This Gazette may contains Multiple Subjects

REGD . NO . D. L. (N) 04/0007/2003-05 रजिस्ट्री सं. डी. एल. ( एन ) 04/0007/2003-05

सत्यमेव जयते

भारत का राजपत्र The Gazette of India

प्राधिकार से प्रकाशित

PUBLISHED BY AUTHORITY

साप्ताहिक

WEEKLY

सं. 49]

नई दिल्ली, नवम्बर 28 दिसम्बर4 , 2010 , शनिवार/अग्रहायण 7-अग्रहायण 13 , 1932 No. 49] NEW DELHI, NOVEMBER 28 DECEMBER 4, 2010, SATURDAY/AGRAHAYANA 7 - AGRAHAYANA 13, 1932 इस भाग में भिन्न पृष्ठ संख्या दी जाती है जिससे कि यह पृथक संकलन के रूप में रखा जा सके Separate Paging is given to this Part in order that it may be filed as a separate compilation

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

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

मुख्य आयकर आयुक्त का कार्यालय

जयपुर , 23 नवम्बर , 2010

सं. 18/2010-11

का.आ. 2951.-आयकर नियम , 1962 के नियम 2 सी ए के साथ पठनीय आयकर अधिनियम , 1961 ( 1961 का 43 वां ) की धारा 10 के खण्ड( 23 सी ) की उपधारा ( vi ) के द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए मुख्य आयकर आयुक्त , जयपुर एतद्वारा निर्धारण वर्ष 2010-11 एवं आगे के लिए कथित धारा के उद्देश्य से " तिरूपति कालेज ऑफ टेक्नीकल एजूकेशन सोसायटी , जयपुर " को स्वीकृति देते हैं बशर्ते कि समिति आयकर नियम 1962 के नियम 2 सी ए के साथ पठनीय आयकर अधिनियम , 1961 की धारा 10 के उपखण्ड( 23 सी) की उपधारा ( vi ) के प्रावधानों के अनुरूप कार्य करे ।

[क्रमांक:मुआआआआआ/(मु.)/जय/ 10 (23 सी) ( vi ) / 10-11/3049 ]

मुकेश भान्ती , मुख्य आयकर आयुक्त OFFICE OF THE CHIEF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

Jaipur, the 23rd November, 2010

No. 18/2010-11

(8241)

S.O. 2951. In exercise of the powers conferred by sub- clause (vi) of clause (23C) of Section 10 of the Income- taxAct, 1961 (43 of 1961 ) read with rule 2CA of the Income-tax Rules , 1962 the Chief Commissioner of Income- tax, Jaipur 4548 GI/ 2010 8242

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 4, 2010/AGRAHAYANA 13, 1932

[PART II- SEC. 3 (ii ) ] hereby approves " Tirupati College of Technical Education Society, Jaipur " for the purpose of said Section for the Α. Υ. 2010-11 & onwards .

Provided that the society conforms to and complies with the provisions of sub - clause (vi ) of clause ( 23C) of Section 10 ofthe Income - tax Act, 1961 read with rule 2CA of the Income - tax Rules, 1962.

[No. CCIT/JPR/Addl.CIT (Hqrs . )/ 10 (23C) ( vi )/2010-11 /3049 ] MUKESH BHANTI , Chief Commissioner of Income-tax

जयपुर , 24 नवम्बर , 2010

सं. 19/2010-11

का. आ. 2952,-आयकर नियम , 1962 के नियम 2 सी ए के साथ पठनीय आयकर अधिनियम , 1961 ( 1961 का 43 वां ) की ध ारा 10 के खण्ड( 23 सी ) की उपधारा ( vi ) के द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए मुख्य आयकर आयुक्त , जयपुर एतद्वारा निर्धारण वर्ष 2010-11 एवं आगे के लिए कथित धारा के उद्देश्य से " सोसायटी ऐफिलिऐटेड दू रूरल डवलपमैन्ट फॉर हैल्थ एण्ड ऐग्रीकल्चर , देवली , टौंक " को स्वीकृति देते हैं बशर्ते कि समिति आयकर नियम 1962 के नियम 2 सी ए के साथ पठनीय आयकर अधिनियम , 1961. की धारा 10 के उपखण्ड ( 23 सी ) की उपधारा ( vi ) के प्रावधानों के अनुरूप कार्य करे ।

[क्रमांक:मुआआआआआ/ ( मु. ) /जय/ 10 ( 23 सी ) ( vi ) / 10-11 /3058 ]

मुकेश भान्ती, मुख्य आयकर आयुक्त

Jaipur , the 24th November, 2010

No. 19 /2010-11

S.O. 2952. In exercise ofthe powers conferred by sub- clause ( vi ) of clause ( 23C) ofSection 10 of the Income- tax Act, 1961 (43 of 1961 ) read with rule 2CA of the Income- tax Rules , 1962 the Chief Commissioner of Income - tax, Jaipur hereby approves " Society Affiliated to Rural Development for Health & Agriculture, Deoli, Tonk" for the purpose of said Section for the A. Y. 2010-11 & onwards .

Provided that the society conforms to and complies with the provisions of sub- clause ( vi ) of clause ( 23C ) of Section 10 of the Income- tax Act , 1961 read with rule 2CA ofthe Income - tax Rules , 1962 .

[No. CCIT/JPR/Addl.CIT (Hqrs . ) / 10( 23C) ( vi ) /2010-11 /3058 ]

MUKESH BHANTI , Chief Commissioner of Income-tax

कोयला मंत्रालय

नई दिल्ली, 30 नवम्बर , 2010

का.आ. 2953.-केन्द्रीय सरकार , कोयला धारक क्षेत्र ( अर्जन और विकास ) अधिनियम , 1957 ( 1957 का 20 ) की धारा 3 द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए इससे उपाबद्ध अनुसूची के स्तंभ ( 2 ) में विनिर्दिष्ट अधिकारियों को उक्त अधिनियम की ऐसी धाराओं के प्रयोजन के लिए जो उक्त सक्षम प्राधिकारी के सामने इसके स्तंभ ( 4 ) में तत्स्थानी प्रषिष्टि में विनिर्दिष्ट है , मैसर्स एम.जे.एस.जे. कोल लिमिटेड, हाउस नं. 42 , प्रथम तल, आनंद नगर, हाकिमपाड़ा, अंगुल -759153 ( ओडिसा ) की अधिकारिता के भीतर आने वाले क्षेत्र के संबंध में सक्षम प्राधि कारी नियुक्त करती है ।

शासकीय पता

कार्य का क्षेत्र

अधिनियम की धाराएं

क्रम संख्याक

सक्षम प्राधिकारी के रूप में नियुक्त व्यक्ति का पदनाम

(1)

(2)

(3)

(4)

(5) 01

1. निदेशक

मेसर्स एम.जे.एस.जे. कोल

4(3)

सर्वेक्षण , डिप बोर , 2. मुख्य महाप्रबंधक

लिमिटेड ,

पूर्वेक्षण, अहाते 3. परियोजना प्रबंधक

हाउस नं. 42, प्रथम तल ,

कीचाहरदिवारी 8243

भारत का राजपत्र : दिसम्बर 4, 2010/अग्रहायण 13 , 1932

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii ) ]

(3)

(2)

(1)

(5)

(4)

आनन्द नगर , हाकिमपाड़ा,

अंगुल पिन-759153 ( ओडिशा )

4. वरिष्ठ सर्वेक्षण अधिकारी

5. उप सम्पदा प्रबन्धक

प्रादेशिक निदेशक , सीएमपीडीआईएल- आरआई-7

प्रादेशिक निदेशक , सीएमपीडीआईएल, क्षेत्र ' 7 , गरूहा निर्माण भवन , सचिवालय मार्ग , भुबनेश्वर , ओडिशा पिन -751001 1. निदेशक

2. मुख्य महाप्रबंधक

3. परियोजना प्रबंधक

4. वरिष्ठ सर्वेक्षण

मेसर्स एम.जे.एस.जे. कोल लिमिटेड, हाउस नं. 42 , प्रथम तल , आनन्द नगर, हाकिमपाड़ा, अंगुल पिन-759153(ओडिशा )

अधिकारी

5. उप सम्पदा प्रबंधक

कोयला नियंत्रक

कोयला नियंत्रक का कार्यालय , 1 , काउंसिल हाउस स्ट्रीट, कोलकाता-700001

1. निदेशक

मेसर्स एम.जे.एस.जे. कोल लिमिटेड,

2. मुख्य महाप्रबंधक

3. परियोजना प्रबंधक

हाउस नं. 42 , प्रथम तल , आनन्द नगर , हाकिमपाड़ा, अंगुल पिन-759153(ओडिशा )

4. वरिष्ठ सर्वेक्षण अधिकारी

5. उप सम्पदा प्रबंधक

1. निदेशक

निर्माण , सीमांकन और उससे संबंधित कार्य व्यवस्था ।

4(3)

सर्वेक्षण , डिप बोर , पूर्वेक्षण , अहाते की सीमा रेखा और उससे संबंधित कार्य व्यवस्था । 6

धारा 4 ( 3 ) के अंतर्गत हुई किसी नुकसानी के लिए प्रतिकर ।

आपत्ति की सुनवाई । 8 (2)

अर्जित भूमि पर कब्जा लेने का अधिकार । 13(6)

लिमिटेड,

मेसर्स एम.जे.एस.जे. कोल

2. मुख्य महाप्रबंधक

3. परियोजना प्रबंधक

हाउस नं. 42 , प्रथम तल , आनन्द नगर , हाकिमपाड़ा, अंगुल पिन-759153( ओडिशा )

4. वरिष्ठ सर्वेक्षण अधिकारी

5. उप सम्पदा प्रबंधक

1. निदेशक

मेसर्स एम.जे.एस.जे. कोल लिमिटेड,

2. मुख्य महाप्रबंधक

3. परियोजना प्रबंधक

हाउस नं. 42 , प्रथम तल , आनन्द नगर , हाकिमपाड़ा, अंगुल पिन -759153( ओडिशा )

4. वरिष्ठ सर्वेक्षण अधिकारी

5. उप सम्पदा प्रबंधक

उस नुकसानी के लिए प्रतिकर जो अधिनियम में उपबंधित नहीं है । 22

प्रवेश एवं निरीक्षण लेने का अधिकार । [ फा. सं. 43015/ 26/ 2008- पीआरआईडब्ल्यू-1 ]

एम. शहाबुद्दीन , अवर सचिव 8244

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: DECEMBER 4, 2010/AGRAHAYANA 13 , 1932

[PART II- SEC . 3 ( ii ) ]

MINISTRY OF COAL

New Delhi , the 30th November , 2010

S.O. 2953. In exercise of the powers conferred by the Section 3 of the Coal Bearing Area ( Acquisition and Development) Act, 1957 (20 of 1957) , the Central Government hereby appoints the officers specified in column (2) , of the schedule hereto annexed to be the competent authority for the purpose of such of the sections of the said Act as are specified against the said competent authority in the corresponding entry in column (4) thereof in respect of the areas falling within thejurisdiction of the M/ s . MJSJ Coal Limited, House No. 42 , 1st floor, Ananda Nagar , Hakimpada , Angul- 759153 , Odisha.

Sl . No.

Official address

Designation of person appointed as competent authority

(1)

(2)

(3) 01

1. Director

2. ChiefGeneral Manager

3. Project Manager

4. Sr. Survey Officer

5. Dy. Estate Manager 02

Regional Director, CMPDIL- RI - 7 03

1. Director

2. ChiefGeneral Manager

3. Project Manager

4. Sr. Survey Officer

5. Dy. Estate Manager

M/ s . MJSJ Coal Ltd. , House No. 42 , 1st floor, AnandaNagar, Hakimpada , Angul Pin- 759153 (Odisha)

CoalController

The Office ofCoal Controller, 1 Council House Street , Kolkata- Pin-700001 05

1. Director

2. Chief General Manager

3. Project Manager

4. Sr. Survey Officer

5. Dy. Estate Manager

M/ s. MJSJ Coal Ltd. , House No. 42, 1st floor, Ananda Nagar, Hakimpada, Angul Pin-759153 ( Odisha)

1. Director

2. Chief General Manager

3. Project Manager

4. Sr. Survey Officer

5. Dy. Estate Manager

M/s . MJSJ Coal Ltd. , House No. 42, 1st floor, Ananda Nagar , Hakimpada , Angul Pin- 759153 ( Odisha)

1. Director

2. Chief General Manager

3. Project Manager

4. Sr. Survey Officer

5. Dy. Estate Manager

M/ s . MJSJ Coal Ltd. , House No. 42, 1st floor, Ananda Nagar, Hakimpada, Angul Pin-759153 (Odisha )

Sections of the Act Area of function (4)

(5)

4(3)

M/ s . MJSJ Coal Ltd. , House No. 42, 1st floor, AnandaNagar , Hakimpada, Angul Pin-759153 ( Odisha)

Survey, Dip bore , prospecting , set out boundary and line of prospecting and work related thereto .

4(3)

Survey, Dip bore , prospecting , set om boundary and line of prospecting and work related thereto .

Regional Director, CMPDIL Region - 7 , Gruha Nirman Bhavan , Sachivalaya Marg , Bhubaneswar , Odisha Pin-751001 6

Compensation for any damage done under section 4 (3 ) .

8(2)

Hearing objection .

Power to take possession of land acquired.

13(6)

Compensation for damage not provided in theAct .

Power to enter and inspect.

[F. No. 43015 /26/2008 - PRIW - I ] M. SHAHABUDEEN , Under Secy.

8245 भारत का राजपत्र: दिसम्बर 4, 2010/अग्रहायण 13 , 1932

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

नई दिल्ली , 30 नवम्बर , 2010

का.आ. 2954.- केन्द्रीय सरकार , कोयला धारक क्षेत्र ( अर्जन और विकास ) अधिनियम , 1957 ( 1957 की धारा 20 ) ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त अधिनियम कहा गया है ) की धारा 4 की उप - धारा ( 1 ) के अधीन भारत सरकार ने कोयला मंत्रालय के द्वारा जारी की गई अधिसूचना संख्यांक का.आ. 1997 , तारीख 15 जुलाई , 2009 , जो भारत के राजपत्र के भाग II , खंड 3 , उपखंड ( ii ) , तारीख 25 जुलाई , 2009 में प्रकाशित की गई थी , उक्त अधिसूचना से संलग्न अनुसूची में विनिर्दिष्ट परिक्षेत्र की भूमि में जिसका माप 1624.66 हेक्टर ( लगभग ) या 4014.54 एकड़ ( लगभग ) है ;

और, केन्द्रीय सरकार का यह समाधान हो गया है कि इस अधिसूचना से उपाबद्ध अनुसूची में विहित उक्त भूमि के भाग में कोयला अभिप्राप्त करना है ;

अतः , अब , केन्द्रीय सरकार , कोयला धारक क्षेत्र ( अर्जन और विकास ) अधिनियम , 1957 की धारा 7 की उप - धारा ( 1 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए , अनुसूची में वर्णित उक्त 1596.00 हेक्टर ( लगभग ) या 3943.786 एकड़ ( लगभग ) माप वाली भूमि में या उस पर के सभी अधिकार के अर्जन करने की, अपने आशय की सूचना देती है ।

टिप्पण 1 : इस अधिसूचना के अधीन आने वाले क्षेत्र के रेखांक संख्या सी-1 ( ई ) III / एफयूआर/ 837-0810 , तारीख 7 अगस्त , 2010 को जिलाधिकारी , नागपुर ( महाराष्ट्र) के कार्यालय में या कोयला नियंत्रक , 1 , 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 : उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 8 के उपबंधों की ओर ध्यान आकृष्ट किया जाता है , जिसमें निम्नलिखित उपबंध है :-

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 से तीस दिन 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 अर्थान्त 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 स्वयं 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 उप - धारा ( 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, यह व्यक्ति किसी भूमि में हितबद्ध समझा जाएगा जो प्रतिकर में हित का दावा करने का हकदार होता , यदि भूमि या ऐसी भूमि में या उस पर के अधिकार इस अधिनियम के अधीन अर्जित कर लिए जाते । "

टिप्पण 3 : केन्द्रीय सरकार ने भारत के राजपत्र , भाग II , खंड 3 , उपखंड ( ii ) , तारीख 11 जून , 1983 में प्रकाशित अधिसूचना संख्या का.आ. 2519 , तारीख 27 मई , 1983 द्वारा कोयला नियंत्रक , 1 , काउंसिल हाउस स्ट्रीट , कोलकाता -700 001 को उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 3 के अधीन सक्षम प्राधिकारी नियुक्त किया है ।

अनुसूची

दिनेश ओपनकास्ट ( मकरधोकरा- III ) खान

उमरेर क्षेत्र

जिला-नागपुर ( महाराष्ट्र )

[ रेखांक संख्या: सी -1 ( ई ) III / एफयूआर/ 837-0810 , तारीख 7 अगस्त , 2010 ] 8246

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 4, 2010 / AGRAHAYAΝΑ 13 , 1932 [PART II- SEC. 3 ( ii ) ] (सभी अधिकार )

क्र. सं. ग्राम का नाम

पटवारी सर्किल संख्या तहसील जिला

क्षेत्रफल हेक्टर में

टिप्पणियां (1)

(2)

(3)

(4)

(5)

(6)

(7) 1. मकरधोकरा

उमरेर

नागपुर

646.84

भाग 2. सुकली

उमरेर

नागपुर

447.55

भाग 3. बोपेश्वर

उमरेर

नागपुर

205.81

भाग 4. हेवटी

उमरेर

नागपुर

209.63

भाग 5.

कटारा

उमरेर

नागपुर

46.88

भाग 6. दहेगांव

उमरेर

नागपुर

28.77

भाग 7. सायकी

उमरेर

नागपुर

10.52

भाग

कुलः 1596.00 हेक्टर ( लगभग )

या

3943.786 एकड़ ( लगभग ) ग्राम मकरधोकरा में अर्जित किए जाने वाले प्लाट संख्यांकः

26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31 , 32, 33 , 34, 35 , 36, 37, 38 , 39, 40/1 , 40/2 , 41 , 42, 43, 44, 45 , 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 73 , 74 , 75 , 76 , 79, 80, 81 , 82 , 83 , 84, 85 , 86, 87, 88 , 89, 90/1 , 91/2, 93, 94, 95 , 96, 97, 98, 99/1 , 99/2, 100/1 , 100/2, 101, 102, 103, 104, 105 , 106/1 , 106/2, 107, 108, 109, 110, 111 , 112, 113, 114, 115, 116/1 , 116/2 , 117, 118/1 , 118/2, 119, 136/1 , 136/2 , 137, 138, 139, 140, 141, 142, 143 , 144, 145, 146, 147, 148, 149 , 150 , 151 / 1,151 /2 ; 152/1 , 152/2 , 153 , 154, 155, 161 , 162, 163 , 164, 165/ 1 क, 165/ 1 ख 1 , 165/ 1ख2, 165/2 , 166/1 , 166/2, 166/3 , 167, 168 , 169, 170, 171/1 , 171/2 , 172/2, 173 , 174, 175, 176, 177, 178, 179, 180, 181 , 182, 183 , 184, 185 , 186/1 , 186/ 2, 187, 188 , 189/1 , 189/2, 190, 191, 192, 193 , 194, 195, 196, 197, 198, 199, 200, 201/1 , 201/2 , 202, 203 , 204/1 , 204/2, 205 , 206 , 207, 208, 20 , 210, 211, 212, 213 , 214, 215/1 , 215/2 , 215/3 , 216/1 , 216/2, 217 , 218 , 219, 220, 221 , 222/1 , 222/2 , 223 , 224 / 1,224/ 2 , 224/3 , 224/4 , 225 , 226/1 , 226/2, 227 , 228, 229/ 1 क, 229/ 1 ख, 229/2, 229/3 , 229/4, 230, 231 , 232/1 , 232/2, 232/3 , 233 / 1 क , 233/ 1 ख, 233/2, 233/3, 234/ 1 /क 1 , 234 / 1 /क2, 234/1/3 , 234/1/4, 234/ 1 / ख 1 , 234/1/02, 234/ 1/ख3, 234/ 1 /ख 4 , 234/ 1 ग, 234/2 , 234/3 , 234/4, 234/5 क, 234/5ख , 234/6 क, 234/6ख, 235/1 , 235/2, 236, 237, 238, 239, 240/1 क, 240/ 1 ख, 240/2, 240/3 , 241/1 , 241/2 , 241/3 , 241/4, 242, 243, 244/1 , 244/2, 245, 246, 247 / 1,247/2,248 , 249, 250/ 1 क, 250/ 1 ख, 250/2, 250/3 , 251 , 251/1 , 252/2 , 253 , 254/1 , 254/2 , 254/3 , 255 , 256 , 257/1 , 257/2, 258/1 , 258/2, 259, 260, 261 , 262, 263, 264, 265 , 266, 267, 268 , 269 , 270 , 271 , 272 , 273/1 , 273/2,274,275 / 1 , 275/2, 276/1 , 276/2, 276/3 , 276/ 4,276/ 5,277, 278, 279, 280, 281 , 282, 283 , 284, 285/1 , 285/2 , 286, 287, 288/1 , 288/2, 288/3 , 288/4, 289, 290, 291, 292, 293, 294, 295 , 296, 297, 298, 299, 300, 301 , 302, 303/1 , 303/2, 304, 305, 306 , 307, 308, 309, 310/1क, 310/ 1 ख, 310/2, 310/3 , 311 , 312, 313/1 , 313/2, 314/1 , 314/2, 315, 316, 317, 318, 319, 320, 321 , 322, 323, 324 , 325 , 326 , 327 , 328, 329/ 1क, 329/ 1 ख, 329/2, 330, 331, 332, 333/1, 333/2 , 333/3 , 334, 335/1 , 335/2,336, 337/ 1,337 /2,559 , 571/1 , 571/2 , 571/3 , 574 , 575,578,579/1,579/2, 580, 581, 582, 583 , 584 , 585, 588 , 589, 590, 591 , 592, 593 , 594/1 , 594/2 , 595 , 596/ 1 क, 596/ 1 ख, 596/2, 597 , 598, 599, 601 , 602, 603, 604, 605, 606, 607, 608, 609, 610, 611 , नहर , नाला और सड़क ।

ग्राम सुकली में अर्जित किए जाने वाले प्लाट संख्यांक :

1, 2, 3 , 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 , 9 , 10, 11 , 12/1 , 12/2, 13 , 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21 , 22/1 , 22/2, 23 , 24, 25, 26/1 , 26/2 , 26/3 , 26/4, 27, 28 , 29/1 , 29/2 , 30/1 , 30/2 , 31 , 32 , 33/1 , 33/2 , 34/1 , 34/2 , 35 , 36 , 37 , 38, 39, 40, 41 , 42, 43, 44, 45 , 46, 47/1 , 47/2 , 47/3 , 48 , 49 , 50 , 51 , 52/1 , 52/2 , 52/3 , 52/4, 53/1 , 53/2, 53/3 , 54, 55, 56, 72, 73 , 94, 95 , 96, 97, 98 , 99, 100, 101 , 102, 103 , 104 , 105 , 106, 107/2, 109, 110/1 , 110/2, 110/3 , 111 , 112, 113, 114, 115, 116, 117, 118, 119, 120/1 , 120/2 , 120/3 , 121 , 122, 123, 124/1 , 124/2 , 125/1 , 125/2 , 125/3 , 126/1 , 126/2 , 127, 128, 129/1 , 129/2, 129/3, 130 , 131 , 132, 133 , 134, 135, 136, 137/1 , 137/2,138, 139, 140/1 , 140/2 , 141 , 142 , 143/1 , 143/2, 144/1, 144/2, 145 , 146, 147, 148, 149, 150, 151 , 152, 153/1 , 153/2, 154, 155, 156/1 , 156/2, 156/3 , 156/4 , 156/5 , 157, 158, 159, 160, 161 , 162, 163, 164, 165, 166, 167, 168/1 , 168/2, 169, 170, 171, 172, 173 , 174, 175, 176, 177, 178/1 , 178/2, 179, 180, 181 , 182, 183 नहर , नाला और सड़क । 8247 भारत का राजपत्र: दिसम्बर 4, 2010/अग्रहायण 13 , 1932

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii ) ]

ग्राम बोपेश्वर में अर्जित किए जाने वाले प्लाट संख्यांक:

1 , 2, 3 , 4, 5 , 6 , 8/1 , 8/2 , 9/1 , 9/2, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16/1, 16/2, 17/1 क, 17 / 1 ख, 17/2 क, 17 /2ख, 18 , 19/1 , 19/2, 20/1 , 20/2 , 20/3,20/ 4, 21/1 , 21/2, 22, 23 , 24, 25, 26, 27, 28 , 29, 30 , 31/1 , 31/2, 33 , 34, 35, 36, 37/1/1 , 37/1/2 , 37/1/3, 37/ 1 क, 37 / 1 ख, 37/2,37/3 , 37/4 , 38,39, 40/1 , 40/2, 41/1 , 41/2; 41/3 , 41/4 , 42/1 , 42/2 , 77, 78 , 79 , 80/1 , 80/2 , 80/3 , 80/4 , 81 , 82/1 , 82/2, 83 , 84 , 85/1 , 85/2, 86 , 87 , 88 , 89, 90 , 91/1 , 91/2, 91/3 , 91/4 , 92/1 , 92/2, 93/1 , 93/2 , 94/1 , 94/2, 94/3 , 95 , 96 , 97/1 , 97/2, 97/3 , 97/4 , 97/5 , 98/1 , 98/2 , 98/3 , 98/4, 98/ 5, 98/6, 99 , 100 , 101/1 , 101/2, 102/1 , 102/2, 102/3 , 103, 104/1, 104/2क, 104/2ख, 104/3 , 104/4 , 104/5 , 105/1 , 105/2, 105/3 , 106/1 , 106/2, 107, 108. 109/1 , 109/2, 110 , 111/1 , 111/2, 112/1 , 112/2 , 113/1 , 113/2 , 114/1 , 114/2, 115 , 116/1 , 116/ 1 /क1 , 116/ 1/क2 , 116/ 1/क3 , 116/1 ग , 116/2, 116/3 , 116/3 क, 116/4, 116/5, 116/6, 117, 118 , 119/1 , 119/2, 120 , 121 , 122, 123 , 124, नाला , सड़क । ग्राम हेवटी में अर्जित किए जाने वाले प्लाट संख्यांक:

1, 2, 3 , 4, 5 , 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13 , 14/1 , 14/2 , 15/1 , 15/2 , 15/3 , 15/4 , 16/1 , 16/2, 16/3 , 17, 18 , 19, 20, 21 , 22, 23 , 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31/1 , 31/2 , 31/3 , 31/4, 32, 33 , 34, 35, 36, 37,38/ 1 , 38/2, 38/3 , 39, 40 , 41 , 42, 43 , 44, 45, 46, 47, 48 , 49 , 50, 51 , 52, 53 , 54, 55 , 60, 61/1 , 61/2, 62, 102/1 , 102/2, 102/3 , 103 , 104, 105 , 106, 107/1 , 107/3 , 111 , 112/1 , 112/2, 112/3 , 113 , 114, 115 , 116/1 , 116/2, 117, 118 , 119, 171 , 172, 173 , 174, 175, 176, 177, 178, 179, 180/1 , 180/2 , 181 , 182, 183 , 184, 185, 186, 187, 193 , 220, 221 , 222, 223 , 224, 225, 226, 227, 228 , 229, 230, 231 , 232, 233,247 , 249 , 250 , 251 , 252/ 1 क, 252/ 1 ख, 252/2, 252/3क, 252/3 ख , 252/4 ,. 253 , 254/1 , 254/ 2,255 / 1,255 / 2,256,257,258 , 259 , 260 , 261 , 262,263 , 264 , 265, 266, 267, 268, नहर , नाला और सड़क ।

ग्राम कटारा में अर्जित किए जाने वाले प्लाट संख्यांक :

6/1 और 7/3 , 6/2 और 7 /3 क, 7/1 , 7/2 , 7/4,8/ 1,8 / 2,9 / 1,9 /2 , 9 / 3,9 / 4,9 / 5 , 9/6 , 9/7 , 9/8 , 9/9, 9/10, 10/1 , 10/2 , 11 , 12, 13/1 , 13/2, 13/3 , 13/4 , 13/5 , 14, 15 , 16, 17, 18 , 19 , 25, 26, 27 , 28 , 29 , 30 , 31 , 32 , 33 , 131 , 132/1 , 132/2 , 132/3 , 132/4 , 132/5 , सड़क। ग्राम दहेगांव में अर्जित किए जाने वाले प्लाट संख्यांक:

94/1 , 94/2 , 95 , 96, 97 , 98 , 99 , 100, 106, 107, नाला , सड़क ।

ग्राम सायकी में अर्जित किए जाने वाले प्लाट संख्यांक:

215, 216, 219 , नाला , सड़क ।

सीमा वर्णन :

क-ख रेखा ग्राम सायकी और ग्राम मकरधोकरा की सम्मिलित ग्राम सीमा पर बिन्दु " क " से आरम्भ होती है और ग्राम मकरधोकरा में प्लाट संख्या 56 ( वन ) से होकर गुजरती है फिर प्लाट संख्यांक 51 , 52/1 , 52/2 , 52/3 , 52/4 , 53/1 , 53/2 , 53/3 की बाहरी सीमा से लगकर गुजरती है और सड़क पार करती है फिर प्लाट संख्यां 55 की बाहरी सीमा से लगकर गुजरती है और सड़क पार करके , सड़क, और नाले से लगकर गुजरती है फिर प्लाट संख्या 72 ( सरकारी ) से होकर गुजरती है फिर सड़क पार करती है और प्लाट संख्या 73 से होकर गुजरती है , फिर सड़क पार करती है , फिर प्लाट संख्यांक 94 , 102 , 103 , 107/2 , 106 , 109 , 116 की बाहरी सीमा से लगकर गुजरती है और ग्राम मकरधोकरा और ग्राम हेवटी की सम्मिलित ग्राम सीमा पर बिन्दु " ख " पर मिलती है । ख- ग रेखा ग्राम हेवटी से नहर के किनारे से लगकर गुजरती है, फिर प्लाट संख्यांक 60 , 61/2 , 61/1 , 62 की बाहरी सीमा से लगकर गुजरती है , नहर पार करती है फिर प्लाट संख्यांक 102/2 , 107/3 , 111 , 112/2 , 112/3 , 112/1 , 114 ( वन ) की बाहरी सीमा से लगकर गुजरती है फिर सड़क पार करती है और पुनः प्लाट संख्यांक 115 , 116/1 , 119 ( वन ) , 118 , 174 , 172 , 171 की बाहरी सीमा से लगकर गुजरती है फिर सड़क पार करती है और फिर प्लाट संख्यांक 184, 187 , 186, 193 , 222 , 221 , 220 की बाहरी सीमा से लगकर गुजरती है और बिन्दु " ग " पर मिलती है ।

ग- घ रेखा ग्राम हेवटी से , प्लाट संख्यांक 220 , 231 , 232 , 233 , 249 , 247 की बाहरी सीमा से लगकर गुजरती है फिर नाला पार करती है और ग्राम हेवटी और ग्राम बोपेश्वर की सम्मिलित ग्राम सीमा पर बिन्दु " घ " पर मिलती है ।

घ-ड रेखा ग्राम बोपेश्वर से , प्लाट संख्यांक 41/1 , 42/1 , 42/2 , फिर 42/1 , 40/1 , 36 , 33 , 34 , 35 , 31/1 , 29 , 28 , 77 , 78 , 79 , 80/2 , 80/4 की बाहरी सीमा से लगकर गुजरती है फिर ग्राम बोपेश्वर और ग्राम कटारा की बाहरी सीमा को पार करती है फिर रेखा ग्राम कटारा 8248

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 4, 2010 /AGRAHAYANA 13 , 1932 [PART II- SEC. 3 (ii) ] से प्लाट संख्या 19 की बाहरी सीमा से लगकर गुजरती है , सड़क पार करती है और प्लाट संख्या 25 की बाहरी सीमा से लगकर गुजरती है और बिन्दु " ड़ " पर मिलती है ।

ड़- च रेखा ग्राम कटारा से रेल की सीमा और प्लाट संख्यांक 25, 26 , 27 , 28 , 29 , 30 , 31 , 32 , 33 की बाहरी सीमा से एक साथ लगकर गुजरती है फिर सड़क पार करती है , फिर रेल की सीमा और प्लाट संख्यांक 9/4 , 9/5 , 8/2 , 7/2 , 7/4 , 7/1 , 6/2 और 7/3 क , 131 , फिर 6/2 और 7 / 3 क की बाहरी सीमा से एक साथ लगकर गुजरती है फिर ग्राम कटारा और ग्राम बोपेश्वर की सम्मिलित ग्राम सीमा को पार करती है फिर रेखा ग्राम बोपेश्वर से रेल सीमा और प्लाट संख्यांक 117 , 118 , 124 , 123 की बाहरी से एक साथ लगकर गुजरती है फिर ग्राम बोपेश्वर और ग्राम मकरधोकरा से, सड़क से लगकर गुजरती है फिर रेल सीमा और प्लाट संख्यांक 203 , 161 , सड़क, 154, 155 की बाहरी सीमा से एक साथ लगकर गुजरती है और नाले के मध्य में बिन्दु " च " पर मिलती है । च- छ रेखा ग्राम मकरधोकरा से रेल सीमा और प्लाट संख्यांक 137 की बाहरी सीमा से एक साथ लगकर गुजरती है , फिर सड़क पार कर , सड़क के किनारे से लगकर गुजरती है , फिर प्लाट संख्यांक 136/2 , 119 की बाहरी सीमा से लगकर गुजरती है फिर सड़क पार करती है और प्लाट संख्यांक 73 , 74 , 598 की बाहरी सीमा से लगकर गुजरती है फिर नहर पार कर , नहर के किनारे से होती हुई प्लाट संख्यांक 83,89,90/ 1 , 91/2,97,96 की बाहरी सीमा से लगकर गुजरती है , फिर रेल सीमा और प्लाट संख्यांक 93,50,49 की बाहरी सीमा से एक साथ लगकर गुजरती है , फिर सड़क पार करती है और पुनः रेल सीमा और प्लाट संख्यांक 33,32,26 ( वन ) की बाहरी सीमा से होकर गुजरती है और ग्राम मकरधोकरा और ग्राम दहेगांव की सम्मिलित ग्राम सीमा पर बिन्दु " छ " पर मिलती है । छ- क रेखा ग्राम दहेगांव से सड़क और प्लाट संख्यांक 107 ( वन ) , 106 ( वन ) , 100 की बाहरी सीमा से एक साथ लगकर गुजरती है, फिर नाला पार करती है और फिर सड़क और प्लाट संख्यांक 94/2 , 94/1 , 96 95 ( वन ) की बाहरी सीमा से एक साथ लगकर गुजरती है , फिर ग्राम दहेगांव और ग्राम सायकी की सम्मिलित ग्राम सीमा को पार करती है , फिर रेखा ग्राम सायकी से वन प्लाट संख्या 219 से होकर गुजरती है , नाला पार करती है , फिर प्लाट संख्या 219 ( वन ) से होकर गुजरती है , फिर नाला पार करती है , फिर प्लाट संख्या 216 ( वन ) से होकर गुजरती है और सड़क पार करती है फिर प्लाट संख्या 215 ( वन ) से होकर गुजरती है और आरंभिक बिन्दु " क " पर मिलती है ।

[फा. सं. 43015 /4/2009- पीआरआईडब्ल्यू-1 ]

एम. शहाबुद्दीन , अवर सचिव

New Delhi , the 30th November, 2010

S.O. 2954. Whereas by the notification of the Government of India in the Ministry of Coal number S. O. 1997 dated the 15th July, 2009, issued under sub- section ( 1 ) ofSection 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 25th July, 2009, the Central Government gave notice of its intention to prospect for coal in 1624.66 hectares (approximately ) or 4014.54 acres (approximately ) of the land 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 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 all rights inor over the land measuring 1596.00 hectares ( approximately ) or 3943.786 acres ( approximately ) described in the Schedule.

Note 1 : The plan bearing number C- 1 ( E ) III/ FUR/ 837-0810, dated the 7thAugust, 2010 of the area covered by this notification may be inspected at the office of the Collector, Nagpur (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 - 440 001 ( Maharashtra) .

Note 2: Attention is hereby invited to the provisions of Section 8 of the said Act which provide 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 .

8249 भारत का राजपत्र : दिसम्बर 4 , 2010/अग्रहायण 13 , 1932

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii)?

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) Forthe purpose of this section, a person shall be deemed to be interested in land who would be entitled to claim aninterest 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 the Gazette of India , Part - II , Section 3 , Sub - section ( ii) dated the 11 th June , 1983 .

SCHEDULE

DINESH OPENCAST (MAKARDHOKRA - III) MINE UMRER AREA

DISTRICT NAGPUR ( MAHARASHTRA )

(Plan bearing number : C- 1 ( E ) III/FUR/ 837-0810 , dated 7th August, 2010 )

(All Rights )

Remarks

Area in hectares

District

Tahsil

Patwari Circle number

Name of village

Sl . No.

