678631
IS 1417
1999 108. 3330844 02-03-2010
Gold and gold alloys , jewellery/ artefacts- Fineness and marking
Chinnan Sons Jewellers No. 15/63 Chittor Road, Kozhin- jampara Palakkad , Kerala- 678555
IS 1417
1999 109. 3331038 09-03-2010
Gold and gold alloys , jewellery/ artefacts- Fineness and marking
Pulimoottil Jewellery, Karavattee Kurize , Piravom , Eranakulam , Kerala - 686664
IS 1417
1999 110. 3331139 09-03-2010
Gold and gold alloys , jewellery/artefacts- Fineness and marking
Vithayathil Jewellers Chirakkakam Opp . Christ Nagar Church , Varapuzha P. O. Ernakulam , Kerala - 683517
3099Gl /10-5 5094
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: AUGUST 21 , 2010 / SHRAVANA 30 , 1932
PAR : 11 SEC. 3 ( ii ) ]
(6)
(7) ( 8) (9)
(5)
(1) (2)
(3)
(4)
1999
IS 1417 3331240 09-03-2010
111.
Swapna Fashion jewellery Mitchel Junction , Mavelikara , Alappuzha . Kerala - 690101
Gold and gold alloys , jewellery/ artefacts- Fineness and marking
IS 1417
1000 112. 3331341 10-03-2010
Gold and gold alloys , jewellery/ artefacts- Fineness and marking
Ananda Jewellery Pulamon ( JN) , Kottarakara P. O. Kollam , Kerala- 691506
IS 2062
2006 113. 3331745 10-03-2010
Steel for general structural purposes-
World Wide Iron & Steels Private Limited , VIII/ 862 , Wise Park Petronet Road , NIDA Kanjikode Palakkad , Kerala- 678621
1999
IS 1-417 114. 3332040 10-03-2010 Fashion Jewellery Punalur Road . Anchal Kollam Kerala
Gold and gold alloys , jewellery / artefacts- Fineness and marking
IS 5430
-1981 115. 3334044 10-03-2010
Ammonia preserved concentrated natural rubber latex
Thamarapally Rubber Company Limited Calicut Estate , Thekkumkutty , P.O. Alli Mukkom Kozhikode Kerala - 673602
IS-4990
1993 116. 3334751 16-03-2010
Plywood for concrete shuttering work
Shero Plywoods Door No. AP VIII 585M , Industrieal Development Plot, Andoor , Parassinikadavu P. O. Kannur , Kerala - 670563
IS 1417
1900 117. 3333850 16-03-2010
Gold and gold alloys , jewellery / artefacts- Fineness and marking
Kannath Jewellery Kannath House , Venkitangu P. O. Thrissur Kerala - 680510
118. 3333951 16-03-2010
IS 2830
1992 World Wide Iron & Steels Private Limited VIII/ 862 , Wise Park Petronet Road , NIDA Kanjikode Palakkad Kerala - 678621
Carbon steel cast billet ingots , billets , blooms and slabs for re - rolling into steel for general structural purposes
119. 3333749 16-03-2010
IS 1417
1999
Gold and gold alloys , jewellery / artefacts- Fineness and marking
Rishad Jewellery Dilshad Manzil , Kannanalloor P. O. Kollam , Kerala - 691576
IS 2830
1992 120. 3336452 23-03-2010 Mannarkkad Steels Private Limited , VIII /960 , Wise Park Menonpara Road , Kanjikode , Palakkad , Kerala- 678621
Carbon steel cast billet ingots , billets , blooms and slabs for re - rolling into steel for general structural purposes
121. 3336553 23-03-2010
IS2830
1992 Marutham Steels Industries Private Limited , VIII / 885 , NIDA , Kanjikode Post, Palakkad , Kerala - 678621
Carbon steel cast billet ingots , billets , blooms and slabs for re - rolling into steel for general structural purposes
[ No. CMD 13:13
C. K. MAHESHWARI , Scientist- G ( Certification) 5093 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]
भारत का राजपत्र अगस्त 21 , 2010/ श्रावण 30 , 1932
नई दिल्ली , ।। अगस्त, 2010
का.आ. 2050.- भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो नियम , 1987 के नियम 7 के उपनियम ( 1 ) के खण्ड ( ख ) के अनुसरण में भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो एतद्वारा अधिसूचित करता है कि अनुसूची में दिये गये मानक ( कों ) में संशोधन किया गया/किये गये हैं : -
अनुसूची
संशोधनों की संख्या और तिथि
संशोधन लागू होने की तिथि संशोधित भारतीय मानक ( कों ) की संख्या वर्ष और शीर्षक
क्रम संख्या
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
27-7-2010
संशोधन संख्या 3 जुलाई , 2010
1 . आईएस 15391-2003 अतप्त बेल्लित गैर - दिशात्मक विद्युत इस्पात की चद्दर एवं पत्तीअर्ध- प्रकृमित प्ररूप-विशिष्टि
इस संशोधन की प्रतियां भारतीय मानक की प्रतियां भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो , मानक भवन , 9 , बहादुर शाह जकर मार्ग , नई दिल्ली-110002 , क्षेत्रीय कार्यालयों नई दिल्ली , कोलकाता , चण्डीगढ़ , चेन्नई , मुम्बई तथा शाखा कार्यालयों अहमदाबाद , बंगलौर , भोपाल , भुवनेश्वर , कोयम्बतूर , गुवाहाटी , हैदराबाद , जयपुर , कानपुर , नागपुर , पटना, पूणे तथा तिरुवनन्तापुरम में बिक्री हेतु उपलब्ध हैं।
[संदर्भ : एमटीडी 4/टी -212 ]
पी . घोष , वैज्ञानिक ' एफ ' एवं प्रमुख ( एमटीडी)
New Delhi , the 11th August , 2010
S.O. 2050. In pursuance of clause ( b) of sub - rule ( 1 ) of Rule 7 of the Bureau of Indian Standards Rules , 1987 , the Bureau of Indian Standards hereby notifies that the Amendment Indian Standards particulars of which are given in the Schedule hereto annexed have been established on the date indicated against each : ---
SCHEDULE
No. and year of the amendment
Sl No. No. and year of the amendment ( s )
Date from which the amendment shall have effect (2)
( 1)
(3 )
(4)
27-7-2010
Amendment No. 3 July 2010
1. IS 15391 : 2003 Cold rolled non - oriented electrical steel sheet and strip- Semiprocessed Type-Specification
Copy of this amendment is available for sale with the Bureau of Indian Standards , Manak Bhavan, 9. Bahadur Shah Zafar Marg , New Delhi - 110002 and Regional Offices , New Delhi , Kolkata , Chandigarh , Chennai , Mumbai and also Branch Offices , Ahmedabad , Bangalore , Bhopal , Bhubaneshwar , Coimbatore , Guwahati , Hyderabad , Jaipur , Kanpur, Nagpur, Patna , Pune , Tairuvananthapuram .
[ Ref: MTD 4/ T -212 ]
P. GHOSH , Scientist 'F ' & Head ( Met Engg .)
नई दिल्ली , 13 अगस्त , 2010
का.आ. 2051.- भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो नियम , 1987 के नियम 7 के उपनियम ( 1 ) के खण्ड ( ख ) के अनुसरण में भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो एतद्वारा अधिसूचित करता है कि नीचे अनुसूची में दिये गये मानक ( कों ) में संशोधन किया गया /किए गये हैं : -- 5096
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 21 , 2010 / SHRAVANA 30 , 1932
[ PART II --- SEC . 3 ( ii) ]
अनुसूची
स्थापित तिथि संशोधित भारतीय मानक ( कों ) की संख्या वर्ष और शीर्षक संशोधनों की संख्या और तिथि
क्रम संख्या
(3)
( 1) ( 2)
(4)
31 जुलाई, 2010 1 . आई एस 1813 : 1961 पानी के उपचार के लिए अभ्यास के समुद्री बॉयलरों की रीति संहिता
संशोधन संख्या नं. 1 ,
जुलाई, 2010
31 जुलाई , 2010
संशोधन संख्या नं. 2 ,
जुलाई , 2010
2. आई एस 201 : 1992 वस्त्र उद्योग के लिए जल की गुणत छूटें -विशिष्टि
( दूसरा पुनरीक्षण)
30 जून , 2010 3. आई एस 7932 : 1982 बायलर जल उपचार यौगिकों के लिए विशिष्टिता
संशोधन संख्या नं . 1 ,
जून , 2010
(पहला पुनरीक्षण)
30 जुलाई , 2010
संशोधन संख्या नं . 1 ,
जुलाई, 2010
4. आई एस 3328 : 1993 तरण तालों के लिए पानल की गुणता छूटें
(पहला पुनरीक्षण)
इस भारतीय मानकों की प्रतियां भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो , मानक भवन , 9 , बहादुर शाह जफर मार्ग , नई दिल्ली 110002 , क्षेत्रीय कार्यालयों नई दिल्ली , कोलकाता , चण्डीगढ़ , चेन्नई , मुम्बई तथा शाखा कार्यालयों अहमदाबाद , बंगलौर , भोपाल , भुवनेश्वर , कोयम्बतूर , गुनाहाटी , हैदराबाद, जयपुर , कानपुर , नागपुर , पटना , पूणे तथा तिरुवनन्तापुरम में बिक्री हेतु उपलब्ध हैं।
[संदर्भ : सीएचडी 13 / आईएस 1813 ]
ई. देवेन्दर, वैज्ञानिक ' एफ' एवं प्रमुख ( रसायन )
New Delhi , the 13th August , 2010
S.O. 2051 .-- In pursuance of clause (b ) of sub - rule ( 1 ) of Rule 7 of the Bureau of Indian Standards Rules , 1987, the Bureau of Indian Standards hereby notifies that amendments to the Indian Standards , particulars of which is given in the Schedule hereto annexed have been issued .
SCHEDULE
SI No. No. and year of the Indian Standards
No. and year of the amendment
Date from which the amendment shall have effect (2)
( 1)
(3)
(4)
31 July, 2010 1 . IS 1813 : 1961 code of practice for treatment of water for marine boilers
Amendment No. 1
July, 2010
2.
31 July , 2010
Amendment No. 2 July , 2010
IS 201 : 1992 quality tolerance for water for Textile Industry - Specfication (Second Revision )
30 June , 2010
Amendment No. 1
June , 2010
3. IS 7932 : 1982 specification for boiler water treatement compounds (First Revision )
4.
31 July , 2010
Amendment No. 1
July , 2010
IS 3328 : 1993 quality tolerances for water for swimming pools (FirstRevision )
Copy of these standards are available for sale with the Bureau of Indian Standards , Manak Bhavan , 9 Bahadur Shah Zafar Marg . New Delhi - 110002 and Regional Offices , New Delhi , Kolkata , Chandigarh , Chennai , Mumbai and also Branch भारत का राजपत्र अगस्त 21 , 2010/ श्रावण 30 , 1932
[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]
5097 Offices , Ahmedabad , Bangalore , Bhopal , Bhubaneshwar , Coimbatore , Guwahati , Hyderabad , Jaipur, Kanpur , Nagpur , Patna , Pune , Thiruvananthapuram.
[ Ref: CHD 13 / IS 1813 ] E. DEVENDAR , Scientist ' F ' & Head ( Chemical )
नई दिल्ली , 13 अगस्त, 2010
का.आ. 2052.- भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो नियम , 1987 के नियम 7 के उपनियम ( 1 ) के खण्ड ( ख ) के अनुसरण में भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो एतद्वारा अधिसूचित करता है कि जिन भारतीय मानकों के विवरण नीचे अनुसूची में दिये गये हैं वे स्थापित हो गये हैं : -
अनुसूची
स्थापित भारतीय मानक ( कों ) की संख्या , वर्ष और शीर्षक क्रम संख्या
(2)
( 1)
1. आई एस 3025 ( भाग 21 ) : 2009 जल और अपशिष्ट जल के नमूने लेने तथा परीक्षण ( भौतिक एवं रसायन ) की पद्धतियाँ भाग 21 कठोरता ( दूसरा पुनरीक्षण )
स्थापित तिथि नए भारतीय मानक द्वारा अतिक्रमित भारतीय मानक अथवा मानकों, यदि कोई हो , की संख्या और वर्ष
(4) (3)
31 दिसम्बर , 2009 इस भारतीय मानक की प्रतियां भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो , मानक भवन , 9 बहादुर शाह जफर मार्ग , नई दिल्ली -110002 , क्षेत्रीय कार्यालयों नई दिल्ली , कोलकाता , चण्डीगढ़ , चेन्नई, मुम्बई तथा शाखा कार्यालयों अहमदाबाद, बंगलौर, भोपाल , भुवनेश्वर , कोयम्बतूर, गुवाहाटी, हैदराबाद , जयपुर , कानपुर , नागपुर , पटना , पूणे तथा तिरुवनन्तापुरम में बिक्री हेतु उपलब्ध हैं ।
[ संदर्भ : सीएचडी 32 / आईएस 3025 ( भाग 21 ) ] ई. देवेन्दर , वैज्ञानिक ' एफ ' एवं प्रमुख ( रसायन )
New Delhi , the 13th August, 2010
S.O. 2052 .-- In pursuance of clause ( b ) of sub - rule ( 1 ) of Rule 7 of the Bureau of Indian Standards Rules , 1987 , the Bureau of Indian Standards hereby notifies that the Indian Standards particulars of which is given in the Schedule hereto annexed have been estblished on the date indicated against each :
SCHEDULE
SI No. No. & Year of Indian Standard Established
(2)
(1)
1. IS 3025 ( Part 21 ) : 2009 Methods of sampling and test ( Physical and Chemical ) for water and wastewater Part 21 Hardness ( Second Revision )
Date of
Establishment
No. and Year of the Indian Standards , if any , Superseded by the New Indian Standard
(4) (3)
31 December , 2009 Copy of this Standard is available for sale with the Bureau of Indian Standards , Manak Bhavan , 9 Bahadur Shah Zafar Marg, New Delhi - 110002 and Regional Offices , New Delhi , Kolkata , Chandigarh , Chennai , Mumbai and also Branch Offices , Ahmedabad , Bangalore , Bhopal , Bhubaneshwar , Coimbatore , Guwahati , Hyderabad , Jaipur , Kanpur , Nagpur , Patna , Pune , Thiruvananthapuram .
[ Ref: CHD 32 / IS 3025 ( Part 21 ) ] E. DEVENDAR, Scientist ' F ' & Head ( Chemical ) 5098
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 21 , 2010 / SHRAVANA 30 , 1932
[ PART II- SEC . 3 ( ii) ]
कोयला मंत्रालय
शुद्धि-पत्र
नई दिल्ली , 9 अगस्त, 2010
का.आ. 2053.-कोयलाधारी क्षेत्र ( अधिग्रहण और विकास ) अधिनियम , 1957 ( 1957 का 20 ) की धारा 7 की उपधारा ( 1 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए केंन्द्र सरकार मई 15 , 2010 को भारत के राजपत्र के भाग II खंड -3 , उपखंड ( ii ) में प्रकाशित 5 मई , 2010 के का.आ. 1238 के अनुसार भारत सरकार , कोयला मंत्रालय की अधिसूचना को एतद्वारा संशोधित करती है , अर्थात् : - उक्त अधिसूचना के हिन्दी रूपांतरण में अनुसूची के नीचे दिये गये क्रम संख्या 4. " ग्राम झिगुरदा में अर्जित किये जाने वाले प्लाट संख्यांक " में संख्या " 4.3 ( भाग ) " के स्थान पर " 403 ( भाग ) " प्रतिस्थापित किया जाएगा ।
[फा.सं. 43015 / 15 /2009/पीआरआईडब्ल्यू-1 ]
एम. शहाबुद्दीन , अवर सचिव
नई दिल्ली , 10 अगस्त, 2010
का.आ. 2054.-केन्द्रीय सरकार ने कोयला धारक क्षेत्र ( अर्जन और विकास ) अधिनियम , 1957 ( 1957 का 20 ) ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त अधिनियम कहा गया है ) की धारा 4 की उपधारा ( 1 ) के अधीन भारत सरकार ने कोयला मंत्रालय के द्वारा जारी की गई अधिसूचना संख्या का. आ. 449 तारीख 3 फरवरी , 2010 , जो भारत के राजपत्र के भाग -11 , खंड -3 उपखंड ( ii ) तारीख 13 फरवरी , 2010 में प्रकाशित की गई थी , उस अधिसूचना से संलग्न अनुसूची में विनिर्दिष्ट परिक्षेत्र की भूमि में जिसका माप 221.710 हेक्टर ( लगभग ) या 547.875 एकड़ ( लगभग ) है;
और कंन्द्रीय सरकार का यह समाधान हो गया है कि इस अधिसूचना से संलग्न अनुसूची में विहित उक्त भूमि में कोयला अभिप्राप्त है;
अत : अब , केन्द्रीय सरकार , कोयला धारक क्षेत्र ( अर्जन और विकास ) अधिनियम , 1957 की धारा 7 की उपधारा ( 1 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए , उक्त भूमि का अर्जन करने की, अपने आशय की सूचना देती है । इससे संलग्न अनुसूची में वर्णित 221.710 हेक्टर ( लगभग ) या 547.845 एकड़ ( लगभग ) माप वाली भूमि में या उस पर के खनन अधिकार ।
टिप्पण 1 : इस अधिसूचना के अधीन आने वाले क्षेत्र के रेखांक संख्या सी -1 ( ई ) III / एचआर/ 826-0410 , तारीख 21 अप्रैल , 2010 को जिला अधिकारी , छिन्दवाड़ा के कार्यालय में या कोयला नियंत्रक , । , काउंसिल हाउस स्ट्रीट, कोलकाता -700 001 के कार्यालय में या महाप्रबंधक , वेस्टर्न कोलफील्ड्स लिमिटेड ( राजस्व विभाग ) , कोल इस्टेट , सिविल लाईन्स , नागपुर -440 001 ( महाराष्ट्र) के कार्यालय में किया जा सकता है ।
टिप्पण 2 : कोयला धारक क्षेत्र ( अर्जन और विकास ) अधिनियम , 1957 ( 1957 का 20 ) की धारा 8 के उपबंधों की ओर ध्यान आकृष्ट किया जाता है , जिसमें निम्नलिखित उपबंध हैं : ....
अर्जन की बाबत आपत्तियां :
8 ( 1 ) कोई व्यक्ति जो किसी भूमि में जिसकी बाबत धारा 7 के अधीन अधिसूचना निकाली गई है , हितबद्ध है , अधिसूचना के निकाले जाने में तीस दिनों के भीतर सम्पूर्ण भूमि या उसके किसी भाग या ऐसी भूमि में या उस पर के किन्हीं अधिकारों का अर्जन किए जाने के चार में आपत्ति कर सकेंगा ।
स्पष्टीकरण :
( 1) इस धारा के अधीन यह आपत्ति नहीं मानी जाएगी , कि कोई व्यक्ति किसी भूमि में कोयला उत्पादन के लिए स्वयं खनन संक्रियाएं करना चाहता है और ऐसी संक्रियाएं केन्द्रीय सरकार या किसी अन्य व्यक्ति को नहीं करनी चाहिए ।
( 2) उपधाग ( 1 ) के अधीन प्रत्येक आपत्ति सक्षम प्राधिकारी को लिखित रूप में की जाएगी और सक्षम प्राधिकारी आपत्तिकर्ता को स्वयं मुने जाने का या विधि व्यवसायी द्वारा सुनवाई का अवसर देगा और ऐसी सभी आपत्तियों को सुनने के पश्चात् और ऐसी अतिरिक्त जांच , यदि कोई हो, करने के पश्चात् जो वह आवश्यक समझता है , वह या तो धारा 7 की उपधारा ( 1 ) के अधीन अधिसूचित भूमि के या ऐसी भूमि में या उस पर के अधिकारों के संबंध में एक रिपोर्ट या ऐसी भूमि के विभिन्न टुकड़ों या ऐसी भूमि में या उस पर के अधिकारों के संबंध में आपत्तियों पर अपनी सिफारिशों और उसके द्वारा की गई कार्यवाही के अभिलेख सहित विभिन्न रिपोर्ट केन्द्रीय सरकार को उमकं विनिश्चय के लिए देगा ।
(3) इस धारा के प्रयोजनों के लिए वह व्यक्ति किसी भूमि में हितबद्ध समझा जाएगा जो प्रतिकर में हित का दावा करने का हकदार होता, यदि भूमि या किसी ऐसी भूमि में या उस पर के अधिकार इस अधिनियम के अधीन अर्जित कर लिए जाते हैं । " 5099 भारत का राजपत्र अगस्त 21 , 2010 / श्रावण 30 , 1932
[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]
टिप्पण 3 : केन्द्रीय सरकार ने कोयला नियंत्रक, 1 , काउंसिल हाउस स्ट्रीट , कोलकाता -700 001 के उक्त अधिनियम के अधीन अधिसूचना सं. का.आ. 2519 , तारीख 27 मई , 1983 द्वारा भारत के राजपत्र , भाग- II खंड 3 , उपखंड ( ii ) , तारीख 11 जून , 1983 द्वारा प्रकाशित को सक्षम प्राधिकारी द्वारा नियुक्त किया जाता है ।
अनुसूची
भाकरा अंडरग्राउंड माईन
कन्हान क्षेत्र
जिला- छिन्दवाड़ा ( मध्य प्रदेश )
[ रेखांक संख्या सी -1 ( ई ) 11 /एचआर/ 826-0410 , तारीख 21 अप्रैल , 2010 ]
खनन अधिकार :
टिप्पणियां
जिला
तहसील
क्र. स. ग्राम का नाम
क्षेत्रफल हेक्टर में
नया पटवारी सर्किल संख्या
पुराना पटवारी सर्किलसंख्या
(6)
(7)
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
(8) ( 1)
भाग भाकरा
09
06
144.469 1.
छिन्दवाड़ा
जुन्नारदेव
भाग 2.
नंदना
77.241 16
04
छिन्दवाड़ा
जुन्नारदेव
कुल : 221.710 हेक्टर ( लगभग )
या
547.845 एकड़ ( लगभाग ) ग्राम भाकरा में अर्जित किए जाने वाले प्लाट संख्याक :
28 ( भाग ) , 29 , 30 ( भाग ) , 31 , 32 , 33 , 34 , 3 ( भाग ) , 4 ( भाग ) , 5 ( भाग ) , 6 ( भाग ) , 7 ( भाग ) , 9 ( भाग ) , 26 ( भाग ) , 27 ( भाग ) ,
47/1 , 47/2 , 47/3 , 48 , 49 , 50 , 51 , 52 , 53/1 , 53/2 , 53/3 , 53/4 , 54 , 55 , 35 , 36 , 37 , 38 , 39 , 40 , 41 , 42 , 43 , 44, 45 , 46 ( भाग ) ,
56 , 57 , 58 , 59 , 60 , 61 , 62/1 , 62/2 , 63 , 64/1 , 64/2 , 64/3 , 64/4 , 65 , 66 , 67 , 68 , 69 , 70 , 71/1 , 71/2 , 72/1 , 72/2 , 72/3 , 72/4 , 72/5 , 72/6 , 72/7 , 72/8 , 72/9 , 73 , 74 ( भाग ) , 75, 76( भाग ) , 77 , 78 , 79 , 80 , 81 , 82 , 83 , 84 , 85 , 86 , 87 , 88 , 89/1 , 89/2 , 90 , 91 ,
भाग ) , 106 ( भाग ) , 92, 93 , 94 ( भाग ) , 95 , 96 ( भाग ) , 97 ( भाग ) , 98 ( भाग ) , 101 ( भाग ) , 102/1 , 102/2 , 102/3 , 103 , 104 ( भाग ) , 105 (
179 ( भाग ) , 180 ( भाग ) , 181 , 182 , 183 , 184 ( भाग ) , 209 ( भाग ) , 210 ( भाग ) , 107 ( भाग ) , 108 ( भाग ) , 175 ( भाग ) , 176 ( भाग ) , 177
212 (भाग ) , 213 ( भाग ) , 215/1 ( भाग ) , 215/2 .
ग्राम नंदना में अर्जित किए जाने वाले प्लाट संख्याक :
11 ( भाग ) , 12 , 13/1 ( भाग ) , 14( भाग ) , 15 ( भाग ) , 16 ( भाग ) , 17 ( भाग ) , 18/1 ( भाग ) , 18/2 , 18/3 , 18/4 ( भाग ) , 19 , 20/1 , 20/2 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 , 25 , 26 , 27 , 28 , 29 , 30 , 31 , 32 , 33 ( भाग ) , 35 ( भाग ) , 42 ( भाग ) , 46 ( भाग ) , 47 ( भाग ) , 48 , 49 ( भाग ) , 53 ( भाग ) , 54/1 ( भाग ) , 54/2 ( भाग ) , 54/3 , 54/4 , 55 , 56 , 57 , 58 ( भाग ) , 59/1 , 59/2 , 59/3 , 59/4 , 60 , 61 , 62 , 63/1 , 63/2 , 64 , 65 , 66, 67 , 68 , 69 , 70 , 71 , 72 , 73 , 74 , 75 , 76 , 77 , 78/1 , 78/2 , 79 ( भाग ) , 88 ( भाग ) , 89 ( भाग ) , 90 , 91/1 ( भाग ) , 91/2 , 91/3 , 91/4 , 92, 93 , 94/1 , 94/2 , 95 ( भाग ) , 96 ( भाग ) , 98 ( भाग ) , 99 , 100 , 101 , 102, 103 , 104 ( भाग ) , 105 ( भाग ) ।
सीमा वर्णन :
क-ख- ग रेखा ग्राम भाकरा में बिन्दु " क " से आरंभ होती है और प्लाट संख्यांक 98 ( भाग ) , 97 ( भाग ) , 96 ( भाग ) , 101 ( भाग ) , 95 ( भाग ) , 94 ( भाग ) , 175 ( भाग ) , से गुजरते हुए बिन्दु " ख " के पास से गुजरती है फिर प्लाट संख्या 176 ( भाग ) , से होकर प्लाट संख्या 177 की सीमा से लगकर गुजरती है फिर प्लाट संख्यांक 179 ( भाग ) , 180 ( भाग ) , 182 ( भाग ) , 215/1 ( भाग ) , 213 ( भाग ) , 212 ( भाग ) , 210 ( भाग ) , 209 ( भाग ) , से होकर गुजरती है और बिन्दु " ग " पर मिलती है । ग- घ-ड.
रेखा ग्राम भाकरा से प्लाट संख्यांक 209 ( भाग ) , 210 ( भाग ) , 212 ( भाग ) , से होकर गुजरती है फिर प्लाट संख्या 182 की सीमा से लगकर गुजरती है फिर प्लाट संख्यांक 184 ( भाग ) , 30 ( भाग ) , 26 ( भाग ) , से होकर गुजरते हुए बिन्दु " घ " के पास से गुजरती है और फिर से प्लाट संख्या 26 ( भाग ) , से होकर बिन्दु ' ङ ' पर मिलती है । 5100
[ PART II - SEC . 3 ( ii) ] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 21 , 2010 / SHRAVANA 30 , 1932
ड - च- क रेखा ग्राम भाकरा से प्लाट संख्यांक 26 ( भाग ) , 184 ( भाग ) , 27 ( भाग ) , 28 ( भाग ) , 9 ( भाग ) , 7 ( भाग ) , 6 ( भाग ) , 5 ( भाग ) , 4 ( भाग ) , 3 ( भाग ) , 74 ( भाग ) , से होकर गुजरती है फिर ग्राम भाकरा और ग्राम नंदना की सम्मिलित ग्राम सीमा को पार करती है फिर ग्राम नंदना के प्लाट संख्यांक 58 ( भाग ) , 53 ( भाग ) , 54/2 ( भाग ) , 54/1 ( भाग ) , 49 ( भाग ) , 47 ( भाग ) , 42 ( भाग ) , 46 ( भाग ) , 33 ( भाग ) , 35 ( भाग ) , 11 ( भाग ) , 13/1 ( भाग ) , 13/2 ( भाग ) , 14 ( भाग ) , 16 ( भाग ) , 15 ( भाग ) , से होकर गुजरती है फिर बिन्दु " च " के पास से गुजरते हुए प्लाट संख्यांक 15 ( भाग ) , 16 ( भाग ) , 17 ( भाग ) , 18/1 ( भाग ) , 18/4 ( भाग ) , 79 ( भाग ) , 89 ( भाग ) , 88 ( भाग ) , 91/1 ( भाग ) , 96 ( भाग ) , 98 ( भाग ) , 105 ( भाग ) , 104 ( भाग ) , 58 ( भाग ) , से होकर गुजरती है फिर ग्राम नंदना और ग्राम भाकरा की सम्मिलित ग्राम सीमा को पार करती है फिर ग्राम भाकरा से प्लाट संख्या 103 की सीमा से लगकर गुजरती है और प्लाट संख्यांक 104 ( भाग ) , 105 ( भाग ) , 106 ( भाग ) , 107 ( भाग ) , 108 ( भाग ) , 101 ( भाग ) , 98 ( भाग ) , से होकर गुजरती है और आरंभिक बिन्दु " क " पर मिलती है ।
[फा.सं. 43015 / 33 / 2009- पीआरआईडब्ल्यू-1 ]
एम. शहाबुद्दीन, अवर सचिव
MINISTRY OF COAL
New Delhi the 10th August , 2010 .
S.O. 2054. Whereas , by the notification of the Government of India in the Ministry of Coal number S.O. 449 . dated the 3rd February , 2010 , issued under sub - section ( 1 ) of Section 4 of the Coal Bearing Areas ( Acquisition and Development ) Act , 1957 ( 20 of 1957 ) ( hereinafter referred to as the said Act ) and published in the Gazette of India , Part - II . Section - 3 , Sub- Section . ( ii ) dated the 13th February , 2010 , the Central Government gave notice of its intention to prospect for coal in 221.710 hectares ( approximately ) or 547.845 acres ( approximately ) of the lands in the locality specified in the Schedule annexed to that notification ;
And whereas , the Central Government is satisfied that coal is obtainable in a part of said lands prescribed in the schedule ( s ) appended to this notification;
Now , therefore , in exercise of the powers conferred by sub - section ( 1 ) of Section 7 of the said Act , the Central Government hereby gives notice of its intention to acquire Mining Rights in or over the land measuring 221.710 hectares ( approximately ) or 547.845 acres ( approximately ) in Mining Rights described in the Schedule .
Note 1 : The plan bearing number C - 1 ( E ) III / HR / 826-0410 , dated the 21st April , 2010 of the area covered by this notification may be inspected at the office of the Collector , Chhindwara ( Madhya Pradesh ) or at the office ofthe Coal Controller , 1 , Council House Street , Kolkata ( Pin -700 001 ) - or at the office of the General Manager , Western Coalfields Limited ( Revenue Department ) , Coal Estate , Civil Lines , Nagpur - 440001 ( Maharashtra ) .
Attention is hereby invited to the provisions of Section 8 of the said Act which provides as follows : Note 2:
Objections to Acquisition :
"8 ( 1 ) Any person interested in any land in respect of which a notification under section 7 has been issued may, within thirty days of the issue of the notification , object to the acquisition of the whole or any part of the land or of any rights in or over such land .
Explanation:
(1) It shall not be an objection within the meaning of this section for any person to say that he himself desires to undertake mining operations in the land for the production of coal and that such operations should not be undertaken by . the Central Government or by any other person.
(2) Every objection under sub - section ( 1 ) shall be made to the competent authority in writing , and the competent authority shall give the objector an opportunity of being heard either in person or by a legal practitioner and shall. after hearing all such objections and after making such further inquiry , if any , as he thinks necessary , either make a report in respect of the land which has been notified under sub - section ( 1 ) of Section 7 or of rights in or over such land , or make different reports in respect of different parcels of such land or of rights in or over such land , to the Central Government , containing his recommendations on the objections , together with the record of proceedings held by him , for the decision of that Government .
(3): For the purpose of this section , a person shall be deemed to be interested in land who would be entitled to claim an interest in compensation if the land or any rights in or over such land were acquired under this Act . " $101 भारत की राजपत्र अगस्त 21 , 2010/ श्रावण 30 , 1932
[भाग II-खण्ड 3( ii) ]
Note3 : The Coal Controller , 1, Council House Street, Kolkata -700 001 has been appointed by the Central Government as the competent authority under section 3 of the said Act , vide notification number S.O. 2519 , dated the 27th May, 1983 , published in the Gazette of India , Part- II , Section 3 , Sub- Section ( ii ) , dated the 11th June , 1983 .
SCHEDULE
BHAKRA UNDERGROUND MINE KANHAN AREA
DISTRICT CHHINDWARA (MADHYA PRADESH)
[Plannumber: C- I (E ) III /HR/ 826-0410 , dated the 21st April , 2010]
MINING RIGHTS :
Old
New.
Tahsil
Areain
District
Remarks S1. Nameof No.
Patwari Patwari
hectares
village
Circle number
Circle number
1 Bhakra
09
Chhindwara
06
144.469
Part
Junnardeo
2
77.241
Junnardeo
Nandna
16
04
Chhindwara
Part
Total : 221.710 hectares
(approximately)
or547.845 acres
(approximately) Plot number to be acquired in village Bhakra :
3 (P) , 4( P), 5 (P) , 6 ( P) , 7 ( P), 9 (P) , 26(P), 27 ( P) , 28 (P), 29 , 30(P) , 31 , 32, 33 , 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40 , 41 , 42, 43 , 44, 45, 46(P), 47/1 , 47/2 , 47/3 ,48, 49, 50, 51 , 52, 53/1 , 53/2 , 58/3 , 53/4 , 54, 55, 56, 57, 58 , 59, 60, 61 , 62/1 , 62/2 , 63 , 64/1 , 64/2, 64/3 , 64/4 , 65 , 66, 67,68 , 69, 70 , 71/1 , 71/2 , 72/1 , 72/2 , 72/3 , 72/4 , 72/5 , 72/6 , 72/7 , 72/8 , 72/9 , 73 , 74( P) , 75 , 76( P) , 77 , 78, 79 , 80, 81 , 82 , 83 , 84, 85 , 86, 87, 88, 89/ 1,89/2 , 90, 91 , 92, 93 , 94(P), 95 , 96(P) , 97(P) , 98 (P) , 101 ( P) , 102/1 , 102/2 , 102/3 , 103 , 104(P) , 105 ( P) , 106( P) , 107( P) , 108 ( P) , 175 ( P) , 176( P) , 177, 179( P) , 180(P) , 181 , 182, 183 , 184(P) ' , 209( P), 210 (P) , 212( P), 213( P), 215/1 ( P) , 215/2 .
Plot number to be acquired in village Nandna :
11 ( P), 12 , 13/1 (P) , 14( P) , 15(P) , 16( P) , 17(P) , 18/1 (P ), 18/2 , 18/3 , 18/4 (P) , 19, 20/1 , 20/2 , 21 , 22, 23 , 24 , 25 , 26, 27, 28, 29 , 30, 31 , 32 , 33 (P) , 35 (P), 42(P) , 46(P), 47(P) , 48 , 49(P) , 53 ( P) , 54/1 (P) , 54/2 (P), 54/3 , 54/4,55 , 56 , 57, 58(P) , 59/ 1,59/2 , 59/3 , 59/4,60, 61,62,63/1 , 63/2 , 64, 65, 66 ,67, 68, 69 , 70 , 71 , 72, 73 , 74, 75, 76 , 77 , 78/1 , 78/2 , 79 (P) , 88 (P), 89( P) , 90, 91/1 ( P) , 91/2 , 91/3 , 91/4 , 92, 93 , 94/1 , 94/2, 95 (P ), 96( P) , 98 (P), 99, 100, 101 , 102, 103 , 104(P), 105 (P) .
Boundary description :
' A' - ' B ' - ' C ' : Line starts from Point ' A' in village Bhakra and passes through plot numbers 98 (P) , 97 ( P), 96 ( P ), 101 ( P ), 96 (P) , 94 (P ), 175 (P) , and nearby point ' B ' and then proceeds through plot number 176 ( P) , along with the outer boundary ofplot number 177 and then passes through plot numbers 179( P), 180( P) , 182 ( P ) , 215/1 (P ) , 213 ( P), 212 (P) , 210(P) , 209 (P) and meets at Point ' C' .
' C ' -' D ' - ' E' : Line passes through village Bhakra through plot numbers 209 ( P) , 210( P) , 212( P) , along with the outer boundary ofplot number 182 , then proceeds through plot numbers 184 ( P) , 30 (P ) , 26 ( P ) , and passes nearby Point ' D' then again proceeds through plot number 26 ( P) , and meets at Point ' E' .
'E' - ' F ' - ' A' : Line passes through village Bhakra through plot numbers 26 ( P) , 184 ( P ) , 27 (P ) , 28 (P ) , 9( P) , 7 ( P), 6 (P ) , 5 ( P) , 4(P) , 3 (P ) , 74(P ) , crosses common village boundary of villages Bhakra and Nandna then passes through village Nandna and plot numbers 58 ( P) , 53 ( P) , 54/2 ( P) , 54/1 (P) , 49 (P) , 47 ( P), 42 (P) , 46 (P ), 33 (P) , 35(P) , 11 (P) , 13/1 , 13/2 (P) , 14(P) , 16 (P), 15 ( P ) , and passes nearby Point ' F ' then again passes . through plot numbers 15 (P) , 16(P) , 17 ( P) , 18/1 ( P), 18/4 (P) , 79 ( P) , 89 ( P) , 88 (P ) , 91/1 (P) , the along the outer boundary ofplot number 90 and then passes through plot numbers 91/1 ( P), 96(P) , 98 (P) , 105 (P) , 104 (P) , 58 ( P ) , crosses common village boundary 3099GI /10-6 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 21 , 2010/ SHRAVANA 30 , 1932
[PART II - SEC. 3 ( ii) ] of villages Nandna and village Bhakra then passes through village Bhakara along plot number 103 ( P ) , then proceeds through plot sumber 104 (P ) , 105 ( P ) , 106 ( P ) , 107 ( P) , 108 ( P ) , 101 ( P) , 98 ( P ) , and meets at starting Point' A' .
[ F.No. 43015 / 33 /2009 - PRIW - I ] M. SHAHABUDDIN , Under Secy.
नई दिल्ली , 12 अगस्त, 2010
का.आ. 2055.- केन्द्रीय सरकार ने कोयला धारक क्षेत्र ( अर्जन और विकास ) अधिनियम , 1957 ( 1957 की धारा 20 ) ( जिसे इसमें दृश्चात् उक्त अधिनियम कहा गया है ) की धारा 4 की उपधारा ( 1 ) के अधीन भारत सरकार ने कोयला मंत्रालय के द्वारा जारी की गई संख्या का. आ. 91 तारीख 9 जनवरी , 2009 , जो भारत के राजपत्र के भाग II , खंड-3 उपखंड ( ii ) तारीख 17 जनवरी , 2009 में शत की गई थी, उस अधिसूचना से संलग्न अनुसूची में विनिर्दिष्ट परिक्षेत्र की भूमि में जिसका माप 142.34 हेक्टर ( लगभग ) या 351.72 एकड़ ( लगभग ) है;
और केन्द्रीय सरकार का यह समाधान हो गया है कि इस अधिसूचना में संलग्न अनुसूची में विहित की गई उक्त भूमि के भाग में कोयला भिप्राप्त करना है ;
अत : अब , केन्द्रीय सरकार कोयला धारक क्षेत्र ( अर्जन और विकास ) अधिनियम , 1957 की धारा 7 की उपधारा ( 1 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए , उक्त भूमि का अर्जन करने की अपने आशय की सूचना देती है । इससे संलग्न अनुसूची में विहित 139.04 हेक्टर ( लगभग ) या 343.56 एकड़ ( लगभग ) माप वाली भूमि में या उस पर के सभी अधिकार ।
टिप्पण 1 : इस अधिसूचना के अधीन आने वाले क्षेत्र के रेखांक संख्या सी -1 ( ई ) III / जेजेएनआर/ 831-0510 , तारीख 29 मई , 2010 को जिला अधिकारी , यवतमाल ( महाराष्ट्र ) के कार्यालय में या कोयला नियंत्रक , 1 , काउंसिल हाउस स्ट्रीट , कोलकाता-700 001 के कार्यालय में या महाप्रबंधक , वेस्टर्न कोल फील्ड्स लिमिटेड ( राजस्व विभाग ) , कोल इस्टेट , सिविल लाईन्स , नागपुर -440 001 ( महाराष्ट्र) के कार्यालय में किया जा सकता है ।
टिचाल 2 : उक्त अधिनियम, की धारा 8 के उपबंधों की ओर ध्यान आकृष्ट किया जाता है, जिसमें निम्नलिखित उपबंध है : - अब बावत आपत्तियां :
काई व्यक्ति जो किसी भूमि में जिसकी बाबत धारा 7 के अधीन अधिसूचना निकाली गई है , हितबद्ध है , अधिसूचना के निकाले जाने से तीस दिनों के भीतर सम्पूर्ण भूमि या उसके किसी भाग या ऐसी भूमि में या उस पर के किन्हीं अधिकारों का अर्जन किए जाने के बारे में आपत्ति कर सकेगा ।
स्पष्टीकरण: -
( 1) इस धारा के अधीन यह आपत्ति नहीं मानी जाएगी , कि कोई व्यक्ति किसी भूमि में कोयला उत्पादन के लिए स्वयं खनन संक्रियाएं करना चाहता है और ऐसी संक्रियाए केन्द्रीय सरकार या किसी अन्य व्यक्ति को नहीं करनी चाहिए ।
(2) उपधारा ( 1 ) के अधीन प्रत्येक आपत्ति सक्षम प्राधिकारी को लिखित रूप में की जाएगी और सक्षम प्राधिकारी आपत्तिकर्ता को स्वयं सुने जाने का या विधि व लायी द्वारा सुनवाई का अवसर देगा और ऐसी सभी आपत्तियों को सुनने के पश्चात् और ऐसी अतिरिक्त जांच , बांद कोई हो , करने के पश्चात् जो वह आवश्यक समझता है , वह या तो धारा 7 की उपधारा ( 1 ) के अधीन अधिसूचित भूमि के या ऐसी भूमि में या उस पर के अधिकारों के संबंध में एक रिपोर्ट या ऐसी भूमि के विभिन्न टुकड़ों या ऐसी भूमि में या उस पर के अधिकारों के संबंध में आपत्तियों पर अपनी सिफारिशों और उसके द्वारा की गई कार्यवाही के अभिलेख सहित विभिन्न रिपोर्ट कंन्द्रीय सरकार को उसके विनिश्चय के लिए देगा ।
इस धारा के प्रयोजनों के लिए वह व्यक्ति किसी भूमि में हितबद्ध समझा जाएगा जो प्रतिकर में हित का दावा करने का हकदार होता , यदि भूमि या किसी ऐसी भूमि में या उस पर के अधिकार इस अधिनियम के अधीन अर्जित कर लिए जाते हैं । " टिप्पण 3 : केन्द्रीय सरकार ने कोयला नियंत्रक ,, काउंसिल हाउस स्ट्रीट , कोलकाता -700 001 को उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 3 के अधीन अधिसूचना सं. का. आ. 2519 , तारीख 27 मई , 1983 द्वारा भारत के राजपत्र , भाग- II खंड 3 , उपखंड ( ii ) , तारीख 11 जून , 1983 द्वारा प्रकाशित को सक्षम प्राधिकारी द्वारा नियुक्त किया जाता है । अनुसूची
जुनाड एक्सटेंशन ब्लॉक
वणी नार्थ क्षेत्र
जिला- यवतमाल ( महाराष्ट्र)
(रेखांक संख्या सी-1 ( ई ) III /जेजेएनआर/ 831-0510 , तारीख 29 मई , 2010 )
खनन अधिकार :
क्र. स.
ग्राम का नाम
तहसील
पटवारी सर्किलं संख्या
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4) 1 .
बोरगांव
33
वणी 2.
33
वणी जुनाडा
3.
33
पिंपलगांव
वणी ग्राम बोरगांव में अर्जित किए जाने वाले प्लाट संख्याक :
जिला
टिप्पणियां
क्षेत्रफल हेक्टर में
(5)
(6)
(7) यवतमाल
22.70
भाग यवतमाल
98.34
भाग यवतमाल
18.00
भाग
कुल : 139.04 हेक्टर ( लगभग )
या
343.56 एकड़ ( लगभग ) 78 , 103 , 104/1 , 104/ 1 ए , 104/2 , 105/1 , 105/2 , 106/1 , 106/2 , 107/1 , 107/2 , 107/3 , 107/4 , 121 , 122 1
ग्राम जुनाडा में अर्जित किए जाने वाले प्लाट संख्याक :
24/1 , 24/2 , 28 , 29/1 , 29/2 , 30/1 , 30/2 , 31 ( भाग ) , 32/1 , 32/2 , 32/3 , 32/4 , 33/1 , 33/2 , 34 , 35 , 36 , 37 , 38/1 , 38/2 , 39/1 , 39/2 , 39/3 , 40 , 41 , 43/1 , 43/2 , 43/3 , 43/4 , 44/1 , 44/2 , 45 , 46 , 47 , 48 , 49/1 , 49/2 , 49/3 , 50 , 51 , 52 , 53 , 54/ 1 ए, 54/1 बी . 54 / 2 ए , 54 / 2 बी , 55 , 56/1 , 56/2 , 57 ( भाग ) , 61 , 62 , 63/1 , 63/2 64 , 65 , 68/1 , 68/2 , 68/3 , 68/4 , 70/ 1 ए , 70/ 1 बी , 70/2 , 70/3 , 70/4 , 71 , सड़क ।
ग्राम पिंपलगांव में अर्जित किए जाने वाले प्लाट संख्याक :
147 , 148 , 149 , 150/1 , 150/2 , 150/3 , 151/1 , 151/2 , 152/1 , 152/2 , सड़क ।
सीमा वर्णन :
क-ख
रेखा बिन्दु " क " ग्राम बोरगांव और ग्राम जुनाडा की सम्मिलित ग्राम सीमा से आरंभ होती है और ग्राम बोरगांव से होते हुए प्लाट संख्यांक 78 , 103 , 104/1 , 104 / 1 ए , 104/2 , 105/1 , 122 , 121 , 107/3 , 107/4 , की बाह्य सीमा से लगकर गुजरते हुए बिन्दु " ख " पर ग्राम बोरगांव और ग्राम जुनाडा की सम्मिलित ग्राम सीमा पर मिलती है ।
ख- ग - घ रेखा ग्राम जुनाडा से प्लाट संख्या 43/4 की बाह्य सीमा से लगकर गुजरती है और बिन्दु " ग " के पास से गुजरते हुए प्लाट संख्या 41 की बाह्य सीमा से लगकर गुजरते हुए बिन्दु " घ " पर ग्राम जुनाडा और ग्राम पिंपलगांव की सम्मिलित ग्राम सीमा पर मिलती है ।
घड रेखा ग्राम पिंपलगांव से प्लाट संख्यांक 148 , 147 , 150/1 , 150/2 , 150/3 , 151/2 , 152/2 की बाह्य सीमा से लगकर गुजरती है और बिन्दु " ड. " पर ग्राम पिंपलगांव और ग्राम जुनाडा की सम्मिलित ग्राम सीमा पर मिलती है ।
ड -च - छ - ज- क रेखा ग्राम जुनाडा में प्लाट संख्यांक 24/2 , 24/1 , 28 की बाह्य सीमा से लगकर गुजरती है फिर प्लाट संख्या 31 से होकर गुजरती है और सड़क पार करती है फिर प्लाट संख्या 57 से होकर गुजरती है फिर प्लाट संख्यांक 57 , 54 / 1 ए , 61 , 63/2 , 71 , 70/4 . 70/3 , 70/2 , 70 / 1 बी , 70 / 1 ए , 68/3 , 68/2 , 68/1 , की बाह्य सीमा से लगकर गुजरती है फिर बिन्दु " छ " के पास से गुजरते हुए फिर प्लाट संख्यांक 68/1 , 68/2 , 68/3 ,68/4 , 70/ 1 ए , 70/ 1 बी , 65 की बाह्य सीमा से गुजरते हुए बिन्दु " ज " से लगकर गुजरती है और फिर प्लाट संख्यांक 64 , 63/2 , 63/1 , 52 , 51 की बाह्य सीमा से लगकर गुजरती है और आरंभिक बिन्दु " क " पर मिलती है ।
[फा.सं. 43015 / 21 /2008 - पीआरआई ]
एम. शहाबुद्दीन , अ सचिव PRE SEC. 3 ( 1 ) ] 5104
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA . AUS 21 , 2010 / SHRAVAN 192
New Delhi the 12th August , 2010
5.0. 2055.-- Whereas , by the notification of the Government of Indin the Ministry of Coal number S. O. 91 dated the 9th January , 2009 , issued under sub - section ( 1 ) of Section 4 of the Coal Bearing Areas ( Acquisition and Development ) Act , 1957 ( 20 of 1957 ) (hereinafter referred to as the said Act ) and publisned in the Gazette of India, Part II , Section - 2, Sub - Secnon . ( ii ) dated the 17th January , 2009 , the Central Government gave notice of its intention to prospect for coal in 142.34 hectares ( approximately ) or 351.72 acres ( approximately ) me lands in the locality specified in the Schedule annexed to that notification ;
And whereas , the Central Government is satisfied that coal is obtainable a part of said lands prescribed in the schedule appended to this notification ;
Now , therefore , in exercise of the powers conferred by sub- section ( 1 ) of Section 7e Coal Gearmy areas (Acquisition and Development ) Act , 1957 the Central Government hereby gives notice of its intention to arquire all nights in or over the land measuring 139.04 hectares ( approximately ) or 343.56 acres ( approxırnately ) discribed in the Schedda appended hereto.
Note 1 : The plan bearing number C - 1 ( E ) III / JJNR/ 831-0510 , dated the 29th May 2010 of the area covered by this notification may be inspected in the office of the Collector , Yavatmal ( Maharashtra ) or in the office of the al Controller , 1 , Council House Street , Kolkata (Pin - 700 001 ) in at the office of the General Manager. Wesen Coalfields Limited ( Revenue Department ) , Coal Estate , Civil Lines , Nagpur - 440001 ( Maharashtra ) .
Note 2: Attention is hereby invited to the provisions of Section 8 of the said Act which provides as follows Objections to Acquisition :
"8( 1 ) Any person interested in any land in respect of which a notification under Section 7 has beer.red within thirty days of the issue of the notification , object to the acquisition of the whole or any part of the land or of any rights in or over such land .
Explanation:
(1) It shall not be an objection within the meaning of this section for any person to say that he himself desires to undertake mining operations in the land for the production of coal and that such operations should not be undertaken by the Central Government or by any other person .
Every objection under sub - section ( 1 ) shall be made to the competent authority in writing , and the co ...petent authority shall give the objector an opportunity of being heard either in person or by a legal practitioner and shall , after hearing all such objections and after making such further inquiry , if any , as he thinks necessary , either make a report in respect of the land which has been notified under sub - section ( 1 ) of Section 7 or of rights in or over such land , or make different reports in respect of different parcels of such land or of rights in or over such land , to the Central Government , containing his recommendations on the objections , together with the record of proceedings held by him , for the decision of that Government .
(3) For the purpose of this section , a person shall be deemed to be interested in land who would be entitied to Jaim an interest in compensation if the land or any rights in or over such land were acquired under this Act. " Note3: The Coal Controller , 1 , Council House Street , Kolkata - 700 001 has been appointed by the Central Government as the competent authority under se tion 3 of the said Act , vide notification number S.O. 2519 , dated the 27th May , 1983 , published in Part - II , Section 3 , Sub- Section ( ii ) , the Gazette of India , dated the 11th June , 1983
SCHEDULE
JUNAD EXTENSION BLOCK WANI NORTH AREA DISTRICT YAVATMAL (MAHARASHTRA) (Plan bearing number: C - 1 ( E) III/ JJNR/ 831-0510 , dated the 29th May , 2010 )
ALL RIGHTS:
Tahsil
District
Remarks
Area in Hectares
S1. No.
Name of village
Patwari Circle number
33
Wani
Yavatmal
22.70
1.
2.
33
98.34
Borgaon Junada
Wani
Yavatmal
Part Part Part 33
Wani
Yavatmal
18.00
3.
Pimpalgaon
Total: 139.4 hectares
(approx . 343.56 acres
(approximately ) भारत का राजपत्र अगस्त 21 , 2010/ श्रावण 30 , 1932
[भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]
Plot number to be acquired in village Boragaon :
78, 103 , 104/1 , 104/ 1A, 104/2 , 105/1 , 105/2 , 106/1 , 106/2 , 107/1 , 107/2 , 107/3 , 107/4 , 121 , 122 .
Plot number to be acquired in village Junada :
24/1,24/ 2 , 28 , 29/1 , 29/2 , 30/1 , 30/2 , 31 ( P ) , 32/1 , 32/2 , 2/3 , 32/4 , 33/1 , 33/2 , 34 , 35 , 36, 37 , 38/1 , 38/2 , 39 / 1,39 /2, 39/3 , 40, 41 , 43/1 , 43/2 , 43/3 , 43/4 , 44/1 , 44/2 , 45 , 46, 47, 48 , 49 ,/ 1 , 49/2 , 49/3 , 50 , 51 , 52 , 53 , 54 / 1A , 54/ 1B , 54/ 2A, 54/ 2B , 55 , 56/1 , 56/2 , 57 ( P ) , 61 , 62 , 63/1 , 63/2 , 64 , 65 , 68/1 , 68/2 , 68/3 , 68/4 , 70 / 1A , 70 / 1B , 70/2 , 70/3 , 70/4 , 71 , Road
Plot number to be acquired in village Pimpalgaon :
147 , 148 , 149 , 150/1 , 150/2 , 150/3 , 151/1 , 151/2 , 152/1 , 152/2 , Road .
Boundary description :
A-B :
Line start from Point ' A ' on the common boundary of villages Borgaon and Junada and passes through village Borgaon along the outer boundary of plot numbers 78 , 103 , 104/1 , 104/ 1A , 104/2 , 105/1 , 122 , 121 , 107/3 , 107/4 and meets at Point ' B ' on the common boundary of villages Borgaon and Junada .
B-C-D:
Line passes through village Junada along the outer boundary of plot number 43/4 and passes nearby Point ' C' then passes outer boundary of plot number 41 and meets at Point ' D ' on common boundary of villages Junada and Pimpalgaon .
D- E: Line passes through village Pimpalgaon along the outer boundary of plot numbers 148 , 147, 150/1 , 150/2 , 150/3 , 151/2 , 152/2 and meets at Point ' E ' on common boundary of villages Pimpalgaon and Junada .
E - F-G - H - A: Line passes through village Junada along the outer boundary of plot numbers 24/2 , 24/1 , 28 then passes through plot number 31 , crosses road, again passes through plot number 57 then passes along the . outer boundary ofplot numbers 57 , 54 / 1A , 61 , 63/2 , 71 , 70/4 , 70/3 , 70/2 , 70 / 1B , 70/ 1A, 68/3 , 68/2 ; 68/1 , then passes nearby Point ' G ' and again passes along with the outer boundary of plot 68/1 , 68/2 , 68/3 , 68/4 , 70 / 1A , 70 / 1B , 65 , then passes nearby Point ' H ' and along with , the outer boundary of plot numbers 64 , 63/2 , 63/1 , 52 , 51 , and meets at starting Point ' A ' .
[F.No. 43015/21 /2008 - PRIW - I ] M. SHAHABUDDIN , Under Secy.
नई दिल्ली , 12 अगस्त, 2010
का.आ. 2056.-केन्द्रीय सरकार ने कोयला धारक क्षेत्र ( अर्जन और विकास ) अधिनियम , 1957 ( 1957 का 20 ) ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त अधिनियम कहा गया है ) की धारा 4 की उपधारा ( 1 ) के अधीन भारत सरकार ने कोयला मंत्रालय के द्वारा जारी की गई अधिसूचना संख्या का. आ. 368 , तारीख 4 फरवरी , 2009 , जो भारत के राजत्र के भाग II , खंड -3 उपखंड ( ii ) तारीख 14 फरवरी , 2009 में प्रकाशित की गई थी , उस अधिसूचना से संलग्न अनुसूची में विनिर्दिष्ट परिक्षेत्र की भूमि में जिसका माप 476.86 हेक्टर ( लगभग ) या 1778.36 एकड़ ( लगभग ) है;
और केन्द्रीय सरकार का यह समाधान हो गया है कि इस अधिसूचना से संलग्न अनुसूची में विहित उक्त भूमि में कोयला अभिप्राप्त है ;
अत : अब , केन्द्रीय सरकार , कोयला धारक क्षेत्र ( अर्जन और विकास ) अधिनियम , 1957 की धारा 7 की उपधारा ( 1 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए , उक्त भूमि का अर्जन करने की अपने आशय की सूचना देती है । इससे संलग्न अनुसूची में वर्णित 467.21 हेक्टर ( लगभग ) या 1154.51 एकड़ ( लगभग ) माप वाली भूमि में या उस पर के सभी अधिकार ।
टिप्पण 1 : इस अधिसूचना के अधीन आने वाले क्षेत्र के रेखांक संख्या सी -1 ( ई ) III / जेआर/ 820-0410 , तारीख 5 अप्रैल , 2010 को जिला अधिकारी , यवतमाल ( महाराष्ट्र ) के कार्यालय में या कोयला नियंत्रक , 1 , काउंसिल हाउस स्ट्रीट , कोलकाता -700 001 के कार्यालय में या महाप्रबंधक , वेस्टर्न कोल फील्ड्स लिमिटेड ( राजस्व विभाग ) , कोल इस्टेट , सिविल लाईन्स , नागपुर -440 001 ( महाराष्ट्र ) के कार्यालय में किया जा सकता है ।
टिप्पण 2 : कोयला धारक क्षेत्र ( अर्जन और विकास ) अधिनियम , 1957 ( 1957 का 20 ) की धारा 8 के उपबंधों की ओर ध्यान आकृष्ट किया जाता है , जिसमें निम्नलिखित उपबंध है : -
अर्जन की बावत आपत्तियां :
"8( 1) कोई व्यक्ति जो किसी भूमि में जिसकी बाबत धारा 7 के अधीन अधिसूचना निकाली गई है , हितबद्ध है , अधिसूचना के निकाले जाने से तीस दिनों के भीतर सम्पूर्ण भूमि या उसके किसी भाग या ऐसी भूमि में या उस पर के किन्हीं अधिकारों का अर्जन किए जाने के बारे में आपत्ति कर सकेगा । स्पष्टाकरण : -
(1) इस धारा के अधीन यह आपत्ति नहीं मानी जाएगी , कि कोई व्यक्ति किसी भूमि में कोयला उत्पादन के लिए स्वयं खनन संक्रियाएं करना चाहता है और ऐसी संक्रियाएं केन्द्रीय सरकार या किसी अन्य व्यक्ति को नहीं करनी चाहिए ।
(2) उपधारा ( 1 ) के अधीन प्रत्येक आपत्ति सक्षम प्राधिकारी को लिखित रूप में की जाएगी और सक्षम प्राधिकारी आपत्तिकर्ता को रत्रयं सुने जाने का या विधि व्यवसायी द्वारा सुनवाई का अवसर देगा और ऐसी सभी आपत्तियों को सुनने के पश्चात् और ऐसी अतिरिक्त जांच , यदि कोई हो, करने के पश्चात् जो वह आवश्यक समझता है , वह या तो धारा 7 की उपधारा ( 1 ) के अधीन अधिसूचित भूमि के या ऐसी भूमि में या उस पर के अधिकारों के संबंध में एक रिपोर्ट या ऐसी भूमि के विभिन्न टुकड़ों या ऐसी भूमि में या उस पर के अधिकारों के संबंध में आपत्तियों पर अपनी सिफारिशों और उसके द्वारा की गई कार्यवाही के अभिलेख सहित विभिन्न रिपोर्ट केन्द्रीय सरकार को उसके विनिश्चय के लिए देगा ।
( 3) इस धारा के प्रयोजनों के लिए वह व्यक्ति किसी भूमि में हितबद्ध समझा जाएगा जो प्रतिकर में हित का दावा करने का हकदार होता, यदि भूमि या किसी ऐसी भूमि में या उस पर कि अधिकार इस अधिनियम के अधीन अर्जित कर लिए जाते हैं । "
टिप्पण 3 : केन्द्रीय सरकार ने कोयला नियंत्रक, 1 , काउंसिल हाउस स्ट्रीट , कोलकाता -700 001 को उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 3 के अधीन अधिसूचना सं. का.आ. 2519 , तारीख 27 मई , 1983 जो भारत के राजपत्र , भाग -11 खंड 3 , उपखंड ( ii ) , में ।। जून 1983 को प्रकाशित हुई थी , द्वारा को सक्षम प्राधिकारी नियुक्त किया है ।
अनुसूची
भटाडी विस्तार ओपनकास्ट खान
चन्द्रपुर क्षेत्र
जिला- चन्द्रपुर ( महाराष्ट्र )
[ रेखांक संख्या सी -1 ( ई ) III/जेआर/820-0410 , तारीख 5 अप्रैल , 2010 ]
सभी अधिकार :
क्र. सं.
तहसील ग्राम का नाम
पटवारी सर्किल संख्या
(4)
(3)
( 1)
(2)
1 .
12
पायली भटाडी
चन्द्रपुर 2.
12
किटाडी ( राय )
चन्द्रपुर
11
3.
चन्द्रपुर चांदलासुर्ला
भद्रावती 4.
तिरवंजा चक
34
ग्राम पायली भटाडी में अर्जित किए जाने वाले प्लाट संख्यांक:
जिला
टिप्पणियां
क्षेत्रफल हेक्टर में
(6)
(7) (5)
भाग
270.04
चन्द्रपुर
भाग
51.14
चन्द्रपुर
68.15
भाग चन्द्रपुर
भाग
77.88
चन्द्रपुर
कुल : 467.21 हेक्टर ( लगभग )
या
1154.51 एकड़ ( लगभग) 44, 45 , 46 , 47/1 , 47/2 , 47/3 , 47/4 , 48 , 49 , 50 , 51 , 52 , 53 , 54 , 55 , 56/1 , 56/2 , 59/1 , 59/2 , 60 , 61 , 62 , 63 , 64 , 65, 66 , 67 , 68 , 69/1 , 69/ 2 क , 69/2ख , 69/3 , 70/1 , 70/2 , 70/3 , 70/4 , 70/5 , 71/1 , 71 / 1 ख , 71/2 , 71/3 , 71/4 , 72/ 1 क , 72/2 , 72/2बी , 72/3 , 73 , 74 , 75 , 76 , 77 , 78 , 79 , 80 , 81/1 , 81 / 1 ए, 81/2 , 81/3 , 98 , 99/1 , 99/2 , 99/3 , 99/4 , 99/5 , 100 , 101/1 , 101/2 , 102/1 , 102/2 , 102/3 , 113 , 114 , 115 , 116 , 117 , 118 , 119/1 , 119/2 , 119/3 , 123 , 124/1 , 124/2 , 125/1 , 125/2 , 125/3 , 176 , 177 , 178 , 179 , 180 , 181 , 199/1 , 200 , 201 , 202 , 203 , 204 , 205/1 , 206 ( सरकारी ) , 206/1 , 206/2 , 206/3 , 206/4 , 206/5 , 206/6 , 206/7 , 206/8 , 206/9 , 206/10 , 206/11 , 206/12 , 206/13 , 206/14 , 206/15 , 206/16 , 206/17 , 207 , 208/1 , 209/1 , 210 , 211 , 212 , 213 , 214/1 , 214/ 2 क , 214/3 ख , 215 , 216/ 1 क , 216/ 1 ख , 216/2 , 216/3 , 217/1 , 217/2 , 218 , 219/1 , 219/2 , 220/1 , 220/2 , 220/3.220/4क , 220/4ख , 221 , 222/1 , 222/2 , 223/1 , 223/2 , 224/1 , 224/2 , 224/3 , 224/4 , 224/5 , 224/6 , 224/7 , 225 , 226/1 , 226 / 1 क , 226/1 ख , 226/ 1 ग , 226/ 2 क , 226/2 ख , 226/21 , 226/2 , 227/1 , 228/1 , 228/2 , 228/3 , 229 , 230 , 231/1 , 232 , 233 , 234 , 235/1 , 235/2 , 236 , 237/1 , 237/2 , 238/1 , 238/2 , 238/3 , 239/1 , 239/2 , 240/1 , 240/2 , 241 , 242/1 , 242/2 , 242/3 , 242/4 , 243, 244, 245, 246/1 क, 5107
का राजपत्र अगस्त 21, 2010/ श्रावण 30 , 1932
[भाग ! I- खण्ड 3 (i)]
246/2ख , 247 , 247/2 , 248/ 1 क , 248/2 , 245/2 ख , 249 , 250 , 251 , ( वन ) , 252 , 253 , 254 , 255 ( सरकारी ) , 256/1 , 256/2 , 256/3 , 256/4 , 257/ 1,257/2 , 258 , ( सरकारी ) , 259 , 260 , 261 , 262 , 263 , 264/1 , 264/2 , 264/3 , 264/4 , 265/1 , 265/2 , 266/ 1 क , 266/ 1 ख , 266/ 2,266/3 , 266/4 , 266 / 4 क , 266/5 ( सरका 267/1 , 267/2 आबादी ( भाग ) , सड़क ( भाग ) , नदी ( भाग ) , नाला ( भाग ) , । ग्राम किटाडी ( राय ) में अर्जित किए जाने वाले 'लाट संख्यांक :
18, 19 , 20/1 , 20/1 ख , 20/2 , 20/3 , 21 / 1.21/ 2 , 21/3 , 22/1 , 22/2 , 22/3 , 23 , 24 , 25 , 26 , 27/1 , 27/2 , 28 , 29 , 34/1 , 34/2 , 34/3 , 34/4 , 34/5 , सड़क ( भाग ) , नाला ( भाग ) , नदी ( भाग ) ।
ग्राम चंदलासुर्ला में अर्जित किए आने वाले प्लाट संख्यांक:
15 , 71/6 , 71/7 , 79 , 80 , 81 , 82 , 83 , 84/1 , 84/2 , 85 , 86 / 1 क , 86 / 1 ख , 91 , 92/ 1 क , 92/ 1 ख , 92/2 ( सड़क ) , 93/1 , 93/2 , ( सड़क ) , 94/1 , 94/2 3 , 104 , 105 , नाला ( भाग ) । 63/1 , 63/2 , 64 , 65 , 71/1 , 71/2 , 71/3 , 71/4, 86/17 , 86/2 , 87/1 , 87/2 , 87/3 , 88/1 , 88/2 , 88/3 , 89 , 9 . (सडक ) , 97 , 98/1 , 98/2 , 99 , 100 , 101/1 , 101/2 , 102 ,
ग्राम तिरवंजा चक में अर्जित किए जाने वाले प्लाट संख्यांक :
124/1 , 124/2 , 124/3 , 124/4 , 124/5 , 135/1 , 135/2 , 16 , 137 , 138/1 , 138/2 , 138/3 , 139 , 140/1 , 140/2 , 142/1 , 142/2 , 142/3 , 176/1 , 176/2 , 177 , 178/1 , 178/2 , 178/3 , 191 , 192 , 193, 194 , 195 , 196 , 197 , 198 , 199/1 , 199/2 , 200 , 201 / 1 क , 201 / 1 ख , 201/2 , 202 , 204/1 , 204/2 , 204/3 , 205/1 , 205/2 , 2081
सीमा वर्णन :
क-ख
रेखा बिन्दु " क " से आरंभ होती है और ग्राम तिरवंजा चक के प्लाट संख्यांक 142/1 , 176/1 की बाह्य सीमा से गुजरती है और ग्राम तिरवंजा चक तथा ग्राम पायली भटाडी की सम्मलित ग्राम सीमा को पार करती हुई ग्राम पायली भटाडी के प्लाट संख्यांक 52 , 51 की बाह्य सीमा के साथ गुजरती है और एक पार करती हुई प्लाट संख्यांक 47/1 , 46 , 45 , 44 की बाह्य सीमा के साथ गुजरती हुई बिन्दु " ख " पर मिलती है ।
ख- ग
रेखा ग्राम पायली भटाडी से प्लाट संख्यांक 44 , 70/1 , 71/1 , 72/1 क , 102/1 की बाह्य सीमा से गुजरती हुई सड़क पार करती है और सड़क तथा प्लाट संख्या 113 की बाह्य सीमा के साथ गुजरती हुई पुनः सड़क पार करती है और प्लाट संख्यांक 267/1 , 266/ 1 क , 266/ 1 ख , 266/2 , 266/5 की बाह्य सीमा से गुजरती हुई इराई नदी तथा ग्राम पायली भटाडी एवं ग्राम किटाडी की सम्मिलित ग्राम सीमा को पार करती है और ग्राम किटाहो में प्लाट संख्यांक 34/1 , 34/2 , 34/3 , 34/4 , 34/5 की बाह्य सीमा से गुजरती हुई बिन्दु " ग " पर मिलती है ।
ग -घ
रेखा ग्राम किटाडी से प्लाट संख्यांक 34/5 , 29 नाला , 18 , 19 , 20/1 , 20/ 1 ख , 20/3 , की बाह्य सीमा से गुजरती हुई नाला पार इराई नदी की बाह्य सीमा के साथ गुजरती हुई बिन्दु " घ " पर मिलती है ।
घ -ड.
रेखा ग्राम किटाडी से गुजरती हुई इराई नदी तथा ग्राम किटाडी और ग्राम पायली भटाडी की सम्मिलित ग्राम सीमा को पार करती हुई ग्राम पायली भटाडी में इराई नदी तथा प्लाट संख्यांक 225 , 224/6 , 224/7 , 223/1 , 223/2 की बाह्य सीमा से गुजरती हुई ग्राम पायली भटाडी एवं ग्राम चांदलासुर्ला की सम्मिलित ग्राम सीमा को पार करती हुई ग्राम चांदलासुर्ला से इराई नदी तथा प्लाट संख्यांक 101/1 , 101/2 , 102 , 103 , 104 , 105 की बाह्य सीमा से गुजरती हुई बिन्दु " ङ " पर मिलती है । ड. च
रेखा ग्राम चांदलासुर्ला से प्लाट संख्यांक 105 , 99 , 98/2 , 97 , 94/1 , की बाह्य सीमा के साथ रास्ता पार करती हुई प्लाट संख्यांक 93/1 , 63/2 , 63/1 , 64 , 65 , 86/2 , 86/ 1 ख , 71/6 , 71/7 बाह्य सीमा से गुजरती हुई ग्राम चांदलासुर्ला तथा ग्राम तिरवंजा चक की सम्मिलित ग्राम सीमा को पार करती हुई ग्राम तिरवंजा चक के प्लाट संख्यांक 205/2 , 205/1 , 208 , 200 की बाह्य सीमा से गुजरती हुई बिन्दु " च " पर मिलती है ।
च -छ
रेखा ग्राम तिरवंजा चक से सड़क तथा प्लाट संख्यांक 200 , 199/2 , 199/1 , 198 , 197 , 196 , 195 , 124/1 , 124/5 , की बाह्य सीमा से गुजरती हुई बिन्दु " छ ' पर मिलती है ।
छ-ज
रेखा ग्राम तिरवंजा चक से सड़क प्लाट संख्यांक 124/5 , 124/4 , 191 , 192 , 193 , 202 , 204/1 की बाह्य सीमा से गुजरती हुई ग्राम तिरवंजा चक तथा ग्राम चांदलासुर्ला की सम्मिलित ग्राम सीमा को पार करती हुई ग्राम चांदलासुर्ला के प्लाट संख्यांक 71/1 , 71/2 , की बाह्य सीमा से गुजरती हुई नाला पार कर प्लाट संख्यांक 79 , 80 , 81 , 83 , 84/1 , 84/2 , 88/1 , की बाह्य सीमा के साथ गुजरती हुई बिन्दु " ज " पर मिलती है ।
ज-झ
रेखा ग्राम पायली भटाडी से प्लाट संख्यांक 202 , 201 , 200 , 199/1 , 205/1 , 208/1 , 209/1 की बाह्य सीमा के साथ गुजरती हुई सड़क पार कर प्लाट संख्यांक 231/1 , 228/1 , 228/2 , 228/3 , 227/1 , 266 / 2 क , 226 / 2 ख , 262 / 2 ग , 226/2 तथा इराई नदी की बाह्य सीमा के साथ गुजरती हुई बिन्दु " झ " पर मिलती है । 5108
[PART 11- SEC. 3 ( ii ) ] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 21 , 2010 / SHRAVANA 30 , 1932
झ -ञ रेखा ग्राम पायली भटाडी से प्लाट संख्यांक 240/2 , 239/2 , 238/3 , 237/2 , 237/1 , 236 , 232 की बाह्य सीमा से गुजरती हुई सड़क पार करती है और प्लाट संख्यांक 207 , 206 , 181 की बाह्य सीमा के साथ गुजरती हुई बिन्दु " ञ " पर मिलती है ।
ञ - ट रेखा ग्राम पायली भटाडी से प्लाट संख्यांक 181 177 , 125/3 , 125/2 , 125/1 , 123 तथा सड़क संख्यांक 98 , 99/5 , 99/4 , 99/3 , 99/2 , 99/1 की बाह्य सीमा से गुजरती हुई सड़क पार करती है और प्लाट संख्यांक 176 , की बाह्य सीमा से गुजरती हुई प्लाट संख्या 119/3 को पार करती हुई प्लाट की बाह्य सीमा के साथ गुजरती हुई बिन्दु " ट " पर मिलती है । ਟ- ਰ रेखा ग्राम पायली भटाडी से प्लाट संख्यांक 75 , 76 , 77 , 78 , 79 , 80 , 81 / 1 क , 81/3 तथा सड़क एवं प्लाट संख्यांक 59/2 , 59/1 , 56/2 की बाह्य सीमा के साथ तथा ग्राम पायली भटाडी एवं ग्राम तिरवंजा चक की सम्मिलित ग्राम सीमा से गुजरती हुई ग्राम तिरवंजा चक के प्लाट संख्यांक 178/1 , 178/2 , 178/3 , 138/3 , 138/1 , 137 , 136 , 135/2 की बाह्य सीमा के साथ गुजरती है और बिन्दु " ठ " पर मिलती है ।
ठ-क रेखा ग्राम तिरवंजा मोकासा और ग्राम तिरवंजा चक की सम्मिलित ग्राम सीमा से गुजरती हुई ग्राम तिरवंजा चक के प्लाट संख्यांक 135/2 , 135/1 , 140/2 , 140/1 , 142/3 , 142/2 , 142/1 , की बाह्य सीमा के साथ गुजरती हुई आरंभिक बिन्दु " क " पर मिलती है ।
[ फा.सं. 43015 / 27/2008- पीआरआईडब्ल्यू-1 ]
एम. शहाबुद्दीन , अवर सचिव
New Delhi , the 12th August , 2010
S.O. 2056. Whereas , by the notification of the Government of India in the Ministry of Coal number S. O. 368 dated the lth February , 2009 , issued under sub - section ( 1 ) of Section 4 of the Coal Bearing Areas ( Acquisition and Development ) Act , 1957 ( 20 of 1957 ) ( hereinafter referred to as the said Act) and published in the Gazette of India , Part II , Section - 3 , sub - section ( ii ) dated the 14th February, 2009 , the Central Government gave notice of its intention to prospect for coal am 476.86 hectares ( approximately ) or 1178.36 acres ( approximately) of the lands in the locality specified in the Schedule amexed to that notification ;
And, whereas , the Central Government is satisfied that coal is obtainable in a part of the said lands prescribed in the Schedule appended to this notification ;
Now, therefore , in exercise of the powers conferred by sub - section ( 1 ) of Section 7 of the Coal Bearing Areas (Acquisition and Development ) Act , 1957 the Central Government hereby gives notice of its intention to acquire the lands measuring 467.21 hectares ( approximately ) or 1154.51 acres ( approximately) in all rights as described in the Schedule appended hereto.