(7)

(6)

(5)

(4)

(3)

(2)

(1)

Part

646-84

Umrer

Nagpur

Makardhokra

Part

447-55

Nagpur

Umrer

Sukali

Part

205-81

Nagpur

Umrer

Bopeshwar

Part

209-63

Nagpur

Umrer

Hewati

Part

46-88

Nagpur

Umrer

Katara

Part

28-77

Nagpur

Umrer

6. Dahegaon

Part

10-52

Umrer Nagpur

7. Sayaki

Total : 1596.00 hectares

(approximately)

3943-786 acres

(approximately) Plot numbers to be acquired in village Makardhokra :

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 4, 2010 /AGRAHAYANA 13 , 1932 [PART II--SEC. 3 ( ii ) ] 146, 147, 148, 149, 150, 151/1 , 151/2, 152/1 , 152/2 , 153 , 154, 155, 161, 162, 163, 164, 165 / 1A, 165 / 1B1 , 165 / 1B2, 165/2 , 166/1 , 166/2/166/3 , 167, 168, 169, 170, 171/1 , 171/2, 172/2 , 173 , 174, 175, 176, 177, 178 , 179, 180, 181, 182, 183 , 184 , 185 , 186 , 186/2 , 187, 188, 189/1 , 189/2, 190, 191, 192, 193, 194, 195, 196, 197, 198, 199, 200, 201/1 , 201/2 , 202, 203 , 204/1 , 204/2 , 205 , 206 , 207 , 208, 209, 210, 211 , 212, 213 , 214, 215/1 , 215/2, 215/3 , 216/1 , 216/2, 217, 218 , 219, 220 , 221 , 222/1 , 222/2 , 223 , 224/1 , 224/2 , 224/ 3,224/ 4 , 225 , 226/1 , 226/2, 227, 228, 229 / 1A, 229/ 1B , 229/2 , 229/3, 229/4 , 230, 231 , 232/1 , 232/2 , 232/3 , 233 / 1A, 233/18 , 233/2 , 233/3 , 234 / 1/ Α1 , 234 / 1 / Α2, 234/ 1 / A3 , 234 / 1 / A4, 234/ 1 /B1 , 234/ 1 /B2 , 234/ 1 /B3 , 234/ 1/B4 , 234/ 1C , 234/2 , 234/3 , 234/4,234/ 5A, 234/5B , 234/ 6A, 234/ 6B , 235/1 , 235/2 , 236, 237, 238, 239, 240/ 1A, 240/ 1B , 240/2, 240/3 , 241/1 , 241/2, 241/3 , 241/4, 242 , 243 , 244/1 , 244/2 , 245 , 246, 247/1 , 247/2 , 248, 249, 250/ 1A, 250/ 1B, 250/2, 250/3 , 251 , 251/1 , 252/2,253,254/ 1,254/2 , 254/3 , 255 , 256, 257/1 , 257/2 , 258/1 , 258 /2,259,260,261,262,263,264,265,266,267,268,269,270,271,272,273 / 1,273 / 2,274,275 / 1,275 / 2,276 / 1 , 276/ 2,276/3,276/4, 276/5, 277, 278, 279, 280, 281 , 282, 283 , 284, 285/1 , 285/2 , 286, 287, 288/1 , 288/2, 288/3 , 288/4, 289 , 290, 291 , 292, 293, 294, 295, 296, 297, 298, 299, 300, 301 , 302, 303/1, 303/2 , 304, 305, 306, 307, 308 , 309, 310/ 1A, 310/ 1B , 310/2, 310/3,311 , 312, 313/1 , 313/2 , 314/1 , 314/2, 315, 316, 317, 318, 319, 320, 321 , 322, 323 , 324, 325, 326, 327, 328 , 329/14 , 329/ 1B, 329/2 , 330, 331, 332, 333/1 , 333/2, 333/3 , 334, 335/1 , 335/2, 336, 337/1 , 337/2, 559, 571/1 , 571/2, 571/3 , 574, 575 , 578 , 579/1 , 579/2 , 580 , 581 , 582, 583,584,585, 588 , 589 , 590, 591, 592, 593 , 594/1 , 594/2, 595, 596/ 1A, 596/18, 596/2 , 597, 598 , 599 , 601 , 602, 603 , 604, 605 , 606, 607, 608, 609, 610, 611 Canal, Nallah and Road.

Plot numbers to be acquired in village Sukali :

1 , 2, 3 , 4, 5, 6, 7 , 8, 9, 10, 11 , 12/1 , 12/2, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21 , 22/1 , 22/2 , 23 , 24, 25 , 26/1 , 26/2 , 26/3 , 26/4 , 27 , 28 , 29/1 , 29 / 2,30/ 1,30 /2,31,32, 33/1 , 33/2 , 34/1 , 34/2 , 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41 , 42, 43 , 44 , 45 , 46 , 47/1 , 47/2 , 47/3 , 48 , 49 , 50 , 51 , 52/1 , 52/2 , 52/ 3,52 / 4 , 53/1 , 53/2, 53/3 , 54, 55, 56, 72, 73, 94, 95, 96, 97, 98 , 99 , 100 , 101 , 102 , 103 , 104 , 105 , 106, 107/2 , 109, 110/1 , 110/2, 110/3 , 111 , 112, 113, 114, 115, 116, 117, 118, 119, 120/1 , 120/2, 120/3 , 121 , 122 , 123 , 124/1 , 124/2 , 125/1 , 125/2 , 125/3 , 126/1 , 126/2, 127 , 128 , 129/1 , 129/2, 129/3 , 130, 131, 132, 133, 134, 135 , 136, 137/1 , 137/2 , 138 , 139, 140/1 , 140/2 , 141 , 142 , 143/1 , 143/2 , 144/1 , 144/2, 145, 146, 147, 148 , 149, 150, 151, 152, 153/1 , 153/2, 154, 155 , 156/1 , 156/2 , 156/3 , 156/4 , 156/5 , 157, 158, 159, 160, 161 , 162, 163, 164, 165, 166, 167, 168/1 , 168/2, 169, 170, 171, 172, 173 , 174, 175 , 176, 177 , 178/1 , 178/2 , 179, 180 , 181, 182, 183 Canal , Nallah and Road.

Plot numbers to be acquired in village Bopeshwar :

1 , 2, 3,4 , 5 , 6 , 8/1 , 8/2, 9/1 , 9/2 , 10, 11 , 12, 13, 14, 15, 16/1 , 16/2, 17 / 1A, 17/18 , 17 / 2A, 17 / 2B , 18, 19/1 , 19/2 , 20/1 , 20/2 , 20/3 , 20/4 , 21/1 , 21/2, 22, 23 , 24, 25, 26, 27, 28 , 29, 30, 31/1, 31/2, 33, 34 , 35, 36, 37/1/1 , 37/1/2 , 37/1/3 , 37/14 , 37 / 1B , 37/2 , 37/3 , 37/4, 38, 39, 40/1 , 40/2, 41/1 , 41/2, 41/3 , 41/4 , 42/1 , 42/2 , 77 , 78, 79, 80/1 , 80/2, 80/3 , 80/4 , 81 , 82/1 , 82/2 , 83 , 84 , 85/1 , 85 /2,86,87,88,89,90,91 / 1 , 91/2 , 91/3 , 91/4 , 92/1 , 92/2 , 93/1 , 93/2, 94/1 , 94/2 , 94/3 , 95 , 96 , 97/1 , 97/2 , 97/3 , 97/4 , 97/5 , 98/1 , 98/2 , 98/3 , 98/4, 98/5, 98/6, 99, 100, 101/1, 101/2, 102/1 , 102/2, 102/3 , 103 , 104/1 , 104/ 2A, 104/2B , 104/3 , 104/4 , 104/5 , 105/1 , 105/2 , 105/3 , 106/1 , 106/2, 107, 108 , 109/1, 109/2, 110, 111/1 , 111/2, 112/1 , 112/2, 113/1 , 113/2, 114/1 , 114/2, 115, 116/1 , 116/ 1 /A1 , 116/ 1 / A2 , 116/ 1 / A3 , 116/ 1C, 116/2, 116/3 , 116/3A, 116/4, 116/5 , 116/6, 117, 118, 119/1 , 119/2 , 120 , 121 , 122, 123 , 124, Nallah, Road .

Plot numbers to be acquired in village Hewati :

1, 2, 3 , 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13 , 14/1 , 14/2, 15/1, 15/2, 15/3 , 15/4 , 16/1 , 16/2 , 16/3 , 17, 18, 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 , 25 , 26 , 27 , 28 , 29, 30, 31/1 , 31/2, 31/3 , 31/4, 32, 33 , 34, 35, 36, 37, 38/1 , 38/2, 38/3, 39, 40, 41 , 42, 43 , 44, 45 , 46 , 47, 48 , 49, 50, 51 , 52 , 53 , 54 , 55 , 60, 61/1 , 61/2, 62, 102/1 , 102/2, 102/3 , 103, 104, 105, 106, 107/1 , 107/3 , 111 , 112/1 , 112/2, 112/3 , 113 , 114, 115, 116/1 , 116/2 , 117, 118, 119, 171 , 172, 173, 174, 175, 176, 177, 178, 179, 180/1, 180/2 , 181 , 182, 183, 184, 185, 186, 187, 193 , 220 , 221 , 222 , 223 , 224, 225, 226, 227, 228, 229, 230, 231 , 232, 233, 247, 249, 250, 251 , 252/ 1A, 252 / 1B , 252/2 , 252/ 3A, 252/ 3B , 252/ 4,253 , 254 / 1,254/ 2 , 255/1 , 255/2, 256, 257, 258 , 259, 260, 261 , 262, 263, 264 , 265, 266, 267, 268 , Canal , Nallah and Road.

Plot numbers to be acquired in village Katara :

6/1 & 7/3 , 6/2 & 7/3A, 7/1 , 7/2, 7/4, 8/1 , 8/2 , 9/1 , 9/2, 9/3 , 9/4 , 9/5 , 9/6, 9/7 , 9/8 , 9/9, 9/10, 10/1 , 10/2 , 11 , 12, 13/1 , 13/2, 13/3 , 13/4, 13/5, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29 , 30, 31 , 32, 33, 131 , 132/1 , 132/2, 132/3 , 132/4, 132/5 , Road .

Plot numbers to be acquired in village Dahegaon :

94/1 , 94/2, 95 , 96, 97, 98 , 99, 100, 106, 107, Nallah, Road .

8251 भारत का राजपत्र : दिसम्बर 4, 2010/अग्रहायण 13 , 1932

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii ) ]

Plot numbers to be acquired in village Sayaki :

215 , 216, 219, Nallah, Road .

Boundary description :

A-B : Line start from Point ' A' from common village boundary of villages Sayaki and Sukali then passes through village Sukali through plot number 56 (Forest ) , then passes along with the outer boundary of plot numbers 51 , 52/1 , 52/2, 52/3 , 52/4 , 53/1 , 53/2 , 53/3 , crosses road , again passes along with the outer boundary of plot number 55 , then again crosses road and passes along the road and nallah , then passes through plot number 72 (Govt . ) crosses road , then again passes through plot number 73 , crosses road, then passes along the outer boundary of plot numbers 94 , 102, 103 , 107/2 , 106, 109, 116, and meets at Point ' B ' on common village boundary of villages Sukali and Hewati .

B-C: Line passes through village Hewati along the canal then passes along with the outer boundary of plot numbers 60, 61/2 , 61/1 , 62, then crosses canal , then again passes along with the outer boundary of plot numbers 102/2 , 107/3 , 111 , 112/2 , 112/3 , 112/1 , 114 (Forest) , then crosses road and again passes along with the outer boundary of plot numbers 115, 116/1 , 119 (Forest) 118 , 174, 172 , 171 , crosses road, then again passes along with the outer boundary ofplot numbers 184, 187, 186, 193 , 222 , 221 , 220 and meets at Point ' C' .

C-D; Line passes through village Hewati along with the outer boundary of plot numbers 220, 231 , 232 , 233 , 249, 247 , crosses nallah and meets at Point ' D ' on common village boundary of village Hewati and Bopeshwar .

D-E: Line passes through village Bopeshwar along the outer boundary of plot numbers 41/1 , 42/1 , 42/2 , again 42/1 , 40/1 , 36, 33 , 34, 35, 31/1 , 29, 28 , 77 , 78 , 79 , 80/2, 80/4 , then crosses common village boundary of villages Bopeshwar and Katara , then line passes through village Katara along the plot number 19 , then crosses road, then passes along the outer boundary of plot number 25 and meets at Point ' E ' .

E-F: Line passes through village Katara simultaneously railway boundary and outer boundary of plot numbers 25 , 26 , 27, 28 , 29, 30, 31 , 32 , 33 , then crosses road and again passes along the railway boundary and outer boundary of plot numbers 9/4 , 9/5 , 8/2 , 7/2 , 7/4 , 7/1 , 6/2 , 7 / 3A , 131 , again 6/2 , 7 /3A, then crosses common village boundary of villages Katara and Bopeshwar , then line passes through village Bopeshwar along the railway boundary and outer boundary of plot number 117 , 118 , 124 , 123 , then crosses common village boundary of villages Bopeshwar and Makardhokra, then line passes through village Makardhokra along the road and simultaneously railway boundary and outer boundary of plot numbers 203 , 161 , road , 154, 155 and meets at Point ' F ' on center of nallah .

F-G: Line passes through village Makardhokra simultaneously along railway boundary and outer boundary of plot number 137, crosses road, then passes along the road and passes along the plot numbers 136/2 , 119 , then crosses road, then passes along the plot numbers 73 , 74, 598 , then crosses nallah and passes along the nallah , then passes along the outer boundary ofplot numbers 83 , 89, 90/1 , 91/2 , 97 , 96 , then passes simultaneously along the railway boundary and outer boundary of plot numbers 93 , 50, 49, crosses road , then again passes along railway boundary and outer boundary of plot numbers 33 , 32, 26 ( Forest ) and meets at Point ' G ' on common village boundary of villages Makardhokra and Dahegaon .

GA: Line passes through village Dahegaon simultaneously along the road and outer boundary of plot numbers 107 (Forest) , 106 ( Forest) , 100 then crosses nallah and passes along the plot numbers 94/2, 94/1 , 96 , 95 ( Forest ) , then crosses common boundary of villages Dahegaon and Sayaki , then line passes through village Sayaki through forest plot number 219, crosses nallah, then passes through plot number 219 ( Forest ) , again crosses nallah , then passes through plot number 216 (Forest ) , then crosses road, then passes through plot number 215 ( Forest ) and meets at starting Point 'A' .

[F. No. 43015/4/2009 - PRIW - 1 ]

M. SHAHABUDEEN, Under Secy.

8252

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 4, 2010/ AGRAHAYANA 13 , 1932

(1) पेट्रोलियम और प्राकृतिक गैस मंत्रालय

काजिआमा नई दिल्ली , 25 नवम्बर , 2010

का.आ. 2955.-केन्द्रीय सरकार ने पेट्रोलियम और खनिज पाइपलाइन ( भूमि में उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन ) अधिनियम , 1962 ( 1962 का 50 ) ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त अधिनियम कहा गया है ) की धारा 3 की उप - धारा ( 1 ) के अधीन जारी भारत सरकार के पेट्रोलियम और प्राकृतिक गैस मंत्रालय की अधसूिचना का. आ. 3348 तारीख 2 दिसम्बर , 2009 द्वारा उस अधिसूचना से सलग्न अनुसूची में विनिर्दिष्ट उड़ीसा राज्य की तहसील खोद्धा जिला खोद्धा की भूमि में , पारादीप- सम्बलपुर - रायपुर - रांची पाइपलाइन परियोजना के कार्यान्वयन के लिए इंडियन ऑयल कार्पोरेशन लिमिटेड द्वारा उड़ीसा राज्य में पारादीप से रायपुर ( छत्तीसगढ़ ) एवं रांची ( झारखण्ड) तक पेट्रोलियम उत्पादों के परिवहन के लिए पाइपलाइन बिछाने हेतु उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन करने के अपने आशय की घोषणा की थी;

और उक्त अधिसूचना की प्रतियां जनता को तारीख 13 जनवरी , 2010 को उपलब्ध करा दी गई थीं ;

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

और , केन्द्रीय सरकार ने उक्त रिपोर्ट पर विचार करने के पश्चात् इस अधिसूचना से उपाबद्ध अनुसूची में विनिर्दिष्ट भूमि में उपयोग के अधिकार अर्जित करने का विनिश्चय किया है ;

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

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

अनुसूची

तहसील : खोद्धा जिला : खोद्धा

राज्य-उड़ीसा

गांव का नाम

प्लाट नं.

क्षेत्रफल

एयर वर्ग मीटर

हेक्टेयर

(1)

(2) (3) (4) (5)

काजिआमा

404

405

406

407

408

409

[PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii ) ] (2) (3) (4) (5) 424

37 421

84 416

35 417

08 90 355

06 99 356

14 27 506

47 360

18 361

41 332

10 15 331

72 330

07 16 329

59 328

07 79 325

00 52 326

03 06 318

07 80 324

00 51 319

73 314

71 315

316

81 502

05 90 312

01 73 311

43 307

02 04 304

02 41 303

03 33 301

07 44 302

00 15 300

65 468

78 284

14 39 290

02 495

24 287

H 288

01 20 289

10 277

14 30 274

276

05 39 भारत का राजपत्र: दिसम्बर 4, 2010/अग्रहायण 13 , 1932

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

(1)

( 5)

(4)

(3)

(2)

(1)

8253

(5) (3) (4)

(2)

1734

कुम्भारवस्त

351

मुकन्दप्रसाद

1914

कुम्भारवस्त

1915

1913

1911

1910

1897

2069

1895

1889

1888

1884

1874

1873

1869

1870

1843

1842

1837

1835

1836

1829

1831

1830

1827

1804

1805

गुरुजंग

1825

1824

1822

1823

1816

1812

1813

1756

1749

1746

1747

1735

1712

1711

1710

1227

1229

1701

1230

1231

1691

1690

1234

1237

1238

1246

1239

1241

1937

2058

1626

1614

1963

1612

1616

1611

1610

1602

1599

1247

1202

1246

1245

1244

1242

1203

1204

1205

1207

1208

1211 8254

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 4, 2010/AGRAHAYANΑ 13, 1932

(1)

(2) (3) (4) (5) (1) गुरुजंग

1194

67 उइलकिनसननगर

1762

1195

06 65

1197

00 10

1196

06 50

1192

01 25

1139

00 68

1190

टागिआपडा

1145

05 31

1189

02 73

1146

05 08

1149

1148

12 68

1103

04 58

1152

03 33

1102

1101

1098

14 49

1099

1097

01 71

1096

04 94

1053

00 97

1800

02 28

1081

06 61

1080

1079

07 75

उइलकिनसननगर

560

558

05 34

551

556

552

555

554

545

546

11 69

902

539

07 31

530

04 83

532

04 25

533

06 93

[PART II-SEC. 3 ( ii ) ] (2) (3) (4) ( 5) 534

09 45 536

00 10 508

11 21 504

10 58 502

06 08 500

00 75 790

77 925

03 48 725

00 10 726

01 95 727

80 729

03 28 730

02 29 731

02 91 734

(3 26 733

717

875

02 65 715

08 29 713

04 74 712

11 61 746

24 747

51 753

95 754

12 51 763

07 81 764

39 765

33 766

778

ΟΙ

51 678

00 77 686

06 40 681

05 56 680

44 675

82 674

01 40 676

05 62 937

65 928

05 80 672

03 69 890

02 67 भारत का राजपत्र : दिसम्बर 4, 2010/अग्रहायण 13 , 1932

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

(1)

( 5)

(4)

(3)

(2)

(1)

8255

(5)

(4)

(3)

(2)

02 05 00

343

टागिआपडा

00.

669

टागिआपडा

668

877

617

616

614

615

613

378

344

07 60 00

326

440

439

438

441

325

323

955

पाइकतिगिरिआ

610

379

609

380

383

382

381

539

384

587

584

583

582

580

578

577.

576

411

413

414

887

422

423

362

349

435

350

348

347

346

345

342

964

963

956

957

958

959

960

945

946

944

943

939

940

936

925

00 35

1498

926

927

889

00 88

924

887

09 64

888

872

875

874

873

818

820

843

821

08 96

822

823 8256

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 4, 2010/ AGRAHAYANA 13 , 1932

(1)

(2) (3) (4) ( 5) (1) पाइकतिगिरिआ

835

02 34 पाइकतिगिरिआ 824

833

02 79

829

00 59

830

06 21

760

00 82

1429

05 11

759

00 48 होसेनपुर 491

05 69

1489

00 10

492

10 83

493

10 05

176

00 60

1425

495

01 08

175

04 76

महारथापुर 496

00 10

174

06 21

ठाकुरपडा 173

05 17

172

118

06 92

119

122

1495

102

06 26

103

02 55

104

02 62

105

00 12

05 97

00 10

04 19

04 20

00 28

02 69

01 10

09 33

00 28

08 18

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

( 5)

(4)

00 00 28 20

02 60 1485

06 23 19

00 14 16

00 10 18

04 18 17

06 05 6

11 58 10

00 26 9

08 89 8

02 30 7

02 22 5

12 06 1

06 68 51

72 49

00 62 661

05 80 655

53 656

00 82 653

05 75 654

20 652

45 479

17 482

481

10 483

41 484

02 23 485

13 486

10 488

42 489

06 48 490

88 469

20 424

05 44 425

04 99 426

00 20 464

08 62 429

87 462

20 भारत का राजपत्र : दिसम्बर 4, 2010/अग्रहायण 13 , 1932

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ]

(1)

( 5)

(4)

(3)

(2)

(1)

बिंकुडिआ

430

ठाकुरपडा

439

431

438

432

433

434

435

436

414

04 47

415

नूआपडा

362

416

361

363

364

359

365

263

261

260

259

258

257

256

00 03

255

243

245

244

234

247

235

233

231

232

225

223

1181

बिंकुडिआ

1102

07 73

1103

8257

(5)

(4)

(3)

(2)

1177

1178

1179

1180

1190

1191

1193

1194

1195

1185

1184

1555

1554

1552

1539

1538

1541

1542

1545

1544

1243

1244

1242

1241

1236

1240

1239

1238

1175

1174

311

312

313

310

309

317

318

319

320

335

297 8258

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 4, 2010/AGRAHAYANA 13 , 1932

(1)

(2) (3) (4) (5) (1) नूआपडा

285

[PART II- SEC. 3 (ii) ] (2) (3) (4) (5)

04 72

मुक्तापुर

284

05 90

286

02 60

283

08 10

275

09 70

276

00 35

274

00 88

273

14 70

272

05 13

266

05 85

200

00 20

बाधेइआगि

203

07 15

265

00 10

264

04 72

207

06 45

205

01 20

211

05 05

04 10

04 45

06 26

02 80

08 10

01 26

13 00

00 10

01 45

04 40

दिब्यसिंह प्रसाद

00 94

01 79

मुक्तापुर

276

06 96

बालिसाहि 275

16 76

252

07 08

251

274

00 20

253

02 71

254

03 22 244

04 12 243

09 242

10 232

02 19 233

02 83 234

07 14 236

01 03 235

03 70 211

01 75 210

07 05 1094

00 80 1093

04 58 1092

05 21 966

07 14 1067

05 07 1063

06 07 1064

02 09 1065

05 38 1062

00 10 1057

08 25 1058

00-

10 1056

06 83 1055

06 40 1073

03 71 1024

07 89 1022

13 26 1023

03 82 1025

08 52 1019

00 23 1258

00 10 4026

00 69 1018

57 1017

02 38 1361

00 97 1360

15 1359

09 41 1365

36 1367

03 11 1368

05 70 भारत का राजपत्र : दिसम्बर 4 , 2010/अग्रहायण 13 , 1932

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

(1)

(5)

(4)

(3)

(2)

(1)

8259

( 5)

(4)

(3)

(2)

00 31 00

743

बालिसाहि

1369

बालिसाहि

1357

1353

1351

1282

1283

1285

बसन्त

1284

1292

1293

1278

1279

1280

1294

1277

1263

1276

1271

1270

1265

1269

1266

1267

1268

1229

1225

1230

1224

1219

1231

1210

763

762

761

1216

754

753

750

751

752

00 20

742

749

748

747

746

745

744

2055

2052

2049

2046

25 82

1846

1850

1901

1900

1887

1888

1889

1890

1885

1883

1338

1339

1340

1355

1464

1356

1357

1358

1461

1459

1436

1441

1440

1437

1442

1438

00 80

1439

00 18

1416

1414

1413 8260

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 4, 2010/AGRAHAYANA 13 , 1932

(1)

(2) (3) (4) ( 5) (1) बसन्त

1448

00 26 ब्राह्मणबेरेणी

1412

05 02

1411

64 हाटसाहि 1407

17 98

1404

1403

08 89

ब्राह्मणबेरेणी

922

02 19

921

08 87

920

13 52

918

919

04 75

889

05 80

890

02 45

888

01 75

891

03 81

892

02 27

893

02 87

894

08 23

895

896

08 17

864

863

932

703

01 18

702

00 10

704

09 13

705

00 20

358

02 27

357

02 34

356

04 40

354

00 20

355

06 87

353

02 10

368

373

374

00 59

372

00 21

377

09 86

332

00 28 कुआपुट 379

378

12 21

[PART II- SEC . 3 ( ii ) ] (2) (3) (4) (5) 331

16 10 1496

16 59 305

02 43 306

98 307

07 71 304

00 38 309

00 20 310

08 47 302

00 37 313

34 311

14 33 975

00 20 974

00 59 312

30 405

01 87 406

06 59 407

00 10 424

05 77 408

56 423

52 422

03 55 421

02 23 420

27 419

01 21 418

10 412

01 83 504

75 503

32 492

10 34 491

05 31 490

03 25 489

925

00 13 480

37 476

03 44 475

478

20 469

02 12 3063

04 17 3064

04 30 3073

08 59 भारत का राजपत्र : दिसम्बर 4, 2010/अग्रहायण 13 , 1932

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii ) ]

(1)

(5)

(4)

(3)

(2).

(1)

कुआपुर

3072

कुआपुर

3044

3039

3037

3040

3041

3035

3034

3000

2997

2998

2996

2995

2990

2988

2989

2987

2986

2985

3148

2984

2983

2980

2978

2977

2745

2769

2746

2747

2768

2755

00 03

2749

2748

2753

2750

2752

2751

2740

2741

2742

1764

8261

( 5)

(4)

(3)

(2)

1765

1766

1767

1768

1769

1770

1771

1821

1820

1822

1828

1827

1825

1826

1854

1855

(12

1856

1861

1860

1859

1866

1867

1865

1920

1921

1933

1932

1931

1938

1939

1949

1950

1957

1955

1956

1960

1027

1029

00 10

1028

(3 53

1022

03 83

1034 8262

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 4, 2010/AGRAHAYANA 13, 1932 [PART II-SEC. 3 ( ii) ] (1)

(2) (3) (4) (5) (1)

(2) (3) (4) (5) कुआपुट

1035

05 83

कुआपुर

735

00 98 1021

03 06

738

00 63 1008

10 90

621

10 1007

04 24

622

00 20 1036

688

12 1011

02 05

689

50 1010

690

00 31 1009

687

ΟΙ 510

00 10

686

01 42 511

01 48

623

00 81 786

00 23

685

12 15 512

664

90 513

01 67

684

01 27 535

00 20

683

31 534

682

77 532

672

ΟΙ

23 531

00 80

673

16 533

04 36

671

00 83 539

02 28

669

10 540

00 68

674

00 9% 544

02 00

670

04 87 538

02 48

667

00 10 545

00 51

714

17 17 782

03 73

781

[सं.आर. - 25011/16/2009- ओ.आर. - 1 ]

778

06 45

बी. के. दत्ता , अवर सचिव 777

MINISTRY OF PETROLEUM AND NATURAL GAS 775

03 00

772

04 41

New Delhi , the 25th November , 2010 768

03 58

765

766

00 81

767

01 20

762

03 09

761

01 91

740

01 74

741

742

S.O. 2955. Whereas by the notification of the Government of India in the Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Gas number S.O. 3348 dated 2-12-2009 issued under sub-section ( 1 ) of Section 3 of the Petroleum and Minerals Pipelines ( Acquisition of Right of User in Land ) Act, 1962 (50 of 1962) the Central Government declared its intention to acquire the right of user in the land in Tehsil - Khurda , District- Khurda, in Orissa State, specified in the schedule appended to that notification for the purpose of laying pipeline for the transportation of Petroleum products from Paradip (Orissa ) to Raipur ( Chhattisgarh ) and Ranchi (Jharkhand ) by Indian Oil Corporation Limited ;

743

739

Andwhereas , copies of the said notification were made available to the public on 13th January, 2010 ;

737

736

00 10

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

भारत का राजपत्र : दिसम्बर 4, 2010/अग्रहायण 13 , 1932 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

(1)

8263

(5)

(4)

(3)

(2)

00 51 00

324

Kanjiama

And whereas , the Central Government has after considering the said report . decided to acquire the right of user in the land specified in the Schedule appended to this notification;

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

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

SCHEDULE

Tehsil : Khurda District : Khurda State: Orissa

Area Are

Plot No. Hectare

Name of theVillage

Square Metre

(5)

(3) (4)

(2)

(1)

404

Kanjiama

405

406

407

408

409

424

Mukundaprasad

Kumbharabasta

421

416

417

355

356

506

360

361

332

331

330

329

328

325

326

318

319

314

315

316

502

01 73 00

312

311

307

304

303

301

302

300

468

284

290

495

287

288

289

277

274

276

351

05 04

1914

1915

06 87

1913

1911

1910

1897

2069

1895

1889

1888

1884

1874

1873

1869

1870

1843 8264

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 4, 2010/ AGRAHAYANA 13 , 1932

(1)

(2) (3) (4) (5) (1) 1842

Mukundaprasad

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

(2) (3) (4) (5)

03 69

Mukundaprasad Kumbharabasta

1837

36 Kumbharabasta 1835

03 05

1836

01 04

1829

01 98

1831

02 07

1830

03 14

1827

02 96

1804

00 99

1805

01 18 Gurujanga 1825

1824

04 17

1822

00 44

1823

04 08

1816

04 42

1812

03 64

1813

04 06

1756

05 26

1749

04 80

1746

03 66

1747

00 83

1735

04 31

1734

04 34

1712

05 33

1711

01 11

1710

1227

02 57

1229

02 08

1701

00 20

1230

02 84

1231

02 42

1691

1690

1234

04 14

1237

04 03

1238

02 27

1246

00 03 66

1239

05 66

1241

05 49

1937

2058

1626

04 84

1614

16 95 1963

00 10 1612

00 28 1616

05 09 1611

07 38 1610

15 55 1602

00 15 1599

(2 07 1247

91 1202

35 1246

00 10 1245

13 75 1244

07 88 1242

76 1203

13 14 1204

00 81 1205

00 10 1207

05 17 1208

08 08 1211

10 1194

67 1762

00 88 1195

06 65 1197

10 1196

06 50 1192

01 25 1139

68 1190

15 1145

05 31 1189

02 73 1146

05 08 1149

05 21 1148

12 68 1103

04 58 1152

03 33 1102

03 87 1101

79 1098

14 49 1099

00 10 1097

71 भारत का राजपत्र: दिसम्बर 4, 2010/अग्रहायण 13 , 1932

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

(1)

( 5)

(4)

(3)

(2)

(1)

8265

(5)

(4)

(3)

(2)

746

Tangiapada

1096

Gurujanga

1053

1800

1081

1080

1079

560

Wilkinsannagar

558

551

556

552

555

554

545

546

902

539

530

532

533

534

536

508

10 58

504

502

00 75

500

790

925

Tangiapada

725

726

727

00 03

729

00 02

730

731

734

733

717

875

715

713

712

747

753

754

763

764

765

766

778

678

686

00.

681

680

675

674

676

937

928

672

02 の

890

00.

669

668

877

617

616

614

615

613

378

610

379

609

380

383

382

381

539

384

587

584

05 40

583 8266

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 4, 2010/AGRAHAYANA 13 , 1932

(1)

(2) (3 ) (4) (5) (1) Tangiapada

582

[PART II-SEC. 3 ( ii ) ] (2) (3) (4) (5)

08 02

Paiktigiria

580

06 19

578

577

00 28

576

06 31

411

413

00 11 26

414

00 여 43

887

06 06

422

08 14

423

939

00 00 76 940

117 50 936

06 60 925

13 72

00 35 1498

926

(1)

28 927

(00

00 45 889

(1)

26 26 924

(1)

887

(00

00 34

01 男

362

어 82

349

04 60

435

00 10

350

00 45

348

13 44

347

346

345

02 37

342

01 82

343

00 02 05

344

00 18

326

07 60

440

어 62

439

00 37

438

00 10

441

15 08

325

00 08 34

323

Paiktigiria

955

06 02

964

963

956

00 15

957

06 53

958

959

09 08

960

00 10

945

09 00

946

00 20

944

00 06 23

943

888

09 664 872

11 52 875

41 874

95 873

(1)

12 25 818

06 (B 820

05 06 843

(1) 20 821

06 04 822

(00

08 % 823

15 835

(2 34 824

833

00 12 7) 829

59 830

(X)

21 760

(1)

(1) X2 1429

(00

759

(1)

(K)

491

(11)

15 (4) 1489

10 492

(1)

10 83 493

(1)

10 15 176

1425

(0)

495

175

76 496

(1)

10 174

(11)

06 21 173

05 17 172

(X)

68 भारत का राजपत्र : दिसम्बर 4, 2010/ अग्रहायण 13 , 1932

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3( ⅱ) ]

(1)

(5)

(4)

(3)

(2)

(1)

8267 (3)

(5)

(4)

(2)

653.

Thakurpada

118

Paiktigiria

119

122

1495

102

103

104

106

57.

04 19

00 00

1485

Hosenpur

00 02

Maharathapur

661

Thakurpada

655

656

00 20 00

654

652

479

482

481

483

484

485

00 10

486

488

489

490

469

424

425

426

464

429

462

117

430

439

431

(01)

438

01 95

432

433

04 31

434

06 99

435

436

414

415

362

416

361

363

364

359

365

(0)

263

261

260 8268

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 4 , 2010/AGRAHAYANA 13 , 1932

( 1)

(2) (3)

(5)

(4)

(1)

259

Thakurpada

[PART II- SEC. 3 ( ii ) ] (2) (3) (4) ( 5)

02 53

Nuapada

258

02 27

257

00 20

256

03 90

255

08 30

243

08 52

245

02 60

244

07 60

234

03 68

247

00 20

235

233

231

07 67

232

02 88

225

00 11

223

01 47

Binkudia

1181

05 31

1102

1103

1177

03 98

1178

06 19

1179

1180

03 25

1190

00 30

1191

05 75

1193

1194

08 00

1195

04 54

1185

1184

02 19

1555

Nuapada

08 30

1554

19 40

1552

21 10

1539

08 50

1538

00 86

1541

06 36

1542

08 83

1545

13 57

1544

1243

03 88

1244

14 30

1242

00 20 1241

01 75 1236

01 00

1240

08 70 1239

78 1238

26 1175

04 39 1174

04 80 311

03 20 312

17 10 313

02 70 310

08 50 309

04 90 317

04 95 318

04 20 319

75 320

06 66 335

50 297

01 10 285

04 72 284

05 90 286

02 60 283

10 275

09 70 276

00 35 274

00 88 273

14 70 272

05 13 266

005 85 200

00 20 203

07 15 265

00 10 264

72 207

45 205

20 211

05 82

010

10 80

00 30 81

04 45 79

06 26 63

(0)

(12 80 भारत का राजपत्र : दिसम्बर 4, 2010/अग्रहायण 13 , 1932

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii ) ]

(1)

(5)

(4)

(3)

(2)

(1)

8269

( 5)

(4)

(3)

(2)

10 00

1258

Bagheitangi

08 10

Nuapada

Balisahi

Dibyasinghaprasad

276

Muktapur

275

252

251

274

253

254

244

243

00 10

242

232

233

234

236

235

211

210

1094

Bagheitangi

1093

1092

966

1067

1063

1064

1065

1062

1057

1058

1056

1055

1073

1024

1022

1023

00 08

1025

1019

(00

1026

1018

(12

1017

1361

1360

1359

1365

1367

1368

1369

(0)

1357

1353

1351

1282

1283

(X)

1285

1284

(0)

1292

(B 84

1293

(00)

1278

1279

1280

(X)

1294

1277

1263

1276

(X)

1271

1270

1265

(14

1269

1266

1267

00 18

1268

1229

1225

00 00

1230

(12

1224

1219

1231

(04

1210

763

762

761

1216

754

753 8270

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 4, 2010 /AGRAHAYANA 13 , 1932

( 1)

(2) (3) (4) ( 5) (1) Balisahi

750

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

(5)

(4)

06 83

Basanta 751

752

742

00 20

743

00 31

749

02 63 Brahmanabereni 748

02 73

747

00 65

746

00 74

745

744

03 29

Basanta

2055

2052

16 39

2049

08 01

2046

05 65

1846

1850

20 49

1901

00 10

1900

1887

04 27

1888

01 48

1889

06 89

1890

00 10

1885

1883

1338

19 15

1339

04 40

1340

00 20

1355

1464

00 34

1356

1357

1358

01 94

1461

04 90

1459

(03 82

1436

04 97

1441

02 51

1440

02 85

1437

1442

1438

06 98

1439

1416

Hatasahi 1414

1413

03 88

1448

1412

05 02 1411

00 64 1407

8 1404

12 1403

08 89 922

(2 19 921

08 87 920

13 52 918

00 76 919

04 75 889

05 80 890

(2 45 888

75 891

03 81 892

(12 27 893

02 87 894

08 23 895

65 896

08 17 864

56 863

10 932

67 703

18 702

10 704

09 13 705

00 20 358

02 27 357

02 34 356

04 40 354

00 20 355

06 87 353

(0)

10 368

13 373

(03 56 374

59 372

00 21 377

09 86 332

28 379

56 378

12 21 331

16 10 1496

16 59 305

02 43 306

01 98 307

71 304

00 38 भारत का राजपत्र: दिसम्बर 4, 2010/अग्रहायण 13 , 1932

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

(1)

(5)

(4)

(3)

(2)

(1)

Kuaput

309

Hatasahi

310

302

313

311

975

974

312

405

406

407

424

408

423

422

421

420

419

418

412

504

503

492

491

490

489

925

480

476

475

478

469

3063

Kuaput

3064

3073

3072

3044

3039

3037

3040

3041

3035

3034

3000

2997

2998

8271

(5)

(4)

(3)

(2)

(0)

2996

(0)

2995

2900

( 12

2988

(12

2989

(01

(1)

2987

(04

(00

2986

(012

2985

(0)

3148

2984

2983

(X)

2980

2978

2977

2745

2769

2746

(00

2747

2768

2755

(1)

2749

2748

(X )

2753

(03

2750

(0)

2752

2751

(1)

2740

2741

2742

(12

1764

1765

(0)

1766

1767

04 66

1768

(14

(0)

1769

1770

(1)

1771

1821

1820

(0)

1822

1828

1827

1825

(1)

(X)

1826

1854

1855 8272

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 4, 2010/AGRAHAYANA 13 , 1932

(1)

(2) (3) (4) (5)

(1) Kuaput

1856

02 12 Kuaput

1861

08 58

1860

03 18

1859

00 33

1866

1867

1865

04 77 1920

00 47 1921

01 92

1933

03 71

1932

03 61

1931

00 10

1938

01 89

1939

06 48

1949

02 28

1950

1957

00 60

1955

08 58

1956

00 96

1960

00 10

1027

01 42

1029

1028

00 10

1022

03 53

1034

03 83

1035

05 83

1021

1008

00 10 90

1007

04 24

1036

1011

00 02 05

1010

01 13

1009

ΟΙ

510

00 10

511

ΟΙ

786

00 23

512

01 82

513

535

00 20

534

01 62

532

00 01 62

531

00 80

533

04 36

539

02 28

540

00 68

544

[PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii ) ] (2) (3) (4) (5) 538

02 48 545

00 SI 782

03 73 781

05 23 778

06 45 777

00 10 775

00 03 00 772

04 41 768

58 765

00 58 766

00 81 767

01 20 762

09 761

01 91 740

74 741

50 742

47 743

79 739

76 737

18 54 736

10 735

00 86 738

00 63 621

00 10 622

00 20 688

(2 12 689

00 50 690

00 31 687

ΟΙ 686

ΟΙ

42 623

00 81 685

15 664

684

27 683

31 682

77 672

23 673

16 671

83 669

10 674

00 00 % 670

04 87 667

(X) 10 714

17 17 [No. R-25011/ 16/2009- OR- 1 ] B. K. DATTA , Under Secy .

8273 भारत का राजपत्र: दिसम्बर 4, 2010/ अग्रहायण 13 , 1932

[ भाग II- खण्ड 31

अधिसूचना का शेष अंश अपरिवर्तित रहेगा। नई दिल्ली, 25 नवम्बर , 2010

[सं. आर-25011 /19/2009-ओ.आर. -1 ]

बी. के. दत्ता , अवर सचिव

New Delhi , the 25th November , 2010 का.आ. 2956. 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 ) के द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए , भारत सरकार के पेट्रोलियम और प्राकृतिक गैस मंत्रालय की अधिसूचना संख्या का.आ. 3349 , तारीख 2-12-2009 में , जो भारत के राजपत्र, भाग II , खण्ड 3 , उप- खण्ड ( ii ) तारीख 12-12-2009 में पृष्ठ 7971 से 7986 तक प्रकाशित की गई थी , निम्नलिखित संशोधन करती है , अर्थात्: -

पृष्ठ संख्या 7978 से 7980 तक , गांव बोधखण्डि के लिए " तहसील - बालिअन्ता, जिला- खोद्धा , राज्य- उड़ीसा " की जगह " तहसील- बालिपाटणा , जिला- खोद्धा , राज्य उड़ीसा " पढ़ें ।

S.O. 2957. In excrcise 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 makes the following amendments in the notification of the Government of India in the Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Gas number S.O. 3350 , dated the 2nd December, 2009, published at pages 8013 to 8024 , in Part - 11 , Section 3, Sub - section ( ii ) of the Gazette of India , dated the 12th December , 2009 , namely : -

अधिसूचना का शेष अंश अपरिवर्तित रहेगा।

[सं. आर. - 25011 /18/2009- ओ.आर. - 1 ]

बी. के. दत्ता , अवर सचिव

At pages 8023 to 8024 , for "Tehsil- Balipatua , District- Khurda , State - Orissa " in respect of village "Gangeswarpursasan " , read " Tehsil- Bhubaneswar , District - Khurda , State - Orissa " .

New Delhi , the 25th November , 2010

The other content of the notification remain unaltered .

[No. R- 25011 / 19/2009 - OR - 1 ] B. K. DATTA , Under Sory . नई दिल्ली, 25 नवम्बर , 2010 S.O. 2956. In excrcise of the powers conferredby 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 makes the following amendments in the notification of the Government of India in the Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Gas number S.O. 3349 dated the 2nd December , 2009, published at pages 7986 to 8001 , in Part - II , Section 3, Sub - section ( ii ) of the Gazette of India , dated the 12th December, 2009 , namely: -

का.आ. 2958.-केन्द्रीय सरकार को ऐसा प्रतीत होता है कि लोकहित में यह आवश्यक है कि गुजरात राज्य में मलाया में उत्तर प्रदेश राज्य में मथुरा तक पेट्रोलियम क्रूड के परिवहन के लिए " सलाया- मथुरा पाइपलाइन के अन्तर्गत डो - वॉटलनेकिंग परियोजना " के कार्यान्वयन हेतु इंडियन ऑयल कॉर्पोरेशन लिमिटेड द्वारा एक पाइपलाइन बिछाई जानी चाहिये;

At pages 7993 to 7995 , for the " Tehsil -Balianta, District - Khurda , State - Orissa " in respect of village "Bodhakhandi " , read " Tehsil- Balipatna , District- Khurda , State - Orissa " .

unaltered . The other contents of the notification remain

और केन्द्रीय सरकार को उक्त पाइपलाइन बिछाने के प्रयोजन कः लिये यह आवश्यक प्रतीत होता है कि उक्त भूमि में. जिसके भीतर रक्त पाइपलाइन बिछाई जाने का प्रस्ताव है और जो इस अधिसूचना में संलग्न अनुसूची में वर्णित है, उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन किया जाए:

[No. R- 25011 / 18 / 2009 - OR - 1 ] B. K. DATTA , Under Secy .

नई दिल्ली, 25 नवम्बर , 2010

अतः अब , केन्द्रीय सरकार , पेट्रोलियम और खनिज पाइपलाइन्प (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 , उक्त भूमि में उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन करने के अपने आशय की घोषणा करती है;

का.आ. 2957.-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 ) के द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए , भारत सरकार के पेट्रोलियम और प्राकृतिक गैस मंत्रालय की अधिसूचना संख्या का.आ. 3350 , तारीख 2-12-2009 में, जो भारत के राजपत्र , भाग II , खण्ड 3 , उप- खण्ड (ii ) तारीख 12-12-2009 में पृष्ठ 8001 से 8013 तक प्रकाशित की गई थी , निम्नलिखित संशोधन करती है , अर्थात्:-

कोई व्यक्ति , जो उक्त अनुसूची में वर्णित भूमि से हितबद्ध है . उस तारीख से जिसको भारत के राजपत्र में यथा प्रकाशित इग्स अधिसूचना की प्रतियाँ जनसाधारण 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 भीम सिंह , सक्षम प्राधिकारी , इंडियन ऑयल कॉर्पोरेशन लिमिटड . पाइपलाइन्स विभाग . 33 एवं 281 , मुक्तानंद नगर, निकट गोपालपुरा बाईपास , जयपुर -302018 ( राजस्थान ) को लिखित रूप में आक्षेप भेज सकेगा

पृष्ठ संख्या 8011 से 8013 तक , गांव गन्गेस्वरपुरसासन के लिए " तहसील- बालिपाटणा , जिला- खोद्धा , राज्य- उड़ीसा " की जगह " तहसील - भुबनेस्वर , जिला- खोद्धा, राज्य उड़ीसा " पढ़ें । 8274

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 4, 2010/AGRAHAYAΝΑ 13 , 1932 [ PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii ) ] अनुसूची

(1) (2)

(3)

(4) (5) (6) तहसील : पिण्डवाडा जिला सिरोही

राज्य-राजस्थान

रामपुरा

134

40 क्र.सं. गांव का नाम खसरा सं.

क्षेत्रफल

184

60 हेक्टेयर एयर वर्गमीटर

182

06 (1)

90 (2)

(3)

(4) (5) (6)

183

10 1. गोलियां

268

179

30 269

180

( )

20 (सरकारी

174

20 भूमि)

177

()

30 255

173

80 253

178

70 254

104

50 252

(सरकारी

भूमि)

102

( )

60 251

101

00 2. कोदरला

366

560/82

70 (सरकारी

(सरकारी

भूमि)

345

.80

90 (सरकारी

50 भूमि)

50 301

30 300

()

30 (सरकारी

559/82

10 भूमि)

295

(सरकारी भूमि)

(सरकारी

()

10 भूमि)

(17

20 294

()

(0)

70 3.

रामपुरा

139

30 (ग्राम

40 पंचायत)

557/46

40 138

(सरकारी

137

भूमि)

135

20 133/1

60 133

20 150/2

80 150/1

50 149

90 187

(03

90 8275 भारत का राजपत्र: दिसम्बर 4, 2010/ अग्रहायण 13 , 1932

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii ) ]

(6)

(5)

(4)

(3)

(2)

(1)

(5) (6)

(4)

(3)

(2)

(1)

(07

अजारी

रामपुरा

149

बनास

158

()

161

()

(0 )

160

162

163

164

(X )

47/2

137 ( ग्राम पंचायत)

135

()

147

132

(सा.नि.वि.)

130

148

122

2746

पिण्डवाडा

114

2747

115

(09

2748

2750

2751

2752

80 (रेलवे विभाग)

()

193

(सरकारी भूमि)

()

134

(सरकारी भूमि)

134/3821

131

घोडियावा

130

()

124

(सरकारी भूमि)

40/53

113

144

अजारी

()

(सरकारी भूमि)

(0 66

63 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA OPC EMBER 4, 2010 /AGRAHAYANA 13 , 1932 [PART 11 -S (i ) ] (21

(3)

(4)

( 6)

New Delhi , the 25th November , 2010 978

{ )

981

(1)

974

977

41)

(सरकार)

S.O. 2958. Whereas , it appears to the Central Government , that it is necessary in the public interest that for the transportation of petroleum crude a pipeline from Salaya in the State of Gujaratto Mathura in the State of Uttar Pradesh , ( Under Salaya - Mathura Pipeline De- bottlenecking Project ) should be laid by the Indian Ori Corporation Limited ;

भूमि)

974

()

973

970

960

And, whereas , it appears to the Central Governmem that for the purpose of laying the said pipeline . it is necessary to acquire the Right of User in the land under whien the said pipeline is proposed to be land , and which is described in the Schedule annexed to this notification;

964

206

( )

96 !

Now, therefore , in exercise of the powers conferredby sub - section ( 1 ) of Section 3 of the Petroleum and Minerals Pipelines ( Acquisition of Right of Usum Land) Act , 1962 (50 of 1962 ) , the Central Goveruntem hereby declares its intention to acquire the Right of User 096

(f)

therein;

सरकारी

খুমি)

(1)

125

मकारी

भूमि)

Any person interested in the land described m the said schedule may, within twenty one days from the date on which the copics of this notification isstied under sub - sectica ( 1 ) of Section 3 of the said Act , as publishei inthe 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 ,t Shri Bhim Singh , Competent Authority, Indian Od Corporation Limited ( Pipelines Division) . 33 & 281 , Muktanand Nagar , Near Gopalpura Byepass , Jaipur . 302018 ( Rajasthan ) .

()

SCHEDULE

Tehsil : Pindwara District : Sirohi State. Rajasthan ()

SI . Nameof Khasra

Arca 48

( 1)

No. Hectare Are

No. Village

Square (सरकारी

भूमि)

(1) (2)

(3)

(4)

(5)

(6) 47

1. Goliya

268

()

10 46

269

( )

(1) 45/398

()

(Govt. Land)

255

( )

12 41

( )

253

(X)

70 ( )

254

()

20 37

252

()

(X) (सरकारी

(Govt. Land )

भूमि)

251

( )

37/397

2. Kestarla

366

( )

(Govt .

()

Land)

[ सं.आर. - 25011/44.01 ]

345

()

01 बी. के.....

(Govt . Land)

नर सचिव

8277 भारत का राजपत्र : दिसम्बर 4, 2010/अग्रहायण 13 , 1932

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii ) ]

(6)

(5)

(4)

(3)

(2)

(1)

(6)

(5)

(4)

(3)

(2)

(1)

301

300 (Govt. Land)

559/82 (Govt. Land)

295 (Govt. Land)

294

139

2 Rampura

(Gram Panchayat Land)

138

557/46 (Govt. Land)

10 0

0 137

0 0

135

133/1

133

150/2

(04

150/1

149

(12

187

134

184

()

149

Banas

182

158

183

161

179

(X)

()

160

80 180

()

162

70 174

112

()

163

41) 177

164

10 0

() 173

178

137 ( Gram Panchayat Land)

104

(12

()

135

()

132

(Govt. Land)

(04

0 0

130

102

()

122

101

()

114

560/82

()

115

70 (Govt. Land)

(12

( )

30 94

0 8278

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 4, 2010/AGRAHAYANA 13, 1932

(1) (2)

(3)

(4) ( 5) ( 6 ) (1) (2)

80 (Railway Dpt.)

(Govt. Land)

5. Godiyawa

(Govt. Land)

40/53

6. Ajari

144

8. Bilar 63

47/2

147 (P. W. D.)

148

9. Sadalwa !

7. Pindwara

2746

2747

2748

2750

2751

2752

193

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

(4) (5) (6) (Govt. Land)

134

0 08

50 134/3821

20 131

50 130

60 124 (Govt. Land)

113

0 02

90 29

70 13

90 (Govt. Land)

10 10

20 15

60 14

10 978

10 981

00 979

40 977 (Govt. Land)

974

60 973

20 970

00 969

(X) 965

80 964

20 962

30 961

(0)

60 960 (Govt. Land)

90 75

()

00 74

(X )

00 125 (Govt . Land)

10 62

00 8279 भारत का राजपत्र : दिसम्बर 4, 2010/अग्रहायण 13 , 1932

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

अनुसूची

(6)

(5)

(4)

(3)

( 2)

(1)

राज्य: राजस्थान

जिला : अजमेर

तहसील : मसूदा

क्षेत्रफल

खसरा सं.

क्र.सं. गांव का नाम

एयर वर्ग मीटर

हेक्टेयर

(6)

(4) (5)

(3)

(2)

(1)

(Govt. Land)

00 10 90

2179

1. कानाखेडा

2178/1

2178/2

45/398

2163

2202

2103

00 90

2102 (सरकारी भूमि)

(Govt. Land)

00 0

2101

37/397

00 04

2104

2081

[No. R. 25011 /44/2010- OR - 1 ]

2082

B.K.DATTA , Under Secy.

05 50

2083

नई दिल्ली, 25 नवम्बर , 2010

2086

2065

878

1945/2

1945/1

1946

का.आ. 2959.-केन्द्रीय सरकार को ऐसा प्रतीत होता है कि लोकहित में यह आवश्यक है कि गुजरात राज्य में सलाया से उत्तर प्रदेश राज्य में मथुरा तक पेट्रोलियम क्रूड के परिवहन के लिए " सलाया- मथुरा पाइपलाइन के अन्तर्गत डी- बॉटलनेकिंग परियोजना " के कार्यान्वयन हेतु इंडियन ऑयल कॉर्पोरेशन लिमिटेड द्वारा एक पाइपलाइन बिछाई जानी चाहिये;

1942/2 (सरकारी भूमि)

918

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

919

(04

1941

1940

1934/3

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 , उक्त भूमि में उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन करने के अपने आशय की घोषणा करती है;

1939

2. केसरपुरा

707 (सरकारी

भूमि)

708

709

710

712

637

कोई व्यक्ति , जो उक्त अनुसूची में वर्णित भूमि में हितबद्ध है, उस तारीख से जिसको भारत के राजपत्र में यथा प्रकाशित इस अधिसूचना की प्रतियाँ जनसाधारण 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 भीम सिंह , सक्षम प्राधिकारी , इंडियन ऑयल कॉर्पोरेशन लिमिटेड , पाइपलाइन्स विभाग , 33 एवं 281 , मुक्तानंद नगर , निकट गोपालपुरा बाईपास , जयपुर -302018 ( राजस्थान ) को लिखित रूप में आक्षेप भेज सकेगा । 8280

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: DECEMBER 4 , 2010 / AGRAHAYANA 13 , 1932 [ PART II - St . 3 ( ii ) ] (1) (2)

(3)

(4) (5) (6) (1) (2)

(3)

(4) (5)

(61) 2. केसरपुरा

(सरकारी

312

(α)

50 भूमि)

311

(0) 638

313/1

(X)

01 634/2

233

(1)

70 634/1

(सरकारी

635

भूमि)

1096

(0 )

4) (सरकारी

(सरकारी

भूमि)

630

1091/1

(0)

20 631

1091/2

(1)

80 632

1092

(X)

1093

(X)

(1) (सरकारी भूमि)

20 483

1095

(X)

1094

1097

(सरकारी भूमि)

(X )

30 487

()] 00

1099

( X)

(12

494

1098

( X)

00 394

(सरकारी भूमि)

393

6852

3. सूरजपुरा

(α)

40 392

6848/1

(α)

11 347

20 00

6850/1

אז

( X) 346

10 00

6834

(1) 345

70 00

6836

(1) 344

60 00

(0)

6753

(X)

(0)

40 331

112

6752/1

(X)

07 330

90 00

6755

(X)

25 326

20 00

(सरकारी

306

भूमि)

6765

20 (सरकारी भूमि)

6763

50 309/1

6762

(X )

05 318/2

004

6756

20 318/1

() ]

6286

(1) 307

6285

70 316/1

6287

(X)

30 316/2

(सरकारी

310

भूमि)

315/2

004

6278 (सा.नि.वि.)

40 8281 भारत का राजपत्र : दिसम्बर 4, 2010/अग्रहायण 13 , 1932

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

(6)

(5)

(4)

(3)

(2)

(1)

6289

सूरजपुरा

(सरकारी भूमि)

And , whereas , it appearsto the Central Government that for the purpose of laying the said pipeline , it is necessary to acquire the Right of User in the land under which the said pipeline is proposed to be laid, and which is described in the Schedule annexed to this notification ;

6290

6275

6273

6274

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;

6266

6267

5946

5947

5943

5942

5941

Any person interested in the land described in the said schedule may , within twenty one days from the date on which the copies of this notification issued under sub- section ( 1 ) of Section 3 of the said Act , as published in the Gazette of India , are made available to the general public , object in writing to the acquisition of the Right of User therein or laying of the pipeline under the land , to Shri Bhim Singh , Competent Authority, Indian Oil Corporation Limited ( Pipelines Division ) , 33 & 281 , Muktanand Nagar, Near Gopalpura Byepass , Jaipur -302018 ( Rajasthan ) .

5949

SCHEDULE

5940

5934

State : Rajasthan

Tehsil: Masuda District : Ajmer

5935

Area

Khasra

Are

Hectare

No.

5927

Name of Village

SI . No.

Square Metre

(6)

(5)

(4)

(3)

(सरकारी भूमि)

(2)

(1)

2179

Kanakheda

5926

(X)

2178/1

5925

2178/2

5924

(0)

2163

5917

(0 )

2202

00 06

5923

(X)

2103

5919

(0)

(1)

2102

5991

(Govt.

Land)

(सरकारी भूमि)

( )

( X)

2101

(1)

5/5

04 4. नासून

2104

60 [सं. आर.-25011/45/2010- ओ.आर. - 1 ]

2081

00 श्री. के. दत्ता . अवर सचिव

2082

(0)

2083

New Delhi, the 25th November, 2010

(1)

2086

(0)

2065

(X )

(0)

878

אן

(0 )

1945/2

(1)

1945/1

S.O. 2959. - Whereas , it appears to the Central Government , that it is necessary in the public interest that for the transportation of petroleum crude a pipeline from Salaya in the State of Gujarat to Mathura in the State of Uttar Pradesh, ( Cader Salaya- Mathura Pipeline De- bottlenecking Project ) should be laid by the Indian Oil Corporation Limited ;

8282

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 4, 2010 /AGRAHAYANA 13, 1932 [PART I--Sec. 3 ( ii) ] (1) (2)

(3)

(4) (5) (6) (1) (2)

(3)

(5)

(4)

(6) Kanakheda

1946

345

Kesharpura

(X)

50 1942/2

344

(1)

500

331

(X)

02 (Govt. Land)

330

918

910

326

(X)

1941

(1)

(X)

80 1940

५)

(Govt. Land

1934/3

3091

00 1939

318/2

(04

50 707

2. Kesharpura

31/1

00 Govt Land)

(X)

(0)

00 708

(X)

()

31/2

709

00 (1)

310

710

אז

712

3152

(X)

114 637

(X)

311

(3)

90 (Govt Land)

313/1

40 638

233

(我)

( 14

71 ) 634/2

634/1

(0)

(Govt. Land)

1096

635

(X)

(Govt . Land)

(Govt. Land)

1091/1

(X)

20 630

1091/2

(X)

80 631

1092

(X)

40 632

1093

(()

(X)

20 (Govt . Land)

1095

(X }

40 483

1004

(0)

(۲)

1097

(01)

2) (Govt. (puer)

1000

00 457

(1)

8601

( X) (1)

(Govt . Land)

6852

3. Surajpura

(X)

(1)

40 (00

6848/1

(0)

20 (X)

6850/1

10 (X)

6834

(0)

103

70 00

(0)

6836

(X)

(1) 8283 भारत का राजपत्र: दिसम्बर 4, 2010/अग्रहायण 13 , 1932

[ भाग II-खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

(6)

(5)

(4)

(3)

(2)

(1)

(6)

(5)

(4)

(3)

(2)

(1)

5919

6753

Surajpura

5991

6752/1

6755

(Govt. Land)

5/5

4. Nasoon

(Govt. Land)

[No. R. 25011 /45/2010- OR - 1 ]

6765

B. K. DATTA , Under Secy.

6763

नई दिल्ली , 1 दिसम्बर , 2010

6762

6756

6286

(02

6285

6287

(Govt. Land)

का.आ. 2960.- भारत सरकार ने पेट्रोलियम और खनिज पाइपलाइन ( भूमि में उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन ) अधिनियम , 1962 ( 1962 का 50 ) की धारा 2 के खण्ड ( क ) के अनुसरण में मैसर्स गेल ( इण्डिया ) लिमिटेड द्वारा पाइपलाइन बिछाने के लिए उक्त अधिनियम के अधीन संलग्न सूची के कॉलम ( 1 ) में वर्णित व्यक्ति को कॉलम ( 2 ) में वर्णित क्षेत्र में सक्षम प्राधिकारी के कृत्यों का पालन करने के लिए नियुक्त करती है।

अनुसूची

6278 (PWD)

अधिकारिता का क्षेत्र

व्यक्ति का नाम और पता

(2)

(1)

श्री एन. कन्नन ,

6289 (Govt. Land)

सम्पूर्ण तमिल नाडू एवं पुडुचेरी यूनियन टैरेटरी

6290

6275

6273

6274

स्पेशल तहसीलदार मैसर्स गेल ( इण्डिया ) लिमिटेड में प्रतिनियुक्ति पर गेल ( इंडिया ) लिमिटेड , 172 , कमाराजर सलई , कराइकल-609602

6266

[सं. एल. - 14014/39/2010- जी.पी. ]

6267

स्नेह पी. मदान , अवर सचिव

5946

New Delhi , the 1st December, 2010

5947

5943

5942

5941

5949

5940

5934

S.O. 2960.- Whereas , in pursuance of clause ( a) of Section 2 of the Petroleum and Minerals Pipelines (Acquisition of Right of User in Land ) Act , 1962 ( 50 of 1962) , the Government of India hereby authorizes the person mentioned in column ( 1 ) of the schedule given below to perform the functions of the Competent Authority under the said Act for laying pipelines by the said M/s . GAIL ( India ) Limited in the area mentioned in column (2) of the said schedule.

SCHEDULE

5935

Name and Address of the Areas of Jurisdiction person

5927 (Govt. Land)

Whole State of Tamil Nadu & Union Territory

5926

of Puducherry

5925

Shri N. Kannan , Special Tehsildar, On deputation to M/ s . GAIL ( India) Limited

5924

(12

(0)

5917

[No. L- 14014/39/2010-GP. ] SNEH P. MADAN , Under Ser

5923 8284

THE GAZETTE OF IFNDIA : DECEMBER 4 , 2010 / AGRAHAYANA 13 , 1932

===

Part II Sec . 3 ( ii ) |

नई दिल्ली , 3 दिसम्बर , 2010

का. आ. 2961.- भारत सरकार को लोकहित में यह आवश्यक प्रतीत होता है कि तमिलनाडु में तिख़्तन्नी के पास विजयवाडा-नैल्लोर-चैन्नई पाइपलाइन के टर्मिनल प्वाइंट से देश के विभिन्न हिस्सों में उपभोक्ताओं तक प्राकृतिक गैस के परिवहन के लिए मैसर्स रिलोजिसटिक्स इन्फ्रास्ट्रक्चर लिमिटेड द्वारा चैन्नई- टयूटीकोरिन पाइपलाइन विछाई जानी चाहिए ;

और, भारत सरकार को उक्त पाइपलाइन विछाने के प्रयोजन के लिए यह आवश्यक प्रतीत होता है कि उस भूमि में, जिसके भीतर उक्त पाइपलाइन विछाई जाने का प्रस्ताव है और जो इस अधिसूचना से उपावद्ध अनुसूची में वर्णित है, उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन किया जाए ;

अतः, अव, भारत सरकार, पेट्रोलियम और ग्खनिज पाइपलाइन ( भूमि में उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन ) अधिनियम , 1962 (1962 का 50 ) की धारा 3 की उपधारा ( 1 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का पयोग करते हुए, उनमें उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन कग्ने के अपने आशय की घोषणा करती है;

कोई व्यक्ति, जो उक्त अनुसूची में वर्णित भूमि में हितवद्ध है, उस तारीख से जिमको उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 3 की उपधाग ( 1) के अधीन जारी की गई अधिसूचना की प्रतियां माधारण जनता को उपलब्ध करा दी जाती हैं , इक्कीम दिन के भीतर भूमि के नीचे पाइपलाइन विछाई जाने के लिए उपयोग के अधिकार के अर्जन के संबंध में श्री एस राजनिक्कम , सक्षम प्राधिकारी, ग्लिोजिसटिक्स इन्फ्रास्ट्रक्चर लिमिटेड, न. 9 डी/ 6 डी, रामकृष्णपुरम , पील्लेयार कोबील के सामने, बाहुर 639001 , तमिलनाडु राज्य को लिखित रूप में आक्षेप भेज सकेगा ।

अनुसूची

तालुक:आत्तुर

जिला:सेलम

गाँव का नाम

सर्वे सं / सब डिविजन सं-

2 1) अम्ममपालयम

339

340

1/14

गज्य: तमिलनाडु

आर- ओ- यू- अर्जित करने के लिए क्षेत्रफल

हेक्टेयर एयर सि एयर 3

74 00

94 00

सर्वे न. 1/7 में रास्ता

1/10

341

1/5वी

1/ 6ए

2/2मी

2/ 2 ए

2/1

तालुक: वेदासन्दुर

33 00

62 00

30 00

62 00

जिला:डिन्डिगल

1 ) आर . पुदुकोट्टय

1250 राज्य तमिलनाडु

सर्वे न . 1251 में रास्ता

1252

1253

1265

1266 00 82

03 00

59 00

87 00

45 00

06 8285

भारत का राजपत्र : दिसम्बर 4, 2010/अग्रहायण 13 , 1932

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii ) ]

2 1

1267 1) आर . पुदुकोट्टय (निरंतर)

1414

1413/2

1413/3

1415/2

1416/1

1416/2

1410

1408/2

1400

1401

1399

1376/1

1398

1378/1

1373/1 ए

1373/1बी

1372/2

1530/8

1530/6

1530/5

सर्वे न . 1530/4 में रास्ता

सर्वे न . 1530/3 में रास्ता

1533/4ए1

1533/3

1533/2

1536/5

1536/4

1536/3

1536/2

1536/1

10 00

सर्वे न . 1537 में रास्ता

1541/2

1541/3

1541/5

1543/1

1543/2

1543/3

1543/4

1546/1

1546/2

1546/3

1546/4

1546/5

1547/1

1547/ 2ए

40 00

63 00

00 8286

THE GAZETTE OF IFNDIA : DECEMBER 4 , 2010/ AGRAHAYANA 13 , 1932

2 1 ) आर . पुदुकोट्य (निरंतर )

[ Part II Sec . 3 ( ii ) | 3

सर्वे न . 1776 में नाला

1775

00 07

23 00

सर्वे न . 1774 में नाला

1773

02 00

1771/3

1771/1

1771/2

00 09

1772/ 2बी

1743/2

1743/ 1 ए

1743/1बी

1841

1842

00 07

05 00

11 00

सर्वे न . 1843 में रास्ता

1848/1

1849/1

00 00

1848/2

1857

1852/1 00

11 00

22 00

1852/ 2 ए

1852/ 2वी

1851/4वी

तालुक: थूथुकुडि

00 02

जिला : थुथुकुडि

1 ) मिलविट्टान

138/वी

137/वी

राज्य: तमिलनाडु

00 29

18 00

सर्वे न . 136/वी में रास्ता

मर्वे न . 134/वी में रास्ता

133/वी

132/वी

131/वी

48 00

03 01

75 00

सर्वे न . 779 में रास्ता

129

780

22 00

26 00

38 00

75 00

91 00

71 00

61 00

03 01

30 00

सर्वे न . 49 में रास्ता

मर्वे न . 48 में रास्ता

मर्वे न . 41 में गस्ता

सर्वे न . 42 में रास्ता

00 03

सर्वे न . 35 में गस्ता

86 8287

भारत का राजपत्र दिसम्बर 4, 2010/अग्रहायण 13 , 1932

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii ) ]

2 1

सर्वे न . 36 में रास्ता 1) मिलविट्टान (निरंतर )

322/1

322/2

322/5

322/6

321/2

321/3

325/1

320/2सी

326/1 ए

326/1 बी

64 00 32

सर्वे न . 326/1डी में नाला

326/ 2ए

326/ 2बी

सर्वे न . 326/ 2 सी में नाला

326/ 2डी

326/25

327/4

327/5

327/6

327/7

327/8

327/9

421/ 1 एच

420 / 1 ए

सर्वे न . 420/1 वी में रास्ता

420/1सी

328/3डी

328/9

328/10

420/2

419

418/1

418/2

418/4

418/5

417/1

417/2

सर्वे न . 432/1 में रास्ता

432/2

राज्य: तमिलनाडु

जिला : थुथुक्कुडि

तालुक:एट्टायपुरम

सर्वे न . 396 में नदी

1 ) करूप्पुर 8288

THE GAZETTE OF IFNDIA : DECEMBER 4 , 2010/ AGRAHAYΑΝΑ 13 , 1932

2 2) सिंदलकराय

Part II -Sec . 3 ( ii ) | 3

139/1

तालुक: ओट्टाप्पिडारम

जिला : थुथुकुडि 1) वेल्लाराम

00 02

75 राज्य: तमिलनाडु

79/5बी

80/1

80/8

80/2

80/4

80/5

82/1

12 00

65 00

75 00

70 00

69 00 00

21 00

सर्वे न . 82/4 में नाला

82/5

83/4

68 00

47 00

90/1 ए

90/3

90/4

90/5

34/1

2 ) दलवायपुरम

34/3

35/4वी

35/5

35/9ए

35/9बी

36/5

36/6

36/10

10 00

81 00 08

51 00

14 00

95 00

30 00

61 00

55 00

68 00

74 00

41 00

04 00

सर्वे न . 37 में नाला

211/1 ए

210

58 00

211/1वी

211/4

214/ 1 ए

213/1

00 00

10 00

70 00

62 00

213/ 2 डी

213/3

223/1 ए 00

56 00

00 00

223/1 वी

223/8

20 00

25 00

सर्वे न . 233 में नाला

232/4सी

232/4डी 00 00

12 00

सर्वे न . 234 में रास्ता

सर्वे न . 231 में रास्ता

235/1

235/ 2 ए 00

55 00

98 00

235/ 2 एफ

69 भारत का राजपत्र दिसम्बर 4. 2010 / अग्रहायण 13 , 1932

| भाग ।। - खण्ड 3 ( ii) !

2 1

235/2जा 2) दलवायपुरम (निरंतर)

235/ 2एच

246/1

245/1

246/3ए

246/3डी

245/2

246/5

257/1

257/5

257/6

256/3

256/ 2एफ

256/25

256/1 सी

256/4

256/ 5ए

255

256/6

262

261/1

261/2

सर्वे न . 260 में नाला

283/4

284/1

284/5 ए

284/2

284/5वी

284/5सी

284/3

284/4

422 3 ) पांचालंकुरिचि

421

420

423

395/1

395/3

395/4ए

397

393/1

392

391

390/1

390/2

390/3

390/6ए

8289

63 00

29 08

58 00

73 02

64 01

84 00

08 22

80 38

00 8290

THE GAZETTE OF IFNDIA : DECEMBER 4 , 2010 / AGRAHΑΥΑΝΑ 13 , 1932

[Part 11 See. Sin 3

27 00 13

388/1

3 ) पांचालंकुरिचि (निरंतर)

08 00

388/3वी

44 00 02

388/2

82 00 05

388/5ए

386

16 00

58 00

387/1

56/1

58/1

59/1

59/3

05 00

25 00

33 00 01

14 00

58 00

गर्दै न. 59/5 में गस्ता

59/6

59/7

59/8

17 00

89 00 02

155/3

155/4

154/1

154/2

02 00

154/4

00 08

154/5

82 00

154/6

153

14 00

151/ 8 ए

152/3

29 00

143/ 2 मी

143/ 3ए

143/4

मर्वे न . 140 में रास्ता

141/ 3डी

141 /4ए

141/4वी

141/4सी

सर्वे न . 116 में नाला

117/4

00 00

84 00

117/5

117/6

111

29 00

95 00

117/7

4) स्वलियम

6/5सी

6/ 6मी

6/7

6/8

6/2

17 00

97 00

58 00

39 00

56 00

22 8291

भारत का राजपत्र : दिसम्बर 4, 2010/अग्रहायण 13 , 1932

[ भाग 11- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

2 1

4) स्वामिनयम (निरंतर)

10/3

10/4

11/2

11/3

12/4

12/5

19/3

19/4

19/6

19/ 5बी

17/2

17/3

17/4

17/50

17/5 वी

18/3डी

63/2

63/3

63/4

सर्वे न . 61/2 में नाला

59/4

59/5

59/1

59/2

59/3

58/3

59/9

सर्वे न . 52 में रास्ता

70/2

70/3

70/6

70/ 5ए

70/ 5 वी

70/4वी

70 /4ए

70/55

70 / 5सी

70/110

70/11जी

70/10डी

72/1

71/1

52 22

52 21

59 15

73 08

84 09

00 8292

[ Part II - Sec . 3 ( ii ) | THE GAZETTE OF IFNDIA : DECEMBER 4 , 2010 / AGRAHAYANA 13 , 1932

71/2

4) स्वामिनथम (निरंतर)

5 00

65 00 06

71 /7ए

93 00

71/7बी

71/8

71/6

42 00 00

71/10 ए

07 00

71/10बी

33 00 09

71/10सी

71/11

71/14

94 00

90 00 04

20 00

सर्वे न . 76 में नाला

59 00

सर्वे न . 467 में नाला

सर्वे न . 469 में नाला

468/1

474/1

474/2

474/3

473/4

473/5

473/6

473/7

473/8

473/9

472/4

00 00

80 00

59 00

32 00

49 00

93 00

83 00

80 00

83 00

13 00

सर्वे न . 472/7 में नाला

475/5

476/1

476/2

476/3

476/4

476/8

492/1

492/2

492/3

38 00

41 00

52 00

54 00

48 00 02

32 00

76 05

मर्वे न . 491 में नाला

489/3वी

489/2

489/1

490/3

504/1

505

00 00

10 00 00

49 00

98 00

11 00 00

10 00

21 8293

भारत का राजपत्र : दिसम्बर 4, 2010/अग्रहायण 13 , 1932

[ भाग 1 ] - खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

2 1

504/2 4) स्वामिनथम (निरंतर)

सर्वे न . 506 में नाला

518/1

518/2

518/3

518/4

510/ 1 ए

517/1

517/2

517/3

516/ 2ए

516/ 2 बी 2

515/1

515/2

540

541/1

542/1

542/3

542/2

543/1

543/3

543/2

सर्वे न . 149 में नाला 5 ) पुदियमपुत्तुर

154/16

154/15

154/14वी

154/ 1 /

154/18

155/1

155/14

155/13

155/15

155/16ए

155/17

155/19 ए

155/21

155/22

155/23

155/24

155/25

96 26

51 08

74 28

38 18

44 09

सर्वे न . 158 में नाला

156/2

00 8294

THE GAZETTE OF IFNDIA : DECEMBER 4 , 2010 / AGRAHAYANA 13 , 1932

2 5 ) पुदियमपुत्तुर (निरंतर )

Part II See.