Note 1: The plan bearing number C - 1 ( E ) III / JR / 820-0410 dated the 5thApril , 2010 of the area covered by this notifi- cation may be inspected at the office of the Collector , Chandrapur ( Maharashtra ) or at the office of the Coal Controller , 1 , Council House Street , Kolkata ( Pin - 700001 ) or at the office of the General Manager , Western Coalfields Limited ( Revenue Department ) , Coal Estate , Civil Lines , Nagpur - 440001 ( Maharashtra ) .
Note 2: Attention is hereby invited to the provisions of Section 8 of the said Act which provides as follows :
Objections to Acquisition :
"8( 1 ) Any person interested in any land in respect of which a notification under section 7 has been issued , may, within thirty days of the issue of the notification , object to the acquisition of the whole or any part of the land or of any rights in or over such land .
Explanation:
(1) It shall not be an objection within the meaning of this Section for any person to say that he himself desires to undertake mining operation in the land for the production of coal and that such operation should not be undertake by the Central Government or by any other person .
(2) Every objection under sub - section ( 1 ) shall be made to the competent authority in writing , and the competent authority shall give the objector an opportunity of being heard either in person or by a legal practitioner and shali , after hearing ail such objections and after making such further inquiry , if any , as he thinks necessary . either make a report in respect of the land which has been notified under sub - section ( 1 ) of Section 7 or of rights in or over such land , or make different reports in respect of different parcels of such land or of rights in or over such land , to the Central Government , containing his recommendations on the objections , together with the record of proceedings held by him , for the decision of that Government .
5109 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]
भारत का राजपत्र अगस्त 21, 2010/ श्रावण 30 , 1932
(3)
For the purpose of this section, a person shall be deemed to be interested in land who would be entitled to claim an interest in compensation if the land or any rights in or over such land were acquired under this Act. " Note 3 : The Coal Controller , 1 , Council House Street , Kolkata - 700 001 has been appointed by the Central Government as the competent authority under section 3 of the said Act , vide notification number S.O. 2519 dated the 27th May, 1983 , published in Part- II , Section 3 , sub - section ( ii ) of the Gazette of India , dated the 11th June, 1983.
SCHEDULE
BHATADI EXPANSION OPENCAST MINE
CHANDRAPUR AREA
DISTRICT CHANDRAPUR ( MAHARASHTRA )
(PlanNumber C - I ( E ) III/JR/ 820 - ' 0410 dated the 5th April, 2010 )
ALL RIGHTS :
District
Remarks
Tahsil
Area in Hectares
SI . No.
Name of village
Patwari Circle number
12
270.04
Paili Bhatadi
Part 1.
Chandrapur
Chandrapur
12
Part 2.
51.14
Kitadi (Rai )
Chandrapur
Chandrapur
Part 11
68.15
3.
Chandlasurla
Chandrapur
Chandrapur
77.88
4.
Part
Bhadrawati
34
TirwanjaChak
Chandrapur
Total: 467.21 hectares
(approximately)
or
1154.51 acres
(approximately) Plot numbers to be acquired in village Paili Bhatadi :
44,45,46, 47/1 , 47/2 , 47/3 , 47/4, 48 , 49, 50, 51 , 52, 53 , 54 , 55 , 56/1 , 56/2, 59/1 , 59/2 , 60, 61 , 62, 63 , 64, 65 , 66, 67, 68, 69/1 , 69/2A, 69/2B, .69/3 , 70/1 , 70/2,70/ 3,70 /4,70 / 5 , 71/1 , 71 / 1B, 71/2 , 71/3 , 71/4, 72/ 1A, 72/2 , 72/ 2B, 72/3 , 73 , 74, 75, 76, 77, 78, 79, 80, 81/1 , 81 / 1A, 81/2 , 81/3 , 98 , 99/1 , 99/2 , 99/3,99/4,99/5 , 100, 101/1 , 101/2 , 102/1 , 102/2 , 102/3 , 113 , 114, 115, 116, 117, 118 , 119/1 , 119/2 , 119/3 , 123 , 124/1 , 124/2 , 125/1 , 125/2 , 125/3 , 176 , 177 , 178 , 179 , 180 , 181 , 199/1 , 200 , 201 , 202 , 203 , 204 , 205/ 1,206 (Govt. ) , 206/1 , 206/2 , 206/3 , 206/4 , 206/5 , 206/6 , 206/7 , 206/8 , 206/9 , 206/10, 206/11 , 206/12 , 206/13 , 206/14 , 206/15, 206/16 , 206/ 17,207,208/ 1 , 209/1 , 210, 211 , 212, 213 , 214/1 , 214/2A, 214/3B, 215 , 216/ 1A, 216/ 1B, 216/2, 216/3 , 217/1 , 217/2 , 218, 219/1 , 219/2, 220/1 , 220/2 , 220/3 , 220 /4A, 220/4B , 221 , 222/1 , 222/2 , 223 / 1,223/ 2,224/ 1,224 /2,224/ 3,2 24/4,224/ 5 , 224/6, 224/7 , 225 , 226/1 , 226/ 1A, 226/18 , 226/ 1C , 226/2A, 226/2B , 226/2C , 226/2 , 227/1 , 228/1 , 228/2 , 228/3 , 229 , 230 , 231/1 , 232 , 233 , 234, 235 / 1,235/2 , 236 , 237/1 , 237/2,238/ 1 , 238/2 , 238/3 , 239/ 1,239/2 , 240/ 1,240/2 , 241 , 242/1 , 242/2,242/3 , 242/4 , 243 , 244 , 245 , 246/ 1A, 246/2B , 247/1,247/2,248 / 1A , 248/2 , 248 /2B, 249 , 250 , 251 (Forest), 252, 253 , 254, 255 (Govt. ), 256/1 , 256/2 , 256/ 3,256/4/ 257 / 1,257/2 , 258 (Govt .) 259 , 260, 261 , 262, 263 , 264/1 , 264/2 , 264/3 , 264/4 , 265/ 1,265/2 , 266/ 1A, 266/ 1B , 266/2,266 /3,266 /4 , 266/4A, 266/5 (Govt.) , 267/1 , 267/2 , Abadi ( Part ) , Road (Part) , River (Part ) , Nallah (Part) .
Plot numbers to be acquired in village Kitadi ( Rai ) :
18 , 19, 20/1 , 20/ 1B , 20/2 , 20/3 , 21/1 , 21/2 , 21/3 , 22/1 , 22/2 , 22/3 , 23 , 24, 25,26,27 / 1,27 /2,28,29,34/ 1,34/2,34 /3,34/4,34/ 5, Road (Part ) , Nallah , ( Part) , River (Part).
Plot numbers to be acquired in village Chandlasurla :
63/1 , 63/2 , 64, 65 , 71/1 , 71/2 , 71/3 , 71/4 , 71/5 , 71/6 , 71/7 , 79, 80 , 81 , 82 , 83 , 84/1 , 84/2 , 85, 86/ 1A, 86 / 1B, 86/ 1C , 86/2 , 87/1,87/2,87/ 3,88/ 1 , 88/2, 88/3 , 89 , 90 , 91 , 92/ 1A, 92/ 1B , 92/2 (Road) , 93/1 , 93/2 (Road) , 94/1 , 94/2 (Road ), 97, 98/ 1,98 /2, 99 , 100, 101/1 101/2, 102 , 103 , 104 , 105, Nallah (Part).
Plot numbers to be acquired in village Tirwanja Chak:
124/1 , 124/2 , 124/3 , 124/4, 124/5 , 135/1 , 135/2 , 136, 137, 138/1 , 138/2, 138/3 , 139 , 140/1 , 140/2 , 142/1 , 142/2 , 142/3 , 176/1 , 176/2 , 177 , 178/1 , 178/2 , 178/3 , 191 , 192, 193 , 194, 195, 196, 197, 198 , 199/1 , 199/2 , 200 , 201 / 1A, 201/18, 201/2 , 202 , 204/1,204/2,204/3,205/1,205/2 , 208.
3099G1/10-7 5110
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 21 , 2010/ SHRAVANA 30 , 1932
[ PART II - SEC . 3 ( ii) ] BOUNDARY DESCRIPTION :
A' - ' B' : Line starts from Point ' A ' and passes in village Tirwanja Chak, along the outer boundary of plot numbers 142/1 , 176/1 , and crosses the common village boundary of villages Tirwanja Chak and Paili Bhatadi then proceeds through village Paili Bhatadi and passes along the outer boundary of plot numbers 52 , 51 , crosses road , then proceed along with the outer boundary of plot numbers 47 / 1,46,45,44 and meets at Point ' B ' .
'B' - ' C':
Line passes through village Paili Bhatadi along the outer , boundary of plot numbers 44 , 70/1 , 71/1 , 72 / 1A , 102/1 , crosses road then passes along the outer boundary of road and plot number 113 , crosses road then passes along with the outer boundary of plot numbers 267/1 , 266 / 1A, 266 / 1B , 266/2 , 266/5 and crosses the Erai River and common village boundary of villages Paili Bhatadi and Kitadi then passes through village Kitadi along the outer boundary of plot numbers 34/1 , 34/2 , 34/3 , 34/4 , 34/5 and meets at Point ' C" .
' C' - ' D' : Line passes through village Kitadi along the road and outer boundary of plot numbers 34/5 , 29 , Nallah , 18 , 19 , 20/1 , 20 / 1B , 20/3 and then cross the Nallah and passes along the outer boundary of Erai River and meets atPoint ' D.
' D' - ' E' :
Line passes through village Kitadi and crosses the Erai River and common village boundary of villages Kitadi and Paili Bhatadi then passes through village Paili Bhatadi along the outer boundary of Erai River and plot numbers 225 , 224/6 , 224/7 , 223/1 , 223/2 , then crosses the common village boundary of villages Paili Bhatadi and Chandlausrla then passes through village Chandlasurla along the outer boundary of Frai River and plot numbers 101/1 , 101/2 , 102 , 103 , 104 , 105 and meets at Point ' E' .
'E' - ' F' :
Line passes through village Chandlasurla along the outer boundary of plot numbers 105 , 99 , 98/2 , 97 , 94/1 , cross road along the plot numbers 93/1 , 63/2 , 63/1 , 64 , 65 , 86/2 , 86 / 1B , 71/6 , 71/7 , then crosses common village boundary of villages Chandlasurla and Tirwanja Chak then passes through village Tirwanja Chak along the outer boundary of plot numbers 205/2 , 205/1 , 208 , 200 and meets at Point ' F '
'F' -' G':
Line passes through village Tirwanja Chak along the outer boundary of road and plot numbers 200 , 199/2 , 199/1 , 198 , 197 , 196 , 195 , 124/1 , 124/5 and meets at Point ' G '
' G' - 'H' : Line passes through village Tirwanja Chak along the outer boundary of plot numbers 124/5 , 124/4 , 191 , 192 , 193 , 202 , 204/1 , then crosses the common village boundary of villages Tirwanja Chak and Chandlasurla then passes through village Chandlasurla along the outer boundary of the plot numbers 71/1 , 71/2 , cross Nallah then passes along the outer boundary of plot numbers 79 , 80 , 81 , 83 , 84/1 , 84/2 , 88/1 and meets at Point ' H' ,
'H' - 'T' :
Line passes through village Paili Bhatadi along the outer boundary of plot numbers 202 , 201 , 200 , 199/1 , 205/1 , 208/1 , 209/1 , crosses road then passes along with the outer boundary of plot numbers 231/1 , 228/1 , 228/2,228/3 , 227/1 , 226 / 2A , 226 / 2B , 226 / 2C , 226/2 and outer boundary of Erai River and meets at Point ' I' .
:''-'וי
Line passes through village Paili Bhatadi along the outer boundary of plot numbers 240/2 , 239/2 , 238/3 , 237/2 , 273/1 , 236 , 232 , crosses the road then proceed along with the outer boundary of plot numbers 207,206 , 181 and meets at Point ' J ' .
' J' - ' K' : Line passes through village Paili Bhatadi along the outer boundary of plot number 181 , crosses road , then passes along with the outer boundary of plot numbers 176 , 177 , 125/3 , 125/2 , 125/1 , 123 , and road , then passes through plot number 119/3 and along with the outer boundary of plot numbers 98 , 99/5 , 99/4 , 99/3 , 99/2 , 99/1 and meets at Point ' K ' .
' K ' - ' L' :
Line passes through village Paili Bhatadi along the outer boundary of plot numbers 75 , 76 , 77 , 78 , 79 , 80 , 81 / 1A , 81/3 , Road , 59/2 , 59/1 , 56/2 and along the common village boundary of villages Paili Bhatadi and Tirwanja Chak and then passes through village Tirwanja Chak along the outer boundary of plot numbers 178/1 , 178/2 , 178/3 , 138/3 , 138/1 , 137 , 136 , 135/2 and meets at Point ' I.
' L' -' A' : Line passes along the common village boundary of villages Tirwanja Mokasa and Tirwanja Chak then passes through village Tirwanja Chak along the outer boundary of plot numbers 135/2 , 135/1 , 140/2 , 140/1 , 142/3 , 142/2 , 142/1 and meets at starting Point ' A' .
[ F.No. 43015 / 27/ 2008 - PRIW - I ] M. SHAHABUDDIN , Under Secy.
1 पेट्रोलियम और प्राकृतिक गैस मंत्रालय
नई दिल्ली , 16 अगस्त, 2010
का.आ. 2057, 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;
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 आश्य की घोषणा करती है ;
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 जनता को उपलब्ध करा दी जाती है , इक्कीस दिन के भीतर , उसमें उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन करने या भूमि के नीचे पाइपलाइन बिछाए जाने के संबंध में श्री दिलीप कुमार अग्रवाल , सक्षम प्राधिकारी , इंडियन ऑयल कॉर्पोरेशन लिमिटेड , पारादीप- सम्बलपुर- रायपुर- राँची पाइपलाइन परियोजना , एन -17 , सेक्टर 2 , अवंति विहार , रायपुर-492006 ( छत्तीसगढ़ ) को लिखित रूप में आक्षेप भेज सकेगा ।
अनुसूची
राज्य- छत्तीसगढ
तहसील - बसना जिला- महासमुंद
क्षेत्रफल
क्रम सं. गांव का नाम खसरा सं.
हेक्टयर एयर वर्ग मीटर
5
6 2
4
3
64
00
3
931
1 सिंघनपुर
71 910
00
02
00
909
03
69
15
00
10
908
00
66 905
02
00
03
21 907
906
00
67
03
45
00
06
923
01
26 902
00
67 901/3 00
02
06
901/4 00
68
05
00
08
897
4
2
3
5
6 896
00
00
10 894
00
सिंघनपुर --जारी
09
26
08
33 892
00
890
00
09
07 886
00
75
13
00
00 883
10
00
847
02
39 955
00
54
11
00
74 962
06 964
00
86
01
00
01
966
00
03 965
21
00
12
42 968
986
00
34
01
00
985
08
89
00
05
42 991
00
10
17 993
00
07
88 1001
00
00
10 1002
00
03
88 1017
00
04
80 1016
00
09
67 1023
00
02 1037
9%
00
22
04 1036
00
07
1045
56
00
38 1051
05
17
57
00
1050
00
1064
06
44
00
14 1083
38
67
00
1081
04
00 1082
00
33
52 1080
00
10
00
03
74 382
62
00
05 387
04
00
59 388
414
00
00
76
00
04
10 413
21 389
00
01
03
00
74 412
64
00
06
398
399
00
22
04
00
03
94 400
401
00
08
32
94 402
00
01
11
00
86 367
00
01
26 368
356
00
12
15
00
03
61 357
04
00
358
58
05
00
55 353 1
सिंधनपुर
-जारी
354
310
300
274
258
260
266
264
242
1333
239
240
226
1334
1337
1338
1339
1340
1344/2 00
1343
1346
1347
1348
1376
1375
1361
1374
1362
1363 00
1364
1365
1373
1366
1371
THE JALETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 21 , 2010/ SHRAVANA 30 , 1932
[ PART II-SEC. 3 ( ii ) ] 1370
सिंघनपुर
-जारी
1369
1394
गौरटेक
1705
1706
1707
1714
1713
1710
1712
1711
1680
1679
1676
1672
1671
1670
1650
1649
1651
1652
1647
831
833
827
822
819
716
718
712
619
2 3 4 5 6 1 2 3 4 5 6 352 00 02 10 00 06 59 00 00 20 00 00 62 311 00 11 28 00 05 47 00 08 00 2 00 02 70 312 00 04 75 00 06 00 96 04 36 275 00 03 34 00 00 10 00 00 10 00 00 63 257 00 10 10 00 13 47 00 04 80 00 03 26 261 00 00 15 00 04 51 00 02 60 1710/1718 00 00 98 00 04 86 00 03 13 269 00 00 10 00 01 70 268 00 00 10 00 00 91 267 00 02 81 00 01 12 265 00 00 78 00 12 40 00 05 32 00 00 57 244 00 10 65 00 10 75 243 00 04 63 00 09 03 00 08 56 1648 00 00 10 241 00 05 62 00 05 79 00 01 01 00 00 23 00 06 46 00 00 91 00 00 53 00 08 19 237 00 01 54 00 07 97 238 00 08 73 832 00 18 71 00 09 37 00 03 83 00 00 31 00 02 68 00 02 88 835 00 15 .87 00 05 38 836 00 14 79 00 04 59 00 05 90 00 06 41 00 00 10 04 23 818 00 07 96 00 01 68 817 00 00 10 00 13 71 816 00 15 00 00 04 55 815 00 06 05' 00 08 33 814 00 04 37 00 05 15 813 00 03 19 00 10 49 800 00 07 42 00 04 18 794 00 06 95 00 06 78 00 08 71 00 00 10 00 00 79 01 92 717 00 09 12 00 01 719 00 00 19 10 713 00 05 42 00 03 06 00 18 24 00 00 10 711 00 00 10 00 06 00 614 00 02 38 00 06 93 00 00 99 [ भाग II - खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]
गौरटेक
615
-जारी
618
560
616
558
631
630
208
3. बोहारपार
207
4. संकरी
1514
1508
1507
1506
1504
1503
1500
1501
1502
1456
1457
1458
1459/2 00
1463 00
1462
1444
1472 00
1476
1477
1481
1479
1480
1482
950
334/1
5. जगत
3115
भारत का राजपत्र अगस्त 21 , 2010/ श्रावण 30 , 1932
जगत -जारी
164
165
166
167
318
317
316
314
313
312
311
169
308
170
56/3
178
246
244/3
236/2
235/3
236/1
235/2 00
235/1
215/2
224
220
218/2
218/1
1 2 3 4 5 6 1 2 3 4 5 6 00 00 10 161 00 02 08 00 04 51 00 09 15 00 06 59 00 00 50 00 00 10 00 09 73 00 08 51 559 00 08 44 00 17 41 00 01 17 00 05 94 633 00 06 05 00 00 10 628 00 03 91 00 00 38 629 00 04 78 00 06 23 00 00 56 00 00 38 00 18 54 00 02 59 00 05 97 00 01 02 00 00 10 00 11 33 00 11 10 00 13 63 00 00 60 00 14 62 50 00 05 71 00 09 57 49 00 06 08 00 07 56 51 00 02 03 00 06 17 48 00 01 23 1505 00 01 96 47 00 04 61 00 07 58 46 00 04 87 00 02 56 45 00 02 91 00 03 53 44 00 02 24 00 05 32 173 00 04 26 00 00 20 177 00 00 60 00 03 90 00 26 15 00 11 14 00 08 10 00 10 247 00 00 10 07 54 245 00 13 21 00 03 73' 00 04 01 00 11 96 244/2 00 07 14 05 43 252 00 18 97 00 00 61 251 00 03 31 00 01 10 00 02 14 00 06 06 00 04 39 00 00 38 00 00 16 03 45 00 08 87 00 05 24 953 00 01 89 211 00 00 42 00 00 40 234 00 05 18 952 00 04 46 00 03 12 00 05 43 216 00 10 64 948 00 14 99 00 00 10 00 04 26 00 05 23 158 00 00 29 219 00 08 90 159 00 13 54 217 00 00 10 160 00 07 56 00 05 13 162 00 00 44 00 10 36 163 00 04 59 223 00 00 30 3114
[ PART I - SIC . 3 ( 11 ) ] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 21 , 2010/ SHRAVANA 30 , 1932
217/6
पठियापाली
754
6. जोगीपाली
-जारी
217/2
311
217/4
310
7. पौंसरा
649
214
193
196
191
189
180
8. पठियापाली
168
653
9. जलकोट
663
664
670
10. हबेकांटा
683
676
497
496
491
573
308
259
319
237
318
250
363
369
373
217/3 00
1 2 3 4 5 6 1 2 3 4 5 (6 00 07 14 00 12 70 753 00 09 46 00 05 35 00 00 50 00 01 65 00 00 21 260 00 01 70 194 00 01 21 212 00 01 17 00 00 48 213 00 .03 49 00 07 05 00 06 42 192 00 05 56 215 00 10 51 00 00 54 00 06 06 00 16 41 194 00 05 17 188 00 00 84 193 00 05 46 181 00 01 12 192 00 07 10 00 00 87 186 00 06 56 656 00 03 190 00 39 06 02 657 00 02 86 181 00 14 95 658 00 00 08 89' 13 20 167 00 00 02 30 11 74 659 00 18 59 162 00 10 32 661 00 00 10 121 00 01 27 662 00 00 70 161 00 12 34 00 07 27 24 00 02 51 00 10 86 00 00 12 00 14 20 23 00 14 66 672 00 15 33 9 00 05 12 686 00 02 52 1 00 00 37 685 00 01 56 2 00 26 72 684 00 01 64 3 00 06 66 673 00 05 46 499 00 08 48 00 04 08 498 00 14 16 00 17 26 304 00 02 76 680 00 06 54 305 00 18 64 678 00 00 60 00 03 53 679 00 05 68 00 06 53 687 00 00 10 495 00 04 34 574 00 09 72 00 02 57 00 01 36 00 13 65 569 00 00 15 390 00 03 24 262 00 00 10 311 00 26 80 00 16 99 00 02 30 00 03 34 00 16 89 258 00 06 29 320 00 06 97 00 04 18 00 19 93 252 00 00 26 00 06 31 254 00 07 38 371 00 06 66 253 00 01 77 00 00 34 03 38 374 00 04 50 5115 भारत का राजपत्र अगस्त 21 , 2010/ श्रावण 30 , 1932
[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]
194
375
13. बरगांव
10. हबेकांटा
182
184
384
186
418
401
416
188
161
11. बिटांगीपाली
14. खटखटी
419
420
421
416
164
168
163
12. पदरडीह
108/3
108/2 00
108/1
144
111
146
140
82/2
82/4
128
126
69/2
437/417 00
59/2
29/1
19/1
1 2 3 4 5 6 1 2 3 4 5 6 00 00 10 00 10 09 381 00 05 36 193 00 11 66 380 00 03 98 00 02 86 383 00 00 48 00 09 15 00 07 28 185 00 09 84 00 05 24 00 03 98 00 16 94 187 00 02 66 00 04 76 00 00 30 12 00 05 83 00 01 72 11 00 04 68 160 00 04 89 19 00 05 28 159 00 08 14 20 00 06 27 429 00 01 68 18 00 00 10 428 00 07 12 21 00 06 89 00 04 25 22 00 10 36 00 11 43 31 00 01 62 00 03 97 30 00 04 22 00 13 72 23 00 00 55 414 00 06 91 29 00 04 49 158 00 02 54 28 00 05 39 00 00 77 27 00 04 29 00 07 24 37 00 01 14 161 00 02 87 107 00 24 46 00 02 07 00 13 30 154 00 04 67 155 00 00 10 89 00 03 39 153 00 09 16 88 00 16 59 152 00 04 37 05 95 00 04 14 151 00 04 05 150 00 11 41 110 00 03 26 00 05 87 86 00 02 37 145 00 18 52 00 01 05 00 11 37 82/1 00 04 39 00 00 33 00 07 16 132 00 00 10 82/3 00 07 50 131 00 10 98 00 09 78 130 00 06 68 81 00 02 80 129 00 05 57 78 00 03 53 00 03 16 79 00 08 52 127 00 05 91 00 09 59 00 01 58 00 06 57 59 00 03 25 70 00 20 96 02 00 00 07 67 27 00 06 68 58 00 16 71 28 00 04 85 29 00 03 21 24 00 07 78 00 02 68 23 00 15 59 25 00 02 25 22 00 00 10 23 00 20 97 00 24 52 22 00 01 34 00 04 31 221 00 02 55 19/2 [ PART II- SEC . 3 ( ii) ] 5116
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 21 , 2010 / SHRAVANA 30 , 1932
1
खेभडा
14. खटखटी
339
224
340/3
346/2
341
348
162
15. खेमडा
363
867
368/2
370
864
386
384
842
398
843
797
423
427
16. जीराडबरी
950
309
949
948
310
940
308
938
937
936
699
307
[सं. आर-25011/19/2010-ओ.आर. -1 ] 2 3 4 5 6 1 2 3 4 5 6 21 00 11 62 331 00 06 36 222 00 17 12 335 00 00 12 00 08 36 00 01 72 225 00 07 73 00 08 25 7 00 20 92 341 00 06 41 8 00 18 03 342 00 14 55 3 00 05 39 343 00 07 17 2/3 00 03 05 00 01 22 2/2 00 14 88 00 15 73 2/1 00 01 80 00 09 48 00 00 10 351 00 01 62 870 00 03 43 355 00 12 06 869 00 10 04 354 00 06 56 00 00 10 00 19 93 868 00 07 46 00 00 86 865 00 04 369 00 04 36 00 01 19 00 09 52 863 00 00 99 00 02 23 862 00 05. 382 00 04 33 25 861 00 00 35 385 00 08 96 00 03 05 00 00 42 848 00 11 47 392 00 04 47 851 00 00 71 393 00 05 06 847 00 00 27 00 06 64 846 00 03 06 397 00 07 59 845 00 03 55 396 00 06 45 00 06 02 399 00 00 10 799 00 11 11 437 00 01 3 798 00 06 93 400 00 00 46 00 08 95 425 00 11 59 754 00 02 17 424 00 02 19 753 00 15 45 426 00 01 18 752 00 03 34 00 01 25 751 00 08 63 00 10 74 253 00 03 93 951 00 08 60 00 06 91 00 10 01 318 00 01 60 00 07 38 00 18 11 00 11 55 00 06 48 00 03 05 319 00 00 72 941 00 14 85 321 00 00 61 00 20 62 322 00 00 40 00 08 13 323 00 00 50 00 20 06 324 00 00 69 00 01 26 00 06 69 00 00 10
282
बी. के. दत्ता , अवर सचिव 5117
अगस्त 21, 2010/ श्रावण 30, 1932
[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]
भारत का राजपत्र
6
4
1 2
3
5 MINISTRY OF PETROLEUM AND NATURAL GAS
NOTIFICATION
1
00
07
09
Singhnpur 890
New Delhi , the 16th August, 2010
75
886
00
13
00
00
10
883
00
02
39
847
54
00
11
955
06
00
74
962
00
86
964
01 S.O. 2057. 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 laid by Indian Oil Corporation Limited;
00
966
01
03
21
00
965
968
42
12
00
00
01
34
986
Andwhereas, 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;
00
08
89
985
05
42
00
991
00
10
17
993
88
1001
00
07
00
10
00
1002
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;
00
03
1017
88
00
04
1016
80
09
67
1023
00
96
1037
00
02
00
22
04
1036
00
07
56
1045
00
05
1051
38
00
17
57
1050
06
44
00
1064
00
1083
14
38 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 or laying of the pipeline under the land to Sri Dilip Kumar Agarwal , Competent Authority , Indian Oil Corporation Limited, Paradip - Sambalpur - Raipur- Ranchi Pipeline Project, N - 17 , Sector-2 , Avanti Vihar, Raipur- 492006 , Chhattisgarh .
00
67
1081
04 SCHEDULE
33
00
00
1082
State : Chhattisgarh
Tehsil: Basna District : Mahasamund
1080
00
10
52
74
382
00
03 Khasara
Area
Sr. Name of the
05
62
387
00
Hectare Are
No.
Sq.mtr.
No. Village
00
04
59
388
76 4
6
414
00
00 1
2
3
5
10
413
00
04 03
931
00
64
1. Singhnpur
21
389
00
01 00
71
910
02
412
74
00
03 909
00
69
06 03
00
64
398
04
22
399
00
00
908
10
15
00
03
94
400
66
905
00
02
00
08
32
401
00
21
907
03
94
402
00
01
67
906
03
00
11
86
367
00
923
00
06
45
00
01
26
368
00
26
902
01
356
15
12
00
67
02
901/3 00
00
357
03
61 06
68
901/4 00
00
04
58
358
00
08
05
897
55
05
353
05
00
10
896
00
352
00
10
02 00
09
26
894
00
20
354
00
00
08
33
892
28
311
00
11 3099GI /10-8 5118
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 21 , 2010 / SHRAVANA 30 , 1932
5
3
4
6
1
00
1.
08
2 .
310
(X) Smghnpur
00
7i 312
01
00
300
00
275
34
05
00
274
00
10 257
00
10
10
()
258
04
20 261
00
00
15
00
260
02
60
()
266
269
268
00
02
31 267
265
00
73
05
264
32 244
00
10
65
(1
243
00
66 242
OS
00
56 241
00
05
62
00
1333
01
01
239
06
00
46 240
00
53
00
237
00
01
54 238
08
(X)
73 226
00
1334
00
00
1337
00
02
00
05
1338
38 1339
00
59
04
1340
00
41
06
(x1
1344/2 00
23 1343
00
01
18 1346
00
7i
13
1347
00
04
55
08
1348
00
33
00
05
1376
1375
00
10
49 1361
00
18 1374
06
06
78 1362
00
00
10 1363
00
01
1364
00
01
19 1365
00
03
06 1373
00
00
10 1366
00
06
(0) 1371
00
06
93 1370
50
00
06
1369 00
00
62 1394
00
05
47
[PART II SEC . 3 ( ii ) ] 2
S
3
6 Gourtak
1705
00
04
1706
00
36
00
1707
()
10 1714
00
00
1713
47
00
15
1710 00
06
26 1712
00
04
51 1710/1718 00
98 1711
00
06
13
70 1680
01
00
1679
00
1676
01
1672
00
1671
00
00
57 1670
00
10
75 1650
00
09
03 1648
10
00
00
00
70 1649
05
1651
00
23
00
1652
00
00
91 1647
08
00
19 831
00
07
97 832
00
71
18
833
00
03
83 827
00
02
68
15
87 835
00
836
14
00
79 822
00
05
06 819
00
00
10 818
00
07
96 817
00
00
10 816
00
00
15
815
00
06
05 814
00
04
37 813
00
03
19 800
00
07
42 794
00
06
95 716
00
71
08
718
00
00
7) 717
00
09
12
00
00
719
10
42 713
00
05
712
00
18
24 711
00
00
10 614
00
02
38 619
99
00
00
615
00
00
10 618
00
09
15 560
50
00
00
616
00
09
73 4
3
5 2
Gourtak
633
629
631
630
3. Boharpar
207
Sankri
1514
1508
1507
1506
1505
1503 00
1500
1501
1502
1456
1457
1458
1459/2 00
1463
1462
1444
1472
1477
1481
1479
1480
953
1482
952
950
948
334/1 00 5. Jagat
158
159
160
162
163
164
165
166
Jagat
318
317
316
314
313
170
56/3
246
247
245
244/3 00
244/2
252
236/2
235/3
236/1
235/2
235/1
234
215/2
216
224
220
219
218/2
218/1
754
6. Jogipali
2 3 4 6 $59 00 08 167 00 08 51 $58 00 17 00 17 41 00 05 94 628 00 05 91 00 00 10 04 78 00 00 38 (X) 00 56 00 06 23 18 54 312 00 00 38 208 05 97 311 00 02 59 00 00 10 169 00 (0 02 308 00 33 4. 00 11 10 00 13 63 00 14 62 00 00 60 00 09 50 00 05 71 00 07 56 49 00 06 08 1504 00 06 17 51 00 02 03 00 01 96 48 00 01 23 07 58 47 00 61 00 02 56 46 00 04 87 00 03 53 45 00 02 91 00 05 32 44 00 02 24; 00 00 20 173 000 04 00 03 90 177 00 00 26 0 00 11 14 178 00 26 に 00 00 10 00 1(1 00 07 54 00 21 00 03 73 04 00 11 96 00 14 00 05 43 00 1476 00 00 61 251 00 03 31 00 02 14 00 10 00 04 39 00 06 06 00 00 16 00 00 38 00 08 87 00 03 45 00 01 89 00 05 24 00 00 40 211 00 00 42 00 04 46 00 05 18 00 03 12 00 05 43 00 10 64 00 14 99 00 00 10 04 26 00 05 23 00 00 29 00 08 90 00 13 54 217 00 00 10 00 07 56 00 05 13 00 00 44 00 10 36 00 04 59 223 00 00 30 161 00 02 08 00 07 14 00 04 51 753 00 46 00 06 59 311 00 50 00 00 10 00 21
310 5120
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 21 , 2010 / SHRAVANA 30 , 1932
1 2 3 4 5 6
00
01
21
194
7. Pounsara
00
649
00
48
193
00
07
05
00
05
56
192
00
00
54
191
00
41
189
16
00
84
00
188
00
01
181
12
00
180
00
87
00
8.
656
03
39 Pathiyapali
657
00
02
86
658
00
08
89
653
00
02
30
00
18
59
659
10
00
661
00
00
00
662
70
663
00
07
27
00
664
86
10
00
670
20
14
15
672
00
33
686
00
52
02
685
00
56
01
684
00
01
64
673
05
00
46
00
683
04
08
676
00
17
26
680
00
06
54
00
00
60
678
679
00
05
68
687
00
00
10
00
574
09
72
00
01
573
36
569
00
00
15
262
00
00
10
00
259
16
99
262
00
00
10
00
259
16
99
00
34
237
03
06
29
00
258
04
250
18
00
252
00
26
00
07
38
254
00
253
00
01
217/3 00
03
38
217/6 00
12
70
217/2 00
35
05
217/4 00
01
65
[PART II- SEC. 3 ( ii ) ] 2
3
4
5
6
00
01
70 Pathiyapali 260
212
00
01
17
213
00
03
49
214
00
06
42
215
00
10
51
06
196
00
06
194
00
05
17
00
05
46
193
192
00
10'
07
00
186
06
56
190
00
06
02
181
00
95
14
00
168
13
29
167
00
11
74
162
00
10
32
00
01
121
27
00
161
34
12
24
9. Jalkot
00
02
51
00
00
12
00
23
14
99
9
00
05
12
1
00
37
00
2
00
26
72
3
00
06
66
00
499
48
08
10. Habekanta
498
00
14
16
304
00
02
76
00
305
18
64
497
00
03
53
496
00
53
06
495
00
04
34
00
491
02
57
00
308
13
65
390
00
24
03
311
00
80
26
319
00
02
30
318
00
89
16
320
00
06
97
363
00
19
93
00
369
06
31
371
00
06
66
373
00
00
34
374
00
04
50
375
00
00
10
381
00
05
36
380-
00
98
03
383
00
00
48 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]
6
4
5 2
3
1
07
28
00
384
10. Habekanta
24
05
00
418
94
00
16
401
04
76
416
00
83
00
05
12
11. Bitangipali
68
00
04
11
28
05
19
00
27
00
06
20
10
00
18
00
89
06
00
21
36
00
10
22
62
01
00
31
22
04
30
00
00
00
55
23
00
49
04
29
05
39
00
28
04
29
00
27
14
00
01
37
24
46
107
00
12. Padardih
30
00
13
108/3
03
39
00
89
16
59
00
88
95
05
108/2 00
00
14
04
108/1
26
00
03
110
37
00
02
86
01
05
00
111
00
04
39
82/1
16
00
07
82/2
00
07
50
82/3
00
78
09
82/4
00
02
80
81
00
03
53
78
52
00
08
79
09
00
59
77
57
00
06
69/2
96
70
20
00
00
07
67
59/2
71
16
00
58
00
21
03
29
78
00
07
24
59
15
23
00
00
10
00
22
52
24
00
19/1
00
04
31
19/2
09
10
194
00
13. Bargaon
00
66
11
193
5121
भारत का राजपत्र अगस्त 21 , 2010/ श्रावण 30 , 1932
6
5
4
3
2
1
86
00
02
182
.Bargaon
00
15
09
184
84
09
185
00
00
03
98
186
66
02
187
00
30
00
188
00
72
00
01
161
89
160
00
04
14
159
00
08
68
00
01
429
14. Khatkhati
12
428
07
00
25
00
04
419
43
420
00
11
97
00
03
421
72
13
416
00
00
06
91
414
02
54
158
00
00
00
77
164
24
00
07
168
02
87
161
07
00
02
163
67
04
00
154
00
00
10
155
00.
09
16
153
37
00
04
152
00
04
05
151
41
00
11
150
87
00
05
144
00
52
18
145
146
00
11
37
00
33
140
00
00
10
00
132
10
98
00
131
68
00
06
130
00
05
57
129
16
00
03
128
91
127
00
05
01
126
58
00
25
00
03
59
00
02
437/417 00
68'
00
06
27
85
04
28
00
00
02
68
29/1
00
02
25
25
97
00
20
23
34
00
01
22
55
00
02
221
62
21
00
11 5122
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST21 , 2010/ SHRAVANA 30 , 1932
[ PART 11 -Si.C . 5 ( 11 ) 1 2 3 4 5 6 1 2 3 4 5 6
00
17
12
222
14. Khatkhati
00
36
224
08
225
00
07
73
7
92
00
20
00
8
18
03
00
05
3
39
00
2/3
03
05
00
14
88
2/2
80
00
2/1
01
00
00
162
10
00
03
43
870
15. Khemda
00
04
869
10
00
10
867
00
07
00
46
868
865
00
04
19
864
00
01
00
863
00
99
05
00
25
862
00
861
00
35
00
05
03
842
00
47
848
00
00
71
851
00
00
27
847
00
846
03
06
00
03
845
55
00
06
843
02
00
11
799
798
00
06
93
797
08
95
00 .
00
17
754
02
45
753
00
15
752
00
03
34
00
08
63
751
253
00
03
93
91
309
00
06
00
01
60
318
18
00
11
310
00
06
48
308
00
00
72
319
00
00
321
61
00
322
00
40
00
00
50
323
00
69
00
324
69
307
00
06
282
00
10 Khemda
331
(
335
00
12
00
10
339
340/3
00
08
341
06
00
00
14
342
55
00
07
17
343
346/2
00
01
00
15
73
341
00
09
348
-18
00
62
351
01
355
00
12
06
354
00
06
56
19
93
363
00
00
86
368/2
00
04
369
00
36
09
52
00
370
386
00
02
23
33
00
04
382
00
96
08
385
(0
42
384
00
47
392
00
04
00
05
06
393
00
398
06
64
07
59
00
397
00
15
06
396
399
00
00
10
01
437
83
00
400
00
00
46
59
425
00
11
19
424
00
02
426
00
01
18
25
423
00
01
00
427
10
74
951
00
08
16. Jeeradabri
60
950
00
10
01
00
949
07
38
55
00
11
948.
940
00
03
05
00
85
941
14
00
20
62
938
13
00
08
937
00
06
936
20
699
00
01
26
[No. R - 25011 / 19 /2010 OR - 1 |
B. K. DATTA, Linder Sec .
5123 भारत का राजपत्र अगस्त 21 , 2010/ श्रावण 30 , 1932
| भाग II - खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]
6
3
4
2
5
1
नई दिल्ली , 16 अगस्त , 2010
12 78
00
कोलियारीडीह 369
43
00
367
02
00 10
370
00
65
364
00 15
76
00 08
357
00 03 48 का.आ. 2058.-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;
358
07
00
54
359
00 00 17
114
08
360
00
51
19
803
00
53
3. मेढापाली
34
00
761
09 और केन्द्रीय सरकार को उक्त पाइपलाइन बिछाने के प्रयोजन के लिए यह 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 ;
760
04
00 03
749
00 00 33
00
750
23 15
00
12 82
741
01 67
742
00
63
11
00
740
अतः अब , केन्द्रीय सरकार , पेट्रोलियम और खनिज पाइपलाइन ( भूमि में उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन ) अधिनियम , 1962 ( 1962 का 50 ) की धारा 3 की उप - धारा ( 1 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए , उनमें उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन करने के अपने आश्य की घोषण करती है ;
02
00
12
501
16 05
458
00
00
04 83
457
06 73
448
00
00
07 12
449
442
00
00 10
00
57
01
441
82
00
451
01
28
440
00 03
438
00 05 28
00
95
439
06 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 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 दिलीप कुमार अग्रवाल , सक्षम प्राधिकारी , इंडियन ऑयल कॉर्पोरेशन लिमिटेड , पारादीप - सम्बलपुर- रायपुर - राँची पाइपलाइन परियोजना , एन -17 , सेक्टर 2 , अवंति विहार , रायपुर -492006 ( छत्तीसगढ़ ) को लिखित रूप में आक्षेप भेज सकेगा ।
25
00 05
437
00 08 95
391
अनुसूची
34
10
208
00
राज्य- छत्तीसगढ़
तहसील- बसना
जिला-महासमुंद
58
00
13
211
00
68
215
34 क्षेत्रफल
00 00 66
210
क्रम सं गांव का नाम खसरा सं. हेक्टेयर एयर वर्ग मीटर
17
218
00 00
17
00
276
50 4
6
5
3
2
1
61
00 07
277
00
00 00
278
05 20 उमरिया
1329
1 .
91
00 06
273
21
09
00
2.
कोलियारीडीह 715
00 06 73
272
82
710
00 31
271
00 01
54
18
00 01
711
00 08 59
270
35
00
13
456
00
00 48
268
50 63
00
00 443
06 00
263
00
10
15
00
45
269
04 415
86
15
45
234
00 418
00 01
00 08 09
235
64
00 28
430
00
04 85
237
42
00
00
435
00
44
02
963
पिलवापाली
75
4.
06
436
00
00 10 45
964
31
00
01
403
967
00 04 44
44
00
10
384
10
00
965
00 00 04 79
381
966
00 05 50 00 04 75
379 5124
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 21 , 2010 / SHRAVANA 30 , 1932
6
4
5
3
1
2
1 968
00
50
पिलवापाली
15
00 01
-जारी
969
09
13 03
993
00
00
00
994
92
08
10
992
00
00
976
10
28
00
00
85
975
5.
06
977
00
51
00
00
978
11
00
980
00 41
86
15
00
935
10
00 00
979
00
01
33
931
00
22
934
07
12
933
00 00
17
00
859
41
24
860
00
00
00
30
02
861
71
852
00
04
00
66
853
00
77
823
00 02
06
00
82
826
00
11 93
827
14
828
00
83
09
00
44
668
612
00 30
52
613
00
11
00
610
00
90
609
00
00
60
02
608
00
04 90
606
607
00
50.
03 .
06 05
603
00
00
605
00 89
00 03 28
588
63
587
00 02
92
586
00 02
86
00 00
584
61
581
00 01
00 03 44
585
00 05 80
529
56
530
00 01
00
05 08
528
279
00 05 19
18
00 02
76
07
00 02
75
33
00 06
74
84
00 03
00 03 61
73
00
10 59
41
[ PART II - SEC . 3 ( ii ) ]
4
2
3
5
6 42
00
72
02
पिलवापाली
00
-जारी
44
05 31
47 45
00
03
00
62 46
02
00
12 47
00
40
00
11 82
47 607
00
09
संतपाली
00
19 604
09
605
00
58
00
00 79
00
602
00
599/2
03 99
00 07 67 599/1
552
03 81
00
05
00
81 551
08 550/1 00 04
553
00 00
52 550/2 00 05 72
00
554
03 57
07
68 538
00
457
00
19
09
458
00 08 12
00
433
08 09
00
434
08 85
00
429
07 64
72 419
00 02
420
00
11 88 421
00 00 99
00 08
426
%
48 422
00 04
00
413
02 06 412
00 00
12 423
00
17
84 396
00 00 23
00
62 398
01
99 397
00 09
399
00 08 98
23
00
291
07 290
00 03 46
00
90 282
22
00
283
01
83
00
299
02 66 281
00 04 13
00
280
05 49 276
00
10 41
00
277
01 73
00
270
15 44 266
00 08 59 267
06
00
65 भारत का राजपत्र अगस्त 21 , 2010/ श्रावण 30 , 1932
[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]
4
6
1 1
2
3
5
7.
00 07
.6. पलसाभाडी 268
28
00 07
70
600
01
00 05
587
70
07
00
588
00 06 31
592
42
00
591
00
00 04
72
593
00 01 80
594
14
532
00 19
14
533
00 06
00
534
01 04
00
535
10
00
76
02
529
00
78
528
00 07
00 00 79
527
00 05 54
526
75
511
00 02
524
00
00 64
00 08 48
190
75
00
00
199
188
00 04 96
00
12 20
187
01
184
00 01
03 55
00
183
00 14 56
182
00
26
181
00
141
18
00
91
00
47
142
05
8.
12 52
00
129
07
00
44
130
45
05
00
126
127
00
28
03
00
06 89
105
07
00
08
103
00 07
102
60
49
95
00 02
15
96
00
83
00
80
00
10
76
00 09 86
84
75
00 09
74
10
00 00
00 13 02
54
56
00 25
00
858
00
22 19
7. खोगसा
00 08 31
857
00
65
856
08
00 13 02
859
00 01
01
879
832
00 02 33
13 29
833
00
3099GI /10-9
5125
4
3
5
6 2
36 खोगसा
831
00 08
834
00 19 72
00
98 836
24
05
711
00
99 714
00 06 47
00 03 08 716
00
09 46 715
558
03
32
00
677
00 00 12
05
00
676
64 675
08
00
84
07
79 674
00
00
665
00
68 667
00
12 63
46
07
666
00
625
00
57
09
614
00 00 99
00 624
00 03
623
00 6 64
01 620
00 10
633
00
15 90 636
00 16 96
00
635
00 80
02 44 639
00
00
17 638
22
599
00 01
54
00
14
02
678
28 555
00 01
कुसमुर
556
00
19
06
25
389
00
17
06 390
00 01
00 07 26 388
89 385
00
12
17
00 00
387
00
386
ال
00
04 49 380
01
48
00
379
47
00
378
07
00 01 51 373
06
44
00
372
02 45 369
00
06 99
00
371
00 01
368
54
00
06
370
73 206
00 04
21
62
00 08
149
16 94 148
00
63
00 03
147
62 146
00 36
35 145
02
00 5126
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 21 , 2010 / SHRAVANA 30 , 1932
[ PART 11 --SEC. 3 ( ii ) ] 1
कुसमुर -जारी 144
450
घुटीकोना
-जारी 451
452
446
115
461
564/4 00
564/2
564/3
547
9. घुटीकोना
536
388
532/2 00
532/3
391
532/4
392
393
सागुनडीह
394
260
254
264
208
207
209
93/3
93/2
93/1
449
448
2 3 4 5 6 1 2 3 4 5 6 00 00 10 139 00 11 49 00 93 00 04 39 137 00 14 74 00 01 46 136 00 06 01 00 12 59 00 00 18 459 00 01 06 134 00 00 10 460 00 06 68 135 00 02 82 00 04 04 118 00 11 76 03 -18 122 00 06 53 542 00 15 78 111 00 08 25 00 01 36 121 00 08 14 00 00 11 91 00 06 12 560 00 21 70 92 00 16 10 559 00 11 ふり 94 00 03 55 545 00 57 95 00 06 97 00 03 76 499 00 02 70 546 00 04 33 386 00 03 25 548 00 05 60 389 00 00 97 00 05 51 00 05 51 10 73 387 00 04 51 00 00 00 00 80 00 (X) 62 00 02 09 530 00 00 03 10. 147 00 14 377 00 03 41 143 00 09 42 148 00 (X) 34 397 00 06 68 146 00 00 45 263 00 00 10 144 00 08 261 00 03 17 145 00 الف 00 00 21 138 00 0 108 262 00 06 78 154 00 256 00 06 92 320 00 11 255 00 00 72 319 00 01 00 08 81 324 00 01 88 253 00 00 75 322 00 00 10 252 00 02 11 321 65 250 00 00 38 00 20 10 251 00 03 00 204 00 05 95 238 00 02 18 205 00 00 237 00 03 33 00 05 17 97 00 05 17 00 00 10 00 00 12 00 05 45 00 01 67 210 00 09 00 08 13 212 00 78 00 04 39 214 00 11 410 00 04 69 213 00 02 8! 92 63 218 00 04 50 98 00 02 78 217 00 10 442 19 219 00 03 91 00 05 40 220 00 03 90 00 04 04 223 00 08 is [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]
5147 भारत का राजपत्र अगस्त 21 , 2010/ श्रावण 30 , 1932
2
1
222
सागुनडीह
भँवरचुवा
-जारी
-जारी
500
502
501/2 00 956
501/1
11 . करनापाली
858
850
भँवरचुवा ( दु. ) 181
216
835
207
204
229
838
829
828
233
231
12. भँवरचुवा
232
201
200
198
630
631
594
596/1
487
486
490
492/2 00
492/1 00 01
छातापठार
483/712 00 02
3 4 5 6 1 2 3 4 5 6 00 03 16 45 00 18 59 499 00 16 33 00 02 09 41 00 11 37 00 70 38 00 12 16 02 78 00 03 30 00 03 93 15 00 01 93 332 00 02 83 16 00 20 65 505 00 06 52 18 00 17 58 506 00 00 91 713 00 00 19 507 00 15 49 711 00 30 32 508 00 05 72 710 00 03 66 509 00 07 82 725 00 02 83 514 00 11 42 00 22 49 511 00 14 60 859 00 16 85 512 00 14 88 00 00 10 13 00 02 91 851 00 06 04 00 09 76 852 00 06 84 215 00 07 34 847 00 02 78 208 00 05 82 00 05 60 00 06 97 836 00 01 33 00 08 93 834 00 00 41 228 00 02 80 837 00 06 21 00. 03 70 00 00 70 230 00 00 81 832 00 00 94 236 00 00 10 831 00 09 97 235 00 01 84 00 03 67 234 00 03 40 00 11 39 00 03. 00 654 00 06 64 00 02 37 657 00 02 76 00 00 10 656 00 05 19 00 04 55 655 00 06 68 00 03 84 652 00 21 37 199 00 03 00 00 20 30 00 02 57 626 00 00 10 96 00 09 85 00 00 57 95 00 00 59 593 00 14 45 93 00 00 10 00 08 08 81 00 26 95 595 00 10 36 80 00 00 17 00 10 60 52 00 07 88 488 00 09 25 53 00 00 42 00 07 54 51 00 07 88 00 00 95 48 00 01 01 00 04 96 47 00 24 97 491 00 01 50 46 00 07 20 05 62 43 00 13 55 46 85 00 03 26 493 00 05 68 14 403 00 03 22 91 314 00 10 35 497 39 409 00 15 79 498 00 03 97 408 00 01 44 5128
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 21 , 2010 / SHRAVANA 30 , 1932
4
6
2
3
5
1
00 05
छातापठार
312
30
-जारी
00
313/1
04 68
00
57
313/2
03
05 25
310
00
350
00 14 85
16. 249
00 02 74
00
57
00
247
00
57
251
03
01 78
00
254
00 06 36
244
255
00 00 69
00
00
47
49
05
48
30
00
00
38
49
07
45
00
69
00
50
00
01
58
45/586
19
00 07
44/5
00 02 81
00
01
78
44/3
44/2
63
00 01
00
44/1
15
00
00
37
06
43/4
10
43/1
00 00
00
02
43/5
57
41
85
00 00
00
29
58
06
00
59
01 81
24
00 09 74
00 68
00
11/3
00
02 54
11/2
00 00
15
12
19
00 07
00
15/1
93
01
00
14
00
59
60
15/2
00 04
00
03
16
8
00
21
01
7
00 05 73
5
00 03 90
1
00 02 78
716
00
62
15.
02
हरदा
00
74
05
517
00 03
515
61
516
00 09 30
506
42
505
60
507
00 09
47
21
508
00 02
51
00 03
501
509
00 02
90
[PART II -SEC . 3 ( ii ) ] 2
3
4
5
6
65 500
00
हरदा -जारी
00
00 08 61 498
00
499
00
11
00
495
03 30
40 510
00 02
00
01
72 बडेसाजापाली 1559
1868
13
00
35 1867
00
04
03
00
48 1869
00
00
1866
03 35
00
1861
00
56
21 1859
00 21
1841/9
16
01
00
00
1857/4 00
17 1841/8 00 03
1841/7 00
16 05
11
1841/6
51
00
1841
04
52
10 1870 优
00
14 184101 (5)
09 1840
02
07 05 1832
13
1833
00
74
06 1837
08
00
07
00
1834
00
10 1835
00
00
1801
00
84
00 08 20 1798
04
25 1797
00
1796
02
00
51
00
08 81 1767
1768
00 02 49 1769
00 06 66
00
1711
21 87
55 1712/3 00 02
1712/4 00
10
00
1707
00
21
31 1710
00
20
00
15
65 1706
00
1705
00 03
05
06
1174/9 00
82
37 1174/10 00 02
1174/5 00 03 51
62 1174/7 00 03
1174/6 00 05 00
25
00
1177
00
1184
00 00 10 1185
00 02 50
00
1186
03
35
00
00 36 1183
00
1187
02 93
71 1182
00
06
00
1180
00
10 5129 भारत का राजपत्र अगस्त 21 , 2010/ श्रावण 30 , 1932
[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]
6
5
4
2
3
1
4
6
5
2
3
1
01 16
145
00
00 07 90
बुन्देलाभांठा
1181
बडेसाजापाली
09
08
00
144
-जारी
06
00
68
-जारी
1110
04 84
00
143
00 07 28
1114
272
02
8
00
26
00 00
1106
41.
00 03
7
02 02
1115 00
89
00
01
5
00 18
1116 00
04 39
00
23
86
00 01
1100
49
05
24
00
04 88
1099/3 00
10
00
00
3
71
00
1099/2 00
93
00 02
25
00 73
1099/4 00
69
07
00
26
06 87
1098/1 00
00 30 19
264
लोहारपाली
18.
00 10
1097 00
19
265
05
00
10
00 1096
00
09
10 02
00
266
1103 00
00
15
55
00 00 05
00
269/3
487
17. बुन्देलाभांठा
00 72
00 10 00
269/2 00
539
00 05 08
24 486
00 09
263
00 61
488
00
06 49
270
00
49
00 01
490
05 11
271
00
00 04 68
489
00 05 01
258
00
00 22
493
00 61
00
195
48
00 03
494
00 32
257
00
00 04 37
495
00
196
13 82
80
00 01
497
83 08 50
00
12 00
191
461
00 50
00
498
23
00
186
01 02 39
462
00
59
00 23
187
04 38
460
00
70
144
11
00
01 24
00
463
78
00
06
143
00
459
07 60
00
22
145
08 00 11 07
433
86
00 04
146
00
62
458
01
73
23
00 10
00
08 434
119
00 02 55
426
61
04
00
118
94
00 07
417
00
22.
42
02 00
78
425
01
02 34
44
00
15
00
10
418
00
01 47
45
00
02 93
420
09
43
00
02 00 17
00
181
00
76
14
46
00 09 27
179
04
88
00
56 00 02
47
178
00
02
00
194
49
48
00
10 00 01 01
196
00
20
00
54
00 06 38
176
00
14 71
39
08
00 05
174
09 87
55
00 00
00
79
197
57
00 05 45 00 06 90
173
10
00 00
58
03 94
00
171
00 08 19
169
00 05 01
294
19 बुटीपाली
00
08
146
87
295
00 08 13 00 04 19
147
03 07
00
148
[सं. आर -25011/ 19/ 2010-ओ आर -1 ] 00
00
54
149
बी. के. दत्ता , अवर सचिव 5130
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 21 , 2010 / SHRAVANA 30 , 1932
1 New Delhi , the 16th August , 2010
S.O. 2058. - Whereas , it appears to the Central Government that it is necessary 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 laid by Indian Oil Corporation Limited ;
3. 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 the Gazette of India , are made avilable to the General Public , object in writing to the acquisition of the right of user therein or laying of the pipeline under the land to Shri Dilip Kumar Agrawal , Competent Authority , Indian Oil Corporation Limited , Paradip - Sambalpur- Raipur- Ranchi Pipeline . Project , N - 17 , Sector - 2 , Avanti Vihar , Raipur- 492006 , Chhattisgarh .
SCHEDULE
Tehsil: Basna District: Mahasamund State- Chhattisgarh
Area
Sr.No. Name of the
Hectare Are Sq.mtr .
Khasara No.
Village
4
1
2
3
5
6
1329
00 00
1. Umariya
2.
00 09 21
715
Koliyaridih
00 31
710
82
711
00 01 18
456
00
35 13
00
443
50 63
415
10
15
00
418
00
01 45
00
430
28 64
435
00
00
42
00
06
436
75
403
00
01 31
44
00
384
10
4.
00
04 79
381
379
04
00
75
00
12
369
78
00
367
02 43
00
370
00
10
00
15 65
364
[ PART II SEC. 3 ( ii ) 2 3 4 5 6
08
76
00
357
Koliyaridih
358
--Contd .
00 03 48 359 00 07 54
17
00
114
00
00 08
360
51
00 19 53 803
Medhapali
09
761
(00
34
04
00
03
760
00
00
749
33
00
23
750
15
12
00
741
82
67 742
00
01
740
63
00
11
12
501
02
00
00
458
16 05
00
457
04 83
00
448
06 73 449
00 07
12 442
00 00
10
57 441
00 01
451
00
82
01
28 440
00 03
438
00 05 28
00 06 95 439
25 437
05
00
391
00 08 95 208
00
10 34 211
13
00
58 215
34
00
68 210
00
66
00
218
00
00 17
17
276
00
50 277
00 07 61 278
00 05 20 273
06 91
00
272
00 06 73 271
00
01
54 270
08
59
00
00
268
00
48 263
06
00
00 269
00
04 45 234
00 15 86 235
00 08 09 237
00 04 85 963
00 02 44 Pilwapali
10
964
00
45 967
00 04 44 965
00 00 10 966
00 05 50
00
15 50 968 [ भाग II - खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]
भारत का राजपत्र अगस्त 21 , 2010/ श्रावण 30 , 1932
1
2
4
3
5
6
1 969
00 01 09
Pilwapali
00
-Contd.
13
993
03
00
994
00 92
992
00 08 10
976
00
10 28
5. 975
00 00 85
977
00
05 51
978
00
11 00
00
980
00 41
00
935
15 86
979
00
00
10
931
00
33
01
00
934
07 22
00
933
00 12
859
00
17 41
860
24
00 00
861
00
30
02
00
852
71
04
853
00
00
66
823
77
00 02
826
00 06 82
827
00 11 93
828
00
14 83
668
00
09 44
612
00 30
613
00 00
52
610
00
00
11
609
00 90
00
608
00
60
02
606
00
04 90
607
00 03 50
603
00
06 05
605
00 00 89
588
00 03 28
587
00
02
63
586
00 02 92
584
00
00
86
581
00 01 61
585
00 03 44
529
00
80
05
00
530
01
56
528
00 05 08
279
00
05 19
77
00
02 18
76
00
02 07
75
00 06 33
6. 74
00 03
84
73
00 03 61
41
00 10 59
42
00
72
02
5131
6 2
3
4
5
44
00 05 31 Pilwapali
03
-Contd .
00
45
47 46
00 02 62 47
00 00 12 40
82
00
607
00
09 47 Santpali
604
00 09 19 605
00 00 58 602
00
00
79
00 03
599/2
00
599/1
07 67 552
81
00 03
00
551
05 81 550/1
00
04 08
00
553
00 52 550/2
00
05
72 554
00 03 57 538
00
07 68 457
00
09 19 458
00
08
12
00
433
08 09 434
00 08 85 429
00
07 64 419
00 02 72 420
00
11 88 421
00
99
00
426
00 08 96
00
422
04 48
00
413
02 06 412
00
00
12 423
00
84
17
396
00 00 23
00
62 398
01
397
00 09 99 399
08 98
00
291
00
23 07 290
00
03 46 282
00
90
22
283
00 01 83 299
00
66
02
00
281
04
13 280
00
05 49 276
00
10 41 277
00
01
73 270
00
15
44 266
00
08 59 267
00 06 65 268
07 28
00
00
Palsabhadi 600
00 70 587
00 05 01 588
00
07 70
00
06 31 592 5132
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 21 , 2010/ SHRAVANA 30 , 1932
4
5
6
1 3
42
00 00
591
Palsabhadi
00
04 72
-Contd. 593
00
01
80
594
14
532
00 19
00
06 14
533
00 01 04
534
00
10
00
535
76
00 02
529
528
00 07
78
00 00
527
79
526
00 05
54
75
00 02
511
00 64
00
524
48
00 08
190
00
75
00
199
96
188
00 04
187
00 12 20
01
01
00
184
55
03
183
00
14
00
56
182
26
00 00
181
00 18 91
141
00 05 47
142
8.
52
00 12
129
07
130
44
00
00 05 45
126
00 03 28
127
105
00 06 89
08
00 07
103
07
60
102
00
49
95
00 02
15 83
96
00
10
00
00
80
00
86
09
76
84
00
75
09
74
00
00
10
13
00
02
54
25
00 00
56
19
858
00 22
7. Khogasa
00
08 31
857
856
00 08 65
859
00 13 02
01
01
879
00
33
00 02
832
29
00 13
833
36
831
00 08
72
834
00 19
98
836
00 24
99
00 05
711
47
714
00 06
[PART II- SEC . 3 (ii) ] 3
4
2
5
6.
00 03 08 Khogasa 716
46 715
00 09
-Contd .
00
558
03 32 677
00 00 12 676
00 05 64
84 675
00 08
674
00 07 79
00
665
00
68
63 667
12
00
46 666
00 07
625
00
09 57
00
614
00
99 624
03 00
00
00
623
06 64
00
10 01 620
633
90
00
15
636
16 96
00
80
00
635
00
639
00
44
02
22 17 638
00
00
54 599
01
14 678
02
00
00
555
01 28 Kusmur
00
19 556
06
25
17 389
00
00
06
01
390
388
07 26
00
385
12 89
00
00
17
00
387
01
77 386
00
49
04
00
380
48 379
00 01
378
00
07 47
01
51 373
00
06 44
00
372
369
00 02 45
99
00
371
06
01
00
54 368
06 73 370
00
04
206
00
62
00
149
08
16 94
00
148
147
03 63
00
36
146
00
62 145
02. 35
00
144
00
10
00
139
49
00
11
14
137
00
74
00
01
06
136
115
00 00 18 5133
भारत का राजपत्र अगस्त 21, 2010/ श्रावण 30 , 1932
[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]
4
6
1
5
2
3
1
00 00
134
10
Kusmur
82
00 02
-Contd 135
76
00 11
118
06
122
00
53
08 25
00
111
08
00
14
121
12
06
00
91
16
92
00
10
55
03
00
94
00 06 97
95
70
00 02
499
25
00 03
386
9.. Ghutikona
00 00 97
389
00
51
388
05
00
51
04
387
80
00
00
391
00
09
02
392
10.
00 03 77
393
41
00 03
377
00
42
09
394
00
68
06
397
00
00
10
263
17
00 03
261
00 00 21
260
06 78
00
262
92
06
00
256
72
00
255
00
81
00 08
254
00
00
75
253
00 02 11
252
00 00 38
250
00
00 03
251
238
18
00 02
00 03 33
237
00 05 17
97
12
00
00
96
67
00 01
93/3
00
13
08
93/2
39
00 04
93/1
69
00 04
410
63
92
78
02
00
98
00
00
19
442
40
00 05
449
00
04
04
448
00 02 93
450
00 04 39
451
46
00 01
452
59
00 12
446
06
00 01
459
3099GI /10-10
3
4
5
2
00
Ghutikona 460
06
00 04 04 461
-Contd .
48 564/4 00
15 78
00
542
36
01
564/2 00
00 00
564/3
11
00
560
21 70 559
00 11 39
04
545
57
00
76
00 03
547
00
33
04
546
00
548
05 69
00 05 51 536
10
532/2 00
73
00 00 10 532/3
00
62 532/4 00
08 60
00
530
147
00
01 14 Sagundih
08
143
96
00
00
00
34 148
00 45
00
146
00
144
94
08
00
00
48 145
01 08 138
00
02 22 154
00
11 95
00
320
01
00 01
319
88
01
324
00
00
00 10 322
65
00
11
32.
20
264
00
10
05 95
00
204
205
00 03 99
05 17
00
208
00
00
10 207
05 45
00
209
09
15 210
00
78 212
00 03
17
00
214
11
213
02 81
00
04 50
00
28
00
00 10 217
91
00 03
219
03 90 220
00
00 08 15 223
00 03 16 222
45
00
18 59
11 37
00
41
00
12 16 38
30
03
00
956 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 21 , 2010 / SHRAVANA 30 , 1932
3
5
6 15
W
93 Sagundih
100
65
20 Contd. 16
58
17 18
713
00 00 19 Kamapali
00
30 711
32 710
03
00
66 725
00
02 83
00
858
49
22 859
00
16 85 850
00
10
00
00
06 04 851
00 06
84 852
847
00
78
02 835
00 05 60
01
33 836
00
00
834
00 41
20
837
21
06 838
10 00 70 832
00 00 94
09 97 831
ني
03
00
67 829
828
00 11 39
00
Bhawarchuwa 654
06 64 657
00
76
02
00
656
05 19 655
06
00
68 652
21
00
37 630
00 20 30 626
00
00
10
57 631
00 00
00 14
45 593
08 594
00 08
00
595
10 36 596/1 00
60
10 488
00
25
09 487
00 07
54 486
00 00 95 490
00 04 9% 491
01
50 492/2
05
00
62 492/1 00 01 46 493
68
00 05
91 483/712 00 02 497
39
03 498
00
97 499
00 16 33 500
00 02
09 502
00 04 79 501/2 00 02 78 501/1 00 03 93 332
00
02 83
[PART II- SEC. 3 ( ii ) ]
4
1
2
5
3
6
00 06
52 Bhawarchuwa 505
00 03
----Contd. 506
91
49
00
15
507
508
05
00
00
509
07
82
42 514
00
11
14
511
00
60 512
00
14 88
91
00
13.
02
216
00 09 76 Bhawarchuwa 181 (Part)
215
00 07 34 208
00
05 82
97
06
207
00
204
00 08 93
00
228
02 80
00
70 229
03
230
00
00 81 236
00
00 10 235
00 01 84 234
00 03 40
00 03 00 233
231
00 (02 37 232
00
00
10
55
00 04
201
84 200
00 03
199
00
00
03
02
198
00
57
00
96
85
09
25
00 00 59
00
95
00 10 81
00 26 95 80
00
00
17 52
00
07 88 53
00 00 42
(07
51
00
88 48
00
01
01
24 97 47
00
00
20 46
07
43
00
55
13
00
85
03 26
00
14.
03
Chhatapathar 403
10
314
00
35 409
15
00
79 408
00 01
44 312
00 05 30 313/1 00 04 68
57 313/2 00 03
25 310
00 05
00
350
85 भारत का राजपत्र अगस्त 21 , 2010 / श्रावण 30 , 1932
[ भाग II - खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]
1 2
3
4
5
6
00 02 74
16. Chhatapathar 249
247
00 00 57
Contd .
251
57
00 03
254
00 01
78
00
06
36
244
255
00 69
00
47
00 00
49
05
48
00
30
49
00 07 38
45
00 69
00
50
58
00 01
19
45/586 00 07
00
44/5
02 81
44/3
00 01 78
63
44/2
00 01
44/1
00 15
00
00 06
43/4
37
00 00
43/1
10
43/5
57
00
02
00
00
85
41
06
58
29
00 01 81
59
00 09
24
74
68
11/3
00
02
54
15
11/2
07
12
00
19
00 01 93
15/1
14
00 00 59
60
15/2
00 04
00 01
16
03
21
00 01
8
00 05 73
7
5
00 03 90
02
1
78
00
02 62
00
15. Harda
716
517
00 05 74
515
00 03 61
00 09 30
516
506
42
00
505
00
60
00 09 47
507
00 02 21
508
00
03 51
501
90
509
00 02
500
65
498
0800
61
499
11
00 03 30
495
02
510
00
40
2
4
3
5
6
00 01 72 Badesajapali 1559
13 1868
35
00
1867
00 03 04 1869
00 00
1866
03
00
35
00
1861
00 56 1859
21
00
21
01 1841/9 00
16 1857/4 00 00 1841/8 00 03 17
16 05 1841/7 00
1841/6 00 11 51 1841/4
04
00
52
00
1830
00 10
00
14 1841/1
00 1840
00 02 09 1832
07 05
00
00 13 1833
74 1837
00 08 06 1834
00 07 77 1835
00 00
10 1801
00
00
84 1798
00 08 20
04
25 1797 00
1796
00 02 51
00
1767
08 81 1768
00
49
02 1769
00 06 66
00
1711
21 87
02 55 1712/3 00
00 1712/4 00
10 1707
21 31
00
1710
00 00 20 1706
00
15 65 1705 00 03 05
06 1174/9 00
82
02 37 1174/10 00
1174/5 00 03 51
03 62 1174/7 00
1174/6 00 05 00
00
25 1177
00
00 1184 00
10
00 02 1185
50 1186
03 35
00
1183
00 00 36
00 02 93 1187
06 1182
71
00
1180
00 00
* 1:31
00 07
06
0 5136
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA AUGUST 21 , 2010/ SHRAVANA 30 , 1932
4
2
3
5
6
1
1
00
28
07
Badesajapali 1114
26
1106
00
-Centd.
00
00
1115
02 (2
00
00
18
1116
00
1100
86
01
04
1099/3 00
88
00
71
1099/2 00
00 73
1099/4 00
06
87
1098/1 00
1097
10
00
10
1096
05
09
00 02
1103
17.
487
00
05
Bundela-
55
18.
00 00
539
bhantha
00 05 08
486
488
00
00 61
49
490
00 01
489
00 04 18
00
00
493
2
00
48
494
03
495
00
04
37
01
497
00
80
00
08
461
50
00
50
498
00
00
02 39
462
460
00 04 38
24
463
00 01
00 07 60
459
00
433
07
11
00
458
01 62
23
434
00 10
426
00 02 55
417
00 07 94
425
00
78
01
10
00
418
15
00
420
02 93
17
181
00
179
27
00 (0)
00
178
88
02
194
00
00
0
00
01
196
00
38
176
174
00 05 08
00 79
197
00
00
173
06 90
171
00 03 94
19.
08
19
169
00
146
00 08 87
147
00
19
04
03
148
00
07
[ PART II ---SEC . 3 ( ii ) ] 2
3
4
5
6
00
54 Bundela- 149
145
00 01
16 bhar it a
00
-Con
144
08
09 143
00
81 8
272
00
7
41
00
5
()
23
00 01 30 4
49
it .
00
(0)
25
00 02
26
00
07
19 264
30
Loharpali
00
265
00 03
G
00 16 266
06
2690
269:2
00
il
24 263
09
00
270
06
00 05
271
258
00 05
00
195
00
6
い 257
00 00
ין
82 196
00.
191
00
12 83
23 186
00 01
187
23
00
144
00
70
11
143
00 06 78
08
145
00
2
00
146
04 86
00
119
08 73
00
118
04 61 42
00
02
22 44
00 02
45
00
01 47 43
02 (09
00
46
00
14
76 47
00 04
48
00 10
54
00 00
20
00
71 39
14
55
00.
(0) 87 57
00 05 45 58
00 00 10
05
294
00
01 Butipali
295
13
00 08
[No. - 25011 / 19 / 2010 OR - 1 ] B. K. DATTA , Under Secy .
5137 भारत का राजपत्र अगस्त 21 , 2010/ श्रावण 30 , 1932
[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]
4
6
3
5
2
1
नई दिल्ली , 16 अगस्त, 2010
201
10
28
00
रेंहटीखोल
00
219
11
15
-जारी
00
07
96
223
00
02
70
218
का.आ. 2059.- 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;
00
00
225
74
29
00
224
06
00
12
82
239
240
00
89
11
00
02
45
274
और केन्द्रीय सरकार को उक्त पाइपलाइन बिछाने के प्रयोजन के लिए यह 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;
00
85
20
255
263
10
96
00
10
257
00
00
00
00
258
27
262
00
06
12
00
15
32 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;
261
76
00
01
260
76
00
23
309
2. मुरमुरी
03
97
289
00
71
08
00
288
00
16
40
287
53
00
276
02
26
00
17
274/1
89
275
00
19 कोई व्यक्ति, अनुसूची में वर्णित भूमि में हितबद्ध है , उस तारीख से जिसको भारत के राजपत्र में यथा प्रकाशित इस अधिसूचना की प्रतियां 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 दिलीप कुमार अग्रवाल, सक्षम प्राधिकारी , इंडियन ऑयल कॉर्पोरेशन लिमिटेड , पारादीप- सम्बलपुर - रायपुर - राँची पाइपलाइन परियोजना , एन -17 , सेक्टर 2. अंवति विहार , रायपुर -492006 ( छतीसगढ़ ) को लिखित रूप में आक्षेप भेज सकेगा ।
270
00
04
82
36
268
00
02 अनुसूची
13
91
267
00
राज्य - छतीसगढ़
तहसील-सरायपली जिला- महासमुंद
00
07
00
266
क्षेत्रफल
खसरा सं.
क्रम गांव का नाम
265
00
02
63
00
262
08
37
वर्ग मीटर
सं.