156/3

00 00

159/13वी

00 00

159/14

सर्वे न . 157 में नाला

00 08

159/15

162/1

162/2

162/4

00 07

162/6

162/3

162/7वी

162/8

162/9

163/8

00 02

163/9

163/12

163/13

162/17

162/18

162/19

164/1 ए

164/ 8ए

164/ 8बी

164/8सी

164/7ए

164/7बी

164/75

164/9

164/13

165/17

तालुक: उसिलमपट्टि

62 00

57 00

10 00

69 00

जिला: मदुरै

317

1 ) मुदलायकुलम

70/5

राज्य: तमिलनाडु

77 00

सर्वे न . 70/3 में नाला

00 04

सर्वे न . 70/4 में रास्ता

70/8

70/6

70/7ए

70/ 7बी

70/ 9ए

77/ 1 ए

77/2

76/6

49 00

41 00

11 00

54 00

20 00

77 00

38 00

41 00

72 भारत का राजपत्र दिसम्बर 4, 2010/ अग्रहायण 13 , 1932

[ भाग 11 - खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

2 1

76/2

1 ) मुदलायकुलम (निरंतर)

76/3ए

76/4

76/5

76/3बी

76/3सी

75/1 ए

75/1सी

74/1सी

74/2

89/3

89/2बी

89/8

89/9सी

89/9 ई

89/ 9एफ

89/9डी

86/5सी

89/6

86/6ए

86/ 6 बी3

86/6बी4

86/7 सी 2ए

8295

92 11

88 12

10 00

09 19

13 18

87 06

0.2

सर्वे न . 86/7 सी 2 बी में नाला

86/7सी 2सी

86/10

85/3

85/1जे

85/4सी 1

85/4सी3

84/4वी

84/5वी

83/1 ए

83/1वी

83/1 एल

163 2) कन्ननुर

166

162

165/2

161/1

155/1

00 8296

THE GAZETTE OF IFNDIA : DECEMBER 4 , 2010 / AGRAHAYANA 13 , 1932

2 2) कन्ननुर (निरंतर )

[Part II See . S 3

155/2

155/3

सर्वे न . 159 में नाला

सर्वे न . 170 में रास्ता

169/5वी

173/1

174/2

173/2

173/3

172

63 00

176/15

176/1 एफ

176/1 जी

00 02

176/ 1 डी 19

176/1 एच

179

82 00

180/1 ए6

00 02

180/1 ए7

180/1 वी 1

180/ 1 ए8

203/ 3 ए 2

203/3वी

201

207

209/2

209/4

211

212

213

87/1 ए 1 वी

87/12

64 00

53 00

99 00

56 00 08

88 00

17 00

13 00 39

17 00

93 00

सर्वे न . 86/1 वी में नाला

86/1 मी

3 ) करूमाथुर

268

266/1 एफ

266/ 2मी 5

266/ 2मी 6

266/27

267/2

269/1

269/6ए

51 00

14 00

38 00

77 00

09 00

59 00

33 00 02

53 00

71 00

37 00

61 भारत का राजपत्र दिसम्बर 4. 2010/ अग्रहायण 13 , 1932

| भाग ।। खण्ड (ⅱ) ]

2 1

269/7ए 3) करूमाथुर (निरंतर)

254/6

253

252

280/3

280/20

280/1

280/ 2बी

280/ 2सी

280/4

280/5ए

280/5बी

279/4ए

282/4ए

282/2

282/5

282/6

282/7ए

282/4ड

282/45

282/4वी

282/10 वी

282/10सी

282/10 ड

282/8 ड

283

284/1

284/2

284/3

284/4

284/7

284/8

285/1

285/12

285/15ए

285/15वी

285/19वी

285/16

285/18

288

290

297 4548G1 /10-8

829

00 31

02 06

65 60

06 36

07 04

31 02

10 00

16 01

27 00

45 06

00 8298

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA DECEMBER 4 , 2010 / AGRAHAYANA 13. 1932

2 3 ) करूमाथुर (निरंतर)

296

298

295

422

299

373

372/2

372/30

374/1ची 5

374/1 वी4

374/1 बी 3

374/5

374/6

375

371

369

367/1 ए

366

367/2

367/3बी

367/4

367/6

367/7

367/8

[Part 1 Sec. Stir) 3

5 00

63 00

70 00

81 00

99 00

88 00

85 00

78 00

30 00

88 00

73 00 04

76 00

20 00 01

22 00

94 00

08 00

96 00

80 00

46 00

37 00

24 00

16 00

08 00

43 00 06

26 00

सर्वे न . 367/10 में रास्ता

380/8

380/9

380/10 ए

380/11

381

399/1

399/2

398/1डी

398/15

398/2

तालुक:तिरूमंगलम

जिला: मदुरै

324

1 ) वेल्लाकुलम (के . )

325

मर्वे न . 607 में रास्ता

सर्वे न . 307 में रास्ता

300

301

302

14 00 00

81 00

47 00

39 00

01 00

66 00

61 00

40 00 08

13 00 09

08 00

37 राज्य: तमिलनाडु

93 00

56 00

36 00

58 00

45 00 46

16 00

77 भारत का राजपत्र दिसम्बर 4. 2010: अग्रहायण 13 , 1932

| भाग 11 - खण्ड 3 ( ii )

2 1

सर्वे न . 293 में रास्ता 1 ) वेल्लाकुलम (के . ) (निरंतर )

42/1

42/ 2 ए

42/ 2वी

42/3

42/4

42/5

46/1

46/2

46/3

46/6

51/5

50/1

50/2

52/80

52/ 8बी

52/20

56/3ए

58/4वी

58/4ए

57/ 1 ए

57/4

57/7

57/ 8 ए

57/ 8वी

57/ 8सी

57/ 8डी

सर्वे न . 61 में नाला

सर्वे न . 66 में नाला

65/1

65/2

65/ 3 ए

65/4

82/6सी

83/10

83/1 वी

83/14

83/3

83/20

83/ 2ची

54 08

00 8300

THE GAZETTE OF IFNDIA : DECEMBER 4 , 2010 / AGRAHAYANA 13 , 1932

84/3

1 ) वेल्लाकुलम (के . ) (निरंतर)

Part II See Sin 3

5 00

85/ 2ए

84/4

85/3

98 00

03 00

85/ 2वी1

85/ 2वी 2

147/10

147/1वी

147/3

147/ 4ए

147/4वी

00 00

147/ 5ए

147/6

00 04

146/1

145

00 00

10 00

144/4

144/5ए

144/ 5वी

144/ 6ए

144/7ए

144/8

00 07

47 00

144/7 वी

144/9ए

144/9वी

00 09

मर्वे न . 140 में नाला

139/1

02 00

मर्वे न . 141 में नाला

139/2

03 00

मर्वे न . 138 में रास्ता

95 00

मर्वे न . 133/1 में गस्ता

मर्वे न . 133/2 में रास्ता

133/3

132/5

132/6

132/7ए

132/7वी

20 00

68 00 04

31 00

58 00

77 00

सर्वे न . 131/1 में नाला

131/4

123

124/2

124/2वी

124/1

41 00

30 00

58 00

54 00

60 00

83 भारत का राजपत्र : दिसम्बर 4, 2010/ अग्रहायण 13 , 1932

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

2 1

124/3 1 ) वेल्लाकुलम (के . ) (निरंतर )

124/6

सर्वे न . 125 में नाला

126/4

126/5

126/6

232/3

233/1

233/2

233/3

233/4

233/5

234

182

2) चेन्नमपट्टि

183/1

184/4

184/5

जिला: मदुरै तालुक: वाडिपट्टि

सर्वे न . 350 में नाला 1 ) करूपट्टि

सर्वे न . 371 में नाला

351

349

346/1

सर्वे न . 374 में नाला

2) अयंकुरिवितुराय

84/1

84/2

79/3

79/2

8301

60 18

91 05

42 07

10 00

79 18

77 01

राज्य: तमिलनाडु

सर्वे न . 86/1 में नदी

101/1

101/2

102/2

98/5

98/8

98/11

98/10

107

106/2

सर्वे न . 111 में नाला

138/2

00 8302

THE GAZETTE OF IFNDIA : DECEMBER 4 , 2010 / AGRAHAYANA 13 , 1932

2 2) अयंकुरिवितुराय (निरंतर)

[ Part II Sec. 3 (1 ) | 3

137/1

137/3 बी 2

131/1

134/1

134/2

135

42 00

171/1 ए

171/1 बी

171/3

172/3

172/4

172/5

173/1

174

177

178/1

200/1

200/2

200/3

200/4

199/2

199/3

210

211/1

211/2

212

213

208

222/1

220/1

220/2

222/ 3 ए

222/4ए

222/4वी

222/4सी

221/2

3 ) मन्नडिमंगलम

436/ 2 ए

436/ 2बी

436/4 बी 1

436/4बी 2

435/2

433/1

00 00

32 00 28

34 00

06 00

36 00

89 00

79 00

05 00

12 00

18 00 21

10 00

38 00

29 00

78 00

61 00

79 00

90 00 02

18 00

96 00

81 00 02

70 00 03

20 00

71 00 08

62 00

16 00

68 00

78 00

12 00

70 00

79 00

20 00

46 00

15 भारत का राजपत्र : दिसम्बर 4 , 2010/अग्रहायण 13 , 1932

| भाग ।। - खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

2 1

433/ 2बी 3) मन्नडिमंगलम (निरंतर)

सर्वे न . 438 में नाला

428

426/3

427

423/4

422/1

422/3

420/ 2 बी1

421/1

421/8

420/ 2 बी 2

421/4

421/ 2बी

421/5

418

416/2

सर्वे न . 539 में नाला

414

411

410/1बी

406

407/1

407/2

407/3बी

405/1 ए

407/3ए

405/1वी

405/2

403/1

403/ 2ए

403/3

403/ 2वी

सर्वे न . 578 में रास्ता

260

259

258

257/1

257/2

256/1

256/4

257/4

8303

96 00

10 00

0.0

57 00

05 00

47.

00 8304

THE GAZETTE OF IFNDIA : DECEMBER 4 , 2010 / AGRAΗΛΥΑΝΑ 13 , 1932

Sec . 3 ( ii ) |

[ Part II

257/6

3 ) मन्नडिमंगलम (निरंतर )

00 00

256/5

95 00

256/ 6ए

269/3

00 06

269/5

271/1

00 02

271/ 2सी

270

274

276

277

58 00 00

10 00 02

87 00

36 00 20

290/1

290/2

290/3

289/1

289/2

288

10 00

सर्वे न . 573 में रास्ता

315

314

00 02

76 00 15

50 00

299/1सी

00 06

302/1

302/2

313/5ए

313/ 5वी

303/1 ए

303/ 2 ए

303/3ए

सर्वे न . 303/1 बी में रास्ता

304/1

सर्वे न . 304/2 में रास्ता

110

00 02

40 00

105/ 1 ए

105/1 बी

105/3

105/4

105/5

74 00

66 00

46 00 00

सर्वे न . 105/6 में नाला

108/1 बी

108/2

108/3

107/1

10 00

22 00

79 00

15 भारत का राजपत्र : दिसम्बर 4 , 2010/अग्रहायण 13 , 1932

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii ) ]

2 1

88/1ए 3) मन्नडिमंगलम (निरंतर)

88/1सी

88/1डी

सर्वे न . 87/1 में नाला

सर्वे न . 88/1 ई में नाला

सर्वे न . 88/1 एफ में नाला

सर्वे न . 87/2 में नाला

367/1 4) मुल्लिपल्लम

358

359

360

361/ 2बी

361/ 2सी

361/ 2ए

355/1

354

355/3

353/1

229/2

353/2

231/1

231/5

232/ 1 ए

232/ 2ए

231/3

231/4ए

8305

सर्वे न . 232/1 बी में रास्ता

सर्वे न . 231 /4बी में रास्ता

सर्वे न . 521 में रास्ता

275/1 ए

275/1 बी

276/2

276/ 3डी

275/2

274

260

261/1

261/ 2ए

261/2वी

262

264 4548 GI /10-9

00 8306

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 4 , 2010/ AGRAHAYANA 13 , 1932

263

4 ) गुल्लिपल्लम (निरंतर)

267/3

268

250/20

250/2वी

249/2

49/3

245/1

248

245/2

212/1

212/2

211/2

211/3ए

209

208/1

211/3वी

207

208/2

208/30

208/3वी

148/2

148/4

147/ 2ए

147/ 2वी

147/3ए

147/3वी

147/4

146/1

144/1

144/2

144/3

144/4

140/2

140/31

[Part II See Stu 3

5 00

58 00

35 00

17 00 02

40 00

13 00

78 00

35 00

03 00

96 00

82 00

89 00

31 00

14 00 08

47 00

01 00

89 00 09

65 00

87 GU 08

01 00

97 00

78 00 06

05 00 03

83 00

62 00

74 00 18

61 00

45 00

10 00

19 00

22 00

22 00 30

62 00

मर्वे न . 145 में रास्ता

86 [फा सं. एल. 14014101/ 2010- जी.पी. ] स्नेह प्रभा मदान , अवर सचिव

New Delhi , the 3rd December , 2010

Waerens & appear 20 . oneporation of maternd Pie Fruttani in TanulNadu rapalline should be land by M/s Government of India that it is necessary in public interest that from terminal point of Vijayawada Nellore Chennai pipeline consumers in various parts of the country , Chennai - Tuticorin Reogistics Infrastructure Limited ;

And, wheras, it appearsto Government of India that for the purpose of laying such pipeline , it is aquae the Right and which are described su the User in land under which the said pipeline is proposed to be laid hedule annexed hereto;

Now, therefore, in exercise of ir powers conferred by sub - section ( 1 ) of Section 3 of the Petroleum Bud Misoras Pipelines: Acquision of Right of User in Land) Act , 1962 (50 of 1962 ) , Government of India bercky declaras de intention to acquire the Right of User therein;

भारत का राजपत्र दिसम्बर 4, 2010 / अग्रहायण 13 , 1932

[ भाग II - खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

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 under sub - section (1) of Section 3 of the said Act, are made available to the general public, object in writing to the acquisition of the Right of User therein for laying the pipeline under the land to Shri S.Rajamanickam , Competent Authority , Relogistics Infrastructure Limited, No. 9D/ 6D Ramakrishnapuram , Opp Pillayar Kovil, Karur - 639 001 , Tamil Nadu State .

Schedule

State: Tamil Nadu

District: Salem

Taluk : Attur

Area to be acquired for

Survey No./Sub-Division

Village

2 1

339

1 ) Ammampalayam

340

1/14

C-Are

Are

Hec

Road in Survey No. 1/7

1/10

341

1/5B

1/6A

2/2C

2/2A

2/1

State : Tamil Nadu

District : Dindigul

Taluk: Vedasandur

1250 1) R- Pudukottai

Road in Survey No. 1251

1252

1253

1265

1266

1267

1414

1413/2

1413/3

1415/2

1416/1

1416/2

1410

1408/2

1400

1401

1399

1376/1

1398

1378/1

1373/ 1A

1373/ 1B

1372/2

1530/8

1530/6

00 8308

THE GAZETTE OF IFNDIA : DECEMBER 4 , 2010 / AGRAHAYANA 13 , 1932

2 1) R -Pudukottai (Contd)

1530/5

Road in Survey No. 1530/4

Road in Survey No. 1530/3

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

5 00

87 00

19 00

1533 /4A1

1533/3

1533/2

1536/5

1536/4

1536/3

1536/2

1536/1 00

51 00

76 00

47 00

48 00

19 00

74 00

05 00

Road in Survey No. 1537

1541/2

1541/3

1541/5

1543/1

1543/2

1543/3

1543/4

1546/1

1546/2

1546/3

1546/4

1546/5

1547/1 00

55 00

40 00

86 00

33 00

63 00

25 00

66 00

10 00

1547/ 2A

Nala in Survey No. 1776

1775

Nala in Survey No. 1774

1773

1771/3

1771/1

1771/2

1772/2B

1743/2

1743 / 1A

1743 / 1B

1841

1842

Road in survey No. 1843

1848/1

1849/1

Conti ....

भारत का राजपत्र : दिसम्बर 4 , 2010/अग्रहायण

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

2 1

1848/2 1) R- Pudukottai (Contd)

1857

1852/1

1852/ 2A

1852/2B

1851/4B

8309 13 , 1932

State: Tamil Nadu

District: Thoothukudi

Taluk: Thoothukudi

138/B 1) Milavittan

137/B

Road in Survey No. 136/B

Road in Survey No. 134/B

133/B

132/B

131/B

Road in Survey No. 779

129

780

Road in Survey No. 49

Road in Survey No. 48

Road in Survey No. 41

Road in Survey No. 42

Road in Survey No. 35

Road in Survey No. 36

322/1

322/2

322/5

322/6

321/2

321/3

325/1

320/2C

326/ 1A

326/ 1B

00 8310

THE GAZETTE OF IFNDIA : DECEMBER 4 , 2010 / AGRAHAYANA 13 , 1932

2 1) Milavittan ( Contd)

Nala in Survey No. 326 / 1D

326/ 2A

326/2B

Nala in Survey No. 326 / 2C

326/2D

326 / 2E

327/4

327/5

327/6

327/7

327/8

327/9

[ Part II Sec . 3 ( ii) | 3

5 00

93 00

08 00

99 00

61 00

68 00

49 00

34 00

07 00

55 00

19 00

44 00

421 / 1H

420 / 1A

Road in Survey No. 420/ 1B

420/ 1C

328/3D

328/9

328/10

420/2

419

418/1

418/2

418/4

418/5

417/1

417/2

Road in Survey No. 432/1

432/2 Taluk : Ettaiyapuram

District : Thoothukudi 1) Karuppur

23 00

11 00

99 00

10 00

41 00

59 00

61 00

10 00

70 00

41 00

89 00

44 00

66 00

35 00

97 00

67 State: Tamil Nadu

River in Survey No. 396

2) Sindalkarai

139/1

Taluk : Ottappidaram

District : Thoothukudi 1 ) Vellaram

79/5B

80/1

80/8

80/2

80/4

80/5

82/1

80 00

75 State : Tamil Nadu

12 00

65 00

70 00

Nala in Survey No. 82/4

82/5

83/4

90/ 1A

10 8311

भारत का राजपत्र : दिसम्बर 4, 2010/अग्रहायण 13 , 1932

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

2 1

90/3 1) Veliaram (Contd)

90/4

90/5

34/1 2) Dalavaypuram

34/3

35/4B

35/5

35 /9A

35 /9B

36/5

36/6

36/10

Nala in Survey No. 37

211 / 1A

210

211 / 1B

211/4

214/ 1A

213/1

213 /2D

213/3

223 / 1A

223/ 1B

223/8

Nala in Survey No. 233

232/4C

232/ 4D

Road in Survey No. 234

Road in Survey No. 231

235/1

235 / 2A

235 / 2F

235/ 2G

235 / 2H

246/1

245/1

246/3A

246/3D

245/2

246/5

257/1

257/5

00 8312

THE GAZETTE OF IFNDIA : DECEMBER 4, 2010 /AGRAHAYANA 13 , 1932

2 2) Dalavaypuram (Contd)

257/6

256/3

256/ 2F

256/2E

256/ 1C

256/4

256/ 5A

255

256/6

262

261/1

261/2

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

5 00

90 00

45 00

35 00

27 00

10 00

55 00

86 00

28 00

39 00

58 00

92 00

Nala in Survey No. 260

283/4

284/1

284/ 5A

284/2

284/ 5B

284/5C

284/3

284/4

3 ) Panchalankurichi

422

421

420

423

395/1

395/3

395/4A

397

393/1

392

391

390/1

390/2

390/3

390/ 6A

388/1

388/3B

388/2

388 /5A

386

27 00

17 00

09 00

00.

58 8313

भारत का राजपत्र दिसम्बर 4, 2010/ अग्रहायण 13 , 1932

भाल - खण्ड 3( il ) !

2 1

387/1 3) Panchalankurichi (Contd)

56/1

58/1

59/1

59/3

Road in Survey No. 59/5

59/6

59/7

59/8

155/3

155/4

154/1

154/2

154/4

154/5

154/6

153

151 /8A

152/3

143/2C

143/3A

143/4

Road in Survey No. 140

141/3D

141/4A

141/4B

141/4C

Nala in Survey No. 116

117/4

117/5

117/6

111

117/7

7 4) Swaminattam

6/5C

6/6C

6/7

6/8

6/2

10/3 4548 GI/10-10

00.

52 00

00 8314

THE GAZETTE OF IFNDIA DECEMBER 4 , 2010 / AGRAΗΛΥΑΝΑ 13 , 1932

2 4) Swaminattam ( Contd )

10/4

11/2

11/3

12/4

12/5

19/3

19/4

19/6

19/5B

17/2

17/3

17/4

17/5A

17/ 5B

18/3D

63/2

63/3

63/4

Part 11 Sec . 3 ( ii ) | 3

5 00

59 00

73 00

84 00

36 00

76 00

40 00

79 00

50 00

36 00

12 00

46 00

65 00

44 00

78 00

54 00

36 00

38 00

19 00

10 00

Nala in Survey No. 61/2

59/4

59/5

59/1

59/2

59/3

58/3

59/9

51 00

01 00

61 00

28 00

20 00

82 00

05 00

Road in Survey No. 52

70/2

70/3

70/6

70/5A

70/ 5B

70/4B

70/4A

70 / 5E

70/ 5C

70/ 11A

70/ 11B

70/ 10D

72/1

71/1

72 00

05 00

72 00

17 00

80 00

50 00

16 00

64 00

20 00

34 00

16 00

98 भारत का राजपत्र दिसम्बर 4 , 2010 / अग्रहायण 13 , 1932

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

2 1

71/2 4) Swaminattam ( Contd)

71 /7A

71/ 7B

71/8

71/6

71/ 10A

71/ 10B

71/ 10C

71/11

71/14

8315

Nala in Survey No. 76

Nala in Survey No. 467

Nala in Survey No. 469

468/1

474/1

474/2

474/3

473/4

473/5

473/6

473/7

473/8

473/9

472/4

59 00

43 00

Nala in Survey No. 472/7

475/5

476/1

476/2

476/3

476/4

476/8

492/1

492/2

492/3

16 00

Nala in Survey No. 491

489 /3B

489/2

489/1

490/3

504/1

505

00 8316

THE GAZETTE OF IFNDIA : DECEMBER 4 , 2010 / AGRAΗΛΥΑΝΑ 13 , 1932

2 4) Swaminattanı ( Contd)

504/2

[ Part II Sec. 3 ( ii ) ] 3

5 00

96 00

Nala in Survey No. 506

518/1

518/2

518/3

518/4

510/ 1A

517/1

517/2

517/3

516/ 2A 00

74 00

38 00

01 00

18 00

60 00

81 00

26 00

516/282

515/1

515/2

540

541/1

542/1

542/3

542/2

543/1

543/3

543/2 5) Pudiyamputtur

13 00

61 00

49 00

54 00

98 00

78 00

15 00

Nala in Survey No. 149

154/16

154/15 00

97 00

154/ 14B

154-17

154/18

155/1

155/14

155/13

155/15 00

79 00

91 00

50 00

10 00

66 00

45 00

155/ 16A

155/17 00

78 00

155/ 19A

155/21

155/22

155/23

155/24

155/25 00

39 00

Nala in Survey No. 158

156/2

58 भारत का राजपत्र : दिसम्बर 4 , 2010/अग्रहायण 13 , 1932

[ भाग 11- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

2 1

156/3 5) Pudiyamputtur ( Contd)

159/ 13B

159/14

Nala in Survey No. 157

159/15

162/1

162/2

162/4

162/6

162/3

162/ 7B

162/8

162/9

163/8

163/9

163/12

163/13

162/17

162/18

162/19

164/ 1A

164/ 8A

164/8B

164/ 8C

164/7A

164/7B

164/ 7E

164/9

164/13

165/17

8317

State: Tamil Nadu

District: Madurai

Taluk : Usilampatti

317 1) Mudalaikulam

70/5

Nala in Survey No. 70/3

Road in Survey No. 70/4

70/8

70/6

70/ 7A

70/ 7B

70 /9A

77 / 1A

77/2

76/6

00 8318

THE GAZETTE OF IFNDIA : DECEMBER 4 , 2010 / AGRAHΛΥΑΝΑ 13 , 1932

2 1 ) Mudalaikulam ( Contd)

76/2

76/3A

76/4

76/5

76/ 3B

76/3C

75/ 1A

75/ 1C

74/ 1C

74/2

89/3

89/2B

89/8

89 /9C

89 / 9E

89/ 9F

89/9D

86/5C

89/6

86/6A

86/6B3

36/ 6B4

[ Part II See. Sin 3

5 00

10 00

92 00

88 00

10 00

09 00

13 00

95 00

87 00

26 00

08 00

61 00

50 00

74 00

20 00

19 00

30 00

34 00

35 00

22 00

17 00

93 00

63 00

86/ 7C2A

Nala in Survey No. 86 /7C2B 00

49 00

86/ 7C2C

86/10

85/3

85/ 1J

85/4C1

85/4C3

84/4B

84/ 5B

83 / 1A

83/ 1B

83 / 1L

2) Kannanur

163

166

162

165/2

161/1

155/1

63 8319

भारत का राजपत्र : दिसम्बर 4, 2010/अग्रहायण 13 , 1932

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

2 1

155/2 2) Kannanur ( Contd)

155/3

Nala in Survey No. 159

Road in Survey No. 170

169/ 5B

173/1

174/2

173/2

173/3

172

176 / 1E

176/ 1F

176/ 1G

176/ 1D19

176/ 1H

179

180/ 1A6

180/ 1A7

180/ 1B1

180/ 1A8

203 /3A2

203 /3B

201

207

209/2

209/4

211

212

213

87 / 1A1B

87 / 1A2

Nala in Survey No. 86/ 1B

86/ 1C

268 3) Karumathur

266/ 1F

266/2C5

266/2C6

266/2C7

267/2

269/1

269 / 6A

00 8320

THE GAZETTE OF IFNDIA : DECEMBER 4 , 2010/ AGRAHAYANA 13 , 1932

2 3) Karumathur ( Contd)

[Part II -Sec . 3 ( ii) | 3

269/7A

254/6

253

252

280/3

280/ 2A

280/1

280/2B

280/ 2C

280/4

280/ 5A

280/ 5B

279 /4A 00

31.

00 00

02 00

65 00

06 00

07 00

31 00

10 00

16 00

27 00

45 00

53 00

282/4A

282/2

282/5

282/6

282/ 7A

282/4D

282/ 4E

282/4B 00

282/ 10B

282/ 10C

282/ 10D

282/8D

283

284/1

284/2

284/3

284/4

284/7

284/8

285/1

285/12

285/ 15A

285/ 15B

285 / 19B

285/16

285/18

288

290

297

73 8321

भारत का राजपत्र दिसम्बर 4, 2010/ अग्रहायण 13 , 1932

[ भाग 11- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

2 1

296

3) Karumathur (Contd)

298

295

422

299

373

372/2

372/3A

374/ 1B5

374/1B4

374/ 1B3

374/5

374/6

375

371

369

367/ 1A

366

367/2

367/3B

367/4

367/6

367/7

367/8

63 00

70 00

81 00

73 00

26 00

Road in Survey No. 367/10

380/8

380/9

380/ 10A

380/11

381

399/1

399/2

398/ 1D

398/ 1E

398/2

State: Tamil Nadu

District: Madurai

Taluk: Tirumangalam

324 1) Vellakulam ( K)

325

Road in Survey No. 607

Road in Survey No. 307

300

301

302 4548GI /10-11

00 8322

THE GAZETTE OF IFNDIA : DECEMBER 4 , 2010 AGRAHAYANA 13 , 1932

2 1 ) Vellakulam ( K ) ( Contd)

Part 1 S 3

Road in Survey No. 293

42/1

42/ 2A

42/2B

42/3

42/4

42/5

46/1

46/2

46/3

46/6

51/5

50/1

50/2

52/ 8A

52/8B

52/20

56/3A

58/4B

58/ 4A

57/ 1A

57/4

57/7

57 /8A

57/8B

57/ 8C

57/ 8D

54 00

41 00

04 00

32 00

37 00

91 00

24 00

42 00

90 00

21 00

91 00

09 00

02 00

76 00

32 00

74 00

32 00

17 00

26 00

55 00

35 00

44 00

96 00

17 00

36 00

10 00

28 00

24 00

17 00

Nala in Survey No. 61

87 00

Nala in Survey No. 66

65/1

65/2

65/3A

65/4

82/ 6C

83 / 1A

83/ 1B

83 / 1C

83/3

83 /2A

83/2B

86 00

94 00

62 00

04 00

88 00

92 00

05 00

06 00

63 00

13 00

97 00

81 8323

भारत का राजपत्र दिसम्बर 4, 2010/ अग्रहायण 13 , 1932

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

2 1

84/3

1 ) Vellakulam ( K) (Contd)

85 /2A

84/4

85/3

85/2B1

85/2B2

147/ 1A

147/ 1B

147/3

147/4A

147/4B

147/ 5A

147/6

146/1

145

144/4

144/5A

144/5B

144/6A

144/ 7A

144/8

144/ 7B

144/9A

144/9B

Nala in Survey No. 140

139/1

Nala in Survey No. 141

139/2

Road in Survey No. 138

Road in Survey No. 133/1

Road in Survey No. 133/2

133/3

132/5

132/6

132/ 7A

132/ 7B

Nala in Survey No. 131/1

131/4

123

124/2A

124/2B

124/1

8324

THE GAZETTE OF IFNDIA : DECEMBER 4 , 2010/ AGRAHAYANA 13 , 1932

2 1 ) Vellakulam ( K) ( Contd)

124/3

124/6

Sec . 3 ( ii ) |

| Part II

5 00

34 00

60 00

Nala in Survey No. 125

126/4

126/5

126/6

232/3

233/1

233/2

233/3

233/4

233/5

234

182

2) Chennampatti

183/1

184/4

184/5 Taluk : Vadipatti

District : Madurai 1) Karupatti

91 00

42 00

10 00

79 00

77 00

30 00

79 00

16 00

02 00

22 00

90 00

72 00

90 00

11 00

44 State: Tamil Nadu

Nala in Survey No. 350

50 00

Nala in Survey No. 371

351

349

346/1

10 00

56 00

31 00

Nala in Survey No. 374

2) Ayankurivithurai

84/1

84/2

79/3

79/2

66 00

13 00

56 00

20 00

95 00

50 00

16 00

River in Survey No. 86/1

101/1

101/2

102/2

98/5

98/8

98/11

98/10

107

106/2

79 00

89 00

02 00

24 00

Nala in Survey No. 111

138/2

71 =

8325

भारत का राजपत्र दिसम्बर 4, 2010 /अग्रहायण 13 , 1932

[ भाग ।।- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

2 1

137/1

2) Ayankurivithurai ( Contd)

137 /3B2

131/1

134/1

134/2

135

171 / 1A

171/ 1B

171/3

172/3

172/4

172/5

173/1

174

177

178/1

200/1

200/2

200/3

200/4

199/2

199/3

210

211/1

211/2

212

213

208

222/1

220/1

220/2

222/ 3A

222/4A

222/4B

222/4C

221/2

436/2A 3 ) Mannadimangalam

436/2B

436/4B1

436/4B2

435/2

433/1

00 8326

THE GAZETTE OF IFNDIA : DECEMBER 4 , 2010/ AGRALIAYANA 13 , 1932

2 3) Mannadimangalam ( Contd)

[Part II Sec . 3 ( ii) ] 3

433/2B

Nala in Survey No. 438

428

426/3

427

423/4

422/1

422/3 00

84 00

10 00

31 00

38 00

36 00

24 00

420/ 2B1

421/1

421/8 00

39 00

84 00

420/2B2

421/4

421/2B

421/5

418

416/2 00

28 00

32 00

10 00

97 00

50 00

Nala in Survey No. 539

414

411

410/ 1B

406

407/1

407/2

407/3B

405/ 1A

407/3A

405/1B

405/2

403/1

403 / 2A

403/3

403/2B 00

Road in Survey No. 578

260

259

258

257/1

257/2

256/1

256/4

257/4

46 8327

भारत का राजपत्र दिसम्बर 4, 2010/ अग्रहायण 13 , 1932

= [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii ) ]

2 1

257/6 3) Mannadimangalam ( Contd)

256/5

256 / 6A

269/3

269/5

271/1

271 /2C

270

274

276

277

290/1

290/2

290/3

289/1

289/2

288

Road in Survey No. 573

315

314

299 / 1C

302/1

302/2

313 /5A

313/5B

303 / 1A

303 / 2A

303 / 3A

Road in Survey No. 303 / 1B

304/1

Road in Survey No. 304/2

110

105 / 1A

105/ 1B

105/3

105/4

105/5

Nala in Survey No. 105/6

108/ 1B

108/2

108/3

107/1

00 8328

THE GAZETTE OF IFNDIA : DECEMBER 4 , 2010 / AGRAHAYAΝΑ 13 , 1932

2 3) Mannadimangalam (Contd)

88 / 1A

88/ 1C

88/ 1D

[ Part II Sec . 3 ( ii ) | 3

5 00

50 00

20 00

10 00

Nala in Survey No. 87/1

59 00

Nala in Survey No. 88 / 1E

Nala in Survey No. 88 / 1F

07 00

Nala in Survey No. 87/2

4) Mullipallam

367/1

358

359

360

361/2B

361 / 2C

361 / 2A

355/1

354

355/3

353/1

229/2

353/2

231/1

231/5

232/ 1A

232/ 2A

231/3

231 /4A

87 00

34 00

07 00

38 00

Road in Survey No. 232 / 1B

Road in Survey No. 231 /4B

Road in Survey No. 521

275 / 1A

275 / 1B

276/2

276/3D

275/2

274

260

261/1

261 /2A

261/2B

262

264

18 8329

भारत का राजपत्र दिसम्बर 4, 2010/ अग्रहायण 13 , 1932

| भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

2 1

263

4) Mullipallam (Contd)

267/3

268

250 /2A

250/2B

249/2

249/3

245/1

248

245/2

212/1

212/2

211/2

211 / 3A

209

208/1

211/ 3B

207

208/2

208 /3A

208 /3B

148/2

148/4

147/ 2A

147/2B

147 /3A

147/3B

147/4

146/1

144/1

144/2

144/3

144/4

140/2

140/3A1

88 00

Road in Survey No. 145

[ F. No. L - 14014/101/2010-GP] SNEH P. MADAN , Under Secy.

नई दिल्ली, 3 दिसम्बर , 2010

का. आ. 2962. - भारत सरकार को लोकहित में यह आवश्यक प्रतीत होता है कि तमिलनाडु में तिरूतन्नी के पास विजयवाडा -नैल्लोर -चैन्नई पाइपलाइन के टर्मिनल प्वाइंट से देश के विभिन्न हिस्सों में उपभोक्ताओं तक प्राकृतिक गैस के परिवहन के लिए मैसर्स रिलोजिसटिक्स इन्फ्रास्ट्रक्चर लिमिटेड द्वारा चैन्नई- टयूटीकोरिन पाइपलाइन विछाई जानी चाहिए ;

और , भारत सरकार को उक्त पाइपलाइन विछाने के प्रयोजन के लिए यह आवश्यक प्रतीत होता है कि उस भूमि में , जिसके भीतर उक्त पाइपलाइन विछाई जाने का प्रस्ताव है और जो इस अधिसूचना से उपावद्ध अनुसूची में वर्णित है, उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन किया जाए;

अतः, अव , भारत 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 घोपणा करती है ;

8330

THE GAZETTE OF IFNDIA : DECEMBER 4 , 2010/ AGRAHAYANA 13 , 1932 [Part II Sec . 3 ( ii ) | कोई व्यक्ति, जो उक्त अनुसूची में वर्णित भूमि में हितवद्ध है, उस तारीख से जिसको उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 3 की उपधारा ( 1 ) के अधीन जारी की गई अधिसूचना की प्रतियां साधारण जनता को उपलब्ध करा दी जाती हैं, इक्कीस दिन के भीतर भूमि के नीचे पाइपलाइन विछाई जाने के लिए उपयोग के अधिकार के अर्जन के संबंध में श्री एस . राजामनिक्कम , सक्षम प्राधिकारी , रिलोजिसटिक्स इन्फ्रास्ट्रक्चर लिमिटेड , न . 9 डी/ 6 डी , रामकृनापूरम , पील्लैयार कोवील के सामने , करूर 639001 , तमिलनाडु राज्य को लिखित रुप में आक्षेप भेज सकेगा ।

अनुसूची

तालुक: आलुर

जिला: मेलम

गाँव का नाम

सर्वे सं / सब डिविजन सं .