हेक्टयर एयर
10
260
00
00 4
5
6
3
2
1
06
42
263
00
00
29
127
00
1. रेंहटीखोल
06
00
06
261
82
00
12
126
258
66
00
06
16
55
00
132
00
53
257
15 00
07
13
74 133
00
221
15
3. चिवराकुंटा
00
09 00
37 24
18
220
123
45
00
03 00
61
219
07
138
00
15
05
218
00
02
156
81
00
08
27
217
21
00
00
157
75
27
00
216
07
10
00
155
00
215
03
19
82
07
170
00
05
12
00
214
65
00
00
171
55
00
06
32
213
13
00
202 [PART 11--- SEC. 3 ( in ) | 5138
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 21 , 2010/ SHRAVANA 30, 1932
1
475
गनियारीपाली-जारी
चिवराकुंटा -जारी
209
208
198
465
204
205
132
583/1
583/2
586/3
586/5
586/2
587
590/3
590/2
5.
सिंघोडा
168
193
216
4. गनियारीपाली
218
190
138
2 3 4 5 6 1 2 3 ! 5 6 211 00 15 67 00 00 17 210 00 08 45 476 00 13 43 00 00 42 470 (X) 00 86 00 09 11 460 00 00 10 00 14 26 469 70 201 00 03 03 468 00 17 13 00 01 60 134 00 04 Aj 503 508 123 50 : 122 00 13 510 05 20 00 410 00 04 !!! 00 02 44 579 ( K ) (X ) 118 21 581 (X) 02 00 راد 582 00 (09 27 113 00 03 00 05 50 112/1 00 55 ( X) 04 08 100 00 20 11 (5) 02 15 108 00 05 18 00 05 54 107 00 60 10 08 67 104 00 00 17 103 00 $0 16 00 07 68 10 58 00 16 90 00 158 24 68 89 0 57 159 00 02 1: 74 00 19 31 00 09 96 73 00 81 169 00 15 38 75 00 05 170 00 00 20 76 00 200 00 00 93 78 00 32 201 00 00 10 80 00 : 00 00 10 34 00 34 192 00 06 69 00 16 35 191 00 00 81 15 08 00 07 77 24 00 17 38 189 00 00 84 22 01 28 175 00 06 13 00 13 23 139 00 03 03 478 17 00 00 15 94 140 00 00 35 09 40 00 (01 35 5139
का राजपत्र अगस्त 21 , 2010 / श्रावण 30 , 1932
[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii)
सागरपाली
184
182
181
7. पलसाभाडी 139
60
140
136
428
8. ६. बडी
146
148
147
1857
9 . लखनपुर
1856
1855
1854
1846
1844
1843
820
9/2
9/3
818
816
2 4 6 i 2 3 4 5 6 13: 00 18 6. 109 00 05 68 -जारा 00 22 108 00 00 10 00 01 69 107 00 06 13 134 00 01 05 105 00 06 16 00 04 27 104 00 04 79 00 03 1 103 00 04 80 04 102 00 01 94 123 4 101 00 15 17 92 00 00 10 93 00 08 13 90 00 22 10 92 00 00 37 82. 00 00 44 91 00 00 10 80 00 00 38 00 18 62 81 00 13 17 137 00 01 53 78 00 04 00 00 31 79 00 07 71 00 00 78 75 00 02 91 135 00 01 72 76 00 08 43 134 00 03 84 77 00 08 58 127 00 05 50 71 00 00 20 126 00 15 36 69 00 07 60 125 00 04 35 68 00 03 76 00 07 20 66 00 12 78 154 00 15 04 58 00 00 38 153 00 05 54 62 00 15 72 00 16 35 60 00 03 59 00 02 92 59 00 00 19 00 07 45 57 00 01 23 145 00 01 82 29 00 05 44 00 00 13 30 00 01 96 00 02 78 31 00 05 63 00 11 98 28 00 03 79 00 14 69 32 00 07 83 00 04 07 13 00 03 43 00 00 10 14 00 02 99 00 03 10 9/1 00 00 10 00 08 72 00 05 96 821 00 10 00 00 76 819 00 01 33 8 00 09 27 00 03 40 6 00 06 95 817 00 00 10 5 00 01 14 00 06 20 [ PART II- SEC . 3 ( ii) ] 5140
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: AUGUST 21 , 2010 / SHRAVANA 30 , 1932
4
5
6
6
3
4
2
1
2
5
3
1
00
20
बटकी
06
83
03
29
10.
00
812/3
लखनपुर - जारी
00
00
78
82
73
00
812/2 00
66
04
00
85
78
05
812/1
00
68
07
00
86
49
05
809
00
07
00
52
87
05
75
00
808/2
44
02
00
78
04
46
807
00
78
00
77
05 05
00
60
803
02
00
66
261
06
00
11
802
00
13
89
109
03
43
00
801
00
01
59
110
10
00
00
798
00
00
48
112
05
00
90
796
00
12
33
113
94
00
04
797
00
06
18
132
02
45
00
790
00
55
05
131
00
02
42
793
10
00
130
00 00
69
792
05
00
134
05
10 00
05
20
791
09
00
04
136
01
83
765
00
00
61
135
00
00
02
29
764
05
33
00
148
36
00
05
766
00
149
00
10
04
00
74
767
74
00
02
150
00
03
74
768
36
00
04
151
05
00
769
98
00
00
10
147
46
06
770
00
152
00
10
88 771
00
03
01
00
04
43
160
00
00
10
777
47
00
06
161
00
19
50
772
00
227
04
13 00
00
19
421
226
00
05
67 436
00
14
90
225
00
07
49 425
00
12
65
76
00
06
172
00
97
00
423
00
58
175
12
04
12
424
00
07
25
223
00 416
00
01
92
2.1
222
00
03
05
00
01
438
224
00
02
39 437
00
01
54
76
00
01
474
64
01
426
00
06
02
476
00 00
26
99
414
00
05
478
28 00
34
07
412
479
00
39
06
06 00
39
378
480
00
07
85
00
67
400
00
00
18
31
00
06 377
481
42 5141
भारत का राजपत्र अगस्त 21 , 2010/ श्रावण 30, 1932
[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]
6
4
5 2
3
1
46
1040 00
21 11. रुढा
60
00
1042
08
00
33
11
1043
84
07
00
1044
02
46
00
1089
02
03
00
1050
23
00
16
1083
25
00
1062
19
00
10
00
1061
82
07
00
1063
01
55
1080
00
99
02
00
1079
01
66
00
1076
09
83
00
1078
00
00
11
1109
71
00
1071
00
06
00
14
1074
00
79
00
1111
29
07
1113 00
64
00
03
1115
64
11
1116 00
08
41
1117
00
84
00
08
808
16
00
05
809
04
66
00
807/1
63
00
02
810
00
806
02
97
78
00
10
804
00
02
23
802
00
02
00
801
11
51
800
00
58
00
07
786
00
10
785
00
85
03
787
00
00
53
05
788
00
41
02
732
10
00
733
00
93
02
00
734
80
731
00
03
51
00
05
730
3099Gl/10-11
5
3
6 2
4
1
729
00
04
92 रुढा-जारी
02
289
00
98
290
00
85
01
00
21
01
291
00
05
81
293
02
53
282
00
00
-00
99
281
20
11
00
198
88
03
00
201
62
03
00
202
00
93
02
194
00
17
97
191
00
20
00
190
00
10
00
189
00
04
30
181
00
03
14
137
00
01
58
180
75
00
00
179
10
00
00
178
02
08
68
00
22
00
03
67
00
04
68
66
00
04
35
35
03
97
00
36
20
00
00
38
07
95
00
37
00
04
43
40
75
00
06
32
10
58
00
47
14
06
00
53/1
08
00
56
24/2
03
69
49/1266 00
10
00
00
49/1
50
05
00
20
13
00
03
19
00
02
32
18
02
02
00
17
06
99
00
15
30
00
00
219
12. आकाशखार
00
26
04
278 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 21 , 2010 / SHRAVANA 30 , 1932
[ PART 11 SEC . 3 ( ii ) ] 4
2
3
6
5
4
2
3
1
5
6 277
00
37
04
आकाशखार
134
(X)
65
02
खम्हारपाली
03
-जारी
276
00
46
-जारी
00
05
42
11
04
274
00
54
00
03
16
14
273
00
08
16
15
00
08
36 220
00
13
73
00
42
16
30
19
00
221
00
10
82
12
21
74
15
00
00
28
08
06
199
29
00
08
70 200
00
04
49
30
00
02
91 00
196
09
19
31
00
15
56 00
197
08
95
00
34
00
10 00
81
222
01
109
00
05
00 00
05
89
185
23
119
00
46
73
00
183
11
1243
00
08
12
14. छिंदपाली
00
81
182
10
22
1246
00
52 00
226
00
13
00
1244
04
09 13
36
148
00
1245
00
88
30
06
14
175
00
00
03
07
1249
00
94
06
151
1298
00
73
57 03
152
00
84
1299
00
18
69 06
154
00
17
00
1301
03
56
47
1300
157
00
05
65
00
04
00
1302
08
75 00
03
27
156
1365
00
21
41 01
169
00
77
00
1366
00
10 00
43
21
61
07
1367
00
82 00
48
42
04
1368
00
08
98 04
41
04
00
1369
00
02
21 00
09
72
37
00
03
1372
70 36
00
00
90
25
1373
00
03 00
07
71
69
00
99
1374
08 14. खम्हारपाली 120
00
00
10
96
1423
00
35 123
00
11
52
1421
04
95
00
125
24
44
49
00
1433
06 124
00
04
29
00
20
1416
77 00
140
00
10
00
1446
00
10 141
00
00
11
00
12
1444
19 00
10
93
143
1445
04
17
00
00
25
1456/7 00
01 144
02
85
08
1457/1 00
59 142
00
04
04
711/2
00
10 02
59 145
00
53
711/4
00
00
10 00
14
146
00 5143 भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]
भारत का राजपत्र अगस्त 21 , 2010/ श्रावण 30 , 1932
6 4
6
3
4
5 2
3
5
2
1
00
00
31 00
235
712
05
89
छिंदपाली
15. चट्टीगिरोला
244
00
17
29 01
41
00
-जारी
713
00
03 02
82
245
709
00
00
236
00
29 28
720
00
20
00
243
00 721
06
20
00
96
237
00
13
62 722
14
97
00
02
238
00
30
70
608
00
01
79
232
00
07 00
08
82
395
00
97 00
233
00
08
55
396
00
06
21 04
47
218
00
397
00
60
215
03 00
14
96
398
217
00
64
02 00
14
70
400
00
18
05
216
00
06
08
439
00
06
15 00
19
213
437
18
00
04
46
50
00
00
48
438
07
47
124/1 00
00
02
436
65
00
02
63
124/2
02
51
435
00
65
211
00
05 00
00
10
433
00
12 03
93
123/1
64
434
00
00
00
123/2
20 00
08
430
50
14
134
08
00
00
06
01 429
122/1
00
02
85 476
00
02
37
11
428
00
11
71
67/1
00
15 06
61
426
00
00
02
79
90 00
10
17
00
04
21 425
78
06
67
00
496
31
80
00
06 00
02
35
497
00
75
00
15 00
03
36
498
01
25
00
81
02
93
00
499
65
00
16
82
06
00
69
423
70/2
00
07
04 00
02
41
500
00
04
76
70/1
502
00
03
01
00
14
35
01
93
502/1497 00
73
34
00
01 00
01
56
503
33
00
11
21
54
04
504
00
06
32
00
04 00
66
03
505
35
867
00
62
16 बोदानवापाली
00
00
15
286
4()
09
00
866
31
15
00
285
00
08
27
868
00
08
69
510
00
3
865
03
79
00
28
511
70
20
30
00
11
885
00
278 5144
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: AUGUST21 , 2010 / SHRAVANA 30 930
4
6 2
5
00
00
79 बोदानवापाली 830
883
00
17
23
884
00
05
53
882
00
06
59
886
00
21
07
856
00
54
04
780
00
56
18
00
781
00
79
08
00
775
19
776
00
08
61
00
773
11
10
00
02
00
777
762
00
17
96
12
32
758/2389/3 00
00
799
00
15
749
00
26
93
750
00
00
16
00
747/2
19
08
00
813
59
98
00
812
07
02
815
00
22
17
00
779
00
86
00
34 17. र्द्धाभाठा
1328
37
03
1288
00
42
1274
00
27
52
00
1273
08
47
04
1272/3 00
45
1272/1
00
01
07
04
1272/2 00
94
00
32
1275
00
1236
00
06
20
00
1082
13
93
00
01
1154
38
1083
00
08
40
1086
00
03
82
00
1085
85
09
15
1087
00
50
20
00
1118
78
00
00
1108
10
1107
00
01
44
[ PAR: 11 SEC. 3 ( ii ) ]
4
2
3
5
1
00
1103
103
दर्शभाठा
50 -जारी
1090
00
00
04
1100
00
1101
03
1038
01
95
1037
00
00
02
86
1036
00
05
17
1035
1034/2 00
00
06
22
1032
00
41
1031
13
996
(K)
(F)
03
997
962
17
00
26
984
07
75
00
983
06
26
00
985
00
01
981/2 00
18
00
975
15
976
00
00
28
09
974
00
03
973
00
00
972
00
75
895
00
55
18. वैदपाली
75
881
00
00
6!
896
00
92
95
00
826
12
03
425/915 00
00
02
825/2
67
827/2
00
67
11
00
19
821
31
829
07
00
830
00
03
833
00
13
507
00
48
509
05
00
0
508
06
00
515
00
53
514
00
06
82 भारत का राजपत्र अगस्त 21 , 2010/ श्रावण 30 , 1932
[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]
6
4
5 2
3
1
09
16
00
541
बैदपाली
69
01
00
540
-जारी
05
00
31
542
45
00
00
547
32
00
04
546
01
69
00
545
07
00
82
549
00
95
12
701
00
01
01
710
77
12
00
699
23
00
06
698
95
02
00
711
13
68
00
697
09
24
00
695
53
00
05
693
70
00
03
640
12
40
00
639/1
07
94
00
638
00
06
12
637
07
27
00
630
00
14
00
631
00
04
12
629
00
24
00
628
01
37
00
627
10
55
00
622
50
08
00
1144
19. बालसी
00
01
32
1147
16
00
02
1146
00
00
83
1148
00
01
69
1145
00
23
65
1140
05
00
01
1139
36
01
00
1141
06
75
00
1138
22
08
00
1137
98
08
531
00
07
50
1152 00
24
09
1136 00
13
43
00
1133
65
02
00
1006
81
01
00
1001
5145
4
5
6 3
2
1
96
05
00
1002
बालसी--जारी
07
71
00
1000
00
05
72 1008
07
08
1009
00
30
00
00
1018
07
77
00
1019
45
00
05
1021
14
00
01
1020
47
00
04
1035
43
00
03
1033
72
04
00
1032
36
02
00
1031
06
93
00
1030
46
00
01
1043
39 1044
00
02
00
16
16 1029
06
00
13 1065
04
47
00
1066
01
05
00
1067
40
02
00
1068
34 1070
00
07
43
00
01
1069
73
01
00
1074
18
915
00
64
00
74
00
912
32
27
00
913
96
09
00
884
00
19
00
885
00
00
28 874
24
04 883
00
65
00
04
875
00
83
12
878
14
00
11 880
06
00
44 679/3
00
14
13 679/4
16
84
00
676
00
84
00
679/2
06
59
00
679/1
34
00
03
681
18
23
00
682
06
02
00
687 5146
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 21 , 2010 / SHRAVANA 30 , 1932
[PART II --- SEC . 3 (ii ) j ! 2 3 4 5 6 1 2 3 4 5 6 बालसी-जारी 686/1
लुकापारा- जारी 256
684
267
685
698
719
196
190
779
778
764/3
764/5
764/1
20. बरिहापाली
736
130
702
693
21. लुकापारा
290
22.
परसदा
259
254
[सं. आर-25011 /20/2010 - ओ.आर.
00 04 52 00 01 90 00 14 28 00 00 60 00 15 53 246 00 14 66 00 06 86 245 00 06 28 720 00 13 92 221 00 06 01 00 01 13 195 00 14 84 722 00 49 41 00 04 03 780 00 12 47 00 04 38 00 10 41 197 00 00 35 00 02 08 189 00 20 31 777 00 06 60 163 00 01 88 763 00 13 82 188 00 00 10 762 00 05 96 164 00 09 57 764/2 00 29 64 165 00 04 61 00 09 71 166 00 01 01 00 10 25 159 00 14 06 765 00 10 87 154 00 01 45 00 10 86 153 00 06 82 737 00 10 25 151 00 08 86 00 08 24 138 00 12 86 726 00 23 45 137 00 01 91 725 00 08 54 141 00 18 32 724 00 18 28 133 00 09 74 723 00 11 69 132 00 08 51 722 00 04 ( ) 131 00 05 85 721 00 14 01 00 14 706 00 03 33 78 00 04 83 705 00 07 69 77 00 00 62 00 10 32 73 00 20 57 701 00 05 32 71 00 03 17 703 00 08 50 72 00 05 57 00 00 10 53 00 16 97 692 00 21 31 45 00 02 20 291 00 00 77 49 00 01 09 00 06 04 50 00 12 44 261 00 05 59 48 00 05 28 260 00 04 24 150 00 06 84 00 16 11 00 00 10 00 00 10 258 00 09 97 257 00 00 10
वी. के. दत्ता , अवर सचिव 5147 त का राजपत्र अगस्त 21 , 2010/ श्रावण 30 , 1932
[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]
4
2
3
5
6
1
New Delhi , the 16th August . 010
224
00
29
Rehatikhol
06
1.
00
12
82
239
--Contd .
89
240
00
11
45
274
00
02
85
20
255
.00
S.O 2059.- 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 laid by Indian Oil Corporation Limited ;
96
00
263
10
257
00
00
10
00
258
00
27
00
06 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;
262
12
32
261
15
00
00
76
260
01
00
76
2.
309
23
Murmuri
00
03
97
289
Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferd by Sub - section ( 1 ) of Section 3 of the Petroleum a 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 ;
00
08
71
288
287
16
40.
00
276
00
02
53
00
26
17
274/1
89
275
00
19
00
82
270
04
268
00
02
36
00
13
91
267
266
00
07
00 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 Dilip Kumar Agarwal , Competent Authority , Indian Oil Corporation Limited , Paradip - Sambalpur - Raipur- Ranchi Pipeline Project , N - 17 , Sector- 2 , Avanti Vihar , Raipur- 492006, Chhattisgarh .
265
00
02
63
262
00
08
37 SCHEDULE
00
10
00
260
State :Chhattisgarh
Tehsil : Saraipali District : Mahasamundu
263
00
06
42
00
06
261
06 Sr. Name of the Khasara
No.
06
258
00
66 No. Village
Hectare
Area Are Sq.mtr .
257
00
15
53 2
4
5
3
6
1
221
00
15
74
3. Chiwarakut
00
00
29
220
127
00
09
37 1. Rehatikhol
00
126
12
82
219
00
03
45 00
16
00
15 132
55
218
05 07
00
13
00
08
27 133
217
00
24
00
123
18
216
27
75 00
07
61
00
138
215
03
19 00
00
12
05 156
81
214
02
00
00
21
00
06
55 157
213
00
10
07
211
00
67 155
15
00
170
00
07
82
08
45
210
00
00
65
42 171
00
209
00 13
202
00
32
00
09
208
11 00
26 201
10
28
00
14
198
00
15
219
11
201
00
03
03 00
223
07
204
96
00
17
13 00
02
218
70
205
00
01
60 00
00
04
74
00
225
134
88 5148
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 21 , 2010 / SHRAVANA 30. 1932
[ PART II -SEC . 3 ( ii ) ] Chiwarakut
Ganiyaripali 581
-Contd.
582
-Contd .
583/1
583/2
586/3
586/5
586/2
118
116
590/3
590/2
112/1
Singhoda
100
159
169
103
190
140
Ganiyaripali 216
137
470
468
465
466
503
412
1 2 3 4 5 6 1 2 3 4 5 6 3. 132 00 16 90 131 00 04 96 00 02 41 00 09 27 123 00 02 05 00 05 50 122 00 43 00 04 08 120 00 23 68 00 02 15 117 00 02 44 00 05 54 00 00 21 00 08 67 00 01 49 587 00 17 88 113 00 03 31 00 07 00 00 55 00 16 (x4 00 20 11 5. 158 00 24 68 108 00 05 18 00 02 13 107 00 00 10 168 00 09 96 104 00 03 06 00 15 38 00 08 16 170 00 00 20 68 00 32 200 00 00 58 93 90 00 02 93 201 00 00 10 89 00 01 37 193 00 00 10 74 00 19 31 192 00 06 69 73 00 09 81 191 00 00 81 75 00 10 05 00 07 76 00 02 06 189 00 00 84 78 00 38 32 175 00 06 13 80 00 00 19 139 00 03 03 34 (X) 02 34 00 00 35 00 16 35 138 00 01 35 218 00 15 08 00 02 18 222 00 17 38 135 00 00 22 224 00 01 28 99 00 01 69 226 00 13 23 136 00 01 05 478 00 15 94 184 00 04 27 477 00 09 182 40 00 03 54 475 00 00 17 181 00 04 05 476 00 13 43 123 00 03 47 00 00 86 92 00 00 10 460 00 00 10 90 00 22 10 469 00 06 70 82 00 00 44 00 09 45 80 00 00 38 00 01 92 81 00 13 17 00 00 10 78 00 04 60 467 00 20 93 79 00 07 71 00 20 05 75 00 02 91 508 00 11 49 76 00 08 43 501 00 05 08 77 00 08 58 510 00 05 32 71 00 00 20 00 04 35 69 00 07 60 579 00 00 44 68 00 03 76 [ भाग II - खण्ड 3( ii) ]
भारत का राजपत्र अगस्त 21 , 2010/ श्रावण 30 , 1932
4
2
3
5
6
1
12
78
00
9. Singhoda 66
---Contd. 58
00
00
38 62
00
15
72
00
60
03
59 59
00
00
19 57
23
00
01
29
05
44
00
30
00
%
01
31
00
05
63 28
00
03
79 32
00
07
83
00
13
03
43
00
14
99
02
9/1
10
00
00
9/2
00
05
96 9/3
76
00
00
8
00
09
27
06
95 6
00
5
00
14
01
109
00
05
68 6. Sagarpali
00
00
108
10
00
107
06
13
00
06
105
16
04
104
00
79 103
00
04
80
00
01
94 102
101
00
15
17 93
00
08
13 92
00
00
37 91
00
00
10
00
7. Palsabhadi 139
18
62
00
137
01
53 140
00
00
31
136
00
00
78
00
135
01
72
00
134
84
03
127
00
05
50 126
15
36
00
125
00
04
35 428
00
07
20 8. Kharkhari 154
00
15
04 153
00
05
54 146
00
16
35 148
00
02
92
147
00
07
45
145
00
01
82 3099G1/10-12
5149
5
2
3
4
6 1857
00
13
00
Lakhanpur
1856
00
02
78
00
1855
98
14
1854
00
69
04
1846
07
00
:
00
00
1844
10
00
03
10 1843
08
72 820
00
00
10 821
00
00
01
819
33 818
00
03
40
00
817
00
10
00
20 816
06
03
00
29 812/3
00
73
00
812/2
00
05
78 812/1
809
00
05
49
05
75 808/2 00
(04
46 807
00
05
60 803
00
!!
802
00
03
43 801
00
798
00
00
796
00
05
94
04
797
00
02
45 790
00
02
793
00
42 792
00
69
05.
00
05
20 791
765
01
83
00
02
29 764
00
36
05
766
00
767
00
04
70 768
00
03
769
00
00
06
770
771
00
00
10 717
00
10
00
00
42
436
00
425
00
12
65 423
00
97
00
424
04
12
00
01
92 416
00
00
01
05 433
437
00
01
54
00
01
64 426 5150
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 21 , 2010 / SHRAVANA 30 , 1932
3
4
2
5
6 1
414
00
26
99
412
00
07
34 Lakhanpur -(Contd.)
06
00
39
378
00
00
67
400
00
18
31
377
20
83
00
06 10. Batki
00
78
82
00
85
04
00
66
07
86
00
68
07
52
87
78
02
00
44
05
77
00
78
261
00
02
66
89
109
00
13
00
01
59
110
00
00
112
48
00
12
113
33
06
132
00
18
55
00
05
131
130
10
00
00
00
05
10
134
00
04
136
09
135
00
00
61
05
148
33
00
00
00
10
149
150
00
74
02
00
36
151
04
147
00
00
10
152
00
10
88
160
43
04
00
00
161
06
47
227
00
04
13
226
05
67
00
00
225
07
49
172
00
06
76
00
175
12
58
00
223
25
07
222
00
21
03
224
39
00
02
474
00
01
76
476
00
06
02
478
00
05
28
06
479
00
39
07
480
00
85
00
06
481
42
1040 00
21
46 11. Ruda
1042
00
60
08
[ PART II -- SEC . 3 ( ii ) } 2
3
1
4
6
5
1043
Ruda
00
11
33 1044
00
07
84 -(Contd .)
1089
02
00
46 1050
00
03
02 1083
00
16
23 1062
19
00
25 1061
00
00
10 1063
82
00
07
1080
55
00
01
02
99 1079
00
00
(01
1076
66 1078
83
00
09
00
00
1109
11 1071
00
00
71 1074
00
14
06
00
00
1111
79 1113
00
07
29
00
03
1115
64
00
64 1116
1117
00
08
41
00
808
08
84 809
00
05
16 807/1
00
04
66 810
00
02
63 806
02
00
97 804
00
10
78
00
02
802
23
02
801
00
00
00
800
51 786
(07
00
58 785
00
00
10
00
787
03
85 788
00
05
53 732
00
02
41 733
00
00
10
00
734
02
93 731
03
00
80 730
00
05
51
00
729
04
92 289
00
02
98
85
00
01
290
291
01
00
21 293
00
05
81 282
00
02
53
00
281
00
99
00
198
11
20
03
88
00
201
202
00
03
62 194
02
00
93
00
191
17
97 5151 भारत का राजपत्र अगस्त 21 , 2010/ श्रावण 30 , 1932
[भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]
Akashkhara 157
190
-(Contd.) 156
189
--(Contd.)
169
181
137
179
13. Khamharpali 120
140
141
143
142
145
53/1
146
24/2
134
49/1266 00
49/1
00 12. Akashkhara 219
278
109
274
119
273
1243
14. Chhindpali
1246
220
1244
221
1245
88 199
1249
200
1299
222
1300
1302
1365
182
1366
82
1367
148
98
1368
1369
151
1372
2 3 4 5 6 1 2 3 4 5 6 Ruda 00 00 20 00 05 65 00 00 10 00 03 27 00 30 04 00 01 00 03 14 43 00 21 61 180 00 01 58 42 00 04 48 00 00 75 41 00 04 04 37 00 09 72 178 00 10 36 00 00 90 68 00 02 08 69 00 07 71 67 00 03 22 00 00 10 66 00 04 68 123 00 11 52 35 00 04 35 125 00 24 44 36 00 03 97 124 00 04 29 38 00 00 20 00 00 10 37 00 07 95 00 11 00 40 00 04 43 00 10 93 32 00 06 75 144 00 02 25 47 00 10 58 00 04 04 00 06 14 00 02 53 00 08 56 00 00 14 00 02 65 03 69 11 00 05 42 00 00 10 14 00 03 16 20 00 05 50 15 00 08 36 19 00 03 13 42 16 30 18 00 02 32 19 00 12 21 17 00 02 02 28 00 15 74 15 00 06 99 29 00 08 70 00 00 30 30 00 02 91 00 04 26 31 00 15 56 277 00 04 37 34 00 00 10 276 00 03 46 00 05 00 00 04 54 00 23 46 00 08 16 00 08 12 00 13 73 00 22 52 00 10 82 00 04 09 00 08 06 00 30 00 04 49 00 03 07 196 00 09 19 1298 00 73 57 197 00 08 95 00 18 69 00 01 81 1301 00 03 56 185 00 05 89 00 04 47 183 00 11 73 00 08 75 00 10 81 00 21 41 226 00 00 13 00 00 10 00 13 36 00 07 175 00 14 06 00 08 00 06 94 00 02 152 00 03 84 00 03 154 00 06 17 1373 00 03 5152
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 21 , 2010/ SHRAVANA 30 , 1932
[ PART II-SFC . 3 ( ii ) ]
6
2
3
4
5
1
3
4
2
5
6 1
00
04
54 00
1374
99
08
Chhindpali 504
00
35
96
1423
505
00
03
66 Chhindpali ~~( Contd .)
-(Contd.)
00
95
1421
04
286
00
00
15 00
06
49
1433
285
00
15
31 00
20
Π
1416
08
510
00
69 00
1446
00
10
28
511
00
79 12
19
00
1444
00
278
00
20 1445
04
17
00
00
00 01
31 1456/7 00
85
15. Chattigirola 235
59
00
08
1457/1
00
17
244
29 00
59
711/2
10
245
00
03
51 00
10
711/4 00
236
00
00
29 712
00
05
89
00
243
00
96
41
713
00
01
00
13
62
237
709
00
02
82
00
238
02
30 720
20
00
28
07
79 06
232.
00
721
00
20
14
97
722
00
233
00
00
97
70
00
01
608
00
218
21
00 08
00
395
82
215
00
03
60 00
08
55
396
217
02
00
64
47
397
00
04
00
216
05
18 14
96
398
00
15
213
00
06
70
00
400
14
50
00
06
00
(04 439
08
46 00
437
19
18
00
124/1
07
47 00
00
48
438
00
02
124/2
63
65
436
00
02
211
00
05
65
51
435
00
02
123/1 00
93
12 00
433
00
10
123/2 00
(0
20
64
434
03
00
134
00
01
14 00
50
430
08
06
122/1
00
02 429
08
85 00
476
37
00
02
00
15
67/1
71 00
11
11
428
7)
00
90
02 426
00
06
61
78
00
004
21 425
10
17
00
00
80
06
31
67
00
06
496
75
00
00
15 497
02
35
00
81
00
25
01 00
03
498
36
82
00
65
10 499
02
00
93
70/2
00
07
04
69
06
423
00
70/1
04
76
00
41
500
00
02
35
14
00
64 502
00
03
01
00
34
01
73 01
502/1497 00
93
21
33
00
56
503
00
01
00
32
04
06 5153 भारत का राजपत्र अगस्त 21 , 2010/ श्रावण 30 , 1932
[ भाग 11- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]
4
5
6 1
2
6
3
4
3
5
1
2
00
15
50 35
62
Darrabhata 1087
00
16. Bondanavapali 867
20
78 866
00
09
40
00
1118
(Contd .)
00 868
00
08
27
00
10
1108
00
01
44
1107
00
83
865
03
70
00
03
92
1103
885
00
11
00 00
79
00
1099
880
00
50 00
23
1100
00
04
38 883
17
00
05
53
00
64 884
00
1102
29
00
00
06
59
1101
05 882
1038
00
03
18 00
21
07
886
01
95
54
00
856
00
04
1037
86
56
1036
00
02 780
00
18
00
00
79
00
05 781
1035
00
08
00
05
79
1034/2
775
19
00
06 08
61
1032
00
22 776
00
10
12 00
1031
40 773
11
00
00
03 00
02
996
13 777
00
03 00
17
96
09 762
997
962
00
17
12
32
26 758/2389/3 00
00
07
75 799
00
00
15
984
26
00
749
00
26
93
983
06 00
985
00
01
52 750
00
16
00
29
00
18
89 08
981/2
747/2
59
00
813
15 00
98
99
975
976
00
28 812
00
07
02
00
69
974
815
22
17
00
03 00
86
00 779
00
973
00
60
11
00
972
35 1328
00
37
34
17. Darrabhata
00
75 00
42
895
55 1288
03
18. Baidpali
00 00
27
52
881
00
61 1274
00
92 08
47
896
95 00
1273
00
03 04
45
826
12 1272/3 00
02
09 01
07
1272/1 00
425/915 00
825/2
00
67 1272/2 00
04
94
02
00
11
67 1275
00
32
827/2
00
00
19
31 1236
00
06
821
20
00
07
85 1082
00
13
829
93
16
03
00
1154
00
01
38
830
00
13
19 00
08
40
833
1083
48 03
00
82
02 1086
507
00
05
00
98
85
00
09
509
1085 5154
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 21 , 2010/ SHRAVANA 30 , 1932
1
2
3
4
5
6
00
06
00
508
Baidpali
515
00
22
53 (Contd.)
00
514
06
82
16
00
09
541
01
00
540
00
05
542
31
547
00
00
45
546
00
04
32
545
00
01
69
00
07
549
82
00
701
12
95
710
00
01
01
699
00
12
00
06
23
698
95
711
00
02
13
697
00
68
695
00
09
24
00
693
05
53
640
00
03
70
639/1
00
40
12
638
00
07
94
06
637
00
12
630
07
27
00
631
00
00
14
629
00
04
12
628
00
24
00
627
00
01
37
00
10
55
622
00
08
1144
19. Balsi
50
1147
00
01
32
00
02
1146
16
00
00
1148
83
1145
00
01
69
00
65
23
1140
01
1139
00
05
00
01
1141
36
1138 00
75
06
1137
00
08
22
00
531
08
98
00
1152
07
50
1136 00
09
24
00
1133
13
43
1006
00
02
65
1001
00
01
81
[PART II SEC. 3 ( ii );
6 1
2
3
4
00
96 Balsi
1002
05
71 1000
00
07
--(Contd .)
05
00
1008
00
07 1009
08
30
00
00
1018
07
77 1019
00
05
45
00
1021
00
1020
01
47
04
1035
00
43
00
1033
03
1032
00
04
00
1031
02
36
93 1030
00
06
01
00
1043
46
00
02
39 1044
16
16 1029
00
00
1065
06
13 1066
00
04
47 1067
00
05
01
49 1068
00
02
07
1070
00
34 1069
01
43
00
73 1074
00
01
915
00
18
64
00
912
00
74 913
00
32
27
00
884
09
96 885
00
00
19 874
00
00
28
00
24
883
04
00
875
04
65 878
00
83
12
880
00
14
11
00
679/3
06
44 679/4
00
14
13 676
16
00
84 679/2
00
00
84
00
06
679/1
59
00
681
03
34
23
682
00
18 687
00
06
02 686/1
00
04
52 684
14
00
28 דיווידוווור
4
5
6
3
5
6
1
3
2
4
2
00
00
60
53
267
00
15
685
Balsi
Lukapara
00
06
86
14
00
66 698
---(Contd. ) 246
---(Contd .)
92
00
13
720
245
00
06
28 00
01
13
719
221
00
06
01 49
41
00
722
00
14
195
84
47
00
12
780
00
04
03
196
10
41
00
779
00
38
04
190
08
00
02
778
00
00
35
197
00
60
777
06
00
20
189
31 13
82
763
00
88
163
00
01 00
05
96
762
00
00
10
188
29
64
764/2 00
00
09
57
164
71
00
09
764/3
04
61
165
00
25
00
10
764/5
166
00
01
01
87
10
00
765
00
06
14
159
86
00
10
764/1
01
00
154
45
25
00
10
737
20. Baherapali
00
06
82
153
24
736
00
08
00
08
86
151
45
00
23
726
00
12
138
86
54
00
08
725
00
01
91
137
18
28
00
724
00
18
32
141
00
723
11
69
00
09
74
133
00
04
09
722
08
51
132
00
14
00
01
721
05
85
00
131
706
00
03
33
00
14
22
130
07
69
00
705
78
00
04
83
32
00
10
702
00
00
77
62 00
32
05
701
20
00
57
73
00
50
08
703
00
17
71
03
10
00
693
00
00
05
57
72
21
31
00
692
16
97
00
53
00
Π
00
291
21. Lukapara
20
45
00
02 06
00
04
290
49
00
09
01 05
59
00
261
44
12
00
50
04
24
00
260
00
28
48
05
16
11
00
259
00
06
84
150
Parsada
22.
00
10
00
254
10
1
00
00
97
00
09
258
00
00
10
257
[No. R - 25011 /20/2010 - OR - 1 ] B. K. DATTA , Under Secy.
01
00
90
256 नई दिल्ली , 16 अगस्त , 2010
का.आ 2060.- केन्द्रीय सरकार को लोहित 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;
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 ;
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 जनता को उपलब्ध करा दी जाती है , इक्कीस दिन के भीतर , उसमें उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन करने या भूमि के दीचे पाइपलाइन बिछाए जाने के संबंध में श्री दिलीप कुमार अग्रवाल , सम्रग प्राधिकारी , इंडियन ऑयल कॉर्पोरेशन लिमिटेड , पारादीप- सम्वत्लपुर रायपुर राँची पाइपलाइन परियोजना , एन -17 , सेक्टर 2 , अवंति विहार , रायपुर-492006 ( छत्तीसगढ़ ) को लिखित रूप में आक्षेप भेज सकेगा ।
अनुसूची
तहसील-सरायपाली जिला- महासमुंद राज्य- छत्तीसगढ़ क्रम गांव का नाम प्लाट नं.
क्षेत्रफल
सं.
वर्ग मीटर
हेक्टयर एयर
2
1
4
3
6
5
1. बालसी
74/1
00
30
13
764/3 00
07
66
757
00
03
03
764/5 00
00
10
756
00
09
03
764/4 00
22
15
754
00
62
00
00
2. बरिहापाली
735
08
04
734
00
99
00
00
733
14
35
00
729
20
97
730
00
26
29
00
36
572
02
505
00
46
07
[ PART 11.11 ] 1 2
4
3
6
5
504
00
03
15
00
बरिहापाली -(जारी )
11
82
503
500
00
00
66
498
00
10
00
507
25
59
00
00
05
15
399
398
00
02,
54
397
00
02
56
00
20
396
28
393
00
17
32
2230
00
22
45 3. मोखापुटका
2231
00
03
51
2232
00
00
10
2236
00
06
71
2239
06
00
53
2240
00
08
69
2241
00
03
94
2195
00
07
54
2194
00
02
80
2198
00
02
04
2199
00
00
10
2192
00
00
10
2190
00
14
02
2191
00
03
09
2155
00
09
22
2154
00
08
35
1867
10
00
99
1766
00
12
15
1827
09
00
98
1835
00
18
11
1836
00
07
88
1838
00
16
44
2006
00
00
10
2005
00
06
06
2004
00
(01
87
2003
00
08
63
2002
00
04
21
2009
00
00
10
1997
00
05
66
1994
00
(12
68
1993
00
04
13
1992
03
00
82
00
1991
00
1969
00
05
11
1968
00
04
59
00
1967
02
80
1966
00
03
47
1971
00
00
17
1965
00
01
00
1960
00
02
68 5157 भारत का राजपत्र अगस्त 21 , 2010/ श्रावण 30 , 1932
[ भाग 11- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]
3
5
2
4
1
New Delhi , the 16th August, 2010 00
00
32
1945
मोखापुटका
00
1961
00
52
-(जारी )
04
1959
00
26
51
1958
00
03
00
01
54
1950
S.O 2060.- 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) , "Paradip- Sambalpur - Raipur - Ranchi Pipeline " should be laid by Indian Oil Corporation Limited;
1956
00
05
41
11
00
01
1951
00
00
38
1955
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 , 06
1952
00
24
16
1954
00
00
00
23
1953
13
00
00
92
1932
45
00
29
1107
4. कनकेवा
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:
24
00
07
1111
07
00
72
1110
00
02
54
1109
66
00
39
1112
01
35
1149
00
00
01
35
1148
00
06
92
1147
04
08
00
1159
1157
00
05
29
00
00
58
1156
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 or laying of the pipeline under the land to Shri Dilip Kumar Agrawal , Competent . Authority, Indian Oil Corporation Limited , Paradip - Sambalpur - Reiour- Ranchi Pipeline Project, N - 17 , Sector -2, Avanti Vihar, Raipur - 492006 , Chhattisgarh.
1155
00
03
34
SCHEDULE
00
74
1162
25
Tehsil: Saraipali District: Mahasamund 1179
00
00
10
State: Chhattisgarh 14
00
1191
34
67
00
11
1180
Sr. Name of the Khasara
Arca
82
00
1187
10
No. Hectare Are Sq. intr.
No. Village
20
00
1185 00
2
6
4
5
3
1186
09
00
11
32
74/1
00
30
13 1234
1. Balsi
00
07
1235
00
71
07
00
07
764/3
66 00
13
1236
00
03
03
00
757
00
05
1247
50.
00
00
764/5
10 00
44
03
1246
09
756
00
67
00
1255
02
00
764/4
22 00
00
10
1256
754
00
87
1245
00
00
?
08
735
00
Barihanali
00
27
44
1242
00
00
734
00
01
15
1263
14
733
00
1530
00
94
18
20
00
729
00
37
1529
05
26
29
40
1524
00
00
00
730
00
1525
11
61
02
00
36
572
1226
85
00
29
07
505
00 46
28
00
07
1528
15
03
504
00
04
31
1527
00
82
11
503
00
66
500
00
00 [सं. आर 25011/20/2010- ओआर-1 ]
10
00
00
498
बी. के. दत्ता , अवर सचिव
3099G1/10-13 5158
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 21 , 2010/ SHRAVANA 30 , 1932
[PART II--SEC . 3 ( ii) ] 4
5
6
2
3
2
1
3
4
5
6 00
25
507
59
00
04
26 Barihapali
1959
Mokhaputka
399
00
05
15
----(Contd. )
1958
00
03
51
-(Contd.)
00
02
54
398
00
1950
01
54 00
56
397
02
1956
00
05
41
20
28
396
1951
00
01
11 00
32
00
17
393
00
1955
38
00
22
00
45
1952
00
06
24 3. Mokhaputka 2230
2231
00
51
03
1954
00
00
16 00
2232
10
00
13
1953
00
23 2236
06
71
00
1932
00
00
92 2239
00
06
53
4. Kankewa
1107
29
45
00
69
08
2240
00
00
1111
07
24 00
03
94
2241
1110
00
07
72 00
07
2195
54
1109
00
02
54
02
80
2194
00
00
1112
39
66
04
00
2198
02
1149
00
01
35 00
00
10
2199
1148
00
01
35
10
00
2192
00
00
1147
06
92 2190
14
00
02
00
1159
04
08 2191
00
03
09
1157
00
05
29 09
2155
00
22
1156
00
00
58 00
08
35
2154
1155
00
03
34 1867
00
10
99
25
1162
00
74 1766
15
00
12
1179
00
00
10 1827
00
09
98
00
1191
14
34 00
18
1835
11
1180
00
11
67 07
1836
00
88
1187
00
10
82
16
1838
44
00
00
1185
00
20 00
2006
10
00
09
1186
00
11 00
2005
06
06
1234
00
32
07 2004
00
01
87
00
1235
07
77
63
00
2003
08
1236
00
00
13 2002
04
21
00
1247
00
05
50 2009
00
00
10
44
1246
00
03 1997
05
66
00
1255
00
02
67 1994
68
00
02
1256
00
00 00
04
1993
13
1245
00
00
87 1992
00
03
82
1242
00
27
44
96
00
1991
00
1263
00
01
15 1969
00
11
05
1530
00
18
94 1968
00
04
59
1529
00
05
37 1967
00
80
02
00
1524
40
00 00
03
1966
47
1525
00
11
61
17
00
00
1971
1226
00
29
85 1965
01
00
00
1528
07
00
28 00
68
1960
02
1527
00
04
31 1945
00
00
32
[No. R - 25011 / 20/ 2010 - OR - 1 ]
52
1961
00
00
B.K. DATTA , Under Secy.
[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]
श्रम एवं रोजगार मंत्रालय नई दिल्ली , 22 जुलाई , 2010
का.आ. 2061.- औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार लाइफ इंश्योरेंस कॉरपोरेशन ऑफ इंडिया के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच , अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में औद्योगिक अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालय , जोधपुर के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 6/2008 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 21-7-2010 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।
[ सं. एल- 17012 / 7/2002- आईआर/ ( एम ) ] अनिल कुमार शर्मा , अनुभाग अधिकारी MINISTRY OF LABOUR AND EMPLOYMENT New Delhi , the 22nd July , 2010
S.O. 2061. - In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) , the Central Government hereby publishes the Award ( Ref. No. 6/2008) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal - cum - Labour Court , Jodhpur now as shown in the annexure , in the industrial dispute between the management of Life Insuarance Corporation of India and their workmen , which was received by the Central Government on 21-07-2010 .
[No. L - 17012/7 /2002 - IR/ ( M ) ] ANIL KUMAR SHARMA , Section Officer
अनुबन्ध
औद्यौगिक विवाद् अधिकरण एंव श्रम न्यायालय , जोधपुर पीठसीन अधिकारीः श्री एच. आर. नागौरी , आर.एच.जे.एस. औद्यौगिक विवाद् ( केन्द्रीय ) संख्या 6 सन् 2008 शक्तिसिंह पुत्र श्री रामचन्द्र निवासी बागर बैरी किल्ला रोड, जोधपुर।
.... प्रार्थी
बनाम
दी डिवीजनल मैनेजर लाईफ इन्श्योरेन्स कॉरपोरेशन ऑफ इण्डिया, डिवीजन ऑफिस , जीवन प्रकाश सर्किट हाऊस रोड़, जोधपुर ।
अप्रार्थी उपस्थितिः-
( 1 ) प्रार्थी के प्रतिनिधी - श्री आर. एस. सलूजा उपस्थित
(2) अप्रार्थी के प्रतिनिधी- श्री भुपेन्द्र कुमार भटनागर उपस्थित
अधिनिर्णय
5159
भारत का राजपत्र अगस्त 21 , 2010 / श्रावण 30 , 1932
"Whether the Industrial dispute raised by Sh. Shakti Singh S/ o Sh . Ram Chandra against the management of Life Insurance Corporation over his termination from service w.e.f. 2-1-2001 justified ? If, so , to what relief the concerned workman is entitled ?"
2. प्रार्थी ने अपने मांग - पत्र में यह उल्लेख किया है कि उसने अप्रार्थी के यहां चौकीदार के पद् के लिए आवेदन किया था तथा अप्रार्थी ने प्रार्थी को अपने पत्र दिनांक 26-5-2000 के द्वारा साक्षात्कार के लिए बुलाया था। साक्षात्कार की कॉल लेटर को प्रदर्श । बताया है । प्रार्थी ने यह उल्लेख किया है कि अप्रार्थीगण ने प्रार्थी का इन्टरव्यू लिया तथा बाद में अपने आदेश दिनांक 26 जुलाई 2000 के द्वारा प्रार्थी को नियुक्ति आदेश प्रदर्श -2 के द्वारा नियुक्ति दी।
3. प्रार्थी ने अपने प्रार्थना - पत्र में आगे यह उल्लेख किया है कि प्रार्थी ने नियुक्ति के बाद चौकीदार के पद का कार्यभार ग्रहण किया। प्रार्थी प्रोबेशन काल में सन्तोषप्रद रुप से कार्य कर रहा था , उस समय विभाग के ट्रेड यूनियन के सचिव श्री सुरेश कुमार चाचरा ने प्रार्थी को एक लाख रुपये देने के लिये बाध्य किया । श्री चाचरा ने प्रार्थी को यह कहकर बाध्य किया कि जीवन बीमा निगम में यह राशि कर्मकार के रिक्रुटमेन्ट की कोस्ट है। श्री चाचरा ने प्रार्थी को यह भी कहा कि यदि प्रार्थी यह राशि अदा नहीं करता है तो उसके शिक्षा सम्बन्धी प्रमाण-पत्रों को बदल दिया जायेगा तथा वहाँ कूटरचित प्रमाण- पत्र लगा दिये जायेंगे । श्री चाचरा ने प्रार्थी को यह भी कहा कि उसके शिक्षा सम्बन्धी प्रमाण- पत्र के स्थान पर कूटरचित प्रमाण- पत्र लगाने के बाद कूटरचित प्रमाण- पत्रों के आधार पर प्रार्थी की सेवा प्रोबेशनकाल में ही समाप्त कर दी जायेगी । प्रार्थी को श्री सुरेश कुमार चाचरा के इस कृत्य से भय हो गया कि वह अब अपनो नौकरी खो देगा और इस कारण उसने शांति के लिए और यह मानते हुए कि वह ट्रेड यूनियन की ताकत को नहीं झेल पायेगा , उसने श्री सुरेश कुमार चाचरा को 35,000 रुपये दिये। प्रार्थी द्वारा श्री चाचरा को 35,000 रुपये देने के बाद भी श्री सुरेश कुमार चाचरा सन्तुष्ट नहीं हुआ और प्रार्थी को बकाया 65,000 रुपये देने के लिए बाध्य करता रहा। प्रार्थी यह राशि देने के लिए असमर्थ था और इस कारण उसने श्री चाचरा से जनवरी 2001 तक समय देने के लिए प्रार्थना की । जनवरी 2001 में प्रार्थी का प्रोबेशन पीरीयड समाप्त हो रहा था और इस कारण श्री चाचरा ने प्रार्थी को 65,000 रुपये देने के लिए बाध्य किया और नहीं देने पर इस राशि की अदायगी को सुनिश्चित करने के लिए । जनवरी 2001 का पोस्ट डेटेड त्याग - पत्र लिखने के लिए कहा। प्रार्थी ने यह उल्लेख किया है कि उसने उसकी तथा श्री चाचरा की बात - चीत को टेपरिकोर्ड पर रिकोर्ड कर लिया। प्रार्थी ने टेप - रिकोर्ड पर रिकोर्ड की गई वार्ता को लेखबद्ध कर इस प्रार्थना- पत्र के साथ प्रदर्श-3 के रुप में प्रस्तुत किया।
दिनांक : 3-3-2010
1. भारत सरकार के श्रम मंत्रालय ने अपनी अधिसूचना क्रमांक एल . 17012 / 7/ 2002- आई. आर. ( एम. ) नई दिल्ली दिनांक 3-6-2005 के द्वारा निम्न अधिनिर्णय हेतु इस न्यायालय को प्रेषित किया गया है । : -
4. प्रार्थी ने अपने प्रार्थना- पत्र में आगे यह उल्लेख किया है कि वह उक्त 65,000 रुपये की बकाया राशि को देने में असमर्थ था और इस कारण श्री सुरेश कुमार चाचरा द्वारा उक्त पोस्ट डेटेड त्याग - पत्र का उपयोग किया गया और उस त्याग - पत्र को डिवीजनल मैनेजर के ऑफिस में प्रस्तुत कर दिया । प्रार्थी ने यह उल्लेख किया है कि वह त्याग - पत्र सहज ही डिवीजनल मैनेजर द्वारा स्वीकार कर लिया गया । इस त्याग - पत्र स्वीकृति का आदेश प्रदर्श -4 बताया। 5160
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 21 , 2010 / SHRAVANA 30 , 1932
5. प्रार्थी ने अपने प्रार्थना- पत्र में आगे यह उल्लेख किया है कि उक्त तथ्यों से यह स्पष्ट है कि प्रार्थी ने उक्त त्याग पत्र अपनी स्वतंत्र इच्छा से प्रस्तुत नहीं किया है । प्रार्थी ने यह उल्लेख किया है कि यह त्याग- पत्र उसने युनियन नेता श्री सुरेश कुमार चाचरा के दबाव में प्रस्तुत किया है । प्रार्थी ने यह भी उल्लेख किया है कि जिस त्वरितता (speed) से यह त्याग पत्र स्वीकार किया गया है उससे श्री सुरेश कुमार चाचरा का यह आरोप सही प्रमाणित होता है कि उक्त एक लाख रुपये की राशि अप्रार्थी जीवन बीमा निगम में नियोजन प्राप्त करने के लिए खर्च करनी पड़ती हैं। प्रार्थी ने यह उल्लेख किया है कि उस पर दबाव देकर रुपये प्राप्त कर त्याग - पत्र को स्वीकार करने के परिणामस्वरूप उसकी सेवामुक्ति स्पष्ट रुप से अवैध है । प्रार्थी ने यह भी उल्लेख किया है कि उसकी सेवामुक्ति औद्योगिक विवाद् अधिनियम के प्रावधानो के विपरित है । यह अनफेयर लेबर प्रेक्टिस में आता हैं । प्रार्थी ने यह भी उल्लेख किया है कि यह मामला कर्मकार के शोषण का होकर अनफेयर लेबर प्रेक्टिस का है । प्रार्थी औद्यौगिक विवाद् अधिनियम की धारा 2 ( एस ) के अन्तर्गत कर्मकार की परिभाषा में आता है तथा उसके साथ औद्यौगिक विवाद् अधिनियम के प्रावधानों के विपरित अनफेयर लेबर प्रेक्टिस की गई है । उक्त आधारों पर प्राथी ने यह प्रार्थना की है कि उसके विवादित त्याग - पत्र के आधार पर उसकी सेवा समाप्ति करने वाले आदेश दिनांक । जवनरी 2001 को अवैध घोषित कर उसे निरस्त किया जावे और प्राथी को पुनः सेवा में स्थापित किया जावे तथा उसे सेवा के सभी लाभ प्रदान करवाये जावें । 6. अप्रार्थी निगम ने अपने प्रतिउत्तर में यह उल्लेख किया है कि इस न्यायाधिकरण को जो रेफरेन्स केन्द्रीय सरकार द्वारा किया गया है वह पूर्णतया गलत है, उस आधार पर यह न्यायाधिकरण कोई कार्यवाही नहीं कर सकता है । अप्रार्थी ने यह उल्लेख किया है कि यह एक स्वीकृत तथ्य है कि प्रार्थी की सेवामुक्ति नहीं की गई बल्कि उसके द्वारा दिनांक 1-1-2001 को अपनी स्वेच्छा से त्याग-पत्र दिया गया था और जो अप्रार्थी निगम ने अपने आदेश दिनांक 1-1-2001 के द्वारा दिनांक 3-1-2001 को स्वीकार कर लिया था। इस न्यायाधिकरण को प्राप्त रेफरेन्स में प्रार्थी की सेवा समाप्ति दिनांक 1-1-2001 से किया जाना पूरी तरह में गलत है।
7. अप्रार्थी ने यहाँ प्रार्थी की चौकीदार के पद पर नियुक्ति करने के तथ्य को स्वीकार किया है , लेकिन अन्य तथ्यों को अस्वीकार किया है। अप्रार्थी निगम ने यह उल्लेख किया है कि प्रार्थी द्वारा प्रस्तुत समस्त तथ्य गलत तथा मनगढ़त हैं। अप्रार्थी निगम ने यह उल्लेख किया है कि प्रार्थों पर दबाव के सम्बन्ध में प्रार्थी ने कभी भी अप्रार्थी निगम को अथवा अन्य किसी भी ओथोरिटी को कोई सूचना अथवा रिर्पोट नहीं दी। इस तथ्य को गलत बताया है कि श्री सुरेश कुमार चाचरा ने प्रार्थी का त्याग - पत्र प्रस्तुत किया। अप्रार्थी निगम ने यह उल्लेख किया है कि प्रार्थी स्वयं ने अपनी स्वेच्छा से अप्रार्थी निगम को अपना त्याग- पत्र प्रस्तुत किया था और उस त्याग - पत्र को अप्रार्थी निगम ने नियमानुसार स्वीकार किया था । अप्रार्थी निगम ने यह उल्लेख किया है कि प्रार्थी द्वारा किये गये कथन पूर्णतया After thought हैं । अप्रार्थी निगम ने यह उल्लेख किया है कि प्रार्थी के विरुद्ध योग्यता के जाली प्रमाण- पत्र . देने के सम्बन्ध में शिकायत प्राप्त हुई थी और अप्रार्थी निगम ने दिशांक 2212-2000 के पत्र के द्वारा प्रार्थी से स्पष्टीकरण की मांग
[PART II SEC. 3 ( ii ) ] की थी। इस पर प्रार्थी ने दिनांक 26-12-2000 को स्पष्टीकरण हेतु केवल अपने स्कूल के स्थानान्तरण प्रपत्र की फोटो प्रति प्रस्तुत की और अन्य कोई दस्तावेज प्रस्तुत नहीं किया । दिनांक ।। 2001 के अपने त्याग पत्र में प्रार्थी ने घरेलू परिस्थिति का कारण उल्लेख कर अप्रार्थी निगम की सेवा से त्याग - पत्र दिया । प्रार्थी परिवीक्षा काल में था अतः उसे किसी प्रकार का कोई नोटिस इत्यादी देने की आवश्यकता नहीं थी। प्रार्थी द्वारा नियुक्ति कपटपूर्वक झूठे दस्तावेज के आधार पर ली गई थी और शिकायत होने पर उसने त्याग पत्र दे दिया । अप्रार्थी निगम ने यह उल्लेख किया है कि प्रार्थी द्वारा प्रेषित एक प्रार्थना - पत्र अप्रार्थी निगम में दिनांक 23-7-2001 को प्राप्त हुआ था और उसमें उसने यह अंकित किया था कि उसके द्वारा पूर्व में दिया प्रमाण- पत्र गलत था और वह अब सही प्रमाण - पत्र दे रहा है और इस आधार पर उसने पुनः नियुक्ति देने की प्रार्थना की थी। उक्त आधारों पर अप्रार्थी निगम ने प्रार्थी का प्रार्थना - पत्र निरस्त करने की प्रार्थना की । 8. प्रार्थी ने एक जवाबुल जवाब भी प्रस्तुत किया । प्रार्थी ने अपने जवाबुल जवाब में यह उल्लेख किया है कि रेफरेन्स दिनांक 3-6-2005 केन्द्रीय सरकार ने माननीय उच्च न्यायालय के निर्णय / आदेश दिनांक 27-5-2005 के अनुसरण में किया था। माननीय उच्च न्यायालय ने यह आदेश दोनों पक्षों को प्रार्थी की सेवामुक्ति के बिन्दु पर सुनकर पारित किया था । प्रार्थी ने यह उल्लेख किया है कि इन परिस्थितियों में अप्रार्थी उक्त रेफरेन्स के सम्बन्ध में कोई आपत्ति प्रस्तुत नहीं कर सकता है। प्रार्थी ने स्वंय ने अपनी सेवा छोड़ी है अथवा अप्रार्थी द्वारा प्रार्थी की सेवा समाप्त की गई है , इस बिन्दु पर इस न्यायाधिकरण को निर्णय करना है । प्रार्थी ने यह उल्लेख किया है कि प्रार्थी ने त्याग- पत्र प्रस्तुत नहीं किया था । अभिलेख से यह साफ स्पष्ट है कि उक्त त्याग- पत्र दिनांक 1-1-2001 का था और अप्रार्थी द्वारा जल्दी में दिनांक 3-1-2001 को स्वीकार कर लिया गया था । प्रार्थी ने यह उल्लेख किया है कि ऐसा षड़यंत्र कर किया गया है। प्रार्थी ने यह उल्लेख किया है कि उसने अपनी योग्यता के सम्बन्ध में कोई कूटरचित दस्तावेज प्रस्तुत नहीं किया है। प्रार्थी ने दिनांक 20-12-2000) के नोटिस की पालना में दिनांक 26-12-2000 को अपना स्पष्टीकरण दिया था और अप्रार्थी निगम ने प्रार्थी के उत्तर तथा उसके द्वारा प्रस्तुत दस्तावेज से सन्तुष्ट होकर अप्रार्थी निगम ने प्रार्थी के विरुद्ध कोई कार्यवाही नहीं की थी। द्वेषता स्वच्छाचारिता तथा षड्यंत्र से यह स्पष्ट है कि उक्त त्याग- पत्र दिनांक 1-1-2001 को दिया गया था तथा प्रार्थी से कोई स्पष्टीकरण मांगे बिना ही उस त्याग पत्र को दिनांक 3-1-2001 को स्वीकार कर लिया गया था इसका यह कारण बताया गया कि विपक्षी निगम के अधिकारी यूनियन लीडर श्री च्चान्चरा से मिले हुए थे तथा उन दोनों के बीच में nexus था । प्रार्थी ने यह उल्लेख किया है कि प्रोबेशन पीरीयड में भी नोटीस दिया जाना नियमों के अर्न्तगत त्याग- पत्र स्वीकार करने के पूर्व आवश्यक है । प्रार्थी ने कभी भी कूटरचित दस्तावेज पेश नहीं किये।
9. प्रार्थी ने अपने प्रार्थना पत्र में उल्लेख किये गये तथ्यों की पुष्टिमें स्वयं का शपथ- पत्र प्रस्तुत किया । उससे प्रतिपरीक्षा की गई। साक्ष्य में नियुक्ति- पत्र प्रदर्श -1 , टेपरिकार्ड से टेप की गई वार्ता का विवरण प्रदर्श -2 तथा त्याग पत्र स्वीकृति का पत्र प्रदर्श-3 को प्रस्तुत कर प्रदर्श करवाये गये। अप्रार्थी की ओर से श्री आर.सी. माथुर का शपथ- पत्र प्रस्तुत हुआ। उससे भी प्रतिपरीक्षा की गई। | भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]
गया । 10. बहस उभय- पक्ष सुनी गई । पत्रावली का अवलोकन किया 11. विद्वान प्रतिनिधि प्रार्थी का यह तर्क है कि प्रार्थी से श्रम संगठन के सचिव श्री सुरेश कुमार चाचरा ने एक लाख रुपये की माँग की थी तथा यह धमकी दी कि यदि प्रार्थी उसे एक लाख रुपये नहीं देगा तो वह प्रार्थी की सेवाऐं येन- केन प्रकारेण समाप्त करवा देगा। विद्वान प्रतिनिधि प्रार्थी का यह तर्क है कि प्रार्थी ने पेंतिस हजार रुपये श्री सुरेश कुमार चाचरा को दे दिये थे तथा बाकी पेंतीस हजार रुपये के लिए श्री चाचरा ने प्रार्थी से जबरदस्ती त्याग पत्र लिखवा लिया और प्रार्थी द्वारा बाकी पैंसठ हजार रुपये की व्यवस्था नहीं होने पर श्री चाचरा ने यह त्याग - पत्र अप्रार्थी के अधिकारी के समक्ष प्रस्तुत कर उसे स्वीकार करवा लिया। विद्वान प्रतिनिधि प्रार्थी का यह तर्क है कि यह त्याग- पत्र प्रार्थी को भयोपरत् कर तथा दबाव देकर लिखवाया है और प्रार्थी ने यह त्याग - पत्र प्रस्तुत नहीं किया और इस कारण उसकी सेवा समाप्ति का आदेश विधिसम्मत् नहीं कहा जा सकता। 12. विद्वान प्रतिनिधि प्रार्थी का यह भी तर्क है कि प्रार्थी तथा श्री सुरेश कुमार चाचरा के बीच में हुए वार्तालाप को टेपरिकोर्ड पर रिकोर्ड किया गया था तथा इस वार्तालाप प्रदर्श -2 से भी उक्त तथ्य प्रमाणित होता है । विद्वान प्रतिनिधि प्रार्थी का यह तर्क है कि श्री सुरेश कुमार चाचरा ने प्रार्थी का त्याग - पत्र दिनांक 1-1-2001 को प्रस्तुत किया था तथा अप्रार्थी निगम ने प्रार्थी का त्याग - पत्र उसी दिन प्रार्थी को कोई नोटिस दिये बिना तत्परता से तत्काल स्वीकार कर लिया था। विद्वान प्रतिनिधि प्रार्थी का यह तर्क है कि इन तथ्यों से भी यह तथ्य प्रमाणित होता है कि प्रार्थी का त्याग पत्र प्रार्थी की स्वेच्छा से न होकर दवाव तथा दुष्प्रेरण से लिखवाकर प्रस्तुत किया गया था । इन आधारों पर विद्वान प्रतिनिधि प्रार्थी का यह तर्क है कि प्रार्थी की सेवामुक्ति उचित तथा वैध नहीं कही जा सकती ।
13. उक्त तर्को के विपरित विद्वान प्रतिनिधि अप्रार्थी का यह तर्क रहा है कि प्रार्थी ने 1-1-2001 को अपना त्याग- पत्र स्वेच्छापूर्वक प्रस्तुत किया था । प्रार्थी ने स्वंय ने दिनांक 1-1-2001 को अपना त्याग पत्र प्रस्तुत किया तथा उस त्याग पत्र को तत्काल स्वीकार किये जाने के आधार पर यह उपधारणा नहीं निकाली जा सकती कि यह त्याग- पत्र प्रार्थी की स्वेच्छापूर्वक न होकर दबाव तथा दुष्प्रेरण से उसकी इच्छा के विपरित लिखवाया गया। विद्वान प्रतिनिधि अप्रार्थी का यह तर्क है कि श्री सुरेश कुमार चाचरा को साक्ष्य में प्रस्तुत नहीं किया गया है । प्रार्थी ने साक्ष्य में उस तथाकथित रुप से अपनी सुरेश कुमार चाचरा से हुई वार्तालाप की टेप को साक्ष्य में पेश नहीं किया है। टेप साक्ष्य में पेश नहीं होने से श्री सुरेश कुमार चाचरा की उस टेप में तथाकथित आवाज को प्रमाणित नहीं किया जा सका है । तथाकथित टेप के वार्तालाप को लिपिबद्ध कर प्रदर्श 2 के रुप में प्रस्तुत किये जाने से ही उक्त तथाकथित वार्तालाप प्रमाणित नहीं होता है। विद्वान प्रतिनिधि अप्रार्थी का यह तर्क है कि यदि प्रार्थी पर त्यागपत्र देने के सम्बन्ध में कोई इस प्रकार का दबाव होता तो प्रार्थी समय पर अपने अधिकारियों को इसकी शिकायत करता । प्रार्थी द्वारा ऐसा नहीं किया
5161
भारत का राजपत्र अगस्त 21 , 2010/ श्रावण 30 , 1932
गया और ऐसी स्थिति में यह नहीं माना जा सकता कि प्रार्थी का त्याग - पत्र दबाव से उसकी इच्छा के विपरित प्रस्तुत करवाया गया। विद्वान प्रतिनिधि अप्रार्थी का यह तर्क है कि यह तथ्य प्रमाणित करने का भार प्रार्थी पर था कि वह यह प्रमाणित करता कि उक्त त्याग- पत्र उसकी इच्छा के विपरित दबाव में लिखवाया गया , लेकिन प्रार्थी इन तथ्यों को समुचित साक्ष्य से प्रमाणित करने में असमर्थ रहा है । इन तथ्यों के आधार पर विद्वान प्रतिनिधि अप्रार्थी का यह मानना है कि प्रार्थी की सेवामुक्ति अवैध तथा अनुचित प्रमाणित नहीं होती है। विद्वान प्रतिनिधि अप्रार्थी ने अपने इन तों की पुष्टि में एक विधिक दृष्टांत गुजरात लेदर इण्डस्ट्रीज लिमिटेड बनात अब्दुल सत्तार गुलामरसुल शेख 2001 111 एल.एल.जे . ( सप्लीमेन्ट्री ) गुजरात पेज ।। प्रस्तुत किया है माननीय न्यायालय ने इस विधिक दृष्टांत में निम्न सिद्वाँत प्रतिपादित किया है: --
"Bombay Industrial Employment ( Standing Orders ) Rules , 1959 - Rule 23 ( 5 ) -Resignation- Respondent Permanent worker - Resignation accepted immediately- Employer not waiting for 30 days- Industrial Dispute raised after 6 years - Involuntary resignation under threat alleged- Reinstatement awarded - Labour Court holding obligatory for employer to wait for 30 days - No obligation on part of employer to wait for 30 days after resignation tendered by employee but obligation on employee to give one month's notice of intention of resigning from service and no evidence to show said resignation obtained under threat , coercion or inducement . "
14. हमने उक्त तर्कों पर पत्रावली पर उपलब्ध साक्ष्य के परिप्रेक्ष्य में विचार किया तथा उक्त विधिक दृष्टांत का भी अध्ययन किया। प्रार्थी ने अपनी प्रतिपरीक्षा के अन्त में इस तथ्य को सही बताया है कि उसने अपनी घरेलू परिस्थितियों के कारण नौकरी छोड़ी है यधपि इसके बाद इस साक्षी ने कहा है कि उससे जबरदस्ती त्याग- पत्र लिखवाया गया था और उसकी कोई घरेलू परिस्थितियों नहीं थी। यह एक तथ्य है कि प्रार्थी का त्याग पत्र दिनांक 1-1-2001 को प्रस्तुत हुआ था तथा इस त्याग - पत्र को उसी दिन स्वीकार कर लिया गया था। इस प्रकार प्रार्थी का त्याग पत्र तत्काल तथा तत्परता से स्वीकार किया गया , लेकिन उक्त विधिक दुष्टांत में प्रतिपादित सिद्धांत के परिप्रेक्ष्य में हमारी यह राय है कि केवल यही तथ्य इस बात का प्रमाण नहीं माना जा सकता कि प्रार्थी से उक्त त्याग पत्र जबरदस्ती तथा दबाव से लिखवाया गया।
15. प्रार्थी को यह प्रमाणित करने के लिए कि उससे यह त्याग - पत्र दबाव तथा दुष्प्रेरण से लिखवाया गया है , उसे यह तथ्य अपनी स्पष्ट साक्ष्य से प्रमाणित करना था। इस तथ्य को प्रमाणित करने का भार प्रार्थी पर था । प्रार्थी ने इसके लिए स्वंय तथा 5162
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 21 , 2010 / SHRAVANA 30 , 1932
श्री सुरेश कुमार चाचरा की तथाकथित टेपरिकोर्ड पर टेप की गई वार्ता का लेख प्रदर्श -2 साक्ष्य में प्रस्तुत किया है । हमारी यह राय है कि प्रार्थी ने इस लेख को समुचित साक्ष्य से प्रमाणित नहीं करवाया है। प्रार्थी ने न तो उक्त सुरेश कुमार चाचरा को साक्ष्य में प्रस्तुत किया है और न ही उक्त तथाकथित टेप को साक्ष्य में पेश किया है । प्रार्थी द्वारा उक्त तथाकथित टेप साक्ष्य में पेश नहीं करने के कारण यह तथ्य प्रमाणित नहीं होता है कि लेख प्रदर्श-2 उसी तथाकथित टेप से लिपिबद्ध कर तैयार किया गया है । उक्त तथाकथित टेप साक्ष्य में प्रस्तुत नहीं होने से उस तथाकथित टेप में श्री सुरेश कुमार चाचरा की तथाकथित आवाज का श्री सेरेश कुमार चाचरा की आवाज से सत्यपान नहीं हो सका है । इसके अलावा यहाँ यह उल्लेख करना भी समीचीन है कि प्रार्थी ने न तो अपने मॉग- पत्र और न ही लेख प्रदर्श 2 में यह स्पष्ट किया है कि उसके तथा श्री सुरेश कुमार चाचरा के मध्य यह तथाकथित वार्तालाप कौन सी तिथि को हुआ था । अतः समस्त परिस्थितियों पर सावधानीपूर्वक विचार करने के पश्चात् हमारी राय में पत्रावली पर ऐसी कोई साक्ष्य नहीं है जिसके आधार पर यह माना जा सके कि उक्त त्याग पत्र प्रार्थी की इच्छा के विपरित उसपर दबाव देकर लिखवाया गया।
16. पत्रावली पर यह साक्ष्य है कि प्रार्थी ने कोई कुटरचित दस्तावेज पेश कर अप्रार्थी निगम मे चौकीदार के पद की नौकरी प्राप्त की थी यपि यह तथ्य समुचित साक्ष्य से प्रमाणित नहीं हुआ है, लेकिन प्रार्थी ने अपनी प्रतिपरीक्षा में यह उल्लेख किया है कि उसे पुलिस को बुलाने की धमकी दी थी । यदि प्रार्थी का कहीं दोष नहीं था और प्रार्थी के सारे दस्तावेज सही थे , तो चाहे प्रार्थी को पुलिस बुलाने की धमकी दी गई हो , लेकिन इससे प्रार्थी को भयभीत होने की कोई आवश्यकता नहीं थी । पत्रावली पर उपलब्ध साक्ष्य से यह तथ्य सामने आता है कि सम्भवतः प्रार्थी द्वारा कोई गलत दस्तावेज प्रस्तुत कर नौकरी प्राप्त की गई थी और जब यह तथ्य सामने आया तो प्रार्थी ने अन्य कोई कार्यवाही से बचने के लिए स्वेच्छापूर्वक अपना त्याग- पत्र प्रग्तुत किया।
17. हमने ऊपर उल्लेख किया है कि प्रार्थी ने न तो अपने मॉग पत्र में और न ही लेख प्रदर्श 2 में यह स्पष्ट किया है कि उसके तथा श्रो मुशि कुमार चाचरा के मध्य वार्तालाप कब हुआ। प्रार्थी ने अपने मांग पत्र में यह उल्लेख किया है कि उसकी नियुक्ति के पश्चात् श्री सुरेश कुमार चाचरा ने उससे एक लाख रुपये मॉगे और उस समय प्रार्थी ने उसे पेंतीस हजार रुपये अदा किये , लेकिन सुरेश कुमार वाचग उसपर दबाव डालता रहा तथा पेंसठ हजार रुपये की और मॉग करता रहा तथा अन्त में प्रार्थी ने पेंसठ हजार रुपये अदा करने के लिए सुरेश कुमार चाचरा से समय माँगा और उसके साथ ही उम्मन अपना त्याग पत्र अगली तारीख में लिखा। इन तथ्यों से यह स्पारन है वि. यदि इस प्रकार प्रार्थी तथा श्री सुरेश कुमार चाचरा के बीच ऐसी कोई बात हुई तो यह बात लम्बी अवधि तक चली । यह एक ग्वाभाविक मानवीय आचरण है कि र्याद ऐसी कोई बात होती है तो जिस व्यक्ति के साथ ऐसी बात होती है वह व्यक्ति अपने उच्च अधिकारियों तथा मित्रों के मध्य ऐसी बात की चर्चा करता है और
[ PART 11 SEC . 3 ( ii) ] शिकायत भी कर सकता है । पत्रावली पर ऐसी कोई साक्ष्य नहीं है कि प्रार्थी ने इस सम्बन्ध में अपने साथियों तथा अपने अधिकारियों से चर्चा की और कोई शिकायत प्रस्तुत की। हमारी यह राय है कि प्रार्थी का यह आचरण स्वाभाविक मानवीय आचरण के विपरित है । अतः समस्त परिस्थितियों पर सावधानीपूर्वक विचार करने के पश्चात् हमारी राय में अप्रार्थी निगम द्वारा प्रार्थी के त्याग- पत्र दिनांक 1-1-2001 को स्वीकार कर दिनांक 2-1-2001 से प्रार्थी की सेवा समाप्त करना उचित तथा विधिसम्मत् है। समस्त परिस्थितियों पर सावधानीपूर्वक विचार करने के पश्चात् प्रार्थी किसी अनुतोष को प्राप्त करने का अधिकारी नहीं है ।
आदेश
18. अतः यह अधिनिर्णित किया जाता है कि अप्रार्थी भारतीय जीवन बीमा निगम द्वारा प्रार्थी शक्तिसिंह के त्याग पत्र दिनांक - 1-2001 को स्वीकार कर दिनांक 2-1-2001 से सेवा समाप्त करना उचित तथा वैध है । प्रार्थी अप्रार्थी से कोई अनुतोष प्राप्त करने का अधिकारी नहींहै ।
19. इस अधिनिर्णय को प्रकाशनार्थ भारत सरकार के श्रम मंत्रालय को प्रेषित किया जावे ।
20. यह अधिनिर्णय आज दिनांक 03-03-2010 को खुले न्यायालय में हस्ताक्षर कर सुनाया गया।
एच. आर. नागौरी , न्यायाधीश नई दिल्ली , 23 जुलाई , 2010
का.आ. 2062. औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में , केन्द्रीय सरकार एंव डब्ल्यू.सी. एल. के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच , अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण , श्रम न्यायालय जबलपुर के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 163/93 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 23 7 2010 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।
[ सं. एल 22012/151/1993 आईआर( सी- II ) |
अजय कुमार गौड़ , डेस्क अधिकारी New Delhi , the 23rd July , 2010
S.O. 2062.- In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) , the Central Government hereby publishes the Award ( Ref . No. 163 / 93 ) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal - cum- Labour Court , Jabalpur as shown in the annexure , in the industrial dispute between the management of WCL and their workman , which was received by the Central Government on 23-07-2010 .