87/ 2डी 1 ) उनत्तुर

88/1वी

38/1 ए

87/5

87/4वी

89/5

89/4

89/3

89/2

89/1 वी

89/10सी

89/10 ए

90/ 2सी

90/3

90/4

90/5

90/6

90/-7

सर्वे न . 91 में रास्ता

97/4

97/3

सर्वे न . 316 में नाला

317/1डी

317/1सी

317/1वी

317/9

317/7

317/8

317/6

317/3

317/ 2वी 2

317/5

317/4

314/14ए राज्य: तमिलनाडु

आर- ओ - यू अर्जित करने के लिए क्षेत्रफल

हेक्टेयर एयर सि एयर 3

5 00 00

21 00

24 00

51 00 04

07 00

29 00

11 00 09

82 00

24 00

25 00

51 00

69 00

21 00

40 00

19 00

92 00

54 00

71 00 00

34 00 05

54 00

96 00

28 00

31 00

08 00

87 00 00

32 00

72 00

85 00

36 00 06

92 00 09

62 00

05 00 00

91 00

65 00

20 04 8331

भारत का राजपत्र : दिसम्बर 4, 2010/अग्रहायण 13 , 1932

[ भाग 11- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

2 i

314/12सी 1 ) उनतुर (निरंतर)

314/13ए

314/12ए

314/12बी

314/13 बी

314/6 बी

314/16

313/1 बी

313/1सी

313/2

313/3

313/16 ए

313/13 बी

313/13 ए

313/12 ए

313/11 ए

313/9 ए

313/8 ए

313/7 ए

313/6 ए

313/8 वी

313/7 वी

313/6बी

313/7 सी

313/6 सी

192/12ए

192/12वी

192/12 सी

192/11 सी

196

197/1

195/11 डी

202/6 ए

195/11 सी

202/5

202/3

202/4 वी

202/4 ए

202/4सी

202/1

77 05

43 03

97 01

69 09

21 02

47 10

82 01

22 00

सर्वे न . 201 में नाला

199/1 ए

200/15

200/14

00 8332

THE GAZETTE OF IFNDIA : DECEMBER 4 , 2010/ AGRAHAYANA 13 , 1932

[Part Il Sec S 3

200/17

1) उनत्तुर (निरंतर)

200/16

200/5

200/4

200/3

00 08

200/2

00 08

288/4

00 02

200/1

205/14

00 00

288/2

288/3

288/5 ए

287/14

287/13

286/3

286/4

286/2

286/6

214/13 वी

214/13 ए

00 29

214/12वी

214/12ए

00 04

257/1 वी

00 19

257/1 ए

215

217/5

217/4

217/3

02 00

70 00

08 00 12

51 00 08

255/3 ए

255/2

255/1

255/4

218/10 00

16 00

54 00

21 00

38 00

218/9वी

241/3

17 00

241/1 ए2

241/1 ए1 00

67 00 02

240/3 वी1

240/1वी

240/2

239

1/3

2) वारागुर

00 18

56 00

73 00

48 00

00 00

67 भारत का राजपत्र दिसम्बर 4 , 2010/ अग्रहायण 13 , 1932

[ भाग II - खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

2 1

1/2

2) वारागुर (निरंतर )

130/3

130/2

130/1

157/1 3) नेप्पनत्तम

157/2

153/1

153/9

153/3

153/8

153/2

153/5

150

147

149/8ए

136/8

149/1

149/2

131 /8 ए

131/6

131/11

131/10

131/9

131/8बी

131/1

130

123/9

123/8

123/7

123/2

123/1 ए

123/1 बी

126

127/ 4ए

127/ 6ए

127/7 बी

127/ 5बी

127/ 5ए

127/ 7ए

127/8

127/9

127/10

8333

27 00

16 09

00 8334

THE GAZETTE OF IFNDIA : DECEMBER 4 , 2010 / AGRAJIAYANA 13 , 1932

[Part II- Sec . 3 ( ii ) ) 3

5 00

127/ 11 डी

3 ) वेप्पनत्तम (निरंतर)

127/2

127/1

41 00

127/11सी

24 00

127/11 ए

107/1

107/10

107/9

107/8

00 08

107/7

00 09

107/6

107/3

107/4

107/2

65 00

111/3

86 00

111/4ए

39 00

111/4वी

61 00

111/5

10 00

111/1वी

48 00

110/1 ए

112/1

112/2

4) सिरूवाचुर

10 00

212/1

212/ 2वी 2

212/ 2 वी1

80 00

212 / 2ए

211/3वी

211/3 ए

211/2

84 00

सर्वे न . 206 में रास्ता

209/3

209/5

209/4

55 00

209/1वी

209/1 ए

209/2

209/10

209/11

208/7

208/6

208/5

00 05

32 8335

भारत का राजपत्र : दिसम्बर 4, 2010/अग्रहायण 13 , 1932

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

2 1

229/4 4) सिरूवाचुर (निरंतर)

229/3बी

229/3 ए

229/2

230/1

198/4सी

231

सर्वे न . 191 में रास्ता

189/5

189/6

189/4

189/3

189/2

189/9

सर्वे न . 188 में नाला

167/6

167/7

167/8

167/10

166/15

166/14

166/13

166/4

166/5

166/9

166/8

166/7

166/6

164

165/1

161/ 2डी

265/ 6सी

265/ 6बी

265/ 6 ए

265/5

265/4

265/3

265/2

265/1

266/6

266/5

266/4

5 4

71 12

00 8336

THE GAZETTE OF IFNDIA : DECEMBER 4 , 2010/AGRAHAYANA 13 , 1932

2 4) सिरूवाचुर (निरंतर)

[Part 11 Sec. 3 ( ii ) ] 3

266/2बी

266/3बी

00 06

266/ 2ए

266/3ए

268/1

134/6

134/3बी

134/3ए

133/2

133/1

137/4

00 00

137/12

137/11

137/10 ए

137/10वी

137/5

137/ 8ए

137/8वी

137/6

137/7

138/12

138/13

00 09

138/9

138/8

130

138/7

38 00

24 00

129/1

291

55 00

129/3

292/3

292/1वी

292/1 ए

128/3वी

00 06

128/3सी

00 02

293/11

293/3

293/6

293/2

293/5

293/1

571/3सी

571/3ची

00 09

97 00

00 00 09

61 00

80 00

09 00

75 00

43 00

08 8337

भारत का राजपत्र दिसम्बर 4, 2010/ अग्रहायण 13 , 1932

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

2 1

571/7

4) सिरूवाचुर (निरंतर)

596

594/2

594/3

594/1

599/2

599/3

601

602

605/2

314

605

606/2बी

606/ 2ए

606/1

607

611

609

610

56/5 5 ) मनिविलुन्दान

56/7

56/1

55/89

55/7

55/3

55/4

55/8वी

55/1

54/7ए

54/1

54/3

54/6

53/5

53/4

53/1

53/3

83/3

85/6 4548 GI /10-13

5 4

56 20

71 03

7-2

00 8338

THE GAZETTE OF IFNDIA : DECEMBER 4 , 2010 / AGRAHAYANA 13 , 1932

2 5 ) मनिविलुन्दान (निरंतर)

85/7

85/1

85/5

[Part II Sec . 3 ( ii ) | 3

5 00

33 00

90 00

109/7

109/6

109/5

109/2

110/5

111/6

49 00

106/2

106/1

105

52 00

04 00

102/ 6वी

102/ 6ए

102/5

102/4

131/9

131/8

131/2

131/7

131/6

131/1

131/5

138/13

139/4

139/3

139/2

139/8

140/15

140/4

140/12

140/11

140/9सी

140/7

140/2

53 00

08 00

79 00

99 00

02 00

73 00

10 00

84 00 19

20 00

76 00

70 00

43 00

05 00

91 00

12 00

39 00

62 00

28 07

57 00

97 00

33 00

सर्वे न . 606 में नाला

मर्वे न . 605 में नाला

41/4

41/3

41/1

598

98 00

74 00

13 00

27 00

92 भारत का राजपत्र दिसम्बर 4, 2010 / अग्रहायण 13 , 1932

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

2 1

597

5) मनिविलुन्दान (निरंतर)

708

711

712

715

714

693

505/4.

6) काटुकोट्टय

507/4

सर्वे न . 507/1 में रास्ता

504/5 ए

504/4

508/1 वी

504/3

503/1

503/4

509/5

509/4

509/2

509/6

509/1

512/1

512/2

513/8

513/5

513/9

8339

89 00

30 00

सर्वे न . 513/4 में रास्ता

513/1

76/21

76/22

76/27

552/5

552/3

552/6

552/2

सर्वे न . 552/1 में रास्ता

553

551/6

00 8340

THE GAZETTE OF IFNDIA : DECEMBER 4 , 2010 / AGRAHΗΛΥΑΝΑ 13 , 1932

[ Part 11 - Sec . 3 ( ii ) [ 3

551/5

6 ) काटुकोट्टय (निरंतर )

551/4

551/8

00 16

551/3

551/1

549/4वी

549/5

542

540/6

540/7ए

540/7बी

541/1

541/2

541/3

517/5

37 00 09

04 00

05 00

10 00

517/3बी

2/2

2/5

2/4

2/6

2/1

519

52 00

44 00

20 00 00

22 00

63 00

42 00

सर्वे न . 522 में नाला

527/8

527/2

03 00

24 00

96 00

सर्वे न . 527/1 में रास्ता

528/8

522

526

528/3

528/1

529/1

529/3

502/8

7) कल्लान्तम

197/4

197/1

197/5

197/2

203/6

203/7

203/4

203/3

64 00

45 00

25 00

33 00

30 00

69 00

80 00

89 00

20 00

16 00

04 00

83 00

24 00

55 00

70 00

25 00 19

93 भारत का राजपत्र : दिसम्बर 4, 2010/ अग्रहायण 13 , 1932

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

2 1

203/2 7) कल्लान्तम (निरंतर)

202/6

202/5

202/3

202/2

205/8

205/6

201/4

205/1

35/3

35/6

35/1

33/3बी

34/8

8341

5 4

23 10

73 06

56 16

23 08

13 00

08 00 19

सर्वे न . 33/ 2 सी में रास्ता

34/2

34/6

34/1

31.

28/5

28/4

28/6

28/1बी

27/3

27/2

27/4सी

27/4वी

217/4

223

224/3

224/2

224/1

221/2

24/ 1 ए

24/2

सर्वे न . 86 में नाला 8 ) अक्किचेटीपालयम

82/2

82/3वी

87/1

82/3डी

82/5वी

82/5एफ

00 8342

THE GAZETTE OF IFNDIA : DECEMBER 4 , 2010 / AGRAHAYANA 13 , 1932

2 8 ) अक्किचेटीपालयम (निरंतर)

[Part II Sec . Stii ) | 3

82/55

11/13

11/14

00 00

65 00

82/5जी

00 09

82/ 5एल

82/ 6ए

82/ 6वी

82/7

88/1

88/2

88/4ए

88/5

80/2

88/6

80/3

80/5

75/11 ए

75/11 सी

72/9

72/10/ए

72/10

72/11

72/12

72/4एच

१ ) इच्चमपटी

119/1वी

119/1 सी

119/ 2एफ

119/1 ए

119/ 2डी

118/ 2वी

118/ 2ए

118/1 वी

118/1 ए

45 00

24 00

88 00

32 00

51 00

89 00

00 00

88 00

00 00

24 00

52 00

62 00

80 00

02 00

78 00

11 00

73 00

01 00

71 00

83 00

26 00

33 00

86 00

03 00

89 00

24 00

55 00

50 00

58 00

12 00

05 00

सर्वे न . 117 में रास्ता

125/5

125/3

125/4

85 00

31 00

30 00

69 8343

भारत का राजपत्र दिसम्बर 4, 2010/ अग्रहायण 13 , 1932

{ भाग ।। - खण्ड 3 ( ii ) |

2 1

124

9) इच्चमपटी (निरंतर)

147

146

145/5ची 1 वी

सर्वे न . 145/5ए में रास्ता

144/ 6वी

144/6सी

144/10

144/11

144/12

144/8

144/9

144/14वी

144/14ए

144/15ए

18 41

30 55

25 44

16 31

32 03

18 00

सर्वे न . 143/20 में नाला

143/7

143/9

143/10

143/11

143/12

143/16

142

141

140/8

140/9

140/10

140/11

140/12

140/13

140/14

140/15

68/12

68/11 डी

68/11 सी

68/11 बी

68/7सी

68/7डी

68/ 7ए

68/6

68/4

68/5

00 8344

THE GAZETTE OF IFNDIA : DECEMBER 4 , 2010/ AGRAHAYANA 13 , 1932

67/5

9) इच्वमपटी (निरंतर)

[Part II Sec . 3 ( ii ) | 3

5 00 51

64/17बी

64/17ए

64/17सी

64/3बी

64/ 2सी

64/17डी

00 00

64/17g

64/ 2वी

64/1

63/9

63/7

63/6

63/5

54 00 00

24 00 06

43 00 06

62 00

77 00 01

145/ 5 वी 2

00 00

147/4ए

125/1वी

10 ) सिलियमपटी

56/4

00 02

88 00

56/1डी

56/1सी

56/1 ए

55/19

55/17

55/14

55/16

55/15

53/13

40 00

83 00

49 00

89 00

80 00

50/ 12ए

50/11

50/10

50/2

50/3

55 00

54 00

46 00 06

74 00. 01

सर्वे न . 50/1 में रास्ता

49/4

49/5

49/8

49/9

48/3

48/4

48/5

48/11

48/6

00 00 06

19 00

73 00

28 00

18 00

49 00

69 00

46 00

00 00

63 8345

भारत का राजपत्र दिसम्बर 4, 2010/अग्रहायण 13 , 1932

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

2 1

48/7

सिलियमपटी (निरंतर)

10)

48/12

48/8बी

48/10

48/8ए

48/9

47/5

47/4

47/3

14/7

14/6

14/4

14/3

14/8

14/2

13/7

13/6

13/3

13/2

8/6

8/5

8/4

8/3

8/2

12/1

12/2

11/7

11/1-

10/8

10/7

10/5

11/8

11/6

11/5

11/3

11/4

11/2

11/10

11/13 4548 GI /10-14

90 00

00 8346

THE GAZETTE OF IFNDIA : DECEMBER 4 , 2010/ AGRAHAYANA 13 , 1932

[Part II Sec . 3 ( ii ) ] 3

11/12

10 ) सिलियमपटी (निरंतर )

1/1

1/2

11 ) अरतनतम

88 00

95 00

91 00

27 00

सर्वे न . 321 में नाला

319/1सी

319/15

00 00

318/3

318/ 2बी

00 00

318/ 2 ए

00 02

318/1

00 05

319/1डी

319/1 एफ

319/11

319/10

315/5

315/ए

315/3

315/ 2ए

315/ 2बी

257/3सी

257/5

257/ 3ए

253/3

253/2

00 09

253/7

253/4

253/1

259

252/1

68 00 26

55 00 00

43 00

252/18

252/17

252/16

252/15

00 07

252/14

267

72 00

252/13

सर्वे न . 251 में रास्ता

199

39 01

250/1 सी

201/5

201/7

54 00

36 00

73 भारत का राजपत्र दिसम्बर 4 , 2010 / अग्रहायण 13 , 1932

[ भाग 11- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

2 1

201/6 अरसनतम (निरंतर )

11)

200/1

201 /1 ए

201/1 सी

201/1 ए

201 / 2 ए

202/ 6वी

202/ 6ए

202/1 वी

202 / 1 ए

202/5

202/4

202/3

205/2

204/1सी

204/ 1 वी15

204/1 वी14

204/1 वी13

204/1 वी12

204/ 1 वी 11

204/1 वी10

204/1 वी 9

204/1 वी8

204/1 वी 7

204/1 बी6

204/1 वी5

204/ 1 ए

206

186

185/2

185/3

58/4

58/3

58/2

58/5

58/6

58/1वी

58/1 ए

8347

27 09

44 08

39 30

18 10

52 04

10 00

90 00 11

सर्वे न . 63 में रास्ता

62/2

62/3

62/1 आड

00 8348

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 4 , 2010 / AGRAHAΥΑΝΑ 13 , 1932

2 11) अरतनतम (निरंतर )

62/1डी

62/1एच

62/15

62/1सी

62/1 ए

61/1

75/2

74/1 ए

76/1

76/2

79/4

79/3

79/1 ए

79/1 बी

82/3 सी 2

82/ 3 डी 1

82/ 3 डी 2

83/4

83/3

83/1

सर्वे न .92 में नाला

सर्वे न .91 में नाला

99/2

99/7

99/8

99/5

99/6

99/4

99/3

99/1

102/1

Part II Sec . Stin) 3

5 00 05

04 00

11 00

73 00

57 00 04

10 00 30

80 00

88 00

81 00

87 00 05

81 00

33 00

22 00

43 00

54 00

57 00

82 00

22 00

97 00

10 00

20 00

99 00

49 00 06

60 00 00

43 00

53 00 09

96 00

20 00

52 00

63 00

84 00

84 [फा सं. एल.- 14014/90/2010 - जी.पी. ] स्नेह प्रभा मदान , अवर सचिव

New Delhi , the 3rd December , 2010

S. O. 2962.- Whereas it appears to Government of India that it is necessary in public interest that for the transportation of Natural Gas from terminal point of Vijayawada Nellore Chennai pipeline near Tiruttani in Tamilnadu to consumers in various parts of the country , Chennai - Tuticorin pipeline should be laid by M / s Relogistics Infrastructure Limited ;

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

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 ) , Government of India hereby declares its intention to acquire the Right of User therein;

8349

भारत का राजपत्र दिसम्बर 4, 2010/अग्रहायण 13 , 1932

[ भाग !!- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

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 under sub - section ( 1 ) of Section 3 of the said Act , are made available to the general public , object in writing to the acquisition of the Right of User therein for laying the pipeline under the land to Shri S.Rajamanickam , Competent Authority , Relogistics Infrastructure Limited, No. 9D/ 6D Ramakrishnapuram , Opp . Pillayar Kovil , Karur - 639 001 , Tamil Nadu State .

Schedule

District: Salem Taluk: Attur

Survey No./Sub-Division No.

Village

2 1

87 /2D 1) Unattur

88/ 1B

88/ 1A

87/5

87/4B

89/5

89/4

89/3

89/2

89 / 1B

89 / 10C

89/ 10A

90/2C

90/3

90/4

90/5

90/6

90/7 State: Tamil Nadu

Area to be acquired for RoU

C-Are

Are

Hec

11 00

Road in Survey No.91

97/4

97/3

Nala in Survey No. 316

317 / 1D

317/ 1C

317 /1B

317/9

317/7

317/8

317/6

317/3

317 / 2B2

317/5

317/4

314/ 14A

314/ 12C

314/ 13A

314/ 12A

00 8350

THE GAZETTE OF IFNDIA : DECEMBER 4 , 2010 /AGRAHAYANA 13 , 1932

2 1) Unattur ( Contd)

314/ 12B

314/ 13B

314/6B

314/16

313 /1B

313/ 1C

313/2

313/3

313/16A

313/ 13B

313 / 13A

313/ 12A

313/ 11A

313 /9A

313/8A

313/7A

313/6A

313/8B

313/ 7B

313/6B

313/ 7C

313/ 6C

192 / 12A

192/ 12B

192/ 12C

192/ 11C

196

197/1

195/ 11D

202 / 6A

195/ 11C

202/5

202/3

202/4B

202/4D

202/4A

202/4C

202/1

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

5 00

69 00

21 00

47 00

82 00

22 00

15 00

71 00

59 00

10 00

28 00

44 00

72 00

91 00

14 00

05 00

34 00

60 00

47 00

82 00

84 00

49 00

34 00

37 00

Nala in Survey No. 201

199/ 1A

200/15

200/14

42 8351

भारत का राजपत्र दिसम्बर 4, 2010/अग्रहायण 13 , 1932

[ भाग II - खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

2 1

200/17 1) Unattur (Contd)

200/16

200/5

200/4

200/3

200/2

288/4

200/1

205/14

288/2

288/3

288 / 5A

287/14

287/13

286/3

286/4

286/2

286/6

214/ 13B

214 / 13A

214/ 12B

214/ 12A

257 / 1B

257/ 1A

215

217/5

217/4

217/3

255 / 3A

255/2

255/1

255/4

218/10

218/9B

241/3

241 / 1A2

241 / 1A1

240/3B1

240/18

240/2

239

1/3 2) Varagur

5 4

00 8352

THE GAZETTE OF IFNDIA : DECEMBER 4 , 2010 / AGRAΗΛΥΑΝΑ 13 , 1932

2 2) Varagur ( Contd)

1/2

130/3

130/2

130/1 3 ) Veppanattam

157/1

157/2

153/1

153/9

153/3

153/8

153/2

153/5

150

147

149 / 8A

136/8

149/1

149/2

131 /8A

131/6

131/11

131/10

131/9

131/8B

131/1

130

123/9

123/8

123/7

123/2

123 / 1A

123/ 1B

126

127 / 4A

127 / 6A

127 / 7B

127/ 5B

127/ 5A

127 / 7A

127/8

127/9

127/10

Part II Sec . 3 ( ii ) ] 3

5 00

27 00

16 00

24 00

79 00

92 00

44 00

00 00

77 00

43 00

94 00

08 00

30 00

84 00

01 भारत का राजपत्र दिसम्बर 4 , 2010/ अग्रहायण 13 , 1932

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

2 1

127/ 11D 3) Veppanattam ( Contd)

127/2

127/1

127/ 11C

127/ 11A

107/1

107/10

107/9

107/8

107/7

107/6

107/3

107/4

107/2

111/3

111 /4A

111/4B

111/5

111 / 1B

110/ 1A

112/1

112/2

4) Siruvachur

212/1

212/2B2

212/2B1

212/2A

211/3B

211/3A

211/2

8353

5 4

06 00

Road in Survey No. 206

209/3

209/5

209/4

209/ 1B

209/ 1A

209/2

209/10

209/11

208/7

208/6

208/5 4548 GI /10-15

00 8354

THE GAZETTE OF IFNDIA : DECEMBER 4 , 2010/ AGRAHAYANA 13 , 1932

2 4) Siruvachur (Contd)

229/4

229/3B

229/3A

229/2

230/1

198/4C

231

Sec . 3 ( ii) ]

[Part II

5 00

71 00

68 00

02 00

84 00

43 00

48 00

83 00

Road In Survey No.191

189/5

189/6

189/4

189/3

189/2

189/9

18 00

96 00

54 00

81 00

18 00

91 00

Nala Survey No. 188

167/6

167/7

167/8

167/10

166/15

166/14

166/13

166/4

166/5

166/9

166/8

166/7

166/6

164

165/1

161/2D

265/6C

265/6B

265/6A

265/5

265/4

265/3

265/2

265/1

266/6

266/5

256/4 00

22 00

02 00

78 00

18 00

61 00

87 00

04 00

23 00

33 00

51 00

45 00

68 00

04 00

38 00

68 00

78 8355

भारत का राजपत्र दिसम्बर 4, 2010/ अग्रहायण 13 , 1932

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii ) ]

2 1

266/2B 4) Siruvachur (Contd)

266/3B

266/2A

266/ 3A

268/1

134/6

134/3B

134/3A

133/2

133/1

137/4

137/12

137/11

137/ 10A

137/ 10B

137/5

137/8A

137/8B

137/6

137/7

138/12

138/13

138/9

138/8

130

138/7

129/1

291

129/3

292/3

292/ 1B

292/ 1A

128/3B

128/3C

293/11

293/3

293/6

293/2

293/5

293/1

571 /3C

571/3B

00 8356

THE GAZETTE OF IFNDIA : DECEMBER 4 , 2010 / AGRAHAYANA 13 , 1932

2 4) Siruvachur ( Contd)

571/7

596

594/2

594/3

594/1

599/2

599/3

601

602

605/2

314

605

606/ 2B

606/2A

606/1

607

611

609

610

5) Manivilundan

56/5

56/7

56/1

55/89

55/7

55/3

55/4

55/ 8B

55/1

54/7A

54/1

54/3

54/6

53/5

53/4

53/1

53/3

83/3

85/6

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

5 00

06 00

56 00

71 00

14 00

22 00

84 00

07 00

99 00

67 00

86 00

81 00

72 00

35 00

94 00

12 00

29 00

56 00

80 00

2.5 00

50 00

66 00

32 00

90 00

32 00

61 8357

भारत का राजपत्र दिसम्बर 4 , 2010/अग्रहायण 13 , 1932

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

2 1

85/7

5) Manivilundan (Contd)

85/1

85/5

109/7

109/6

109/5

109/2

110/5

111/6

106/2

106/1

105

102/6B

102/ 6A

102/5

102/4

131/9

131/8

131/2

131/7

131/6

131/1

131/5

138/13

139/4

139/3

139/2

139/8

140/15

140/4

140/12

140/11

140/9C

140/7

140/2

Nala in Survey No.606

Nala in Survey No.605

41/4

41/3

41/1

598

00 8358

THE GAZETTE OF IFNDIA : DECEMBER 4 , 2010 / AGRAHAYANA 13 , 1932

2 5) Manivilundan ( Contd)

597

708

711

712

715

714

693

6) Kattukottai

505/4

507/4

Part II Sec . 3 ( ii ) | 3

5 00

89 00

78 00

18 00

08 00

93 00

45 00

48 00

Road in Survey No. 507/1

504/ 5A

504/4

508 / 1B

504/3

503/1

503/4

509/5

509/4

509/2

509/6

509/1

512/1

512/2

513/8

513/5

513/9

30 00

Road in Survey No. 513/4

513/1

76/21

76/22

76/27

552/5

552/3

552/6

552/2

Road in Survey No. 552/1

553

551/6

10 भारत का राजपत्र दिसम्बर 4, 2010 / अग्रहायण 13 , 1932

| भाग ।। - खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

2 1

551/5 6) Kattukottai ( Contd)

551/4

551/8

551/3

551/1

549/4B

549/5

542

540/6

540/7A

540/ 7B

541/1

541/2

541/3

517/5

517 /3B

2/2

2/5

2/4

2/6

2/1

519

8359

Nala in Survey No. 522

527/8

527/2

Road in Survey No. 527/1

528/8

522

526

528/3

528/1

529/1

529/3

502/8

197/4 7) Kallanatham

197/1

197/5

197/2

203/6

203/7

203/4

203/3

00 8360

THE GAZETTE OF IFNDIA : DECEMBER 4 , 2010 / AGRAHAYANA 13 , 1932 |

2 7) Kallanatham ( Contd)

203/2

202/6

202/5

202/3

202/2

205/8

205/6

201/4

205/1

35/3

35/6

35/1

33/3B

34/8

Part II Sec . 3 ( ii ) ]

5 00

23 00

73 00

56 00

23 00

15 00

13 00

11 00

00 00

08 00

46 00

17 00

82 00

06 00

92 00

Road in Survey No. 33 /2C

34/2

34/6

34/1

28/5

28/4

28/6

28 / 1B

27/3

27/2

27/4C

27/4B

217/4

223

224/3

224/2

224/1

221/2

24/ 1A

24/2

8 ) Akkichettipalayam

10 00

33 00

17 00

47 00

20 00

43 00

41 00

17 00

39 00

36 00

57 00

00 00

45 00

42 00

76 00

96 00

Nala in Survey No. 86

82/2

82/3B

87/1

82/3D

82/5B

82/ 5F 00

14 00

13 00

14 00

70 00

81 00

85 8361

भारत का राजपत्र दिसम्बर 4, 2010/अग्रहायण 13 , 1932

[ भाग II- खण्ड (ii ) ]

2 1

82/5E 8) Akkichettipalayam (Contd)

11/13

11/14

82/5G

82/5L

82/6A

82/6B

82/7

88/1

88/2

88 /4A

88/5

80/2

88/6

80/3

80/5

75/ 11A

75/ 11C

72/9

72/ 10/ A

72/10

72/11

72/12

72/4H

119/ 1B 9) Ichchampatti

119 / 1C

119/2F

119 / 1A

119/2D

118 /2B

118 /2A

118/ 1B

118 / 1A

89 00

Road in Survey No. 117

125/5

125/3

125/4 4548Gl /10-16

00 8362

THE GAZETTE OF IFNDE : DECEMBER 4 , 2010 / AGRAHAYANA 13, 1932

2 9) Ichchampatti ( Contd)

124

147

146

[ Part II Sec . 3 ( ii ) ] 3

18 00

30 00

145/ 5B1B

Road in Survey No. 145 / 5A

144/6B

112 00

16 00

32 00

34 00

74 00

14414B

144/14 00

144/154

10 90

Nala in Survey No. 143/20

143/7

143/9

143/10

143/11

142/12

143/15

140/8

110/9

140/10

140/11

140/12

140/13

140/14

140/15

68/12

17 00

(10

68/ 11D

68/ 11C

68/ 11B

68 /7C

68/ 7D

68/7A

68/6

58/4

68/5

78 8360

का राजपत्र दिसम्बर 4, 2010/ अग्रहायण 13 , 1932

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii ) ]

2 1

67/5 9) Ichchampatti ( Contd)

64/ 17B

64/ 17A

64/17C

64/3B

64/2C

64/ 17D

64/ 17E

64/2B

64/1

63/9

63/7

63/6

63/5

145/5B2

147/4A

125/ 1B

56/4 10) Siliyampatti

56/1D

56/ 1C

56/ 1A

55/19

55/17

55/14

55/16

55/15

53/13

50 / 12A

50/11

50/10

50/2

50/3

83 00

Road in Survey No. 50/1

49/4

49/5

49/8

49/9

48/3

48/4

00 8364

THE GAZETTE OF IFNDIA : DECEMBER 4 , 2010/ AGRAHAYANA 13 , 1932

2 10 ) Siliyampatti ( Contd)

48/7

48/12

48/8B

48/10

48 /8A

48/9

47/5

47/4

47/3

14/7

14/6

14/4

14/3

14/8

14/2

13/7

13/6

13/3

13/2

8/6

8/5

8/4

8/3

8/2

12/1

12/2

11/7

10/8

10/7

10/5

11/8

11/6

11/5

11/3

11/4

11/2

11/10

11/13

[ Part II Sec . 3 ( ii ) | 3

5 00

53 00

13 00

74 00

34 00

14 00

90 00

08 00

50 00

67 00

73 00

84 00

56 00

97 05

13 00

26 00

52 00

15 00

55 00

37 00

62 00

80 00

45 00

46 00

01 भारत का राजपत्र : दिसम्बर 4 , 2010/ अग्रहायण 13 , 1932

| भाग ।। - खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

2 1

11/12 10) Siliyampatti (Contd)

1/1

1/2

8365

Nala in Survey No. 321

11 ) Arasanattam

319/ 1C

319 / 1E

318/3

318/2B

318 /2A

318/1

319/ 1D

319/ 1F

319/11

319/10

315/5

315 /A

315/3

315 / 2A

315 /2B

257 / 3C

257/5

257 / 3A

253/3

253/2

253/7

253/4

253/1

259

252/1

252/18

252/17

252/16

252/15

252/14

267

252/13

Road in Survey No. 251

199

250/ 1C

201/5

201/7

00 8366

THE GAZETTE OF IFNDIA : DECEMBER 4 , 2010 / AGRAHAYANA 13 , 1932

2 11 ) Arasanattam ( Contd)

201/6

200/1

201 / IB

201 / IC

201 / 1A

201 / 2A

202/ 6B

202/ 6A

202/ 1B

202/ 1A

202/5

202/4 .

202/3

205/2

204/ 1C

204/1815

204/1814

204/ 1B13

204/ 1B12

204/1811

Pan

5 00

27 00

44 00

39 00

18 00

52 00

10 00

53 00

39 00

20 00

08 00

61 00

90 00

23 00

82 00

31 00

70 00

08 00

30 00

204/ 1B10

204/ 1B9 00

77 00

204/ 1B8

204/ 1B7

204/ 1B6 00

50 00

46 00

204/ 1B5

204/ 1A

206

186

185/2

185/3

58/4

58/3

58/2

58/5

58/6

58/ 1B

58/ 1A 00

58 00

12 00

28 00

08 00

65 00

23 00

55 00

65 00

48 00

79 00

55 00

76 00

Road in Survey No. 63

62/2

62/3

62/11

62/ 1D

62/ 1H

62/ 1E

62/ 1C

62/ 1A

61/1

75/2

74/ 1A

76/1

05 00

35 00

56 00

31 00

04 00

11 00

73 00

57 00

10 00

80 00

88 00

81 00

87 8367

भारत का राजपत्र दिसम्बर 4, 2010/ अग्रहायण 13 , 1932

{ भाग !! - खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

2 1

76/2 11 ) Arasanaftam ( Contd )

79/4

79/3

79 / 1A

79/1B

82/3C2

82/ 3D1

82/3D2

83/4

83/3

83/1

Nala in Survey No. 92

Nala in Survey No. 91

99/2

99/7

99/8

99/5

99/6

99/4

99/3

99/1

102/1

[ F. No. L- 14014/ 90 /2010 -GP] SNEH P. MADAN , Under Secy.

नई दिल्ली , 3 दिसम्बर, 2010

का. आ. 2903.- भारत सरकार को लोकहित में यह आवश्यक प्रतीत होता है कि तमिलनाडु में तिरूतन्नी के पास विजयवाडा- नैल्लोर -चैन्नई पाइपलाइन के टर्मिनल प्वाइंट से देश के विभिन्न हिस्सों में उपभोक्ताओं तक प्राकृतिक गैस के परिवहन के लिए मैसर्स रिलोजिसटिक्स इन्फ्रास्ट्रक्चर लिमिटेड द्वारा चैन्नई- टयूटीकोरिन पाइपलाइन बिछाई जानी चाहिए ;

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

अतः, अब , भारत 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 ;

कोई व्यक्ति , जो उक्त अनुसूची में वर्णित भूमि में हितबद्ध है , उस तारीख से जिसको उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 3 की उपधारा (1 ) के अधीन जारी की गई अधिसूचना की प्रतियां साधारण जनता को उपलब्ध करा दी जाती हैं, इक्कीस दिन के भीतर भूमि के नीचे पाइपलाइन बिछाई जाने के लिए उपयोग के अधिकार के अर्जन के संबंध में श्री एस । राजामनिक्कम , सक्षम प्राधिकारी , रिलोजिसटिक्स इन्फ्रास्ट्रक्चर लिमिटेड , न .9डी/ 6डी, रामकृम्नापुरम , पील्लैयार कोवील के सामने , कटूर 639001 , तमिलनाडु राज्य को लिखित रुप में आक्षेप भेज सकेगा । 8368

THE GAZETTE OF IFNDIA : DECEMBER 4 , 2010 / AGRAHAYANA 13 , 1932

अनुसूची तालुक: नमक्कल

[Part 11 Sec . 3 ( ii ) |

जिला: नमक्कल

गाँव का नाम

सर्वे सं / सब डिविजन सं

2 1 ) ईच्चमप्पटि

58/1

राज्य: तमिलनाडु

आर- ओ- यू- अर्जित करने के लिए क्षेत्रफल

हेक्टेयर एयर सि एयर 3

5 00

सर्वे न . 58/2 में रास्ता

57/2

56/1

56/2

56/3

77 00

76 00

73 00

84 00

सर्वे न .53 में नाला

00 00

सर्वे न . 55 में नाला

52/2

52/3

51/1

00 08

91 00

12 00

48 00

99 00 36

सर्वे न . 51/2 में रास्ता

51/3वी

51/3ए

42/2

2) पल्लिप्पटि

117/1 डी

117/ 1 ए

00 08

03 00 08

02 00

15 00

85 00 20

72 00

20 00

सर्वे न . 94 में रास्ता

96/ 2ए

96/ 2वी

96/6

96/1वी

96/7

113

109/ 1 ए

102/3सी

102/4वी

103/1बी

109/2

108/1

103/3

108/1 बी

106/1बी

106/2

37 00 00

10 00

26 00

05 00

89 00

67 00

48 00

86 00 08

17 00

60 00

46 00 03

05 00 09

04 00 00

15 00 00

10 00

69 00

46 00

37 भारत का राजपत्र : दिसम्बर 4 , 2010/ अग्रहायण 13 , 1932

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

106/3सी 2) पल्लिप्पटि (निरंतर)

106/3डी

403/ 2ए 3) वलवदिकोम्बाय

403/2बी

403/ 2सी

72/1

4) बोडिनायक्कनपटि

72/9

72/11

72/14

72/13

72/15

73/1

73/2

73/3

73/4

73/7ए

73/7बी

73/8वी

73/ 8सी

77/1

77/ 2डी

77/ 2सी

77/ 2एच

77/3

77/13

77/12

77/11

75/2

णल निश्शवाट पे । 76

248

5 ) पेरूमापटि

254

253

257

258

सर्वे न . 259 में रास्ता

260

235

234

229

सर्वे न . 228 में नाला

सर्वे न . 227 में रास्ता

सर्वे न . 226 में रास्ता 4548GI /10-17

8369

5 3

21 00

10 00

53 00

40 00

10 00

25 00

13 00

54 00

10 00 00

57 00 05

00 00

76 00

36 00

20 00 19

38 00

00 06

42 00 00

43 00

69 00

42 00

02 00

30 00 08

33 00 19

72 00 29

75 00

51 00 05 8370

THE GAZETTE OF IFNDIA : DECEMBER 4 , 2010 / AGRAΗΑΥΑΝΑ 13 , 1932

5) पेरूमापटि (निरंतर)

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

5 00

55/ 2सी

55/ 2बी

55/ 2ए

53/1 वी1

00 47

53/1 वी 2

53/2

6) पुदुपटि

58 00

633/1

633/4

633/2

00 09

611/1

633/3

00 09

611/2

633/5

632/1

632/2

631

71 00

630/3सी

630/3वी

00 09

630/3 ए

630/1एन

630/3आइ

00 00

630/3जे

00 01

630/2

630/1 क्य

630/1पी

628/ 3ए

628/2

627/3

32 00

627/2

00 18

627/1 वी

00 00

10 00

सर्वे न . 492 में नाला

490/7

490/2

490/1

490/3

490/4

486/1 ए

486/1वी

93 00 00

88 00 19

57 00 08

41 00

10 00

95 00

09 00

486/4ए 2 ए

00 00

486/4ए1

486/4ए 2 वी

00 00

10 8371

भारत का राजपत्र दिसम्बर 4, 2010/ अग्रहायण 13 , 1932

भाग 11- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

2 1

450/2 6) पुदुपटि (निरंतर)

485/2

450/3

450/1

451

450/4

450/5

450/6

448/2बी

448/ 2सी

448/ 2 डी1

448 / 2 डी 2

439/ 1 ए 1

439/ 1 ए2

438

सर्वे न . 439/1 बी में रास्ता

439/2

439/3ए

439/3बी

439/3सी

439/4

439/ 5एफ

439/5जी

439/5एच

445/1

445/ 2ए

445/ 2बी

444/1 बी

444/ 1 ए

444/1सी

444/3सी

444/ 2बी

444/3बी

444/4बी

441

सर्वे न . 384 में नाला

374/1बी

374/1 ए

374/1सी

374/3

374/4डी

371/5ए 1

00 8372

THE GAZETTE OF IFNDIA : DECEMBER 4, 2010/ AGRAHAYANA 13 , 1932

2 6) पुदुपटि (निरंतर)

[ Part 11-Sec . 3 ( ii ) | 3

371/5ए2

371/5डी 1

371/4जी

371/4एफ

373

09 00

371/4जे

00 01

353/14

353/13

353/15

353/16सी

00 04

353/16सी

352/28

352/29बी

00 01

352/30

00 10

352/31ए

352/16

352/25

00 02

354/13बी

354/13सी

00 04

350/11

00 02

350/8ए

00 00

350/12

350/8बी

00 00

350/8डी

00 01

350/20

00 00

350/21

00 03

350/22

00 04

350/23

342/5

38 00 19

342/10ए

00 12

341/3बी

00 00

341/5सी

00 01

342/14बी1

00 00

342/14वी 2

00 00

342/14बी4

341/5डी

336

332

331

327

328

10 00 06

84 00

02 00

79 00

07 00 79

55 00 05

सर्वे न . 319 में रास्ता

27 भारत का राजपत्र दिसम्बर 4 , 2010/ अग्रहायण 13 , 1932

| भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

2 1

320

6) पुदुपटि (निरंतर)

323

322/ 2 ए

322/ 2वी

322/5

322/4

322/6

सर्वे न . 322/8 में नाला

219/3 7) वलायप्पटि

219/1 बी

219/ 1 सी 1

219/1 सी 2

217/1

217/3 ए

181/1

180

179/4बी

182/ 2बी

182/ 2 ए

182/1

183

179/6

179/7

185/5

185/6

185/7

185/11

178 / 2ए

178/ 2बी

178/ 2सी

178/ 2डी

178/3ए

178/3 बी

162/1

162/2

163/1

163/2

163/4

162/3

162/6

163/7

162/5

8373

38 00 09

56 00 40

15 00

58 00

56 00 06

20 00

75 00

90 00

77 00 03

19 00 15

43 00

42 00 03

00 8374

THE GAZETTE OF IFNDIA : DECEMBER 4, 2010 / AGRAJIAYANA 13 , 1932

| Part 11-- Sec . 3 ( ii ) | 3

163/5

7) क्लायप्पटि (निरंतर)

161/2

17 00

155/ 1 ए

61 00

155/1 बी

27 00

160/1

36 00

155/5

160/2

156

00 08

14 00 08

35 00

157/ 1 ए

157/1 बी

00 00

74 00

157/ 3ए

157/3बी

01 00

157/3डी

58 00 06

सर्वे न . 157/3सी मे नाला

34 00

सर्वे न . 157/5 में नाला

84 00

158/1

76 00

158/ 2सी

80 00

158/ 2डी 1

158/ 2डी 2

158/ 2 डी 3

00 00

158/25

124

09 00

94 00

सर्वे न . 119/ 1 ए में रास्ता

90 00

सर्वे न . 119/1 बी में रास्ता

38 00

सर्वे न . 119/1 सी में रास्ता

121/1

41 00

121/3

121/4

00 43

121/6

121/7

69 00

121/8

00 01

121/10

73/2

73/3

74/4

74/3

74/2

68ए/ 1

680/5

68ए/ 6

68ए/ 7

80 00 08

97 00 19

14 00

63 00

03 00 00

10 00 06

42 00 05

92 00

49 00 12

91 00 02

34 8375

भारत का राजपत्र : दिसम्बर 4, 2010/अग्रहायण 13 , 1932

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

2 1

68ए/8 7) क्लायप्पटि (निरंतर)

सर्वे न . 656 में रास्ता

सर्वे न . 655 में रास्ता

68बी

67बी/ 1

सर्वे न . 5 में रास्ता

3/3ए

3/ 2ए

3/ 1 ए

3/1वी

3/1सी

3/ 1डी

3/15

3/ 2वी

3/3सी

3/3वी

2/1

1/ 1 ए

2/2वी

2/ 2सी

1/4ए

2/ 2डी

1/25

1/2एफ

1/4वी

राज्य: तमिलनाडु

जिला:नमक्कल

तालुक:रासिपुरम

सर्वे न . 191 में रास्ता 1 ) मत्तुरूदु

186/2

188

186/3

187

184

182/5

182/45

182/4सी

182/4वी

182/3सी

182/3वी

182/3ए

182/4ए

182/ 1 ए

173

179

70 00

00 8376

THE GAZETTE OF IFNDIA : DECEMBER 4 , 2010/ AGRAHAYANA 13 , 1932

2 1) मत्तुरूदु (निरंतर)

[ Part 11- Sec. 3 ( ii ) ] 3

सर्वे न . 177 में रास्ता

178

81 00

176/4सी

00 08

176/4बी

00 02

176/ 4ए

00 07

176/3सी

00 06

176/3ए

00 02

176/3बी

176/ 2ए

00 03

176/1 बी

00 05

176/1 ए

164

165

00 04

32 00 51

32 00 06

101/3बी

167/1

00 39

94 00 00

101/ 2 डी

101/ 2सी

00 06

101/ 2बी

00 06

101/ 2ए

83/5 ए

83/ 2सी

83/ 2ए

83/1

84/7

84/8

88/12

88/9

00 08

35 00

81 00

27 00 08

02 00

27 00

49 00

11 00 06

31 00 02

सर्वे न . 89 में नदी

88/6

88/1

88/5

90/1

90/4

90/5

90/6

00 05

19 00

01 00 22

15 00

35 00

89 00

13 00 20

89 00

सर्वे न . 90/7 में रास्ता

61/13

61/12

61/10

61/8वी

61/8ए

08 00

92 00

33 00

25 00

91 00

50 00 05

58 8377

भारत का राजपत्र : दिसम्बर 4, 2010/अग्रहायण 13 , 1932

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii ) ]

2 1

61/7

1) मतुल्टु (निरंतर)

61/6

61/4

61/5

59/13

59/12

59/9बी

59/9ए

59/5

59/10

59/4

59/3

42/9सी

42/9बी

42/9ए

42/5

42/2

42/1

15/3सी

15/35

15/3बी

15/3डी

16/16

16/14बी

24/2

24/6डी

24/12वी

24/ 12 ए

24/11

24/10बी

24/10ए

24/6वी

30/13

30/11

30/12

30/9 4548G1/10-18

85 00

50 00 29

81 00 02

77 00 03

69 00 09

00 8378

THE GAZETTE OF IFNDIA : DECEMBER 4 , 2010 / AGRAΠΑΥΑΝΑ 13 , 1932

2 1 ) मत्तुरूद्ध (निरंतर)

Sec . 3 ( ii )|

Part II

30/ 8सी

30/ 8वी

30/7वी

30/7ए

30/6वी

30/ 6ए

30/5

48 00

23 00

सर्वेन . 33 में रास्ता

34/3

34/2

34/1

34/5

246

2 ) अरियकवुन्डनपटि

32 00

95 00

89 00

61 00

48 00 49

247/1

245

00 05

34 00

245/3

14 00 00

सर्वे न . 242/ 2बी में रास्ता

सर्वे न . 3ए में रास्ता

00 06

242/ 2ए

242/1सी

00 02

242/1 डी

00 15

242/15

243/4बी 2

243/4बी1

241/1

31 00

238/2

239/1

52 00

58 00

सर्वे न . 290 में रास्ता

289/1

45 00

292/ 2 ए3

292/ 2ए4

00 24

292/ 2 ए 2

292/1 सी 1

72 00

सर्वे न . 292/1 सी 2 में नाला

68 00 02

सर्वे न . 292/ 2 बी में नाला

39 00

सर्वे न . 292/1 सी 3 में नाला

280 / 2 ए

292/1 ए

56 00

सर्वे न . 295/ 2 बी में नाला

38 00

सर्वे न . 295/ 2 ए में नाला

294

296

40 00

28 00 00

65 [ भाग II - खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : दिसम्बर 4, 2010/ अग्रहायण 13 , 1932

297

2) अरियकवुन्डनपटि (निरंतर )

298/2

300

299/3

299/2

299/1 ई

299/1सी

299/ 1 ए

301/ 2बी

301/ 2 सी

301/1 वी

8379

41 00

56 00

92 00

88 00 06

68 00 09

42 00

सर्वे न . 302/ 6 ए में नाला

302/ 6बी

224/1

224/2

323/ 2बी

323/ 2ए

323/ 2सी

83 00

36 00

94 00

91 00

63 00 00.

सर्वे न . 322/1 ए में रास्ता

322/1 बी

322/ 2 ए 1

322/22

322/ 2 ए3 बी

320/1 बी

320/2

319/1

सर्वे न . 319/2 में नाला

319/3

349/1

350/2

350/1

121/3

121/1 बी

121/ 1 ए

120/1

120/ 2 ए

118

119/1

96 00

06 00

94 00

09 00

79 00

07 00 02

20 00

00 00

10 00 06

32 00

65 00

59 00 24

51 00 00

83 00 06

27 00

सर्वे न . 108/ 2 ए में रास्ता

108/ 2सी 1

108/1

107/ 1 ए

55 00 $380

THE GAZETTE OF IFNDIA : DECEMBER 4 , 2010 / AGRAHAYANA 13 , 1932

2 1

[ Part II - Sec. 3 ( ii ) ]

19 00

107/ 1 बी 1

2) अरियकवुन्डनपटि (निरंतर)

62 00 06

109/2

109/1 बी

110

103

51 00

37 00 42

101/2

101/1

46 00

100/ 2बी

01 00

100/ 2ए

98/1

98/3

98/2

45 00 29

37 00

14 00

00 15

109/1

3 ) पच्चुडयमपालयम (तोप्पाप्पटि)

109/2

94 00

54/4वी

55/4

55/1

55/3वी

55/2

07 00

53/5वी

70 00

53/ 5ए

सर्वे न . 53/2 में रास्ता

77 00 56

77 00

62/ 1 ए

62/1 वी

62/3

62/4

62/2

87 00

94 00

63/ 2 ए 1

63/ 2 ए 2

32 00

63/1वी

13 00

सर्वे न . 34 में रास्ता

32/1

32/2

32/4

32/5

32/6

92/2

4 ) जेडरपालयम (तोप्पाप्पटि)

93/6

92 00

64 00 07

64 00

00 00

89 00

10 00

00 8381 भारत का राजपत्र : दिसम्बर 4 , 2010/ अग्रहायण 13 , 1932

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

93/3

4 ) जेडरपालयम (तोप्पाप्पटि) (निरंतर)

93/2

93/4

93/5बी

95/ 1 ए

96/1 ए

96/1 बी

96/1सी

[फा सं. एल. - 14014/92/ 2010 - जी.पी. ]

स्नेह प्रभा मदान , अवर सचिव

New Delhi , the 3rd December , 2010

S. O. 2963.- Whereas it appears to Government of India that it is necessary in public interest that for the transportation of Natural Gas from terminal point of Vijayawada Nellore -- Chennai pipeline near Tiruttani in Tamilnadu to consumers in various parts of the country , Chennai - Tuticorin pipeline should be laid by M/s Relogistics Infrastructure Limited;

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

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 ) , Government of India 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 under sub - section ( 1 ) of Section 3 of the said Act , are made available to the general public , object in writing to the acquisition of the Right of User therein for laying the pipeline under the land to Shri S.Rajamanickam , Competent Authority , Relogistics Infrastructure Limited , No. 9D / 6D Ramakrishnapuram, Opp . Pillayar Kovil , Karur – 639 001 , Tamil Nadu State 8382

THE GAZETTE OF IFNDIA : DECEMBER 4 , 2010/AGRATIAYANA 13 , 1932

Schedule Taluk : Namakkal

District: Namakkal Village

Survey No./Sub-Division 1

58/1

1) Ichchampatti

[ Part II -Sec . 3 ( ii ) ] State: Tamil Nadu

Area to be acquired for RoU Hec

C-Are

Are

5 00

36 00

Road in Survey No.58/2

57/2

56/1

56/2

56/3

77 00

76 00

84 00

72 00

Nala in Survey No.53

Nala in Survey No. 55

52/2

52/3

51/1

91 00

12 00

48 00

99 00

91 00

Road in Survey No. 51/2

51/3B

51 /3A

42/2

117/ 1D 2) Pallippatti

117/ 1A

02 00

15 00

85 00

72 00

20 00

31 00

Road in Survey No. 94

96/2A

96/2B

96/6

96/1B

96/7

113

109/ 1A

102/ 3C

102/4B

103/ 1B

109/2

108/1

103/3

108/ 1B

106/ 1B

106/2 00

10 00

26 00

05 00

89 00

67 00

48 00

86 00

17 00

60 00

46 00

05 00

04 00

15 00

10 00

69 00

46 00

37 भारत का राजपत्र दिसम्बर 4 , 2010 / अग्रहायण 13 , 1932

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

2 1

106/3C 2) Pallippatti (Contd)

106/ 3D

403 /2A 3) Valavandicombai

403/2B

403/2C

72/1

4) Bodinayakkanpatti

72/9

72/11

72/14

72/13

72/15

73/1

73/2

73/3

73/4

73/ 7A

73/ 7B

73/8B

73/8C

77/1

77/2D

77 /2C

77/2H

77/3

77/13

77/12

77/11

75/2

8383 4

24 00

10 00

54 00

10 00

97 00

32 00

88 00

82 00

36 00

20 00

65 00

Nala in Survey No. 76

248

5) Perumapatti

254

253

257

258

42 00

84 00

Road in Survey No. 259

260

235

234

229

32 00

33 00

Nala in Survey No. 228

Road in Survey No. 227

51 00

Road in Survey No. 226

8384

[ Part II Sec . 3 ( ii ) ] THE GAZETTE OF IFNDIA : DECEMBER 4 , 2010 / AGRALHAYANA 13 , 1932

2 1

5) Perumapatti ( Contd)

55 /2C

55/2B

55/ 2A

53/ 1B1

53/ 1B2

53/2

633/1 6) Puduppatii

633/4

633/2

611/1

633/3

611/2

633/5

632/1

632/2

631

630/3C

630/3B

630/ 3A

630/ IN

630/31

630/3J

630/2

630/ 1Q

630/ 1P

628 /3A

628/2

627/3

627/2

627/ 1B

Nala in Survey No. 492

490/7

490/2

490/1

490/3

490/4

5 3

67 00

58 00

21 00

34 00

67 00

47 00

46 00

56 00

38 00

11 00

33 00

46 00

10 00

88 00

41 00

10 00

95 00

486/ 1A

486/ 1B

30 00

486/ 4A2A

486/ 4A1 00

71 00

486/ 4A2B

00 | भाग ।। - खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

भारत का राजपत्र दिसम्बर 4 , 2010/ अग्रहायण 13 , 1932

2 6) Puduppatti ( Contd)

450/2

485/2

450/3

450/1

451

450/4

450/5

450/6

448/2B

448/2C

448/2D1

448/ 2D2

439/ 1A1

439/ 1A2

438

8385

5 00

18 00

54 00

42 00

07 00

35 00

97 00

90 00

59 00

70 00

04 00

61 00

87 00

Road in Survey No. 439/ 1B

439/2

439/3A

439/3B

439/3C

439/4

439/ 5F

439/5G

439/ 5H

445/1

445 /2A

445/2B

444/ 1B

444/ 1A

444/ 1C

444/3C

444/2B

444/3B

444/4B

441

35 00

49 00

96 00

38 00

25 00

39 00

Nala in Survey No. 384

374/ 1B

374/ 1A

374/ 1C

374/3

374/4D

371/ 5A1 4548 Gl/10-19

10 3386

DECEMBER 4 , 2010 / AGRAHAYANA 13. 1932

THE GAZETTE OF IFNU

2 1

371/ A2 Puduppatti ( Contd)

37L SDI

371/13

3714F

373

371/45

353/14

3516A

352/298

352.31A

352/16

352/25

354/ 13B

354/13C

350/11

350/8A

250/12

350/80

350 /8D

350/20

350/21

350/22

350/23

342/5

342/10A

341/3B

341 / 5C

342/ 14B1

342/ 14B2

342/ 14B4

341/5D

336

332

331

327

328

Part 11 Sec 3 ( ii ) |

5 3

46 00

18 00

79 00

65 00

13 00

42 00

50 00

51 06

80 00

10 00

65 00

38 00

80 00

99 00

70 00

84 00

02 00

79 00

55 00

76 00

Nala in Survey No. 319

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) )

भारत का राजपत्र दिसम्बर 4 , 2010/ आग्रहायण 13. 1932

320

6) Puduppatti (Contd)

323

122 /2A

322/2B

322/5

302/4

322/6

Naia in Survey No. 322/8

219/3 7) Valaiyappatti

219/ 1B

219/ 1C1

219/ 1C2

217/1

217/3A

181/1

180

179/4B

182/28

182/ 2A

182/1

183

179/6

179/7

185/5

185/6

185/7

185/11

178 /2A

178/2B

178 /2C

178 /2D

178 /3A

178/3B

162/1

162/2

163/1

163/2

163/4

162/3

162.6

163/7

162/5

8387 3

5 00

02 8388

THE GAZETTE OF IFNDIA : DECEMBER 4 , 2010 / AGRAHAYANA 13 , 1932

163/5 7) Valaiyappatti ( Contd)

161/2

155/ 1A

155/ 1B

160/1

155/5

160/2

156

157/ 1A

157/ 1B

157/3A

157/3B

157/3D

Nala in Survey No. 157/3C

Nala in Survey No. 157/5

158/1

158/2C

158/2D1

158/2D2

Part 11 Sec. Sting

78 00

17 00

61 00

27 00

36 00

14 00

35 00

74 00

42 00

58 00

84 00

47 00

158/2D3

158/2E

124

Road in Survey No. 119/1A

Road in Survey No. 119/18

Road in Survey No. 119/ 1C

121/1

121/3

121/4

121/6

121/7

121/8

121/10

73/2

73/3

74/4

74/3

74/2

68A/ 1

68A/5

68A/ 6

68A/ 7 00

94 00

90 00

38 00

41 00

97 00

63 00

42 00

91 00

34 00 भारत का राजपत्र दिसम्बर 4, 2010 / अग्रहायण 13 , 1932

[ भाग 1 ] - खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

2 1

68A/8 7) Valaiyappatti (Contd)

8389

5 3

99 00

Road in Survey No. 656

Road in Survey No. 655

68B

67B/ 1 00

38 00

Road in Survey No. 5

3/3A

3/ 2A

3/ 1A

3/ 1B

3/1C

3/ 1D

3/ 1E

3/2B

3/3C

3/3B

2/1

1/ 1A

2/2B

2/2C

1/4A

2/2D

1 / 2E

1 /2F

1/4B 00

18 00

11 00

04 00

34 00

73 00

10 00

52 00

04 00

27 00

63 00

32 00

06 00

00 00

District : Namakkai

Taluk : Rasipuram

State: Tamil Nadu

Road in Survey No. 191

1) Matturutu

186/2

188

186/3

187

184

182/5

182/ 4E

182/4C

182/4B

182/3C

182/3B

182/ 3A

182 / 4A

182/ 1A

173

179

12 00

10 00

79 00

84 00

85 00

50 00

59 8390

[Part II Sec . 3 ( ii ) ] THE GAZETTE OF IFNDIA : DECEMBER 4 , 2010 / AGRALHAYANA 13 , 1932

2 1

1) Matturutu ( Contd)

Road in survey No. 177

178

176/4C

176/4B

176/ 4A

176/3C

176/3A

176/ 3B

176/ 2A

176/ 1B

176/ 1A

164

165

101/3B

167/1

101 / 2D

101 /2C

101/2B

101 / 2A

83 /5A

83 /2C

83 / 2A

83/1

84/7

84/8

88/12

88/9 00

30 00

44 00

17 00

40 00

29 00

49 00

32 00

61 00

93 00

26 00

32 00

03 00

35 00

81 00

27 00

49 00

11 00

19 00

River in survey No. 89

88/6

88/1

88/5

90/1

90/4

90/5

90/6

Road in Survey No. 90/7

61/13

61/12

61/10

61/8B

61/8A

01 00

15 00

35 00

89 00

58 00

08 00

25 00

50 00

58 8391

भारत का राजपत्र दिसम्बर 4, 2010/अग्रहायण 13 , 1932

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

2 1

61/7 1) Matturutu ( Contd)

61/6

61/4

61/5

59/13

59/12

59/ 9B

59/9A

59/5

59/10

59/4

59/3

42/9C

42/9B

42/9A

42/5

42/2

42/1

15/3C

15 /3E

15/ 3B

15 /3D

16/16

16/14B

24/2

24/6D

24/ 12B

24/ 12A

24/11

24/ 10B

24/ 10A

24/6B

30/13

30/11

30/12

30/9

5 3

03 00

74 00

95 00

85 00

82 00

50 00

35 00

81 00

67 00

28 00

80 00

93 00

10 00

41 00

84 00

44 00

25 00

32 00

85 00

77 00

39 00

33 00

12 00

06 00

20 00

04 8392

[Part 11 Sec . 3 ( ii ) ] THE GAZETTE OF IFNDIA : DECEMBER 4 , 2010/ AGRAIHAYANA 13 , 1932

30/8C 1 ) Matturutu ( Contd)

30/8B

30/7B

30/ 7A

30/ 6B

30/6A

30/5

5 3

75 00

57 00

59 00

23 00

Road in Survey No. 33

34/3

34/2

34/1

34/5

246

2) Ariyakavundanpatti

247/1

245

245/3

Road in Survey No. 242/2B

Road in Survey No. 242/3A

242/ 2A

242/ IC

242/ 1D

242/ 1E 00

89 00

61 00

48 00

97 00

34 00

22 00

14 00

70 00

84 00

56 00

243/4B2

88 00

243/4B1

241/1

238/2

239/1

31 00

40 00

58 00

Road in Survey No.290

289/1 00

292/ 2A3

292/ 2A4

292/ 2A2

292/ 1C1

Nala in Survey No. 292 / 1C2

Nala in Survey No. 292/ 2B

Nala in Survey No. 292/ 1C3

293

292/ 1A

Nala in Survey No. 295 /2B

Nala in Survey No. 295 /2A

294

296

33 00

39 00

63 00

01 00

38 00

28 00

65 [ भाग ।। - खण्ड ) ]

8393

भारत का राजपत्र दिसम्बर 4, 2010/ अग्रहायण 13 , 1932

2 2) Ariyakavundanpatti ( Contd)

297

298/2

300

299/3

299/2

299 / 1E

299/ 1C

299 / 1A

301/2B

301 / 2C

301/ 1B

5 00

41 00

56 00

92 00

88 00

14 00

35 00

68 00

Nala in Survey No. 302 / 6A

302/6B

224/1

224/2

323/2B

323 / 2A

323/ 2C 00

36 00

63 00

96 00

Road in Survey no . 322 / 1A

322/ 1B

322/ 2A1

322 / 2A2

322/ 2A3B

320/ 1B

320/2

319/1 00

Nala in Survey No. 319/2

319/3

349/1

350/2

350/1

121/3

121/ 1B

121 / 1A

120/1

120/ 2A

118

119/1 00

Road in Survey No. 108 /2A

108/2B1

108/1

107/ 1A 4548 GI /10--20

21 8394

Sec

Part 11

THE GAZETTE OF IFNDIA : DECEMBER 4 , 2010 / AGRAHAYANA 13 , 1932

2 1

19 00

107/181

2) Ariyakavundanpatti (Contd)

109/2

109/ 1B

110

103

101/2

101/1

100/23

100 /2A

98/1

98/3

98/2

109/1 3) Pachudayampalayam ( Thoppappatti)

109/2

54/4B

35/4

55/1

55/3B

55/2

53/5B

53 / 5A

Road in Survey No. 53/2

62/ 1A

62/ 1B

62/3

62/4

62/2

63/ 2A1

63/2A2

63/ 1B

Road in Survey No. 34

32/1

32/2

32/4

32/5

32/6

92/2 4) Jedarpalayam ( Thoppappatti )

93/6

62 00

30 00

88 00

74 00

01 00

45 00

0.4

37 00

14 00

32 00

85 00

45 00

07 00

84 00

77 00

62. 00

55 00

94 00

32 00

92 00

64 00

19 00

15 00

89 00

00 8395 भारत का राजपत्र दिसम्बर 4 , 2010/अग्रहायण 13 , 1932

T !!! - खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

93/3

Jedarpalayam ( Thoppappatti ) ( Contd)

93/2

93/4

93 / 5B

95 / 1A

96/ 1A

96/ 1B

96/ IC

[ F. No. L - 14014/92/2010 -GP] SNEH P. MADAN , Under Secy.

नई दिल्ली, 3 दिसम्बर , 2010

का. आ. 2964. - भारत सरकार को लोकहित में यह आवश्यक प्रतीत होता है कि तमिलनाडु में तिरूतन्नी के पास विजयवाडा -नैल्लोर -चैन्नई पाइपलाइन के टर्मिनल प्वाइंट से देश के विभिन्न हिग्सों में उपभोक्ताओं तक प्राकृतिक गैस के परिवहन के लिए मैसर्स रिलोजिसटिक्स इन्फ्रास्ट्रक्चर लिमिटेड द्वारा चैन्नई - टयूटीकोग्नि पाइपलाइन विछाई जानी चाहिए ;

और , भारत सरकार को उक्त पाइपलाइन विछाने के प्रयोजन के लिए यह आवश्यक प्रतीत होता है कि उम भूमि में , जिसके भीतर उक्त्त पाइपलाइन विछाई जाने का प्रस्ताव है और जो इम अधिसूचना से उपावद्ध अनुसूची में वर्णिन है , उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन किया जाए;

अनः, अव, भारत सरकार , पेट्रोलियम और ग्खनिज 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 कुग्ने के अपने आशय की घोषणा करती है ;

कोडं व्यक्ति , जो उक्त अनुसूची में वर्णित भूमि में हितवद्ध है, उस तारीख से जिसको उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 3 की उपधारा ( 1 ) के अधीन जारी की गई अधिसूचना की प्रतियां साधारण जनता को उपलब्ध करा दी जाती है, इक्कीस दिन के भीतर भूमि के नीचे पाइपलाइन विछाई जाने के लिए उपयोग के अधिकार के अर्जन के संबंध में श्री एस राजामनिक्कम , सक्षम प्राधिकारी , रिलॉजिगटिक्स इन्फ्रास्ट्रक्चर लिमिटेड, न. 9 डी/ 6 डी , रामकृष्णपुग्म, पाल्लैयार कोवील के सामने , कपूर 639001 , तमिलनाडु राज्य को लिखित रुप में आक्षेप भेज सकेगा । 8396

THE GAZETTE OF IFNDIA : DECEMBER 4 , 2010 / AGRAHAYANA 13 , 1932

अनुसूची

[Part II Sec . 3 ( ii ) |

जिला:सेलम

तालुक:आत्तुर

गाँव कानाम

सर्वे सं / सब डिविजन सं-

2 1

राज्य: तमिलनाडु

आर- ओ- यू-अर्जित करने के लिए क्षेत्रफल

हेक्टेयर एयर सि एयर 3

22 00

सर्वे न . 45 में रास्ता

1 ) अलगापुरम

44/2

44/1

43/1

33 00

24 00

सर्वे न . 43/2 में रास्ता

43/3

43/8

43/7

43/6

42/1

13/3

13/9

13/8

10 00

64 00

42 00

61 00

13/10ए

00 09

सर्वे न . 14 में रास्ता

15/5

15/4

15/6

39/1

61 00

74 00

24/22

24/21

24/7

41 00

24/16

24/18

24/19

24/17

सर्वे न . 37 में नाला

10 00 03

24/20

28 00 09

25/10

25/9

25/7

19 00

35 00

25/ 6डी

25/8

37 00

सर्वे न . 34 में नाला

35/3

35/4

35/5

84 00

59 00 8397

भारत का राजपत्र दिसम्बर 4, 2010/अग्रहायण 13 , 1932

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

2 1

35/6

1 ) अलगापुरम (निरंतर )

36/1

35/13

35/16

36/2

35/18सी

35/18डी

35/19

5 3

45 00

98 00

राज्य:तमिलनाडु

जिला:डिन्डिगल

तालुक:डिन्डिगल

431

1 ) तडिक्कोम्बु

430/13

430/14

430/19

430/20

430/21

432/1डी

432/15

432/ 2ए

432/ 2बी

432/ 3ए

432/ 1 एफ

432/ 2सी

432/3वी

432/ 2डी

435/3डी

435/25

432/4ए 1

432/4ए2

432/4सी 1

432/4 सी 2

432/4डी 1

432/45

435/7ए

433

434/1

434/2

434/3

434/4

434/5

437/ 2ई

437/ 2एफ

437/ 2के

69 00

65 00

34 00

00 8398

THE GAZETTE OF IFNDIA DECEMBER 4 , 2010 / AGRAHAYANA 13 , 1932

438/1

1 ) तडिक्कोम्बु (निरंतर)

438/3

438/4

493/8

494/70

494/15डी

494/7डी

494/7सी

494/16सी

504/2

504/1

503/9सी

503/9वी

505/4ए 1

505/3वी

505/ 3सी

509/1

509/3

509/8

509/9

510/2

513/1

513/ 2 ए

513/2वी

513/1

515

517/3

Parti Sec. Sho 00

70 CO

CD 03

05 00

82 00 06

39 00

33 00

53 00

10 00

55 00

42 00

70 00

01 00

65 00

4.3 00

19 00

58 00

54 00 01

95 00

01 00

00 09

97 00

10 00

57 00

64 00

सर्वे न . 519/2 में नाला

532/1

533/1

534

67 00 16

52 00

सर्वे न . 1135 में नदी

सर्व न . 1054 में नदी

1054

1057/4ए

1058/ 1 ए

1058 / 2 ए

1058/ 2सी

1052/ 2वी 00 08

03 00

40 00 20

40 00

49 00

00 00 06

62 00

सर्वे न . 1059 में रार

1078/1 बी 2 00

86 भारत का राजपत्र दिसम्बर 4. 2010 अग्रहायण 13 , 1932

भाग - खण्ड 3( xi )|

1078/1 वी3 1) तडिक्कोम्बु (निरंतर)

1078/2

1079

1127/ 3ए

1080/ 2वी

1080/4वी

1080 / 2 ए

1080/4ए

1080/6

1080/8

1127/3बी

1110/1

1112/1

1110/2

1112/3

1112/4

1556/2

1559/ 8 ए

1559/ 8 बी

1562/7

1562/6

1564/4सी

1564/4डी

1564/45

1564/ 6बी

1564/ 6सी

1567/3सी

1567/35

1567/3 बी

1567/ 3डी

1567/ 3एच

1567/3आड

सर्वे न . 1578 में नाला

1570/1

1570/2

1570/3

1570/4

1570/6

1570/10

1570/ 9बी

1570/ 9 ए

8399

79 00

95 00

00 8400

THE GAZETTE OF IFNDIA DECEMBER 4 , 2010/ AGRAHAYΛΝΑ 13 , 1932

Part II Sec sin 3

1570/11

1 ) तडिक्कोम्बु (निरंतर )

1570/21

1570/20

1570/16

1570/17

1570/15

1570/14

1570/18

1570/19

1573/ 2ची

15/3/ 2 ए

1573/1 डी

1573/1सी

1573/70

15-3/10

15/3/12

1573/3

1573/4

1530/60

15 0/ 6वी

19 00

26.10 / 81

11 30,8 भी

1.27

1528

20 00

52 00

30 00

.1529 में नाला

1518

15 00

गर्ने न . 1511 में रास्ता

1510/ 5वी

1510/ 5सी

00 02

72 00

सर्वे नं . 1510/7 में रास्ता

1509/1

1509/ 2 ए

1509/25

1509/ 2डी

1509/ 2 एच

1509/ 2सी

1509/2 आड

1509/ 2जे

1509/ 2के

00 02

1508/3जी

10 [ भाग II - खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

8-101

भारत का राजपत्र : दिसम्बर 4, 2010/अग्रहायण 13 , 1932

2 1

1508/ 3आइ 1 ) तडिक्कोम्बु (निरंतर)

1508/4ए

1508/ 6ए

1508/4वी

1508/6बी

1508/5

1507/9

1507/ 5जी

1507/ 8ए

1507/ 8 बी

1507/ 5एफ

1507/5號

1507/7

1507/10बी

1507/10सी

1506/1सी

1506/ 1 डी

1506/1 एफ

1504

1506/151

1506/152

1506/1 बी 8

1506/1 बी 9

1505

1438

1439

1444

1449/1वी

1449/ 1 ए

1449/1सी

1445/ 2 ए3

1445/22

1445/ 2 ए 1 3

5 00

76 00 03

73 00

42 00

01 00

00 02

47 00 00

48 00

94 00

39 00

91 00

95 00

58 00 00

29 00

21 00

98 00

41 00

00 00

36 00 02

00 06

19 00 00

37 00

79 00

10 00

90 00 18

96 00

60 00

64 00

04 00

60 00

70 00

सर्वे न . 1445/1 बी में रास्ता

1445/ 2 सी

1445/ 1 सी

1448/1

1448/ 2वी

1447/1

1447/2

1432

4548 GI /10-21

00 00

60 00

15 00

94 00

10 00

63 00 8402

Part II Sec . 3 ( ii ) | THE GAZETTE OF IFNDIA : DECEMBER 4 , 2010/ AGRAHAYANA 13 , 1932

2 1

1431

1 ) तडिक्कोम्बु (निरंतर)

1426

1425

07 00

सर्वे न . 1433 में रास्ता

1636

1423

1640

1957

1955

1964

1979

1980

1981

1984

1982

1976

1983

1994

1995

99 00

15 00

37 00

10 00

10 00 09

2230

97 00

2229

2223/3सी

2223/3 ई

89 00

2223/35

69 00

2222/1

2213/3बी

21 00

2215

2216/3

2217

76 00

सर्वे न . 2218 में रास्ता

2341

2339/2

2339/1बी

59 00

2339/ 1 ए3

11 00

2339/1 ई

24 00

2.339/ 1 ए 1

32 00

2339/1डी

2339/1 सी

2338

2346/3

सर्वे न . 2337 में रास्ता

8403

भारत का राजपत्र दिसम्बर 4, 2010/अग्रहायण 13 , 1932

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

2 1

2334/2 1) तडिक्कोम्बु (निरंतर)

2334/3

2334/ 1 ए9

2334/ 1 ए 10

2334/ 1 ए 11

2332/1

2332/3

2329/3सी

2329/ 5सी

2329/ 6सी

2329/ 8 ए

2329/ 7 डी

2329/75

2329/7सी

2327/ 2सी

2327/ 4सी

2327/ 5डी

2327/ 2बी

2327/ 2 ए

2327/4बी

2327/ 5सी

2327/ 4ए

2327/ 5बी

2327/ 3 ए

2327/3बी

2326/2

2314/ 2जी

2314/ 2 एच

2314/1

2312/ 7 ए

2314/ 3ए

2314/3बी

2314/3सी

2310/1 ए

2310/1सी

2310 / 2 ए

2310/ 2बी

2310/ 2डी

2314/ 3डी

2315

2316/1

5 3

14 00

26 00

28 00 06

48 00

50 00

00 02

72 00

29 00

01 00

04 00 19

95 00

13 00

73 00 04

90 00

00 00

10 00 00

52 00

09 8404

THE GAZETTE OF IFNDIA : DECEMBER 4 , 2010 / AGRAHAYANA 13 , 1932

2 1 ) तडिक्कोम्बु (निरंतर)

[Part II Sec . ( ii ) 3

2316/4बी

00 04

2316/4ए

2318/3बी

2318/3 ए

2318/2

2318/15

2318/1 एफ

00 06

2319

सर्वे न . 2475 में नाला

2452

सर्वे न . 2474 में नाला

2486

2485

2483

2481

2480

2484

2491

तालुक: वेदासन्दुर

63 00

03 00

75 00

53 00

14 00

49 00

जिला:डिन्डिगल

1 ) मल्लापुरम

34/3

34/1

34/ 2ए

34/6

34/ 2वी

34/ 2सी

34/ 2डी

33/1

33/2

32/1सी

32/1डी

32/3

42/ 2 ए

42/ 2सी

43/2

43/ 1 ए

57/4

57/1 ए

57/1 बी

राज्य: तमिलनाडु

25 00

39 00

27 00

31 00 06

56 00

79 00

56 00 00

10 00 03

78 00

33 00

78 00

37 00

66 00

62 00

66 00 09

75 00 04

97 00

सर्वे न . 60 में रास्ता

26 00

सर्वे न . 67 में रास्ता

69/1सी

10 00

80 भारत का राजपत्र दिसम्बर 4 , 2010 / अग्रहायण 13 , 1932

[ भाग ।। - खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

2 1

69/ 2सी 1) मल्लापुरम (निरंतर)

69/ 2डी

82/1सी

82/2

85/ 2 ए

85/ 2बी1

85/ 2बी 2

85/ 2बी3

85/ 2वी4

97/ 1 ए

97/1 बी 2

97/ 2वी

97/1 बी3

97/3सी 2

96/4

96/6

96/ 1 ए2

96/1डी

96/2

104/1

107/2

सर्वे न . 108 में रास्ता

109/ 1 ए

109/1 वी

113/1

113/ 2 ए

113/ 2 बी 1

113/ 2बी 2

113/3

113/4

243

244

245

247

248

254/1

254/2

257

267

266

8105

5 3

86 00

68 00

55 00

32 00

06 00 08

65 00

92 00

52 00

15 00

56 00

39 00 20

28 00

13 00

24 00

57 00

56 00

28 00 06

83 00 47

93 00

72 00

67 00 8406

THE GAZETTE OF IFNDIA : DECEMBER 4 , 2010/ AGRAHAYANA 13 , 1932

Part II Sec . 3 ) 3

5 00

271/1

1 ) मल्लापुरम (निरंतर)

271/2

58 00

272/1

83 00

272/2

273

282

84 00

19 00

281/1

36 00

281/2

281/3

48 00

281/4

87 00

289/1

53 00

289/2

290

43 00

53 00

291/1

36 00

292/1 वी 1

292/1सी

सर्वे न . 293 में रास्ता

453/ 1 ए

00 06

453/1वी

सर्वे न . 454 में रास्ता

455/1

455/2

24 00

457/2

96 00

457/3

23 00

457/4

449

57 00

सर्वे न . 448 में रास्ता

450/1

70 00

450/2

442/1

442/2

441

433

15 00

49 00

72 00

434/1

47 00

434/2

431/4

425/1वी

44 00

426/3बी

426/3ए

419/5

35 भारत का राजपत्र दिसम्बर 4 , 2010/ अग्रहायण 13 , 1932

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

2 1

419/4

1) मल्लापुरम (निरंतर)

418

463/3बी

463/3ए

463/ 2बी

463/ 2ए

463/1सी

सर्वे न . 464 में रास्ता

466

सर्वे न . 465 में रास्ता

720/ 2 ए

720/ 2 सी

720/3बी

719/ 2 ए

719/ 3वी

719/3ए

709

717/3वी

717/ 2वी

711/4

711/3

712

8407

5 3

49 00

83 00

16 00

86 00

85 00

22 00

24 00

31 00

सर्वे न . 713/1 ए में नाला

सर्वे न . 695 में रास्ता

572/2

सर्वे न . 573 में नाला

584

583

581/1

581/2

581/3

590/ 2वी

581/4

581/5

580/3

580/4

580/5

579/1

579/2

578/1

589/1 वी

25 00

61 00

05 00 04

71 00 08

81 00

57 00

08 8408

Part II Sec. 3 ( i ) THE GAZETTE OF IFNDIA : DECEMBER 4 , 2010 / AGRAHAYANA 13 , 1932

2 3

5 00

589/1सी

1) मल्लापुरम (निरंतर)

88 00

589/ 2ए

580/2

18/1

2) पालापट्टि

39 00

51 00

18/4ए

18/4बी

18/5

42 00

00 02

10 00

17/ 2बी

17/3

24/ 1 ए

सर्वे न . 25 में रास्ता

824/1 बी

824/ 2 ए

824/2बी

824/ 2सी

821/1

826

57 00

821/2

821/4

830/ 1 ए

830/1 बी

830/2

00 06

829/1बी

816/1 बी

28 00

816/3ए

816/3बी

816/4

64 00 11

831/1 ए

832/1 ए

815

839/1

839/ 2ए

839/ 2बी

44 00

838/2

835

836/1बी

00 02

सर्वे न . 836/2 में रास्ता

846

849/ 3 ए

[ भाग II - खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : दिसम्बर 4 , 2010/अग्रहायण 13 , 1932

849/2 2) पालापट्टि (निरंतर)

849/3बी

849/1

854

862

863/1

863/2

864/1

866/3

866/2

866/1

3 ) वानिक्कराय

20/5

20/4

21/2

22/3

22/4

24/3

24/7

24/1

26/3

26/2

26/1

26/4

26/5

26/6

92/ 2ए

92/ 2सी

92/2वी

92/ 6सी

92/4

92/ 6डी

92/5डी

92/65

92/6र्ज

93/1

93/3

93/2

93/4

1548 G10-22

8409

5 3

47 00

59 00

80 00

83 00

86 00 03

97 00

63 01

61 00 59

23 00

12 00 37

63 00

17 00

44 00

54 00

00 08

24 00 04

00 08

08 00

14 00

01 00

4 00

86 00 25

16 00 03

98 00

17 00

28 00

64 8410

THE GAZETTE OF IFNDIA : DECEMBER 4 , 2010 AGRAHAYANA 13. 1932

Part fi Sec. Stinj 3

5 00

82/ 3 ए

3 ) वानिक्कराय (निरंतर )

65/2

4 ) कुवाक्कपट्टि

65/3

81 01

49 00

24 00

63 00 09

66/1 ए

66/1सी

66/2

56/1

56/2

52 00

13 00

55/ 2ए

88 00

55/ 2वी

55/ 2सी

53/2

64 00

34 00

53/1वी

60 00 09

53/1सी

146/1 सी

79 00

146/2

99 00

146/4सी

146/4वी

73 00

146/4ए

145/1 ए

47 00

142/1

142/2

64 00

141/1

68 00

141/2

141/3

21 00 06

127/ 1 ए

127/2

127/3

51 00

126/ 2 सी 1

59 00

126/2 वी 1

78 00

126/ 2 ए 1

99 00

126/ 2 ए 2

126/202

447/ 2ए

24 00

सर्वे न . 446 में रास्ता

445/ 2ए

445/ 2वी

30 00

445/ 2डी

445/25

71 00 00

445/2एफ

भारत का राजपत्र दिसम्बर 4. 2010 / अग्रहायण 13 , 1932

| भाग 11 - खण्ड 3 ( ii ) !