[No. 1. -22012 151 / 1993 - IR ( C - II ) |
AJAY KUMAR GAUR , Desk Officer भारत का राजपत्र अगस्त 21 , 2010/ श्रावणे 30 , 1932
[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]
ANNEXURE
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL - CUM - LABOUR COURT ,
JABALPUR
No. CGIT / LC/ R/ 163/93
PRESIDING OFFICER : SHRI MOHD.SHAKIR HASAN The General Secretary ,
Μ.Ρ.Κ.Κ.Μ.Ρ. ( HMS ) ,
PO Junnardeo ,
Workman / Union Distt . Chhindwara ( MP )
Versus
The Manager , WCL..
Rakhikol Colliery ,
PO Rakhikol ,
Distt . Chhindwara
...Management
AWARD
Passed on this 12th day of July , 2010 1. The Government of India , Ministry of Labour vide its Notification No.L. - 22012 / 151 / 93 - IR ( C - II ) dated 23-8-93 has referred the following dispute for adjudication by this tribunal :
"Whether the action of the management of Rakhikol Colliery of WCL , Kanhan Area , PO Rakhikol , Distt . Chhindwara . in dismissing Shri Fegelal S/ o Linga , Temp . D.P.R.from service w.e.f. 25-4-90 is justified ? If not , to what relief the worker is entitled to ?" 2. The case of the Union / workman in short is that the workman Fagelal was working as daily piece rated worker since 1973. He was terminated from the service without giving proper opportunity to defend himself . It is stated that no charge sheet was served on him and no enquiry was conducted before terminating him from service . The workman was not absent from duty rather the management had stopped him verbally from work and had illegally retrenched without paying compensation . Even the amount ofPF and gratuity was withheld. Under the circumstances , the reference be answered in favour of the workman .
3. The case of the management , interalia , is that the workman . Fagelal was casual piece rated worker . He was habitual absentee . After appointment , in the year 1987 , he worked 51 days and from Jan to March 89. he worked only 46 days . Thereafter he became absent without any intimation . He was chargesheeted on 23-6-89 , when no reply was received , a departmental proceeding was initiated and Shri J.D Jindal , Dy. Personnel Manager was appointed who sent notice twiceby registered post and the same were received by the workman but the workman did not appear . The notice was also published in the daily newspaper on 1-11-89 and notice was also pasted on the notice board of the colliery . When the workman did not appear in the
5163 enquiry proceeding , the Enquiry Officer proceeded exparte and after enquiry found the charges proved against the workman and submitted enquiry report . The Disciplinary authority considered the enquiry report passed the order oftermination from service w.e.f. 25-4-90 . It is stated that he was absent for a long period without any intimation and therefore the order of termination from service is just and proper . The workman is not entitled to any relief.
4. On the pleadings of both the parties the following issues are framed : - --
i. Whether the enquiry is just , proper and legal ?
ii . Whether the management is entitled to lead evidence before this Tribunal ?
iii. Whether the charges of misconduct are proved on the facts of the case ?
iv . Whether the punishment awarded is proper and legal?
v . Relief and costs .
5. Issues No. 1 & 2
These two issues are taken up as preliminary issues and the then Tribunal after considering the material on record held on 12-4-96 that the departmental enquiry conducted by the management was legal and proper . Accordingly these issues have been decided.
6. Issue No. 3
The Union/ workman has not adduced any evidence in the case . The management has examined one witness . The management witness Shri J.D.Jindal was Personnel Manager in WCLL . He was Enquiry Officer . He has supported the case of the management . He has stated that he knew the workman and as he was habitual absentee , a chargesheet was issued against him . He was cross - examined but there is no denial that the workman was not habitual absentee . Thus it is clear that the misconduct is proved against the workman and there is no perverse finding . This issue is decided in favour of the management .
7. Issues No.4 & 5
On the basis of discussion made above , it is clear that the workman is a habitual absentee . I tind no reason to interfere in the order punishment awarded by the management . As such the workman is not entitled to any relief and the action of the management appears to be legal and justified . The reference is , accordingly , answered .
8. In the result , the award is passed without any order to costs .
9. 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 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: AUGUST 21 , 2010 / SHRAVANA 30 , 1932
5164
नई दिल्ली , 23 जुलाई , 2010
का. या. २००३. औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की भाग 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 75/93 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 23-7-2010 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।
[सं. एल- 22012/ 2/1998- आईआर ( सी- II ) ]
अजय कुमार गौड़ , डेस्क अधिकारी New Delhi , the 23rd July , 2010
S.O. 2063. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) , the Central Government hereby publishes the Award ( Ref. No. 75/93 ) ofthe Central Government Industrial Tribunal- cum- 1.abour Court , Jabalpur as shown in the annexure , in the industrial dispute between the employers in relation to the management of SECL and their workman , which was received by the Central Government on 23-07-2010 .
[No. 1-22012 / 2 / 1998 - IR ( C - II ) ] AJAY KUMAR GAUR , Desk Officer
ANNEXURE
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL - CUM - LABOUR COURT, JABALPUR
No. CGIT/LC / R/ 75/ 93
PRESIDING OFFICER : SHRI MOHD.SHAKIR HASAN Area Secretary,
PART II SEC . 3 ( ii ) ] and Govind Singh as Dumper Operators Gr.ll (Group " C " ) after completion of their one year training period is justified ? If not , to what relief the concerned workmen are entitled to ? "
2. The case of the union workmen , in short , is that the workinen namely Shri K.P.Sharma , Nago Rao . Parsu Ram Dhruve and Govind Singh were appointed as HI: MM Operator Trainee from Selection process who , were previously working in Irrigation Department of the State of M.P. After completion of their traming period , they were regularized as Dumper Operator , Group D vide letter No.2907 dated 6-7-90 . It is stated that the workmen were operating 50 tons Dumper during their training period . It is stated that similarly Shri Kanti Kumar and five others in the same Gevra Project were regularized as Dumper Operator Group " C " vide letter No. 5569 dated 7-11-89 who were also Dumper Operator ( Trainee ) . It is stated that similarly Shri Lala Nikam and . Rajendra Kumar Vishkarma who were trainee operator , were also regularized in Group " C " after one year vide order No. 1033 dated 24-2-89 .It is stated that the management has discriminated to these workmen from regularizing them as Dumper Operator Group " C " . The Union workmen claim that these workmen are entitled to be regularized as Dumper Operator Group " C " with wages from the same date.
.Workmen / Union
Sanyukta Khadan Mazdoor Sangh ( AITUC ) , Union Office , M / 162 , Urja Nagar , SECL . Gevra project , Distt. Bilaspur
Versus
Deputy General Manager ,
3. The Management filed Written Statement in the reference . The case of the management , in short , is that admittedly the workmen were appointed as HEMM Operator Trainee in Gevra Project of SECT.. The period of training was for one year on the satisfaction of the management . On successful completion of the training period , the appointment in regular scale of pay was to be considered under NCWA by the duly constituted committee on the basis of vacant post of different Grade of Dumper Operator . Their cases were considered by the committee and they had been appointed in regular scale of pay in terms of appointment order . The cases cited by the Union / workmen of other employees cannot be compared as they were appointed much earlier than these workmen . Under the circumstances , the workmen are not entitled to any relief .
....Management
SECL , Gevra Project , Post Gevra , Distt . Bilaspur
AWARD
Passed on this 11th day of May , 2010 1. The Government of India , Ministry of Labour vide its Notification No.L - 220 12 / 2 / 98 - IR ( C - II ) dated 6-4-93 has referred the following dispute for adjudication by this tribunal:
Whether the action of the management of Gevra Project of SECL , Bilaspur in denying regularization ofS / Shri K.P. Sharma , Nago Rao , Parsu Ram Dhurve 4. The Union / workmen after filing the statement of claim absented and therefore the then Tribunal proceeded the reference exparte against the Union/ workmen on 16-11-06.
5. The only issue for determination is as to whether the action of the management is justified in denying regularization to these workmen as Dumper Operator Gr.II. Group "C" .
6. To prove the case the management has adduced oral and documentary evidence . The management witness Shri . S.Ram Krishna Rao is presently working as Dy.Chief 11111
ハ
Personnel Manager in Gevra Project . He has stated in his evidence that the terms of appointment vide office order 7410. 7414 and 7415 dated 30-11-88 clearly shows that after completion of the training period , the workmen will be considered in regular pay scale under NCWA and after successful completion of their training , they have been placed as Dumper Operator Gr . III Group D. He has further stated that Shri Kanti Kumar and others were senior to them and therefore these workmen cannot compare themselves with their cases . The appointment letters are filed by the management which are Paper Nos 6/2 to 6/5 . The workmen have also filed the same document . These appointment letters donot show that after completion of their training period , they will be regularized as Dumper Operator Gr . II Group " C " rather it shows that on successful completion of training , they will be appointed in regular scale of pay under NCWA . There is no other evidence in rebuttal of the evidence of the management . There is no reason to disbelieve the evidence of the management . I find that the action of the management is justified . Accordingly the reference is answered.
7. In the result , the award is passed without any order to costs .
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 , 23 जुलाई , 2010
का. आ. 2064.-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में , केन्द्रीय सरकार एस.ई.सी. एल. के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच , अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण जबलपुर के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 211/93 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 23-7-2010 को प्राप्त हुआ था।
[सं. एल- 22012/ 203/ 1993- आईआर ( सी- Ii ) ] अजय कुमार गौड़ , डेस्क अधिकारी New Delhi , the 23rd July , 2010
S.O. 2064. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) . the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref . No. 211/93 ) 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 SECL and their workmen , which was received by the Central Government on 23-7-2010 .
No.1-22012/ 203 / 1993 - IR ( CII ) ] AJAY KUMAR GAUR , Desk Officer 3099Gl /10-14
ANNEXURE
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL - CUM - LABOUR COURT, JABALPUR
NO . CGIT/LC / R/ 211 / 93
PRESIDING OFFICER : SHRI MOHD . SHAKIR HASAN The Secretary,
Workman / Union Central India Labour Association ( HMS ) . Qr . No. B / 1 , Vikas Nagar Colony . PostKusmunda Project. Distt . Bilaspur (MP)
Versus
Sub Area Manager , SECL , Laxman Project , Posı Kusmunda Project , Distt . Bilaspur (MP)
Management
AWARD
Passed on this 11th day of May 2010 1. The Government of India, Ministry of Labour vide its Notification No.1-22012 /203 / 93 - IR ( C - II ) dated 4-10-93 has referred the following dispute for adjudication by this tribunal :
" Whether the management of Laxman Project of SECL , Bilaspur is justified in not giving the Excavation Grade Gr.ll cat . B w.e.f. March 1992 ? If not , to what relief the workmen concerned are entitled to ? " 2. The case of the Union / workmen in short is that these two workmen were intially appointed as Driver ( '1' ) in Kusmunda Project , SECL , Bilaspur. After successful training and on recommendation of Departmental Promotion Committee ( in short DPC ) , they were regularized as Driver Cat- V . The workmen were again selected for Dumper Operator in the year 1987. After successful training, they were not regularized confirmed as Dumper Operator Gr.II Cat- C w.e.f. 2-9-1988 though their work was fully satisfactory and similarly other employees were regularized on the post . These workmen were regularized w.e.f. 7-1-90 . These workmen claim regularization w.e.f. 2/4-9-1988 and grant of all consequential benefits from the said date . It is stated that the management invited application from eligible employees in Dumper Operator Grade- 11 Cat-C for selection as Shovel Operator Grade - 11 . Cat- B which was a category higher in rank , status and pay. The said notice is in possession of the management . These workmen submitted their applications and were selected for the training vide order dated 9-3-1991 . Upon successful completion of training , these workmen were regularized as Shovel Operator Gr - 11 Cat -C instead of Shovel Operatot Gr.ll Cat " B " . Since Dumper Operator Gr - 11 Cat - C was equal in rank, the order dated 9-3-91 was moditied to the extent thatupon successful completion of training , the workmen wonki be regularized as Shovel Operator Gr.II , Cat- B . After completion of training , the workmen were not regularized as Shovel Operator Grade - II , Cat- B w.e.f. 9-3 1992 with seriority and back wages .
3 The management appeared and filed Written Stement The case of the management , inter alia , is that admittedly the workmen Shri Jaswant Singh and Shri Laxmi Prasen Yadav were appointed as Driver in Category - I on 85 and 4-4-85 respectively and were promoted to Driver Car Thereafter they were selected as Dumper Operator (T) by the OPC and after completion of training they were regalarized us Dumper operator Gr.II in Excavation Gr.C weet is also admitted that due to shortage of the- etop , rater excavator ) in the Project , applications were meated itor the departmental candidates for apponument as Shovel operator and notice dated 25-2-91 was regulated. In response is the notice , these two workthen appeared and were selected for appointment as Shovel Operator ( T ) waf. 9-3 91. The said office order was subsequently corrected by corrigendum bearing No. 1553 dated 12-3-91 whereby the word shovel operator ' Gr - II Excavation Cat was withdrawn by the management and the word Excavator Operator Gr.1 , Excavation Cat "B " was inserted . iris stated that the word " Excavation Cat " B " was a clerical mistake which should have been read as Excavation Cat "C". Shovel Operator and Excavator Operator are one and some post . I stated that the workinen were appointed for the post at avelOperator Gr.11 . Excavation Cat C and in the condum inadvertently and due to typing mistake the word at B " was typed . Accordingly the workmen were reuniarized to the post of Excavator Grade- If in Groep 8. It is stated that Group " B " is promotional post from Group " to a person on acquiring certain experience and on fulfilling other conditious . The claim of the Intan is not justified and the workmen are not entitled to
4. On tis plaadings of both the parties , the following isstues are for adud- cation .
1. Whether the action of the management in not A in the post of Excavation Grade - II in Category Bothese workmen is justified?
Bnet to what relief the workmen are entitled to?
5. Before discussing the issues , the admitted facts of the parties are te be enumerated .
( The workmen Shri Jaswant Singh and Shri Laxmi Prasad Yadav were initially appointed as Driver in angry - i on 26-3-85 and 4-4-85 respectively .
Ct they were promoted and regularized to the post of Driver Cn . V on recommendation of DPC (3) they were further selected as Dumper Operator ( 1 ) in the year 1987 and on successful training .
they were regularized as Dumper Opertor Gr.II Cat ' C ' w.e.f. 7-1-90 .
(4) Due to shortage of Shovel Operator ( Excavator) in the Project , the applications were invited from . the departmental candidates through issuance of notice dated 25-2-91 for appointment as shovel operator.
(5) In response to the notice , these workmen applied.. appeared and were selected for appointment as ShovelOperator .
(6) The order No. 1517 dated 9-3-91 ( M / 11 ) for selection as Shovel Operator ( Trainee ) on recommendation of DPC was passed by Sue Area Manager that on successful training for a period of one year , they will be regularized to the post Shovel Operator Gr.II , Excavation Cat (7) Subsequently a corrigendum was issued vide office order No. 1555 dated 12-3-1991 (21 日 whereby the office order No. 1517 dated 0.3.91 was partially modified and the words Operator Grade - II Excavation Cat- C read as Excavator Operator Grade - II IN Cat" B " and remaining will be unaltered 6. Issue No.1
(1 To decide the issue , it is necessary : determine as to whether the modification vadeder so 1555 dated 12-3-1991 ( M / 12 ) of the word Category modified as Category " B " or not or this is a clerical mistaks and was done inadvertently as has been alfeged betwe inanagement . It is evident from the pleadings of t parties that all documents filed by the managemen case have been also referred by the Union workm theirpleadings as such it is deemed to be admitted by both the parties.
7. The specific case of the Union workes while the workmen were working as Dumpered Grade - II Category " C" , the management of SEC issuance of notice invited applications from the employees in Catrgory " C" for selection of Shovel per thei Grade II Category " B " which is a category higher hand,. status and pay . The issuance of notice for select , departmental candidate to the post of Shovel Operat is admitted by the management but it is specifically nodurre that the notice was not for selection of Shovel Operator Grade Il Category " B " rather it was for selection of Shovel Operator Grade II Category " C ". A fact which is specificate not denied is deemed to be admitted . Another aspect is that notice whereby the application was invited for setechon is not filed in Court . The said notice was very important piece of evidence to decide that the application was invited from the departmental candidates for selection of Shevel [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]
Operator Grade - II , Category " C " or category " B " . Admittedly the said notice was in possession of the management . In absence of the said notice , it is to be inferred that the selection was for Category " B " .
8. The corrigendum issued vide order No. 1555 dated 12-3-1991 ( M / 12 ) is an admitted document . The management case is that the word " Category B " in the corrigendum was wrongly typed by clerical mistake and inadvertently and it should be and be read as the word "Category C " . The Union / workmen has not examined any oral evidence . Only the documents filed by the management are also referred by the Union/ workmen in the statement of claim and are deemed to be admitted documents. However the burden is on the management that in the corrigendum the mistake is a clerical mistake and is done inadvertently . On perusal of the documents which are marked as M / ll and M / 12 , it is clear that the corrigendum was issued only to modify the word ' Excv . Cat ' C ' to Excv. Car' B ' . It is not the case that the entire corrigendum was issued inadvertently and it was a clerical mistake . The same officer has issued the corrigendum . If the story of the management is to be believed , that the word Excv.Cat " B " . is a clerical mistake and it was done inadvertently then the corrigendum carries no meaning because practically that it is the only correction of the main order No. 1517 dated 9-3-91 ( M /11 ) . In this way there was no need of any corrigendum. Moreover it appears that the management had not passed any further order to cancel the said co.rigendum which did not carry any meaning according to the Management if it was done inadvertently. This shows that the corrigendum was issued knowingly and deliberately to correct the word " Excv.Cat C " to " Excv.Cat B " by the Sub Area Manager , Laxman O / C Project in accordance with the notice of selection to the post . In view of the circumstances and absence of the notice for selection ssued on 25-2-91 , there was no clerical mistake in the corrigendum ( M / 12 ) and it was not inadvertently done .
9. The management has examined one witness in the case . The management witness Shri P. V. Satyanarayana is presently working as Sr. Personnel Officer . He has come to say that the word Cat- " B " was a clerical mistake which should have been read as Cat- " C " . He has not stated that the entire corrigendum issued was a clerical mistake because there was the only correction to be made in the main order No. 1517 dated 9-3-91 . If it is a mistake , then corrigendum carries no meaning . He wa at the person who had typed the corrigendum. He was not the Officer who had signed the corrigendum . He appears to be not competent to say that it was a clerical mistake . Moreover in view of the documentary evidence , the oral evidence is not to be believed and the corrigendum will have no purpose , if such mistake is said to have been done . The facts stated by the management doesnot appears to be probable in view of
भारत का राजपत्र अगस्त 21 , 2010/ श्रावण 30 , 1932
the discussion made above . I findthat the matugmenti notjustified in not giving the post of Prithuc - fi Category " B " to these workmen w . This issue i decided in favour of the union/workmer . 2ui aquist the management .
10. Issue No. Ji
Onthe basis of the discussion nu le above, ha ha that the management has failed to shiblish that there was clerical mistake in the corrigendu whereby he werkimer are entitled to the post of Excavator Grade - i in Cetegory " B " w.e.f. 9-3-92 . It appears that the action a tms management is not justified . Accordingis the affigna is directed to regularize the aforesaltanok shovel operator Grade - II category "B" with affec from 9-3-92 with seniority as shovel opant longwith buck wages with effect from the same date within three month , from the receipt of the award . This is the and the reference are thus answered .
11. In the result, the award passed without any order to costs .
12. Let the copies of the award be sent to the Government of India , Ministry of Labar & Employinent as per rules .
MOHD . SHAKIR HASAN , Presiding Officer नई दिल्ली , 23 जुलाई 10
का.आ. 2065. 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 कंन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालय , जबलपुर के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 57/97 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 23-7-2010 को प्राप्त हुआ था।
[ सं. एल- 22012/267/1995- आईआर ( सी- II ) ] अजय कुमार गौड़ , डेस्क अधिकारी New Delhi , the 23rd July , 2010
S.O. 2065.In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) , the Central Government hereby publishes the Award ( Ref . No. 57/97 ) ofthe Central Goverment Industrial Tribunal - cum- Labour Court , Jabalpur as shown in the annexure , in the industrial dispute between the employers in relation to the management of SECL and their workmen, which was received by the Central Governrent on 23-07-2010 .
[No. 1.- 22012/ 267 / 1995 - IR ( C - II ) ] AJAY KUMAR GAUR , Desk Officer 5168
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 21 , 2010 / SHRAVANA 30, 1932
ANNEXURE
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM - LABOUR COURT , JABALPUR
NO . CGIT/LC / R/ 57 / 97
PRESIDING OFFICER : SHRI MOHD.SHAKIR HASAN The Vice President ,
M.P. Koyla Mazdoor Sabha ( HMS ) , 71 , W. No.22 , Near Mithbada Station ,
...Workman/Union Shahdol ( MP )
Versus
The General Manager ,
Hasdeo Area of SECL ,
Post South Jhagrakhand Colliery ,
[PART II SEC. 3 ( ii) ] regularization with back wages and other benefits were given to those contractual workers whose names were referred to the Arbitrator by the respective Unions . The MPKMS ( HMS ) referred the names of 173 workers who were accordingly departmentalized . It is stated that the present dispute raised in the light of the said award by the Union of 46 workmen were not covered with the list of the MPKMS . The said Arbitration Award was already implemented and confirmed by the appropriate Govt. vide order dated 1-5-96 . It is stated that the arbitration award was implemented long back and the claim of employment bythe said Union therefore is after thought . Thus the Union / workmen are not entitled to any relief.
...Management
Distt . Surguja ( MP)
AWARD
Passed on this 6th day of May 2010 1. The Government of India , Ministry of Labour vide its Notification No.1 . - 220 12 / 267 / 95 - IR ( C - II ) dated 5-3-97 has referred the following dispute for adjudication by this tribunal :
Whether the demands of M.P.K.M.S. ( HMS ) for regularization of services of Shri Mahagu and 45 other tub loaders of Hasdeo Area of SECL is justified and legal ? If so , what relief the concerned workmen are entitied to?"
2. The Union/workmen did not appear in the reference inspite of proper notice . Lastly the then Tribunal proceeded the reference exparte against the Umon/ workmen on 30-7-07.
3. The management appeared and filed his written statement . The case of the management in short is that the Union / workmen did not appear and therefore the particulars of the workmen and their claim appear to be vague regarding their engagement , place of work etc. As such the reference is not maintainable . It is stated that in view of the reference at seems that the claim have been made in the light of award dated 30-8-90 passed by Shri II.GG.Bhave , the then joint Chief I abour Commissioner ( Central ) ( Retd . ) who was appointed as a sole Arbitrator . The Unions including MP.K.M.S ( UMS ) raised dispute and on agreement with magement to refer to the Arbitrator, the terms of the teference was referred to the sole Arbitrator to decide for departmentalization of contractual workers of tub repairing jobs of Hasdeo Area . The lists were furnished to the sole Arbitrator by the Unions of the Contractual workers . Ultimately the Sole Arbitrator passed the award dated 30-8-90 and the same was notified in the Gazette on 7-9-90 . Thereafter a Committee was constituted for verification of the claimants as per list submitted by the respective Unions for implementation . Consequently the departmentalization , 4. The point for issue is as to whether the management of SECL , Hasdro Area tot regularizing the services of Shri Mahgoo and 45 otheus Tub Loaders is justified and legal?
5. Before discussing the evidence of the management , it is not out of place to say that the reference made is for determining the legality of regularization of Shri Mahgoo and 45 others . Tub leaders nereas the list attached alongwith the order of reference is wah respect to 46 Tub repairing workers of Hascico Area. Thus it is clear that there is clear differences of the nature of work of the workers whose names are attached with the order of reference . The workman /Union did not appear to raise the dispute in the Tribunal . As such , it appears that the learned Counsel for the management has rightly pointed out that the reference is vague .
6. To prove the case the management has examined one witness . The management witness Shri A.M. Sen is Personnel Manager at SECL , Hasdeo Area . He has stated that the management and the representative of the Unions had signed an agreement to refer the dispute with respect to the departmentalization of Tub Repair workers of Hasdeo Area to arbitration and the reference was made to sole Arbitrator to decide the dispute who passed an arbitration award dated 30-8-90 . The Unions including the present Union MPKMS gave the lists of the Tub Repair workers to Arbitrator. The said Arbitration award was accordingly implemented and the list of workers furnished by MPKMS ( HMS ) was also departmentalized . He has stated that the present list of 46 workers was not submitted to the Arbitrator and therefore the said list is after thoughts . It looks probable that the present list is doubtful because the Union was free to raise the dispute of all the workers of similar nature before the Arbitrator . Subsequent act of the Union to re - agitate the dispute for departmentalization of similar workers is not justified . Moreover neither Union nor the workmen are present to raise the dispute before this Tribunal . Accordingly the reference is answered in favour of the management and the action of the management isjustified and legal .
[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]
7. In the result , the award is passed exparte against the Union/ workmen without any order to costs .
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 , 23 जुलाई , 2010
का.आ. 2066. 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 47/91 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 23-7-2010 को प्राप्त हुआ था।
[सं. एल- 22012/391/1990- आईआर ( सी- II ) ]
अजय कुमार गौड़ , डेस्क अधिकारी New Delhi , the 23rd July, 2010
S.O. 2066. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) , the Central Government hereby publishes the Award ( Ref. No. 47/91 ) 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 SECL and their workmen , which was received by the Central Government on 23-7-2010 .
[No. L -22012/391 / 1990 - IR ( C - II ) ] AJAY KUMAR GAUR , Desk Officer ANNEXURE
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL -CUM - LABOUR COURT, JABALPUR
NO . CGIT /LC / R/ 47 / 91
Presiding Officer : SHRI MOHD . SHAKIR HASAN The President ,
M.P. Koyla Shramik Sangh , ( CITU ) ,
West Chirimiri Colliery,
Post Kurasiya
5169
भारत का राजपत्र अगस्त 21 , 2010/ श्रावण 30 , 1932
1. The Government of India , Ministry of Labour vide its Notification No.L - 22012/ 391 / 90 - IR ( Coal - II ) dated 25-3-91 has referred the following dispute for adjudication by this tribunal :
" Whether the action of the management of Chirimiri Area of SECL Ltd. , in not absorbing Shri D.K. Das Gupta , Shri Jwala Prasad , Shri S.K. Nath , Shri N.C. Sarkar, Shri Nanhu , Shri Shievbachan and Shri Raju on company's roll , is legal and justified ? If not to what relief the workmen are entitled for ? " 2. The case of the Union/ workmen in short is that the workmen were initially appointed by the co - operative society and were working for and under the Central Co- operative Store Ltd. which was owned by erstwhile Coal Mines Welfare Organisation ( in short CMWO ) . It is stated that with the take over of CMWO alongwith field units , cooperative societies / stores etc.by the SECL , Chirimiri Area w.e.f. 1-10-1986 , all rights , liabilities and obligation vested in the Chief General Manager , Chirimiri Area , SECL . After the takeover , these seven workmen also approached the management of the Chirimiri Area , SECL for their regularization or absorption in the company's roll but the management had discriminated with these workmen while absorbing other similarly situated persons namely Shri B.L.Sharma and B.M.Mandal of the society in which they were also employees . These workmen have completed four and half year services directly under the management of SECL, Chirimiri Area . The management is practicing unfair labour practice by depriving them from regularizing w.e.f. 1-10-1986 after taking over by the SECL . The workmen claim regular pay with all consequential benefits .
... Workman /Union
Distt . Surguja ( MP)
Versus
General Manager ,
Chirimiri Area of SECL , Post West Chirimiri Colliery , Distt. Surguja (MP)
3. The management appeared and filed Written statement . The case of the management , interalia, is that the reference is not maintainable as they were never employees of the SECL . These workmen are not members ofMPKSS ( CITU ) Union and therefore the Union does not have locus standi to raise the dispute . It is stated that Central Cooperative Store registered under the cooperative society's Act was functioning in Chirimiri and had nothing todo with the management of SECL . The CMWO in Chirimiri Area was admittedly merged with the SECL and two persons namely Shri B.N.Sharma Co - operative Inspector and Shri B.M.Mandal Cooperative Organiser were employees of the CMWO and therefore they were absorbed by the management . These seven workmen were never employers of the CMWO and had no right to be absorbed with the SECL . Under the circumstances , the workmen are not entitled to any relief.
...Management
AWARD
Passed on this 8th day of July , 2010 4. The point for issue is as to whether the action of the management of Chirimiri Area in not absorbing the workmen is legal and justified ?
5170
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 21 , 2010/ SHRAVANA 30 , 1932
5. On the pleadings of both the parties , it is an admitted fact that the CMWO was taken over by the SECL , Chirimiri Area Management w.e.f. 1-10-86 .It is also an admitted fact that the administration , assets , liabilities , manpower , field units , dispensaries , Co - operative societies / stores etc. in Chirimiri Area of CMWO also came under the control of SECL . It is also admitted that the establishment of Central Co - operative Inspector and Shri B.N.Sharma . Co - opeprative Organiser were the employees of the said establishment and were absorbed by the SECL.
6 Now the evidence of the Union / workmen is to be examined that these workmen were employees of the establishment of Central Co - operative Stores . Chirimiri . The workmen Shri S.K.Nath , Shri Jhwala Prasad , and Shri D.K.Das are examined in the case . They claim themselves that they had been appointed in the Central Co -operative Store , SECL.. Chirimiri Area and the said C- operative store was owned and controlled by the CMWO. They have admitted that they got appointment letters . The said appointment letters are not filed in the case to substantiate the claim of their appointment . In absence of the appointment letters , it is difficult to say that they were casual employees or regular employees specially because the management challenges that they were not the employees of the establishment of CMWO , which was merged with the SECL .
7. The Union has only filed the photocopy of the office order of Chief General Manager , Chirimiri Area which is marked as Exhibit W / l . This is simply filed to show that the SECL , Chirimiri Area Management had taken over the administration , assets , liabilities , manpower etc. of the CMWO Offices , field units , dispensaries , Co - operative Societies / Stores etc. in Chirimiri Area w.e.f. 1-10-86 . This fact is an admitted fact . There is no other documentary evidence to show that these workmen were on the roll of Central Co - operative Stores , Chirimiri Area under the control of CMWO at the time of merger with the SECL . The burden is on the Union to prove the above facts but even the appointment letters are not filed to substantiate the appointment in the said establishment .
8. On the other hand , the management has adduced oral and documentary evidence . According to the management these workmen were never employees of the CMWO and they were probably working in other Co - operative Society who was an independent body and had nothing to do with the CMWO. The management witness Shri Amarender Mohan Sen is Dy Personnel Manager in Chirimiri Area of SECL . He has supported the case of management . He has stated that the Co - operative Store in which Shri Mandal and Shri Prasad were working was of SECI .. This is an admitted fact . There is nothing in his evidence to show that the seven workmen were
[ PART St.30 ) ] employed in the same Co - operative Society as in which Shri Mandal and Shri Prasad were working .
9. The management has also filed circular dated 25-9-86 whereby the CMWO was taken over by the Coat India Limited and its subsidiary companies w.e.f. 1-10-86 which is marked as Exhibit M /l . This is an adnitted fact that the CMWO was merged with SECT The circular further shows that categories of employees including the names of establishments which was under the control and jurisdiction of different subsidiary companies were indicated in Annexure- I. Detailed list of employees indicating the names , designation , pay scale , pay etc. had already been furnished to the respective companies earlier . The said Annexure - 1 and detailed list of employees are not filed by the management though it was part of the circular . The incomplete document is inadmissible in law.
10. Another document is filed which is statement showing name of establishments , designation and No. of employees working under CMWO . This is an admitted document and is marked as Exhibit M 2. This is filed to show that one post of Co - operative Inspector and one post of Co - operative Organizer of Central Co - operative Stores , Chirimiri was under CMWO . Shri Mandat and Shri Prasad were admittedly observed in SERT . This document corroborates that these seven workmen were not in the Central Co - operative Store under ( MWG at the time of merger and therefore their posts did not have place in the list . This document proves the case of the management . Exhibit M /3 is the forwarding letter of the circular ( M/ 1 ) . Exhibit M/ 4 is the telex message ofDirector Personnel for constituting a committee for taking over assets , liabilities , manpower etc. of the CMWO . This is also an admitted document . Exhibit M/ 5 is the office order whereby the committee was constituted . Exhibit M'o is the office order and the same document is also filed by the Union which is marked as Exhibit W 1 .
11. Considering the discussion made above , it is clear that there were only two posts of Central Co - operative stores . Chirimiri under the CMWO and the employees of the said posts were absorbed by the SECL . As such the Union / workmen are not entitled to any relief. Accordingly the reference is answerca.
12. In the result , the award is passed without any order to costs .
13. 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 Dated : 8-7-2010 11)311-905ויורן ( [
नई दिल्ली , 23 जुलाई , 2010
का.आ. 2067.-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में , केन्द्रीय सरकार डब्ल्यूसी एल. 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 97/2001 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 23-7-2010 को प्राप्त हुआ था। [सं. एल-22012/ 292/2000- आईआर ( सी- II ) ] अजय कुमार गौड़, डेस्क अधिकारी New Delhi , the 23rd July , 2010
S.O. 2067. - In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award ( Ref. No.97/2001 ) 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 WCL and their workman , which was received by the Central Government on 23-7-2010 .
[No. L - 22012 / 292 /2000 - IR ( C - II ) ]
AJAY KUMAR GAUR, Desk Officer
ANNEXURE
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL - CUM - LABOUR- COURT , JABALPUR
No. CGIT/ LC / R/97 / 2001
Presiding Officer : Shri Mohd. Shakir Hasan
Shri Rajnu , S / o Shri Darafee , Wo Shri D.N. Tripathi , President , Γ.Κ.Κ.Κ.K.Sangh ,
Damua , P. O. Damua ,
Distt . Chhindwara
5171
भारत का राजपत्र अगस्त 21 , 2010/ श्रावण 30 , 1932
"Whetner the action of the Manager , Nandan Mine No. 1 of WCL , Kanhan Area, PO Nandan , Distt . Chhindwara (MP) in terminating the services of Shri Rajanoo Pasvan S/o Shri Dharafee , General Mazdoor , T.No. 2547 of Nandan Mine No. 1 of WCL, Kanhan Area w.e. f. 7-7-96 is legal and justified? Ifnot , to what relief the workman is entitled to ? "
.... Workman/ Union
Versus
The Chief General Manager , WCL , Kanhan Area , .O. Dungaria, Distt . Chhindwara ( MP )
....Managernent .
AWARD
Passed on this 4th day of May -2010 1. The Government of India , Ministry of Labour vide Notification No. L - 22012 / 292 / 2000 -IR ( C - II ) dated 0-5-2001 has referred the following dispute for adjudication ythis tribunal: -
2. The case of the workman, in short is that the workman Shri Rajanoo Paswan was appointed as Departmental Piece Rated worker in Nandan Mine No.1 of WCL in the year 1982. Thereafter his service was transferred to General Mazdoor by the management . The workman was also office bearer of the AITUC Union . It is stated tha: a chargesheet dated 5-6-95 was issued against him alleging therein that he was habitual absentee and therefore had committed misconduct . The workman denied the charges and replied that whenever he remained absent either on illness or otherwise he submitted medical certificate or application . The management did not find his reply satisfactory and a departmental proceeding was initiated against him . Shri B.B. Mishra , Dy Personnel Manager was appointed as Enquiry Officer. The Presenting Officer only gave his statement in the proceeding and the documents filed in the proceeding had no significance . Thereafter the statement of the delinquent workman was recorded . Then only the Enquiry Officer concluded the enquiry and submitted his enquiry report holding that the charge of habitual absenteeism without any sufficient cause or leave was proved . The Disciplinary Authority without application of his mind mechanically agreed with the perverse and contrary finding of the Enquiry Officer and passed order dated 23-6-96/ 7-7-96 for dismissal of the workman . The Enquiry Officer considered past record which was beyond the charge and no punishment was ever imposed on the past record to the workman . The same is basically illegal and against the principle of natural justice . It is stated that the punishment of dismissal imposed on the workman is too harsh looking into the alleged misconduct . The workman is said to have filed appeal to the General Manager, WCL, Kanhan Area on 10-7-96 and also a review application to the Chairman - Cum- Managing Director , WCL on 13-4-2000 but the same are still pending . It is submitted that the dismissal order be set aside and the workman be reinstated with back wages and other benefits.
3. The management appeared and filed written statement. The case of the management , interalia , is that admittedly the workman Rajnoo Paswan was appointed as piece Rated worker and was made subsequently as General Mazdoor . He remained absent from duty unauthorizedly without any intimation , permission and sanctioned leave on several occasions . The workman was given ample opportunity to improve himself by not taking any serious action . It is stated that in the year 1992 , he was on attendance for 46 days , in 1993-68 days , 1994-74 days . 1995-80 days and till May 1996-68days.It is stated that absenteeism in Coal Mines affect the production . The 5172
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 21 , 2010 /SHRAVANA 30, 1932
workman was issued chargesheet dated 6-6-95 for his habitual absenteeism . The reply was submitted by the workman but the same was not found satisfactory by the competent authority and a departmental enquiry ( in short DE) was initiated against him . Shri B. Prasad, Dy. Personnel Manager was appointed as Enquiry Officer ( in short E.O. ) and Shri Manohar , Token Clerk was appointed as Management representative ( in short M.R. ) . The several sittings of the departmental enquiry were conducted by the E.O. The workman appeared and denied the charges . Thereafter another E.O. Shri B.B. Mishra was appointed and M.R. Shri A.K. Chakraborty was also appointed Shri P. K. Bannerjee was allowed to represent as co - worker to defend the workman . Thereafter Shri Ram Singh Sharma co -worker was changed . The Management representative was only examined in the proceeding on behalf of the management . The chargesheet , reply of the workman and a chart of attendance were the only documents filed by the management in the D.E. Thereafter the workman was only himselfexamined and cross - examined in the D.E. The E.O then closed the enquiry and submitted his enquiry report holding the charges as proved . The Disciplinary Authority considering the enquiry report and the documents filed in the enquiry , agreed with findings and the order of termination dated 7-7-96 was passed against the workman Rajnoo Paswan . It is denied that the workman was absert on illenss and had submitted medical certificate or application in his absence . It is stated that the punishment imposed on the workman is proportionate to the gravity of misconduct proved against him . It is submitted that the workman is not entitled to any relief.
4. The following issues are for adjudication in the reference -
1. Whether the departmental enquiry conducted against the workman is proper and legal ?
2. Whether the misconduct of habitual absentee is proved against the workman ?
3. Whether the order of termination from service of the workman is justified ? If not what relief the workınan is entitled to ?
5. Issue No. I
The learned counsel for the management has submitted that the workman has not challenged the departmental enquiry rather his counsel has admitted before the Tribunal on 18-2-2005 . The learned counsel for the workman has also endorsed his admission on the list of documents of departmental enquiry papers filed by the management . Accordingly the then Tribunal passed the order on 18-2-2005 which is reproduced below : - "Case is called out . Shri R. C. Shrivastava , Advocate for workman and Shri A.K. Shashi , Advocate for management are present . Rejoinder filed on behalf of workman. Shri R.C. Shrivastva , Advocate submitted that he is not challenging the legality of the enquiry .
[ PART 11 - SEC . 3 ( 11 ) ] He clearly submitted that enquiry has been validly conducted or held. Fix 25-5-2005 for argument . " The learned counsel for management urged that it is proved on admission that there is no illegality in conducting the departmental enquiry and it was proper and legal .
6. The learned counsel for the workman argued that it is true that the legality of the enquiry is not challenged rather it is challenged that the misconduct is not proved against the workman and the finding of the Enquiry Officer isperverse and is not based on material evidence . However it is clear from the order dated 18-2-2005 that the workman has not challenged the legality and validity of the enquiry conducted by the Enquiry Officer . This issue is deemed to be already decided earlier by the then Tribunal . This issue isaccordingly decided in favour of the management .
7. Issue No. 2
Another important issue for consideration is as to whether the misconduct of habitual absenteeism is proved against the workman . In this reference none has examined any evidence either oral or documentary in court . Both have relied the evidence adduced in the departmental enquiry.
8. The learned counsel for the workman has submitted that the management had not examined any witness to prove the charges against the workman before the E.O and there is no legal evidence against him . The finding of the E. O is perverse and contrary to the record . It is also submitted that the Tribunal has power under Section 11 A of the .D . Act , 1947 to interfere with the finding ofthe E.O as his finding is based on no evidence and contrary to the record . The learned counsel has placed reliance upon a decision reported in 2008 ( 118 ) FLR 400 ( S.C ) Usha Breco Mazdoor Sangh versus Management , M / s . Usha Breco Ltd. and another wherein the Hon'ble Supreme Court held that
" Interpretation of Section 11 - A of the Act came up for consideration before this Court in Firestone Tyre and Rubber Co. ( Supra ) . It was opined that Section 11 - A of the Act had brought about a complete change in this behalf . This Court , despite insertion of Section 11 - A . Not only conferred jurisdiction on the Tribunal to alter the quantum of punishment imposed upon a workman , but also held that it can enter into the merit of the matter se far as deterīnination of the proof of misconduct or otherwise on the part of the workman is concerned .
Two extreme view's , viz . that the entire law has been re-written and despite insertion of Section 11 - A . the management neither could raise the legality or validity of the Domestic enquiry as a preliminary issue or request the Tribunal to allow it to adduce evidence before it even if no enquiry has been held or as to whether such a right can still be exercised by the management came up for भाग II- खण्ड 3( ii ) ]
onsideration in Fire Stone Tyre and Rubber Company Supra).
One of the questions passed by the Vaidialingam , J vas as to whether section 11 - A has made any changes in he legal position as regards the principles which had merged -from various decisions and as noticed in Delhi 'loth and General Mills Co. ( supra). Rejecting both the xtrime contentions and starting on the premise that the Act is a benéficial piece of legislation enacted in the interest of the employees , it was held that although the legal right of the management to raise such a preliminary issue and in he event the same was determined in favour of the vorkmen to lead evidence for the first time before the ribunal/ Labour Court could not be denied , opining :
"The Tribunal is now at liberty to consider not only hether the finding of misconduct recorded by an employer s correct, but also to differ from the said finding if a proper ase is made out . What was once largely in the realm of the atisfaction of the employer , has ceased to be so , and now is the satisfaction of the Tribunal that finally decides the satter."
It was further more held :
Therefore it will be seen that both in respect of cases where a domestic enquiry has been held as also in cases where the Tribunal considers the matter on the evidence dduced before it for the first tirne , the satisfaction under section 11 - A, about the guilt or otherwise of the workman oncerned, is that of the Tribunal . It has to consider the vidence and come to a conclusion one way or other . Even cases where an enquiry has been held by an employer ud a finding of misconduct arrived at , the Tribunal can ow differ from that finding in a proper case and hold that misconduct is proved . "
Thus it is clear that the Tribunal has to see that the inding arrived in the departmental enquiry is in accordance with the evidence adduced by the management by which setmisconduct is proved or not.
9. The learned consel for the management has ubmitted that it is false to say that no evidence is adduced efore the E.O. The management had examined oral and ocumentary evidence in the enquiry to substantiate the harges . The Management Representative was examined a witness and there is no bar that M.R. cannot be a itness . The learned management counsel has placed eliance upon a decision reported in 1978 LIC 1335 Motor ndustries Co. Ltd. versus Shiekh Mohammad and another . ac Hon'ble Karnataka High Court has held that:
"Coming to the second question , there is no principle fnatural justice which requires that a person who has idged a complaint cannot be a presenting officer and a tosecutor in a domestic enquiry . "
3099GI /10-15
5173
भारत का राजपत्र अगस्त 21 , 2010/ श्रावण 30 , 1932
Thus I find in principle that there is no bar that Management Representative cannot be a witness of the Management but it appears that he is an interested witness . Admittedly there is no other witness . However , now let us examine the evidence adduced before the E.O.
10. The departmental enquiry proceeding dated 10-6-96 ( Paper No. 8/68 ) shows that only three documents were filed and relied by the management befored the E.O. They are as follows :
1. Chargesheet No. 1916 dated 6-6-95 which was marked as M , Exhibit No. 1 .
2. Reply of the charges of the workman Shri Rajnoo Paswan dated 14-6-95 which was marked as IM. Exhibit 2.
3. Attendance particulars of Shri Rajnoo Paswan prepared by wage clerk dated 20-6-95 which was marked as M. Exhibit 3 .
Except these three documents , the Management had not relied an other documents to establish the charges against the workman .
11. M. Exhibit -1 is chargesheet No. 1916 dated 6-6-95 whereby the workman Shri Rajnoo Pasvan was charged for his absence in Oct. 1994-22 days , in Nov. 1994-14 days , and in Dec. 1994-16 days without any sanction leave in violence of clause 26 (24 ) of the Standing Order . There was no charge of his past conduct of absenteeism. The enquiry proceeding clearly shows that the workman had denied the charges . Simply furnishing of charges to the delinquent is not said to be proved.
12. M. Exhibit -2 is the reply of the charges by the workman Shri Rajnoo Pasvan . The reply shows that the workman had shown reason of his absence in 1994 that he was ill and had furnished medical certificate in the office for his joining . The clause 26 (24 ) of the standing Order as has been stated in the chargesheet shows that if any employee absented without any cogent reason , the same would be treated as misconduct . The reply of the workman shows that he was ill and he had furnished medical certificate at the time of joining . This fact is not denied in evidence . This document is relied by the Management in the enquiry proceeding . Paper 8/68 of the department proceeding corroborates this fact that cogent reason was shown for his absence .
13. M. Exhibit 3 is the attendance particulars of Shri Rajnoo Paswan which appears to have been prepared by wage clerk on 20-6-95 . This attendance particulars are for the year 1992 to 1995. This is not a primary evidence . This particulars appear to have been prepared either from wage register or attendance register. The management had failed to produce those registers before the Enquiry Officer which were admittedly primary evidence . No reason was also assigned as to why these registers were not produced .
31/4
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 21 , 2010/ SHRAVANA 30 , 1932
Moreover the wage clerk , who was maker of the attendance particulars , was also not examined before the E.O to test the verocity of the said document . The attendance particulars of the year 1992 , 1993 and 1995 were also not in the charges . Admittedly the attendance particulars was prepared after serving of the charge sheet to the workman . This was admittedly not part of the chargesheet . The learned counsel for the workman has submitted that this attendance particular has no legal value . Thus it is clear that the documents filed by the management before the E.O do not prove misconduct by habitual absenteeism as it is ot based on legal evidence .
14 The learned counsel for the management has submitted that the Management Representative was examined as a witness in the departmental enquiry on 10-6-96 . It is submitted that his evidence is sufficient to prove the charge . The learned Counsel for the workman has submitted that the proceeding of the departmental enquiry shows that no evidence was recorded by the E.O. ofthe Management Representative and admittedly there is no other witness examined on behalf of the Management before the E.O. Now let us examine the proceeding dated 10-6-96 ( Paper No. 8/86 ) of the departmental enquiry as to whether any evidence was recorded of the Management Representative . The proceeding of the said date shows that the E.O told the M.R. to place the facts of the case of the Management . Accordingly the Management representative told the E.O that " Shri Rajnoo Paswan was habitual to remain absent unauthorisedly Oct. 94-22 days , in Nov. 1994-14 days and in Dec. 1994-16 day he was absent and on his absence , the management/ Mines Superintendent served him with chargesheet . The delinquent workman gave reply of the charges but the same was found unsatisfactory and the departmental proceeding was initiated . He has stated that he was alos unauthorized absent and was on attendance in the year 1992-46 days , 1993-68 days , 1994-74 day and in 1995-80 days . This is clear that Shri Rajnoo Paswan was habitual absentee unauthorisedly . This is only to say to him. " In 15. The learned counsel for the workman has submitted that the Management had not adduced any evidence rather M.R. had placed the fact of the management as Management Representative .It is also argued that the Management Representative had not sought permission to adduce his evidence on behalf of the Management . The E.O. had also not recorded as evidence of the Management witness . It is submitted that this cannot be treated as evidence of the Management . There is no other evidence on behalf of the management . As such there is no legal evidence to prove the charge of the misconduct.
16. The learned counsel for the management has submitted that the said statement of the management Representative is to be treated as evidence by the subsequent act of the E.O. Subsequently the E.O. asked
PART 1 St.3 ( ii) ]
===
the delinquent workman to crossexamine the statement of the M.R. Thereafter the co- worker of thedelinquent workman cross - examined him .
17. It is evident from the record that admittedly the Management Representative had not sought any permission to adduce his evidnce on behalf of the Management . The E.O. had also not recorded the statement as a evidence rather he told the M.R. to place the facts of the management . Admittedly no other oral evidence was adduced on behalf of the management .
18. However if it is evidence of M.R. as a witness of the management , then now let us examine the evidence in the light of charge levelled against the delinquent workman . There is specific case and evidence of the workman that he was ill and he furnished medical centicate at the time of joining . M. Exhibit -2 is the reply of the chargesheet of the workman . It is an admitted document , t discloses that the medical certificate was produced of his illness . The Management Representative had not denied in his evidence that no medical certificate was filed rather in cross examination it is specifically asked that when he was ill and had produced medical certificate of his absence then as to how it is said to be unauthorized ale ence . The reply was that he was absent prior to giving an information as such it was unauthorized absentee . There is no denial thatno medical certificate was filed at the time of reparting on duty . This is deemed to be admitted by the management thatmedical certificate was filed . Admittedis he worked in the year 1995 and 1996. Thereafter the management counsel has referred clause 12.5 of the standing orders of company which is reproduced below: -
"Applications for leave or extension of leave on medical grounds shall be supported by a certificate from a Medical Officer of Company or where there is no such officer , a Government Medical Officer or failing him , from a registered medical practitioner . stating the period for which leave is recommended . On receipt of such application the sanctioning authority shall immediately inform the workman in writing whether the leave or extension of leave has beer granted and if so , for what period . An employee who has been sanctioned leave or an extension of leave on medical ground for a period exceeding fourteen days at a time shall not be allowed to resume duty unless he produces a certificate of fitness . "
The above circumstances of the case show that he was alllowed to continue after illness and theretore his medical certificate was considered and he was found it to resume duty.
19. The M.R. had also stated about his past conduct and had stated that in 1992-46 days , 1993-68 days and 1995-80 days the workman had only in attendance . This fact appears to have been stated to prove habitual absentee . This charge of habitual absentee of those periods [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]
===
was beyond the charge leveled against the delinquent workman . It is urged by the learned counsel for the workman that this part of the fact is not admissible in law. It is submitted that the workman was not bounded to give any explanation ofthis fact which was beyond charge . Moreover the management had not filed any chit of paper to show that he was ever show caused or warned of the alleged past absence . Rather the workman had stated categorically in his evidence that whenever he remained absent on illness , he filed Medical Certificate or application on his absence otherwise . Thus it is clear that the reasonable ground was shown of the absence of workaman which appears to have been admitted by the M.R as he had not denied.
20. The workman Shri Rajnoo Paswan was also examined and cross - examined in the departmental enquiry which are paper Nos . 8/69 to 8/71 of the proceeding. He has stated that he never absented unauthorisedly . He did not do duty only on illness and joined duty after giving information and taking permission from Management . In cross - examination he had further asserted that he never became absent willfully rather only became absent on illness . His evidence shows that he was not unauthorized habitual absentee .
21. The enquiry report ( Paper Nos . 8/73 to 8/74 ) shows as to how the E.O came to the conclusion of habitual absenteeism which is reproduced below : -
" The workman concerned cross - examined the statement of management representative . The management representative did not produced any witness from management side . Shri Rajnoo Pasvan accused workman also did not produced any witness from his side and requested to be permitted to give his statement . In his statement Shri Rajnoo Pasvan stated that he never remained absent unauthorisedly. He remained absent only on the days he was sick and after he got cured from sickness , he attended his duties after informing the management about his sickness , the management also allowed him on duty on the basis of his information that he was sick . He further stated that he is attending his duty regularly at present and except in month of May 96 when he was suspended by the management he was quite regular in attending his duties . He assured that he will attend his duties regularly and will not remain absent hereafter unauthorisedly he also stated that in case he remains absent unauthorisedly he may be punished severely by the management for which he himself will be responsible , he also stated that he may be given one chance to him upon his performance . The co - worker of the accused workman examined the statement of shri Rajnoo Pasvan , during the cross examination by the management representative Shri Rajnoo Pasvan accepted that he
5175
भारत का राजपत्र अगस्त 21 , 2010 / श्रावण 30 , 1932
could not informed the management about s sickness prior to absence b at the et ju ning duties he has informed the ty neat the L for remaining absent .
CONCLUSION
In view of the above , it is proved beyote abie Shri Rajnoo Pasvan is in a heh " hemareng without any sufficient caus . ar leave but it could tow be proved that Shri Rajnee Pas an is in a habit of attending his duty late . "
Thus it is clear that the finding het Osrepe for lack of evidence rather it is established tea whn the workman remained absent , he burnishel mulira ! certificate showing his reasonable ground of his abacnes It is obvious that one cannot informis asence prior to his illness that he is going to become ill This issue in answered in favour of the workman and against the management .
22. Issue No. 3 -
On the basis of discussione above , it is cinar thatthe order of termination is mainly based or the enquiry report which was not sufficient to prove babitual absenteeism of the workman without any reasonable cause. I find that the order of termination passed by the management is not justified .
23. The learned counsel for the management has referred decisions which are reported in ( 1997 ) 6 S.C.C. 75 Commissioner of Police versus Jayasurian and another . AIR 1998 S.C. 300 Union of India & others versus B. K. Srivastava, 1997 M.P.L. S.R. 231 , Dr Rajendra jaiswal versus Indian Institute of Forest Management and others and 1995 I.L.L.J. 1065 A. M. Eashwarachar versus Executive Engineer (Electrical ) . The learned counsel for the workman has submitted that these decisions are not applicable in this case as the finding of the enquiry officer was perverse and the same was based on no evidence on the record . I also find on the basis of evidence on record and discussion as above that the order of termination was not justified . As such the order of termination dated 7-7-96 from service of Shri RajnooPaswan is set aside . Accordingly the management is directed to reinstate the workman Shri Rajnoo Paswan from the date of termination and to pay back wages w.e. f. 7-7-96 . This issue is decided in favour of the workman and against the management . The reference is thus answered .
24. In the result , the award is passed without any order to costs .
25. 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 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 21 , 2010 / SHRAVANA 30 , 1932
PARI 11--Sec. 3 ( 1 ) नई दिल्ली , 23 जुलाई , 2010
referred the following Industrial Dispute to this Tribuna foradjudication .
The schedule mentioned in that order is :
" Whether the action of the Managemcor of the Indian Overseas Bank in dismissing the services of Sri K Jagannathan vide order dated 17-11-2004 is legal and justified ? If not, to what relief the workman is entitled ? "
आज.आ. 2068.--औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 ( 1947 की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में , केन्द्रीय सरकार इंडियन बैंक के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों जैध , अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार अधिकरण , श्रम न्यायालय चेन्नई के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 217 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 22-7-2010 को प्राप्त हुआं था।
[ सं. एल -12012/39/2007- आईआर( बी- II ) ] अनिल कुमार शर्मा , अनुभाग अधिकारी
New Delhi , the 23rd July, 2010
2. After the receipt or the Industrial Dispute. this Tribunal has numbered it as ID 46 /2007and issued nonces to both sides . Both sides entered appearance inrough their advocates and fled their ' zim and Counter and Reply Statement as the case may be
3. The background faas in the Claim Statement stated briefly are as follows
O. 2068 .--In pursuance of Section 17 of the strial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) , the Central vernment hereby publishes the award ( Ref . No.46/2007 ) The Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum- Labour ourt , Chennai now as shown in the Annexure in the dustrial Dispute between the employees in relation to management of Indian Overseas Bank and their werkman , which was received by the Central Government 1922-7-2010 .
[No. 1-12012/39 /2007 - IR (B - II) ]
ANIL KUMAR SHARMA, Section Officer
ANNEXURE
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT DUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL CUM - LABOUR COURT CHENNAI
Friday, the 16th July , 2010
Present : A. N. Janardanan , Presiding Officer Industrial Dispute No. 46/2007
Unde omatter of the dispute for adjudication under clause (i) of sub- section ( 1 ) and sub - section 2 ( A ) of Section 10 of the industrial Disputes Act, 19.47 (14 of 1947) , between the Managament of Indian Bank and river Workman )
BETWEEN
shra jagannathan :
ist Party/Petitioner
Vs
The General Manager
2nd Party /Respondent
Intian Overseas Bank Thegoai - 000002 .
APPEARANCE
For the Petitioner M/ s Balan Haridas , Advocates For the Management : M/ s N.G.R. Prasad , Advocates
AWARD
The Central Government , Ministry of Labour vide its Order No. 1. - 12012 / 39 / 2007 - IR ( B - II ) dated 23-08-2007
The petitioner who earund service of Respondent / Bank as Clerk on 10-04-10 % ocolimator 10-10-1981 while had been working at Sert pengala irinch . Salem since 1997 was suspended on 18-08 and chargesheeted on 02-09-2000 on 13 ngang to alleged acts of omission during the period mar 12-1997 10 30-06-1999 upon which he requested by lever dated 15-09-2000 for sufficient time to tender explanation on and after permission to peruse documents which was rejected on 04-10-2000 on the ground that already available information is to be the basis . Withoutan opportunity of giving explanation domestic enquiry was held as informed by letter dated 02-12-2001 which was conducted in a burry Recurrent requests , reasoned oner for joint enquiry together with his co -employees similarly charged were not considered . Request to avail assistance of lawyer was turned down . As per order of High Court in Writ Petition No. 5969/2002 , advocate was allowed to be engaged . In the enquiry from 19-05-2003 to 08-10-2003.4 witnesses were examined and 207 documents were marked on the Respondent's side and 6 documents on the petitioner's side . On 02-04-2004 , show Cause Notice proposing dismissal from service was issued together with enquiry report . WP No. 12402 2004 against non- issuance of hearing on the enquiry report was preferred but was dismissed on 15-10-2004 . Immediately on 17-11- 2004 the order of dismissal was issued . Appeal preferred was dismissed on 11-07-2005 . There was conciliation which failed whereupon the reference is occasioned . The charges were not proved in the enquiry but were held proved without legal evidence as régards Charge No. 1. Charge No. 2 except item No.7 ( Chaque ) . Charge No. 8 proved except relating to alteration in CO Account by inflating Rs . 200.000 on 23-05-1998,26-05-1998 and 0-4-07- 1998 and Charge Nos . 5. 11 and 12 were not prosed . The finding was based on surmises and conjecture which were accepted by Disciplinary authority mechanically .
5177 भारत का राजपत्र अगस्त 21 , 2010/ श्रावण 30 , 1932
[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]
Charge No. 3
Charge No. 1
6. The Third Charge is that the petitioner caused Şavithri , holder of SB A/ c No.14713 to issue five cheques on various dates in favour of Pushpammal and Sadasivam . As in the 2 earlier charges the same is the allegation that the petitioner collected amounts and thereafter destroyed the cheques in the same manner . There is no evidence to show that the petitioner made Savithri issue cheques or thatthe petitioner or his Wife or Brother - in - Law deposited the cheques for collection in UCO Bank . The charge is also held proved without evidence
Charge No. 4
7. The Third Charge is that the petitioner caused K. Parthasarathy , holder of SB A/ c No.14584 R. Radhakrishnan SB A/ c No.15215 and S. Sumathi , SB A/ c No.16551 to issue cheques to petitioner's Brother - in - Law Sadasivam and cleared them on various dates by presenting through UCO Bank , Salem in the account of Sadasivam and cleared a sum of Rs . 43.52 lakhs . It is alleged that the petitioner effected the misdoing in th same manner as Charge No. 2 & 3. There is no evidence for the allegation against the petitioner . He is made a scapegoat . The charge isheld proved perversely .
Charge No. 5
8. The Fifth Charge has been held noi proved .
Charge No. 6
4. The First Charge is that the petitioner has introduced five SB Accounts , that he dishonestly obtained cheque books relating to SB A/ c No. 14783 and 15215 , fraudulently got the cheques issued by SB A/ c Holder No. 14783 apart from SB A/ c Holder No. 14784 favouring petitioner's wife , R. Pushpammal and Brother- in- Law , R. Sadasivam which cheques he allegedly sent for collection to UCO Bank , Salem where all of them are maintaining SB A /c No. 7629 , 7763 and 7823 respectively. The cheques at the branch were stealthily removed and destroyed by the petitioner without debiting to respective accounts but got credits passed on to the accounts maintained by his wife and brother - in- law in UCO Bank , Salem. It is further alleged that on this pattern on 10 occasions a sum of Rs . 17.00 lakhs has been defrauded which is without substance . The five accounts had been open much prior to the alleged incidents , opened after being duly authorized by authority . That the petitioner got the cheque book relating to S. Periasamy and R. Radhakrishnan dishonestly has no basis since the cheque book register show itself to be written by the concerned staff . The cheques were sent for collection through UCO Bank . The remittance challans for the cheques were written by one Nagarajan , UCO Bank and cheques were not deposited by Pushpammal or Sadasivam or the petitioner as not disputed . Stealthily removing the cheque or destroying it without being to the notice of any other empoyee is not possible . Withdrawals from the account of Pushpammal and Sadasivam in UCO Bank were signed and received by Nagarajan , Staff , UCO Bank . The inference of petitioner as the fraudster is baseless . For SB A / c No. 14584 of Parthasarathy introducer was one R. Subbulakshmi and Parthasarathy who received the Cheque Book . Similar is the case with Account Holders S. Sumathi , Savithri . Merely by reason of petitioner being introducer of some accounts and receiver of Cheque Book of his wife's account does not mean that he is the person who had been using the cheques . The petitioner had nothing to do with the alleged loss of Rs . 17.00 lakhs .
Charge No. 2
9. The Sixth Charge is that the petitioner got cheques issued by customers viz . R. Radhakrishnan with SB A/ c No.15215 and S. Sumathi with SB A / c No.16551 , Suramangalam Branch , Salem favouring Sadasivam and Pushpammmal and presented 4 cheques totaling to Rs . 8.48 lakhs for clearing to UCO Bank , Salem where Sadasivam and Pushpammal have SB A/ c No.7823 and 7763 respectively which the petitioner stealthily removed and destroyed without debiting the respective accounts but got the credits passed on to accounts of Sadasivam and Pushpammal . There is no evidence for the act being done by the Petitioner but there is evidence for the same being done by Nagarajan of UCO Bank , Salem . The Investigation Report perse showing lingering doubts of the transactions and thus is incomplete without further probe commenced fixing of responsibility on the pertitioner . There is no evidence against the petitioner for the different parts of the whole process of the transactions to lead to the materialization of the fraud .
Charge No. 7
10. The Seventh Charge is that Cheque No. 016590 for Rs . 1,00,000 held not proved and Cheque No. 0010733 for Rs . 2,00,000 caused to be isssued by G. Savithri in favour of V. Rajagopal presented by the latter to District Central Cooperative Bank , Salem on 24-04-1998 when 5. The Second Charge is that he got cheques issued from R. Radhakrishnan , SB A/ c No. 15215 at Suramangalam Branch favouring petitioner's wife , Pushpammal and Brother - in - law R. Sadasivam and got presented the cheques totaling to Rs . 10.00 lakhs through UCO Bank , Salem through the accounts in UCO Bank maintained by the petitioner , his Wife and Brother- in- Law . The cheque is alleged having been destroyed in the manner as in the 1st Charge . There is no evidence to show the petitioner as culprit . The charge is held proved except S.No. 7 ( Cheque ) without any evidence .
5178
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 21 , 2010/ SHRAVANA 30 , 1932
[ PART II -SEC. 3 ( ii) ] received for clearance at Suramangalam Branch , the petitioner destroyed it without debiting the account of Savithri but got credits passed on to the account of V. Rajagopal . Here also the petitioner is charged with no evidence .
Charge No. 8
set to choke the petitioner . The petitioner is without employment since the punishment and is in destress without gainful employment . The punishment is also excessive and the same is to be interfered with under section - 11A of the ID Act . The punishment is to be set aside and the petitioner is to be reinstated into service with allbenefits .
16. In the Counter Statement contentions bereft of unnecessary details are as follows:
11. The Eighth Charge is that in order to avoid detection of fraud the petitioner made manipulations in books of account . But on the relevant dates the petitioner has not written the Day Book or the SB Supplementary or Clearing but were written by others . Nobody else has detected any manipulations or complained about which shows the petitioner's innocence .
Charge No. 9
12. The Ninth Charge is that manipulations were made in the balance in the Savings Bank and CO Account Head in the General Ledger by the petitioner regarding which the finding against the petitioner is without substance .
Charge No. 10
13 The Tenth Charge is that the petitioner fraudulently recorded wrong figures in CO summaries in respect of opening and closing balance to cover up fraud.
Charge No. 11 & 12
14. The Eleventh and Twelfth Charge have been held not proved.
Charge No. 13
The petitioner cheated the bank to the extent of Rs . 1.00 crore . For 13 charges enquiry was held . Against other similarly placed employees of the bank also charge sheet was issued . While the charges against the petitioner were ofdefrauding and deriving wrongful gain out of bank's money those against others were of negligence and non verification of records properly but for which the serious incident would not have occurred . Therefore joint enquiry was rejected by the High Court . On the enquiry report the disciplinary Authority proposed and intimated dismissal on 02-04-2004 together with the report against which the petitioner filed Writ Petition before the High Court and obtained stay which writ was later dismissed on 15-10-2004 refusing case of prejudice caused to the petitioner . Afterwards on analyzing the report and the submissions punishment of dismissal was ordered on 17-11-2004 . Appeal preferred was dismissed on 11-7-2005 after personal hearing. It is the bank which lost the money and not any of the customers . Hence examination of the customers is not necessary . The fraud came to light through bank's own investigation and not on complaint. The cheques had not been debited against customer's account . The petitioner manipulated bank's record and caused loss to the bank by sending credit to the UCO Bank wherein petitioner's wife and his brother - in - law's SB Accounts had received illegal credits . There is no prejudice to the petitioner in non - examining the customers . Statements of branch officials had been taken into account in giving the investigation report . The petitioner has not denied maintaining of SB accounts with UCO Bank by his wife and Brother - in - law or that the said accounts had received credits from the Respondent / Bank . Such credits were also not claimed to be genuine credits received . It is also not contended that there were respective debits in the SB Accounts of IOB ( Respondent ) . It has come out in the enquiry that money of the Respondent /Bank was transferred to the credit of petitioner's wife and brother - in- law. The only contention of the petitioner is that it is Nagarajan , staff of UCO Bank who deposited the cheques . Anybody can deposit cheques . Cheques can be deposited only for accounts favouring whom it was drawn upon . Nagarajan introduced their accounts . They know each other . Nagarajan only acted on behalf of them. For the signature of Nagarajan being on the back side of the withdrawal slip , the petitioner's wife and brother - in - law had authorized him to receive the amounts . There is no 15. The Thirteenth Charge is that the petitioner obtained Cheque No.0667535 for Rs . 2,00,000 from K. Parthasarathy , SB A/ c No. 14584 and presented to UCO Bank which when received at Suramangalam Branch he destroyed it and got the proceeds credited to the SB A/ c No. 7823 of UCO Bank , salem pertaining to Brother - in- Law with which money he purchased plot on 15-07-1998 in his wife's name . It was by utilizing Rs . 1,50,000 FD value of the deposit closed on 14-07-1998 that the property was purchased . The Senior Manager of the branch was also charge sheeted but later imposed with the punishment of reduction in pay scale and has been given a nearby posting. Bank has been shielding somebody . CBI has not been intimated despite the defalcated amount exceeded Rs . 25.00 lakhs . Police complaint lodged remains as such . The petitioner alone is discriminated . The reason for missing of Marudha Muthu . Assistant Manager , Incharge of Clearing, Current Term Deposits from the starting day of investigation is not enquired into at all . The transfer of lot of funds between the SB A/ c of Pushpammal and Muthusamy , Staff of UCO Bank has not been investigated . The missing instruments have not been bothered to be checked by the Officers . The bank was in a hurry to close the issue and punish the petitioner . The Respondent was سال
[ মাণ ৫০৬ ১ ( 11 ) ]
made a witness with any statement of him recorded . The complaint against Nagarajan of any fraudulent withdrawal of amounts from their accounts . The charges were proved by oral and documentary evidence . The finding is not perverse . Due to negligence of other Officers , the petitioner was able to carry out his fraudulent activities . The other Officers were suitably punished . None other than petitioner would have committed destruction of the cheques . Considering the sequence of transactions it is evident that it is petitioner who had access to cheques for destruction . It is immaterial as to who had deposited the cheques in UCO Bank . Whoever deposits the same , the ultimate beneficiary is the account holder . Destruction of cheques is to escape from misconduct . The enquiry was in accordance of principles of natural justice and the provisions of Bipartite Settlement . The act involves moral turpitude and he cannot be retained in service . The bank also lost confidence on him . The claim is to be dismissed .
17. The contentions in the Reply statement in a nutshell are as follows :
The petitioner had no role in respect of the transfer of funds from IOB , Suramangalam Branch to UCO Branch . There is no evidence to show that extent . The Respondent failed to prove the charges in the domestic enquiry . The finding is not on legal evidence . The petitioner is suffering being not gainfully employed since dismissal .
18. Points for consideration are :
( i) Whether the dismissal of the petitioner by the Respondent/ Bank is legal and justified ?
(ii) To what relief the concerned workman is entitled ?
19. The evidence consists of the Ex . W1 to Ex . W13 on the petitioner's side and on the Management's side MWI was examined and Ex . M1 to Ex.M151 , all marked on consent and Ex.M152 to Ex . 184 marked through Affidavit subject to objection that they are xerox copies .
Points ( i ) & ( ii )
SB Account Holders have not been questioned or any statement taken from them . Thus the material witnesses were not examined , he would continue to argue . The persons who wrote the registers were not examined for any reasons offered . The Investigation Report showing deficiencies in the working of the branch indicates that the branch was not properly working .It is without any evidence to substantiate the Investigation Report which perse is incomplete that the petitioner was proceeded against . the cheques were presented by Nagaraj and amounts were withdrawn by him . The petitioner was then not responsible for writing Day Book , General Ledger and Central Office Statements , he being a leave reserve only . The best evidence to prove that the cheques were not issued by the SB Account Holders was examining themselves . There is no evidence to show as to who caused the disappearance of the cheques. The Cheque Receipt Officer and Cheque Messenger were not examined and no reason offered . The tampering of the cheque is not established by the petitioner . There is no tangible material to prove the charges . The finding is without any legal evidence and is perverse . The findingsare based on conjectures and surmises . The petitioner was discriminated . In the case of Periasamy and Parthasarathy , the Cheque Officer had authorized issue of cheque , the same is the case with Radhakrishnan as well . so much so question of fraudulently and dishonestly obtaining cheque books from account holders does not arise . In such context , the evidence of the account holder is very essential . Even their statements have not been taken . Without doing so , the charges cannot be held proved by way of documents . No charges are proved by documentary or legal evidence . The relevant entries in the Day Book dated 24.07-1998 , 27-04-1998 , (04-06-1998 and 10-06-1998 were not of the petitioner but of Deputy Manager . Serious charge of manipulation cannot be based on mere statement . The documents Ex . M172 to Ex . M184 not marked in the domestic enquiry are not to be regarded as evidence , the related to merits of the charge . It is not in evidence that the 42 cheques constituting the whole of the fraudulent transactions were encashed by the petitioner . There is no evidence of withdrawal of money from the account by Pushpammal and Sadasivam . The transactions have happened through the accounts of other banks also . It is beyond comprehension as to how 100 lakhs of rupees through 42 cheques are cleared unnoticed . The bank is tring to shield some higher upsfor reasons best known to them. Serious charge of corruption requires to be proved to the hilt as it brings civil and criminal consequences as held by the Apex Court . Solely on circumstantial evidence dismissal from service is illegal . The contents of Ex.M172 to Ex.M184 were not established .
21. The learned counsel for the petitioner placed reliance on the following decisions in support of his contentions .
20. Heard both sides and perused the records , documents and enquiry proceedings with report . Shri Balan Haridas , the learned counsel for the petitioner argued that in order to substantiate the charges against the petitioner it is necessary to prove that the fraudulent cheques of the various SB Account Holders were taken by the petitioner alone , that he himself destroyed them , that he is the beneficiary of the cheque amounts , that he himself altered the Day Book , General Ledger , Central Office Statements , etc. It is without identifying him as the culprit investigation proceeded on a wrong assumption as is evident from the Investigation Report itself. He would point out that Investigation Report while makes mention of one S. Nagaraj of UCO Bank to have presumed to have colluded with the workman still he is not proceeded against or has not been ART 11 -B . Padma Vs. The union of India Represented by Secretary , Ministry of Home Affairs , New Delhi and FiveOthers (2007 - Writ . LR - 7 ) wherein the High Court of Madras held that " failureto examine the complainant whose complaint is the basis for disciplinary action against the petitioner and the failure to provide an opportunity to the petitioner to test the veracity of the complaint made against him has resulted in the deprivation of right of the petitioner amounting to gross violation of principles of natural justice thereby entire disciplinary proceedings are vitiated . "
-In Roop Sing Negi Vs. Punjab National Bank and Others (2009-2 - SCC - 570 ) wherein the Apex Court held " enquiry report , if based on conjectures and surmises cannot be sustained " .
Another decision relied on is A. V. Krishnamurthy Vs. Govt . of Tamilnadu and others ( 1985-1 - LLJ -46 ) , the High Court of Madras held " conclusion to be reached by a Tribunal must be on the basis of acceptable evidence . Such evidence must have some degree of definiteness . "
---In Man Singh vs. State of Haryana and Others (2008-4 - LLN - 113 ) , Supreme Court held " appellant deserves to be treated equally in the matter of departmental punishment for his acts of omissions and commissions vis - a vis the main offender" .