2 1

445/1 वी कुवाक्कपट्टि (निरंतर)

442

436

439

440/1

440/2

440/3

440/4

440/5

430/5

430/6

430/4

421/3

421/4

422

423/1

423/3

423/2

सर्वे न . 420 में नाला

416/ 1 ए

416/ 1 वी 1

416/ 1 ची 2

416/ 2वी

411

410/2

4408

407

406/1

406/ 2ए

406/ 2वी

398/1

398/2

398/3

398/4

402

400/1

400/2

400/3

401

400/4

400/5

8111

5 3

76 00

35 00

33 00 04

30 00

60 00

93 00 02

76 00

36 00

58 00

18 00

43 00

73 00

25 00

83 00

15 00 08

00 8412

THE GAZETTE OF IFNDIA : DECEMBER 4 , 2010 / AGRAHAYANA 13 , 1932

2 [Part II See .

5 00 00

400/9

4) कुवाक्कपट्टि (निरंतर )

80 00

400/10

321

41 00

322/ 1 ए 2

322 / 1 ए3

322/ 1 ए4

322/ 1 ए5

322/1 बी

322/ 1 ए7

322/2

323/2

249

5 ) नाथापट्टि

27 00

247/ 1 ए

247/1सी

247/ 2ए

247/ 2सी

247/ 2डी

237

27 00

236/ 3 ए

235/1

235/2

18 00

228/1

225/ 2वी

228/2

227/1

227/2

226/1

57 00 00

228/5

226/2

2.29/3 ए

226/3

226/4

00 01

29/ 3डी

36 00

229/3 सी

29/3वी

217 में गस्ता 00 40

216/ 1सी

216/15

216/ 2वी

216/ 2 मी

10 00

216/2डी

भाग ।। - खण्ड 3 ( ii ) |

भारत का राजपत्र दिसम्बर 4 , 2010/ अग्रहायण 13 , 1932

2 1

205

5 ) नाथापट्टि (निरंतर)

172/ 2एफ

172/25

172/ 2 जी 1

172/3

173/ 1 ए

173/1 वी

173/15

173/1 डी

173/1 एफ

173/1 एच

173/1 आड

177/1 सी

177/ 1 ए

177/1 बी 1

175/1वी

175/3

176/2

176/6

176/3

176/4

176/5

179/1 वी

179/ 2ए

179/ 2वी

180/ 1 ए

180/1 वी

180/ 2 ए

181/1 बी

181/ 2वी

181/ 2ए

181/ 2सी

180/ 2बी

182/1

182/3ए

182/4

182/3वी

182/ 2सी

182/6

183/7

184/ 1 ए

8413

05 00 52

36 00

00 08

17 00 06

99 00

65 00

91 00

84 00

24 00

42 00

17 00

00 02

16 00

18 00

67 00 05

06 00

43 00

79 00

00 00

55 00

20 00

15 00

18 00

06 00

86 00

04 8414

THE GAZETTE OF IFNDIA : DECEMBER 4 , 2010 / AGRAHAYANA 13. 1932

184/1 बी 5) नाथापट्टि (निरंतर)

184/ 2ए

184/ 2बी

184/ 2सी

185

186

188/3

188/4वी

147/1

147/302

189/ 1 वी 2

189/7

189/1 वी4ए

189/2

189/3

189/1 वी3सी

PartII See Sibl 3

5 00

95 00

47 00

11 00

82 00

18 00

81 00

30 00

70 00

91 00

40 00

54 00

71 00

89 00 00

10 [फा सं. एल. -14014/95/2010 जी.पी. ] स्नेह प्रभा मदान , अवर सचिव

New Delhi , the 3rd December , 2010

S. O. 2964.- Whereas it appears to Government of India that it is necessary in public interest thatfor transportation of natural gas from terminal point of Vijayawada Nellore - Chennai pipeline near Tiruttani in TamilNadu to consumers' in various parts of the country , Chennai - Tuticorin pipeline should be laid by M/ s Relogistics Infrastructure Limited ;

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

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 ) , Government of India 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 under sub - section ( 1 ) of Section 3 of the said Act , are made available to the general public , object in writing to the acquisition of the Right of User therein for laying the pipeline under the land to Shri S.Rajamanickam , Competent Authority , Relogistics Infrastructure Limited, No. 9D/ 6D Ramakrishnapuram , Opp . Pillayar Kovil , Karur - 639 001 , Tamil Nadu State .

दिसम्बर 4, 2010/ अग्रहायण 13 , 1932

भारत का राजपत्र

[ भाग ।।- खण्ड 3 (ii ) ]

8.115

Schedule

State: Tamil Nadu

District : Salem

Taluk : Attur

Area to be acquired for RoU

Survey No./Sub-Division

Village

2 1

C-Are

Are

Hec

Road in Survey No. 45

1 ) Alagapuram

44/2

44/1

43/1

33 00

Road in Survey No. 43/2

43/3

43/8

43/7

43/6

42/1

13/3

13/9

13/8

13/10B

Road in Survey No. 14

15/5

15/4

15/6

39/1

24/22

24/21

24/7

24/16

24/18

24/19

24/17

Nala in Survey No. 37

24/20

25/10

25/9

25/7

25/ 6D

25/8

Nala in Survey No. 34

35/3

35/4

35/5

00 8416

THE GAZETTE OF IFNDIA : DECEMBER 4 , 2010 / AGRAHAYANA 13 , 1932

2 1) Alagapuram ( Contd)

35/6

36/1

35/13

35/16

36/2

35/ 18C

35/ 18D

35/19 Taluk: Dindigul

District: Dindigul

431

1 ) Tadikkombu

430/13

430/14

430/19

430/20

430/21

432/ 1D

432/ 1E

432/ 2A

432/2B

[PartII Sec . 3 ( ii ) ] ::

5 00

05 00

06 00

45 00

84 00

13 00

18 00

17 00

98 State : Tamil Nadu

59 00

32 00

24 00

84 00

36 00

11 00

33 00

64 00

86 00

432/3A

432/ IF

432/2C

432/3B

432/ 2D

435/3D

435/ 2E 00

10 00

13 00

08 00

69 00

65 00

33 00

432/4A1

432/ 4A2

432/4C1

432/4C2

432/4D1

432/ 4E 00

29 00

435/ 7A

433

434/1

434/2

434/3

434/4

434/5

437 / 2E

437 / 2F 00

437/ 2K

20 भारत का राजपत्र : दिसम्बर 4 , 2010/अग्रहायण 13 , 1932

भाग 11- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

2 1

438/1 Fadikkombu ( Contd)

438/3

438/4

493/8

494/7A

494/15D

494/ 7B

494/ 7C

494/16C

504/2

504/1

503 /9C

503/ 9B

505/4A1

505/3B

505/3C

509/1

509/3

509/8

509/9

510/2

513/1

513 /2A

513/2B

518/1

515

517/3

8417

95 00

64 00

Nala in Survey No. 519/2

532/1

533/1

534

57 00

River in Survey No. 1135

River in Survey No. 1054

1054

1057/4A

1058/ 1A

1058/2A

1058 /2C

1058/2B

Road in Survey No. 1059

1078/ 1B2

4548 G/10-23 8418

THE GAZETTE OF IFNDIA : DECEMBER 4 , 2010 / AGRALIΛΥΑΝΑ 13 , 1932

2 1) Tadikkombu ( Contd)

1078/ 1B3

1078/2

1079

1127/ 3A

1080 / 2B

1080/ 4B

1080 /2A

1080/4A

1080/6

1080/8

1127 /3B

1110/1

1112/1

1110/2

1112/3

1112/4

1556/2

1559 / 8A

1559/ 8B

1562/7

1562/6

1564/4C

1564/4D

1564/4E

1564/ 6B

1564/ 6C

1567/ 3C

1567 / 3E

1567/ 3B

1567/ 3D

1567 / 3H

1567/31

Sec . 3 ( ii ) |

[ Part II

5 00

01 00

08 00

97 00

16 00

44 00

79 00

90 00

97 00

13 00

10 00

91 00

69 00

47 00

10 00

48 00

75 00

92 00

01 00

49 00

44 00

16 00

50 00

90 00

45 00

Nala in Survey No. 1578

1570/1

1570/2

1570/3

1570/4

1570/6

1570/10

1570/ 9B

1570/ 9A

54 8-119

भारत का राजपत्र दिसम्बर 4, 2010 /अग्रहायण 13 , 1932

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

2 1 ) Tadikkombu ( Contd)

1570/11

1570/21

1570/20

1570/16

1570/17

1570/15

1570/14

1570/18

1570/19

1573 / 2B

1573 / 2A

1573/ 1D

1573 / 1C

1573/ 7A

1573/10

1573/12

1573/3

1573/4

1530 / 6A

1530/6B

1530 / 8A

1530/ 8B

1530/ 8C

1527

1528

5 3

30 00

22 00

47 00

94 00

16 00

14 00

90 00

41 00

82 00

42 00

94 00

01 00

67 00

69 00

70 00

19 00

73 00

52 00

Nala in Survey No. 1529

1518 00

31 00

Road in Survey No. 1511

1510/ 5B

1510 / 5C

90 00

Road in Survey No. 1510/7

1509/1

1509 / 2A

1509 / 2E

1509 /2D

1509 / 2H

1509 / 2C

1509/21

1509 /2J

1509/ 2K

1508 /3G 00

27 00

14 00

97 00

24 00

87 00

10 8420

Sec . )

Part 11

THE GAZETTE OF IFNDIA : DECEMBER 4 , 2010/ AGRAHAYANA 13 , 1932

2 1

1508/31 1 ) Tadikkombu ( Contd)

5 3

73 00

1508 /4A

1508 / 6A

1508/4B

1508 / 6B

1508/5

1507/9

94 00

1507 / 5G

39 00

1507 / 8A

91 00

1507/ 8B

95 00

1507 / 5F

04 00

1507 / 5E

1507/7

58 00

29 00

1507 / 10B

21 00

1507/ 10C

98 00

1506/ 1C

41 00

1506 / 1D

1506 / 1F

1504

36 00

1506 / 1E1

19 00

1506/ 1E2

1506 / 1B8

1506/ 1B9

1505

1438

1439

1444

10 00

90 00

96 00

1449 / 1B

6.1 00

1449/ 1A

04 00

1449/ 1C

1445/ 2A3

60 00

1445 / 2A2

70 00

1445 / 2A1

Road in Survey No. 1445/ 1B

1445/2C

15 00

1445/ 1C

1448/1

48 00

94 00

1448 /2B

1447/1

1447/2

1432

56 00

00 8.121

भारत का राजपत्र दिसम्बर 4, 2010/ अग्रहायण 13. 1932

! भाग ।।- खण्ड 3 ( ii) )

2 1

1431 1 ) Tadikkombu ( Contd)

.426

1425

Road in Survey No. 1433

1636

1423

1640

1957

1955

1964

1979

1980

1981

1984

1982

1976

1983

1994

1995

2230

2229

2223 /3C

2223 / 3F

2223 /3E

2222/1

2213 /3B

2215

2216/3

2217

(01)

37 00

기

Road in Survey No. 2218

2341

2339/2

2339/ 1B

2339 / 1A3

2339 / 1F

2339 / 1A !

2339/ 1D

2339/ 1C

2338

2346/3 00

Road in Survey No. 2337

8422

THE GAZETTE OF IFNDIA : DECEMBER 4 , 2010 / AGRAJIAYANA 13. 1932

2 1) Tadikkombu ( Contd)

2334/2

2334/3

[ Part II Sec . 3 ( ii ) | 3

5 00

25 00

2334/ 1A9

2334/ 1A10

2334/ 1A11

2332/1

2332/3 00

26 00

28 00

2329/ 3C

2329/ 5C

2329 / 6C

2329 / 8A

2329/ 7D

2329/ 7E

2329/ 7C

2327 / 2C

2327 / 4C

2327/ 5D

2327 / 2B

2327 / 2A

2327 / 4B

2327 / 5C

2327 /4A

2327/5B

2327/ 3A

2327/3B

2326/2 00

2314/ 2G

2314/2H

2314/1 00

2312/ 7A

2314/ 3A

2314/3B

2314/3C

2310/ 1A

2310/ 1C

2310 / 2A

2310/2B

2310/ 2D

2314/3D

2315

2316/1

52 8423

भारत का राजपत्र दिसम्बर 4 , 2010/अग्रहायण 13 , 1932

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

2 1

2316/4B 1) Tadikkombu ( Contd)

2316/ 4A

2318 /3B

2318 / 3A

2318/2

2318 / 1E

2318 / 1F

2319

30 00

87 00

21 00

78 00

Nala in Sruvey No. 2475

2452

19 00

66 00

Nala in Survey No. 2474

2486

2485

2483

2481

2480

2484

2491 Taluk: Vedasandur

75 00

53 00

14 00

39 00

State: Tamil Nadu

District: Dindigul

34/3 1 ) Mallapuram

34/1

34/2a

34/6

34/2B

34/2C

34/2D

33/1

33/2

32/ 1C

32/ 1D

32/3

42/ 2A

42/2C

43/2

43/ 1A

57/4

57/ 1A

57/18

25 00

27 00

31 00

56 00

10 00

78 00

33 00

66 00

97 00

26 00

Survey No. 60

Road in Survey No. 67

69 / 1C

80 00 8-121

Par

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA . DECEMBER 4 , 2010 / AGRAHAYANA 13 , 1932

2 Mallarore ( Contd)

69/ 2C

69/2D

82/10

¥2/2

23/2B1

85/ 2B2

85/283

$ 5/284

97 / 1B2

97 / 2B

96/4

96.0

96/1A2

96/ 1D

04/1

107/2

Road in Survey No. 108

112/1

13/ 2A

13/28 10

1 .

31 00

70 00

واء

} 00

: .

113/ 2B2

113/3

3/4

244

34/2

267

266

2. 00

00 8125

भारत का राजपत्र दिसम्बर 4. 2010/ अग्रहायण 13 , 1932

| भाग 11- खण्ड 3 ( 1 ) ]

2 1

271/1 1 Mallapuran ( Contd)

271/2

272/1

272/2

273

282

281/1

281/2

281/3

281/4

289/1

289/2

290

291/1

292/ 1B1

292/ 1C

5 3

58 00

84 00

36 00

23 00

87 00

43 00

36 00

34 00

Road in Survey No. 293

453/ 1A

453/ 1B

10 00

77 00

Road in Survey No. 454

455/1

455/2

457/2

457/3

457/4

449

16 00

96 00

40 00

52 00

Road in Survey No. 448

450/1

450/2

442/1

442/2

441

433

434/1

434/2

431/4

425/ 1A

425/ 1B

426/3B

426/ 3A

419.5 4548 GI/ 10-24

70 00

29 00

49 00

72 00

47 00

94 00

35 00

44 00

76 00

35 8426

THE GAZETTE OF IFNDIA : DECEMBER 4 , 2010 AGRAHAYANA 13. 1932

2 1) Mallapuram ( Contd )

419/4

418

463/3B

Sec . |

Part 11

5 00

49 00

83 00

463/3A

463/2B 00

16 00

463 /2A

463/ 1C 00

39 00

Road in Survey No. 464

466

73 00

Road in Survey No. 465

720/ 2A

720/ 2C

720/ 3B

719/ 2A

719/ 3B

719/3A

709

717/3B

717 /2B

711/4

711/3

712

Nala in Survey No. 713 / 1A 00

86 00

19 00

34 00

66 00

85 00

32 00

99 00

22 00

24 00

48 00

Road in Survey No. 695

572/2

06 00

Nala in Survey No. 573

584

583

581/1

581/2

581/3

590/2B

581/4

581/5

580/3

580/4

580/5

579/1

579/2

578/1

589/1B 00

57 भारत का राजपत्र दिसम्बर 4 , 2010 / अग्रहायण 13 , 1932

| भाग 11- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

2 1

589 / 1C 1 ) Mallapuram ( Contd)

589/ 2A

580/2

18/1

2) Palapatti

18 /4A

18/4B

18/5

17 /2B

17/3

24/ 1A

8127

94 00

10 00

97 00

Road in Survey No. 25

824/11

824/ 2A

824/2B

824/2C

821/1

826

821/2

821/4

830/ 1A

830/ 1B

830/2

829/ 1B

816/ 1B

816/3A

816/3B

816/4

831/ 1A

832 / 1A

815

839/1

839/2A

839/2B

838/2

835

836/ 1B

39 00

93 00

85 00

51 00

03 00

18 00

86 00

04 00

22 00

18 00

64 00

11 00

Road in Survey No. 836/2

846

849/3A

00 8428

THE GAZETTE OF IFNDIA : DECEMBER 4 , 2010 / AGRAJIAYANA 13 , 1932

2 2) Palapatti ( Contd)

849/2

849/ 3B

849/1

854

862

863/1

863/2

864/1

866/3

866/2

866/1

3) Vanikkarai

20/5

20-4

21/2

22/3

22%

24/3

24/7

24/1

26/3

26/2

26/1

26/4

26/5

26/6

92/ 2A

92/2C

92/28

92/ 6C

92/4

92/6D

92/ 5D

92/ 6E

92/6G

93/1

93/3

93/2

93/4

Part II Sec. S 3

5 00

94 00

59 00

68 00

83 00

86 00

97 00

81 00

10 00

36 01

63 00

6 :

23 00

39 00

63 00

17 00

44 00

85 00

10 00

68 00

53 00

24 00

45 00

98 00

08 00

14 00

01 00

31 00

49 00

40 00

86 00

98 00

17 00

28 00

64 भारत का राजपत्र दिसम्बर 4, 2010 / अग्रहायण 13 , 1932

[ भाग II - खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

2 1

82/ 3A 3) Vanikkarai ( Contd)

65/2 4) Kuvakkapatti

65/3

66/1A

66 / 1C

66/2

56/1

56/2

55/ 2A

55/2B

55/ 2C

53/2

53 / 1B

53 / 1C

146/ 1C

146/2

146/4C

146/4B

146/4A

145 / 1A

142/1

142/2

141/1

141/2

141/3

127 / 1A

127/2

127/3

126/ 2C1

126/ 2B1

126 / 2A1

126/2B2

126/ 2A2

447 / 2A

8429

68 00

88 00

90 00

Road in Survey No. 446

445 / 2A

445/ 2B

445 /2D

445 / 2E

445 / 2F

00 8430

THE GAZETTE OF IFNDIA : DECEMBER 4 , 2010 / AGRAHAYANA 13 , 1932

2 4) Kuvakkapatti ( Contd)

Part ! Sec. Sман 3

445/ 1B

442

436

439

440/1

440/2

440/3

440/4

440/5

430/5

430/6

430/4

421/3

421/4

422

423/1

423/3

423/2 00

76 00

35 00

33 00

72 00

30 00

7'7 00

60 00

93 00

76 00

85 00

20 00

10 00

33 00

36 00

58 00

91 00

Nala in Survey No. 420

416/ 1A 00

416/ 1B1

416/ 1B2

416/2B

411

410/2

4408

407

406/1

406 / 2A

406/ 2B

398/1

398/2

398/3

398/4

402

400/1

400/2

400/3

401

400/4

400/5

69 00

63 00

32 00

43 00

40 00

25 00

83 00

93 00

40 00

65 00

92 00

15 00

44 8.431

भारत का राजपत्र दिसम्बर 4, 2010/ अग्रहायण 13 , 1932

[ भाग 11 - खण्ड 3 ( ii ).

2 1

400/9 4) Kuvakkapatti ( Contd)

400/10

321

322/ 1A2

322/ 1A3

322/ 1A4

322/ 1A5

322/ 1B

322/ 1A7

322/2

323/2

249

5) Nathapatti

247 / 1A

247 / 1C

247/2A

247 /2C

247 /2D

237

236/3A

235/1

235/2

228/1

225 / 2B

228/2

227/1

227/2

226/1

228/5

226/2

229 /3A

226/3

226/4

229 /3D

229/3C

229 /3B

80 00

98 00

37 00

49 00

18 00

67 00

49 00

89 00

26 00

10 00

Road in Survey No. 217

216/ 1C

216 / 1D

216/2B

216 / 2C

216/2D

00 8432

THE GAZETTE OF IFNDIA : DECEMBER 4 , 2010 / AGRALIA YANA 15 , 1932

2 5) Nathapatti ( Contd )

205

172/ 2F

172 / 2E

Part 11 See. Siin !

5 00

05 00

96 00

172/ 2G1

172/3

173 / 1A

173/ 1B

173 / 1E

173 / 1D

173 / 1F

173 / JH

173/11

177 / 1C

177/ 1A 00

17 00

98 00

99 00

46 00

55 00

65 00

91 00

55 00

177/ 1B1

175/18

175/3

176/2

176:6

176/3

176/4

1705

179 / 1B

9/ 2A

179/2B

180/ 1A

180/ 1B

180 /2A

181 / 1B

181/2B

181 / 2A

181 / 2C

180/ 2B

182/1

182/3A

182/4

182/3B

182/6

83/7

184/ 1A 00

84 00

24 00

42 00

16 00

(07

५६

86 8433 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : दिसम्बर 4 , 2010/ अग्रहायण 13 , 1932

184/ 1B

5) Nathapatti (Contd)

184/2A

184/2B

184/2C

185

186

188/3

188/4B

147/1

147/3A2

189/ 1B2

189/7

189/ 1B4A

189/2

189/3

189 / 1B3C

[ F. No. L -14014/95/2010-GP] SNEH P. MADAN , Under Secy.

नई दिल्ली , 3 दिसम्बर , 2010

का. आ. 2965. - भारत सरकार को लोकहित में यह आवश्यक प्रतीत होता है कि तमिलनाडु में तिरूतन्नी के पास विजयवाडा-नैल्लोर-चैन्नई पाइपलाइन के टर्मिनल प्वाइंट से देश के विभिन्न हिस्सों में उपभोक्ताओं तक प्राकृतिक गैस के परिवहन के लिए मैसर्स रिलोजिसटिक्स इन्फ्रास्ट्रक्चर लिमिटेड द्वारा चैन्नई- टयूटीकोरिन पाइपलाइन बिछाई जानी चाहिए ;

और, भारत सरकार को उक्त पाइपलाइन विछाने के प्रयोजन के लिए यह आवश्यक प्रतीत होता है कि उस भूमि में , जिसके भीतर उक्त पाइपलाइन विछाई जाने का प्रस्ताव है और जो इस अधिसूचना से उपाबद्ध अनुसूची में वर्णित है, उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन किया जाए;

अतः, अव, भारत सरकार, पेट्रोलियम और खनिज पाइपलाइन ( भूमि में उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन ) अधिनियम, 1962 (1962का 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 ;

कोई व्यक्ति, जो उक्त अनुसूची में वर्णित भूमि में हितवद्ध है, उस तारीख से जिसको उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 3 की उपधारा ( 1 ) के अधीन जारी की गई अधिसूचना की प्रतियां साधारण जनता को उपलब्ध करा दी जाती हैं, इक्कीस दिन के भीतर भूमि के नीचे पाइपलाइन विछाई जाने के लिए उपयोग के अधिकार के अर्जन के संबंध में श्री एस . राजामनिक्कम, सक्षम प्राधिकारी, रिलोजिसटिक्स इन्फ्रास्ट्रक्चर लिमिटेड, न . 9डी/ 6डी, रामकृष्णपुरम , पील्लैयार कोवील के सामने , करूर 639001 , तमिलनाडु राज्य को लिखित रूप में आक्षेप भेज सकेगा ।

4548 GI/10-25 8434

THE GAZETTE OF IFNDIA : DECEMBER 4 , 2010 / AGRAHΛΥΑΝΑ 13 , 1932

अनुसूची तालुक: एट्टायपुरम

[ Part II Sec. 3 ( ii ) ]

जिला: थूथुकुडि

गाँव का नाम

सर्वे सं / सब डिविजन सं .

87/1

1 ) अरूणाचलपुरम

87/3

87/4

राज्य: तमिलनाडु

आर- ओ - यू- अर्जित करने के लिए क्षेत्रफल

एयर सिएयर हेक्टेयर

5 00

90 00

94/1 ए वी

94/ 2ए

94/ 2वी

03 00

94/1वी

27 00

94/1सी

41 00

94/3वी

20 00

94/ 2मी 1

94/ 2सी 2

94/4

00 00

28 00

94/5ए

94/6

84 00

94/5वी

94/7

00 08

61 00

31 00

सर्वे न . 95/1 में नाला

98/1

98/2

98/4

107

96 00

76 00

91 00

85 00

66 00 43

40 00

108/1 ए

108/1 वी

64 00

108/1 सी

109

50 00

110/4सी

10 00 00

110/3 ए

110/3वी

110/2

00 07

86 00

111/ 2 ए

111/ 2वी

56 00

111/ 2सी

111/3

52 00 02

111/1सी

111/4

22 8435

भारत का राजपत्र : दिसम्बर 4, 2010/अग्रहायण 13 , 1932

[ भाग 11- खण्ड 3 (ii ) ]

2 1

112/1 1 ) अरूणाचलपुरम (निरंतर)

112/2

112/3

112/4

112/5

112/6

113

सर्वे न . 51 में रास्ता

114/1 ए

सर्वे न . 49 में रास्ता

79/1

2) वीरप्पट्टि

80/1

80/2

80/3

80/4

80/ 5ए

80/6

90/ 1 ए

90/1बी

90/3

90/4

90/5

89/1

89/2

89/3

88/1

88/ 2ए

88/2बी

94/1

95/3

94/5

95/4

94/6

95/7

644

3 ) एट्टायपुरम

645

651

652

00 8436

THE GAZETTE OF IFNDIA : DECEMBER 4 , 2010 / AGRAHAYANA 13 , 1932

700

3) एट्टायपुरम (निरंतर)

[ Part 11 Sec. 3 ( ii ) ] 3

5 00

11 00

सर्वे न . 152 में रास्ता

170

171

632

633

4 ) रामनूत्तु

6/1

16/1

16/2

16/3

18/1

18/2

17/1

17/2

18/4

25/2

24/2

48 00

28 01

61 00

07 04

32 00

12 03

25 00

98 00

93 00

11 00

60 00

10 00

08 00

37 00

28 00

58 00

23/ 2 ए 1

23 / 2 ए 2

23/बी

28 00

23/ 2सी

43/1

43/3

44/3

44/2

42/1

41/1

41/4

41/2

40/3

70 00

26 00

58 00

19 00

57 00 00

14 00

16 00

49 00

35 00

27 00

14 00

42 00

सर्वे न . 37 में नाला

55/4

69 00

सर्वे न . 56 में नाला

62/3

32 00

76 00

29 भारत का राजपत्र दिसम्बर 4 , 2010/ अग्रहायण 13 , 1932

[ भाग ।। - खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

2 1

4) रामनूत्तु (निरंतर)

सर्वे न . 65 में गस्ता

सर्वे न . 2 में रास्ता 5 ) नक्कलाकट्टाय

सर्वे न . 158 में नाला

160

161

183/1 6 ) मेल इराल

185/1

185/3

185/4

186/2

186/1

201/1

226/2

227/1

227/4

229/1

229/2

229/ 3 ए

229/3बी

229/4वी

229/5

232/ 3ए

232/3बी

232/5 ए

232/ 5बी

234

233/2

255

138/5 7 ) कील इराल

138/4

138/7

137/3

137/6

136

133/1सी

8437

01 00

88 00

13 00 19

10 00

46 00

51 00

57 00

75 00

57 00

53 00

00 8438

THE GAZETTE OF IFNDIA : DECEMBER 4 , 2010/ AGRAHAYANA 13 , 1932

2 7) कील इराल (निरंतर)

Sec . 3 ( ii ) |

Part II

133/2

115/1

43 00

116/1

116/2

115/3

114/3

113/1

22 00

113/ 3ए

113/3वी

19 00

सर्वे न . 113/2 में रास्ता

112/4

112/5

163

69 00

164/1

164/2

सर्वे न . 92 में रास्ता

8 ) मन्जनायक्कनपट्टि

27 00

49 00

07 00

43 00

36 00

45 00

92 00

85 00

सर्वे न . 243 में रास्ता

244

251

249

250

202

201

203

204

198

66 00

21 00

60 00

51 00

38 00

40 00

10 00 69

66 00

89 00

197/4

१ ) इट्टिलप्पानायक्कनपट्टि

98 00

94 00

25 00

88 00 52

08 00

67 8439

भारत का राजपत्र दिसम्बर 4, 2010/ अग्रहायण 13 , 1932

[ भाग II - खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

2 1

9 ) इट्टिलप्पानायक्कनपट्टि (निरंतर)

सर्वे न . 59 में नाला

204

205

224/1

224/2

224/6

224/3

224/5

223

225/4

225/ 6ए

225/2

225/ 6वी

226/4

226/5

226/7

221

220

217

सर्वे न . 218 में रास्ता

242

294/ 5ए

294/5बी

294/7

294/6

292

326/10

326/11

326/12

327/1

सर्वे न . 328 में नाला

सर्वे न . 329 में नाला

336

334/3

5 3

96 00

69 00

26 00

16 00

98 00

96 00

45 00

23 00

95 00

21 00

89 00

39 00

65 00

23 00

00 8440

THE GAZETTE OF IFNDIA : DECEMBER 4 , 2010 / AGRAHΛΥΑΝΑ 13 , 1932

2 1

Sec . 3 ( ii )|

[Part II

335/1

9 ) इट्टिलप्पानायक्कनपट्टि (निरंतर)

334/4

18 00

335/3

26 00

सर्वे न . 335/6 में रास्ता

135/2

10 ) चोलापुरम

135/3

22 00

135/4

134/1

19 00

134/ 2वी

134/4वी

17 00

134/4ए

29 00

सर्वे न . 134/3 में रास्ता

133

34 00

130/5बी

19 00

130/ 5ए

129/1 ए

128/2

41 00

सर्वे न . 127/1 में रास्ता

127/2

01 00

127/3

127/4

127/6

00 02

127/8

127/9

127/12

127/13

127/11

86 00

126/3

06 00

126/2

47 00

126/4

120

118/2

118/1

117/1

73 00

83 00

59 00

सर्वे न . 115 में नाला

114

113

63 00

65 00

18 00

सर्वे न . 217 में नाला

11 ) कन्नक्कट्टाय

74 00

सर्वे न . 176 में नाला

95 भारत का राजपत्र : दिसम्बर 4, 2010/अग्रहायण 13 , 1932

भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

178

11) कन्नक्कट्टाय (निरंतर)

179/2

179/5

179/3

179/4

181/1

180/8

180/9

181 / 2ए

148/6

148/7

182

146/9

146/6

146/8

146/7

146/5

146/4

146/10

सर्वे न . 144/4 में नाला

144/5

125/1

125/2

124

125/3

125/4

125/5

123

सर्वे न . 121/1 में नाला

122/1

121/2

122/2

228

229

231/6

231/7

231/8

238/3

5 3

84 00 04

66 00 13

64 00 08

00 00

23 00

13 00

78 00

61 00

31 00

19 00 06

27 00

32 00

25 00 09

00 02

16 00

78 00 32

20 00

28 00

26 00

84 00

39 00

55 00

सर्वे न . 238/4 में रास्ता

4548 GI /10-26 8442

THE GAZETTE OF IFNDIA : DECEMBER 4 , 2010 / AGRAHAYANA 13. 1932

2 11 )

[Part II Sec . 3 ) 3

233/1

कन्नक्कट्टाय (निरंतर)