-Again in Union of India Vs. S.C. Goel ( CDJ - 963- SC- 156 ) , the Apex Court held " malafide exercise of power can be attacked independently on the ground that it is malafied . Such an exercise of power is always liable to be quashed on the main ground that it is not a bonafide exercise of power " . But we are not prepared to hold that if malafides are not allegea and bonafides are assumed in favour of the appellant. its conclusion on a question of fact cannot be succesfully challenged even if it is manifest that there is no evidence to suppot it" . The two infirmities are sepatate and distinct , though conceivably in some cases both may be present . There may be cases of no evidence even where the Govt . is acting bonafide . the said infirmity may also exist where the government is acting malafide and in that case , the conclusion of the Govt . not supportedby any evidence may be result of malafides , but does not mean that if it is proved that there is no evidence to support the conclusion of the Govt . , a Writ of Ceritorari will not issue without further proof of malafides".
22. Sri N.G.R. Prasad , the learned counsel for the Respondent addressing arguments before this tribunal submitted that the modus operandi of the commission of
fraud by the petitioner with the help of his wife Pushpammat and Brother- in- Law Sadasivam would be clearly established from the enquiry finding . It is further argued that when an employee is brainchild of the misconduct he deserues a serious punishment and he cannot claim that others should also be similarly dealt with when they are only guilty in less serious manner . fie continues to argue that if one item alone of the different charges is established that would be a sufficient reason to justify the action . The petitioner , his wife and Brother -in - Law know Nagarajan , Staff of UCO Bank , Salem , who introduced their SB Accounts The cheque books of Periasamy and Radhakrishnan were received by the petitioner as found in the relevant registers . The petitioner used their cheque leaves for fraudulent transfer from IOB to UCO Bank for credit to the accounts of petitioner , his wife and Brother- in - law . The petitioner similarly used the cheque book of Parthasarathy obtained by him with out signing the register and credits received similarly in the accounts of petitioner's Wife and Brother in- Law. By depositing cheque for Rs . 1,00,000 01 25-04-1998 by the petitioner in UCO Bank for collection and receive in IOB . Suramangalam the same was destresed by the petitioner without debiting to Períasamy's account at the same time passing credit to the UCO Bank however showing a correspondent credit of Rs . 1,00,000 in the SB Account of Pushpammal which is by way of fraud and which was withdrawn by Pushpammal . If it were a genuine transaction , Pushpammal would have deposited the chequr in IOB , Suramangalam Branch where she had SB Account instead of getting it cleared through K. Jagannathan b putting it into SB Account of L- CO Bank , Salem The petitioner using his position in Suramangalam Buanel: credited the amount to the account of Pushpammal with no correspondent debit in the account of Periasamy indicanne the same to be a bogus transaction . This could be stage- managed only by reason of petitioner's employment ni thu IOB , Suramangalam Branch . The cheque is also not forthcoming being destroyed as could be inferred Likewise the petitioner misappropriated all the money . The petitioner brought about misappropriation of the entire money inGile manner conniving with his Brother - in - Law Sadasivam and his wife as is evident from the records . It is proved that Sadasivam had withdrawn the amounts received on credit fraudulently. The petitioner manipulated the records in SB Supplementary and Day Book . By manipulation he effcted transfer of funds from the Indian Overseas Bank to f Bank to the credit of the accounts of his wife and brethe in- law. He effected alterations to the extent of Rs . 100 lah to cover up his fraudulent withdrawals . Withdrawals wal by Pushpammal and Sadasivam repeatedly at CO Bank show that the manipulation has been done by the petitioner in such a way that Pushpammmal and Sadasivan get the benefits . This was made possible only by reason of Jagannathan being in IOB. The documents relied on by the Respondent clearly give a graphic comprehension of the भारत का राजपत्र अगस्त 21 , 2010/ श्रावण 30 , 1932
[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]
modus operandi of the perpetration of the fraud. Circumstantial evidence coupled with documentary evidence shows the petitioner as the brain child for the fraud . The bank has lost confidence in him .
23. The Learned Counsel for Respondent relied on the following decisions in support his contentions :
Indian Oil Corporation and Another Vs. Ashok Kumar Arora (AIR - 1997 - SC- 1030 ) wherein it is held that the High Court hastotally overlooked the finding of the Enquiry Officer and affirmed by the desciplinary Authority that the Respondent was instrumental in obtaining forged medical bills not only for himself but also for other employees and he was the main actor behind the cheating to the corporation . It is because of this finding the Disciplinary Authority rightly considered the award of penalty to the Respondent differently than the other employees who although got the benefit of reimbursement on the forged bills but they accepted their guilt before the EnquiryOfficer.
In the case of State Bank of India and Tarun Kumar Banerjee and Others (2000-2 - LLJ- 1373 ) the Supreme Court held that " a customer of the bank need not be involved in a domestic enquiry conducted ; as such a course would not be conducive to proper bank customer relationship and, therefore , would not be interest of the bank" .
In the case of State of Orissa and Others Vs. Bidyabhushan Mohapatra ( AIR - 1963 - SC - 779 ) it is held that " if the order of dismissal was based on the findings on charges 1 ( a ) and l ( e ) alone the Court would have jurisdication to declare the order of dismissal illegal but when the findings of the tribunal relating to the 2 out of 5 heads of first charge and second charge was not found to be not liable to be interfered with by the High Court and those findings establish that the respondent was prima facie of grave delinquency, in our view the High Court had no power to direct the Governor of Orissa to reconsider the order of dismissal" .
In the case of Workmen of Balmadi Estates Vs. Management , Balmadi Estates and Others ( 2008-4- SCC - 517 ) Supreme Court held " it is fairly well settled now that in view of the vide power of the Labour Court it can, in an appropriate case, consider the evidence which has been considerd by the domestic tribunal and in a given case on such consideration arrive at a conclusion different from the one arrived at by the domestic tribunal . The assessment of evidence in a domestic enquiry is not required to be made by applying the same yardstick as a Civil Court. could do when a list is brought before it . The 3099 GI/10-16
2101 Evidence Act is not applicable to the proceedings in a domestic enquiry so far as the domestic enquiry are concerned, though principles of fairness are to apply . It is also fairly well settled that in a domestic enquiry guilt may not be established beyond reasonable doubt and the proof of misconduct would be sufficient . In a domestic enquiry all materials which are logically probative including hearsay evidence can be acted upon provided it has a reasonable nexus and credibility" .
In the case of State Bank of India and Another and Bela Bagchi and Others (2005-4 - LLN- 1 ) , the Supreme Court held " it is no defence available to say that there was no loss or profit in the case when the officer acted without authority. The very discipline of an organization more particularly a bank is dependent upon each of its Officers and the Officers acting and operating within their allotted sphere . Acting beyond one's authority is by itselfa breach of discipline and is a misconduct .
In the case of Union of India and Another Vs. Bihari LalSidhana ( 1997-4 - SCC-385 ) the Supreme Court held that " reinstatement would be a charter for him to indulge with impunity in misappropriation of public money" .
24. On an anxious consideration of the rival contentions on either side with reference to the scrutiny of the documentary evidence adduced I am led to conclude that the petitioner is guilty of the proved charges . The arguments advanced on behalf of the petitioner and the rulings relied on in support of the same are not acceptable in view of the contentions advanced on behalf of the Respondent with sound support of the rulings cited by the Respondent's learned counsel. Though some of the documents viz . Ex.M172 to Ex.M184 are documents produced for the first time before enquiry in this Tribunal and were not produced in the domestic enquiry and therefore those documents have to be eschewed as argued by the learned counsel for the petitioner , and if they are so eschewed still there could be materials logically probative to a prudent mind with rational nexus and credibility from which a conclusion could be safely drawn that it is the petitioner and none else who is the brainchild for the perpetration of fraud by which misappropriation of money to the extent of Rs . 1.00 crore is brought about and which benefit has enured to the petitioner and his wife and brother- in- law. Though direct evidence is not forthcoming there is ample documentary evidence which coupled with the circumstantial evidence conclusively and cogently establishes that the petitioner has brought about the fraud and the misappropriation of money . The modus operandi of bringing about the fraud and the ultimate misappropriation of money is gatherable from the 5182
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUS 21 , 2010 /SHRAVANA 30 , 1932
[PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii) ]
to cannot be said to be on mere conjectures or surmises . The petitioner could never be imposed a punishment less serious than the one imposed .At no stretch of imagination the punishment imposed would be shockingly disproportionate even to the petitioner having regard to the gravity involved in the misconduct . Hence neither the finding nor the punishment is liable to be interfered with . The punishment is just proportionate to the gravity of the offence and is only to be upheld. The petitioner is not entitled to any relief .
25. The reference is answered accordingly.
(Dictated to the P.A. transcribed and typed by him , corrected and pronounced by me in the open court on this day the 16th July , 2010)
A. N. JANARDANAN , Presiding Officer
Witnesses Examined :--
None
For the 1st Party /Petitioner :
For the 2nd Paty/ Management : MWI , Sri K. V. Balakrishnan
Documents Marked on the Petitioner's side :--
Ex.No. Date
Description
2-09-2000
Ex.WI
Charge Sheet
Ex.W2 19-05-2003 Enquiry Proceeedins
Ex.W3 16-12-2003 Letter enclosing written brief of the bank
Ex.W4 15-01-2004 Writtenbrief submitted by petitioner
Ex.W5 02-04-2004 Second show cause notice enclosing enquiry report
Ex.W6 30-10-2004 Letter of Bank
Ex.W7 17-11-2004 Order of Punishment
Ex.W8 11-12-2004 Appeal
Ex.W9 17-05-2005 Personal hearing proceedings and letter dated 11-05-2005 of the petitioner
11-07-2005
Ex.W10
Orderrejecting appeal
Ex.W11
List ofManagement exhibits marked in the enquiry and list of employees exhibits marked in the enquiry
Ex.W12
documentary evidence . The challenge against the preliminary investigation report as being incomplete and thereby insufficient to pinpoint the petitioner as a culprit does not assume importance in view of the fact that the lingering doubt reflected in the investigation report is only in regard to the involvement of S. Nagarajan , staff of UCO Bank , salem as and ally with the petitioner for the fraudulent transaction . Since Nagarajan employee of UCO Bank introduced the wife and brother - in - law of petitioner he is familiar to them , there is nothing unusual in depositing the cheques through him and receiving collections . For the mere exercise of such an act he is not to be a delinquent . Disciplinary action against the petitioner alone is to be launched when from the report of investigation it is prima facie brought home that the petitioner is the main culprit. Accordingly the petitioner was charge sheeted and proceeded against in the enquiry. The enquiry discernibly went well . A finding was rendered which is not perverse . The finding is based on legal evidence in the sense that it is in aid of documentary evidence coupled with circumstantial evidence . There is no discrimination between the petitioner or any other employee or Officer who also happened to be responsible in some way or other for aiding the perpetration of fraud by the petitioner , due to negligent conduct . When the neglingent conduct of those employees could be attributed as a contributory factor to aid the petitioner in committing the fraud and misappropriation , they could not be regarded as equally guilty with the petitioner deserving the same punishment . It is the case of Respondent that those employees who were guilty in a trivial manner have also been punished . There is no discriminatin or victimization against the petitioner . He has not been singled out for the same offence with anybody else similarly guilty . Here the bank is the loser of the money misappropriated . With dexterity used by the petitioner in accomplishing the evil design of fraudulently misappropriating the money he hisself and his associates stand to gain which is very much against the conduct and discipline of a bank employee who is required to bestow utmost honesty , integrity and sincerity in safeguarding the interests of the bank , a custodian of public money . There is nothing to challenge the enquiry in its manner of performance or in the finding rendered . It is on legal evidence which is acceptable and reliable . When it is based on documentary evidence coupled with circumstantial evidence of such a nature as is conclusive and cogent to lead to the conclusion that the petitioner is the brainchild of the fraudulent misappropriation and he alone is responsible for the perpetration of fraud and the misappropriation of an amount to the extent of Rs . 1.00 crore , the public cannot behold him without being startled and panic stricken . The argument that the finding is rendered on surmises and conjectues does not stand to reason . When a finding rests on circumstantial evidence
(series)
SB Account opening form of Pushpammal as well inferences drawn on such basis and the finding led 5183 [ भाग II - खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]
भारत का राजपत्र अगस्त 21 , 2010/ श्रावण 30 , 1932
SB Account opening form of Periasamy
Jewel Loan Application (Arurupatti)
Debitit Voucher for jewel loan SB Account opening form of Radhakrishnan
Jewel Loan Ledger SB Account opening form of Rajagopal
Jewel Loan Application (Kanjamalai )
DebitVoucher for jewel loan SB Account opening torm of Sadasivam
Jewel Loan Ledger Pass Book ofPetitioner in UCO Bank
Jewel Loan Application (Kanjamalai) Pass Book of Sadasivam in UCO Bank
Debiit Voucher for jewel loan
Jewel Loan Ledger Pass Book of Pushpammal in UCO Bank
Demand Loan Voucher
Demand Loan Voucher Account opening form of R. Parthasarathy letter of Kanjamalai Branch
Investigation Report alongwith enclosures Suramangalam Branch- Suspense Register
Pushpammal - UCO Bank Book
Sadasivam UCO Bank Book
Jagannathan- UCO Bank Book Letter of Salem District Central Co - op Bank Central Office Summary
Certification of registration Letter of T. Soman David and S. Joseph
Partnership Deed
Partnership Deed Copy of Sale Deed dated 15-07-1998 UCO Bank Challan
SB Opening form of Sumathi Letter of Suramangalam Branch
Ex.W13 (Series)
FDR Receipts
FDR Receipts Letter of Arupatti Branch
FDR Receipts Letter received from Athiaman
FDR Receipts
FDR Receipts Central Office Respondent Voucher
On the Management's side
Fax Message of Central Office
Date
Ex. No.
Description Suramangalam Branch Office Order
Ex .M1
Jewel Loan application (Kanjamalai )
DebitVoucher for jewel loan
Suramangalam Branch SB ( Iset ) supplementary from 18-12-1997 to 22-05-1998 folios : 348 to 351 , 372 to 373 , 380 to 381 , 412 to 415 , 442 to 443 , 264 to 265 , 304 to 313 , 342 to 343 CreditVoucher for jewel loan
Ex . M2
Jewel Loan Ledger
Jewel Loan Application (Kanjamalai )
DebitVoucher for jewel loan
SB ( 1set ) supplementary from 25-05-1998 to 23-09-1998 ; Folios 28 to 31 , 46 to 49 , 54 to 61 , 72 to 73 , 98 to 119 , 125 to 131 , 154 to 157. 162 to 165 , 172 to 175
Jewel Loan Ledger 5184
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 21 , 2010 / SHRAVANA 30 , 1932
Ex .M3
SB ( Ilset ) supplementary from 06-04-1998 to 30-07-1998 ; Folios 236 to 241 , 360 to 363 , 372 to 375 , 388 to 391 , - Original available
Ex . M4
Suramangalam Branch day book 12-06-1998 to 04-09-1999 folios: 38 to 51 , 98 to 101 , 306 to 309, 352 το 359
Ex. M5
Suramangalam Branch day book 07-08-1998 το 07-04-1999 ; folios : 200 to 203 , 232 to 239 , Ex. M6
Suramangalam DBP register April 1997 to March 1998, folios : 67 to 68,10-12-1998 Ex . M7
Suramangalam SB Account Opening form Shri S. Pushpammal bearing account No. 14000
Ex . M8
Suramangalam SB Account Opening form Shri S. Periasamy bearing account No. 14783
Ex. M9
Suramangalam SB Account Opening form Shri S. Radhakrishnan bearing account No. 15215
Ex . M10
Suramangalam SB Account Opening form Shri S. V. Rajagopal bearing account No. 16090
Ex . Mil
Suramangalam SB Account Opening form Shri S. Pushpammal bearing account No. 16298
Ex . M12
Suramangalam SB Cheque Book issued register 28-01-1997 to 19-04-1999 Folio 61 ( issue of Cheque Book containing no . 135811-820 to SB Account No. 15215 on 16-07-1998
Ex. M13
Suramangalaın SB Cheque Book issued register 07-12-1994 to Jan 1997 Folio 111 ( issue of Cheque Book containing no. 0660451-475 to SB Account No. 14783) Folio 45 ( issue of Cheque Book containing no . 0007431-7440 SB Account No. 15215) Folio 114 ( issue of
[PART II SEC. 3 (in ) ]
Cheque Book containing no . 0667526
Ex. M14
Copy of SB Pass Book relating to A/ c Shri S. Jagannathan with UCO Bank , Salem , SB Account No. 7629 ( Vol . II ) Ex. M15
Copy of SB Pass Book relating to A/ c Shri R. Sadasivam with UCO Bank , Salem . SB Account No. 7823
Ex. M16
Copy of SB Pass Book relating to A/ c Shri R. Pushpammal with UCO Bank . Salem , SB Account No. 7763
Ex .M17
Suramangalam SB Account Opening form Shri R. Parthasarathy A c No. 14584 Ex . M18
Suramangalam Branch SB A'c Opening form relating to SB 14713 G. Savithri .
Ex . M19
Suramangalam Branch Agricultural Jewel Loan Ledger No. 2 folio No. 440 & 42 relating to AJI . 168195m 251.95 and 255/95
Ex. M20
Suramangalam Branch Credit Voucher dated 24-04-1998 relating to AJI . 181-95,251-95 and 255/95
Ex . M21
Suramangalam Branch Credit Voucher dated 24-04-1998 relatingto A.IL 112 / 95、132.95 Ex . M22
Suramangalam Branch SB Ledger relating to SB A'c 14783 from opening to till date ( 1.D 50 / F 166. 64 till 2000 ) Ex. M23
Suramangalam Branch SB Ledger relating to A'c 15215 from opening till date folio 230 (07-03-1996 to 14-02-2000 ) Ex . M24
Suramangalam Branch SB Ledger relating to Arc 16090 from opening to till date folio 362,363,365 , 19-09-1997 to 24-02-2000
Ex .M25
Suramangalam Branch SB Ledger relating to A/ c 16268 from opening to till date folio 32828-01-1990 to 11-02-2000 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]
Ex . M26
Suramangalam Branch SB Ledger relating to SB A/ c 14584 from opening to till date folio 168 , 69 , 311 , 365 ( with March 1998 ) EX.M27
Suramangalam Branch SB Ledger relating to SB A/ c 14713 from opening to till date EX.M28
Kanjamalai Branch letter dated 07-08-1999 addressed to Regional Office , Salem regarding loans availed by family members ofMr. K. Jagannathan
Ex. M29
Suramangalam Branch Suspense Register showing outstanding as on 19-05-2002 under non - recurring suspense outstanding Ex . M30
Salem District Co - op Bank Ltd. 31-08-1999 addressed to DCO , IOB , Regional Office alongwith ledger extract Xerox copy of 2 pay in slips with 3 cheques in connection with Mr. V. Rajagopal SB A/ c No. 14042 EX.M31
Central Office Credit Voucher on Salem Branch relating to 1623095.91 inward clearing dated 04-09-1998
Ex. M32
Central Office Credit Voucher on Salem Branch relating to 1623095.91 inward clearing dated 04-09-1998
Ex . M33
Central Office Credit Voucher on Salem Branch relating to 1122987.76 inward clearing dated 04-06-1998
EX.M34
Central Office Credit Voucher on Salem Branch relating to 1036443.32 inward clearing dated 10-06-1998
Ex . M34
Central Office Credit Voucher on Salem- Branch relating to 1158020.51 inward clearing dated 30-06-1998
EX.M35
Central Office Credit Voucher on Salem Branch relating to 1150724.06 inward clearing dated 02-07-1998
EX.M36
Central Office Credit Voucher on Salem Branch relating to 1505705.70 inward clearing dated 03-07-1998
Ex. M37
Central Office Credit Voucher on Salem Branch relating to 2097528.50 inward clearing dated 06-07-1998
Ex. M38
Central Office Credit Voucher on Salem Branch relating to 1170931.93 inward clearing dated 13-07-1998
EX.M39
Central Office Credit Voucher on Salem Branch relating to 1547540.87 inward clearing dated 15-07-1998
Ex . M40
Central Office Credit Voucher on Salem Branch relating to 952197.71 inward clearing dated 20-07-1998
5185
भारत का राजपत्र अगस्त 21 , 2010 / श्रावण 30 , 1932
EX.M41
Central Office Credit Voucher on Salem Branch relating to 514711.60 inward clearing dated 16-05-1998
Ex .M42
Central Office Credit Voucher on Salem Branch relating to 805325.08 inward clearing dated 19-05-1998
Ex. M43
Central Office Credit Voucher on Salem Branch relating to 1751390.48 inward clearing dated 02-06-1998
EX.M44
Central Office Credit Voucher on Salem Branch relating to 1440649.08 inward clearing dated 08-06-1998
Ex. M45
Central Office Credit Voucher on Salem Branch relating to 1192485.08 inward clearing dated 11-06-1998
EX.M46
Central Office Credit Voucher on Salem Branch relating to 880361.85 inward clearing dated 01-07-1998
EX.M47
Central Office Credit Voucher on Salem Branch relating to 640801.20 inward clearing dated 05-08-1998
Ex. M48
Central Office Credit Voucher on Salem Branch relating to 2386830.50 inward clearing dated 14-03-1998
EX.M49
Central Office Credit Voucher on Salem Branch relating to 3149351.32 inward clearing dated 19-03-1998
Ex. M50
Central Office Credit Voucher on Salem Branch relating to 2763871.25 inward clearing dated 02-04-1998
EX.M51
Central Office Credit Voucher on Salem Branch relating to 03616385.08 inward clearing dated 22-04-19
EX.M52
Central Office Credit Voucher on Salem Branch relatingto 799608.80 inward clearing dated 15-05-1998
EX.M53
Central Office Credit Voucher on Salem Branch relating to 1290403.70 inward clearing dated 04-07-1998
EX.M54
Central Office Credit Voucher on Salem Branch relating to 960016.67 inward clearing dated 28-07-1998
Ex. M55
Central Office Credit Voucher on Salem Branch relating to 1370010.29 inward clearing dated 30-07-1998
EX.M56
Central Office Credit Voucher on Salem Branch relating to 727668.60 inward clearing dated 31-07-1998 5186
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 21 , 2010/ SHRAVANA 30 , 1932
Ex.M57
Central Office Credit Voucher on Salem Branch relating to 780257.32 inward clearing dated 03-08-1998
Ex . M58
Central Office Credit Voucher on Salem Branch relating to 1583656.42 inward clearing dated 04-08-1998
Ex.M59
Central Office Credit Voucher on Salem Branch relating to 1229413.06 inward clearing dated 18-11-1998
Ex. M60
Central Office Credit Voucher on Salem Branch relating to 2131263.20 inward clearing dated 19-11-1998
Ex.M61
Central Office Credit Voucher on Salem Branch relating to 1147936.41 inward clearing dated 20-11-1998
Ex. M62
Central Office Credit Voucher - Salem Main Branch dated 02-01-1999 Rs . 1171956.58 Ex. M63
Central Office Credit Voucher - Salem Main Branch dated 06-01-1999 Rs . 1893400.96 Ex.M64
Central Office Credit Voucher - Salem Main Branch dated 08-01-1999 Rs . 2777675.30 Ex . M65
Central Office Credit Voucher - Salem Main Branch dated 06-02-1998 Rs . 1210962.27 Ex.M66
Central Office Credit Voucher - Salem Main Branch dated 13-04-1998 Rs . 1224388.85 Ex.M67
Central Office Credit Voucher - Salem Main Branch dated 09-05-1998 Rs . 2209958.80 Ex.M68
Central Office Credit Voucher - Salem Main Branch dated 17-06-1998 Rs . 1050800.77 Ex. M69
Central Office Credit Voucher - Salem Main Branch dated 29-06-1998 Rs . 2150690.14 Ex . M70
Central Office Credit Voucher - Salem Main Branch dated 08-07-1998 Rs . 1609424.95 Ex.M71
Central Office Credit Voucher - Salem Main Branch dated 16-06-1998 Rs . 20980661.11 Ex . M72
Central Office Credit Voucher - Salem Main Branch dated 09-12-1998 Rs . 529175.80 Ex . M73
Central Office Credit Voucher - Salem Main Branch dated 10-12-1998 Rs . 2044989.17 Ex.M74
Central Office Credit Voucher - Sajem Main Branch dated 05-01-1999 Rs . 1143369.30 Ex.M75
Central Office Credit Voucher - Salem Main Branch dated 24-04-1998 Rs . 1047879.57 Ex.M76
Central Office Credit Voucher - Salem Main Branch dated 06-05-1998 Rs . 706480.98 Ex.M77
Central Office responding ( Debtor Voucher ) dated 25-03-1999 Rs . 1287384.50
M78
Copy of IP Summary dated 25-03-1999 relating to Suramangalam Branch and IP
[ PART 11 SEC. 3 ( ii ) ] Summary submitted to CO , Chennai dated 25-03-1999
CO Summary ( F.185 ) dated 25-03-1999 with enclosures
Ex.M79 (Series)
CO Summary ( F185 ) dated 06-08-1998 with enclosures - 1
CO Summary ( F 185 ) dated 07-08-1998 with Enclosures
CO Summary ( F 185 ) dated 08-08-1998 with enclosures
CO Summary ( F 185 ) dated 10-08-1998 with enclosures
CO Summary ( F185 ) dated 11-08-1998 with enclosures
CO Summary ( F185 ) dated 12-08-1998 with enclosures
CO Summary ( F185 ) dated 13-08-1998 with enclosures
CO Summary ( F185 ) dated 17-08-1998 with enclosures
CO Summary ( F 185 ) dated 18-08-1998 with enclosures
CO Summary ( F185 ) dated 19-08-1998 with enclosures
CO Summary ( F185 ) dated 20-08-1998 with enclosures
CO Summary ( F185 ) dated 21-08-1998 with enclosures
CO Summary ( F 185 ) dated 22-08-1998 with enclosures
CO Summary ( F 185 ) dated 24-08-1998 with enclosures
CO Summary ( F 185 ) dated 25-08-1998 with enclosures
CO Summary ( F185 ) dated 27-08-1998 with enclosures
CO Summary ( F185 ) dated 28-08-1998 with enclosures
CO Summary ( F 185 ) dated 29-08-1998 with enclosures
CO Summary ( F185 ) dated 31-08-1998 with enclosures
CO Summary ( F185 ) dated 18-11-1998 with enclosures
CO Summary ( F185 ) dated 21-11-1998 with enclosures
CO Summary ( F185 )dated 12-1998 with enclosures [ भाग II- खण्ड 3( ii ) ]
CO Summary (F 185 ) dated 10-12-1998 with enclosures
CO Summary ( F 185 ) dated 02-01-1999 with enclosures
CO Summary ( F185 ) dated 05-01-1999 with enclosures
CO Summary (F185 ) dated 06-01-1999 with enclosures
CO Summary ( F185 ) dated 06-01-1999 with enclosures
Suramangalam Branch Copy of IP Summary from the dates mentioned under Item 94 to 12 ' of this list produced
Ex . M80
Certified copy of the sale deed dated 15-07- 1998 for Rs . 1,42,700/- in favour of Smt . Pushpammal , W/ o Sri K. Jagannathan by the vendor Mr. TA Kathirvel (doc no . 2391 , Sub - registrar Office , Salem) - Copy (Vo II ) EX.M81
UCO Bank , Salem Branch Saving Bank Pay inChallan dated 02-04-1987 relating to SB Account 7763 of Smt . R. Pushpammal for Rs . 2.00 lakhs
Ex. M82
UCO Bank , Salem Branch Saving Bank Pay in Challan dated 09-12-1998 relating to SB Account 7763 of Smt . R. Pushpammal for Rs. 2.00 lakhs
Ex. M83
UCO Bank , Salem Branch Saving Bank Pay in Challan dated 25-04-1998 relating to SB Account 7763 of Smt . R. Pushpammal for Rs. 1.00 lakh
Ex . M84
UCO Bank , Salem Branch Saving Bank Pay in Challan dated 22-04-1998 relating to SB Account 7763 of Smt . R. Pushpammal for Rs . 1.00 lakh
Ex . M85
UCO Bank , Salem Branch Saving Bank Pay inChallan dated 17-06-1998 relating to SB Account 7763 of Smt . R. Pushpammal for Rs . 2.00 lakhs
EX.M86
UCO Bank , Salem Branch Saving Bank Pay inChallan dated 14-03-1998 relating to SB Account 7763 of Smt . R. Pushpammal for Rs . 2.00 lakh
Ex . M87
UCO Bank , Salem Branch Saving Bank Pay inChallan dated 19-03-1998 relating to SB Account 7763 of Smt . R. Pushpammal for Rs. 2.00 lakh
Ex . M88
UCO Bank , Salem Branch Saving Bank Pay inChallan dated 05-01-1999 relating to SB
5187
भारत का राजपत्र अगस्त 21 , 2010/ श्रावण 30 , 1932
Account 7763 of Smt . R. Pushpammal for Rs . 2.48 lakhs
Ex. M89
UCO Bank , Salem Branch Saving Bank Pay inChallan dated 10-12-1998 relating to SB Account 7763 of Smt- R. Pushpammal for Rs. 2.01 lakhs
Ex. M90
UCO Bank , Salem Branch Saving Bank Pay in Challan dated 13-07-1998 relating to SB Account 7823 of Sri R. Sadasivan for Rs . 2.00 lakh
EX.M91
UCO Bank , Salem Branch Saving Bank Pay inChallan dated 17-10-1998 relating to SB Account 7823 of Sri R. Sadasivan for Rs . 2.00 lakh
EX.M92
UCO Bank , Salem Branch Saving Bank Pay in Challan dated 19-11-1998 relating to SB Account 7823 of Sri R. Sadasivan for Rs . 2.00 lakh
Ex. M93
UCO Bank , Salem Branch Saving Bank Pay inChallan dated 15-07-1998 relating to SB Account 7823 of Sri R. Sadasivan for Rs . 2.00 lakh
Ex. M94
UCO Bank , Salem Branch Saving Bank Pay inChallan dated 02-01-1999 relating to SB Account 7823 of Sri R. Sadasivan for Rs . 2.79 lakhs
EX.M95
UCO Bank , Salem Branch Saving Bank Pay inChallan dated 30-07-1998 relating to SB Account 7823 of Sri R. Sadasivan for Rs . 2.00 lakhs
EX.M96
UCO Bank, Salem Branch Saving Bank Pay in Challan dated 20-07-1998 relating to SB Account 7823 of Sri R. Sadasivan for Rs . 2.00 lakhs
Ex. M97
UCO Bank , Salem Branch Saving Bank Pay in Challan dated 05-08-1998 relating to SB Account 7823 of Sri R. Sadasivan for Rs . 2.01 lakhs
Ex. M98
UCO Bank , Salem Branch Saving Bank Pay in Challan dated 13-07-1998 relating to SB Account 7823 of Sri R. Sadasivan for Rs . 2.00 lakhs
Ex. M99
UCO Bank , Salem Branch Saving Bank Pay inChallan dated 31-07-1998 relating to SB Account 7823 of Sri R. Sadasivan for Rs . 2.00 lakhs
EX.M100 UCO Bank , Salem Branch Saving Bank Pay in Challan dated 20-11-1998 relating to SB Account 7823 of Sri R. Sadasivan for Rs . 2.00 lakhs 5188
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: AUGUST 21 , 2010 / SHRAVANA 30 , 1932
EX.M101 UCO Bank , Salem Branch Saving Bank Pay in Challan dated 08-07-1998 relating to SB Account 7823 of Sri R. Sadasivan for Rs . 2.00 lakhs
EX.M102 UCO Bank , Salem Branch Saving Bank Pay in Challan dated 01-07-1998 relating to SB Account 7823 of Sri R. Sadasivan for Rs . 2.00 lakhs
EX.M103 UCO Bank , Salem Branch Saving Bank Pay in Challan dated 08-06-1998 relating to SB Account 7823 of Sri R. Sadasivan for Rs.1.00 lakh
EX.M104 UCO Bank, Salem Branch Saving Bank Pay in Challan dated 11-06-1999 relating to SB Account 7823 of Sri R. Sadasivan for Rs.1.00 lakh
EX.M105 UCO Bank, Salem Branch Saving Bank Pay in Challan dated 10-06-1998 relating to SB Account 7823 of Sri R. Sadasivan for Rs . 1.00 lakh
EX.M106 UCO Bank, Salem Branch Saving Bank Pay in Challan dated 30-06-1998 relating to SB Account 7823 of Sri R. Sadasivan for Rs . 2.00 lakhs
EX.M107 UCO Bank , Salem Branch Saving Bank Pay in Challan dated 02-06-1998 relating to SB Account 7823 of Sri R. Sadasivan for Rs.1.00 lakh
EX.M108 UCO Bank, Salem Branch Saving Bank Pay in Challan dated 16-05-1998 relating to SB Account 7823 of Sri R. Sadasivan for Rs . 1.00 lakh
EX.M109 UCO Bank, Salem Branch Saving Bank Pay in Challan dated 10-11-1998 relating to SB Account 7823 of Sri R. Sadasivan for Rs . 2.04 lakhs
EX.M110 UCO Bank, Salem Branch Saving Bank Pay in Challan dated 06-01-1999 relating to SB Account . 7823 of Sri R. Sadasivan for Rs . 2.73 lakhs
EX.M111 UCO Bank , Salem Branch Saving Bank Pay inChallan dated 06-07-1998 relating to SB Account 7823 for Rs . 2.00 lakhs EX.M112 UCO Bank, Salem Branch Saving Bank Pay in Challan dated 02-07-1998 relating to SB Account 7823 of Sri R Sadasivan for Rs . 2.00 lakhs
EX.M113- UCO Bank , Salem Branch Saving Bank Pay inChallan dated 04-06-1998 relating to SB
[ PART 11 - SEC . 3 ( ii) ] Account 7823 of Sri R Sadasivan for Rs.1.00 lakh
EX.M114 UCO Bank , Sam Branch . Saving Bank Pay in Challan dated 18-05-1998 relating to SB Account 7823 of Sri R Sadasivan for Rs.1.00 lakh
EX.M115 UCO Bank , Salem Branch Saving Bank Pay in Challan dated 15-05-1998 relatingto SB Account 7823 of Sri R Sadasivan for Rs . 1.00 lakh
EX.M116 Suramangalam Branch Memo dated 29-07-1999 addressed to Audit and Inspection Section , Regional Office . Salem EX.M117 Arurpatti Branch Memo dated 07-08-1999 addressed to Regional Office , Salem regarding AJL 55/99
EX.M118 Letter dated nil writtenby Mr. R.S. Athiaman , Staff, Suramangalam Branch addrerssed to Regional Office , Salem EX.M119 Copy of Credit Schedule No. 221967 for Rs . 2,321
EX.M120 Copy of Bar Department , Central Office Fax Message dated 29-07-1999 to SRM , IOB , Regional Office , Salem
EX.M121 Suramangalam Branch Officer Order Register showing IOB rotation to Staff Members for the period 01-05-1997 to 31-10-1997,16-12-1997 to 16-06-1998 、 01-07-1998 to 31-12-1998 , 01-01-1999 to 30-06-1999 , 01-07-1999 to 31-12-1999 EX.M122 DBP Debit Voucher of Suramangalam Branch dated 10-12-1998 for 20,482/ - EX.M123 Kanjamalai Branch Debit Voucher dated 05-08-1998 for Rs . 33,000 / - relating to AJL 253/98
EX.M124 Kanjamalai Branch AJI . Ledger folio 129 showing AJL 253/98
EX.M125 Kanjamalai Branch F89 dated 09-06-1999 relatingto AJL 55/99
EX.M126 Kanjamalai Branch AJL Loan Ledger folio 112 relating to AJL 198/99 , 199/99 EX.M127 Kanjamalai Branch F 89E dated 09-06-1999 relating to AJL 199/99 in the name of S. Thirumattai
EX.M128 Kanjamalai Branch Abilasha Loan Ledger folio relating to A / c 1/97 Smt . R Pushpammal for Rs . 15,000/ - [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii)]
EX.M129 Investigation Report dated 07-08-1999 by Mr. A. Krishnamurthy
Ex..M130 UCO Bank - R. Pushpammal
EX.M131
UCO Bank - R. Sadasivan
EX.M132 UCO Bank - K. Jagannathan
EX.M133 Folio 201 of SB Ledger 45 A/c 13779 of S. Nithyanandan
EX.M134 Folio 202 of SB Ledger Folio of A/ c 16551 ofSumathi
EX.M135 Certificate of Registration of Sri Chandu Invest
EX.M136 Partnership deed of Sri Chandu Invest EX.M137 Partnership deed of Sri Chandu Invest EX.M138
12-12-2001 Disciplinary Authority ordering enquiry 20-01-2002
EX.M139
Enquiry Officer advising the workman to verify the documents
30-08-2002
EX.M140
Order of the Hon'ble High Court in WP No. 5969 to 5971 of 2002 filed by the workman
26-11-2002
EX.M141
WA No. 3497 of 2002 filed bythe Bank
16-01-2003
EX.M142
Disciplinary Authority letter to the workman about the change of Enquiry Officer and Presenting Officer and allowing the workman to engage a legal practitioner to defend him as directed by the Hon'ble High Court EX.M143
16-01-2003 Disciplinary Authority letter to Presenting Officer EX.M144 16-01-2003 Disciplinary Authority letter to Enquiry Officer EX.M145 03-04-2003 Enquiry Officer enclosing list of proposed management exhibits and advising the workman to verify at Branch 11-04-2003
EX.M146
Enquiry Officer advising the workman to verify the documents at Branch 05-05-2003
EX.M147
Workman request to peruse the documents alongwith advocate
3099GI/10-17
5189
भारत का राजपत्र अगस्त 21 , 2010/ श्रावण 30 , 1932
05-05-2003
EX.M148
Workman appointing advocate Sri S. Soundarajan as his defence representative EX.M149 06-05-2003 The workman and his defence representative acknowledging perusal of documents at Branch 02-08-2003
EX.M150
Enquiry Officer fixing enquiry on 10-09-2003 EX.M151 15-10-2004 Order of the High Court in WP 12402 of 2004 filed by the workman dismissed WP EX.M152
Attendance Register of Suramangalam Branch for the relevant period 01-07-1996 to 31-07-1999 - Original filed
EX.M153
SB ( 1 set ) supplementary , from 25-05-1998 to 23-09-1998 ; Original filed - Original filed
EX.M154
to SB ( II Set ) supplementary from 26-11-1997 04-04-1998 : folios 236 to 241 , 360 to 363 , 372 to 375 , 388 to 391 -Original filed EX.M155
Suramangalam Branch Day Book 21-10-1997 to 10-06-1998 ; Folios 308 to 313,347,357 to 355,398 to 481 , 446 to 449, 442 to 445 - Original filed
EX.M156
Suramangalam Branch Day Book 02-01-1998 to 05-08-1998 ; Folios 62 to 65 , 190 to 195 , 136 to 139 , 146 to 149, 240 to 243,256 to 259,262 to 263,288 to 296,304 to 397,312 to 315,336 to 343,356 to 363 , 390 to 397 , 368 to 371 , 399 to 400+ perforated sheet - Original filed EX.M157
Suramangalam Branch General Ledger; 01-04-1998 to 31-03-1999 folios; 57 , 58 , 59, 62, 63 , 64 , 110 , 178 to 183 and folios relating to SB & CDAccounts- Original filed 5190
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 21 , 2010/ SHRAVANA 30 , 1932
EX.M158
Suramangalam Branch General Ledger Balance Book ; 02-04-1998 to 26-06-1998 Folios ; 34 , 22-06-1998Original filed ME - 174 also
Ex.M159
Suramangalam Branch Transfer Journal - Clearing from 30-12-1997 17-06-1998- Original filed to Ex.M160
Suramangalam Branch Transfer Journal - Clearing from 18-06-1998 12-11-1998 to Ex.M161
Suramangalam Branch Copy of IP Summary from the dates mentioned under Item 94 to 121 of this list produced Original produced 02-12-1998 to 19-04-1999 Ex.M162
Suramangalam Branch GL Balance Book from 02-12-1997 to 19-11-1998- Original filed
Ex.M163
Suramangalam Branch GL Balance Book from 20-11-1998 to 10-06-1999- Original filed
Ex.M164
Suramangalam Branch GL Balance Book from 18-09-1997 to 30-03-1998- Original filed
Ex.M165
Suramangalam Branch - SB Supplementary 1 set from 24-09-1998 to 11-01-1999- Original filed
Ex.M166
Suramangalam Branch - SB Supplementary 1 set from 13-01-1999 to 14-05-1998- Original filed
ExM167
Suramangalam Branch - SB Supplementary II set from 31-07-1998 to 24-11-1998- Original filed.
Ex.M168
Suramangalam Branch - SB Supplementary II set from 25-11-1998 to 24-03-1999- Original filed
[PART 11- SEC . 3 ( ii) ] , Ex.M169
Suramangalam Branch GL for the period from 01-04-1997 to 14-04-1998- Original filed
Ex.M170
SB Balance Book of Suramangalam Branch for ledger no . 6 (April 1998 ) Ledger No.1 ( May 98 ) Ledger No. 35 ( April & May 1998 ) SB Balance Book for SB Ledger 45 - Original filed Ex.M171
SB Progressive of Suramangalam Branch I & II Set for the period from 01-10-1997 to 21-07-1998 and 22-07-1998 to 31-03-1999 - Original filed - Also ME - 13 &14
Ex.M172
Xerox copy of the documents originally of UCO Bank .
Ex.M173
Ledger account in respect of one Pushpammal and it contains various entries relating to clearance of various cheques Ex.M174
Voucher relating to one transaction of the amount of Rs . 2,80,0001- dated 14-03-1998
Ex.M175
Document of UCO Bank Ex.M176
Document of UCO Bank Ex.M177
Pay- in- slip dated 23-05-1998 account No. 7823 for Rs. 2,00,0001
Ex.M178
Related entries
Ex.M179
Related entries
Ex.M180
Xerox copy of the document ofUCO Bank
Ex.M181
Xerox copy of the document of UCO Bank
Ex.M182
Xerox copy ofthe document ofUCO Bank
Ex.M183
Xerox copy of the document ofUCO Bank
Ex.M184
Xerox copy of the document of UCO Bank [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]
नई दिल्ली , 26 जुलाई , 2010
का. आ. 2069. औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में , केन्द्रीय सरकार हिन्दुस्तान पेट्रोलियम कोरपोरेशन लिमिटेड के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच , अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालय , सं. 2 मुम्बई के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 45/2005 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 26-7-2010 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।
[सं. एल -30015/3/2005- आई आर( एम ) ] कमल बाखरू , डेस्क अधिकारी New Delhi , the 26th July, 2010
S.O. 2069.- In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) , the Central Government here by publishes the Award (Ref. No. 45/ 2005 ) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal -cum- Labour Court , No. 2 Mumbai , now as shown in the annexure , in the industrial dispute between the employers in relation to the management of Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd. and their workan , which was received by the Central Government on 26-7-2010 .
[No. L- 30015 /3 /2005 - IR (M ) ] KAMAL BAKHRU , Desk Officer
ANNEXURE
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL NO. 2 , MUMBAI Present : A. A. Lad , Presiding Officer Reference No. CGIT - 2/45 of2005 Employers in Relation to the Management of Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd.
The Chairman and Managing Director , Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd. , Ballard Estate , Mumbai -400 038 .
First Party
Vrs.
THEIR WORKMEN
The Secretary , Mumbai Shramik Sangh , Sangharsh , Quarry Road , Bhandup ( West ) , Mumbai -400 078.
Second Party APPEARANCE :
FOR THE EMPLOYER : Mr.P.K. Raveendranathan , Advocate .
5191
भारत का राजपत्र अगस्त 21 , 2010/ श्रावण 30 , 1932
FOR THE WORKMEN : Shri Jaiprakash Sawant , Advocates .
Date of passing the Award : 30-6-2010 . AWARD
The matrix of the facts as culled out from the proceedings are as under:
1. The Government of India , Ministry of Labourby its Order No.L -30015 /3 /2005 - IR( M) dated 13th January , 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 workmen whose names are enlisted at Exhibit " A " should be declared as permanent workers and wages and consequential benefits be paid to them?"
2. Claim Statement is filed by the 2nd Party at Exhibit- 7, in support of subject matter referred in the Reference. Said is denied by the 1st Party by filing its reply at Exhibit 13. Issues were framed at Exhibit 15 and Reference was fixed for recording evidence .
3. Though opportunity was given to the Union to keep witnesses present no steps were taken by it to lead evidence in support of Claims Statement . As no evidence is led by the Union in support of the Claims Statement , the Issues framed are answered against Union and Reference is rejected . Hence, the order
ORDER
Reference is rejected with . No order as to its costs .
Bombay, 30th June , 2010 .
A. A. LAD, Presiding Officer नई दिल्ली, 26 जुलाई , 2010
का. आ. 2070.-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार बिलासपुर रायपुर क्षेत्रीय ग्रामीण बैंक 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 सीजीआईटी/एलसी/ आर/4 /98 ) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 26-7-2010 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।
[सं. एल -12012/65/97- आई आर ( बी -1 ) ] जोहन टोपनो , अवर सचिव New Delhi , the 26th July , 2010
S.O. 2070.-In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) , the Central Government here by publishes the Award (Ref. No. CGIT/ 5192
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 21 , 2010 / SHRAVANA 30 , 1932
LC/ R/ 4 / 98 ) as shown in the annexure , in the Industrial dispute between the management of Bilaspur Raipur Kshetriya Gramin Bank , Bilaspur and their workmen , received by the Central Government on 26-7-2010 .
[No. L - 12012/ 65 / 97 - IR ( B - I ) ] JOHAN TOPNO , Under Secy .
ANNEXURE
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL
TRIBUNAL - CUM - LABOUR COURT , JABALPUR NO . CGIT /LC /R/ 4 / 98
PRESIDING OFFICER : SHRI MOHD.SHAKIR HASAN Shri Janak Ram Sahu
Village- Bhendri ,
P.O Jamagaon,
Workman/ Union Distt . Raipur ( MP )
Versus
The Chairman ,
[ PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii ) ] dispute . Thus it is a case of no evidence . Accordingly the reference is answered .
5. In the result , no dispute award is passed without any order to costs .
6. 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 , 26 जुलाई , 2010
का. आ . 2071.-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में , केन्द्रीय सरकार साउथ ईस्टर्न रेलवे नागपुर के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण , नागपुर के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या सीजीआईटी/ एनजीपी/36/2002 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 26-7-2010 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।
[सं. एल-41011/28/ 97- आई आर ( बी-1 ) ] जोहन टोपनो , अवर सचिव New Delhi , the 26th July , 2010
.Management
Bilaspur Raipur Kshetriya Gramin Bank , Dayalband , Bilaspur
AWARD
Passed on this 7th day of April , 2010 1. The Government of India , Ministry of Labour vide its Notification No.L - 12012 / 65 / 97 - IR ( B - I ) dated 31-12-97 dated has referred the following dispute for adjudication by this tribunal :
"Whether the action of the management of Bilaspur Raipur Kshetriya Gramin Bank, in relation to their Jamgaon and Fingeswar Branch , in refusing employment to Shri Shyamlal Sahu of Vill- Bhendri , PO Jamgaon , Distt . Raipur ( M.P ) w.e.f. 6-5-96 is lawful and justified . If not , to what relief, the workman is entitled to ? "
2. The workman did not appear inspite of notice by Registered post as well as under certificate of posting . Lastly the then Tribunal proceeded the reference exparte against the workman on 7-8-08 .
3. The non - applicant Bank filed an application dated 2-12-2008 stating therein that the applicant workman has no interest in contesting the reference and has not raised any claim by filing statement of claim and therefore there is no necessity to file exparte written statement . It is submitted that no dispute award be passed .
4. On the basis of above discussion it is clear that there is no claim of the applicant workman ne the reference inspite of sufficient opportunity was given to raise the S.O. 2071. - In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) , the Central Government here by published the Award ( Ref. No. CGIT/ NGP/ 36 / 2002 ) as shown in the annexure , in the Industrial dispute between the management of The Divisional Commercial Manager , S.E. Railway, Nagpur and their workman , received by the Central Government on 26-7-2010 .
[No. L -41011 /28 / 97 - IR ( B - I ) ]
JOHAN TOPNO , Under Secy. ANNEXURE
BEFORE SHRI A. N. YADAV PRESIDING OFFICER , CGIT - CUM - LABOUR COURT , NAGPUR Case No. CGIT / NGP / 36/ 2002
Petitioner : The General Secretary , Parcel Porter Sanghatana S.E. Railway Nagpur Division Motibag , Nagpur - 440012
PartyNo. 1
Versus
Respondent: The Divisional Commercial Manager S.E. Railway Nagpur .
Party No. 2
AWARD
Date: 15th July , 2010
The Central Government after satisfying the existence of disputes between The General Secretary . Parcel [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]
Porter Sangahatana , Motibagh party No. 1 and The Divisional Commercial Manager Party No. 2 referred the same for adjudication to this Tribunal vide its order No. L- 41011 /28/ 97 - IR( B - I ) Dtd . 28/08/1998 under clause ( d ) of sub- section ( 1 ) and sub - section ( 2A) of Section 10 of Industrial Dispute Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) with the following schedule :
2." Whether the 60 parcel porters (as per list attached) Engaged by the Divisional Manager S. E. Railways Nagpur are " workmen " Under the provision of sec . 2 ( S ) of the Industrial Disputes Act 1947 ? If so whether these 60 parcel porters are to be provided Eight hours work daily regularly and declare Railway " Employees " ? If so to what relief the workman are entitled ? "
3. Again the Central Government after satisfying the existence ofdisputes between The General Secretary, parcel porter Sangahatana , Motibagh party No. 1 and The Divisional Commercial Manager Party No. 2 referred the same for adjudication to this Tribunal vide its Order No. L- 41011 / 9 / 99 - IR ( B - I ) Dtd . 16-08-1999 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:
4. " Whether 151 parcel porters (as per list attached) engaged by the Divisional Manager S. E. Railway Nagpur are " workmen " Under the provision of sec . 2 ( S ) of The Industrial Disputes Act 1947 ? If so to what benefit and status they are entitle to and from what date ? " 5. It seems that both the reference were sent to C.G.I.T. Jabalpur where they respectively were numbered as 203/98 and 287/99 and consequent upon the establishment of this tribunal were sent to Nagpur . Considering their similarity of subject matter and being between the same parities they were consolidated by giving common number as 36/2002 . After recording common evidence and arguments I am passing a common Award . Onreceipt of the notice , 60 and 151 parcel porters as per list , through their Union filed the statement of claim with the fallowing contentions .
6. The present petitioner , secretary , parcel porter Sanghatana , S. E. Railway Nagpur Division , Motibagh Nagpur -12 has raised the dispute before the A.L.C. The Petitioner Union approached to this Tribunal with the contention that the Railway undertakes a systematic activity for production , supply or distribution of goods or services with a view to satisfy the human wants or wishes and with the motive to make a gain and profit . It carries on the business of transportation of goods , parcel all over the country and it practically earning profit there from . The parcel porters are engaged to load and unload, seal and unseal the goods wagon . They were appointed and worked at various railway stations in Nagpur divisions continuously from 1994. They are under the administrative control of S.E. Railway since 1994. Each worker has completed more
5193
भारत का राजपत्र अगस्त 21 , 2010/ श्रावण 30 , 1932
than 240 days in every calendar year . The work of loading and unloading the wagons is of a perennial nature . They also claim that they were appointed after following the selection process , taking screening test and interview and posted them at various places [ or loading and unloading the parcels , opening and sealing the wagons , carrying the parcel from the station to the wagon and vies - versa on arrival of the loaded wagon . They are under the administrative control of the station masters who supervise their work . Thus they are the employees of the railway .
7. That they worked at various Railway stations in Nagpur Division continuously , barring some artificial breaks , directly under the administrative control of the S.E. Railways since 1994. Each worker has completed more than 240 days in every calendar year . However the Management did not provide the job security and benefits of regular employee . The Management enlisted and appointed them as per selection process on interview and posted them at various places for loading and unloading parcels , opening and resealing the wagons , carrying the parcels from station to the wagons and from wagons to stations . They being under the administrative control , work as per directions of the Railway officers who supervise their work . Earlier the Pay Master of Management used to pay their salary on monthly basis . Now the railway is paying atCentral Govt , rate and as per Minimum Wages Act, under regular pay orders . The work is permanent and of perennial nature . Union has raised demand to absorb them as regular parcel porters to the stations of their working . However the management is not treating them at par with the casual labours and illegally treating them as licensed porters whose service conditions are totally different . They are performing similar duties of the parcel porter /Hamals who are the regular railway employees in the pay scale of Rs . 750-940 ( RPS / Rs . 250-3200 ( VPS ) . They were initially provided the work for 4 hours daily . Later on the working hours were increased to 8 by reducing their pay without disturbing others pay . The respondent railway has started the process of filling the vacancies of Safaiwala and of other group ' D ' ( Class IV) of other Departments . It is violative of the guidelines of the Ministry . They finely have prayed to declare them has railway employee , direct the management to provide the work for 8 hour , to grant difference of wages from 1994 . They have also prayed to regularize them by giving temporary status and in regular scale of pay of Group D on the post of Safaiwala as per their Qualification and Suitability.
8. The management while resisting , the claim in Written Statement contended that Petitioners ware engaged aslicensed porters , on payment of license fee , for carrying the luggage of the passengers by issuing special notification , however for the convenience and the benefit ofthe petitioners they were asked to do the work of parcel porters because the number of the licensed porters was more than the available work . Their earning was insufficient 5194
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 21 , 2010/ SHRAVANA 30 , 1932
for them . Considering the earning of the parcel porters the work was entrusted to them on hourly basis with the view to increase their income and avoid the disparity of income between them and the Parcel porters . Each petitioner has executed an agreement , which are the terms and condition of their services . They were neither enlisted nor interviewed . Thus they are not parcel porters or even employees of the railway . They being licensed porters get the remuneration from the respective passengers for carrying their luggage at the rate fixed by Railways . The Minimum wages Act is not applicable to them . They are given out door medical treatment and leave facilities only . In exceptional cases , on their requests they were transferred also but it has no effect on their status . The incompetent officers of the Management have issued them experience certificates which will not confer any right on them . Thus the managements pleads that the petitioners are neither the workman nor entitled for any claimed relief . They prayed to dismiss the reference by answering it in the negative .
9. The crucial point of the reference was whether these workmen claiming to be parcel porters were the workmen under section 2 ( s ) of the Industrial Dispute Act and whether they could be regularized as Railway Employees ? It will not be out of place to mention that the Award passed by me on 28-3-2008 was challenged by filing a writ bearing Writ No.4472/ 2008 before the Hon'ble High Court, Judicature of Bombay , Nagpur Bench and Hon'ble High Court quashed the above Award of this Tribunal . It remanded the reference with the certain directions . While quashing the Award , the Hon'ble High Court has given the findings that the Parcel Porters are workmen within the meaning of Section 2( s ) of ID Act . Similarly it has directed not to discuss or interfere in findings recorded by it in that respect . Now we have the findings of the Hon'ble H C that the petitioners are the workman . These findings are binding on us . The another crucial point that arises for my consideration is whether the petitioners have worked for 240 days continuously as parcel porters though they were appointed as licensed porters and whether they are entitled for regularization in the regular cadre as parcel porters ?
10. Heard both advocates for the parties , perused the evidence , documents and written notes of their arguments . The management claims that the petitioners are licensed porter appointed by it without following the recruitment process for carrying luggage of the passengers at the rates fixed by it and paid by passengers directly to the porters . Thus according to it they are coolies , in a red uniform having , badges permitted to work on accepting the licensed fees . They are not at all the employees of the railway . The management is harping on the agreements executed by the petitioners and allotment of the work of handling the parcels due to insufficient work available to them . It was creating disparity in the earnings of the parcel
[ PART II- SEC . 3 ( ii ) ] porters and them . To avoid the disparity they were provided the work of parcel porters by rotation .
11. It will not be out of place to see the basic differences between the parcel porters and licensed porter . It is clear that there is basic difference in both posts because the licensed porters are the licensees permitted by the railway administration to carry the luggage of the passengers . They are allowed to recover the charges for thatwork directly from the passengers at the rates fixed by the railway . Similarly the railway administration provides them uniform and Badge these licensed porters are popularly known as coolies . They are not the employees ofthe railways but they are the licensees permitted to work accepting the license fees form them to the railway . While the parcel porters are the workman getting monthly salary or particular amount as remuneration , may be on daily basis , from railway . The work of the parcel porters is to carry the parcels from and to the office and load and unload it in the wagons . Thus they do the work of loading and unloading and carrying the parcels from office to the wagon and from wagon to the office after unloading as per directions of the railway administration . They are paid by railway for performing the above work while the licensed porters are required to pay to railway in the form of license fee . They are not the employees of the railway but the parcel porters are the employees .
12. Now let us consider the evidence adduced by the both the parties . In order to prove the respective contentions , after the remand of the case and considering the directions of the Hon H.C. the petitioner union examined in all 152 workmen by filing their affidavits . [ The list (Schedule " D " ) is attached showing Exhibit numbers from W74 to W 223 and documents filed by each of them] besides the earlier witnesses . They have also filed the documents available with them in the nature of the certificates , Identity cards , statements of payments made towards C.P.F. etc. After remaned the evidence is addured by filling the affidavits of all the 152 witnesses which are of similar nature except the difference in working period. Before remand the union had examined Manish Saxena , Rajes Supatkar Bhaurao Shewalkar Jeetendra Chouhan , Jeetendra Rangari , Arun Ramlal Wanjari , Nagesh Gajabhiye , Sanjay Jinde Etc.
13. The witness Sarjukumar Sarkar like other witnesses has stated in response to the advertisement dated 08-08-1994 of the management in news paper he and other had applied for the post of parcel porters . All of them were interviewed and on physical and oral tests they were employed along with other petitioners . He further stated that they were given the job of parcel porters . All petitioners were handling the parcels i.e. carrying and loading of the parcels from station to wagon and vice versa . They were being paid through the regular pay orders from the railway 5195 भारत का राजपत्र अगस्त 21 , 2010/ श्रावण 30 , 1932
[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]
that alongwith the others he was also appointed as a Parcel Porter under the authority of the Divisional Commercial Manager . The Identity Card and the experience certificate were issued to him and they are filed on record by him . He worked continuously. He is cross examined by Shri Gadkari , Advocate appearing for the Railway. He denied all the suggestions put up in the cross - examination . He is cross examined on behalf of the management but his evidence remained unshaken . Similarly all the other witnesses examined after remand are cross examined on behalf of the management but nothing could be brought on record which will prove that they are performing the work as licensed porters or collies and to discard the evidence of these witnesses . All the witnesses examined on the behalf of the Union are supporting the version of their President as well as the other witnesses . I think the version of each and every witness need not be discussed because it will be simply a repetition .
revenue disbursed through station masters . They were initially paid as per minimum wages act and subsequently as decided by the Central Government . Their day to day attendance register was main tend by the railway. He states that the muster role cum wage register was maintained by the railway but their signatures were not obtained . He has never done the job of licensed porters and carried the luggage of the passengers . He further states that the Railway board by its Circular dated 30-07-1997 has observed licensed porters should not be utilized for handling parcel because they were granted the license for carrying the luggage of the passengers . In case they are to be utilized for handling the parcels they shall surrender their licenses as collies . i.e. licensed porters . Besides these he has submitted the identity card and the certificate of the railway station manager which shows that he is handling the parcels at Itwari Rly. Station since 1995 to 2005 continuously and the work is of the perennial nature .
14. The president of the union Shri Saxena has examined himself along with the other members of the union he deposed about the working of the railways and its business of the transportation . The parcels and goods are handled, loaded and unloaded by the parcel porters . They open and reseal the wagons . The work is of permanent and perennial nature . They even open and reseal the wagons . All the petitioners according to him are working with party No. 1 since 1994 and they have completed more than more than 240 days of continuous service he further deposed that the recruitment process was carried out in accordance ofthe circular Dated 08-08-1994 . They were appointed as parcel porters and they worked as parcel porters . Initially their working hours were different . They were appointed at various stations and work of parcel porters was taken from them.
15. They were paid monthly salary from the railway funds and revenue from the office through station masters i.e. by the departments . There names are on the muster role . He has denied that there were any valid agreements between the railway and the parcel porters . Similarly he has stated that they were never given the uniform . He has pointed out that the work of parcel porters initially was given by rotation to them. However , he denied that they were required to work only for 8 hours when there was excess work. He categorically stated that on an average every parcel porters were required to work for 20 days in a month . He has been cross - examined on behalf of the Railway he denied the suggestion which were against them and despite of the cross - examination his evidence remains unshaken .
17. The next important witness examined on behalf of the petitioner is Shri Mahendra Shukla , one of the members of the petitioner union . He has deposed that in the years 1994 after recruitment he was posted at Itwari Railway Station . The minimum wages were paid to them upto September , 2004 as per circular issued by the Divisional Commercial Manager and Divisional Personal Officers . Those circulars are filed on record . He referred the circular ofthe establishment 87 of 1996 which prescribed the procedure to absorb the casual labours engage for loading and unloading operation at railway station and yard after putting more than 120 days work without any break . The circular is dated 15.5.1996 which provides that once a casual workman assumed the status of temporary employee they are to be provided work continuously and in that event regular pay scale is also to be offered to them . They are also eligible for appointment against the vacancies as and when recruitment is carried out . He has further pointed out that they are eligible against the vacancies as and when the recruitment is carried out . He has further pointed out that the management party No. 1 is overlooking this circular and did not offer any temporary status to the parcel porters nor is they absorbed in the employment . On the contrary , when the reference is pending the management has started harassing and stopped giving the work of loading and unloading to them. He is cross examined by Shri Gadkari Advocate for the management . He has pointed out in the cross - examination formal letter of appointment was not issued by the railway to the individual parcel porter . He denied the suggestion that it was advertisement for the appointment of license porter . In fact , as pointed about there was no need for forming any committee for the recruitment of license porters . Thus , his evidence is clear enough to show that practically it was appointment of the petitioners as a parcel porter . Right from the appointment they were given the work of handling 16. The next witness examined by the Party No.2 Mr. Rajesh Supatkar who says that he has been working as a Parcel Porter at Rajnandgaon Railway Station . He has given the registration No. of the Union and pointed out 5196
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 21 , 2010/ SHRAVANA 30 , 1932
the parcels . They never worked as license porter and according to him they are entitled for the absorption as a parcel porter because they have worked as a parcel porter continuously right from their appointment i.e. from 1994- 95. He has filed the certificate of Experience . He has further stated regarding the circular dated 19-10-2004 under which they prevented from the working . The union has filed the cease u/ s 34 - C.I.D. Act .
18. As against this before remand of the case the management has examined Shri A.Vinayagam and Shri K.V.R. Murthi . The first witness MR. Vinayagum a retired Assistant Personal Officer has stated that the D.R.M. South Central Railway has nominated him as one of the screening cornmittee members and he has taken screening test of the licensed Porters . In all 186 candidates were selected as licensed porters Hamals to cope up with the requirement of the division . In the cross examinations he has admitted that he has no knowledge what work was allotted to them . His evidence is clear enough that the committee was constituted for the recruitment Further he admitted that licensed coolies who are for lifting the luggage of passengers have no connection with the personal department . After describing the difference between licensed porters and parcel porters , he admitted that he has not come in contact with licensed porters after their appointment . He has no knowledge whether they had paid license fees and how these licensed porters were paid by the railway . He has stated that the presence of the parcel porters is marked in muster role while no muster is maintained in respect of the licensed porters . However here is a evidence that the presence of petitioners was marked in the muster role and they were paid on monthly basis . Apart from the question of reliability the muster roles are produced by the management on record which show their presence was compulsory . Had they been only licensees the presence would have optional . Asking to sign the muster role it means making the attendance compulsory .
19. It seems that this witness has tried to his level best to avoid the direct answer . He has admitted that for the recruitment of large number of 186 licensed porters and test , the candidate from all over India had gathered at Kamptee . However he avoided answering that the coolies or the licensed porter are to be engaged by the Station Master . In fact licensed porters engaged for carrying luggage of the passenger are not selected by the screening committee . The station manager has powers to grant license to them . Moreover , the question remains that the licensed porters have no connection with the personnel department . There was no need to constitute the committee for recruitment of the licensed porters . This indicates that it was recruitment of parcel porter rather than the licensed porter . His presence itself support the contention of the petitioner that it was not a recruitment process for licensed porter but it was a process of engaging the parcel porters.
[ PART II - SEC . 3 ( ii ) ] 20. The another witness examined on behalf of the management is Shri K.V.R.Murthi , Assistant Commercial Manager , SEC Railway , Nagpur . He had taken a stand that the candidates selected in recruitment process were the license porter but they were asked to handle the railway parcels as well as the passenger's luggage by rotation to provide equal opportunity to them but this stand does not appeal because there is no explanation as to why there was need to carry out the fresh recruitment when admittedly large numbers , of licensed porters were already working at every station even prior to 1994. Had it a intension of the management for allowing to handle the work of parcel porter to provide a sufficient remuneration why this work was not provided to the licensed porters prior to 1994 ?
21. Further , he has stated about the so called agreement signed by the Station Masters for the management and the individual candidates . As already discussed , these agreements have so many infirmities regarding the Execution and their genuineness . The management has filed these agreements on record . They are not on any stamp papers . It seems that many agreements are simply signed by the licensed porters alone without any signatures of the other party . They are without even filling the complete forms and leaving blank space as it is . Many of them are not signed by the Station Manager . In fact the Divisional Manager was expected to singe on it because it was within his powers . Admittedly the agreements are obtained after their joining when they had already worked for so many years and not at time of appointment . As per circular of the management licensed porters are not permitted even to touch the railway parcel . Here the petitioners were handling them . This it self indicates that the work of parcel porter was allotted and taken from the petitioners . The stand taken by the witnesses that it was for enabling them to get more remuneration has no meaning . The witness has admittedly no direct knowledge regarding the selection process by the screening committee in 1994. At that time , he was not working as a Assistant Commercial Manager and his affidavit is based on the documents and the records . This witness cannot be relied up on .
22. Both the witnesses Mr. Mishra and Murthy have admitted that the Railway Management had taken a decision to cancel the contract of handling railway parcels and get the work done through private contractor which was going on earlier to 1994. Accordingly it was canceled . It mustbe the reason for appointing and starting the process of recruitment in respect of parcel porter and not license porter . Thissupport contention of the petitioners particularly when number of working license porter was a quit sufficient at every station . It is apparent that the management after canceling the contact of handling the parcel started recruitment for appointing new parcel porters . Admittedly the number of the parcel porters was very small to meet the requirement.
5197 भारत का राजपत्र अगस्त 21 , 2010/श्रावण 30 , 1932
[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]
23. The management has examined Shri K.V. Ramanna , Assistant Commercial Manager working at Bilaspur. He has admitted that he has no direct knowledge regarding the selection process by the Screening Committee in the year 1994 and his affidavit is onthe basis ofthe record . He has admitted that the railway has decided to cancel the contract of handling the parcel through the persons appointed by the contractor . He has admitted that the contract which was cancelled was not in respect of the carrying luggage of the passenger . He has also no knowledge whether the petitioner had paid license fee and they were given uniform , badges etc. at any time . Thus his evidence is short of knowledge regarding actual working of these persons . However , he has admitted that they were paid as per minimum wages act on monthly basis .
24. After remand , the management has examined three witnesses namely Sari Arun Kachruji Koche, Shri Laxmikant Tiwari and Smt . Karri Mangamma Rao besides already examined. Similarly it has produced the agreements executed by the licensed porters . It has also filed the alleged muster roles and one statement prepared by the clerk of the office showing the numbers of the working days along with the amount paid to each workers .
never handled the luggage of the passengers . They also did not wear their prescribed red uniform , badge numbers . Buckle numbers . etc. He has stated that muster roll was maintained for the Parcel Porters and they were paidfrom the revenue of the Railway . An important fact has been disclosed by him that earlier the handling of the parcel was done through the Contractor . However , it resulted into monetary loss to the railway. There fore , on completion of contract the Divisional Railway Manager decided to engage the Parcel Porter in place of contract Labour . According to this witness the Parcel Porter appointed during his tenure were continued to work for the railway even after his retirement . He has been cross - examined by Shri Gadkari on behalf of the Railway and he has stated during the cross- examination that there was some notification by DCM , SE Railway for recruitment of license porter . He has admitted inthe cross examination that the Commercial Manager had sent the list to the Station Master in the matter of handling the parcel as per their requirement . He has shown his ignorance as regard the badges and license were issued to the members of union . He has not denied it means his answer is affirmative that these badges , uniform and buckles were never given to the petitioners . It suggests thatthe members of the union i.e. Petitioner were working as a Parcel Porters . He evidence shows that they have never worked as licensed porters . If the submission of the railway management that they were appointed as a Licensed Porter is to be accepted then there was no need for constituting the committee for the recruitment . This indicates that the appointment of the petitioners was also as a Parcel Porter as stated by this witness .
25. Witness Mrs. Karri who prepared the statements showing working days and made payments has admittedly no knowledge about the working of the petitioners . She has prepared statements on the basis of the so called muster roles and payment sheet . The muster roles are in fact not bearing the signatures of the petitioners . It means only presence is marked by the management itself in the registers and it is not muster role at all. The petitioners have denied that these were the muster role . Thus the muster roles and the statements prepared by her on the basis of it are doubtful .
27. If the evidence is scanned and tested , on the above basis , no body will dare to say that they are not the workman of the railway. They ware appointed by calling applications , after screening tests and interviews. It is clear that their initial appointment must be as parcel porters . The agreements were executed but when they were already in the service and not at the time of appointments . The evidence shows that they have never worked as licensed porters . The petitioners were working as parcel porters at every station like Gondia, Bhandara , Tumsar, kamptee , Itwari etc. Most of the above stations have no regular parcel porters . No regularly appointed parcel porters are even posted at some of the stations . Since no parcel porter having cadre pay was appointed and posted naturally these petitioner were performing the work of the parcel porters appears to be correct . The evidence is sufficient in this respect . The station masters examined on behalf of the management has admitted the above position . It is the case of the petitioners that they were appointed as parcel porters .No doubt the railway has produced the agreements on record but the petitioners have denied even their signatures and execution of the agreements . Undisputedly the agreements were not executed at the time of their 26. However , the court has examined after summoning ( as court witness ) Mr. Raghuvansh Mishra, Retired Divisional Commercial Manager . He was working on the same post in the year 1994-95 . He states that the SE Railway has issued in the year 1994 a notice for the purpose of recruiting the licensed Porters for handling the parcels . He was one of the committee members of recruitment . There was circular for recruitment of licensed porters for the stations from Itwari to Rajnandgaon . The Divisional Railway Manager had constituted a committee comprising of three officers from personnel department , engineering department and commercial department . The recruitment process was conducted at Kamptee Railway Station under which about 200 persons were selected and recruited as Parcel Porter and were posted on various stations between Itwari and Rajnandgaon . The witness is retired and he says that the petitioners were recruited for handing the parcels of the railway and not of the passengers . They were appointed on the daily wages . He pointed out that they
3099GI /10-18 5198
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 21 , 2010 / SHRAVANA 30 , 1932
appointments or when they joined the duties but were obtained after some years from their joining . These go to show that the agreements were obtained as per need and when suitable to the railway . More over the so called agreements suffer from the basic infirmities , like not on stamps papers and having no signatures of competent persons . Some of them are not even signed by any person on behalf of managements .
28 The management has tried to pose that it has carried out the recruitment pursuant to the notification D/-08-08-1994 . The issuance of special notification itself discloses the intention as well as process of recruitment of the parcel porters was scheduled , otherwise there was no need of even issuing the notification, while ranging the licensed porters no such recruitment procrine is fallowed . Simply the Station Master can appoint the licensed porters . The management has not made it clear . Similarly there is no answer from , the management to the main question as how the management was paying wages to them when they were expected to recover it from the passengers directly . It is totally unanswered as why the management was paying wages to them. The payment of wages speaks voluminous . It establishes the relations as employer and employee . In my view these agreements ware only a show or farce to avoid the claim of petitioners . These agreements are not reliable and they cannot be treated as service conditions of petitioners . They are not helpful to the management to prove that they were appointed and they were working only as licensed porters / coolies for carrying luggage of the passengers .
29. Much has been argued on behalf of the management in respect of notification D/-08-08-1994 under which it was proposed to recruit the licensed porters . The notification certainly was proposing the recruitment of the licensed porters but the law is settled on this point that in Industrial jurisprudence nomenclature of the posts used on the piece of papers is not final answer to the dispute . It is necessary to investigate whether the person concerned was indeed performing the work as per nomenclature . It is necessary to see whether the employer for its benefit and own whims wants to address him in different fashion and designation . Besides the main question as to why the petitioners were being paid as per Miniutra Wages Actby railway why it was required to issue a notification to carry out the recruitment through a proper selection process when the management was intending to recutit licensed porters for the benefit of the passengers .
30. Similarly the receipts filed by the management to show that the petitioners were paying license fec are also not clear about the persons who had deposited the license fee and deposits of Rs . 11.63 under those I receipis . The receipts do not bear the signatures and the names of the person who paid the amount . Only the numberselisto
[PI SC3 ( ii ) ] be of the licensed porters are mentioned on tocin who paid license fees . So many numbers are shown in ri receipt .
parucular There is absolutely no evidence to she
soutter by numbers were given to each and ever
competent authority . On the contrary the wisses of the management have admitted in cros . F
bandage , buckles and red uniforms .
When showing their identity as license porters
they were never given badges and unter
question of giving numbers to them. ...
to show that particular number was give
coolly . It is proper place to mention as
providing of the badges , buckle , et La
accordarce n th the chap
which spesifically indicates it in neces
articles to the licenses porters The a
casts duty on the Station Nasters to ad porters are provided with these ar
prescribed to avoid mauthorized cool :
the luggage of the passengers . It is by wa
to avoid any mischief by unauthor
person . Mir . Tiwari witness of the manager rucifically admitted that at Kamptee Station these na vere
as not fallowed . It is not clear on behalf of th ..
to why these provisions were not fallowe
reason for allowing them to work withoun m. The contentions of the management that these puronnets were working as licensed porters carrying theme ofthe passengers are not reliable .
der Poll. 31. Their presence was marked in the
fat i was Initially they were given four hours duty
increased to eight hours . They were word ieder direct control of the Railway administration semilar thing regarding the work they were asked to peit era the work like handling the parcels including loading deng and even opening and resealing the wagons was patrusted to the petitioners . The Most important and undi puted thing is that the Railway was paying wages to bem trough Supervisors , Station Masters . They were pardener Minimum Wages Act on monthly basis . Thess με το show that they were salaried employees of thay d agreements which are obtained after so mammets the joining have nothing to do with it . They won sever fallowed In case of licensed porters there is tres predice of paying any remuneration by Railway . Beside it, inere are examples of even affecting their transfer-
from one station to another which can not be to event in case of license porters . It has been admitted on behalf of the management that no separate recruitmem tole are provided for the recruitments of the licensed potles, la fact the stand of the respondent management is not comain about the work provided to the petitioners but it is tooms undisputed that they were handling patecis , in at the licensee porters or coolies are not ever entried to touch [भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]
the parcels . No doubt they have signed the agreements but the station masters who are other parties to the execution of these documents are not examined . Only station masters of Kamtee Bhandara Itawari Railway stations are examined . As indicated above the agreciments are not reliable at all .
32. The most important thing is that they were provided with Identity cards as parcel Porters . There is no explanation as to how the identity cards as Parcel Porters were given to them . These support the contention of the petitioner that they were working as well as they appointed as parcel porters. The cards do not bear any number to link the payments as license fees and deposits as alleged by the managements . They have produced the experience certificates issued by the officers of the management . They show that these petitioners are working from 1994. It is contended on behalf of the management that the certificates are not issued by its incompetent officers , alleging thereby that they are bogus . But no evidence is adduced to show that any action has been taken against those erring officer . Even their names are not declared much less any action about their in competency as well as issuing these so called bogus certificates . These certificates support their contention as well . Thus they cannot be called as coolies or parcel protesters as claimed by the management.
33. Itis admitted by the management witnesses that at each railway station the attendance register is maintained the witness Karry and even others have admitted that the attendance the muster roles are prepared on the basis of the attendance register . The signature of the workers is not obtained on the muster role . The muster role are signed by the station masters as well as by chief Clerk . Then they are sent to D.C.M. who after verification sanctions the payment and on receipt muster roles the station master pays wages to the workers after obtaining their signature on the separate register . Attendance register being the main register showing the working days prepared at the very time assumes great importance . The managements witnesses Tiwari and Koche have stated that in order to calculate working days it has importance and easily available with managements . It was directed specifically to produce the attendance register as the notice to produce the documents was issued by the petitioners , The management did not produce the attendance register deliberately . Adverse inference will have to be drawn that the management is deliberately avoiding it to produce the attendance register . On the contrary the witness Karry Katta has produced the statement prepared on the basis of it . In fact it is secondary evidence as opposed to the primary evidence though the originals are available . The adverse inference will have to be drawn that the petitioners have worked as parcel porters as stated by them in their evidence and as per certificates , for more than 240 days continuously.
भारत का राजपत्र अगस्त 21 , 2010/ श्रावण 30 , 1932
It will have to infer that the working days as per the certificates issued by the station masters are correct. Since they have worked continuously for more than 240 days within the period every calendar year they are entitle to regularization as per I.D. Act . , if they are treated as casual labours in that case also they have completed more than 125 days continuous service as parcel porters .
34. An attempt has been made in the evidence by Shri Murthi to show that the petitioners were favoured by the management by asking them to work as parcels porters . However it is not the case or the defence of the Management . There would again a question as to how the discrimination was made leaving other coolies . Another attempt is made by the management with a view to avoid the liability by submitting that they were not working as causal labours , therefore they are not entitled for regularization . I have already concluded that they are the workman of railway . Even the Hon . H. C. has maintained these findings and now there are directions not to interfere in it . The workmen of the respondent and have completed 125/240 days continuous service . The management has admitted that the petitioners were paid the wages as per notification of the Labour Ministry . If they were licensee what was the reason for paying them regulariv month to months . One more theory is introduced that they were absconding and therefore their services were termina.ed. In one breath it is saying that they were not init workmer and in another breath it is contending mat they were terminated because they did not turn . If they were not the workmen then how they were terminated is the question . It falsifies the stand of Railway manageme
35. It is submitted on behalf of the Management that the licensed porters did not prove the fact that they have worked 240 or 125 days . In fact it was the position before remand and now the in all 152 petitioners have filed the fresh affidavits as per list annexure , D. Some of them have also filed, the documents such as Certificates , Identity cards and CPF account numbers . The certificates are issued by the respective Station Masters . They are showing the period ofworking . Some of the station masters are examined by the petitioners and they admitted that the regular parcel porters were not posted and the work of handling parcels including the loading and unloading them in the wagons was taken from these petitioners . All the witnesses examined by the Union are deposing about performing of the work as parcel porters . The evidence is clear enough to show that the petitioners were regularly working as parcel porters as alleged by them. I have in the earlier part of this judgment pointed out that their appointment must be as parcel porters . There is no iota of evidence to prove that the petitioners were doing the work or dutis of the licensed porters contrarily the station masters who are examined are admitting that the petitioners never worked as licensed porters.
5200 ,
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 21 , 2010 / SHRAVANA 30 , 1932
36. The petitioner Union has claimed 60 and 151 parcel porters under order Nos . L -41011 / 28 / 97 - IR ( B - 1 ) Dt . 28-08-1998 and Order No. L - 41011/ 9/ 99 -IR ( B - 1 ) Dt . 16-08-1999 respectively totaling to 211 as entitled for the Regularization. Even the above referred orders of the Central Government Of India has also given the similar number of the parcel porters . The list of the 60 petitioners in first order is in confirmity of number given by the petitioner . However the actual number as per appended lists with the Order No. L - 41011 / 9 / 99 - IR [ B - 1 ) Dt . 16-08- 1999 is less by 9 parcel porters . It is not in conformity ofthe claimed number , of 151 porters . It comes 143 only totaling to 203 parcel porters in all . The petitioners have given the lists of the porters working at particular stations as under- ( 1) Kamthi Rly . Station , 16 parcel porters , ( 2 ) Bhandara Road 09 , (3 ) Tumsar Road 11 , ( 4) Tiroda 04, (5) Gondiya 59, ( 6) Rajnandgaon 08 and ( 7) Itwari Rly Station . 36 parcel porters . Thus the total comes to 143 porters besides the 60 porters/ petitioners in reference no . 203/1998 making grand total of 203 Parcel porters .
37. The same thing is about the availability of the work . The Railway being transporters loading and unloading the parcels and other material in the wagon is the main work besides the other work like sealing unsealing the wagons and carrying the parcels to platform . Parcel porters are appointed for this work . Therefore the work is also of perennial nature and it cannot be said as of casual nature . I am appending the list of the workers along with their working days as annexure " A" .
38. I have prepared four lists attached with this award . They are as annexure A , B ; C and D Annexure A. is showing the names of all the petitioners with their details showing who have filed affidavits and the documents and who have even not filed any documents or affidavit . It is having names of all 201 petitioners mentioned in the list which received along with reference . Some of the petitioners have filed affidavits only without any document like certificates and 1 cards . Etc. But they filed Affidavits . So far they are concerned , it seems that there are no disputes that they have worked and the salary was also paid to them along with other parcel porters in the same capacity . There are no disputes that they worked in handling the parcels . The disputes are whether they have worked for , more than 240 days or not . From their affidavits it is clear that they have also completed more than 240 days continuous service . The work of parcel porters was taken from them also . In my view they are entitled for regularization .
39. The list annexure C is of the petitioners who did not remain present and have not filed any affidavits . Finely the list Annexure D is of the petitioners who filed the affidavits and the documents like identity cards , certificates , Provident fund numbers or any of them showing they worked as parcel porters . Similarly as per list Annexure
[PART II SEC . 3 ( ii) ] " A " there are about 30 petitioners whose names are appearing in the list which has been received from the ministry along with reference but the list does not disclose either exact date or even the year from when they are working . These petitioners who have filed their affidavits and mentioned the years from which they are working . In the affidavit also they have not mentioned the dates . However they are disclosing to have worked for more than 240 days as there is no exact date ofjoining the work they shall be treated as working from the date of respective reference . They shall be treated as have worked from the date of the reference . All the lists A , B , C and D shall form as part and parcel of this award . So far other petitioners who are about 50 in numbers as per list Annexure Care concerned , they have not filed any affidavit or any document . They have not adduced any evidence to prove their entitlements . In the absence of any evidence they cannot be regularized . Hence they are not be regularized and their claim cannot be granted . The names such petitioners are at Annexure " C " . Their claims will have to be dismissed .
40. So far as back wages are concerned the petitioners are demanding the back wages . They have worked as per directions of the authority and they are already paid as per their working hours . The working hours as well as exact days of each petitioner is not available . In fact they were working parcel porters but since there is no specific- dates itwill not be possible to work out the entitlement in respect ofback wages . Hence in my view they cannot be paid the back wages . I proceed to pass the following order .
ORDER
The respondent party no . 2 The Divisional Commercial Manager S.E. Railway Nagpur is hereby directed-
1. To regularize the petitioners whose names are appearing in list Annexure " B " and " D " attached with this award giving them temporary status and regular pay scale of Group " D " at par with the regularly appointed parcel porters treating them as railway employees .
2. To fix their pay in the Group " D " regular cadre from the date of their respective appointments .
3. To give them regular increments and pay the salary with prospective effect from the date of notification ofthis award .
4. The claim of the petitioners mentioned in the list Annexure " C " Shall stand as Dismissed .
The lists at Annexures A , B , C and D appended herewith shall form part and parcel of this Award .
Dated: 15-7-2010
A. N .. YADAV, Presiding Officer .
भारत का राजपत्र अगस्त 21 , 2010/ श्रावण 30 , 1952
[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]
10
Total workingdays
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Approx.more than9years
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
1-12-1994
1-11-1994to 31-7-2004
From1-11-1994
Nil
Nil
Nil
Nil
Nil Nil
Nil
Nil Nil
Nil
9
Workingperiod aspercertificates
8
From9-11-1994
From13-3-1995
From9-12-1994
From11-4-1994
From15-11-1994
From8-6-1995
From13-3-1995
From1-11-1994
From1-12-1994
From1-12-1994
From1-11-1994
From1-12-1994
Notmentioned
Workingperiod asperlistofthe reference
1994-95to2005
1994-95to2005
1994-95to2005
1994-95to2005
1994-95to2005
1994-95to2005
1994-95to2005
1994-95to2005
1994-95to2005
7
Notmentioned
Nil
Nil
Nil
6
DocumentsWorking withdescrip-periodasper tionandexh.affidavit
No.
Nil Nil Nil
Nil Nil
Nil
Verses
1.Card
I.Card
I.Cardand
I.Card
1.Cardand certificate
I.Cardand
1.Cardand certificate
Annexure-A
Ref:CaseNo.36/2002
NagpurDivisionNagpur
Affidavit ExhibitNo.
5
Notfiled
Notfiled
Notfiled
Notfiled
W-122
W-130
W-96
W-202
W-76
W-121
W-140
W-113
W-114
DetailedListofallpetitionerswithparticulars
Rajnandgaon
4
Gondia
Gondia
TumsarRd.
TumsarRd.
Tiroda
TumsarRd.
TumsarRd.
Gondia
TurnsarRd.
Tiroda Working Station
Tiroda
Itwari PartyNo.1:SeniorDivisionalCommercialManager.S.E.C.Rly,
PartyNo.2:ThroughGeneralSecretary,ParcelPorterSangathana,S.E.C.Rly.,Nagpur
3
BudharamNeelkanthThawkar
AnandramRanadharVerma
MahadeoSovindaMane
VasudeoSahadeoBante
SubhashRatiramIswarkar
BhauraoKulpatSelokar
RajeshWasudeoNagpure
DeepatNathujiLanjewar
MohanNarayanBurade
UmeshBhajandasGajhbhiye
SureshManikNavghare
SatishShidulalSahare
NameoftheWorkman
VijayNatthuNinawe
8
Sr.No.
2
4
inthe reference
2 1
1
8.
2. 3.3
9. 9
7. 7
5. 5
4.
6. 6
1.
10.10
12. 12
13. 13
11. 11 SI.
No.
WSMRAVANA 30 , 1934
[ PART - SC.stu ) ] 10
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
14-7-1995
9
From1-11-1994
From1-2-1995
From3-4-1995
From1-2-1995
From1-12-1994
From4-12-1994
From15-3-1995
From6-8-1995
From10-11-1994
Nil
Nil
Nil Nil
Nil
Nil
8
From8-11-1994Nil
From8-7-1995
From1-11-1994
From1-2-1995
From1-11-1994
From4-4-1995
From1-9-1995
From27-12-1995Nil
From1-11-1994Nil
From11-4-1995Nil
From23-12-1994
From1-11-1994
From8-4-1994
From1-12-1994
From13-2-1995
From1-12-1994
From1-12-1994Nil
From4-12-1994
From1-12-1994
From18-10-1994Nil
From3-7-1995
From10-4-1995Nil
From18-10-1994NE
Notmentioned
7
1994-95to2005
1994-95to2005
1994-95to2005
1994-95to2005
1994-95to2005
1994-95to2005
1994-95to2005
1994-95to2005
1994-95to2005
1994-95to2005
1994-95to2005
1994-95to2005
1994-95to2005
1994-95to2005
1994-95to2005
1994-95to2005
1994-95to2005
1994-95to2005
1994-95to2005
1994-95to2005
1994-95to2005
1994-95to2005
Nil Nil
Certificate
Certificate
Certificate
Certificate Certificate
6
Nil
Nil Nil
Nil
Nil
Nil 1.Card
1.Card
I.Card
1.Card
L.Card
I.Card 1.Cardand certificate
1.Card
1.Card
I.Card
1.Card
I.Card
1.Card 5
Notfiled
Notfiled
W
W-86
W-126
W-85
W-198
W-100
W-83
W-127
W-187
W-217
W-118
W-167
W-191
W-119
W-123
W-186
W-155
W-105
W-117
W-120
W-138
W-81
BhandaraRd.
BhandaraRd.
1
Gondia Gondia TumsarRd.
Gondia
TumsarRd.
TumsarRd.
Gondia
Gondia
Gondia
TumsarRd.
Gondia
Firoda
TumsarRd.
Gondia
TumsarRd.
Gondia
Tiroda
Gondia
Tiroda
Gondia
Tiroda
Tirodu Baraskar
3
RamchandraMahadeoJanbandhu
BramhanandFattujiMeshram
UmashankarAsaramShende
BramhanandNagoBurde
GyaneshwarHaridasRaut
KoteshwarGopalraoJeeru
RavindraBaliramDhok
MahadeoRamchanderji
MahendraPandurangSinganjode
ShriramHariNavghare
PanneruVijayShekharRao
PrakashDuryodhanTijare
KrishnaRahesraoKadao BhasratDawadujiBudhe
PrakashNarayanTijare
SanjayYeshwantAtkari
SanjayHiralalYadav
RajeshJanglujiMeshram
DiwaruBajiraoWaghmare AshokShriramShyamkumar
UmraoMahadeoChaudhary
VikasMitaramBhamarde
VinodJagdishMeshram
ArunSamraoRokade
15
17
16
14
20
22
18
25
36
21
34 35
31
37 15.
14.
19.19
16.
23.23
17.
18.
26.26
27.27
29.29
24.24
20.
22.
25.
30.30
32.32
33.33
21.
28.28
31.
34.
35.
37.
5203 भारत का राजपत्र अगस्त 21 , 2010 / श्रावण 30 , 1932
[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]
10
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Approx.more than7years
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
9
From28-1-1995
From1-12-1994
From1-11-1994
Nil
Nil
Nil
Nil
Nil
Nil
Nil Nil Nil
Nil
From1-10-1996 to31-6-2004
8
From1-11-1994Nil
From1-2-1995Nil
From1-11-1994Nil
From6-11-1994Nil
From2-2-1995
From10-1-1995Nil
From20-10-1995Nil
From27-7-1995
From1-11-1994Nil
From28-1-1995
From1-12-1994
From5-1-1995
From13-4-1995
From1-1-1995
From20-12-1994
NotmentionedNil From10-4-1994
From1-11-1994
NotmentionedNil
Notmentioned From1-11-1994
Notmentioned
Notmentioned
7
1994-95to2005
1994-95to2005
1994-95to2005
1994-95to2005
1994-95to2005
1994-95to2005
1994-95to2005
1994-95to2005
1994-95to2005
1994-95to2005
1994-95to2005
1994-95to2005
1994-95to2005
1994-95to2005
1994-95to2005
Nil
Nil
Nil Nil
Nil
Nil Nil Nil
Certificate
6
Nil
Nil Nil
Nil Nil
Nil
Nil
Nil
Nil
Nil
Nil Nil
Nil
Nil
Nil
Nil
Nil
I.Card
I.Card
1.Card
1.Card& Certificate
1.Card
Notfiled Notfiled
5
Notfiled
Notfiled
Notfiled
W-147
W-199 Notfiled
W-141
W-143
W-218
Notfiled
W-153
W-82
W-215
W-213
W-170
W-183
W-137
W-128
W-124
W-192
W-129
Rajnandgaon
BhandaraRd.
BhandaraRd.
TumsarRd.
TumsarRd.
Gondia
TumsarRd.
TumsarRd.
Gondia
Gondia
TumsarRd.
Gondia Gondia
Gondia
Gondia
Gondia
Gondia
TumsarRd.
4
Gondia Tiroda
Tiroda
Tiroda Tiroda
RadheyshyamSitaramBawane 3
NumeshwarPyarelalSahu
MahendraSukharamYadav
MangeshNathaUkey
GautamGovindraoThakur
KailashSakaruMahule
ShriramSubairamJaiswar
RameshDashrathDewangan
ManishMaheshchandSaxena
RakeshChamanDohane
PrakashEknathGawande
MohanPurushottamRao
DeepkarJangaliMeshram(Gedam)
DeepakNarayanRaut
NareshGopalPadore
PrakashPremlalMendhe
MadanBalkaranKhairba
VasantYadavraoBarsagade
BandyaRamajiManwatkar
MilindJayaramBowate
SripatHemrajSalawane
BisanKawaduThawkar
ArunMadhukarBarsagade
57
52
54
60
53
48 49 50
47
45
51
42
44
39
38
43
41
2
58.58
56.56
59.59
55.55
1
60.
54.
57.
46.46
52.
53.
42.
44.
45.
48.
49.
50.
47.
51.
40.40
43.
38.
41.
39.
5204
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 21 , 2010 / SHRAVANA 30 , 1932
PART II -SEC . 3 ( ii ) ] 10
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
9
From1-9-1994
From1-1-1995
From16-9-1994
From16-11-1994
From1-1-1994
From16-10-1994
Nil Nil
Nil Nil
Nil
8
From1-2-1995Nil From16-10-1994Nil
From1-11-1994Nil
From16-10-1994
From23-10-1994Nil From1-10-1994Nil
From25-3-1995
From16-10-1994Nil
From16-10-1994Nil
From18-10-1994Nil
From23-10-1994Nil From16-10-1994
From18-10-1994Nil
From1-1-1995
From16-10-1994Nil
From16-10-1994Nil
From16-10-1994
From16-11-1994
From16-10-1994
From1-10-1994
From1-10-1994
From16-10-1994From25-10-1994
Notmentioned
Notmentioned
NotmentionedNil
7
1994-95to2005
1994-95to2005
1994-95to2005
1994-95to2005
1994-95to2005
1994-95to2005
1994-95to2005
1994-95to2005
1994-95to2005 1994-95to2005 5to2005
1994-95to2005
1994-95to2005
1994-95to2005 1994-95to2005
1994-95to2005
1994-95to2005
1994-95to2005
1994-95to2005
1994-95to2005
1994-95to2005
Nil
Nil Nil
Nil
Nil
Certificate
6
Nil Nil
Nil
Nil
Nil
Nil
Nil
Nil
Nil
Nil
Nil
Nil
Nil
1.Card
1.Card
I.Card
I.Card
I.Card
1.Card
I.Card
I.Card
1.Card
1.Card
I.Card
5
Notfiled
Notfiled
W-110
W-107
W-178
W-173
W-135
W-174
W-216
W-139
W-109
W-112
W-77
W-188
W-172
W-108
W-111
W-136 W-106
W-197
BhandaraRd.
BhandaraRd.Notfiled
BhandaraRd.
BhandaraRd.W-195
BhandaraRd.
BhandaraRd.W-196
BhandaraRd.Notfiled
BhandaraRd.Notfiled
BhandaraRd.
Kamptee Kamptee Kamptee
Kamptee
Kamptee
Kamptee
Kamptee
Kamptee
Kamptee Kamptee
Kamptee
Kamptee
Kamptee
Kamptee
Kamptee
Kamptee
4
3
RadheshyamKalluGondhar
ArvindkumarAmbikaprasadTiwari
ManojkumarJagdishprasadShukla
NandkishoreChimanGajbhiye
HarikrishanNatthujiBhure SunilkumarHariprasadYadav
MahendraDaulatraoRamteke
DevendraBhagwandasRangari
FulchandArjunRahangdale
DeepakNagoraoKathane
SatnamRatansingh
HansrajShivajiKhandekar
KeshavPandurangMasram JagdishSewakramThaware
SecondListasperreferenceNo.L-41011/9/99-IR(B-I)dt.16-8-1999.
RajeshKeshaoWasnik
KanehaRamprasadGupta
SanjayShalikramNarwadiya
SanjayMahadeoJinde
NageshPralhadGajbhiye
ShivaBhadarkaMeshram RajeshSamarthBansod
VikasBakaramaFedre
ArunBaburaoWaghade
ArunRamlalWanjari
N.ShreeNiwasrao
72
70
74
64
75
63
69
73
78
71
77
82 83
81 2
1
79.79
76.76
84.84 66.66
68.68
72.
70.
74.
75.
78.
80.80
62.62
67.67
69.
71.
85.85 65.65
77.
61.61
63.
64.
81.
82.
83.
73.
5205 भारत का राजपत्र अगस्त 21, 2010/ श्रावण 30 , 1932
[भाग 11- खण्ड 3(ii) ]
Approx.more
Approx.more than4years
than8years
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
10
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
11-11-1994to 22-12-1998
1-4-1996to
31-6-2004
From11-1-1995
Notmentioned
N From1-11-1994
Nil
Nil
9
From4-12-1994 8
From28-1-1995Nil
From11-11-1995
From13-1-1995
From11-11-1994
From10-11-1994Na
From1-11-1994Nil
From10-11-1994Ni
From8-11-1994Ni
From1-11-1994Ni
From1-12-1994NI
Notmentioned
From1-11-1994
From1-11-1994
From1-12-1994
Notmentioned
Notmentioned
From16-11-1993NI
NotmentionedNi
From1-12-1994NG
NotmentionedNil
NotmentionedNil
Notmentioned
NotmentionedNil
1994-95to2005
1994-95to2005
1994-95to2005
1994-95to2005
1994-95to2005 7
1994-95to2005
1994-95to2005
1994-95to2005
1994-95to2005
1994-95to2005
1994-95to2005
1994-95to2005
1994-95to2005
1994-95to2005
1994-95to2005
Ni Nil
Nil
Nil
Nil Ni
Nil
NJ
Certificate
Certificate
Certificate
Nil
Ni
I.Card
Ni
1.Card
Nil Ni
Nil
Ni
Nil
6
Nil
Ni
Ni
1.Cardand
certificate
1.Card
Nil
1.Card
1.Card
1.Card
I.Cardand certificate
1.Card
W-214
Notfiled
Notfiled
W-103
W-102
W-194
Notfiled
Notfiled
W-184
W-151
Notfiled
Notfiled
Notfiled
W-125
W-190
W-200
5
W-79
W-163
Notfiled
W-142
W-116
W-189
W-115
W-175
Gondia
Gondia
Gondia
Gondia
Gondia
Gondia
Gondia
Gondia
Gondia
Tiroda
Tiroda
TumsarRd.
TumsarRd.
Tiroda
TumsarRd.
TumsarRd.
Tiroda
TumsarRd.
TumsarRd.
TumsarRd.
TumsarRd.
TumsarRd.
TumsarRd.
4
TumsarRd.
RameshwarSitaramLanjewar
RamkaranJogisterWaghmare
RajendraPrasadRamprasadPal 3
SaileshGovindraoPatil
SanjayMahadeoBorkar
RameshMurlidharLute
PrakashKewaldasRangari GhanshyamNatthuBiranwar
AvinashShuklalMohite
PramodDhondusaSaoji
AbhimanIstaruChoudhary
SureshBaburao
KashiramSitaramSathawane
AnilChandrabhanMeshram
DeelipNathujiDongre
AnilKadaduPadole
MarotiKashiramKamble
SanjayChotelalYadav
AnilVithobaKothangale
AnisKhanRahimKhan
RajuSahadeoShende
AjaySambhajiGajhbiye
M.FakruddinMalilMohd.
AjayChotelalYadav
108 109
107
106
105
104
101
97
95
93 94
92
89
91
88
87
2
108.
109.
106.
107.
105.
99.99
104.
103.103
102102
98.98
9696
100.100
94.
95.
101.
97.
92 93.
90.90
91.
89.
88.
1 86.86
87.
3099161110-19 5206
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 21 , 2010 / SHRAVANA 30 , 1932
[ PART II- SEC . 3 ( ii ) ] 10
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified From3-2-1995
From19-1-1995
From17-2-1995
From23-6-1995
From4-4-1995
From1-4-1995
From23-6-1995
Nil
Nil Nil Nil
Nil
Nil
Nil
Nil
9
8
From1-2-1995
From28-1-1995Nil
From28-1-1995
From28-1-1995
From3-2-1995
From3-2-1995
From13-2-1995
From3-4-1995
From28-1-1995Nil
From21-3-1995Nil
From3-2-1995
From24-3-1995Nil
From7-7-1995Nil
From18-6-1995Nil From3-2-1995
From10-4-1995
From28-6-1995
From28-6-1995
From28-6-1995Nil
From14-2-1995
From23-6-1995
From17-5-1995Nil
From28-6-1995Nil
From29-6-1995Nil
From23-6-1995
7
1994-95to2005
1994-95to2005
1994-95to2005
1994-95to2005
1994-95to2005
1994-95to2005
1994-95to2005
1994-95to2005
1994-95to2005
1994-95to2005
1994-95to2005
1994-95to2005
1994-95to2005
1994-95to2005
1994-95to2005
1994-95to2005
1994-95to2005
1994-95to2005
1994-95to2005 1994-95to2005
1994-95to2005
Nil
Nil
Nil
Nil Certificate
Certificate
Certificate
Certificate
Certificate
Certificate
6
Nil Nil Nil
Nil
Nil
Nil
Nil
Nil
Nil
Nil
1.Card
I.Cardand certificate
I.Card
1.Card
I.Card
I.Card
1.Card
I.Card
1.Card 5
Notfiled
Notfiled
Notfiled
Notfiled
Notfiled
W-203
W-73
W-88
W-93
W-101
W-89
W-171
W-185
W-157
W-168
W-84
W-104
W-97
W-92
W-148
W-205
W-181
W-78
W-94
W-146
Gondia
4 Gondia
Gondia Gondia
Gondia
Gondia
Gondia
Gondia
Gondia Gondia
Gondia
Gondia Gondia
Gondia
Gondia
Gondia
Gondia Gondia Gondia
Gondia
Gondia
Gondia
Gondia
Gondia
Gondia
3
NageshwarraoVirRaju
MadhusudhanLaruramUikey
ShrikrishnaRamajiSathawane
IshwarsinghGokulsinghMadavi
ChakradharGaibhjye
OmprakashMarotiMane SriniwasVeerRajuCh.
ShaileshShrawanBagade
BapatraoArjanBansod
PrakashBashorilalYadav
ShyamalkumarVishwanathModak
MohapatBakaramMuly MaheshPrajapati
RakeshFakirchandSawaitul
PawankumarkishorilalDhare
SanjaykumarShambhuYadav
AshokGovindaMisar
AshokMansaramChandankar
AbdulKalamSheikh
NathuMahadeoBorkar
GirishShankarDhawale
SurajKarudasKathane
SunilKumarpremlalDhurve
VijayAasaramLanjewar
RajuNatthujiDongre
117
112
110
118
127
113
111
116
123
128
134
120 122
121
2
1
26.126
10.
12.
15.115
22.
14.114
24.124
11.
19.119
29.129
33.133 17.
30.130
32.132 13.
16.
23.
27.
28.
34.
18.
25.125
31.131
20.
21.
10
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified Notspecified
Notspecified
From1-1-1995
From1.4.1995
From25-11-1995
Nill
Nil
Nil Nil Nil
Nil
Nil
Nil Nil
Nil
Nil
Nil
9
From4-10-1995
8
From1-9-1995
From1-2-1996Nil
From29-6-1995Nil
From8-8-1995
From2-10-1995
From28-6-1995Nit
From13-7-1995
From30-9-1995Nil
From3-2-1996 From28-6-1995
From13-7-1995
From26-9-1995
From28-11-1995Nil
From3-2-1996
From23-3-1995Nil From23-7-1995
From30-10-1995
From28-11-1995Nil
From1-9-1995Nil
From15-8-1995Nil
From25-11-1995
Notmentioned
Notmentioned
7
1994-95to2005 1994-95to2005
1994-95to2005
1994-95to2005
1994-95to2005 1994-95to2005
1994-95to2005
1994-95to2005
1994-95to2005
1994-95to2005
1994-95to2005
1994-95to2005
1994-95to2005
1994-95to2005
1994-95to2005
1994-95to2005
1994-95to2005
1994-95to2005
Nil
Nil
Nil
Nil
Nil
Nil Certificate
Nil
Nil
Nil
Nil
Nil Nil Nil
Nil
Nil
Nil
Nil
Nil
Nil
I.Card
1.Card
1.Card
1.Card
1.Cardand certificate
1.Card
I.Cardand certificate
I.Card
1.Card
5
Notfiled
Notfiled
NotfiledNil
Notfiled
Notfiled
Notfiled W-95
W-166
W-98
W-149
W-87
W-152
W-144
W-99
W-182 W-145
W-204
W-150
W-179
W-201
W-90
W-72 W-156
W-180
Rajnangaon 4 Gondia Gondia
Gondia
Gondia
Gondia
Gondia
Gondia
Gondia
Gondia
Gondia
Gondia
Gondia
Gondia
Gondia
Gondia
Gondia
Gondia
Gondia
Gondia Gondia Gondia
Gondia 11
HanumantraoBaburaoChandankarGondia
3
RavishankarPremchandBathwa
RamkrishnaSakharamBohare
AnantkumarDomajiKhobragade
IshwarraoChhinnaraoRashkatta
RavindraAnandraoThalal
BhagwanSadashivThawkar
BhushanGaneshSahare
ShankarJivlaneMeshram
JitendraDashrathDamahe
RameshNakaramjiGomase
RakeshDeolalMadavi
GaneshRaojiBorkar
VikashMitaramBhamarde
RajeshAtmaramSupatkar
ShivajiPanjabraoKhapre
TejramBalaramTulsikar RajeshDeolalMadavi
ParasManoharMendekar
ManojParasramMeshram
NavinRajaramThawre
ParasGyaniramBorkar
SunilJairamRamteke
RaviTejramRaut
146
148
154 155 156 142
152
139
144
147
153
135
149
140
145
157 137
143
150
138
141
2
58.158
54.
42.
147
44.
148
36.136
52.
55.
56.
43.
45.
46.
39. 40.
49.
35.
53.
38.
41.
150.
57. 37.
:51.151 17
ΓΑΚΙ 11 - SE 10
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspeecified Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
9
Nil Nil
Nil
Nil
Nil
Nil
Nil Nil
Nil
Nil Nil
Nil
Nil Nil
Nil
8
From27-4-1995Nil
From3-6-1995Nil
From1995
From8-4-1994Nil
From3-6-1995
From13-9-1995
Notmentioned
NotmentionedNit
Notmentioned
Notmentioned
NotmentionedNil
NotmentionedNil
Notmentioned
Notmentioned
Notmentioned
Notmentioned
NotmentionedNil
NotmentionedNil
Notmentioned
Notmentioned
Notmentioned
Notmentioned
Notmentioned
NotmentionedNil 1994-95to2005
1994-95to2005
1994-95to2005
1994-95to2005
1994-95to2005
1994-95to2005
1994-95to2005
1994-95to2005
1994-95to2005
1994-95to2005
1994-95to2005
1994-95to2005
1994-95to2005
1994-95to2005 7
Nil Nil
Nil
Nil Nil Nil
Nil
Nil
Nil
Nil 6
Nil
Nil
Nil
Nil Nil
Nil
Nil Nil
Nil
Nil
Nil
Nil
Nil
Nil
Nil
Nil Nil Nil
Nil I.Card
1.Card
I.Card
1.Card
5
Notfiled
Notfiled
Notfiled
Notfiled
Notfiled Notfiled
W-164
W-131
W-220
W-134
W-209
W-223
W-211
W-177
W-219
W-162
W-193
W-159
W-160
W-221-
W-161 W-80
W-158Nil
W-206
Rainanqaon
Rajnangaon
Rajnangaon
Rajnangaon Rajnangaon
Rajnangaon
Rajnangaon
4
Itwari
Itwari
Itwari
Itwari
Itwari
Itwari
Itwari
Itwari Itwari
Itwari
Itwari
Itwari
Itwari
Itwari
Itwari Itwari
Itwari
3
MoreshwarMasboinwar
DamodharKothangale
MadhukarRamajiMeshram
DushyantBhartialDewangan
ManiklalRaghuberDewangan
ShyamlalRambaranRaut
SandeepDamodarBudhe
DevidasHariMadame
JitendraBaldeoChauhan
KeshavVishwanathKove
KishoreMarotiMeshram
PramodShriramKhobragade
SharadUdaramChware
DeepakDeomanBharne
SheikhBabbu SanjayDomajiKhobragade
DineshShamraoIngole
RajeshShripatGedam
AnandNaidu
RajeshDamodarPande
SheikhRafiqueSheikhGaffur
JairamShyamrao
GopalBudhramRaut
JalilSattarBeg
2
179
167
169 170
172
159 160
164
174
177
173
163
165
178 161
171
181 1
60.
75.175
76.176
64. 65.
70.
80.180 62.162
66.166
67.
68.168
74.
82.182
72.
73.
77.
79. 63.
59.
78.
71.
69.
61.
81.
भारत का ९ ५ ला 21 , 2010/11 JU , 1734
भाग 11- - खण्ड 3 ( 11 ) ]
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified 10
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
1995to2005
From1-11-1994
From12-10-1994
Nil Nil
Nil
Nil
Nil
Nil
Nil
Nil Nil Nil
Nil Nil
Nil
9
8
NotmentionedNil
NotmentionedNil
Notmentioned
Notmentioned
Notmentioned
Notmentioned
Notmentioned
Notmentioned
Notmentioned
Notmentioned
Notmentioned
Notmentioned
Notmentioned
Notmentioned
Notmentioned
Notmentioned
Notmentioned
Notmentioned
Notmentioned
7
1994-95to2005
1994-95to2005
1994-95to2005
1994-95to2005
1994-95to2005
1994-95to2005
1994-95to2005
1994-95to2005
1994-95to2005
1994-95to2005
1994-95to2005
1994-95to2005
Nil
Nil
Nil
Nil
Nil
Nil Nil
6
Nil Nil
Nil
Nil
Nil
Nil
Nil Nil
Nil
Nil
Nil Nil
Nil
1.Card Nil
ICardand certificate
1.Cardand certificate
ICard
I.Cardand certificate
5
Notfiled Notfiled
Notfiled
Notfiled
Notfiled
Notfiled
Notfiled
W-207
W-165
W-74
W-75
W-169
W-210
W-133
W-176
W-222
W-212
W-132
W-208
Itwari
Itwari
Itwari 4
Itwari Itwari
Itwari
Itwari
Itwari
Itwari
Itwari
Itwari Itwari
Itwari
Itwari
Itwari
Itwari
Itwari
Itwari
Itwari
3
MahendraRamlochanShukla
PrabhakarRamchandraGoghate
RavindraBaburaoWasnik
ManoharShyamraoIngole
JitendraDomajiRangari LaxmanYadavraoSawarkar
KulpathTikaram
RoshanMurlidharJanbandhu
GajananNagoraoShove
ShankarVitthalNarnarware
BapudasVithobaKove
SharadHaridasLonare
AshokRaghunathUkey
SachinShyamrao
KavtikFakiraMeshram
AbhayNipane
BabanDaulatYadav
SarjuDineshSarkar
VijaylalajiPanchabudhe
200
199 186
197 198
196
194
201
192 193
190
189
191
188
185
187
184
183
2
1
195.195
192.
198.
194.
190.
199.
200. 188. 189.
196.
197.
201. 83.
186. 187.
193.
184.
185.
191.
11
larisation
Whether
entitled forregs-
10
Total
working days
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
9
Nil
Nil
Nil Nil
Nil Nil
Nil
Nil
Nil
Nil Working period asper certificates
Nil
Nil Nil
Nil
8
From1-12-1994
From1-2-1995
From1-11-1994
From8-6-1995
From1-11-1994
From27-7-1995
From27-12-1995
From1-12-1994
From18-10-1994
From1-12-1994
From20-10-1995
From1-11-1994
Notmentioned
Notmentioned Workingperiod asperlistofthe reference
7
1994-95to2005
1994-95to2005
1994-95to2005
1994-95to2005
1994-95to2005
1994-95to2005
1994-95to2005
1994-95to2005
1994-95to2005
1994-95to2005
1994-95to2005
1994-95to2005
1994-95to2005
Nil Verses
Annexure-B
tionand
DocumentsWorking withdescrip-periodasper affidavit
NagpurDivisionNagpur
Ref:CaseNo.36/2002
exh.No.
Nil
Nil
Nil
Nil Nil Nil
Nil
Nil
Nil
Nil
Nil Nil
Nil
Nil
6
5
Affidavit Exhibit No.
W-202
W-140
W-155
W-153
W-218
W-198
W-138
W-217
W-213
W-170
W-215
W-141
W-143 PartyNo.1:SeniorDivisionalCommercialManagerS.E.C.Rly.
4
BhandaraRd.
BhandaraRd.W-137
TumsarRd.
TumsarRd.
Gondia
TumsarRd.
TumsarRd.
TumsarRd.
Gondia
TumsarRd.
Gondia
Gondia
Gondia
Working Staion
Gondia PartyNo.2:ThroughGeneralSecretary,ParcelPorterSangathana,S.E.C.Rly.,Nagpur
DetailedListofallpetitionerswithparticularswhohavefiledaffidavitsbutnodocuments
3
BramhanandNagoBurde
GyaneshwarHaridasRaut
RamchandraMahadeo
Janbandhu
MangeshNathaUkey
RameshDashrathDewangan
KailashSakaruMahule
MadanBalkaranKhairba
MohanPurushottamRao
DiwaruBajiraoWaghmare
RakeshChamanDohane
ManishMaheshchandSaxena NameoftheWorkman
MohanNarayanBurade
UmeshBhajandasGajhbhiye
SripadHemrajSalawane Sr.No.
12 29
429
12
319
636
532
950
745
848
1254
1051
1153
1356
1458 Sl.
No.inthe refer- ence 5211 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]
भारत का राजपत्र अगस्त 21 , 2010/ श्रावण 30 , 1932
11
10
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Nil Nil
Nil
Nil
Nil Nil
Nil Nil
Nil
Nil
Nil
Nil
Nil
Nil
Nil
9
Nil Nil Nil
Nil Nil
Nil
Nil
8
From28-6-1995
From13-7-1995Nil
From28-6-1995 From1-2-1995
From1-12-1994
From1-11-1994
From28-1-1995
From28-1-1995
From18-6-1995
From13-7-1995
From23-10-1994
From28-6-1995
From16-10-1994
From16-10-1994
From18-10-1994
From23-10-1994
From16-10-1994
From28-6-1995
Notmentioned
Notmentioned
Notmentioned
Notmentioned
Notmentioned
7
1994-95to2005
1994-95to2005
1994-95to2005 1994-95to2005
1994-95το2005
1994-95to2005
1994-95to2005
1994-95to2005
1994-95to2005
1994-95to2005
1994-95to2005
1994-95to2005
1994-95to2005
1994-95to2005
1994-95to2005
1994-95to2005
1994-95to2005
1994-95to2005
1994-95to2005
1994-95to2005
1994-95to2005
1994-95to2005
N
Nil
Nil
Nil
Nil
Nil
Nil Nil
Nil
Nil
Nil
Nil
Nil Nil
Nil
Nil
Nil 6
Nil
Nil
Nil
Nil
Nil
Nil
Nil
5
W-147
W-163
W-203
W-148
W-145
W-204
W-146
W-205
W-151
W-178
W-135
W-152
W-156
W-157
W-199
W-216
4
BhandaraRdW-196
BhandaraRdW-197
BhandaraRdW-195
BhandaraRd.W-136
Kamptee BhandaraRd.W-139
Kamptee
Kamptee
TumsarRd.W-142
TumsarRd.
Gondia
Gondia
TumsarRd.W-200'
Gondia
Gondia
TumsarRd.
Gondia
Gondia'
Gondia
Gondia
Gondia
3
HanumantraoBaburaoChandanGondia
MadhusudhanLaruramUkey
RavishankarPremchandBathwaGondia
GhanshyamNatthuBiranwar
OmprakashMarotiMane
HarikishanNatthujiBhure
MahendraSukharamYadav
DevendraBhagwandasRanga
MohapatBakaramMuly HansarajShivajiKhandekar
RakeshDeolalMadavi
MaheshPrajapati
KeshavPandurangMasram
ManojkumarJagdishprasad Shukla
KanehaRamprasadGupta
DeepakNagoraoKathane
RajeshDeolalMadavi SanjayShalikramNarwadiya
AnisKhanRahimKhan
RajuSahadeoShende
AnilChandrabhanMeshram
138
132
111PrakashBashorilalYadav
135
139
137
104
130
128
113
82
84
92 94
79
90
60
83
59NumeshwarPyarelalSahu
75
2
73
71
81 5212
[ PART II- SEC . 3 ( ii ) ] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 21 , 2010/ SHRAVANA 30 , 1932
10
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified,
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Na
Nil
Na
Nil
Nil
Nil Nil
Nil
Nil
Nil
Nil
Nil
Nil
Na NI
Nil
Ni
Nil
Ni
N
N
9
From4-10-1995
8
From1995
From1-9-1995
From27-4-1995
From3-6-1995
From23-6-1995
From8-8-1995
From30-10-1995
NotmentionedNil
Notmentioned
Notmentioned
Notmentioned
Notmentioned
Notmentioned
Notmentioned
Notmentioned
Notmentioned
NotmentionedNil
Notmentioned
NotmentionedNil
Notmentioned
Notmentioned
Notmentioned
Notmentioned
Notmentioned
7
1994-95to2005
1994-95to2005
1994-95to2005
1994-95to2005
1994-95to2005
1994-95to2005
1994-95to2005
1994-95to2005
1994-95to2005
1994-95to2005
1994-95to2005
1994-95to2005
1994-95to2005
1994-95to2005
1994-95to2005
1994-95to2005
1994-95to2005
1994-95to2005
1994-95to2005
1994-95to2005
1994-95to2005
Nil
Na Nil
Nil
Nil Nil
Na
Nil Nil
Nil
Nil
Nil
Nil
הא
Nil
Nil
Nil
Nil
Ni
Nil
Nil
Nil
Nil
Nil Nil Nil
NI
Nil
Nil
6
5
W-176
W-219
W-207
W-165
W-221
W-220
W-223
W-222
W-164
W-211
W-162
W-208
W-212
W-210
W-161
W-150
W-209
W-144
W-177
W-201
W-149
W-206
W-160
W-158
W-159
Rajnangaon
Rajnangaon
Rajnangaon
Rajnangaon
4
Gondia
Gondia
Gondia
Itwari
Itwari
Itwari
Itwari
Itwari
Itwari
Itwari
Itwari
Itwari
Itwari
Itwari
Itwari
Itwari
Itwari
Itwari
Itwari
Itwari
3
MoreshwarMasboinwar
IshwarraoChhinnaraoRashkaGondia
MadhukarRamajiMeshram
RavindraBaburaoWasnik
ManoharShyamraoIngole ShyamlalRambaranRaut
ShankarVitthalNarnarware
DushyantBhartlalDewangan
ShankarJivlaneMeshram
DevidasHariMadame
SharadHaridasLonare
RoshanMurlidharJanbandhu KishoreMarotiMeshram
KeshavVishwanathKove
ManiklalRaghuberDewangan
JitendraDashrathDamahe
SharadUdaramChware
DeepakDeomanBharne
DineshShamraoIngole
SheikhRafiqueSheikhGaffur
AshokRaghunathUkey
RajeshShripatGedam
GopalBudhramRaut
VijayLalajiPanchabudhe ParasGyaniramBorkar
4161
12
42159
60193
59192
61199
62200
54178
55180
57189
56185
47169
50173
52175
53176
58191
45163
46168
48170
49172
40146
51174
39142
43160
38141
41147 5213 भारत का राजपत्र अगस्त 21 , 2010/श्रावण 30 , 1932
[भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]
11
Whether
Notentitled
Notentitled
Notentitled
Notentitled
Notentitled
Notentitled
Notentitled
Notentitled
Notentitled
Notentitled
Notentitled
Notentitled
Notentitled
Notentitled
Notentitled
Notentitled
Notentitled
Notentitled
Notentitled
Entitled forregu- lazation
10
working
Total days
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified.
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Nil
Nil
Nil
Nil Nil Nil
Nil Nil Nil
Nil
Nil
Nil
Nil
9
Nil
Nil
Working period asper certificates
8
From25-3-1995
From18-10-1994
From5-1-1995Nil
From6-11-1994
From1-9-1995
From13-4-1995
From1-11-1994
From1-11-1994
From1-12-1994
From10-1-1995
From16-10-1994Nil
From13-3-1995
From20-12-1994
From1-1-1995
From15-11-1994Nil
Notmentioned
NotmentionedNil
Notmentioned
Notmentioned
Workingperiod asperlistofthe reference
Working periodasper affidavit
7
Nil
Nil
Nil Nil
Nil Nil Nil
Nil
Nil Nil Nil
Notmentioned
Nil
Nil
Nil Nil
Nil
Nil
Nil
Verses
Annexure-C
6
No.
Nil
Nil NagpurDivisionNagpur
Documents withdescrip- tionandExh.
Nil Nil Nil
Nil
Nil
Nil
Nil
Nil
Nil
Nil
Nil
Nil
Ref:CaseNo.36/2002
5
Notfiled
Notfiled
Notfiled
Notfilet!
Notfiled
Notfiled
Affidavit Exhibit No.
Notfiled
Notfiled
NotfiledNil
Notfiled
Notfiled
Notfiled
Notfiled
NotfiledNil
NotfiledNil
Notfiled
NotfiledNil
NotfiledNil
Notfiled
Listofpetitionerswhohavenotfiledaffidavit
PartyNo.1:SeniorDivisionalCommercialManagerS.E.C.Rly,
Rajnandgaon
Rajnandgaon
4
BhandaraRd.
Kamptee
BhandaraRd.
BhandaraRd.
BhandaraRd.
Kamptee
TumsarRd.
Gondia
TumsarRd.
TumsarRd.
TumsarRd.
Gondia
Gondia
Gondia
TumsarRd.
Gondia
Gondia
Working Station
PartyNo.2:ThroughGeneralSecretary,ParcelPorterSangathana,S.E.C.Rly.,Nagpur
3
RadheshyamSitaramBawane
ArvindkumarAmbikaprasadTiwari
AnandramRanadharVerma
KashiramSitaramSathawane
MahadeoSovindaMane
VasudeoSahadeoBante
N.ShreeNiwasrao
PrakashEknathGawande
GautamGovindraoThakur
ShriramHariNavghare
DeepakNarayanRaut
RajeshKeshaoWasnik
VikashBakaramaFedre
MilindJayaramBowate,
SureshManikNavghare
NareshGopalPadore
ShivaBhadarkaMeshram NameoftheWorkman
VikasMitaramBhamarde
ArunMadhukarBarsagade
ence
refer-
the
12 24
13 38
624
523
842
943
410
741
1469
1255
1678
1047
1885
1572
1780
1987
1357
1152
Sl.Sr.
No. No.in
3099 / 91 / 10-२० 5214
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 21 , 2010 / SHRAVANA 30 , 1932
PART II St. 3 ( ii ) ] .:
11
Notentitled
Notentitled
Notentitled
Notentitled
Notentitled
Notentitled
Notentitled
Notentitled
Notentitled
Notentitled
Notentitled
Notentitled
Notentitled
Notentitled
Notentitled
Notentitled
Notentitled
Notentitled
Notentitled
Notentitled
Notentitled
Notentitled
Notentitled
Notentitled Notentitled
Notentitled
Notentitled
Notentitled
Notentitled
Notentitled
Notentitled
10
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Notspecified
Nil
Nil
Nil
Nil
Nil
Nil
Nil
Nil
Nil
Nil
Nil
Nil
Nil Nil
Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil
Nil
9
Nil
Nil
Nil
Nil
Nil
Nil
Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil 8
From10-4-1995
From3-2-1995
From24-3-1995
From23-3-1995
From13-9-1995
From1-11-1994
From1-11-1994
From7-7-1995
From8-11-1994
From15-8-1995
From1-2-1995
From26-9-1995
From1-12-1994
From10-11-1994
From1-9-1995
From10-11-1994
From28-11-1995
Notmentioned
Notmentioned
Notmentioned
Notmentioned
Notmentioned
Notmentioned
Notmentioned Notmentioned
Notmentioned
Notmentioned
Notmentioned
Notmentioned
Notmentioned
Notmentioned 1994-95to2005
Nil
Nil
Nil
Nil Nil Nil Nil
Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil
Nil Nil
Nil
Nil Nil Nil Nil
Nil
Nil
Nil
Nil Nil
Nil
7
Nil
Nil
Nil
Nil Nil Nil
Nil
Nil Nil
Nil
Nil
Nil
Nil
Nil
Nil
Nil
Nil
Nil
6
Nil
Nil Nil Nil
Nil
Nil Nil
Nil
Nil
5
Notfiled
NotfiledNil
NotfiledNil
Notfiled
NotfiledNil
NotfiledNil
Notfiled
Notfiled
NotfiledNil
Notfiled
Notfiled Notfiled
Notfiled
NotfiledNil
Notfiled
Notfiled
Notfiled
Notfiled
Notfiled
Notfiled
Notfiled
NotfiledNil
Notfiled
NotfiledNil
Notfiled
Notfiled
Notfiled
NotfiledNil
Notfiled
Notfiled
Notfiled
Rajnandgaon
Rajnandgaon
4
TumsarRd.
Gondia
Gondia
Gondia
Gondia Gondia
Gondia
Gondia
Gondia
Gondia
Gondia
Gondia
Gondia
Tiroda
Gondia
Gondia
Tiroda
Tiroda
Itwari
Itwari Itwari
Itwari
Itwari
Itwari
ftwari
Itwari
Itwari
Itwari
Itwari
3
NageshwarraoVirRaju
ChakradharGasbhive
ShrikrishnaRamajiSathawane
RamkaranJogisterWaghmare
PrabhakarRamchandraGoghate BapatraoArjanBansod
RameshMurlidharLute
AvinashShuklalMohite
BapudasVithobaKove PramodDhondusaSaoji
PramodShriramKhobragade
SureshBaburao
VikashMitaramBhamarde
KulpathTikaram
GaneshRaojiBorkar
TejramBalaramTulsikar
SheikhBabbu
KavtikFakiraMeshram
ShivajiPanjabraoKhapre
AnandNaidu
SachinShyamrao
SanjayDomajiKhobragade
BabanDaulatYadav
AbhayNipane
JairamShyamrao
ManojParasramMeshram
AnilKadaduPadole
RajuNatthujiDongre
RaviTejramRaut
AnilVithobaKothangale
12
20%
2299
26103
23100
35156
24101
31133
2198
29122
27114
36157
28118
44183
50198
32143
34150
37158
30124
45184
25102
40167
41179
33149
38164
47187
42181DamodharKothangale
43182
46186
49194
39165
48190 भारत का राजपत्र अगस्त 21 , 2010 / श्रावण 30 , 1952
| भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVT . INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL - CUM - LABOUR COURT NAGPUR
Ref : Case No. 36/2002
Party No. 1 : Senior Divisional Commercial Manager S.E. C. Rly ,
Nagpur Division Nagpur
Verses Party No. 2 : Through General Secretary , Parcel Porter Sangathana , S.E.C. Rly. , Nagpur
Annexure-D
Particulars of the workman who have given evidence before the Tribunal after Remand
Name of the Workman Sr. no. Affidavit Exhibit No.
3
2
W- 72
Rajesh Atmaram Supatkar 2
W-73
Nathu Mahadeo Borkar W-74
3
Sarju Dinesh Sarkar
4
W- 75
Mahendra Ramlochan Shukla W-76
5
Rajesh Wasudeo Nagpure 6
W-77
Sunil Kumar Hariprasad Yadav 7
W-78
Vijay Aasaram Lanjewar 8
W-79
M. Fakruddin Malil Mohd .
9
W-80
JalilSattar Beg
10
W-81
Mahendra Pandurang Singanjode 11
W-82
Vasant Yadavrao Barsagade 12
W-83
Bharat Dawaduji Budhe 13
W-84
Ashok Govinda Misar W-85
14
Bramhanand Fattu Meshram 15
W-86
Mahadeo Ramchandraji Baraska W-87
16
Navin Rajaram Thawre 17
W-88
Suraj Karudas Kathane W- 89
Rakesh Fakirchand Sawaitul 18
W-90
Ravindra Anandrao Thalal 19
Arun Shamrao Rokade 20
W-91
Ashok Mansaram Chandankar 21
W-92
22
W-93
Ishwarsingh Gokulsingh Madavi
Sunil Kumar Premlal Dhurve 23
W-9-4
Sunil Jairam Ramteke 24
W-95
05
W-96
Subhash Ratiram Iswarkar W-97
Shyamal Kumar Vishwanath Moda
Bhushan Ganesh Sahare W-98
W-99
28
Ramesh Nakaramji Gomase
Ravindra Baliram Dhok 29
W-100
Pawan Kumar Kishorilal Dhare 30
W-101
Sailesh Govindrao Patil W-102
31
Working Station Rajnandgaon Gondia
Itwari
Itwari
Tiroda
Kamptee
Gondia
Tumsar Rd.
Rajnandgaon Bhandara Rd .
Gondia
Gondia
Gondia
Gondia
Gondia
Gondia
Gondia
Gondia
Gondia
Gondia
Gondia
Gondia
Gondia
Gondia
Gondia
Gondia
Gondia
Gondia
Gondia
Gondia
Gondia 19
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 21 , 2010/ SHRAVANA 30 , 1932
i
2
3
32
W-103
Rameshwar Sitaram Lanjewar 33
W-104
Abdul kalam sheikh Jamal 34
W-105
Umrao Mahadeo Chaudhary 35
W-106
Arun Ramlal Wanjari 36
W-107
Arun Baburao hade W-108
37
Jagdish Sewakram haware 38
W-109
Fulchand Arjun kaha gdale 39
W-110
San jay Mahadeo inde W- 111
4()
Mahendra Daulatrao Ramteke 41
W-112
Nandkishore Chiman Gajbhiye 42
W- 113
Vijay Natthu Ninawe 43
W- 114
Budharam Neelkanth Thawkar V1-115
Ajay Sambhaji Gajhbiye W-116
Maroti Kashiram Kamble W-117
Krishna Sheshram Kadao 40
47
W-118
Koteshwar Gopalrao Jeeru 48
W-119
Sanjay Hiralal Yadav 49
W-120
Prakash Narayan Tijare W- 121
50
Satish Shidulal Sahare 51
W- 122
Deepat . Nathuji Lanjewar W-123
52
Prakash Duryodhan Tijare 53
W- 124
Deepankar Jangluji Gedam 54
W- 125
Delip Nathuji Dongre 55
W-126
Rajesh Jangluji Meshram 56
W- 127
Sanjay Yeshwant Atkari 57
W-128
Bisan Kawadu Thawkar 58
W-129
Prakash Premlal Mele W-130
Bhaurao Kupat Selokar 60
W-131
Sandeep Damodar Budhe 61
W-132
Laxman Yadavrao Sawarkar 02
W-133
Gajanan Nagorao Shor 63
W-134
Rajesh Damodar Pande 64
W- 135
Deepak Nagorao Kathane 65
W-136
Keshav Pandurang Masram W-137
66
Madan Balkaran Khairba 67 W-138
Diwaru Bajirao Waghmare W -139
68
Sanjay Shalikram Narwadiya 69
W-140
Mohan Narayan Burade 70
W- 141
Kailash Sakaru Mahule 71
W-142
Ghanshyam Natthu Biranwar W-143
Manish Maheshchand Saxsena [ PART II- SEC. 3 ( ii ) ] 4
Gondia
Gondia
Gondia
Kamptee
Kamptee
Kamptee
Kamptee
Kamptee
Kamptee
Bhandara Rd.
Tumsar Rd.
Tumsar Rd .
Tumsar Rd.
Tumsar Rd.
Tumsar Rd .
Tumsar Rd .
Tumsar Rd .
Tiroda
Tiroda
Tiroda
Tiroda
Tiroda
Tiroda
Tiroda
Tiroda
Tiroda
Tiroda
Itwari
Itwari
Itwari
Itwari
Itwari
Kamptee
Bhandara Rd .
Bhandara Rd .
Bhandara Rd .
Bhandara Rd .
Tumsar Rd .
Tumsar Rd .
Tumsar Rd.
Tumsar Rd .
भारत का राजपत्र अगस्त 21 , 2010 / श्रावण 30 , 1932
[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]
2
3
1
W-144
73
Jitendra Dashrath Dhungayae 74
W-145
Ravishankar Premchand Bathwa 75
W-146
Madhusudhan Laruram Uikey W- 147
Mahendra Sukharam Yadav 76
W-148
Omprakash Maroti Mane 78
W-149
Shankar Jivlane Meshram W- 150
79
Paras Gyaniram Borkar 80
W- 151
Anil Chandrabhan Meshram 81
W- 152
Hanumantrao Baburao Chandan 82
Mohan Purushottam Rao W- 153
W- 154
83
Raju Natthuji Dongre 84
W- 155
Gyaneshwar Haridas Raut 85
W-156
Rajesh Deolal Madavi W- 157
86
Mahesh Prajapati
W- 158
87
Dushyant Bhartlal Dewangan W- 159
88
Maniklal Raghuber Dewangan
Sharad Udaram Chware 89
W-160
90
W-161
Sheikh Rafique Sheikh Gaffur
Keshav Vishwanath Kove W- 162
91
W- 163
Raju Sahadeo Shende 93
W-164
Dinesh Shamrao Ingole W-165
Ravindra Baburao Wasnik
Ramkrishna Sakharam Bohare 95
W-166
96
W- 167
Vinod Jagdish Meshram
Girish Shankar Dhawale 97
W-168
98
W-169
Jitendra Domaji Rangari 99
W-170
Rakesh Chaman Dohane W-171
100
Sriniwas Veer Raju Ch .
W- 172
101
Naqesh Pralhad Gajhbiye 102 W-173
Satnam Ratansingh
103
W-174
Radheshyam Kallu Gondhar W-175
104
Ajay Chotelal Yadav
W- 176
105
Manohar Shyamrao Ingole W-177
Kishore Maroti Meshram 106
107 W-178
Hansaraj Shivaji Khandekar W-179
108
Anantkumar Domaji Khobragade 109
Paras Manohar Mendekar W-180
110 W-181
Shailesh Shrawan Bagade W-182
111
Bhagwan Sadashiv Thawkar
Shriram Subairam Jaiswar W- 183
112
4
Gondia
Gondia
Gondia
Gondia
Gondia
Gondia
Gondia
Gondia
Gondia
Gondia
Gondia
Gond ia
Gondia
Gondia
Rajnangaon Rajnangaon Rajnangaon Itwari
Itwari
TumsarRd .
Itwari
Itwari
Gondia
Gondia
Gondia
Itwari
Gondia
Gondia
Kamptee' Kamptee
Kamptee
Tumsar Rd.
Itwari
Itwari
Kamptee
Gondia
Gondia
Gondia
Gondia
Gondia THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 21 , 2010 / SHRAVANA 30 , 1932
5218
2
1
3
113
W-184
Prakash Kewaldas Rangari 114
W-185
Sanjay Kumar Shambhu Yadav 115 W-186
Panneru Viiay Shekar Rao 116 W-187
Umashankar Asaram Shende 117 W-188
Rajesh Samarth Bansod 118 W-189
Sanjay Chotelal Yadav 119
W-100
Abhiman Istaru Choudhary 120 W-191
Ashok Shyamkuwar
121
W-192
Bandya Ramaji Manwatkar 122 W-193
Jitendra Baldeo Chauhan 123
W-194
Rajendra Prasad Ramprasad Pal 124 W-195
Harikishan Natthuji Bhure 125 W-196
Kanhayya Ramprasad Gupta 126 W-197
Manojkumar Jagdishprasad Shuk 127
W- 198
Ramchandra Mahadeo Janbandh W-199
128
Numeshwar Pyarelal Sahu W-200
129
Anis Khan Rahim Khan 130 W-201
Ishwarrao Chhinnarao Rashkatta 131 W- 202
Umesh Bhaiandas Gajhbhiye 132 W-203
Prakash Bashorilal Yadav 133 W-204
Rakesh Dewlal Madavi 134 W-205
Mohapat Bakaram Mule 135 W-206
Shyamlal Rambaran Raut W-207
136
Roshan Murlidhar Janbandhu 137 W-208
Shankar Vitthal Narnarware 138 W-209
Rajesh Shripat Gedam 139 W-210
Viiay Lalaji Panchabudhe 140 W-211
Moreshwar Masboinwar W-212
141
Sharad Lonare
142 W-213
Sripat Hemraj Satwane 143 W-214
Sanjay Mahadeo Borkar 144 W-215
Ramesh Dashrath Dewangan 145 W-216
Devendra Bhagwandas Rangari W-217
146
Bramhanand naga Burde 147
W-218
Mangesh Natha Ukey W-219
148
Deepak Deoman Bharne 149 W-220
Devidas Hari Madame 150 W-221
Madhukar Ramaji Meshram W-222
151
Ashok Raghunath Ukey 152 W-223-
Gopal Budhram Raut
[ PART II SEC. 3 ( ii ) | 4
Gondia
Gondia
Gondia
Gondia
Kampiee
Tumsar Rd .
Iumsar Rd .
Tiroda
Tiroda
Itwari
Gondia
Bhandara Rd .
Bhandara Rd .
Bhandara Rd .
Tumsar Rd.
Tumsar Rd .
Tumsar Rd ..
Gondia
Gondia
Gondia
Gondia
Gondia
Rajnandgaon
Itwari
Itwari
Itwari
Itwari
Itwari
Itwari
Tumsar Rd .
Gondia
Gondia
Kamptee
Tumsar Rd .
Gondia
Itwari
Itwari
Itwari
Itwari
Itwari [भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]
नई दिल्ली , 26 जुलाई , 2010
का. आ. 2072 , औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार एस.ई.सी.एल. के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच , अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण , जबलपुर के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 201/95 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 26-07-2010 को प्राप्त हुआ था।
[सं. एल -22012/ 211/1995 - आई आर ( सी- II ) ] अजय कुमार गौड़ , डेस्क अधिकारी New Delhi , the 26th July , 2010
S. O. 2072. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award ( Ref. No. 201/95 ) 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 SECL and their workman , which was received by the Central Government on 26-7-2010 .
[No. L - 22012/211 / 1995 - IR( C - II ) ]
AJAY KUMAR GAUR , Desk Officer
ANNEXURE
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL - CUM - LABOUR COURT , JABALPUR
NO . CGIT/LC / R/ 201/ 95
PRESIDING OFFICER: SHRI MOHD . SHAKIR HASAN The Secretary ,
M.P.Koyla Shramik Sangh ( CITU ) ,
5219
भारत का राजपत्र अगस्त 21 , 2010 / श्रावण 30 , 1932
2. The case of the Union/ workmen , in short is that the workmen namely Shri D.K.Ghosh , Tub Writer , Shri Choklal Tiberman and Shri Dharamjit , clipper were working with the nonapplicant/ management . They were charge- sheeted against the provision of certified standing order for misconduct of alleged assault and used of filthy languages alleged to have been committed by thein outside the colliery premises on 9-9-93 on the day of all India strike day . The workinen denied the charges and submitted their show cause but the management initiated a department proceeding . The Enquiry Officer conducted the enquiry violating the principle of natural justice . The Enquiry Officer conducted the enquiry exparte and on the basis of perverse finding contrary to the record held that the misconduct was proved against them . The Disciplinary authority thereafter passed the order of dismissal from the service w.e.f. 15-7-94 against them . It is submitted that the order of dismissal be held bad in law and the workmen be reinstated .
...Workman / Union
PostKotma Colliery, Distt . Shahdol (MP)
Versus
The Sub Area Manager ,
Jamuna and Kotma Area of SECL , Post Jamuna Colliery ,
Distt . Shahdol ( MP )
Management
AWARD
Passed on this 19th day of July - 2010/ 1. The Government of India , Ministry of Labour vide its Notification No.L - 220 12 /211 / 95 - IR ( C - II ) dated 16-11-95 has referred the following dispute for adjudication by this tribunal :-
" Whether the action of the Sub Area Manager , Kotma R.O of Jamuna & Kotma Area of SECL in dismissing Shri D.K.Ghosh , Tub writer , Shri Chotelal , Timberman and Shri Dharmjit , clipper ( all employed at Kotma colliery ) w.e.f. 15-7-94 is legal and justified ? If not , to what relief the workmen are entitled ? " 3. The management/ non - applicant appeared and filed Written statement . The case of the management , interalia , is that the workmen were working in Kotma colliery . It is alleged that on 9-9-93 , at about 3.15 P.M. the above named workmen alongwith one more workman chased Shri Ram Prasad , T.No. 1036 , Dresser and Shri Sitaram Gupta clipper near Pump Ghat , Kotma Colliery while they were returning home after their duties and the workmen Dharamjit and Chotelal caught hold Shri Ram Prasad. The workman Shri Ghosh assaulted him with stick and uttered filthy languages. They were chargesheeted . The workmen submitted their reply separately denying the charges . Reply were found unsatisfactory and departmental proceedings were initiated against all the three workmen separately appointing the same Enquiry Officer and Management Representative . The workman Shri D.K. Ghosh initially appeared along with co-worker . One witness Shri Ram Prasad was examined in his presence but the cross- examination was deferred for another day . Thereafter the said workman was absented for one reason or the other , Notice was sent but the same was refused to receive and therefore the notice was pasted on the notice board of the colliery . Even then Shri Ghosh did not appear and therefore the Enquiry Officer proceeded the proceeding exparte and the Management Representative ( in short M / R ) examined four more witnesses . The Enquiry Officer ( in short E.O ) closed the proceeding and submitted enquiry report holding therein that the charge stands proved against Shri Ghosh beyond doubt.
4. The further case of the management is that the workman Shri Dharamjit also appeared in the departmental proceeding and three witnesses were examined and cross- examined in his presence . Thereafter the evidence of the management was closed and the workman examined one witness in defence and no other witness was examined by him. The E.O after closing the enquiry submitted 5220
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 21 , 2010 / SHRAVANA 30 , 1932
enquiry report holding therein that the charge stands proved.
5. The further case of the management is that the workman Chbottelal also appeared alongwith co- worker . Three witnesses were examined in his presence and they were cross - examined and discharged. Thereafter the proceeding was adjourned . The workman Shri Lal and his co - worker were absent . The management examined Dr.B.V.Das . The E.O discharged the management witness and closed the proceeding as there was no prayer for defence . The E.O submitted the enquiry report holding therein that the charges stand proved against him . The Disciplinary authority considered the enquiry reports of all the three workmen separately and was convinced that the charges stand proved of grave and in serious nature against all the three workmen which warranted them to dismiss from the services . Accordingly the Disciplinary Authority passed the order of dismissal with immediate effect from 15-7-94 . In view of the above facts and circumstances , the punishment of dismissal is proportionate to the gravity of misconduct committed by them . It is submitted that the reference be answered in favour of the management .
6. The Industrial Dispute was raised by the Union/ workmen . Thereafter the Ministry referred a single reference of all the three workmen under the provision of section 10 of the Industrial Dispute Act, 1947. The then Tribunal considered that the reference was related to the dismissal of three workmen , separated the case in three cases on 2-4-96 and . registered as CGIT / LC / R / 201 ( A ) / 95 , CGIT/ LC / R/ 201 ( B ) / 95 and CGIT / LC / R / 201 ( C ) / 95 . Again the then Tribunal clubbed together all the three cases of the reference together on 6-10-06 and is numbered as CGIT/ 1.C /R/ 201/95 .
7. On the pleadings of the parties , the following issues are settled for adjudication .
I. Whether the departmental enquiry conducted against the workmen is valid , proper and legal ?
II . Whether the findings in the enquiry report were perverse?
III. Whether the orders of dismissal against the workmen are justified?
IV. To what relief the workmen are entitled ?
8. Issue No. 1
This issue is taken up as preliminary issue by the then Tribunal and after considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case as well as the documents of the departmental proceeding , it is held vide order dated 31-7-2001 that the DE conducted against the workmen is just and proper . It is further held that the management is not required to lead any more evidence to prove the
[ PART II-- SEC . 3 ( ii ) ] misconduct of the workmen in the case . Thus it is clear that this issue is already earlier decided. Accordingly this issue is answered .
9. Issue No.11
Before discussing the issue , it is pertinent to note that none of the parties have adduced any evidence before the Tribunal in support of their case rather the parties have only admitted all papers of all the three departmental proceedings in the case on 25-5-98 . Thus except the papers of the departmental enquiry which are admitted by the parties , there is no other evidence .
10. Now the important point is as to whether the question of perversity is to be seen of the findings of the enquiry report to determine the misconduct or not ? The learned Senior counsel for the management has submitted that the Tribunal does not sit in judgement on merits of the decision. It is not open to the Tribunal to re - appreciate and reappraise the evidence led before the Enquiry Officer and examine the findings recorded by the Enquiry Officer as a court of appeal and reach to its own conclusion . It is submitted that when it is decided as a preliminary issue that departmental enquiry is held proper and legal then now it is not open to see the perversity of the findings of the Enquiry Officer . The Learned Senior Counsel has himself relied upon a decision reported in ( 2008 ) 5 S.C.C. 55-4 , Usha Breco Mazdoor Sangh Versus Management of Usha Breco Ltd. And another wherein the Hon ble Apex Court has held---
"This case involved interpretation and application of Section 11 - A of the Industrial Dispute Act , 1947. Scope of Section 11 - A was considered in Firestone Type and Rubber Co. of India ( P ) Ltd. case , ( 1973 ) 1 SCC 813 wherein it was interalia held that even in cases where an enquiry has been held by employer and findings of misconduct arrived at , the Tribunal can , in view of Section 11 - A , differ from that finding in a proper case and hold that no misconduct is proved .
The issue involved in this case was whether the Labour Court ought to have reappreciated evidence and interfered with the punishment imposed on workmen when ititselfhad concluded that enquiry report was not perverse and domestic enquiry was held according to principles of natural justice .
Held:
Firestone Tyre and Rubber Co. of India ( P ) Ltd. case . ( 1973 ) I SCC 813 must be understood in the context in which it was rendered . Section 11 - A of the Act as interpreted by Firestone Tyre and Rubber Co. of India ( P ) Ltd. case must be applied at different stages . Firstly , when the validity or legality of the domestic enquiries is in question ; secondly, in the event the issue is determined in favour of the management no fresh evidence is requiredto {भाग 11- खण्ड 3 (ii)]
be adduced by it , whereas in the event it is determined in favour of workmen, subject to the request which may be made by management at an appropriate stage , it will be permitted to adduce fresh evidence before the Labour Court .
In the event , fresh evidence is adduced before the Labour Court by management the Labour Court will have jurisdiction to appreciate evidence . But, in a case where materials brought on record by Enquiry Officer fall for re-appreciation by the Labour Court , it should be slow to interfere therewith . It must come to a conclusion that the case was a " Proper " one therefor . The Labour Court shall not interfere with the findings of Enquiry Officer only because it is lawful to do so . It would not take recourse thereto only because another view is possible . Even assuming that , for all intent and purport , the Labour Court acts as an appellate authority over the judgment of enquiry officer, it would exercise appropriate restraint . It must bear in mind that enquiry officer also acts as a quasi -judicial body . Before it , parties are not only entitled to examine their respective witnesses , they can cross - examine witnesses examined on behalf of the other side . They are free to adduce documentary evidence . The parties as also the enquiry officer can also summon witnesses to determine thetruth . The Enquiry Officer can call for even other records. It must indisputably comply with basic principles of natural justice."
In the light of above guideline , the facts and circumstances of the case as well as the evidence of DE papers are to be examined . It is evident that no fresh evidence is examined in the case . The only DE papers are the documentary evidence in the case . It is also a fact that the then Tribunal has held on 31-7-2001 that the departmental enquiry is proper and legal . The then Tribunal has further held that the managtement is not required to lead any more evidence to prove the misconduct of the workman in the case. This shows that the then Tribunal had come to the conclusion that the misconduct is proved against the workmen and the findings of the Enquiry Officer is not perverse .rverse . However on perusal of the DE papers , it appears that the witnesses had supported the alleged occurrence and the doctor has also corroborated the injuries found on the body of the management witness Shri Ram Prasad. Such occurrence appears to be otherwise in connection with employment . I find that the findings of the Inquiry Officer was not perverse and therefore this issue is accordingly decided .
11. Issue No. III & IV
Now another question is as to whether the punishment to these workmen is proportionate to the misconduct proved against them . It is established from the evidences adduced before the Enquiry Officer that they indulged in the act of assault and intimation by entering into the act of criminal offence . Therefore I find that the panishment is not disproportionate to the misconduct 3099161 / 10-21
3441
भारत का राजपत्र अगस्त 21 , 2010/ श्रावण 30 , 1932
proved against them . These issues are decided against the Union/workmen and in favour of the management . Accordingly the reference is answered .
12. In the result , the award is passed without any order to costs .
13. 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, 26 जुलाई , 2010
का. आ. 2073.-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 (1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार एवं हिन्दुस्तान पेट्रोलियम कोरपोरेशन लिमिटेड 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 7/2003 ) को प्रन गित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 26-7-2010 को प्रा हुआ
[सं. एल -30011 /53/2002-७ , कमल बाखरू , डेस्क एम) ] New Delhi , the 26th July , 2010
S. O. 2073.-In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award ( Ref. No. 7/2003 ) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal - cum - Labour Court , No. 2 Mumbai now as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers lation to the management of Hindustan Petroleum Corpo . Ltd. , and theirworkman , which was received by the Centrai "mmen on 26-7-2010.
[No. 1-30011/53 / 2002 - IR (M ) ] KAMAL BAKTIRU , Desk Officer
ANNEXURE
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL NO. 2 , MUMBAI
PRESENT
A.A. LAD PRESIDING OFFICER
Reference No. CGIT - 2 / 7 of 2003
Employers in relation to the management of Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd.
1 . The General Manager ( P &A) . Hindustan Petroleum Co. Ltd. , Mahul Refinery, Chembur , Mumbai - 400074.
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 21 , 2010/ SHRAVANA 30 , 1932
2. The Managing Partner ,
M/ s. Subash Gardens ,
Shivram Building , Aziz Baug ,
Mahul Road , Chembur- 74 ,
Mumbai .
[PART II -SEC . 3 ( ii ) ] नई दिल्ली , 27 जुलाई , 2010
.... First Party
V/ s .
Their workman
The Secretary,
Mumbai Shramik Sangh ,
Sangharsh , Quarry Road , Bhandup ( West ) , Mumbai -400 078 .
....Second Party APPEARANCE :
For the Employer ( 1 ) : Mr. P.K. Raveendranathan , & Mr. B.D. Birajdar , Advocates.
(2) : Mr. J.H. Sawant , Advocate For the Workman : Dr. Armaity Irani , Advocate .
Date of passing the Award : 30-06-2010.
AWARD
The matrix of the facts as culled out from the proceedings are as under:
1. The Government of India , Ministry of Labour by its Order No.L - 30011 / 53 / 2002 - IR ( M ) dated 4th February , 2003 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 51 contract workmen employed by M/ s . Subash Gardens , a contractor engaged by HPCL. , Mumbai are entitled for leave with wages ? If not , to what relief the workmen concerned are entitled?
2. Claim Statement is filed by the Union at Exhibit 15 in support of subject matter referred in the Reference . Said is denied by the Ist Party by filing its reply at Exhibit 17. Issues were framed at Exhibit 18 and Reference was fixed for recording evidence of the Union .
3. Though opportunity was given to Union nobody appeared and led evidence . Said position lead me to answer the above Issues against the Union and proceed to pass the following order:
ORDER
Reference is rejected with no order as to its costs .
A. A. LAD , Presiding Officer Mumbai . 30th June , 2010
का. आ. 2074.-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में , केन्द्रीय सरकार एवं सैन्ट्रल बैंक ऑफ इंडिया 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 12/2009 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 27-7-2010 को प्राप्त हुआ था।
[सं. एल -12012/ 74/2008- आई आर ( बी-II ) ] अनिल कुमार शर्मा, अनुभाग अधिकारी New Delhi , the 27th July , 2010
S. O. 2074. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award ( Ref . No. 12/2009 ) ofthe Central Government Industrial Tribunal - cum - Labour Court , Erankulam now as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employees in relation to the management of Central Bank of India and their workman, which was received by the Central Government on 27-7-2010 .
[ No. L - 12012 / 74 /2008 - JR ( B - II ) ] ANIL KUMAR SHARMA , Section Officer
ANNEXURE
IN THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL CUM - LABOUR - COURT , ERNAKULAM Present : Shri.P.L.Norbert . B.A. , LL.B .. Presiding Officer (Tuesday the 8th day of June , 2010 / 18th Jashttam, 1932 )
I.D.12/2009
Workman : Shri . C.Rajagopalachari , Sree Kailas , Samrdhi Nagar - 56 Asramam , Quilon - 691002 .
By Adv . Shri . Manoj R. Nair .
Management : The Regional Manager, Central Bank of India . P.B.No.98 , Gopal Building, Thyvila Road ,
Thiruvananthapuram - 695001.
By Adv . Sri . Devan Ramachandran .
This case coming up for hearing on 1-6-2010 . this Tribunal - cum -Labour Court on 8-6-2010 passed. the follwing.
AWARD
This is a reference made under Section 10 ( 1 ) ( d ) of Industrial Disputes Act . The reference is:
[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]
"Whether the action of the management of Central Bank of India in compulsorily retiring Shri C. Rajagopalachari , Head Cashier of Kadappakada Branch , Kollam is proportionate considering the gravity of the offence committed by him on 8-5-2004 ? What relief the workman concerned is entitled for ? "
2. The facts of the case in brief are as follows : - The workman Sri . C. Rajagopalachari was the Head Cashier of Kadappakada Branch . Kollam District of Central Bank of India . While so , on 11-08-2004 he was given a charge sheet alleging that an amount of Rs.3500 remitted by a customer on 8-5-2004 was not accounted in the books of accounts of the bank and the money was misappropriated by him . The 2nd allegation is that he was in the habit of remaiming absent unauthorisedly . The workman submitted reply to the charge sheet. An enquiry was conducted and he was found guilty of the first charge . Though he filed an appeal he did not succeed .
3. According to the workman the findings are not based on evidence on record. The management has not proved the allegations . Material witnesses were not examined by the management . The witnesses required by the defence were not summoned . One of the material documents which was only a photostat copy was accepted and marked by the Enquiry Officer . The Psychiatric problems of the workman was not given due consideration either by the Enquiry Officer or by the Disciplinary Authority . The workınan has submitted application for voluntary retirement . That was not considered by the management . The workman is innocent and he is not guilty ofthe charges . The disciplinary authority did not hear him before findings of Enquiry Officer was accepted. The punishment imposed is disproportionate to the gravity of the offence .
4. According to the management the issue referred for adjudication is proportionality of punishment alone and hence the findings cannot be questioned . The misconduct alleged and proved is a gross misconduct and attracts the highest punishment under memorandum of settlement dated 10-03-2002 . At any rate the punisment of compulsory retirement is a lenient punishment . The Disciplinary Authority had considered the entire evidence on record before confirming the findings of Enquiry Officer . The workman was not able to prove that the mental problem alleged by him had affected his duties at the relevant time . There is no reason to interfere with the disciplinary action taken by the management .
5. In the light of the above contentions , the following points arise for consideration .
1. Are the findings sustainable ?
2. Is the punishment legal and proper?
5223
भारत का राजपत्र अगस्त 21 , 2010/ श्रावण 30 , 1932
6. The evidence consists of the oral testimony of MWI and documentary evidence of Ext . M1 Enquiry File .
7. Point No. 1 : --- The workman was Cashier at the time of the incident in Sakthikulangara Branch of Central Bank of India . Ext . ME - 12 is the charge sheet . Two charges were levelled against the workman . The first charge is regarding non accounting of Rs . 3500 handed over to the workman by one Ms. Valsala on 8-5-2004 for crediting it in the CC account of customer , M / s . Sakthi Stores and misappropriation of that amount by him . The 2nd charge is that he remained absent for 14 days from 2-6-2004 to 15-6-2004 . The 2nd charge is found not proved by the EnquiryOfficer.
8. Ext . DE6 is the reply to the charge sheet , thereby the workman denied the allegations and contended that his mental problems was also a reason for omission to account the money . Smt . Valsala who remitted Rs . 3500 came to know that money remitted by her was not accounted by the workrman when she visited the bank again . Hence she made a complaint , Ext . ME2 to the Manager on 11-6-2004 . This was 5 weeks after the remittance of the amount . Three days after the complaint on 14-6-2004 the currency of Rs . 3500 along with voucher was recovered from the cash counter by part time sweeper of the bank . The workman was on leave from 2-6-2004 to 16-4-2004. It is not known how the currency did not come to the notice of anyone so long for five weeks after the incident . The inoney and the voucher were seen kept in the pass book at the time of retrieval . Smı . Valsala got back the passbook from the Manager on 21-6-2004 after issuing a letter of acknowledgement ( Ext . ME - 11 ) .
9. The workman was the receipt cashier on 8-5-2004 when the money was remitted by the customer . The counter foil of the pay - in- slip was filled up , signed and cash received seal was affixed by the workman . Ext . ME - 3 is the counter foil of the pay - in- slip . It was handed over to the customer by the workman . MW1 , the Manager gave evidence in the enquiry that Ext . ME - 3 was filled up, signed and seal affixed by the workman . Ext . DE - 4 is the pay - in - slip of counter foil Ext.ME - 3 . According to MW1 the handwriting in Ext . ME- 3 and DE - 4 is that of the workman . The amount was not accounted in the cash receipt register of 8-5-2004 . It was the duty of the cashier to enter the amount received in the cash receipt register . Ext . ME - 5 is the cash receipt register and it does not contain entry of the amount on 8-5-2004 . Ext . ME -6 is the statement of account of the customer . It also does not reflect remittance of the amount in the account of the customer on 8-5-2004 . After entering the amount in the cash receipt register the cashier had to forward the voucher for scrolling to the concerned officer , He did not do so . Ext . ME - 4 is the scroll register print out which shows that the remittance was not scrolled . Thus in none of the books of accounts the amount remitted by the customer on 8-5-2004 is recorded , i.e. Ext . ME -4 to ME- 6.
5224
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: AUGUST 21 , 2010 / SHRAVANA 30 , 1932
In the light of this evidence the Enquiry Officer found that the amount was received by the workman who was the receipt cashier on 8-5-2004 . Since the amount was not recorded in the books of accounts it was found by the enquiry officer that the amount was misappropriated by the workman . No eral evidence on the defence side was adduced , but some documents were produced and they were marked as Ext. DE - 1 to 19. The defence was not able to establish in the enquiry that the allegations are false and he is innocent . The documents produced by the defence did not help him to disprove the allegations . There can be no doubt that the amount was received by the workman on 8-5-2004 . It was his duty to enter it in the cash receipt register and forward the voucher for the purpose of scrolling to the concerned officer . If there was omission he would have noticed it before the end of the day or at least on the next day . There was no possibility or probability for leaving the pass book with currency notes in the counter for a long period of 5 weeks without the notice of anyone in the bank.
10. The learned counsel appearing for the workinan submitted that it was a heavy day and there were many remittances . Due to heavy rush he might have omitted to record it in the cash receipt register. Besides he was suffering fron: agitated depression ( loss of memory ) since 2003. This also contributed to the omission in the work . Ext. DE -7 is a certificate issued by a psychiatrist of Kollam on 20-8-2004 . It shows that the workman was under treatment for agitated depression from 7-8-2003 . Ext . DE- d and 9 are prescriptions of the date7-3-2003 and 4-11- 2003. The medical certificate is of the date 20-8-2004 , three months after the incident . Exts . DE - 8 and 9 are only prescriptioins of 2003. The workman was not able to show in the enquiry that any time prior to 20-8-2004 he had informed the bank about the mental problem . There is no case either for the workman or for the management that the psychiatric problem had affected the duties of the workman any time prior to the incident . It is not enough simply to produce a medical certificate and contend that he was affected by loss of memory and he was under treatment, but he has to substantiate and establish his mental state by examining the doctor and proving the possibility of omission in duties . There was no such attempt and the same is pointed out by the disciplinary authority.
examir 11. The next contention of the union is that important witnesses like Smt . Valsala who remitted the money and the part time sweeper who found the money were not evamined by the management . Has the management the truth would have coine out . The workman cannot dictate the names of witnesses to be examined on management side . It is for the management to decide . The Enquiry Officer has pointed out that the defence was allowed to summon and examine both the complainant and the part time sweeper . The Enquiry Officer
Patil St.3 ( ii ) ] had given opportunity to the workman to obmon the complainant as well as the part time sweeper on the defence side if workman desired so . Accordingis the defence representative had sent letter to Smt . Valsaia on 12-11-2004 Exts . DE - 10 to DE - 128 are copy of the letter sent , postal receipts ( copy) and copies of two envelops remrned undelivered with endorsement . The management cannot be blamed for not examining Smt . Valsala , it the defence was not able to procure the witnesses on defence side it is not the fault of the management . So also the fan time Sweeper could not be brought on defence side .
12. It was submitted that the recovery of money will prove that the money was not misappropriated by the workman . But so long as it was the daty of the sorkman to account for the money and for 5 weeks the money was not seen by anyone in the office , go against the contention of the workman that he had no involvement in the incident . The workman did not suggest that the money was piamed by someone and made a farce of recovery
13. It was then submitted by the learned coasei fer the union that Ext . MELJ is only a photostan copy and ccsrld not have been received in evidence by the Enquiry Officer . It is to be noted that Ext.ME - 11 is only letter of Smt . Valsala acknowledging receipt of passbook which , was retained in the bank for the prupose of recording remittance and was given back on 21-06-2004 . It is not a material piece of evidence in proving the allegations . Even if ext . ME - 11 is ignored that will affect the case of the management . Moreover the strict rule of evidence is not applicable to enquiry.
14. It was then contended that the findings of L'aquiry Officer was accepted by the disciplinary authority without hearing the workman . This submission does not appear to be correct . The records show that on 30-03-2005 the workman submitted his written objection against findings ofEnquiry Officer . He did so when copy of report ofEnquiry Officer was forwarded to him by the disciplinary authorits on 15-03-2005 inviting his objection . It is thereafter that the findings were confirined and punishment was proposed and show- cause notice regarding proposed punishment was issued to the workman on 12-05-2005 . The opening paragraph of the show- cause notice dated 25-04-2005 reveals that the findings of Enquiry Officer were accepted by the disciplinary authority only after receiving and considering submission of the workman on the findings . The reasons for accepting the findings are narrated in page 2 of the show- cause notice . Ext.M1 Enquiry file contains the reply of workman to the charge sheet , the show - cause memo dated 25-04-2005 and the final order imposing the punishment after hearing the workman regarding proposeri punishment . Therefore that contention of the union also cannot stand .
15. The enquiry was conducted in full compliance with the principles of natural justice and in accordance [ भाग II- खण्ड 3( ii) ]
with the procedure . As long as the validity of enquiry is not challenged or is beyond challenge the scope for attacking the findings of Enquiry Officer , which is confirmed by the disciplinary authority , is limited. Unless the workman is able to show that there is absolutely no material at all on record to prove the allegations levelled against him he cannot succeed in assailing the findings . So far as the present case is concerned there is not only records to prove the allegations but more than enough records to substantiate the prosecution case . Hence I find that there is no infirmity in the findings .
16. Peint No.2 : The punishment imposed is compulsory retirement with superannuation benefits and without disqualification from future employment as per Clause 6 ( c ) of memorandum of settlement dated 10-04-2002 . It was submitted by the learned counsel for the workman that the punishment of compulsory retirement is punitive in nature and cannot be imposed . The learned counsel tried to find support for his submission in the decisions of Hon'ble Supreme Court reported in AIR 2001 SC 1109 State ofGujarat v . Umedbhai M. Patel , ( 1996 ) 5 SCC 103 Sukhdeo v . Commissioner Amravati Division and AIR 1992 SC 1020 Baikuntha Nath Das v . Chief District Medical Officer , Baripada . These were cases in which punishment of compulsory retirement was imposed not in pursuance of domestic enquiry or adverse remarks entered in confidential reports of the employee but for extraneous reasons . Therefore it was held that punishment of compulsory retirement was imposed as a punitive measure and is liable to be set aside . But in the instant case a domestic enquiry was conducted giving full opportunity to defend , the tindings of enquiry officer was subjected to careful scrutiny by Disciplinary Authority after inviting submissions of workınan and was once again considered by the Appellate Authority . Therefore the decisions are not applicable in the instant case . The punishment imposed is as per the provisions ofBipartite Settlement . There is no illegality in the punishment . The charge proved being serious in nature , any of the punishments narrated in Clause - 6 of the settlement could be imposed by the Disciplinary Authority . But a less severe punishment is actually imposed . Therefore there is no reason for this court to interfere with the punishment either.
In the result an award is passed finding that the action of the management in compulsorily retiring the workman from service is legal and justified and the workınan is not entitled for any relief.
The award will come into force one month after its publication in the official gazette .
Dicated to the Personal Assistant , transcribed and typed by her , corrected and passed by me on this the 8th day of June , 2010.
P.L .. NORBERT, Presiding Officer
5225
भारत का राजपत्र अगस्त 21 , 2010 / श्रावण 30 , 1932
Appendix
Witness for the workman
Witness for the management
Sachidananda Kumar K.-. Enquiry Officer .
Nil MWI Exhibit for the workman Exhibit for the management Enquiry File . MI Nil
नई दिल्ली , 27 जुलाई. 2010
का. आ. 2075, औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकारं 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 29/2000 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 27-07-2010 को प्राप्त हुआ था।
[सं. एल-20012 / 145/97- आई आर ( सी -1 ) ] रीता सिंह . अनुभाग अधिकारी New Delhi , the 27th July . 2010
S. O. 2075.- In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award ( Ref. No. 29/2000 ) of the 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 ofM / s . B.C.C.L. and their workman , which was receivedby the Central Government on 27-07-2010 .
[ No. L - 20012/ 145 / 97 - IR ( C - 1 ) ] RITA SINGH , Section Officer
ANNEXURE BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL - CUM - LABOUR COURT , NO . 1 , DHANBAD PRESENT
Shri IH.M. Singh , Presiding Officer
In the matter of an Industrial Dispute under Section 10 (1 ) ( d ) of the I.D. Act . , 1947 .
Reference No. 29 of 2000
PARTIES : Employers in relation to the management ofSendra Bansjora Colliery of M / s . BCCL and their workman .
5226
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 21 , 2010 / SHRAVANA 30 , 1932
APPEARANCES :
Onbehalf of the workman : Mr. D. Mukherjee ,
Secretary, Bihar
Colliery Kamgar Union .
Mr. H. Nath .
On behalf of the employers :
Advocate .
State Jharkhand
Industry : Coal
Dated, Dhanbad , the 12-7-2010
AWARD
The Government of India, Ministry of Labour , in exercise of the powers confered on them under Section 10 ( 1) ( d ) of the 1.D. Act . , 1947 has referred the following dispute to this Tribunal for adjudication vide their order No.1-20012 145 / 97-1.R . ( C - 1 ) , dated , the 3rd April , 2000 .
SCHEDULE
" KYAB.C.C.L .. SENDRA BANSJORA COLLIERY KEY PRAVANDHTANTRA DWARA SHRI SAMRU CHAMAR , JINHEY CHIKITSA BOARD DWARA SEVA HETU AYOGYYA PAYE JANEY PAR SEVA MUKT KAR DIYA GAYA THA , KEY ASHRIT PUTRA KO NIYUKT NA KIYA JANA UCHIT EVAM NAYASANGAT HAIN ? YADI NAHI TO KARMKAR TATHA VA UNKEY ASHRIT KIS RAHAT KEY PATRA HAIN ? "
2. 1 he case of the workman as disclosed in his written statement is that Samru Chamar had been working as permanent raminer at Sendra Bansjora Colliery since long with unblemished record of service . He had been suffering from Leprosy and he was unable to perform his original duty efficiently . Accordingly the management referred him for treatment in the year 1989 and there it was detected that he was suffering from Leprosy. The management instead ofproviding him light duty allowed the concerned workman six months medical leave without pay . After six months the concerned workman reported for his duty and he was allowed to resume his duty . After joining his duty the concerned workman found him unfit for the job and he was not in a position to perform his duty due to disease mentioned so the concerned workman represented before the management in writing to refer him to the Medical Board for determination of his medical disease .
3. It has been further stated by the workmanside that as the management did not take any cognizance of his representation , he again by a letter dated 11-6-91 requested the management to refer him to the Medical Board. However , that representation was forwarded by the Agent of the Colliery to the authority to refer the workman to Medical Board for determination his medical fitness . Unfortunately and surprisingly enough the management did not conduct any medical test so , the concerned workman again represented before the management to refer
[PART 11 - SEC . 3 ( ii ) ] him to Medical Board and accordingly the management by an order dated 11-9-92 directed the concerned workman to appear before the Medical Board on 21-9-92 . The concerned workman though attended the place of medical examination but no medical test was conducted nor any Medical Board or Committee was constituted .
4. The management again issued a notice dated 14-3-93 wherein and whereby directed the concerned workman to appear beofre the Medical Board on 17-3-98 at Loyabad Central Hospital . The concerned workman appeared there before the Medical Board and the Medical Board declared the concerned workman unfit for the job and accordingly the concerned workman's service was terminated due to his medical unfitness . As per NCWA the dependent of an unfit employee is entitled for employment and accordingly the dependent of the concerned workman represented before the management for providing employment but without any effect . Thereafter an industrial dispute was raised on 16-2-95 which ended in failure due to the adamant attitude of the management . The Govt . of India without appreciating law rejected the dispute on the ground of filing the dispute before the ALC ( C ) after the lapse of two years at the instance of the management . Thereafter the union of the concerned workman challenged the illegal and unfortunate rejection order before the Hon'ble High Court , Patna , Ranchi Bench which was registered as CWJC No. 2245/98 ( R ) and the Hon'ble High Courtby its order dated 22-9-99 directed the Government to refer the dispute for adjudication . However, as per order of the Hon'ble High Court present reference was made by the Govt . of India . In view of the facts it has been prayed on behalf of the concerned workman to pass an Award in favour of the workman directing the management to provide employment to the dependent of Samru Chamar and the intervening period i.e. the date of declaration of unfitness and stoppage till the date of providing dependent's employment full wages and attendant benetits be paid .
5. In the written statement filed on behalf of the management it has been stated by them that the present reference is not maintainable both in law and facts of the case . It has been stated further that Sri Samru Chamar , the concerned workman was working as a Trammer at Sendra Bansjora Colliery . He was not declared unfit by the Apex Medical Board and he was retired from his service after attaining the age of 60 years with effect from 1-7-93 . As he retired after completing the age of 60 vears , no question of employment to any dependent of his arises and such a demand is not maintainable . Thereafter an industrial dispute was raised by the Secretary , Bihar Colliery Kamgar Union which resulted reference to this Tribunal for adjudication . It has been prayed on behalf of the management to pass an Award rejecting the claim of the concerned workman .
6. Both the parties have filed their respective rejoinder admitting and denying the contents of some of the paras of each other's Written Statement , भारत का राजपत्र अगस्त 21 , 2010/ श्रावण 30 , 1932
[भाग 1i- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]
7. Management side in order to substantiate their claim have examined Rakesh Ranjan as MW - 1 . Documents on their behalf have been marked as Ext.M - 1 to M - 6 : No witness has been examined on behalf of the workman . However , on his behalf documents have been marked as Ext. W - 1 to W -4.
8. Main argument advanced on behalf of the management is that the concerned workman retired after attaining the age of 60 years on 1-7-1993 . When the concerned workman retired on attaining the age of 60 years of age , no question of providing employment to his dependent arises though in NCWA which is a settlement there is provision that if any workman during the period of service is found to be medically unfit then in that event employment is provided to one of his dependent . It shows that the concerned workman retired on the ground of superannuation though he was medically unfit his dependent was not given employment . No settlement has been filed to show that a person on superannuation is entitled for employment of his dependent though he was medically unfit . The workmanside has referred to a decision reported in 2007 ( 115 ) FLR 427 in which Hon'ble Supreme Court laid down the following:-
" Industrial Disputes Act , 1947- Section 18 ( 3 )— Settlement Known as National Coal Wage Agreement ( N.C.W.A. ) V - Providing for appointment of dependents of deceased employees working in coal mines- Appellant , in terms of said settlement applied for appointment on compassionate ground on the death of his father , a coal mine worker - who died in harness- Appellant's application in the first instance turned down on the ground that he was a minor- Held , turning down again of the appellant's application , moved after he attained majority , on ground of same being beyond six month's period of limitation- Not legally justified Said period of limitation mentioned in circular dated 12-12-1995 was not statutory As same was not part of the original settlement impugned judgement and order of the High Court not sustainable And set aside as such-- Respondent directed to offer appointment to the appellant on a suitable post within 8 weeks Appeal allowed with costs throughout. ( Paras 2 , 6 , 10 , 11 , 15, 16, 17 and 20 ) " Workman side also referred to another decision reported in IL.L.J. 127 in which Hon'ble Supreme Court laid down the following: -
" Industrial Disputes Act- 1947 - Ss.2 ( 00 ) , 2 ( ra ) , 2A , 25B , 25F , Schedule V Item No. 10- Name of employee who is provided with work whenever available. Struck offfrom the list of Tikka Mazdoor- Refusal to provide work- No written orders of termination on the specious plea that he was disqualified for the post being a Matriculate , based on confidential
5227 circular- Action of the management amounts to retrenchment and the same is in violation of the mandatory provisions- The disputes comes squarely within S.2 ( A) of the I.D. Act- Deliberate refusal to engage the employee continuously amounts to unfair labour practice . "
Considering facts , circumstances , evidence , materials on record and citation of case laws I have failed to find out any merit in the claim of the concerned workman . Accordingly the following Award is rendered :-
"The action of the management of Sendra Bansjora Colliery of M/s . B.C.C. Ltd. in not providing employment to the dependent son of Sri Samru Chamar whose service was terminated on the ground of medical unfitness declared byMedical Board is legal and justified . Consequently the concerned workman or his dependent is not entitled to get any relief . "
H.M. SINGH , Presiding Officer नई दिल्ली , 27 जुलाई , 2010
का. आ. 2076.- 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 210/2000 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 27-07-2010 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।
[सं. एल-20012/9 /2000- आई आर ( सी -1 ) ] रीता सिंह , अनुभाग अधिकारी New Delhi , the 27th July , 2010
S. O. 2076.-In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act . 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award ( Ref. No. 210/ 2000 ) of the 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 received by the Central Government on 27-07-2010 .
[ No. L - 20012 / 9/ 2000 - IR ( C - I ) ] RITA SINGH , Section Officer
ANNEXURE
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL - CUM - LABOUR COURT NO . 1 , AT DHANBAD
PRESENT
Shri H.M. SINGH , Presiding Officer 5228
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 21 , 2010 / SHRAVANA 30 , 1932
In the matter of an Industrial Dispute under Section 10( 1) ( d) of the 1.D. Act . , 1947 .
Reference No. 210 of 2000
PARTIES : Employers in relation to the management of Tetulmari Colliery of M/ s , BCCL and theirworkman .
APPEARANCES :
On behalf of the workman None
None On behalf of the employers :
Industry : Coal State : Jharkhand
Dated, Dhanbad , the 14th July , 2010
AWARD
The Government of India , Ministry of Labour , in exercise of the powers confered on them under section 10( 1 ) ( d) of the I.D. Act . , 1947 has referred the following dispute to this Tribunal for adjudication vide their order No.L - 200129 / 2000-1.R . ( C - 1 ) , dated , the 24th July, 2000 .
SCHEDULE
"Whether the action of the management of Tetulmari Colliery of M/ s . B.C.C.L. in dismissing the services of Sri Om Prakash Bouri , W/ Loader , P.No. 02262111 w.e.f. 1-2-96 is justified ? If not , to what relief the concerned workman is entitled ? "
2. in this reference neither the concerned workman nor his representative appeared before this Tribunal . None also appeared on behalf of the management . It appears from the record that the instant reference is pending since July , 2000 and since then none of the parties turned up before this Tribunal to take steps in the matter of hearing of the case . Under such circumstances , a ' No dispute ' Award is passed in this reference presuming non - existence of any industrial dispute between the parties .
H.M. SINGH , Presiding Officer नई दिल्ली , 27 जुलाई , 2010
का. आ. 2077. औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में , केन्द्रीय सरकारं मैसर्स टिसको 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 192/89 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 27-07-2010 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।
[सं. एल-20012/ 79/89-- आई आर ( सी-1 ) ] रीता सिंह , अनुभाग अधिकारी New Delhi , the 27th July , 2010
S. O. 2077.-In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) , the Central
PARE SC3 ( i ) ) Government hereby publishes the award ( Ref . No. 192-89 ) ofthe Central Government Industrial Tribunal - cum - labour Court- 1 , Dhanbad as shown in the Annexure in the industrial dispute between the employees in relation to the management of M / s . TISCO and their workman , which was received by the Central Government on 27-07-2010.
No.1-20012-79-89 - IR( C -D RITA SINGH , Section Officer
ANNEXURE
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL . TRIBUNALNO . 1 AT DHANBAD In the matter of a reference Linder Section 1001) ( d ) of the I.D. Act . ,
Reference No. 192 of 1989
PARTIES : Employers in relation to the management of Malkera Colliery of M.s. Tata Iron & Steel Co. Ltd. and their workman . AND Their Workmen ,
PRESENT : Shri H.M. Singh , Presiding Officer APPEARANCES :
For the Employers
For the Workman
: None None
State : Jharkhand
Industry : Coal Dated , Dhanbad , the 15-7-2010
AWARD
By Order No. L - 20012 / 79 / 89 - IR ( Coal - ndated 27-11-1989 the Central Government in the Ministry of Labour has , in exercise of the powers conferred by clause (d) of section ( 1 ) and sub - section 2 ( A ) of Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 , referred the following dispute for adjudication to this Tribunal :
"Whether the action of the management of Malkera Colliery of M / s . Tata Iron & Steel Company Ltd. , PostMalkera , Dist . Dhanbad in dismissing Shri Bihari Kumar , Miner from service of the company with effect from 1-10-83 is justified ? If not , to what relief is the workman entitled ? "
2. Written statement has been filed on behalf of the concerned workman stating that the concerned workman was appointed as permanent miner / loader . As soon as the management came to know the membership of the concerned workman , the management immediately issued a false and motivated chargesheet dated 2 /3-6-83 . The concerned workman denied the charges emphatically . The biased and prejudiced management dismissed the [भाग II- खण्ड 3( ii )]
concerned workman after completing empty formalities . Even in the invalid and irregular enquiry the charges against the concerned workman was not established . He was dismissed by an unauthorised person . The concerned workman represented before the management against illegal and arbitrary dismissal order but without any effect . Seeing no other alternative the union raised an industrial dispute before the ALC ( C) , Dhanbad , but the same ended in failure. thereafter the dispute has been referred to this Hon'ble Tribunal for adjudication . It has been stated that the action ofthe management in dismissing the concerned workınan from service was illegal , arbitrary, unjustified and against the principle of natural justice .
It has been prayed that the Hon'ble Tribunal be pleased to answer the reference in favour of the workman by awarding reinstatement with full back wages.
3. Written statement has been filed by the management stating that the concerned workman, Bihari Kumar entered into service of the company in the year 1979 as a temporary miner in Malkera Colliery falsely declaring himself as son - in -law of Nanka Kumar , Mechanical Fitter Helper . His false declaration was detected in the year 1983. After receiving confidential informantion that the concerned workman was not the son - in - law of Nanka Kumar and had got his name enrolled in the E.D. Register falsely declaring himself as son - in - law of Nanka Kumar and procuring a false certification of Mukhiya, Sri G.K. Jha, the then Group Personnel Officer of Sijua Group enquired into the matter . Thereafter he was issued a charge sheet No. 34/83 dated 2-6-83 was issued to the concerned workman by fraudulent means. He was charged under clause 19(2) of the certified standing orders for commission ofmisconduct of " fraud and dishonesty in connection with company's property and business " . The departmental enquiry was conducted by Shri S.N. Pandey on 12-9-83 in the peresence of the concerned workman . Sri G. K. cha, the management's representative examined himself as management's witness and gave his statement ind produced the relevant documents and proved the me, He was given fuli opportunity to cross - exame the management's witness . He was given full opportunity to give his own statement and to produce his defence witness . He did not raise any objection against the procedure of enquiry or against the Enquiry Officer . The enquiry was held fairly and properly in accordance with the principles ofnatural justice . The Enquiry Officer submitted his enquiry report dated 16-9-83 to the Manager of the colliery . On the basis of enquiry report , the concerned workman was dismissed from service with effect from 1-10-83 . The concerned workman raised an industrial dispute before ALC (C) . The above dispute was closed as there was no merit in the case . Thereafter , the present dispute has been referrred to this Tribunal for adjudication . It has been submitted that the action of the management in dismissing the 3099/ 91 / 10-22
भारत का राजपत्र अगस्त 21 , 2010/ श्रावण 30 , 1932
concerned workman from his service is legal , bonafide and in accordance with the provisions of the certified standing orders .
It has been prayed that the Hon'ble Tribunal be pleased to pass the award holding that the action of the management is justified and the concerned workman is not entitled to any relief .
4. Both the parties have filed their respective rejoinders admitting and denying the contents of some of the paragraphs of each other's written statement .
5. The management has produced MW- 1 , Sachidanand Pandey, who has proved documents , Exts . M- 1 to M-8 .
The concerned workman has neither produced any witness nor filed any documents .
6. No argument advanced on behalf of either side . I perused the record . The management's witness stated that the concerned workman got employment fraudulently by falsely declaring himself as son- in - law of Nanka Kumar and obtained a false certificate from Mukhiya . Charge sheet was issued to him for making false declaration and securing employment by fraudulent means . He was charged under clause 19 (2 ) of the certified standing orders . The departmental enquiry was conducted by Sri S.N. Pandey on 12-9-93 in presence of the concerned workman . Sri G.K. Jha , management's representative examined himself as management's witness and gave his statement and produced the relevant documents and proved the same. He was given full oppurtunity to cross - examine the management's witness . He was also given full opportunity to give his own statement and to produce his defence witness . He gave his own statement and did not produce any defence witness . He did not raise any objection against the procedure of the enquiry or against the Enquiry Officer . Enquiry proceedings have been proved by the management's witness . Ext . M- 1 is charge sheet , Ext . M - 2 is the replyof the concerned workman to the charge sheet , Ext . M-3 is appointment of the Enquiry Officer , Ext . M - 4 is the ne .. enquiry , Ext . M - 5 is enquiry proceeding . Enquiry had been submitted by the Enquiry Officer as per Erw. dismissal order was passed as per Ext . M- 7 . The concerned workman got employment by fraudulent means , so he has got no right to serve with the management .
7.Accordingly, I render the following award- The action of the management ofMalkera Colliery of M/s . Tata Iron & Steel Company Ltd. , Post Malkera, Distt . Dhanbad in dismissing Shri Bihari Kumar , Miner from service ofthe company w.e.f. 1-10-83 is justified and hence the concerned workman is not entitled to any relief.
H.M. SINGH , Presiding Officer THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 21 , 2010 / SHRAVANA 30 , 1932
नई दिल्ली , 27 जुलाई , 2010
का.अ., 2078.--औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 ( 1947 .की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार स्टेट बैंक ऑफ निरादून के प्रबंधतंत्र के संपद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों श्रीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार द्योगिक अधिकरण । , नई दिल्ली के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 30/2009 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 27-7-2010 को प्राप्त हुआ था।
[सं. एल-12011 / 79/2008- आईआर ( बी -1 ) ] जोहन तोपनो , अवर सचिव New Delhi , the 27th July, 2010
S.O. 2078.-In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) , the Central Cover ment hereby publishes the award (Ref. I. D. No. 30/ 20or the Central Government Industrial Tribunal / Labour No , J , New Delhi now as shown in the Annexure int industrial Dispute between the management of State Bank of India , Dehradun and their workmen , which was received by the Central Government on 27-7-2010 .
[No. L - 12011 / 79 / 2008 - IR ( B - I ) ]
JOHAN TOPNO , Under Secy.
ANNEXURE
BEFORE DR . R. K. YADAV , PRESIDING OFFICER CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL NO . I. KARKARDOOMA COURT COMPLEX, DELHI
L.D.NO 30/2009
Shri Prem Singh ,
Through The General Secretary , Trade Council , INTUC . B - 2/ 16 , Ashiavana Colony , Vivekanand Hospital , Kanth Road, Moradabad ( U. P. )
[ PART II -SEC. 3 ( ii ) ] conducted against him , since he had prepetrated a fraudat the aforesaid branch of the bank He was tound guilty of the charges and complsorily retired on 16th of January , 2003 , while his suspension was treated as not spent on duty . He raised a claim for sanctioning pension in his favour, which was declined . He raised a dispute before the Conciliation Officer . Since conciliation proceeding failed, the appropriate Government referred the dispute to this Tribunal vide Order No. L - 12011 / 79 /2008 - IR ( B - 1 ) dated 1-7-2009 , with following terms:
" Whether the action of the management of State Bank of India in not sanctioning pensionary benefits to the concerned workman Shri Prem Singh , Asstt . Cashier- cum- Clerk retired compulsorily from service w.e.f. 16-1-2003 , is legal and justified ? If yes , to what relief is entitled to and from which date ?" 2. Claim statement was filed by the workman , pleading therein that he was employed with the management bank as Assistant Cashier - cum- Clerk on 22-12-81 . He was transferred to Nagina Branch and threafter to Boodenpur ( Bijnor) branch of the bank in 1995. He was lastly transferred to Dwar Hatt , Almora banch of the bank in 1997. He was suspended in 1997 , By initiating ex parte proceedings against him , he was compulsorily retired vide order dated 16-1-2003 . Though the bank had made payment of his dues upto 2003 , yet his pension benetits were not released . He presents that his period of suspension may be treated as spent on duty and bank may be directed to sanction pensionary benefits in his favour .
Workman
Versus
The Deputy General Manager , State Bank of india , Zonal Office , 1 , New Cantt . Road, Dehradun , Regional Manager , Statement Bank of India , Region IV, Hotel Sikhar , Almora
Management
AWARD
Singh was appointed as Assistant Cashier-cum- lectum Branch of State Bank of India on 22nd of Dece o., 1981. In 1988 he was transferred to Nagina Branch of the bank . He was again transferred to Boodenpur Finore ) branch of the bank in 1995. He was placed under sarponion on 4-8-97 . A departmental enquiry was 3. Contest was given to his claim by the management pleading that since workman committed a fraud in the bank , he was placed under suspension on 4-8-97 . Charge sheet was served upon him on 22-11-97. Departmental enquiry was conducted and charges stood proved against him . Enquiry Officer submitted his report dated 29-1-2001 and Disciplinary Authority found him guilty of gross misconduct . Vide order dated 16-1-2001 he inflicted punishment of compulsory retirement on the workman and the period of his suspenion from 4-8-79 to 16-1-2003 was treated as not spent on duty. As per the provisions of State Bank of India , Employees Pension Fund Rules (hereinafter referred to as the Rules ) suspension period from 4-8-97 to 16-1-2003 cannot be counted as pensionable service. An employee has to complete 20 years of qualifying service for release of pension in his favour . Since the workman has rendered only 15 years 8 months and 13 days service , pensions could not be released in les favour . Clam projected by the workman is not in consonance with the Rules . He is not entitled to any benefit towards pension .
4.Order dated 16-1-2003 was not disputed by the workman . Hence the same is exhibited as Ex . M- 1 The Rules were filed by the bank , which were also not disputed by the workman . Hence same were exhibited as Ex . M- 2 . Workman as well as the Management opted not to lead [भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]
any evidence over the matter . Therefore , evidence of the parties was closed .
5. Arguments were heard at the bar . Workman assisted by Shri S. K. Sharma , his A /R , raised submission in the matter . Shri Rajat Arora A / R raised submissions on behalf of the Management . I have given my careful consideration to the arguments advanced at the bar and cautiously perused the record. My findings on the issues involved in the controversy are as follows :
6. Ex . M - 1 announces that Prem Singh , Assistant Cashier- cum - Clerk , under suspension was ordered to be compulsorily retired and his period of suspension was not to count for any wages , increment , seniority and bonus etc .. except the subsistence allowance already paid to him. Consequently it is evident that the Disciplinary Authority ordered for compulsory retirement of the workman w.e.f. 16-1-2003 , with directions that his period of suspension from 4-8-97 till 16-1-2003 will not earn him any wages , increment . seniority , bonus etc. Consequently it is evident that the said period was not treated as spent on duty .
7. Admittedly workman joined services of the bank on 22-12-81 . He was compulsorily retired on 16-1-2003 .. Period of suspension w.e.f. 4-8-97 till 16-1-2003 was not treated as spent on duty . Therefore , the workman performed qualifying service for 15 years , 8 months and 13 days only .
3231
भारत का राजपत्र अगस्त 21 , 2010/ श्रावण 30 , 1932
provides for sanction of pensionary benefits to workman on rendering 20 years qualifying service . H not rendered 20 years qualifying service to earn pen Since -he had not reached 60 years of age , hence he cann get pension on rendering 10 years qualifying service. Consequently he is not entitled to any relief. Reference is answered accordingly and an Award is , hereby , accordingly passed . It be sent to the appropriate Government for publication.
Dated: 13-8-09 Dr. R. K. YADAV, Presiding Officer नई दिल्ली , 27 जुलाई , 2010
का.आ. 2079.-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में , केन्द्रीय सरकार स्टेट बैंक ऑफ पटियाला के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों कं बीच , अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण नं. 1 , चण्डीगढ़ के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या आई. डी. नं. 129/99 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 27-7-2010 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।
[ सं. एल -12012 /62/99- आईआर ( बी-1 ) ] जोहन तोपनो , अवर सचिव New Delhi , the 27th July , 2010
S.O. 2079. - In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) , the Central Government hereby publishes the Award ( 1. D. No. 129/99 ) as shown in the Annexure in the industrial dispute between the management of State Bank of Patiala , and their workmen, received by the Central Government on 27- 7-2010 .
[No. L - 12012 /62 /99 - IR ( B - I ) ]
JOHAN TOPNO , Under Secy .
ANNEXURE
BEFORE SHRI GYANENDRA KUMAR SHARMA , PRESIDING OFFICER CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL - CUM - LABOUR COURT , -1 CHANDIGARH
Case I. D. No. 129/99
8. The Rules contemplates that an employee shall be eligible for pension after having completed 20 years pensionary service provided that he has attained the age of 50 years . As detailed workman has not completed 20 years qualifying service . In case he is on service in the bank on or after 1-11-93 , he is entitled for pension on completion of 15 years qualifying service provided that he has attained the age of 58 years . In the other eventuality if the employee is in the service in the bank on or after 22-5-98 , he wouldbe eligible for pension on completion of 10 years service provided he has attained the age of 60 years . It is not the case of the workman that he had attained the age of 60 years and rendered 10 years qualifying service to get pensionary benefits . Under these circumstances workman has not been able to show that he has rendered qualifying service to earn pensionary benefits . Consequently no illegality or unjustifiability in the action of the management , in not sanctioning pensionary benefits to the workman , was brought over the record . Therefore , the action of the management is found to be legal and justified .
9. In the dispute under reference the Tribunal is not competent to go behind the order dated 16-1-2003 . It cannot enquire into about legality and justifiability of the order , on the strength of which he was compulsorily retired and his period of suspension was treated as not spent on duty. Consequently the Tribunal has to assess the action of the management on the basis of the Rules Ex.M - 2 which Shri . R. K. Bali , House No. 6 - CC Nangal Township . Distt . Ropar ( Punjab ) - 140124
Applicant
Versus
The Assistant General Manager ( Opp . ) State Bank of Patiala , Head Office , The Mall , Patiala - 147001
Respondent
APPEARANCES
For the Workman : Shri Arun Batra
For the Management : Shri N. K. Zakhmi 5232
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST
AWARD
assed on: 19-7-10
Government of India vide notification No. L - 12012 / 62/99 - IK ( B - 1 ) , Dated 12-5-1999 by exercising its power under Section 10 ofthe Industrial Disputes Act , ( the Act in short) has referred the following industrial dispute for adjudication to this Tribunal :---
"Whether the action of the management of State Bank of Patiala in terminating the services of Shri R. K. Bali is legal and justified ? If not , to what relief the concerned workman is entitled and from which date?"
After receiving the reference , parties were informed .
Parties appeared and filed their respective pleadings . The case of the workman in nut shell is that the workman, who was charge sheeted vide banks letter no . 20481 , dated 20-1-1996 for illegally withdrawal of amount from d ' ' ferent accounts under forged signatures , admitted the charges before the enquiry officer . On the basis of the admission the enquiry officer submitted his enquiry report holding the charges well proved . The disciplinary authority after affording him the opportunity of being heard awarded the punishment and terminated his services .
Both of the parties have made the different Contentions . The contention of the workman is that he samitted the charges under the assurance of the disciplinary authority to award the minor punishkinent . On the other hands , the contention of the management is that there was no assurance and the workman has voluntarily without any force or coercion admitted the charges .
Initially , this Tribunal heard the parties on the fairness of enquiry . The workman challenged the nature of the admission . Considering the fact that enquiry report is based on the admission of the workman , thi . Tribunal directed both of the parties to adduce the evidence on all the issues including the issue of fairness of enquiry and nature of admission . Accordingly evidence was recorded .
In his evidence , the workman has stated that before 9-7-1996 , the day on which he admitted the charges he has denied all the chages on several occasions . Thereafter , he admitted the charges on three occasions samely before enquiry officer , disciplinary authority and the appellate authority. He makes a request to enquiry officer for appointing a legal practitioner which was referred by the enquiry officer to the disciplinary authority as per the rules and proceedings were adjourned . The discipunary author y rejected the request of the workman to appoint a legal practitioner during the departmental proceedings . This decision was conveyed to the workman on 9-7-1996 by the enquiry officer and on the same by the workman admitted the charges . It is the contention and the workman that he admitted the charges on assurance of the disciplinary authority for lighter punishment. But his services were terminated in violation of the assurance . The workman has 2010 RANA15.12
[ PART II - SEC. 3 (ii ) ] further stated apart from this oral contention regarding the oral assuras , he has no other evidence to adduce before this Tribesal.
Parties vot . heard at length . The workman was charge sheeted " . withdrawing the amount from 57 saving bank accounts belonging to different persons on different dates . 9-7-1996 he is not only admitted the charges oral also moved a letter containing the reasons of admission He has catego: ically mentioned the circumstances under which he has witharawn the amount . Thus the fact of withcrawing the amount is well proved . No doubt this letter was given to to, disciplinary authority by the workman but he has not uttered a single sentence before the enquiry officer about the circumstances under which he moved this admission letter the oral contentioa of the workman before this Tribunal or path also reveals that he has not informed the enquiry officer aboabe assurance given by the disciplinary author : Mitg thereby, the enquiry officer has acted fair'y and reasonably on the admission of the workman an i there is per cisay in decision making of the enquiry officer as well , the workman has further failed to prove any circumstances before this Tribunal regarding the assurance of the disciplinary authority.
It is well settled law of service jurisprudence that admission is a good peace of evidence and die eporn based on the admission is as good as givet fter conducting the departmental enquiry , Thus , the fate of the enquiry report cannot be judged and the same cannot be quashed only on the ground that it solely based on the admission of the workman . If the admission is freely without any coercion or without any pressure is tecooled, there is no occasion for the workman to challenge its gunuineness later on . The enquiry officer, as re.ws from the proceedings of the enquiry , has giver til possible opportunity of being heard . The workınan has not admited the charges on three dates . He was given opportunity for engaging the defence representative . As per the evidence rerecorded by this Tribunal no defence represnove was available to the workman on account or the nature of the misconduct . The disciplinary authority has right to refused the assistance of the legal practitioner as it is not mentioned in rules . Thus , the workman has failed to prove that he admitted the charges on assurance or under pressure . The enquity report and the punishment thereafter , based on the enquiry report cannot he qued just on the oral contention of the workman before this Tribunal about the genuineness of admission
On the basis of the above . I am of the view that workman was rightly punished and the punishment awarded to him was proportionate to the committed misconduct . Accordingly , the reference is answered . Let Central Government be informed for publication of award and thereafter , file be consigned to record room .
G. K. SHARMA . Presiding Officer भारत का राजपत्र अगस्त 21 , 2010/ श्रावण 30, 1932
[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]
नई दिल्ली , 27 जुलाई , 2010
का.आ. 2080.-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 (1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में , केन्द्रीय सरकार स्टेट बैंक ऑफ हैदराबाद के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच , अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालय , हैदराबाद के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या एलसीआईडी 69/2005 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 28-7-2010 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।
[सं. एल -12014/2/2010 - आईआर( बी-1 ) ] जोहन तोपनो , अवर सचिव New Delhi , the 27th July, 2010
S.O. 2080.- In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award ( LCID No. 69 / 2005 ) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal -cum- Labour Court , Hyderabad as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the management of State Bank of Hyderabad and their workmen , which was received by the Central Government on 28-7-2010.
[No. L - 12014 /2 / 2010 - IR ( B - 1 ) ] JOHAN TOPNO , Under Secy .
ANNEXURE
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL - CUM - LABOUR COURT AT HYDERABAD
PRESENT : Shri VED PRAKASH GAUR, Presiding Officer
Dated the Ist day of May , 2009
Industrial Dispute L. C. I. D. No. 69/2005 BETWEEN
SriBhuraram,
Petitioner S/ o Babaram , C/o A. P. Industrial Employees Union , "House of Labour " , King Kothi Road, Hyderabad - 29
AND
1. The Dy General Manager , Personal Department , State Bank of Hyderabad , Gunfoundry Head Office , Hyderabad.
....Respondents 2. The Branch Manager , State Bank of Hyderabad , Bellavista Branch , Somajiguda Branch , Hyderabad.
APPEARANCES
Forthe Petitioner M/ s . N. Meenakshi , C. Lavanya & G. Sailaja , Advocates
For the Respondents : Sri Ch. Siva Reddy , Advocate
AWARD
Thisis a petition filed under Sec.2 A ( 2 ) of the 1. D. Act , 1947 in view of the judgment of the Hon'ble High Court ofAndhra Pradesh reported in W.P. No. 8395 of 1989 dated 3-8-1995 between Sri U. Chinnappa and M / s . Cotton Corporation of India and two others by Sri K. Santhosh Kumar challenging the illegality and validity of the order passed by the Respondent dated 6-6-2005 thereby the services were orally terminated by the Respondent.
2. It has been stated by the Petitioner that he was appointed by the Respondent as casual labour in May , 2001 and was posted under 2nd Respondent where the Petitioner worked for more than 240 days continuously without any break in that year on a wage of Rs . 50 per day. The Petitioner has worked in that capacity for more than 14 years but he was not made regular . When the Petitioner insisted for regularization and asked for the correct payment of wages then the services of the Petitioner were terminated on 6-6-2005 without any written order or following the due procedure . Before that the Petitioner made a representation dated 19-5-2005 to regularize his services and pay arrears of wages as per the wages paid to the casual labourer of Kakatiyanagar branch who raised ID No. 35/2001 which was decided on 24-9-2002 and the casual labour of the Kakatiyanagar branch were given wages as per rules and they were also paid arrears of the wages . The Petitioner moved a petition to follow the procedure of 1 /3rd pay after two years one half of pay after another two years and 3 / 4th pay after another two years . The Petitioner further served a reminder on 31-5-2005 but no action was taken by the Respondent management . The action of the management in orally terminating the services of the Petitioner is illegal and against the principles of Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 . The Hon'ble High Court of A.P. in WP No. 15555/93 directed the Respondent to consider the cases of the Petitioners of that case . Another WP No. 18436/2004 decided on 11-10-2004 , the Hon'ble High Court of A.P. , directed the Respondent to pass appropriate order on the observations of the regular employees . But the Respondent has not obeyed that order also . Hence , this petition .
3. The Respondent management has filed counter statement. They have challenged the maintainability of the claim petition . The Respondent has submitted that the Petitioner has not worked for more than 240 days . He was not on the rolls of the bank as such , the question of termination of the services did not arise , the allegation to this effect is baseless and misconceived . The bank has never engaged Petitioner in their employment nor the THE VALETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 21 , 2010 / SHRAVANA 30 , 1932
===
vacancies were notified , the petitioner was engaged for casual work when his services were required by the bank . He was never employed as regular or a full day worker .He isnot entitled for the bebefit U/ s Sec . 25F of the Industrial Disputes Act . 1947 , because he was engaged to work as and when the bank required services of the Petitioner he was employed for that date only . The Petitioner has no force and deserves to be rejected or dismissed . The Petitioner cannot claim any advantage from the order passed in WP No. 15555/93 or WP No. 18436/2004 because the Petitioner was not a party to this petition .
4. Parties were directed to produce their respective evidence . Petitioner filed his affidavit as examination in chief and presented himself for cross examination . He has filed documents marked as Ex . W1 to W7 . Respondent bank filed affidavit of Mr. Ch . Surender Raju as MWI , as examination in chief and presented him for cross examination . Respondent has also filed xerox copy of the award dated 24-9-2004 passed in ID No. 35/2001 . Copy of the order of Hon'ble High Court of A.P. passed in WP No. 15555/93 between Vishnu Kumar and K. Raju Vs. M.D. , State Bank of Hyderabad . Letter of the Personnel Department No. PER . GR . VI / 7777 dated 28-3-2005 to Sri N. Rama Krishna and another letter addressed to Sti V. S. Krishna Chary , another letter to Sri K. Vijaya Kumar informing them that the bank is not in a position to absorb them in the bank's services .
5. I have heard Counsels for both the parties and have perused the relevant claim and counter statement of the parties ,documentary and oral evidences filed by them . It has been argued by the Learned Counsel for the Petitioner that the Petitioner has challenged the oral order of termination without following the procedure laid down U / s 25 F of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 because the Petitioner has already put in more than 240 days of service under the management and control of the Respondent Nos.1 and 2. Thus , non- observance of the provision of Sec . 25F in this case is fatal and it cut the very root of the termination order , because the compensation U / s 25F of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 has not been paid in this case . As against this argument of the Learned Counsel for the Petitioner, the Learned Counsel for the Respondent has argued that the Petitioner of this case has not been able to show and prove that he has worked for more than 240 days in the year preceding the alleged date of termination of his services , because the Petitioner has not produced any appointment letter to showas to when he was appointed in the bank's services . The Learned Counsel for Respondent has cited the statement of the Petitioner dated 1-3-2006 wherein during cross examination the Petitioner has admitted that he was not given any appointment order . The Respndent's counsel has further cited the oral statement of the Petitioner dated 1-3-2006 wherein the Petitioner has stated that he was not assured in the writing for regularization . The Petitioner has stated
[ PA21 II S3 ( ii ) ] thathe worked on the extension counter of the Respondent bank at RTI office . The Petaioner has stated that Respondent bank has not recruited anybody as temporary employee for the last five years . A suggestion has been given to the Petitioner by the Respondent that he has not worked for more than 240 days in a year , though the Petitioner has denied the suggestion but the Petitioner has on his own has not filed any documentary or other reliable evidence which may prove that the Petitioner has worked for more than 240 days in the year preceding date of his termination . Learned Counsel for the Respondent has argued that it is the duty of the Petitioner before the Industrial Tribunal to prove that he has worked for more than 240 days in the year preceding the date of termination of the services then, only the Petitioner shall be entitled for the benefit of Sec.25F of the Industiral Disputes Act . 1947. The Petitioner of this case has not been able to prove that he has worked for more than 240 days preceding the date of his termination as such , the provisions of Sec.251 ofthe Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 is not applicable in the present case and non - observance of the procedure of Sec. 25F of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 does not made the order of disengagement illegal .
6.However , the Petitioner has filed Ex WI letter dated 11-3-89 for absorption of three employees which is not concerned with this present petition . Ex. W2 is dated 29-12-99 regarding Absorption of temporary en.ployees on consolidate wage . Ex . W2 is the letter dated 1-7-2002 proposal - cum - application for appointment forwardedto Head Office , by the Respondent No. 2 for the Petitioner. On the basis of this document , the Petitioner's counsel has argued that the Petitioner has worked from 2002 to 2005 regularly and he has completed 240 days . Respondent's counsel argued that the Petitioner has been engaged on those dates when there is work available with the Respondent . There is no document to prove that the Petitioner has continuously worked for more than one day at one stretch of a time , this proves the contention of the Respondent that the Petitioner was engaged only when there was work available with the Respondent and thus the nature of engagement of the Petitioner was for a single day. He was engaged at the beginning of the date and his services were disengaged on the close of the day . Thus there is no proof or evoat of evidence to substance the contention of the Petitioner that he was continuously working for 240 days or even for single week .
7. Learned Counsel for the Respondent has further argued that the Petitioner has no right to claim regularization or absorption in the services because he was never appointed as a regular casual labour or daily wage worker . Since the Petitioner was not engaged on the regular basis he cannot claim benefit of absorption or regularization . The services of Petitioner were on the day -to - day basis . thus , he has no legal right to claim regularization or claim the benefit of Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 .
5235
का राजपत्र अगस्त 21 , 2010/ श्रावण 30 , 1932
[भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii)]
daily rate worker , even though in the light of the judgment ofUmadevi , daily wage worker have no enforceable legal right to claim for absorption . More so , in this case , the Petitioner has not been able to prove that he was a regular daily wage worker . But from the evidence available on the record it is clear that the Petitioner was engaged by the Respondent management for only those days when there was work available with the management . Thus , the nature ofemployment of the Petitioner was that of a purely daily rate worker , whose employment was terminated at the end of the day and thus he was not entitled to claim even daily wage work from the Respondent management . Thus , this disengagement of the petitioner , who was not appointed following rules of appointment is not fit to be governed by the principles of Industrial Disputes Act , 1947. This disengagement cannot be questioned before this tribunal because Petitioner was not a workman within the meaning of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 .
10. I have considered the above argument and I have also come to the conclusion that from the evidence on record it is proved that Petitioner was engaged for the day's work and his services or engagement were terminated by the end of the day. As such , the Petitioner cannot claim regularization on the basis of such casual engagement . The action of the management in disengaging the services of the Petitioner is neither illegal nor against the principles of Industrial Disputes Act . It cannot be questioned before this tribunal , the Petitioner has not been able to prove his case for declaring the action of the management as illegal or arbitrary and Petitioner is not entitled for any relief.
Award Passed accordingly . Transmit .
Dictated to Smt P. Phani Gowri , Personal Assistant transcribed by her , corrected by me on this the Ist day of May, 2009.
VED PRAKASH GAUR, Presiding Officer
Appendix of e vidence
Witness examined for he Petitioner WW1 : Sri Bhuraram Witness examined for the Respondent MWI : Sri Ch . Surender Raju
Documents marked for the Petitioner
Ex.W 1 :
8. I have considered the above argument of the Learned Counsels for the parties and have also gone through the documents cited above and the catement of the Petitioner . in his statement, the Petitioner les nowhere stated that he has continuously worked for mo than 240 days . He himself has admitted that no appointment letter was given to him and within last five years no person has been employed by the Respondent bank as temporary employee . This statement was recorded on 1-3-2006 from the own admission of the Petitione it is proved that ce 2001 onwards nobody was employed by the Respont bank or recruited by the Respondent bank. Hence , contention of the Petitioner that he is working since 200 . or beyond 2001 is misconceived based on no evidence and not fit to be believed by this tribunał. It is undisputed that the Petitoner has been engaged when the Respondent bank has work to be done on a particular date , thereby the Petitioner was engaged for a day's work as and when required by the Respondent management . The Petitioner was never appointed or recruited as a regular employee of the bank, his services were disengaged on the close of the day as such , he cannot claim the benefit of Sec . 25F ofthe Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 and Respondent bank has not committed any illegality in not following the provisions of Sec . 25F of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 . Since the Petitioner was engaged for a day's work after the close of the day Petitioner did not remain the employee of the bank , therefore , he has not completed more than 240 days in the year preceding the date of his disengagement from the employment . There was no need to follow the procedure of Sec . 25F , Petitioner's disengagement is neither illegal not it is in violation of the principles of Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 and no interference can be done in the action of the management . The Learned Counsel for the Respondent has cited case of Hon'ble Supreme Court of India reported in 2008 ( 10 ) pages 1Official Liquidator Vs. Dayanand and others wherein the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India has quashed the appointment of a company paid staff because they have not come through the proper channel and by their absorption in the service , meritorious person were not given opportunity or could not avail the opportunity to compete for the best . He has further cited the case law reported in 2006 ( 1 ) Decisions Today ( SC ) page 493 of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the matter between the Secretary, State of Karnataka & Others Vs. Umadevi & Others , wherein the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India has held that the public employment should be made in accordance with the rule- Temporary employees or daily worker or contractual workers have no enforceable legal right to be permanently absorbed into service .
Copy of Ir . No.PER/ GR . VI / F.22/ 2279 from the Personnel Manager , Admn . to the Regional , Manager , for permanent absorption under ID Actdt . 11-3-1989
Ex. W2: Copy of Ir . Dt . 29-12-99 reg. Absorption of temporary employees on consolidate wage 9. On the basis of above two case laws of Hon'ble Supreme Court of India , the Learned Counsel for the Respondent has submitted before this court that if this tribunal comes to a conclusion that the Petitioner was 5236
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 21 , 2010 / SHRAVANA 30, 1932
Ex.W3: Copy of Circular for payment of bonus dt . 5-6-2002
Ex. W 4: Copy of proposal for appointment forwarded to Head Office by the Respondent No.2dt . 1-7-2002
Ex.W 5: Copy of Ir . of Personnel department to all the branch managers etc. directing to terminate immediatelydt . 3-6-2005
Ex.W 6: Copy of reply to WWI ' Union President on representation made by the union dt . 2-7-2005
Ex.W7 : Copy of Petty cash vouchers
Documents marked for the Respondent Ex.M 1 : Copy of award of CGIT cum - Labour Court , Hyderabaddt . 24-9-2002
Ex.M 2: Copy of order in WP No. 15555/1993 dt. 28-3-97
Ex.M3: Copy of order in WP No. 18436/2004 dt 11-10-2004
Ex.M4: Copy of ir . of State Bank of Hyderabad head office to Sri N. Rama Krishna dt . 28-3-2005 Ex.M 5 : Copy of Lr . of State Bank of Hyderabad to Sri V. S. Krishnacharydt 28-3-2005 Ex.M6: Copy of Ir . of State Bank of Hyderabad to Sri K. Vijay Kumardt. 28-3-2005 नई दिल्ली , 27 जुलाई , 2010
का.आ. 2081.- औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में , केन्द्रीय सरकार स्टेट बैंक ऑफ हैदराबाद के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच , अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण , हैदराबाद के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या एलसीआईडी 68/2005 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 28-7-2010 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।
[सं. एल -12014/2 / 2010 - आईआर( बी -1 ) ] जोहन तोपनो , अवर सचिव New Delhi , the 27th July, 2010
S.O. 2081. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) , the Central Government hereby publishes the Award ( LCID No. 68/ 2005) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal -cum- Labour Court , Hyderabad as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the management of State Bank of Hyderabad and their workmen , received by the Central Government on 28-7-2010 .
[No. L - 12014/2/ 2010 - IR ( B - I ) ] JOHAN TOPNO , Under Secy.
[ PART II---SEC . 3 ( ii) ]
ANNEXURE
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL- CUM - LABOUR COURT, AT HYDERABAD
PRESENT : Shri VED PRAKASH GAUR, Presiding Officer
Dated the 1st day of May , 2009
Industrial Dispute L. C. I. D. No. 68/2005
BETWEEN
Petitioner Sri P. Srinivas , S/o P. Ramulu , C/ o A.P. Industrial Employees Union , "House of Labour " , King Kothi Road , Hyderabad -29
AND
1. The Dy . General Manager , Personal Department , State Bank of Hyderabad , Gunfoundry Head Office , Hyderabad.
2. The Branch Manager , State Bank of Hyderabad , Bellavista Branch , Somajiguda Branch Hyderabad
...... Respondents
APPEARANCES
For the Petitioner : M/ s . N. Meenakshi , C. Lavanya & G. Sailaja , Advocates
For the Respondent : Sri Ch . Siva Reddy , Advocates
AWARD
This is a petition filed under Sec.2 A ( 2 ) of the I. D. Act, 1947 in view of the judgment of the Hon'ble High Court of Andhra Pradesh reported in W.P. No. 8395 of 1989 dated 3-8-1995 between Sri U. Chinnappa and M/ s . Cotton Corporation of India and two others by Sri P. Srinivas challenging the illegality and validity of the order passed by the Respondent dated 6-6-2005 thereby the services were orally terminated by the Respondent .
2. It has been stated by the Petitioner that he was appointed by the Respondent as casual labour from 18-6-1996 and was posted under 2nd Respondent where the Petitioner worked for more than 240 days continuously without any break in that year on a wage of Rs . 50 per day The Petitioner has worked in that capacity for more than 14 years but he was not made regular . When the Petitioner insisted for regularization and asked for the correct payment of wages then the services of the Petitioner were 5237 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]
भारत का राजपत्र अगस्त 21 , 2010/ श्रावण 30 , 1932
Rama Krishna and another letter addressed to Sri V. S. Krishna Chary , another letter to Sri K. Vijaya Kumar informing them that the bank is not in a position to absorb them in the bank's services .
terminated on 6-6-2005 without any written order or following the due procedure . Before that the Petitioner made a representation dated 19-5-2005 to regularize his services and pay arrears of wages as per the wages paid to the casual labourer of Kakatiyanagar branch who raised ID No. 35/2001 which was decided on 24-9-2002 and the casual labour of the Kakatiyanagar branch were given wagės as per rules and they were also paid arrears of the wages . The Petitioner moved a petition to follow the procedure of 1 / 3rd pay after two years one half of pay after another two years and 3 /4th pay after another two years . The Petitioner further served a reminder on 31-5-2005 but no action was taken by the Respondent management . The action of the management in orally terminating the services of the Petitioner is illegal and against the principles of Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 . The Hon'ble High Court of A.P. in WP No. 15555/93 directed the Respondent to consider the cases of the Petitioners of that case . Another WP No. 18436/2004 decided on 11-10-2004 , the Hon'ble High Court ofA.P. , directed the Respondent to pass appropriate order on the observations of the regular employees . But the Respondent has not obeyed that order also . Hence , this petition.
3. The Respondent management has filed counter statement . They have challenged the maintainability of the claim petition . The Respondent has submitted that the Petitioner has not worked for more than 240 days . He was not on the rolls of the bank as such , the question of termination of the services did not arise , the allegation to this effect is baseless and misconceived . The bank has never engaged Petitioner in their employment nor the vacancies were notified , the petitioner was engaged for casual work when his services were required by the bank . He was never employed as regular or a full day worker . He is not entitled for the benefit Sec . 25F of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 , because he was engaged to work as and when the bank required services of the Petitioner he was employed for that date only . The Petition has no force and deserves to be rejected or dismissed. The Petitioner cannot claim any advantage from the order passed in WP No. 15555/93 or WP No. 18436/2004 because the Petitioner was not a party to this petition .
5. I have heard Counsels for both the parties and have perused the relevant claim and counter statements of the parties , documentary and oral evidences filed by them. It has been argued by the Learned Counsel for the Petitioner that the Petitioner has challenged the oral order of termination without following the procedure laid down u/s 25 F of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 because the Petitioner has already put in more than 240 days of service under the management and control of the Respondent Nos . 1 and 2. Thus , non - observance of the provision of Sec . 25F in this case is fatal and it cut the very root of the termination order , because the compensation u/s 25F of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 has not been paid in this case . As against this argument of the Learned Counsel for the Petitioner , the Learned Counsel for the Respondent has argued that the Petitioner of this case has not been able to show and prove that he has worked for more than 240 days in the year preceding the alleged date of termination ofhis services . The Petitioner has not produced any appointment letter to show as to when he was appointed in the bank's services . The Learned Counsel for Respondent has cited the statement of the Petitioner dated 1-3-2006 wherein during cross -examination the Petitioner has admitted that he was not given any appointment order . The Respndent's counsel has further cited the oral statement of the Petitioner dated 1-3-2006 wherein the Petitioner has stated that he was not assured in the writing for regularization . The Petitioner has stated that he worked on the extension counter of the Respondent bank at RTI office. The Petitioner has stated that Respondent bank has not recruited anybody as temporary employee for the last five years . A suggestion has been given to the Petitioner by the Respondent that he has not worked for more than 240 days in a year , though the Petitioner has denied the suggestion but the Petitioner on his own has not filed any documentary or other reliable evidence which may prove that the Petitioner has worked for more than 240 days in the year preceding date of his termination . Learned Counsel for the Respondent has argued that it is the duty of the Petitioner before the Industrial Tribunal to prove that he has worked for more than 240 days in the year preceding the date of termination of the services then , only the Petitioner's shall be entitled for the benefit of Sec.25F of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. The Petitioner of this case has not been able to prove that he has worked for more than 240 days preceding the date of his termination as such , the provisions of Sec.25F of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 is not applicable in the present case and non - observance of the procedure of Sec . 25F of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 does not made the order ofdisengagement illegal .
4. Parties were directed to produce their respective evidence . Petitioner filed his affidavit as examination in chief and presented himself for cross - examination . He has filed documents marked as Exs . WI to W23 . Respondent bank filed affidavit of Mr. Ch. Surender Raju as MW1 , as examination in chief and presented him for cross- examination . Respondent has also filed xerox copy of the award dated 24-9-2004 passed in ID No.35/2001 . Copy of the order of Hon'ble High Court of A.P. passed in WP No. 15555/93 between Vishnu Kumar and K. Raju Vs. M.D. , State Bank of Hyderabad . Letter of the Personnel department No. PER . GR. VI/ 7777 dated 28-3-2005 to Sri N.
3099 / 01 / 10-23 INDIA : AUGUST 21 , 2010 / SHRAVANA 30 , 1932
PART 11 - SEC . 3 ( 11 } } 6. The Petitioner has filed Ex . W3 xerox copy of the Identity card issued to the Petitioner as casual labour , when this I Card was issued is not clear . When the Petitioner was appointed is not clear . Ex . W19 is recommendatory letter of the Respondent , the Branch Manager recommending for the absorption of P. Srinivas on consolidated wages . Ex . WI letter dated 11-3-89 for absorption of three employees which is not concerned with the present petition . Ex . W11 and W12 are not concerned with the present case . Ex . W11 to W14 are letter for re - sending and receiving the clearing bags through the Petitioner in the year 2002. Ex . W17 and W18 are letter to deliver high value clearance through P. Srinivas . Ex . W22 is the letter of Respondent to the State President , A.P. Industrial Employees Union informing him that K. Santosh Kumar , P. Srinivas , V. S. Krishnachary , Bhuraram and Sri N. Ramakrishna are not workmen within the meaning of Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 because they are engaged on day to day basis depending upon contingency and they have no right for regularization . On the basis of these documents , the Petitioner's counsel has argued that the Petitioner has worked from 2002 to 2005 regularly and he has completed 240 days , this shows and proves that the Petitioner has been engaged on those dates when there is work available with the Respondent . There is no document to prove that the Petitioner has continuously worked for more than one day at one stretch of a time, this proves the contention of the Respondent that the Petitioner was engaged only on these dates when there was work available with the Respondent and thus the nature of engagement of the Petitioner was for a single day . He was engaged at the beginning of the date and his services were disengaged on the close of the day . Thus there is no proof or evoat of evidence to substance the contention of the Petitioner that he was continuously working for 240 days or even for single week .
2001 onwards nobody was employed by the Respondent bank or recruited by the Respondent bank . Hence , the contention of the Petitioner that he is working since 2001 orbeyond 2001 is misconceived based on no evidence and not fit to be believed by this tribunal . It is undisputed that the Petitioner has been engaged when the Respondent bank has work to be done on a particular date , thereby the Petitioner was engaged for a day's work as and when required by the Respondent management . The Petitioner was never appointed or recruited as a regular employee of the bank, his services were disengaged on the close of the day as such , he cannot claim the benefit of Sec . 25F ofthe Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 and Respondent bank has not committed any illegality in not following the provisions of Sec . 25F of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. Since the Petitioner was engaged for a day's work after the close of the day Petitioner did not remain the employee of the bank , therefore he has not completed more than 240 days in the year preceding the date of his disengagement from the employment . There was no need to follow the procedure of Sec . 25F . Petitioner's disengagement is neither illegal nor it is in violation of the principles of Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 and no interference can be done in the action of the management . The Learned Counsel for the Respondent has cited case ofHon'ble Supreme Court of India reported in 2008 ( 10 ) pages 1 Official Liquidator Vs. Dayanand and Others wherein the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India has quashed the appointment of a company paid staff because they have not come through the proper channel and by their absorption in the service , meritorious persons were not given opportunity or could not avail the opportunity to compete for the best . He has further cited the case law reported in 2006 ( 1 ) Decisions Today ( SC ) page 493 of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the matter between the Secretary , State of Karnataka & Others Vs. Umadevi & Others , wherein the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India has held that the public employment should be made in accordance with the rule- Temporary employees or daily worker or contractual workers have no enforceable legal right to be permanently absorbed into service .
7. Learned Counsel for the Respondent has further argued that the Petitioner has no right to claim regularization or absorption in the services because he was never appointed as a regular casual labour or daily wage worker . Since the Petitioner was not engaged on the regular basis he cannot claim benefit of absorption or regularization . The services of Petitioner were on the day to day basis , thus , he has no legal right to claim regularization or claim the benefit of Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 .
8. I have considered the above argument of the Learned Counsels for the parties and have also gone through the documents cited above and the statement of the Petitioner . In his statement , the Petitioner has no where stated that he has continuously worked for more than 240 days . He himself has admitted that no appointment letter was given to him and within last five years no person has been employed by the Respondent bank as temporary employee . This statement was recorded on 1-3-2006 from the own admission of the Petitioner it is proved that since
9. On the basis of above two case laws of Hon'ble Supreme Court of India , the Learned Counsel for the Respondent has submitted before this court that if this tribunal comes to a conclusion that the Petitioner was daily rate worker , even though in the light of the judgement ofUmadevi , daily wage worker have no enforceable legal right to claim for absorption . More so , in this case . the Petitioner has not been able to prove that he was a regular daily wage worker . But from the evidence available on the record it is clear that the Petitioner was engaged by the Respondent management for only those days when there was work available with the management. Thus , the nature of employment of the Petitioner was that of a purelydaily rate worker , whose employment was terminated at the end [भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]
of the day and thus he was not entitled to claim even daily wage work from the Respondent /Management . Thus , this disengagement of the petitioner , who was not appointed following rules of appointment is not fit to be governed by the principles of Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. The disengagement can not be questioned before this tribunal because Petitioner was not a workman within the meaning of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 .
10. I have considered the above argument and I have also come to the conclusion that from the evidence on record it is proved that Petitioner was engaged for the day's work and his services or engagement were terminated by the end of the day . As such , the Petitioner can not claim regularization on the basis of such casual engagement. The action of the management in disengaging the services of the Petitioner is neither illegal nor against the principles of Industrial Disputes Act . It can not be questioned before this tribunal , the Petitioner has not been able to prove his case for declaring the action of the management as illegal or arbitrary and Petitioner is not entitled for any relief.
Award Passed accordingly . Transmit .
Dictated to Smt P. Phani Gowri , Personal Assistant transcribed by her corrected by me on this the 1st day of May, 2009 .
VED PRAKASH GAUR, Presiding Officer Appendix of evidence
Witnesses examined for the Petitioner
WW1 : Sri P. Srinivas
Witnesses examined for the Respondent
MW 1 : Sri Ch . Surender Raju
Documents marked for the Petitioner Ex.W1: Copy of Ir . No.PER/ GR . VI/ F.22/ 2279 from the Personnel Manager , Admn . to the Regional , Manager , for permanent absorption under ID Actdt . 11-3-1989
Ex. W2: Copy of Ir . Dt. 29-12-99 reg . Absorption of temporary employees on consolidate wage dt. 29-12-99
Ex.W3: Identity card Xerox copies
Ex.W4: Copy of Respondent's Ir . to Chief Manager , deputing Petitioner to take delivery dt . 10-11-99
Ex.W5: Copy of certificate to the Petitioner to take delivery of clearing bags
Ex.W6: Copy of Respondent's Ir . to A.G.M. , forwar- ding representation along with proposaldt . 11-10-99
Ex.W7: Copy of proposal submitted by Respondent to A.G.M. , recommending Petitioner for sweeper cum water boy postdt . 26-7-2001 Ex.W8: Copy of proposal submitted by Respondent to A.G.M. , recommending Petitioner for sweeper cum water boy post dt. 27-9-2001
5239
भारत का राजपत्र अगस्त 21 , 2010/ श्रावण 30 , 1932
Ex.W9: Copy of Ir . of A.G.M. , to the Branch Manager Begumpet appointing Sri K. Shankar Babu as scale wage worker
Ex. W10: Copy of Ir. of Respondent No. F /3 / 430 drawing earlier letter dt. 27-9-2001 and sending the proposal for appointment of Petitioner
Ex.W11 : Copy of Respondent's letter to Chief Manager , Service branch deputing the Petitioner dt . 11-4-2002
Ex. W12: Copy of Respondent's letter to Chief Manager Service branch deputing the Petitionerdt . 22-4-2002
Ex.W13 : Copy of Respondent's letter to Chief Manager Service branch deputing the Petitioner dt . 14-5-2002
Ex. W14: Copy of Respondent's letter to Chief Manager Service branch deputing the Petitioner dt . 21-5-2002
Ex.W15 : Copy of circular dt . 5-6-2002 No. PER/ 2002 2003/15 directions by Head Office to pay Bonus
Ex. W16: Copy of Respondent's letter to Chief Manager Service branch deputing the Petitioner dt . 13-8-2002
Ex, W17 : Copy of Respondent's letter to Chief Manager Service branch deputing the Petitioner dt . 27-8-2002
Ex.W18 : Copy of Respondent's letter to Chief Manager Service branch deputing the Petitioner
Ex.W19 : Copy of Ir . of Respondent recommending the Petitioner for appointmentdt . 24-3-2004 Ex.W20: Copy of demand notice dt . 19-5-2005 by WWI to the Respondent for his promotion to next grade
Ex.W21: Copy of circular dt . 3-6-2005 No. PER / GR/ IV / Misc./1297 issued by Head Office to all the branches to terminate the candidates Ex. W22: Copy of Ir . of D.M. , / Per . & HRD to the State President A.P. Industiral Employees Union that the casual labour are not workmen under the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 .
Ex.W23: Copy of note on augmentation of sub - staff sweepers , for date of appointment and continuation Ex . dt . 6-5-99
Documents marked for the Respondent Ex.M1: Copy of award of CGIT - cum Labour Court , Hyderabaddt . 24-9-2002
Ex.M2: Copy of order in WP No. 15555/1993 dt . 28-3-97
Ex.M3: Copy of order in WP No. 18436/2004dt 11-10-2004 5240
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 21 , 2010 / SHRAVANA 30 , 1932
Ex.M4: Copy of Ir. of State Bank of Hyderabad head office to Sri N. Rama Krishna dt . 28-3-2005 Ex.M5: Copy of Ir . of State Bank of Hyderabad to Sri V. S. Krishnachary dt 28-3-2005 Ex.W6: Copy of Ir . of State Bank of Hyderabad to SriK. Vijay Kumar dt . 28-3-2005 . नई दिल्ली, 27 जुलाई , 2010
का.आ. 2082. औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 ( 194 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में , केन्द्रीय सरकार स्टेट बैंक लुधियाना के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण नं. । , चण्डीगढ़ के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 171/2003 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 28-7-2010 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।
[ सं. एल -12012/ 138/2003- आईआर ( बी -1 ) ] जोहन तोपनो , अवर सचिव New Delhi , the 27th July , 2010
S.O. 2082. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award ( I. D. No. 171/2003 ) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal / Labour Court , No.1 , Chandigarh as shown in the Annexure in the industrial dispute between the management of State Bank of India , Ludhiana , and their workman , received by the Central Government on 28-7-2010 .
[No. L - 12012/ 138 /2003 - IR ( B - 1 ) ] JOHAN TOPNO , Under Secy .
ANNEXURE
BEFORE SHRI GYANENDRA KUMAR, SHARMA PRESIDING OFFICER , CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL - CUM - LABOUR COURT - 1 CHANDIGARH
Case 1. D. No. 171/2003
Shri . Iqbal Singh S / o Shri J.G. Verma , House No. 3030 /A Sector- 44-10 , Chandigarh - 160023
[PART II - SEC . 3 ( ii) ] w.e.f. 22-10-1999 is just and legal ? If not , what relief the workman is entitled to and from which date ? " After receiving the reference , parties were informed . Parties appeared and filed their respective pleadings . On perusal of the pleadings of the parties , it is clear that workman was charge sheeted for receiving the premium of certain amounts from different persons namely Smt . Sumitra Devi , Smt . Subhadra, Shri Suresh Kumar , Smt . Mandara and did not deposit the same in their respective accounts . On the basis of the complaint filed by these effected persons (complainant ) explanation was called for and the workman deposited the entire amount . Dissatisfying with the reply, the workman was given a charge sheet . The workman replied the charge sheet . Initially he also denied the charges leveled against him . Butduring the proceedings of the enquiry, the workman in writing as well as in oral admitted the charges . The enquiry officer on the basis of the admission of the workman submitted the enquiry report and the disciplinary authority on the basis of the report , after affording the opportunity for personal hearing to the workman , awarded the punishment . Before this Tribunal , the workman has challenged the very nature of admission . As per the contention of the workman he has not voluntarily admitted the charges and his admission suffered as follows:
(1 ) The enquiry officer before recording admission has not warned him of consequences of admission which can resulted in dismissal/ discharge or removal from the services .
(2) The enquiry officer , disciplinary authority and appellate authority did not take any notice on the explanation given by the workman on the basis of the admission which was not voluntary.
...Applicant
Versus
The Assistam General Manager State Bank of India , Region - II , Zonal Office , Ludhiana - 141008.
(3) The workman has not admitted the charges at the time ofreceiving of the charge sheet . As per the provisions of Bipartite Settlement , the enquiry can be dispensed with only if the employee admitted the charge in reply to the charge sheet and in case the management did not intend to the cessation of the services of the employee charge sheeted .
...Respondent
APPEARANCES
For the Workman : Shri J. P. Singh
For the Management : Shri Ashok Khullar
AWARD
Passed on : 8-7-10
Government of India vide notification No. L - 12012/ 138/ 2003 - IR ( B - 1 ) , dated 19-9-2003 by exercising its powers under Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act . ( the Act in short ) has referred the following industrial dispute for adjudication to this Tribunal: --
Whether the action of the management of State Bank of India in awarding the punishment or removal from services to Shri Iqbal Singh , Ex - Messenger On the basis of the above contentions , the workman has prayed for setting aside the dismissal order . The workman has also stated that the punishment awarded was not proportionate to the misconduct .
Both of the parties were afforded the opportunity for adducing evidence . Complete enquiry file has been filed by the bank . On perusal of the enquiry file and the materials on record filed and adduced before this tribunal . I am of the view that workman was charge sheeted as follows: -
1. While posted as messenger , at Maru Mandi Branch , he allegedly unauthorisedly collected Recurring Deposit instalments from the under noted four Recurring DepositAccount holders : --
2. He did not deposit the so collected money in the relative account holder's accounts immediately after collection.
5241 भारत का राजपत्र अगस्त 21 , 2010/ श्रावण 30 , 1932
[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]
He unauthorisedly made the authenticated entries in respect of the Recurring Deposit instalments collected by him , in the respective pass books of the above mentioned four account holders , without depositing the money in their recurring deposit accounts .
The workman replied the charge sheet and dissatisying with the reply an enquiry was ordered to be conducted . During enquiry proceedings the workman orally and in writing admitted the charges . On the basis of the admission the enquiry officer submitted the report and after complying with the provisions of the Bipartite Settlement regarding issuing show cause notice containing tentative punishment and affording the opportunity of personally hearing , disciplinary authority awarded the punishment . The workman preferred an appeal which was dismissed . Thereafter , the workman raised the industrial dispute and on account of failure of the conciliation proceedings this reference .
Traditional Civil Courts . The proceedings before this Tribunal and the departmental proceedings run on the basis of the justice , equity and good conscious . Provisions of Procedural Laws and the Evidence Act are not applicable . Any evidence which can not be strictly termed as evidence in the Evidence Act , can be relied upon by the Tribunal and by the enquiry officer in department proceedings , if it has credibility and reliability and too if justice requires so to do . The accused has to be informed about the consequences of confessional statement is the settled principle of criminal jurisprudence. It has no role to play in departmental proceedings and proceedings before the Tribunal . Likewise , it is not necessary that workman admits the charges when he has been submitted the charge sheet and not hereafter . There is no bar , legislative and the procedural , applicable in the Tribunal and in department proceedings which restrain the workman or any other delinquent official to admit the charge at any other stage . Meaning thereby, charge can be admitted at any stage . Duty of the enquiry officer and the Tribunal is to look The proceedings before this Tribunal are different then the proceedings before Criminal Courts and the
Name of A/ C Holder
S.No. R/ DA/ C No.
Amount of inst . in Rs .
Dt. ofCollection
Total amount of collection ( in Rs . )
(6)
(5)
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
300
21-8-95
14/2892
Smt . Sumitra Devi
A. ( 1 )
300
21-10-95
(2)
18-11-95
300
(3)
18-12-95
300
(4)
300
20-2-96
(5)
300
18-3-96
(6)
18-4-96
300
(7)
20-5-96
300
(8)
300
18-6-96
(9)
300
18-7-96
(10)
19-8-96
300
(11)
300
18-9-96
(12)
16-10-96
300
(13)
300
18-11-96
.4)
300
18-12-96
(15)
300
18-1-97
(16)
300
18-2-97
(17)
18-3-97
300
(18)
300
18-4-97
(19)
300
19-5-97
(20)
300
18-6-97
(21)
300
19-7-97
(22)
6900
300
18-8-97
(23) 5242
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 21 , 2010/ SHRAVANA 30, 1932
[ PART II - SEC . 3 ( ii ) ] (2)
(1)
(3)
(4)
(5)
(6) Smt . Subhadra
(B) 17/5057
18-6-97
600
600 17/5097
20-6-97
Sh . Suresh Kumar
(C)
200
200 Smt . Mandara
200
18-3-96
(D)(1) 16/3130
18-4-96
200
(2)
20-5-96
200
(3)
18-6-96
(4)
200
18-7-96
200
(5)
19-8-96
200
(6)
18-9-96
200
(7)
16-10-96
(8)
200
18-11-96
200
(9)
18-12-96
200
(10)
18-1-97
200
(11)
18-2-97
200
(12)
18-3-97
200
(13)
18-4-97
200
(14)
19-5-97
200
(15)
18-6-97
200
(16)
19-7-97
200
(17)
18-8-97
200
(18)
3600 Total amount collected in the above four accounts
11300 whether the charge has been admitted freely without coercion and after understanding the nature admitted the fact . If the charge has been admitted freely without pressure or coercion and after knowing the consequences of admission , it will be a good piece of evidence and sufficient to inflict the punishment for the misconduct workman has admitted . Thus , there is no force on any of the contentions raised by the workman regarding the admission .
Once the charge was admitted orally and in writing the burden of proof that charges were not voluntarily admitted is on the workman . The workman has not challenged the voluntarily admission during the cross- examination . In his cross - examination , he has shown his ignorance about the admission . As per the statement of the workman :
I do not remember whether I have admitted the charges during the enquiry proceedings . I do not remember whether enquiry officer has afforded full opportunity of hearing to me . "
was forced to sign the cheque to deposited the amount which he is said to be embezzled. The Manager got his signature under threat of lodging a criminal complaint against him. When any embrzzlement is committed by any person to initiate the criminal proceedings is a right of the department . Initiating criminal proceeding can be termed as threat by workman as it was one of the option available to the management. If the workman has not committing anything, why has he deposited the amount is unanswered ? Moreover , the workman has failed to prove any instance which leads to his admission doubtful . On perusal of the entire materials on record , I am of the view that workman has voluntarily admitted the charges and there was no procedural mistake committed by the enquiry officer in submitting the report on the basis of admission . Considering the nature of misconduct the punishment awarded to the workman , in my view was / is proportionate . No interference is called for in decision making of the enquiry officer and awarding the punishment by the disciplinary authority. The reference and industrial dispute is accordingly answered . Let Central Government be approached for publication of award , and thereafter , file be consigned to record room .
G. K. SHARMA . Presiding Officer The above statement of the workman shows that he has not challenged the nature of admission before this Tribunal . In his evidence , the workman has admited that he has deposited the entire amount but under pressure . He [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]
नई दिल्ली , 27 जुलाई , 2010
का.आ. 2083.-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में , केन्द्रीय सरकार एवं बी.एस.एन. एल. के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच , अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालय , नं. 1 , चण्डीगढ़ के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 1269/2006 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 27-7-2010 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।
[सं. एल- 40012/126/2005 - आईआर ( डीयू) ] जोहन तोपनो , अवर सचिव New Delhi , the 27th July , 2010
S.O. 2083.-In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) , the Central Government hereby publishes the Award ( Ref. No. 1269/ 2006) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal - cum- Labour Court , No. 1 , Chandigarh as shown in the annexure , in the industrial dispute between the employers in relation to the management of BSNL and their workmen , which was received by the Central Government on 27-7-2010.
[No. L -40012/ 126 /2005 - IR ( DU) ] JOHAN TOPNO , Under Secy .
ANNEXURE
BEFORE SRI GYANENDRA KUMAR SHARMA, PRESIDING OFFICER, CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL - CUM - LABOUR COURT - I , CHANDIGARH
Case No. I.D. No.1269 /2006
Smt . Kailash Devi ,
W/ o Shri Kasturi Lal , H. No. 114 , Gali No. 3 , Krishna Nagar , Jammu
...Applicant Versus
The General Manager , Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd. , Exchange Building , Exchange Road , Jammu.
Respondent
APPEARANCES
:
For the Workman
None
None
For the Management :
AWARD
Passed on 06-07-2010
Central Government vide notification No. L 40012 / 126/ 2005 - IR( DU ) , dated 15-06-2006, has referred the following dispute to this Tribunal for adjudication :
5243
भारत का राजपत्र अगस्त 21 , 2010 / श्रावण 30 , 1932
"Whether the action of the management of BSNL i.e. Division Engineer , BSNL , SDE , Telephone , Trunk Exchange , Kachhi Chhawani , Jammu , and General Manager , Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd. , Jammu in terminating the services of workman Smt . Kailash Devi W/ o Kasturi Lal w.e.f. December 2003 is legal and justitied ? If not , what reief the workman is entitled to and from which date ? "
2 Case repeatedly called . None appeared for the workman and the management . The case was fixed for evidence of the parties . The present reference was referred to this Tribunal in the year 2006. Already four years have been elapsed . The workman has not appeared for her evidence . It appears that workman is not interested to pursue with the present reference . In view of the above , the present reference is return to the Central Government for want of prosecution . Central Government be informed. File be consigned .
06-07-2010
G. K. SHARMA , Presiding Officer नई दिल्ली , 27 जुलाई , 2010
का.आ. 2084. औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 (1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में , केन्द्रीय सरकार बी.एस.एन. एल. के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच , अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालय , नं. 1 , चण्डीगढ़ के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 1200/2005 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 27-7-2010 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।
[सं. एल- 40012/20/2005- आई आर ( डीयू) ]
जोहन तोपनो , अवर सचिव New Delhi , the 27th July , 2010
S.O. 2084.- In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) , the Central Government hereby publishes the Award ( Ref . No. 1200/ 2005 ) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal - cum- Labour Court , No.1 , Chandigarh as shown in the annexure , in the industrial dispute between the employers in relation to the management of BSNL and their workmen , which was received by the Central Government on 27-07-2010 .
[No. L -40012/ 20 /2005 - IR ( DU) ]
JOHAN TOPNO , Under Secy .
ANNEXURE
BEFORE SRI GYANENDRA KUMAR SHARMA, PRESIDING OFFICER , CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM - LABOUR COURT - I, CHANDIGARH
Case I.D. No. 1200/2005 5244
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 21 , 2010 / SHRAVANA 30, 1932
Sh . Ram Singh ,
Son of Shri Milkhi Singh , Resident of House No. B - 13 , Mati Dass Nagar , (Mahesh Nagar) Ambala Cantt .
[ PART II SEC. 3 (ii) ] नई दिल्ली , 27 जुलाई , 2010
... Applicant
Versus
1. The General Manager ,
Telecom BSNL , LilaBhawan , Patiala .
2. AGM , Telecom Circle , BSNL , Sector - 34A, Chandigarh
3. The SDO ( Phones - I ) , Baradari Garden , Telephone Exchange , Opposite Kali Devi Mandir , Patiala .
4. The D.E. Telecom , BSNL External , Baradari Garden , Telephone Exchange , Opposite Kali Devi Mandir , Patiala,
का.आ. 2085.-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में , केन्द्रीय सरकार बी.एस.एन. 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 सीजी आई टी/ एल सी/ आर/ 101/90 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 27-7-2010 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।
[सं. एल-40011 / 11/89- डी -2 ( बी) ]
जोहन तोपनो, अबर सचिव New Delhi , the 27th July, 2010
S.O. 2085. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) , the Central Government hereby publishes the Award ( Ref . No. CGITA LC/ R/ 101 /90 ) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal- cum- Labour Court , Jabalpur as shown in the annexure , in the industrial dispute between the employers in relation of the management of BSNL and their workmen , which was received by the Central Government on 27-07-2010 .
Respondent
APPEARANCES
For the Workman
None
:
None
For the Management :
AWARD
Passed on 15-07-2010
Government of India vide notification No. L - 40012/ 20 /2005 - IR( DU ) , dated 17th of August, 2005 by exercising its powers under Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( the Act in short) , referred the following industrial dispute for adjudication to this Tribunal :-
"Whether the action of the management of Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd. , Patiala in removing Shri Ram Singh son of Shri Milkhi Singh , Ex . Mazdoor w.e.f. 27-10-1988 from , service retrospectively without giving him proper opportunity to defend his case is legal and justified? If not , to what relief the concerned work man is entitled to and from which date ? "
2 Case repeatedly called . None appeared for the Parties . Today the case was fixed for the evidence of the parties . No witness of the workman is present . The reference was referred by the Central Government in the year 2005 and already five years have elapsed . It appears that workman is not interested to pursue with , the present reference . In view of the above , the present reference is returned to the Central Government for want of prosecution . Central Govt .be informed . File be consigned .
Chandigarh 15-07-2010
G.K. SHARMA , Presiding Officer
[No. L-40011 / 11 / 89 - D - 2 ( B ) ]
JOHAN TOPNO . Under Secy .
ANNEXURE
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL- CUM - LABOUR COURT , JABALPUR
No. CGIT/LC/ R/ 101 / 90
PRESIDING OFFICER : SHRI MOHD . SHAKIR HASAN Shri L. D. Sharma , Divisional Secretary , Akhil Bhartiya Doorsanchar Karamchari Sangh , Division Chhindwara , CTO Complex,
Workman/ Union Jabalpur
Versus
General Manager , Telecom Department , BSNL , Bhopal (MP)
The Divisional Engineer , Telecommunaication , Chhindwara Division , Civic Centre , In front of Prabhuvandana Talkies . Jabalpur(MP)
Management
AWARD
Passed on this 16th day of July , 2010 1. The Government of India , Ministry of Labour vide its Notification No. L - 4001 1 / 11 / 89 - ID - 2 ( B ) dated 28-2-90 has [भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]
referred the following dispute for adjudication by this tribunal:
" Whether the action of the management of Telecommunication , Bhopal (MP) in terminating the services of Shri Ajay Kumar Kashyap , S / o Shri Motilal Kashyap, Ex. Labour w.e.f. 29-2-88 is justified or not ? If not , what relief the concerned workman is entitled for?"
2. The case of the workman/Union in short is that the workman was appointed as a Telegraph Mazdoor w.e.f. 7-10-85 and worked till 29-2-88 . His service was terminated without any notice or without payment of compensation in accordance with the provision of Sec - 25 - F of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. It is stated that in the year 1985 , he worked 75 days , in 1986 340 days , in 1987 330 days and in 1988 he worked 60 days . It is stated that the termination is illegal and the workman be reinstated with back wages .
3. The non - applicant/management appeared and filed written statement . The case of the management , interlia, is that the workman was casual daily worker for sometime and left the work on his own accord to seek better employment . His whereabout was also not known to the management . It is denied that on 29-2-88 he was orally intimated that his service was no longer required . It is stated that the dispute was raised after about one year . It is submitted that the reference be answered in favour of the management.
4. The Union / workman absented and had not adduced evidence . As such the reference is proceeded exparte against the Union/ workman on 20-5-2009 .
5. The only issue for determination is that whether the termination of ex - workman by the management is proper andjustified.
6. To prove the case , the management has adduced evidence in the reference . The management witness Shri R. K. Shivavedi is Telecom District Engineer , Balaghat . He is conversant with the case . He has stated that workman did work for some time as casual labour and left the work on his own accord . His evidence shows that the workman has not completed 240 days during a period of twelve calendar months preceding the date with reference . His evidence is unrebutted . There is no other evidence on the record to contradict the case of the management . The burden was on the Union/workman who had raised the dispute to prove that provision of Section 25 - F of the I.D. Act 1947 is applicable . Thus it is clear that the management was justified in terminating the services of workman . Accordingly the reference is answered in favour of the management.
7. In the result the award is passed without any order to costs .
3099 4710-24
5245
भारत का राजपत्र अगस्त 21 , 2010/ श्रावण 30 , 1932
8. Let the copies of the award be sent to the Government of India , Ministry of Labour & Employment as per rules .
MOHD. SHAKIR HASAN, PresidingOfficer नई दिल्ली, 27 जुलाई , 2010
का.आ. 2086. औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार एवं दूरसंचार विभाग के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालय हैदराबाद के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 73/2005 ) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 27-7-2010 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।
[सं. एल- 40025/4 /2010--आईआर ( डीयू) ] जोहन टोपनो , अवर सचिव , New Delhi , the 27th July, 2010
S.O. 2086.- In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 73/2005) ofthe Central Government Industrial Tribunal- cum-Labour Court, Hyderabad 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 27-07-2010 .
[No. 1-40025 /4/2010- IR ( DU) ] JOHAN TOPNO , Under Secy.
ANNEXURE
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL- CUM - LABOUR COURT AT HYDERABAD
Present : - Shri Ved Prakash Gaur, Presiding Officer Dated the 2nd day of July , 2010
INDUSTRIAL DISPUTE L.C.No.73/2005
Between:
... Petitioner SriKathakonda Gangaiah , S/ o Venkatnarsu , R/ o Ward No.19 , H.No.5-6-146/1 , Kapuwada, Karimnagar District .
AND
The Sub - Divisional Officer , Telecom, New Telephone Bhawan , Karimnagar- 505001 .
Respondent 5246
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 21 , 2010/ SHRAVANA 30 , 1932
APPEARANCES :
:
For the Petitioner
Sri K. Srinivasa Rao , Advocate For the Respondent : Sri Karoor Mohan , Advocate
AWARD
This petition under Sec.2 A ( 2) of the I.D. Act , 1947 has been filed by Sri K. Gangaiah an ex - employee of S.D.O. , Telecom, Karimnagar in light of the judgment of the Hon'ble High Court of Andhra Pradesh reported in W.P. No.8395 of 1989 dated 3-8-1995 between Sri U. Chinnappa and M/s . Cotton Corporation of India and two others .
2. It has been alleged in the claim petition that Petitioner joined the service of Respondent organization as sweeper in the year 1989 and he worked continuously without any break in service till he was illegally terminated by Respondent on 1-8-2003 without assigning any reason and without conducting any enquiry or without giving any notice which is illegal , unjust , contrary to law and liable to be quashed . It has further been stated that Petitioner reported for duty but he was not allowed to enter in the premises of Respondent . There was plenty of work with the Respondent management and juniors to the Petitioner namely , S/ Sri T. Butchaiah and Srinivas have been continuing in service , thus , the disengagement of Petitioner is illegal and bad in law . Petitioner was issued with the identity card and payment slips , vouchers which will prove that he has been working with the Respondent from the year 1989. He gave several representations for regularization of his services but no action was taken by the management . Though the Petitioner's juniors were regularized in service , Petitioner's services were only terminated . Petitioner was engaged for work of sweeping , watering and gardening of Respondent premises . The action of management is unjustified and punishment imposed is shockingly disproportionate . The Petitioner's family has been thrown on streets without any fault of the Petitioner , hence this petition is to set aside the removal order and to direct the Respondent to engage the Petitioner to be post he was holding .
3. Counter statement has been filed by the Respondent management denying that Petitioner was working with the Respondent since 1989 or his services were terminated on 1-8-2003 . It was also denied that services of Petitioner were terminated without conducting any enquiry or issuance of notice . It has been stated by the Respondent that no employment was given to the Petitioner and he is put to strict proof. The Respondent has further stated that the Petitioner'never reported for duty nor anyone prevented him to enter into the premises of Respondent . The case of Sri T. Butchaiah has no relevance to the Petitioner . No identity card was issued to the Petitioner because it is issued to the permanent employees . Petitioner has no right to seek regularization as such , the question of regularization does not arise . The
[ PART 11 ---SEC . 3 (ii ) ] Petitioner's services were never engaged as such , termination does not arise . Petitioner is not entitled for any relief.
4. Parties were directed to file their evidence . Petitioner has filed community , native and birth certificate which is marked as Ex . W1 . Petitioner has also filed original identity card duly signed by S.D.E. , Telecom District Karimanagar which is marked as Ex . W2 , xerox copy of identity card issued by S.D.E. , Karimnagar , xerox copy of age certificate marked as Ex. W3 , xerox copy of the letter of department of Telecommunications approving the contract of M/ s . Padma Domestic Services , for Rs . 1300 per month , xerox copy of ACG - 17 vouchers of payment to K. Gangaiah by Indian Post and Telegraphs Department for the month of June , 1995 which is marked as Ex.W4 , receipt of payment of Rs. 1800 it is marked as Ex . W5 , original salary certificate by S.D.O. , Phones , Karimanagar dated 18-12-1996 that Sri K. Gangaiah is working in their office on daily wages as sweeper on the payment of Rs.750 / PM it is marked as EX.W6 and filed another two salary certificates dated 18-12-1996 and 10-11-2000 . Copy of representation to the management for appointment as causal mazdoor dated 4-11-1999 it is marked as Ex . W7 , Copy of another representation as part time sweeper to the management dated 9-3-98 it is marked as Ex . W8 and copy of legal notice marked as Ex . W9 .
5. On the date of arguments Petitioner's counsel appeared and argued on behalf of the Petitioner and Respondent's counsel did not attend for arguments . I have heard Learned Counsel of Petitioner also gone through the claim petition , counter statement filed by the parties and the evidence adduced by the Petitioner in the form of documents as well as oral evidence on affidavit .
6. The Petitioner has admitted that he has not filed any document , to prove that he was appointed by the Respondent in 1989 and was terminated on 1-8-2003 . He has admitted that his name was on the muster rolls . He has further admitted that Ex . Wl to W3 were in his custody .
7. It has to be considered whether the Petitioner was employed by Respondent management and was terminated by them without following the procedure of law . The Petitioner has filed xerox copy of identity card signed by S.D.E. , Karimnagar and communication letter between Telecom District Manager and S.D.E. , Karimanagar approving the Labour Contract of M / s . Padma Domestic Services for Rs . 1300 per month for a period of one year . The Petitioner has filed payment receipts of M/ s . Padma Domestic Services as Ex.W5 . He has filed certificate dated 10-11-2000 from S.D.F. , Trunks that K. Gangaiah S / o K.Venkat worked as sweeper from 1-7-1997 to 31-3-1999 again from 1-4-1999 to till date and certificate of payment by SDO , Karimnagar , it prove that Petitioner was engaged to work as sweeper from 1-7-1997 to 10-11-2000 . There is receipt of payment of June , 2002 , this shows and prove भारत का राजपत्र [ भाग II- खण्ड 3( ii) ]
thatPetitioner was engaged to work as part time sweeper in the Office of S.D.O.E , Karimangar . No doubt , there is no written appointment order or written termination order . The documents on record along with oral evidence show that Petitioner was engaged to work from July, 1997 and he worked up to the year 2002 , he has stated that he was disengaged from 1-8-2003 without any order, hence it has been challenged. The Respondent has denied taking services of Petitioner and engaging the Petitioner but document prove that Petitioner has worked in Respondent's organization , his services were taken for more than 6 years but he has been disengaged without following the principles of Sec . 25F of Industrial Disputes Act , 1947, no notice has been given to him . This amount to unfair labour practice. From the service certificate of the Respondent it is proved that Petitioner has worked continuously from 1-7-1997 till 10-11-2000 , as such , it was mandatory on the part of the Respondent management to abide with the provisions of Sec. 25F of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. They have not complied with the provisions of Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. Hence , the disengagement of the Petitioner is unjustified and it amounts to unfair labour practice and illegal in the eye of law. The question is decided accordingly.
8. Since the Petitioner has been disengaged from the services without following the proper procedure as such , he is entitled for the reinstatement in the service . Respondent is directed to reinstate the Petitioner within two months from the receipt of this order . Petitioner will not be entitled for back wages . Hence , this award.
Award passed accordingly. Transmit .
Dictated to Smt . P. Phani Gowri , Personal Assistant transcribed by her corrected by me on this the 2nd day of July, 2010 .
VED PRAKASH GAUR, Presiding Officer Appendix of evidence
Witnesses examined for
the Petitioner
Witnesses examined for theRespondent
WW ! : Sri K. Gangaiah NIL
Documents marked for the Petitioner Ex.WI : Copy of community , nativity & date of birth certificate
Original identity card
Ex.W2:
Ex.W3: Copy of age certificate
Ex.W4: Copies of ACG - 17 pay slips (6. Nos . ) Payment receipt
Ex.W5 :
Ex.W6: Original salary certificates (2 Nos .)
Copy of representation dt 4-11-1999 Ex. W7:
Ex.W8: Original representation dt . 9-3-98
3099 191110-25
5247
अगस्त 21 , 2010/ श्रावण 30 , 1932
Ex.W9: Copy of legal notice Documents marked for the Respondent NIL
नई दिल्ली , 27 जुलाई , 2010
का.आ. 2087. औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार शिप बिल्डिंग सेन्टर के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच , अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालय हैदराबाद के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 127/2004) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 27-7-2010को प्राप्त हुआ था ।
[सं. एल -42025/6/ 2010- आईआर(डीयू) ] जोहन तोपनो , अवर सचिव New Delhi , the 27th July, 2010
S.O. 2087. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 127/ 2004) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal - cum- Labour Court , Hyderabad as shown in the annexure , in the industrial dispute between the employers in relation to the management of Ship Building Centre and their workmen , which was received by the Central Government on 27-7-2010.
[No. L -42025 /6/2010- IR ( DU) ]
JOHAN TOPNO , Under Secy . ANNEXURE
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL - CUM - LABOUR COURT AT HYDERABAD
PRESENT: SHRI VED PRAKASH GAUR, Presiding Officer
Dated the 23rd day of June , 2010
INDUSTRIAL DISPUTE L.C. No. 127/2004 Between:
The Project Director,
Ship Building Centre ,
Varuna Block ,
... Petitioner Visakhapatnam .
AND
Sri M. Ganesh ,
S/ o Ramu Naidu , R/o D. No. 4-61 , Nagendra Colony, Kothapalem .
Gopalapatnam,
...Respondents Visakhapatnam .
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: AUGUST 21 , 2010/ SHRAVANA 30 , 1932
APPEARANCES :
For the Petitioner : Sri Y. Ramesh , Advocate For the Respondent : Sri G. Jaya Prakash Babu , Advocate
ORDER
This case has been filed by the Petitioner Sri M. Ganesh , Ex. Employee of Ship Building Centre , Varma Block , Visakhapatnam under Sec.2 A ( 2) of the I.D. Act , 1947 in view of the judgment of the Hon'ble High Court of Andhra Pradesh reported in W.P. No.8395 of 1989 dated 3-8-1995 between Sri U. Chinnappa and M/ s . Cotton Corporation of India and two others challenging the legality of the order of his termination of the service . Earlier this case was filed in the Industrial Tribunal - cum- Labour Court , Visakhapatnam and after creation of this Court transferred to this Court in view of the Government of India , Ministry of Labour's order No.H - 11026 / 1 /2001 - IR ( C - 11 ) dated 18-10-2001 bearing I.T.I.D. No : 1/2003 and renumbered in this Court as L.C.I.D No. 127/2004 .
2. The management has filed counter . The management has raised the jurisdiction plea through its counter statement challenging the very jurisdiction of this tribunal in Para 4 and 9 of their counter statement . It has been alleged by the Respondent that the Petitioner was not appointed by the Respondent management . Moreover , the employees of Ship Building Centre and Administration (Non Industrial and Non - Ministerial Staff ) supervisory cadre are from the Union Personnel of the Armed Forces of India and their services are governed by the rules of Central Government to whom the Central Administrative Tribunal Act applies . The Ship Building Centre is not an industrial establishment and provisions of Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 is not applicable in the matter of employees of Ship Building Centre .
3. An I. A. was filed by the Respondent management on 21-1-2009 stating therein that the Ship Building Centre , Visakhapatnam is a project of Government of India , Ministry of Defence , Department of Defence Research and Development. The Project Director is the Head of the organisation . The Government of India has exempted the applicability of provisions of Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 videGazette of India notification dated 7-1-2003 , as such the provision of Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 is not applicable in the matter of present Petitioner , the petition is not maintainable and it is fit to be returned to the Petitioner for presentation to the appropriate Court or authority .
4.Along with the affidavit , the Respondent has filed affidavit and certified copy of the Gazette of India Extraordinary , Part II , Section - 3 , Sub- section ( ii ) published on 7-1-2003 whereby the provision of Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 has been exempted to have effect in respect of working of the employees of the Centre .
[ PART II- St.C. 3 ( ii) ]
===
5. The I. A. filed by the Respondent is allowed on 23-6-2010 stating therein that in the light of the provision stated in Sec.36 ( b ) of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 which empowers the appropriate Government to exempt any of its undertakings or establishments from the purview ofthe Industrial Disputes Act , 1947. Therefore , this tribunal has got nojurisdiction to entertain claim petition filed under Sec.2A(2 ) of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 , hence , the petition filed by workman Sri M. Ganesh is without jurisdiction . The petition be returned to the Petitioner for presentation to appropriate forum. In view of the I. A. 60/2009 filed in this case , this petition is closed . Ordered accordingly . Transmit .
Dictated to Smt P. Phani Gowri , Personal Assistant transcribed by her corrected by me on this the 23rd day of June , 2010 .
VED PRAKASH GAUR , Presiding Officer Appendix of evidence
Witnesses examined for the Respondent
Witnesses examined for the Petitioner NIL
NIL
Documents marked for the Petitioner NIL Documents marked for the Respondent NIL नई दिल्ली, 27 जुलाई , 2010
का.आ. 2088. औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में , केन्द्रीय सरकार बी.एस.एन. एल. के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालय नं. 1 , चण्डीगढ़ के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 11/2004) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 27-7-2010 को प्राप्त हुआ था।
[सं. एल- 40012/ 88/2003- आईआर (डीयू) ] जोहन तोपनो, अवर सचिव New Delhi , the 27th July , 2010
S.O. 2088. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the Award ( Ref . No. 11/2004 ) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal - cum - Labour Court No. IChandigarh as shown in the annexure , in the industrial dispute between the employers in relation to the management of BSNL and their workmen , which was received by the Central Government on 27-7-2010 .
[No. L -40012/ 88 / 2003 - IR ( DU ) ] JOHAN TOPNO , Under Secy .
[ भाग II - खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]
ANNEXURE
BEFORE SHRI GYANENDRA KUMAR SHARMA , PRESIDING OFFICER, CENTRAL GOVT . INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL CUM - LABOUR COURT , -I ,
CHANDIGARH
Case I.D. No. 11/2004
Shri Sukhdev Ram,
S / o Shri Sohan Lal ,
C/ o General Secretary , Trade Union Council , Patiala.
5249
भारत का राजपत्र अगस्त 21 , 2010/ श्रावण 30 , 1932
...Applicant
Versus
The General Manager ,
Telecom , BSNL ,
Another preliminary objection was raised that workman was guilty of non -disclosing the material facts . As per the management, before raising this industrial dispute the workman filed an original of application before the Central Administrative Tribunal and the Central Administrative Tribunal after hearing the parties disposed off the petition as contested . The workman without disclosing this fact raised the industrial dispute and the appropriate Government referred the same without considering this issue . The management has contended that the claim of the workman is barred by the principle of resjudicata . On merits , it is contended by the management that workman has voluntarily abandoned his services and it is very well reflected from the orders of the Central Administrative Tribunal .
...Respondent
Sangrur ( Punjab ) .
APPEARANCES
:
For the Workman
Shri H. S. Bath
Shri G.C. Babbar
For the Management :
AWARD
Passed on: - 13-7-10
Government of India vide notification No. L - 40012/ 88 /2003 - IR ( DU ) , dated 29-1-2004 by exercising its powers under Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act , (the Act in short ) has referred the following industrial dispute for adjudication to this Tribunal :-
"Whether the action of the management of General Manager , Telecom ( BSNL ) , Sangrur in terminating the services of Shri Sukhdev Ram S / o Shri Sohan Lal , Ex - work - Charge Employee w.e.f. 09-12-1988 without any notice and without paying him any retrenchment compensation is legal and just ? If not to what relief the concerned workman is entitled to and from which date ? "
After receiving the reference parties were informed .
Parties appeared and filed their respective pleadings . As per the pleadings of the workman , he worked with the management for 1289 days from 25-03-1983 to 09-12-1988 and his services were terminated on 09-12-1988 without notice or one month wages in lieu of notice and without payment of retrenchment compensation . During the period he was working with the management , he was drawing Rs . 14.45 /- per day . The workman could not get the service certificate and submitted a number of representations for reinstatement and also remain sick . Juniors to him are still working which leads his termination void . On the basis of the above , the workman has prayed for setting - aside the termination order and for a consequential order for his reinstatement with consequential benefits .
The management appeared and filed written statement. Preliminary objection was taken that claim of the workman is bad on account of delay and latches .
Parties were afforded the opportunity for adducing evidence . Evidence was rccorded . Documentary evidence filed by the parties are also on record . I have heard the parties at length and perused the entire materials on record .
First of all , I have to discussed the preliminary objections taken by the management regarding delay and latches in raising the industrial dispute and for not disclosing the material facts before this Tribunal . As per the contention of the workman , his services were terminated on 08-12-1988 and he raised the industrial dispute on 06-12-2002 almost after 14 years . It is true that no limitation is given in the Industrial Disputes Act for raising the industrial dispute , but so many judicial pronouncements have settled the issue that industrial dispute should be raised within a reasonable time . No firm definition of the reasonable time can be given . It always depends on the facts and circumstances of each case . Considering the nature of the proceedings before this Tribunal and the departmental proceedings no definite period in which the industrial dispute should be raised can be settled. The Tribunal or the authority concern have to perused so many factors including the socio - econonmic condition of one of the party to the proceedings . Meaning thereby , 14 years delay may not be the fettle if it is properly explained . but in the case before the Tribunal the delay has not been explained . It is only mentioned that workman moved so many representations and also remain sick . No representation has been filed before this Tribunal while the workman was afforded the opportunity for adducing evidence . Likewise , there is no evidence on record to prove the sickness of the workman for the period he failed to raise the industrial dispute . The 14 years period undoubtedly is not a reasonable time . As stated earlier , it may not be fattle if explained , but the workman failed to explain the cause for raising the industrial dispute after abnormal delay of 14 years . Moreover , the management has disclosed one more fact which has not been disclosed by the workman . Before raising the industrial dispute , the workman filed an original petition before the Central Administrative Tribunal , Chandigarh and the Central Administrative Tribunal after affording the opportunity of 5250
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: AUGUST 21 , 2010 / SHRAVANA 30 , 1932
being heard to both of the parties dismissed the petition. The order passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal has been filed by the management . On perusal of the order passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal . It is evidently clear that Central Administrative Tribunal has considered every issue and disposed of the Case which have been raised by the workman before this Tribunal in the industrial dispute , Undoubtedly , the workman is guilty for non - disclosing the material facts . Where any party is guilty and there are latches on the part of any party for non - disclosing the material facts , the Tribunal should take serious note of it . Thus , the workman is guilty of raising the industrial dispute after abnormal delay of 14 years without explaining the reason and he is also guilty for non- disclosing all the material facts as stated above . On these grounds , the claims of the workman have no legs to stand .
On merits as well Central Administrative Tribunal has elaborately discussed the issue of voluntarily abandonment of services by the workman . The documents filed by the workman proves that he himself absented for a long period before approaching to the Central Tribunal and thereafter raising the industrial dispute . The witness of management has categorically stated that if the workman would have not voluntarily abandoned his services , he had been a permanent employee of the department . I le has also admitted that services of the juniors to the workman have been regularized , On perusal of the documents filed and relied upon by the workman and the judgment of the Central Administrative Tribunal . I am of the view that there were latches on the part of the workman . He was himself guilty for abandoning the work, After abnormal time , considering the issue that the services of the juniors have been regularized , he has raised the industrial dispute . Where there are latches on the part of the workman , he should not be entitled for any relief. He himself abondoned his services and he is also guilty for delay and latches and for non- disclosing the material facts to this Tribunal . The reference is answered accordingly . Let appropriate government be approached for publication of award, and thereafter , file be consigned to record room.
G.K. SHARMA , Presiding Officer नई दिल्ली , 28 जुलाई , 2010
का.आ. 2089.-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/ श्रम न्यायालय नं. । , चण्डीगढ़ के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 25,195,197/2000 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 28-7-2010 को प्राप्त हुआ था।
[सं . एल- 42012/187/ 99 - आईआर ( डीयू) ,
एल- 42012/ 183 /99 - आईआर (डीयू) , एल- 42012 / 186/ 99 - आईआर ( डीयू) ]
जोहन तोपनो , अवर सचिव
[ PART II SEC. 3 ( ii ) ] New Delhi , the 28th July , 2010
S.O. 2089 .-- In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) , the Central Government hereby publishes the Award ( Ref. No. 25,195,197/ 2000 ) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal- cum- Labour Court , No.1 Chandigarh as shown in the annexure , in the industrial dispute between the empolyers in relation to the management of CPWD and their workmen , which was received by the Central Government on 28-07-2010 .
[No. L -42012 / 187 / 99 - IR ( DU ) . No. L -42012/ 183/ 99 - IR ( DU ) . No. L -42012/ 186/ 99 - IR ( DU ) ] JOHAN TOPNO , Under Secy .
ANNEXURE
BEFORE SHRI GYANENDRA KUMAR SHARMA , PRESIDING OFFICER, CENTRAL GOVT . INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL - CUM - LABOUR COURT, -1, CHANDIGARH
Case I.D. No. 25/2000 , 195/2000 & 197/2000 1. Shri Babloo S/ o Shri Malkhan , House No. 593 , KumharColony , Sector- 25 , Chandigarh
2. Shri Boby S / o Shri Kanwar Pal , House No. 70 , Sector - 5 , Chandigarh. 3. Surinder S / o Shri Chatru Ram , H. No. 211 , Janta Colony , Sector- 25 , Chandigarh
..Applicants
Versus
The Executive Engineer , CPWD, Central Division - II , Kendriya Sadan , Sector- 9 , Chandigarh
...Respondent
APPEARANCES
For the Workman
: Shri Subhash Talwar .
Shri Anish Babbar
For the Management :
AWARD
Passed on: -20-7-10
This award shall answer three references and industrial disputes namely ID No. 25/2000 , Shri Babloo Versus C.P.W.D. ID No. 195/2000 , Shri Bobby Versus C.P.W.D. and ID No. 197/2000 . Shri Surinder Versus C.P.W.D. All the industrial disputes and references have been referred by the Central Government by exercising its भारत का राजपत्र [ भाग II - खण्ड 3 ( ii)]
powers under Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, (the Act in short) . Common question of law and facts are involved in all the three references . Hence for ends ofjustice all the three references and industrial disputes are decided by this award. The references in all the industrial disputes which were referred by the Central Government are as follows: --
(1) In ID No. 25/2000 , Ref. No. 42012 / 187 /99 /IR (DU) , dated 27-01-2000 , Whether the action of the Executive Engineer, Central Division - II , C.P.W.D. , Chandigarh in terminating the services of Shri Babloo S /o Shri Malkhan w.e.f. 29-12-1988 is legal and justified? If not , to what relief the workman is entitled and from which date ?
(2) In ID No. 195/2000, Ref. No. 42012/ 183/ 99 /IR (DU), dated 29-05-2000 , Whether the action of the Executive Engineer , Central Division - II , C.P.W.D. , Chandigarh in terminating the services of Shri Boby S/ o Shri Kanwar Pal w.e.f. 29-12-1998 is legal and justified ? If not, to what relief the workman is entitled and from which date ?
(3) In IDNo. 197/2000 , Ref. No. 42012/ 186 /99 /IR (DU) , dated 29-05-2000 , Whether the action of the Executive Engineer, Central Division - II , C.P.W.D. , Chandigarh in terminating the services of Shri Surinder S / o Shri Chatru Ram w.e. f. 29-12-1998 is legal andjustified? Ifnot , to what relief the workman is entitled and from which date ?
In all the references it has been the case of the workmen that they were appointed by the management as Safai Karamchari on different dates . They have completed 240 days of work with the management in the preceding year from the date of their termination . Their services were arbitarily terminated without issuing them any notice or one month wages in lieu of notice or retrenchment compensation . New hands were engaged after termination oftheir services without affording them the opportunity to work . As per the contention of the workmen they were under the administrative control of the management and the wages were also paid by the management directly. As per the contention of each workman the above act of the management are void being aganist the provisions of the Act . As the act of termination is void , they deserve to be reinstatement into the services with all the consequential benefits .
The management appeared and contested the claim petition of every workman by filling written statement . The management has challenged the very employer and employee relationship. As per the management no one was appointed directly by the management but the services were provided with by the contractor on outsourcing. The management has also denied the administrative control over the workman and payment ofwages as claimed by the workmen .
3099141110-26
5251
अगस्त 21 , 2010/ श्रावण 30 , 1932
Both of the parties were afforded the opportunity for adducing evidence . Evidence of every workman was separately recorded . On behalf of the management Shri A.K. Gupta . Executive Engineer Central Division- II , C.P.W.D. filed his affidavit and the evidence of management was recorded No documentary evidence was filed by any ofthe workmen . On the other hand , the management has filed the policy regarding carrying out the work of cleaning of office on contract. Copy of the contract agreement entered into between the management and the contractor has also been filed. None of the parties filed the documents relating to the payment of wages .
Parties were heard at length . I have perused entire materials on record .
The issue regarding the nature of the contract entered into between the management and the contractor for supplying contract labour and the conditions under which a contract can be shame and camouflage have been very well settled by Hon'ble the Apex Court in Steel Authority of India Limited and another versus National Union Water Workers and others AIR 2001 Supreme Court 352. Hon'ble the Apex Court in the same judgement has dealt with the issue very elaborately . I have gone through the entire judgement and the principles laid down by Hon'ble the Apex Court, particularly the circumstances under which a workman, in spite of being supply to the management by a so called contractor , can be deemed to be the employee or the principal -employer ? Without quoting the relevant paragraphs , I shall apply the ratio of the judgment in the fact and circumstances of the present references and industrial disputes .
Thereafter , Hon'ble the Apex Court in GM , ONGC Shilchar versus ONGC Contractual Workers Union , 2008 LLR 80 has also dealt with the issue in specific terms. Hon'ble the Apex Court in GM , ONGC Shilchar's case (supra) has also relied upon the principal laid down by Hon'ble the Apex Court in Steel Authority of India Limited's case (supra) . Hon'ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in FCI and other versus Presiding Officer Central Government Industrial Tribunal - cum - Labour Court - 1 Chandigarh and others 2008 LLR 391. On relying upon the principles laid down by Hon'ble the Apex Court in Steel Authority of India Limited's Case ( supra) and G.M. , ONGC Shilchar's case (supra ) has also dealt with the issue of employer and employee relationship between the workman and the management of any organization . Hon'ble Punjab . & . Haryana High Court in the said judgment has also dealt with the circumstances under which a contract can be held to be camouflage, shame , merely an eye wash and just a paper arrangement. If the ratio of all the judgments mentioned above is considered , every workmen has to establish the following facts:--
(1 ) That their existed a master and servant relationship between the workman and the management ( work- man was directly engaged by the management) .
CARLITE OF INDIA : AUGUST 21 , 2010 / SHRAVANA 30 , 1932
[ PART II-- SEC . 3 ( ii) ] (2) That the workman was under the administrative control of the management .
(3) That there was no contractor in between the management and the workmen .
( 4) That the payment of wages made good by the management to the workman directly and not by the contractor .
The workmen have raised one more plea that new persons were engaged without affording them the opportunity to work. The witness of the management has specifically adduced in evidence that the persons named by the workman were appointed as per the rules of the department. These are the two categories of the workman which cannot have the parity under the law . One group is the contractual worker and another is the employee appointed by the department as per the rules of the Central Government . Thus , there is no force in this contention of the workmen as well .
( 5 ) At the cost of the repetition the remittance rolls for the payment of wages made by the management and not by the contractor .
On the basis of the above observation , I am answering all the references with the directions that workmen failed to prove they were employees of the management . There existed no master - servant relations between them and no question for termination of services of workmen arises . Accordingly , none of the workman is entitled for any relief. Let appropriate government be approached for publication of Award , and thereafter , file be consigned to record room.
Chandigarh.
G.K. SHARMA , Presiding Officer नई दिल्ली , 28 जुलाई , 2010 का.आ. 2090.- औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में , केन्द्रीय सरकार दूर संचार विभाग के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनकं कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालय नं. 1 , चण्डीगढ, के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 28/03 तथा 189/02 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार का 28-7-2010 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।
[सं. एल -40012 / 194/2002- आईआर डीयू ) , सं. एल -40012/ 84 /2002- आईआर ( डीयू ) । जोहन तोपनो , अवर सचिव
New Delhi , the 28th July , 2010
S.O. 2090.-In pursuancersuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award ( Ref . No.28 /03 & 189/02 ) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal - cum- Labour Court No. I Chandigarh as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of Department of Telecom and their workman , which was received by the Central Governinent on 28-07-2010 .
[No. L -40012 / 194 /2002 - IR ( DU ) , No. L -40012/ 84/ 2002 - IR ( DU ) ]
JOHAN TOPNO . Under Secy .
If the ratio of the above case laws is applied to the present industrial disputes , it is established before this Tribunal that the management was empowered by Government of India to carry out the work of sweeping through contractor on outsourcing . The management has discharged the work of sweeping and cleaning through the contractor is also established . Thus , two facts are very well established by the management that as per the Government policy the management has entered into a contract with contractor to supply the labour for cleaning the work as well . What is lacking is whether the contractor has also supplied the workmen / labour to the management ? Only oral contents are on record . There is no record to prove that all the three workmen were supplied by name to the management . No doubt , there are certain documents which have been filed by the management to prove that contractor useto supply the number of labours for specified work without disclosing the identity and the payment was made good as per the number of labours provided after verification of the work discharged by them. In my view when the Government has empowered the management to get a particular work through contract labour , the practice adopted by the management to get workers in numbers and to make the payment on the basis of number of workers is not fattle and against law . Under such circumstances , the workmen have to prove that they were not amongst labour supplied by the contractor . They were working independently with the management. They were under the administrative control of the management and were paid the wages by the management and not by the contractor . In the evidence of every workman , it is clearly mentioned that there is no evidence with them to prove they were paid wages directly by the management . On persual of the entire evidence on record filed/ adduced by each workman , I am unable to trace out any fact which can prove administrative control of the management over the workmen . It is settled law of service jurisprudence that workmen have to prove these facts . Whatever the documents were called for an request of the workman and directed by this Court , were filed by the management . The workman utterly failed to prove and established the facts that they were directly engaged by the management and they were paid directly by the management and notby the contractor . Thus , there is no substance in the claim of the workmen that their termination was illegal .
5253
अगस्त 21 , 2010/ श्रावण 30 , 1932
भारत का राजपत्र
[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]
ANNEXURE
BEFORE SHRI GYANENDRA KUMAR SHARMA , PRESIDING OFFICER , CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL - CUM - LABOUR COURT - I , CHANDIGARH.
Case I. D. No. 28/03 & 189/02
1. Smt . Bimla Devi wife of Ashok Kumar , Balmiki Basti , Arjun gate , Karnal .
2. Smt . Rita Rani , 2196 - B , Sector - 24- C , Chandigarh .
....Applicants
Versus
The General Manager , Telecom , Department of Telecom , Karnal- 132001 .
2. The Principal General Manager , Telecom , Telephone Department , Sector - 18A , Chandigarh .
...Respondents
APPEARANCES
For the workman :
Shri Naveen Daryal and Amit
Sharma , Advocates .
Shri Anish Babbar .
For the Management :
AWARD
Passed on 28-7-2010
This award shall answered two references and industrial disputes namely ID No. 28/2003 , Smt . Bimla Devi Versus Telecom and ID No. 189/2002 , Smt . Rita Rani Versus Telecom . Both of the industrial disputes and references have been referred by the Central Government by exercising its powers under Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, (the Act in short ) Central Govt . has referred the following Industrial dispute for adjudication to this Tribunal : - (1 ) ID No. 28/2002 , Ref No. 40012 / 194 / 2002 - IR ( DU ) , dated 13-09-2002 . Whether the action of the management of Telecom , Karnal in terminating the services of Smt . Bimla w.e.f. May 1997 is legal and justified ? If not , What relief the workman is entitled ? "
(2) ID No. 189/2002 , Ref No.40012 / 84 /2002 - IR ( DU) , dated 13-02-2009 . Whether the action of the management of BSNL , in terminating the services of Smt . Rita Rani , Ex -part time Frash is just and legal ? If so , what relief the workman is entitled to ? " Common questions of law and facts are involved in both of the references ; hence , same are being adjudicated and answered by this award . It is the common contention of both of the workmen that they were appointed as part time sweeper ( safaiwala ) by the management of Telecommunication Department . They have completed 240 days of work in the preceding year from the date of their termination . their services were terminated without assigning any reason . They were not given any notice , por paid one month wages in lieu of notice and rawful terminal dues before terminating their services . They were illegally denied the benefits of circular letter faced by the Central Government in the year 2000. In ID N ... 189.2062 Smy . Rita Rani Versus Telecom , it is the contention of the workmon that she was engaged by the managemnet on 10-8-92 and her services were terminated in the month of March 199 She has completed 240 days of work in the every cantenciar year including the preceding year from the date of ker termination . In ID No. 28/2003 , Sint . Bimla Devi , it has been the contention of the workman that she was engaged by S. D. O. Telecom as part time sweeper in the year 1993 and her services were terminated on 31-05-1997 . She has also completed 240 days of work in the preceding year from the date of her termination . On the basis of the above facts , it has been the common contention of both of the workmen that their termination is bad in law and against the provisions of the Act . Every workman has prayed for setting aside the termination order and reinstating of their services with consequential benefits .
The management appeared and opposed the claim petition by filing the written statement . Management has admitted that each workman was engaged as part time sweeper on causal basis but has denied the right of a causal worker to the post . it has been the contention of the management that casual worker are not having any right to post and their services cannot be regularized .
Both ofthe parties were afforded the opportunity for adducing evidence . Evidence of the workman was recorded in detail , whereas , on behalf of the management officers of management filed affidavits and were cross - examined . Documents have also been filed by the parties .
The main issue before this Tribunal are whether the management is guilty for illegal termination of the workmen and consequently denying lawful benefit to them of circular letter no . 269-13 / 99 / STN - II , dated 25-08-2000 ? The consequential issue before this Tribunal is whether the disengagement of the workmen amounts to retrenchment and the same was illegal for want of notice or one month wages in lieu of notice and without lawful terminal dues ? The Tribunal has also to exercise on the relief clause , if any as claimed by each workman .
I have heard the parties at length . On perusal of the entire materials on record , it is evident that management has admitted the status of every workman as part time sweeper during the period in question . The period for which every workmen has claimed working with the management is not disputed . The document and the other materials on record prove the contention of every workmen that they have worked as part time sweeper with the management for a long period . The materials on record also prove that every workmen has completed 240 days of work in the preceding year from the date of her termination . No notice 5254
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 21 , 2010/ SHRAVANA 30 , 1932
or one month wages in lieu of notice and retrenchment compensation was paid to any of the workman . It has been the contention of the management that a causal worker has no right to post . Their services could not be regularized and, accordingly no notice or retrenchment compensation was required to be given /paid .
It is settled law of service jurisprudence that a casual worker or a causal labour has no right to post . The post can be filled in as per the rules applicable in the department relating to the appointment in public offices . But the question before this Tribunal is not relating to the right of post of the workman . The issue before this Tribunal is relating to the protection of right to work and the protection against the illegal termination . Industrial Disputes Act protects certain rights of casual worker . The important right which is protected by the provisions of the Act is his or her termination against the provisions of the Act. The provisions of the act does not prohibits the termination . The provisions of the Act regulates the termination . The termination is deregulated in the sense that if the services of any causal worker are no more required , the management can terminate the services asper the provisions of the Act. Meaning thereby , one month notice or one month wages in licu of notice and retrenchment compensation is the condition precedent for termination of the services of any causal worker . It has not been done by the management . Thus, the termination of every workman was void and illegal being against the provisions of the Act .
The another contention of the workmen has been that they were illegally denied the benefit of circular letter No. 269-13 /99 / STN - II , dated 25-08-2000 . On account of illegal termination of their services , it was compulsive denial the benefits of the circular letter . The issue of benefit of circular letter has been decided by this Tribunal in ID No. 209/2002 , Smt Rajo Devi Versus Executive Engineer , BSNL . This Tribunal has discussed this issue in detail and has held that Smt. Rajo Devi in ID No. 209/2002 has been illegally denied the benefit of the circular letter . Smt . Rajo Devi was a part time casual worker . These two workmen namely Smt. Bimla Devi and Smt . Rita Rani were also the part time sweeper and were similarly situated workmen . Thus , the judicial propriety requires that the same principle should be adopted by this Tribunal which has been established and determined in ID No. 209/2002 to prevent the devergence in judicial decisions in similar cases .
The management has given the benefit of this circular letter to even those workmen which were part time sweeper , whereas the benefit was compulsively denied on account of illegal termination to these two workmen . The management has adopted two standards in implementation ofthe circular letter which is violation of Article 14 & 21 of the Constitution . There should be uniformity in implementation of a circular letter and similarly situated ersons should be treated equally . When a circular letter is ..sued by the management , the same is to be implemented without any discretion in entire territorial jurisdiction of
PART II SEC . 3 ( ii) ] the management . It cannot be claimed by the management thatcircular letter was applicable in particular office and was not applicable to another office. May be Smt . Bimla Devi and Smt Rita Rani working in another office but circular letter issued by the head office of the management shallbe equally applicable to all the similarly situated workmen irrespective of their place of working .
Thus , as stated earlier , the judicial propriety requires that this issue should be decided on the same way as in Smt . Rajo Devi Versus Executive Engineer , BSNL . On the basis of the above observation , I am of the view that Smt. Bimla Devi and Smt . Rica Rani were illegally compulsive denied the benefit of above mentioned circular letter regarding conversion of part time weeper to full time sweeper . Had they not been terminated from services , benefits of the above circular letter would have been conferred on them .
On the basis of the above drcussion . I am of the view that a termination of rousersman from the services was illegal and bad in lavand consequently were illegally denied the benefit of circular lederne 369-13 /99 / STN - II , dated 25-08-2000.
When the services e any workmen has ben declare illegal and void there are two possibleremedies available to the workinen . The first remedy is reinstatement of the workman into the services and another is a reasonable compensation. It is settled law of service jurisprudence that priority should be given for reinstatement of the services of the workman and in exceptional circumstances where the reinstatement of the services is not possible due to some constraints ; the cause of the workmen should be remedied by reasonable compensation .
The management has tried to link the issue of reinstatement with the issue of regularization of the services . These two issues are entirely different and accept in spring circumstances , have no nexus with each other . The remedy which is provided to the workmen is the reinstatement on the position on which they were working and not the regularization of the services . The regularization of the services is entirely the job of the management . But it is believed that management shall act honestly without any biasness as per the rules of the department to prevent the multi fariousness of the judicial proceedings . In similar case , I have also remedied the workmen with reinstatement of the services with direction ofthe management to give the benefit of circular letter in the same terms provided to Smt . Maya Devi as discussed in ID no . 209/2002 Smt . Rajo Devi Versus Executive Engineer , BSNL . Accordingly , I am of the view that both of the workmen namely Smt . Bimla Devi and Smt . Rita Rani deserve to be reinstated into the services along with the direction to the management to provided the benefit of the circular letter . The only difference in two cases is that in case of Smt . Rajo Devi the services of Smt . Rajo Devi was terminated after the circular letter whereas , the services of these workmen was terminated before the circular letter [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]
came to existence . I am of the view that it will make no difference because the workmen were terminated from the services illegally and this illegally termination prevented them to claim the benefit of the circular letter . Accordingly , the management is directed to reinstate the services of each workman within one month from the date of publication of the award . The management is further directed to give the benefit of circular letter no . 269-13/99/ STN - II , dated 25-08-2000 to each workman from 25-08-2000 . Both of the industrial disputes and references are accordingly answered . Let Central Government be approached for publication of award , and thereafter , file be consigned to record room.
Chandigarh
G. K. SHARMA, Presiding Officer नई दिल्ली , 28 जुलाई , 2010
का.आ. 2091.-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में , केन्द्रीय सरकार सेन्ट्रल राशन स्टैंड 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 69/2002 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 28-7-2010 को प्राप्त हुआ था।
[ सं. एल -14012 / 80/ 2001 - आईआर ( डीयू) ]
जोहन तोपनो , अवर सचिव New Delhi , the 28th July , 2010
S.O. 2091. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award ( Ref. No. 69/2002 ) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal - cum - Labour Court No. I Chandigarh as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of Central Ration Stand and their. workman , which was received by the Central Government on 28-07-2010.
[No. L - 14012 / 80 / 2001 - IR (DU ) ]
JOHAN TOPNO , Under Secy.
ANNEXURE
BEFORE SHRI GYANENDRA KUMAR SHARMA, PRESIDING OFFICER , CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL -CUM - LABOUR COURT - I , CHANDIGARH.
Case No. I. D. No. 69/2002
Sh. Mohan Singh Son of Shri Jagdish Singh , Resident of Village Katch , PO Kot Beja , Tehsil Kasauli , Solan Himachal Pradesh
....Applicant
5255
भारत का राजपत्र अगस्त 21 , 2010/ श्रावण 30 , 1932
Versus
The Officer Commanding Central Ration Stand , Subathu Shimla Hills , Tehsil Kasauli Solan HP .
...Respondents
APPEARANCES
For the workman
:
Shri R. P. Rana
:
Shri Sanjiv Sharma For the Management
AWARD
Passed on 20-07-2010
Government of India vide notification No. L - 14012/ 80 /2001 - IR ( DU) , dated 26-4-2002 by exercising its powers under Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act , (the Act in short ) has referred the following Industrial dispute for adjudication to this Tribunal :-
" Whether the Central Ration Stand , Subathu is an industry as per ID Act , 1947 ? If so whether action of the management of Central Ration Stand , Subathu in terminating the services of Shri Mohan Singh S / o Shri jagdish Singh , Casual Labour w.e.f. 23-07-2000 isjust and legal ? If not , to what relief the workman is entitled to and from which date ? "
After receiving the reference , parties were informed. It has been the contention of the workman that he was engaged as casual worker with the management vide appointment letter dated 3-4-99 . His name was sponsored by employment exchange . his appointment was succeeded by an interview conducted by the management . The workman joined on 19-4-99 in pursuance of the appointment letter dated 3-4-99 . The services of the workman were terminated without assigning any reasons , without notice , one month wages in lieu of notice and without lawful terminal dues . The similarly placed workman Shri Naresh Kumar who was appointed as casual worker on 12-12-99 and juniors to the workman were retained in the services and the services of the workman were terminated illegally. The services of Shri Naresh Kumar were also terminated on 9-9-2000 after two months from the date of termination of the services of the workman . Three regular posts are lying vacant with the management . New hands have been recruited by the management without considering the request of the workman to provide with the work. It has been the contention of the workman that above acts of the managemnet are against the provisions of the Act and the termination is void and illegal abinitio . The workamn has prayed for setting aside the termination order and for consequential relief reinstating his services with other benefits .
The management appeared and contested the claim of the workman by filing written statement . The nature of the management as industry has been challenged by the 52.56
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 21 , 2010/ SHRAVANA 30 , 1932
workman by stating that management is not an industry under the Industrial Disputes Act . The reason for the above contention has mentioned in written statement that management is a military establishment which exercises the sovereign functions and the department/ entity or an institution which exercises the sovereign functions cannot be held to be industry . On merits , all the contentions of the workman have been denied by the management with admission that Shri Naresh Kumar was employed for another work.
Parties were afforded the opportunity for adducing evidence . Oral evidence was recorded . Documentary evidence is on record . The copies of attendance register and the register relating to the payment have been filed by the management . There are three important issues to be dealt with by this Tribunal . The first issue is whether the management is an industry , and another issue is whether the employees of the management canteen can claim the privilege of being the Government servant ? Another issue will be regarding the relief to the workman , if any .
So far as the issue of industry is concern , I am of the view that management is an industry as defined under the provisions of Industrial Disputes Act . Whether a particular organization or entity is industry or not is settled by Hon'ble the Apex Court in Bangalroe Water Supply & Sewerage Board versus A. Rajappa & Others AIR 1978 - SC 548. If the principles laid down by Hon'ble Apex Court in Bangalore Water Supply Case ( Supra) is considered , the industrial character of any organization can be seen on the basis of activities carried on and functions discharged by it . The functions of the canteen are to provide the service to the military persons by supplying certain commodities of public utility . On the basis of this view the management of canteen cannot seek exemption from the definition of industry as given by Hon'ble Apex Court in Bangalore Water Supply and Severage Board's case ( supra) . It is the contention of the management that sovereign function is discharged by the management and as such it is exempted from the definition of industry . I am not inclined to accept this contention on the basis of activities of the canteen and services discharged by it . Accordingly, the management of canteen is an industry as per the definition of industry given in the Industrial Disputes Act and in Bangalore Water Supply and Severage Board's case ( supra) . Moreover , the evidence on record proves that workman has not only worked in the canteen but he has done loading and unloading work as a labour other than the canteen and other units under the management .
It is settled principle of service jurisprudence that if the relief claimed by any workmen could only be given under the provisions of the act , the tribunal constituted under the provisions of the act has the jurisdiction to redress the same . The relief sought by the workmen in the claim in question can only be granted under the provisions
[PART II - SEC. 3 ( ii) ] of Industrial Disputes Act , accordingly , this Tribunal has got the jurisdiction to adjudicate the matter and to redress the grievances of the workmen . Accordingly , I am of the view that management is an industry and this Tribunal has jurisdiction to adjudicate the reference referred by the Central Government .
The another issue is whether the workman can claim the privilege ofbeing a Government servant while working in the canteen ? This issue was dealt with by Hon'ble the Apex Court in Union of India and Others Versus F. Aslam and Others 2001 , LAOIC ( Supreme Court ) 488. In Aslam case ( Supra ) , Hon'ble the Apex Court has disposed of several appeal against the judgment of Central Administrative Tribunal on the issue whether the workman serving in the unit run canteen are the Government employees Hon'ble the Apex Court answered in positive that the workman or employee in unit run canteen are the Government servants . Hon'ble the Apex Court has also held that by holding so , it would not entitled them getting all the service benefits , which are available to Government servants or its counterparts serving in the canteens . It would necessarily depend upon the nature and duties discharged by them as well as on the rules and regulations and administrative instructions issued by the employer .
In another judicial pronouncement A.R. Pillai Versus Commanding Officer , while decided his Civil Appeal No. 3495/05 dated 28-04-2009 , Hon'ble the Apex Court has held that sub - canteens are purely private ventures and their employees are not by stretch of imagination employees of the Government or CSD's . No doubt , the workman has not claimed the parity with the employees of CSD's with the management but as he claimed to be working with the canteen , it was mandatory on the part of this Tribunal to decide the nature of his services while working with the canteen . As stated earlier , this issue has not to be decided on isolation but on the basis of facts and circumstances of the case . The law laid down by Hon'ble the Apex Court shall be implemented and ratio of the judgment applied on the facts of the case .
Inthe evidence it has come bete this Tribunal that workman was engaged as casual worker as per the procedure for appointment of casual worker applicable in the department . His name was sponsored by employment exchange . He was called for the interview and a selection letter was given to him . Thus , the initial appointment of the workman was valid . May be for a temporary period it was a valid appointment as a casual labour . The witness of the management Major Parshotam Singh has stated on oath before this tribunal that workman was given one month notice and retrenchment compensation before the termination of his services . He has also stated in his evidence on oath that he will provide the documents regarding the notice and retrenchment compensation within 15 days , but he failed to provide such documents . On 5257
भारत का राजपत्र अगस्त 21 , 2010/श्रावण 30 , 1932
[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]
account of failure of the management to provide the documents as agreed upon during the cross - examination on oath , it shall be considered that no notice was given nor any compensation paid . From the evidence of Major Parshotam Singh , it is evidently clear that workman was not working in canteen only but he was entursted to discharged the work of loading and unloading in other units then the canteen as casual worker . It is admitted by the witness of the management Major Parshotam Singh thatafter termination of the service of the workman another workman for specific work and for specific period was engaged .
Thus , from the perusal of the evidence of the parties , it is evident that workman was not only working in the canteen but was discharging his function as casual worker in the units other than the canteen . He was legally appointed . It is true that he was appointed for a specific period and if it is accepted that for expiry of that period his services were automatically terminated , it is his right to get the work for similar nature if available with the management on priority . Similar nature of work was available with the management . The workman as retrenches was not afforded the opportunity but another person was engaged in the same position . This all has been admitted by the witness of the management . Thus , management has violated the provisions of the Act by ignoring the provisions regarding the priority of work of a retrenches . If the services of the workman are retrenche or the same are automatically retrenched law protects his right to get the similar work on priority if the same is available . The management has failed to comply this provision : accordingly , the workman has right to his reinstatement into the services . The reference is accordingly answered with the direction to the management to reinstate the services of the workman on the same position on which he was earlier working within one month from the date of publication of the award . Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the conduct of the management the workman will also be entitled for the back wages . The management is accordingly directed to reinstated the services of the workman and pay the back wages within one month from the date of publication of award . Let Central Government be approached for publication of award , and thereafter , file be consigned to record room .
Chandigarh
G. K. SHARMA , Presiding Officer नई दिल्ली , 29 जुलाई , 2010
का.आ. 2092.-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में , केन्द्रीय सरकार स्टेट बैंक ऑफ पटियाला के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण / श्रम न्यायालया नं. 1 , चण्डीगढ़ के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 154/1998 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 29-7-2010 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।
[ सं. एल -12012/ 292 /97 - आईआर( बी -1 ) ]
जोहन तोपनो , अवर सचिव New Delhi , the 29th July , 2010
S.O. 2092. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award ( ID No. 154/1998 ) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal - cum - Labour Court No. I , Chandigarh as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of State Bank of Patiala and their workmen , which was received by the Central Government on 29-07-2010.
[No. L - 12012/ 292 / 97 - IR ( B - I ) ] JOHAN TOPNO, Under Secу .
ANNEXURE
BEFORE SHRI GYANENDRA KUMAR SHARMA , PRESIDING OFFICER , CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL - CUM - LABOUR COURT - 1 ,
CHANDIGARH
Case I. D. No. 154/1998
Shri Sat Pal Singh through the General Secretary , All India State Bank of Patiala Staff Fedration , ward No. 6 , H.N. 13 , Solan . HP
Applicants
Versus
The Assistant General Manager , II ( D ) , State Bank of Patiala , Head Office , The Mall , Patiala .
...Respondents
APPEARANCES
None
For the workman :
Shri N. K. Zakhmi
For the Management :
AWARD
Passed on 13-07-2010
Government of India vide notification No. L - 12012 / 292/ 97 - IR ( B - 1 ) , dated 22nd of July , 1998 by exercising its powers under Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( the Act in short ) referred the following Industrial dispute for adjudication to this Tribunal :-
Whether the action of the Assistant General Manager II ( P ) , H. O. State Bank of Patiala in imposing punishment of dismissal from service of Shri Sat Pal Singh , Daftri w.e.f. 30-07-1996 is fair and legal ? If not to what relief the workman Shri Sat Pal Singh is entitled and from which date ?" 5258
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 21 , 2010 / SHRAVANA 30 , 1932
2. the case repeatedly called . None is present on behalf of the workman . Workman is also not present . Learned Counsel for the management is present . Workman is not present for his evidence despite knowledge . The case was referred by the Central Government in the year 1998 and 12 years old . It appears that workman is not interested to pursue with the present reference . In view of the above , the present reference is returned to the Central Government for want of prosecution . Central Government be informed . File be consigned to record room .
Chandigarh
13-7-2010
G. K. SHARMA , Presiding Officer ( रोजगार और प्रशिक्षण महानिदेशालय )
नई दिल्ली, 4 अगस्त, 2010
का.आ. 2093.-केन्द्रीय सरकार , शिक्षु अधिनियम , 1961 ( 1961 का 52 ) की धारा 2 के खंड ( ड. ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए और केन्द्रीय शिक्षुता परिषद् से परामर्श करने के पश्चात्, उक्त अधिनियम के प्रयोजन के लिए प्रौद्योगिकी के क्षेत्र में, निम्नलिखित विषयों को अभिहित व्यवसायों के रूप में विनिर्दिष्ट करती है , अर्थात्:-
" स्नातक और तकनीकी प्रशिक्षु:
1. कम्प्यूटर हार्डवेयर अनुरक्षण
2. औजार और रुपदा प्रौद्योगिकी
3. खाद्य प्रौद्योगिकी
4. होटल प्रबंधन और खानपान प्रौद्योगिकी
तकनीकी ( वृत्तिक ) प्रशिक्षु:
1. कम्प्यूटर विज्ञान
2. पशुधन प्रबंधन ( कुक्कुट चिकित्सा)
3. नर्सरी प्रबंधन और अलंकरण उद्यान कृषि
PART 11 - SEC . 3 ( ii) ) 4. फल और सब्जियां
5. सहकारिता प्रबंधन
6 . लेखा- कर्म सहित कार्यालय सचिव "
[ फा.सं. डीजीईटी -23 ( 10 ) ( 3310 ) /2010 - एपी ]
तरसेम लाल , उपसचिव (Directorate General of Employment and Training) New Delhi , the 4th August , 2010
S.O. 2093. - In exercise of the powers conferredby clause ( e ) of Section 2 of the Apprentices Act , 1961 ( 52 of 1961 ) , and after consultation with the Central Apprenticeship Council , the Central Government hereby specifies the following subject fields in technology as designated trades for the purposes of the said Act. namely :-
"Graduate and Technician Apprentices :
1. Computer Hardware Maintenance
2. Tool and Die Technology
3. Food Technology
4. Hotel Management and Catering Technology Technician ( Vocational) Apprentices :
1. Computer Science
2. Live stock Management ( Poultry Husbandry ) 3. Nursery Management and Ornamental Gardening 4. Fruit and Vegetables
5. Co - operative Management
6. Office Secretaryship with Accountancy. "
[ F. No. DGET - 23 ( 10 ) ( 3310 )/ 2010 - AP ] TARSEM LAL. , Dy . Seey , Printed by the Manager . Government of India Press , Ring Road , Mayapuri , New Delhi - 11006-4 and Published by the Controller of Publications , Delhi - 110054 .