238/6

233/2

96 00

सर्वे न . 237 में नाला

236/1

236/3

61 00

सर्वे न . 284/1 में रास्ता

284/2

284/3

275/3

275/4

275/5

80 00

सर्वे न . 285 में नाला

273/1

89 00

सर्वे न . 274 में नाला

296/1

296/2

00 49

10 00

सर्वे न . 297 में नाला

305/1

305/2

305/3

304

75 00

303/1

88 00

सर्वे न . 341 में रास्ता

79 00

सर्वे न . 342 में रास्ता

338/1

338/2

344/1

338/3

345/1

337

30 00

33 00

13 00

346/1

346/2

348/ 2 ए

02 00

347/ 1 ए

347/1बी

94 00

347/1सी

347/2

347/4

16 00

85 निरंतर ... 11 8-1-13

भारत का राजपत्र दिसम्बर 4 , 2010/ अग्रहायण 13,1932

[ भाग 1 ] - खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

2 1

287/1 12) एप्पोदुम्वेन्रान

287/2

289/1

289/2

290/1 वी

290/3

290/1 सी

290/4

291/2

291/3

293/1

293/2

293/3

293/4

294/1

294/3

295/1

295/2

295/3

85 00

97 00

32 00

10 00

52 00

74 00

37 00

57 00

04 00

राज्य: तमिलनाडु

जिला:थूथुकुडि

तालुक: ओट्टाप्पिडारम

186

1 ) कुमारा एट्टायपुरम

190

172

171

205/ 2 ए

205/ 2वी

205/5

205/ 6ए

205/ 6वी

226/ 2 ए

226/ 2वी

226/3

226/8

226/9

225

सर्वे न . 227 में नाला

228/3

229/2

229/3 00

65 00

55 00 59

14 00

67 00

87 00

86 00

56 00

29 00

72 00

63 00

93 00

सर्वे न . 229/4 में नाला

8-444

THE GAZETTE OF IFNDIA : DECEMBER 4 , 2010 / AGRAHAYANA 13 , 1932

Part 11 See Sin 3

230/2

1 ) कुमारा एट्टायपुरम (निरंतर)

232/1

242/1

232/2

242/ 3ए

239/1

239/2

240

54 00

सर्वे न . 238 में नाला

237

10 00

278/3

236

87 00

278/4ए

278/4वी

2 ) ओट्टाप्पिडाराम

25/5

24/1

24/3

95 00

66 00

44 00

24/4ए

24/5

83 00

24/4वी

23/8ए

23/9

27 00

23/10

23/5

22/3 ए

43 00

78 00

22/3वी

21/8वी

21/6

21/11

21/12

21/ 7वी

20/1 वी

20/1सी

20/ 6гг

20/ 2 ए

20/ 2वी

20/5

20/9

20/3

36 00

73 00

39 00

51 00

71 00

13 00

21 00

65 00

19 00

97 00

06 00

23 00

01 00

24 8.145

भारत का राजपत्र दिसम्बर 4, 2010/ अग्रहायण 13. 1932

नग । खण्ड ( ii ) }

2 1

20/8

2) ओट्टाप्पिडाराम (निरंतर)

20/11

20/10

19सी

19ए/ 1 ए

19ए/1वी

सर्वे न . 815 में रास्ता

19/ 1 ए

85/1 ए

85/1वी

85/11

85/ 5ए

85/2

85/3सी

84/1 ए

85/8

84/2

84/3

85/9

85/10

85/4वी

42/ 2ई

42/ 2एफ

43/1 एफ

43/15

43/1जी

43/5

43/9

44/2वी

44/6

65/4वी

69/6ए

69/7

69/ 6वी

69/4ए

69/2

69/1

68/60

5 3

31 00

56 00

04 00

73 00

96 00

12 00

58 00

13 00

88 00

79 00

00 8446

THE GAZETTE OF IFNDIA : DECEMBER 4, 2010 / AGRAHAYANA 13 , 1932

2 2) ओट्टाप्पिडाराम (निरंतर)

Part II Sec . Sui 3

68/1 ए

68/2

59 00

68/3ए

68/3वी

68/3डी

68/4ए

285/4

285/5ए

285/5वी

275/ 2ए

284/ 1 ए1

284/ 1 ए 2

275/ 2वी

275/ 2डी

273/1

00 49

65 00

252/1वी

252/ 2 ए

252/ 2वी

252/ 2सी

252/4ए

252/4वी

253/8

34 00

253/1 ए

253/1 वी

253/ 2ए

253/ 2वी

254/ 1 ए

84 00

254/1सी

254/1वी

254/ 1 डी

255/ 8 ए

255/ 8वी

255/3

255/4वी

255/5

257/2

257/3

257/4 वी

258 /1 ए

32 00

97 00

31 00

86 00

62 00

54 00

85 00

81 00

42 00

97 00

65 [ भाग !! - खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : दिसम्बर 4 , 2010/अग्रहायण 13 , 1932 =

2 1

258/1 बी 2) ओट्टाप्पिडाराम (निरंतर)

258/ 2 ए

258/ 2बी

258/ 2सी

258/ 3ए

258/3बी

258/3सी

261/1

239

262/4सी

263/4

263/2

150/1 3 ) टेरकु विरपनडियापुर

150/2

150/3

151/2

152/ 2 ए

सर्वे न . 203/1 में नाला

112

203/2

204/1

204/2

205/1

209/2

209/3

209/4

212/1

212/3

212/5

213

264/2

8447

51 00

80 00

18 00

99 00

28 00

51 00

58 00

सर्वे न . 255/1 में नाला

सर्वे न . 256/ 3 ए में नाला

256/2

256/3वी

256/4

254/ 2 ए

254/ 2वी

254/3

30 00

00 Sec. 3 ( ii ) !

Part II

THE GAZETTE OF IFNDIA : DECEMBER 4 , 2010 / AGRAHAYANA 13 , 1932

8448

2 1

09 00

सर्वे न . 252 में नाला

3 ) टेरकु विरपनडियापुर (निरंतर)

99 00

249/1

79 00

249/2

249/3

249/4

56 00

249/5

231/2

234/1

234/2

235/1

92 00

240/3

239/2

239/1

238/1 बी

238/2

237

212/2

250

233

जिला:थूथुकुडि तालुक थूथुक्रुडि

2.7 00

राज्य: तमिलनाडु

41 00 06

सर्वे न . 128 में नाला

1) मुत्तुस्वामिपुरम

89 00

सर्वे न . 131 में नाला

129

51 00 03

130/1

130/3

85 00

130/4ए

130/4वी

59 00

130/4सी

29 00

135/1 बी

99 00

135/ 1 ए2

134/1

2) अय्यानुडायप्पु

94 00

10 00

71 00

सर्वे न . 99 में नाला

32 00

100/3

49 00

100/4

100/5

31 00

100/6

93 00

95/ 2ए

8.1.19

भारत का राजपत्र : दिसम्बर 4, 2010/अग्रहायण 13 , 1932

[ भाग ।। - खण्ड 3 ( ii) .]

2 1

95/ 2वी 2) अय्यानुडायप्पु (निरंतर )

94/ 1ए

94/1बी

87/1

87/3

87/4

87/6

87/7

89/1

89/2

89/4

115

सर्वे न . 114 में नाला

सर्वे न . 117 में नाला

113/2वी

112

सर्वे न . 111 में नाला

132

131

146

149

150

148

3 ) कोरमपल्लम

55 00

10 00

52 00

41 00

82 00

00 06

01 00

82 00

0.6

33 00 06

62 00 06

27 00

04 00

27 00

55 00

सर्वे न . 123/1 ए में रास्ता

123/2

123/1वी

120/1 बी

95/1

95/2

94/ 2सी

94/1 अ1ए

94/1 ए1वी

94/ 1ए3

94/1 ए 2बी

94/1 बी 5

94/ 1 बी1 4548GI/10-27

96 00

54 00 36

91 00

55 00

00 09

75 00

00 8450

THE GAZETTE OF IFNDIA : DECEMBER 4 , 2010 / AGRAHAYANA 13 , 1932

Sec . 3 ( ii ) |

Part II 1

94/1वी4

3 ) कोरमपल्लम (निरंतर)

93/ 2 ए 1 एफ

93/ 2 ए 2

93/ 2 ए 1 जी

93/ 2 ए 1 सी

93/ 2 ए 1 डी

93/ 2 ए1 ई

93/ 2सी

[फा सं. एल. - 14014 / 99 / 2010- जी.पी. ] स्नेह प्रभा मदान , अवर सचिव

New Delhi , the 3rd December , 2010

S. O. 2965.- Whereas it appears to Government of India that it is necessary in public interest thatfor transportation of natural gas from terminal point of Vijayawada - Nellore – Chennai pipeline near Tiruttani in TamilNadu to consumers in various parts of the country , Chennai - Tuticorin pipeline should be laid by M / s Relogistics Infrastructure Limited;

Now , therefore , in exercise of the powers conferred by sub - section ( 1 ) of Section 3 of the Petroleum and Minerals Pipelines ( Acquisition of Right of User in Land ) Act , 1962 ( 50 of 1962 ) , Government of India 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 under sub - section (1 ) of Section 3 of the said Act , are made available to the general public , object in writing to the acquisition of the Right of User therein for laying the pipeline under the land to Shri S.Rajamanickam , Competent Authority, Relogistics Infrastructure Limited, No. 9D/ 6D Ramakrishnapuram , Opp. Pillayar Kovil , Karur - 639 001 , Tamil Nadu State .

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

भारत का राजपत्र दिसम्बर 4, 2010 / अग्रहायण 13 , 1932

8451

Schedule

State: Tamil Nadu

District : Thoothukudi

Taluk : Ettaiyapuram

Area to be acquired for

Survey No./Sub-Division

Village

2 1

87/1

1 ) Arunachalapuram

87/3

87/4

94/ 1AB

94/2A

94/2B

94/ 1B

94/ 1C

94/3B

94/2C1

94/2C2

94/4

94/5A

94/6

94/5B

94/7

C-Are Hec

Are

5 3

90 00

56 00

03 00

27 00

41 00

20 00

28 00

84 00

61 00

Nala in Survey No. 95/1

98/1

98/2

98/4

107

108 / 1A

108/ 1B

108/ 1C

109

110/ 4C

110/3A

110/3B

110/2

111 / 2A

111 /2B

111 /2C

111/3

111 / IC

111/4 00

91 00

85 00

66 00

50 00

26 00

10 00

96 00

22 00

09 8452

THE GAZETTE OF IFNDIA : DECEMBER 4 , 2010 / AGRAIHAYΑΝΑ 13 , 1932

2 1 ) Arunachalapuram ( Contd )

112/1

112/2

112/3

112/4

112/5

112/6

113

Sec . 3 (ii ) |

[Part II

5 00

62 00

17 00

32 00

10 00

20 00

59 00

97 00

Road in Survey No. 51

114/ 1A

38 00

09 00

Road in Survey No. 49

79/1

2) Virappatti

80/1

80/2

80/3

80/4

80/5A

80/6

90/ 1A

90/ 1B

90/3

90/4

90/5

89/1

89/2

89/3

88/1

88 / 2A

88 / 2B

94/1

95/3

94/5

95/4

94/6

95/7

644

3 ) Ettaiyapuram

645

651

652

77 00

07 00

10 00

48 00

10 00

72 00

50 भारत का राजपत्र : दिसम्बर 4 , 2010 /अग्रहायण 13 , 1932 =

[ भाग II - खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

2 1

700

3 ) Ettaiyapuram ( Contd)

8453

48 00

Road in Survey No. 152

170

171

632

633

4) Ramanuttu

6/1

16/1

16/2

16/3

18/1

18/2

17/1

17/2

18/4

25/2

24/2

23 / 2A1

23/ 2A2

23/B

23 /2C

43/1

43/3

44/3

44/2

42/1

41/1

41/4

41/2

40/3

11 00

58 00

57 00

Nala in Survey No. 37

55/4

52 00

Nala in Survey No. 56

62/3

00 8454

THE GAZETTE OF IFNDIA : DECEMBER 4 , 2010 / AGRAHAYANA 13 , 1932

2 4) Ramanuttu (Contd)

Part If Sec . 3 ( ii ) | 3

5 00

62 00

Road in Survey No. 65

5) Nakkalakattai

01 00

53 00

Road in Survey No. 2

61 00

92 00

Nala in Survey No. 158

160

161

6) Mel Iral

183/1

185/1

185/3

185/4

186/2

186/1

201/1

226/2

227/1

227/4

229/1

229/2

229/ 3A

229/3B

229/4B

229/5

232/ 3A

232/ 3B

232/ 5A

232/5B

234

233/2

255

7) Kil Iral

138/5

138/4

138/7

137/3

137/6

136

133 / 1C 00

91 00

93 00

67 00

97 00

57 00

13 00

65 00

87 00

09 00

71 00

99 00

46 00

10 00

46 00

05 00

52 00

93 00

49 00

57 00

75 00

57 00

17 दिसम्बर 4 , 2010/ अग्रहायण 13 , 1932

भारत का राजपत्र

[ भाग ।। - खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

2 1

133/2

7) Kil Iral ( Contd)

115/1

116/1

116/2

115/3

114/3

113/1

113 /3A

113/ 3B

8-155

43 00

80 00

27 00

19 00

22 00

10 00

31 00

19 00

Road in Survey No. 113/2

112/4

112/5

163

164/1

164/2

46 00

69 00

06 00

33 00

Road in Survey No. 92

07 00

36 00

45 00

92 00

85 00

Road in Survey No. 243

8) Manjanayakkanpatti

244

251

249

250

202

201

203

204

198

197/4

9 ) Ettilappanayakkanpatti

21 00

38 00

70 00

94 00

25 00

08 00

00 8456

THE GAZETTE OF IFNDIA : DECEMBER 4 , 2010 / AGRAHAYANA 13 , 1932

9) Ettilappanayakkanpatti ( Contd)

Part 11 Sec . 3 (ii ) |

5 3

72 01

05 00

10 00

Nala in Survey No. 59

204

205

224/1

224/2

224/6

224/3

224/5

223

225/4

225 / 6A

225/2

225/ 6B

226/4

226/5

226/7

221

220

217

10 00

26 00

30 00

16 00

14 00

12 00

32 00

96 00

10 00

45 00

23 00

95 00

21 00

07 00

89 00

90 00

Road in Survey No. 218

242

294/ 5A

294/ 5B

294/7

294/6

292

326/10

326/11

326/12

327/1 00

39 00

65 00

02 00

43 00

74 00

21 00

51 00

23 00

70 00

Nala in Survey No. 328

Nala in Survey No. 329

336

334/3 00

38 8457

भारत का राजपत्र दिसम्बर 4, 2010/अग्रहायण 13 , 1932

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

2 1

335/1 9) Ettilappanayakkanpatti ( Contd )

334/4

335/3

5 3

11 00

Road in Survey No. 335/6

135/2 10) Cholapuram

135/3

135/4

134/1

134/2B

134/4B

134/4A

01 00

22 00

01 00

19 00

86 00

17 00

29 00

00 00

Road in Survey No. 134/3

133

130/5B

130/5A

129/ 1A

128/2

19 00

55 00

41 00

62 00

Road in Survey No. 127/1

127/2

127/3

127/4

127/6

127/8

127/9

127/12

127/13

127/11

126/3

126/2

126/4

120

118/2

118/1

117/1

99 00

54 00

22 00

44 00

33 00

86 00

72 00

73 00

Nala in Survey No.115

114

113

65 00

18 00

Nala in Survey No. 217

95 00

Nala in Survey No. 176

11 ) Kannakkattai

4548GI/10-28 8458

THE GAZETTE OF IFNDIA : DECEMBER 4 , 2010/ AGRAHAΥΑΝΑ 13 , 1932

2 11 ) Kannakkattai (Contd)

178

179/2

179/5

179/3

179/4

181/1

180/8

180/9

181 / 2A

148/6

148/7

182

146/9

146/6

146/8

146/7

146/5

146/4

146/10

Part II Sec . 3 ( i ) | 3

5 00

20 00

84 00

79 00

66 00

64 00

73 00

86 00

Nala in Survey No. 144/4

144/5

125/1

125/2

124

125/3

125/4

125/5

123

Nala in Survey No. 121/1

122/1

121/2

122/2

228

229

231/6

231/7

231/8

238/3

Road in Survey No. 238/4

55 8459

भारत का राजपत्र दिसम्बर 4 , 2010/अग्रहायण 13 , 1932

[ भाग II - खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

2 1

233/1 11) Kannakkattai (Contd)

238/6

233/2

64 00

Nala in Survey No. 237

236/1

236/3

Road in Survey No. 284/1

284/2

284/3

275/3

275/4

275/5

03 00

Nala in Survey No. 285

273/1

Nala in Survey No. 274

296/1

296/2

Nala in Survey No. 297

305/1

305/2

305/3

304

303/1

Road in Survey No. 341

Road in Survey No. 342

338/1

338/2

344/1

338/3

345/1

337

346/1

346/2

348 / 2A

347 / 1A

347/ 1B

347/ 1C

347/2

347/4

86 00

00 8460

THE GAZETTE OF IFNDIA : DECEMBER 4 , 2010 / AGRAHAΥΑΝΑ 13 , 1932

287/1 12) Eppodumvenran

287/2

289/1

289/2

290/ 1B

290/3

290/ 1C

290/4

291/2

291/3

293/1

293/2

293/3

293/4

294/1

294/3

295/1

295/2

295/3 Taluk : Ottappidaram

[ Part 11 Sec . 3 ( ii ) ] 3

5 00

85 00

30 00

97 00

32 00

44 00

63 00

10 00

43 00

68 00

62 00

10 00

52 00

96 00

74 00

60 00

37 00

57 00

District: Thoothukudi

186

1 ) Kumara Ettaiyapuram

190

172

171

205/2A

205/2B

205/5

205 / 6A

205 / 6B

226/2A

226/ 2B

226/3

226/8

226/9

225

State : Tamil Nadu

07 00

65 00

55 00

45 00

14 00

82 00

67 00

87 00

29 00

Nala in Survey No. 227

228/3

229/2

229/3

Nala in Survey No. 229/4

93 8.161

भारत का राजपत्र दिसम्बर 4 , 2010/ अग्रहायण 13. 1932

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii ).]

2 1

230/2 1 ) Kumara Ettaiyapuram ( Contd)

232/1

242/1

232/2

242 / 3A

239/1

239/2

240

Nala in Survey No. 238

237

278/3

236

278 /4A

278/4B

25/5 2) Ottappidaram

24/1

24/3

24/ 4A

24/5

24/4B

23 /8A

23/9

23/10

23/5

22/ 3A

22/ 3B

21/ 8B

21/6

21/11

21/12

21/ 7B

20/ 1B

20/ 1C

20/6A

20 / 2A

20/2B

20/5

20/9

20/3

39 00

97 00

00 8462

THE GAZETTE OF IFNDIA : DECEMBER 4 , 2010 / AGRAHΑΥΑΝΑ 13 , 1932

Sec . 3ti )

Part 11 1

5 2) Ottappidaram ( Contd)

20/8

20/11

20/10

19C

19A/ 1A

19A/ 1B

Road in Survey No. 815

19B/ 1A

85 / 1A

85/ 1B

85/11

85/ 5A

85/2

85/3C

84/ 1A

85/8

84/2

84/3

85/9

85/10

85/4B

42 / 2E

42/2F

43/ 1F

43 / 1E

43/ 1G

43/5

43/9

44/ 2B

44/6

65/4B

69/ 6A

69/7

69/ 6B

69/4A

69/2

69/1

68 / 6A

53 [ भाग II - खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : दिसम्बर 4 , 2010/ अग्रहायण 13 , 1932

2 1

68/ 1A 2) Ottappidaram ( Contd)

68/2

68/3A

68/3B

68/3D

68/4A

285/4

285 / 5A

285 / 5B

275 / 2A

284/ 1A1

284/ 1A2

275 /2B

275 /2D

273/1

252/ 1B

252/2A

252/ 2B

252/ 2C

252/4A

252/4B

253/8

253 / 1A

253/ 1B

253 / 2A

253 /2B

254/ 1A

254 / IC

254/ 1B

254/ 1D

255 /8A

255 /8B

255/3

255 / 4B

255/5

257/2

257/3

257/4B

258 / 1A

8463

59 00

83 00

29 00

68 00

80 00

82 00

65 00

63 00

34 00

38 00

29 00

52 00

78 00

68 00

93 00

32 00

76 00

62 00

85 00

81 00

65 00

11 8464

Sec . Stiin

Part - II

THE GAZETTE OF IFNDIA : DECEMBER 4 , 2010 / AGRAHAYAΝΑ 13. 1932

2 1

258/ 1B 2) Ottappidaram ( Contd)

258 /2A

258/ 2B

258 / 2C

258 /3A

258 /3B

258 /3C

261/1

239

262/4C

263/4

263/2

150/1 3 ) Terku Virapandiyapur

150/2

150/3

151/2

152/ 2A

Nala in Survey No. 203/1

112

203/2

204/1

204/2

205/1

209/2

209/3

209/4

212/1

212/3

212/5

213

264/2

Nala in Survey No. 255/1

Nala in Survey No.256 / 3A

256/2

256/3B

256/4

254/ 2A

254/ 2B

254/3

5 3

12 00

07 00

87 00

61 00

80 00

95 00

10 00

81 00

78 00

25 00

93 00

28 00

95 00

32 00

57 00

47 00

30 00

25 00

16 00

00 8-165

भारत का राजपत्र : दिसम्बर 4, 2010/अग्रहायण 13 , 1932

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

2 1

3) Terku Virapandiyapur ( Contd)

5 3

Nala in Survey No. 252

249/1

249/2

249/3

249/4

249/5

231/2

234/1

234/2

235/1

240/3

239/2

239/1

238/ 1B

238/2

237

212/2

250

233

Taluk: Thoothukudi

District: Thoothukudi 1) Muttuswamipuram

99 00

79 00

10 00

56 00

80 00

92 00

69 00

05 00

39 00

27 00

State: Tamil Nadu

Nala in Survey No. 128

Nala in Survey No. 131

129

130/1

130/3

130/4A

130/4B

130/4C

135/ 1B

135/ 1A2

134/1

2) Ayyanudaippu

55 00

45 00

59 00

29 00

94 00

27 00

10 00

Nala in Survey No. 99

100/3

100/4

100/5

100/6

95 /2A 4548 GI/10-29

32 00

78 25

49 00

14 00

93 8466

THE GAZETTE OF IFNDIA : DECEMBER 4 , 2010/ AGRALIAYANAHAYANA 13 , 1932

2 1

95/ 2B 2) Ayyanudaippu ( Contd)

94/ JA

94/ 1B

87/1

87/3

87/4

87/6

87/7

89/1

89/2

89/4

115

Nala in Survey No. 114

Nala in Survey No. 117

113/ 2B

112

[ Part II Sec . 3 ( ii ) |

5 3

33 00

32 00

10 00

41 00

82 00

13 00

33 00

15 00

06 00

93 00

01 00

82 00

84 00

Nala in Survey No. 111

132

131

146

149

150

148

3 ) Korampallam

Road in Survey No. 123 / 1A

123/2

123/ 1B

120/ 1B

95/1

95/2

94/ 2C

54 00

62 00

27 00

84 00

45 00

78 00

91 00

94/ 1A1A

94/ 1A1B

94/1A3

94/ 1A2B

94/ 1B5

94/ 1B1

94/ 1B4

93/ 2A1F

93 /2A2

93/2A1G 00

59 00

10 00

02 00

17 00

93 / 2AIC

82 00

93/ 2AID

93 / 2A1E

93 / 2C 00

32 00

44 [ F. No. L - 14014/99/2010-GP] SNEH P. MADAN , Under Secy .

8467 भारत का राजपत्र : दिसम्बर 4, 2010/अग्रहायण 13 , 1932

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 , referred the following dispute for adjudication to this Tribunal :

श्रभ एवं रोजगार मंत्रालय नई दिल्ली, 3 नवम्बर , 2010

"Whether the demand of Janta Shramik Sangh that the dependent of the workman , Sri Ram Swarup Paswan should be given appointment by North Tisra Colliery of B.C.C.L. is proper and justified ? If so , to what relief the concerned dependent is entitled and from what date ? "

का.आ. 2966.- 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 334/2000) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 3-11-2010 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल-20012/300/2000- आईआर ( सी- I ) ] डी. एस . एस. श्रीनिवास राव , डेस्क अधिकारी

MINISTRY OF LABOUR AND EMPLOYMENT New Delhi , the 3rd November , 2010

S.O. 2966. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref . No.334/2000 ) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal- cum- Labour Court , No. 1 , Dhanbad now as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of M/ s . B.C.C.L. and their workman, which was received by the Central Government on 3-11-2010 .

[No. L- 20012/300/2000- IR ( C - I ) ] D. S. S. SRINIVASA RAO , Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT

INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL NO . 1 , DHANBAD

In the matter of a reference U/ s . 10 ( 1 ) (d) (2A) of the I.D. Act.

REFERENCE NO . 334 of 2000

Parties:

Employers in relation to the management of North Tisra Colliery ofM/ s . B.C.C. Ltd.

AND

Theirworkman

PRESENT : Shri H.M. SINGH, Presiding Officer APPEARANCES :

For the Employers : Shri D. K. Verma , Advocate

For the Workman : Shri B. N. Singh , Advocate State: Jharkhand

Industry : Coal

Dated , 25-10-2010

AWARD

2. Written statement has been filed on behalf of the concerned workman stating that Ram Swarup Paswan alongwith Mira Yadav , Sushila Rabidasin , Rohan Rajwar , Behari Bhuiya , Ganesh Bhuiya , Jogesh Bhuiya , Sashu Bhuiya , Suraj Narain and Hari Narayan Singh work clay cartridge mazdoors for long continuously worth Tisra Colliery of M/ s.BCCL . The clay cartridge job is of permanent nature . Since they were not treated as workmen of North Tisra Colliery and not paid wages as per NCWA , they raised an industrial dispute , which was ultimately referred to C.GI.T. No.2 , Dhanbad, for adjudication and the Hon'ble Tribunal No.2 , Dhanbad passed an award holding that the demand of the workman of North Tisra Colliery of M/ s . BCCL that the management should treat S/Shri Ram Swarup Paswan , Mira Yadav, Sushila Rabidasin , Rohan Rajwar , Behari Bhuiya, Ganesh Bhuiya , Jogesh Bhuiya , Sadhu Bhuiya, Suraj Narain and Hari Narayan Singh clay Cartridge Mazdoors as their workman and they should bepaid Category - I wages is justified . Consequently all the above workman should be treated as the workmen of North Tisra Colliery w.e.f. 1-5-1972 and should be paid difference of Category - I wages w.e.f. 1-5-1972 . They are also entitled to all the back wages and other emoluments w.e.f. 1-5-1972 . The management did not implement the Award and challenged the Award given in Reference No.2 of 1980 in Hon'ble High Court of Judicature vide CWJC No.1134/ 1981 ( R) and Hon'ble High Court also upheld the validity of the award . Thereafter the management on 25-6-92 sent the workman , Ram Swarup Paswan to Medical Board for examination of his fitness for taking him in employment and this was done by the management partially in compliance to Award but the Modical Board declared him unfit for employment . On being modically unfit Ram Swarup Paswan applied for employment of his dependent under para 9.4.3 . of NCWA but the management did not give employment to his dependent on the pretext that the workman, Ram Swarup Paswan was not permanent workman of North Tisra Colliery and hence the employment to his dependent could not be given which is clear violation of the award . It has been submitted that the demand of Janta Shramik Sangh that the dependent of the concerned workman should be given employment by North Tisra Colliery of BCCL is proper and justifiod .

It has been prayed that the Hon'ble Tribunal be pleased to pass an award in favour of the workman.

By Order No. L - 20012/ 300 /2000 - IR ( C - I ) dated 22-11-2000 the Central Government in the Ministry of Labour has , in exercise of the powers conferred by clause (d) of sub - section ( 1 ) and sub - section ( 2A) of Section 10 of

3. Written statement has been filed on behalf of the management stating that in a reference case No.2 of 1980 8468

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 4 , 2010/ AGRAHAYANA 13 , 1932

the Hon'ble Tribunal No.2 Dhanbad passed an award for treating the concerned person as workman of the management considering him as clay cartridge mazdoor. Besides the aforesaid person some others were also included in the schedule of reference . The management implemented the award in terms of joint decision of the management in respect of such cases of clay cartridge mazdoors and according to joint decision the number of clay cartridge mazdoors were to be fixed on the basis of one thousand clay cartridges per head per shift and the number of persons were to be taken on the roll of the company for undergoing process of verification and checking their medical fitness for their engagement as Category - I mazdoors . It has been submitted that in the processes of selection of such workman and examination ofthe concerned workmen by the Medical Board , it was observed that he was medically unfit to be employed as a general mazdoor in Category - I . Therefore, he was not taken on the roll of the company.

The sponsoring union raised the present dispute for providing employment to one of his dependents as per the provisions of NCWA. It has been submitted that no right exists on the dependents of employees for their employment in a public sector undertaking and the cases of selection and recruitment of dependents are considered purely on compassionate ground keeping in view the provisions of NCWAs . It has also been submitted that Ram Swarup Paswan was never on the roll of the company and he was to be taken on the roll of the company in terms of the settlement with the various unions on the basis of medical fitness and suitability for his job . There was no stipulation anywhere that the persons who would not be provided employment on medical ground or on account of death , their dependents should be provided employment .

In the absence of any such clause either in the award or in the settlement no one can raise any demand for employment of the dependent if any person is found to be medically unfit and he is not taken on the roll of the company . The present demand of the sponsoring union is without any merit and the same is liable to be summarily rejected.

It has been prayed that the Hon'ble Tribunal be graciously pleased to pass an award holding that no relief can be granted to the dependent of Ram Swarup Paswan .

4. Both the parties have filed their respective rejoinders admitting or denying some contents of the paragraphs of each other's written statement .

5. On behalf of the concerned workman two witnesses have been produced , one is WW - 1 , Yugeshwar Yadav and other is WW - 2 , Mathura Paswan , who has proved documents , as Exts . W- 1 , W- 2 , W- 3 .

Management has produced MW- 1 , Malay Kumar Banerjee.

6. Main argument advanced on behalf of the concerned workman is that in Reference No.2 / 80 passed

[ PART II - SEC . 3 ( ii ) ] by the Tribunal No.2 , Dhanbad , the concerned workman alongwith others was ordered to be regularised so he should be regularised. The management had gone on appeal before Hon'ble High Court , Ranchi and the Hon'ble High Court upheld the award . He was sent for medical examination but he was not medically fit so he has demanded that his dependent should be given employment .

In this respect management argued that Ram Swarup Paswan , concerned workman was not on the roll of BCCL so his dependent cannot be considered under Dependents Employment Scheme . He was medically not found to be fit for appointment by the management as General Mazdoor Category - 1 . There is no employer- employee relationship between the management and the concerned workman , so his dependant cannot be given employment . In this respect the evidence of WW- 1 , Yugeshwar Yadav is very much material . He has stated in cross - examination at page 2 that Ram Swarup was declared medically unfit so he was not given employment . The award does not speak that the dependent to the concerned workman be given employment . I have got no knowledgeif the dependent is related to Ram Swarup and there is no such document . WW - 2 , Mathura Paswan , has also stated in cross - examination at page 2 that after order of regularisation all the concerned workmen were called for medical examination . In that medical examination my father was declared medically unfit . Due to this reason my father was not regularised and as he was not regularised he was not available on the roll of BCCL . I have not filed any paper to show that I am the son of my father . After the death of my father I have claimed employment from the management of BCCL. At the time of death of my father he was not on the roll of BCCL . This statement of the dependent of the deceased workman shows that there is no document that he is the son of the deceased workman . As the deceased workman , Ram Swarup Paswan , was declared unfit by Modical Board , he was regularised in the services of BCCL and was not on the roll of BCCL management so his dependent cannot be given employment under Para 9.4.3 of NCWA .

7. In view of the above facts and circumstances , I hold that the demand of Janta Shramik Sangh that the dependent of the workman , Ram Swarup Paswan should be given employment by North Tisra Colliery of M / s . BCCL is not proper and justified . Accordingly the concerned dependent is not entitled to any relief.

This is my award .

H.M. SINGH , Presiding Officer नई दिल्ली, 3 नवम्बर , 2010

का.आ. 2967.- 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 कंन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालय सं.। , धनबाद के पंचाट 8469 भारत का राजपत्र : दिसम्बर 4, 2010/अग्रहायण 13 , 1932

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

( संदर्भ संख्या 84/94 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 3-11-2010 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल-20012/314/93- आईआर ( सी-1 ) ] डी. एस. एस. श्रीनिवास राव , डेस्क अधिकारी

New Delhi , the 3rd November , 2010

S.O. 2967.-In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No.84/ 94 ) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal/ Labour Court- No.1 , Dhanbad now as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of M/ s . B.C.C.L. and their workman , which was received by the Central Government on 3-11-2010.

[No. L - 20012/314/ 1993 - IR ( C - I ) ]

D. S. S. SRINIVASA RAO , Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

(Operation ) and Sri S.K. Gupta , Addl . General Manager , Bhowra Arca which has been alleged to have taken place attheir residential houses of both the officers . It has been stated that the two workmen concerning this case namely, S / Shri Ashok singh and Ragunath Rabidas who were dismissedfrom their services have been taken back into their services except this workman . The management with malafide intention to break the unity of the Labour Union sponsored by Bihar Mines Lal Jhanda Mazdoor Union , in the colliery by dismissing this workman , who was a strong hold man of the Union . So this workman was not taken back into service , when the management has already taken the two dismissed workmen concorning this assault . Actually the concerned workman did not participate in the assault and no specific allegations have been alleged against this workman . He was innocent and never participated in the assault , rather he has been falsely implicated by the management only for an intention to break the unity of the aforesaid Union which was spreading in the colliery like anything .

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNALNO . 1 AT DHANBAD

In the matter of a reference U / S . 10 ( 1 ) ( d) ( 2A) of the I.D. Act .

It has been prayed that this Hon'ble Tribunal be pleased to pass an award holding the dismissal of the concerned workman is not justified and he is entitled to reinstatement with full back wages and other benefits .

Reference No. 84 of 1994

Parties:

Employers in relation to the management of M/ s . B.C.C. Ltd. Bhowra Area No. XI of M/ s . B.C.C.L. AND Their workman

PRESENT: Shri H.M. SINGH , Presiding Officer

APPEARANCES

Forthe Employers : Shri D. K. Verma , Advocate

For the Workman : None

State : Jharkhand

Industry : Coal

Dated , the 27th October, 2010

AWARD

By Order No. L - 20012/ 314/ 93 - IR ( C - I ) dated 8-4-94 the Central Government in the Ministry of Labour has , in exercise of the powers conferred by clause (d ) of sub - section ( 1 ) and sub - section ( 2A) of Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 , referred the following dispute for adjudication to this Tribunal :

"Whether the action of the management of M / s BCCL Bhowra Area No.XI in dismissing workman Shri Chandrabhan Yadav w.e.f. 23-9-92 is justified? If not , what relief is the concerned workman entitled to ? יי

3. Management has filed written statement stating that on 20-9-92 a mob of about 200 persons armed with iron rods , lathis and some deadly weapons proceeded towards the residence of Shri P.K. Roy, General Manager of Bhowra Area and committed various acts of violence at the residence of Shri P. K. Roy at about 9 A. M. The violent mob was led by S / Shri After Khan and Sunil Singh , outsiders , Shri Ashok kumar Singh a workman of Jeenagora Colliety of Lodna Area and S / Shri Raghunath Rabidas , Sudhir Chandra Yadav and the concerned workman , Shri Chandra Bhan Yadav . The mob forcibly entored into the residence of Shri P. K. Roy who was holding discussion relating to official matters with S/ Shri S. K. Chaudhury , Deputy Chief Mining Engineer . Bhowra South Colliery. R. N. Chakravarty, Agent , Bhowra OCP, B. K. Tripathy , Senior ACM and R. A. Mishra Manager 48 OCP and committed criminal trespass and indulged in riotous and disorderly behaviour and physically assaulted Shri P. K. Roy, torne out his Bush Shirt and snatched over Rs.300 from his pocket . The concerned actively participated in the violent activities and abated the misconducts committed by others which ultimatelly resulted in serious injury to shri P. K. Roy on his person . The mob caused serious damage to the properties of Shri P. K. Roy as well as of the Company available in the bungalow within its compound and threatened to kill one 5 year old boy , the nephew of Shri P. K. Roy , who happened to be present at the place and was caught hold of by some persons of the mob . thereafter the mob went to the residence of Shri S. K. Gupta , Additional General Manager of Bhowra Area and caused various acts of violence and damaged on his person and property . The mob being instigated by the concerned workman and others raised slogans like " Officers Saloko 2. Written statement has been filed on behalf of the concerned workman stating that he was Dumper Orerator in Bhowra Area and was dismissed from his service o .. 23-9-93 on the change of assault on the General Manager 8470

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 4, 2010 /AGRAHAYANA 13 , 1932

[PART II -SEC. 3 ( ii ) ]

was the leader of the Union . Ido not know that the dismissed workman , Raghunath Rabidas , Ashok Singh have beentaken back in the service by the management . MW- 3 , P.K. Roy stated in cross - examination that Ashok Singh and Raghunath Rabidas had taken part in the incident but I do not know whether they have been taken in services of the management . The concerncal workman has stated clearly that Ashok Singh and Raghunath Rabidas , who were dismissal from their services , have been taken back into their service . This statement of the management's witness shows that they did not state true fact before this Tribunal . It only shows that they avoided to say that Raghunath Rabidas and Ashok Singh were taken into services by the management .

Maro , Jaladoo " and pelted stones , brake open the gate and entered into the residence of Sri Gupta and dragged him from his hide out in the bungalow and caused injuries on his person holding threat to kill him on the spot . The Police rushed to the spot on receiving telephonic message and rescued Shri Gupta as the mob flod away observing the Police approaching the place of occurrence . The management decided to take immediate action against the concerned workman and accordingly he was dismissed from his service by letter dated 22-9-92 in accordance with the provisions of Certified Standing Orders on the basis of approval of the CMD of the Company, who granted for his summary dismissal . It is submitted that the other persons who took part in similar activities were also dismissed from their services on account of commission of serious misconducts by them. It has been submitted that the action of the management in dismissing the concerned workmen from his service was legal , bonafide and justified and he is not entitled to any relief.

It has been prayed that the Hon'ble Tribunal be pleased to answer the reference in favour of the management .

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 concerned workman examined himself as WW - 1 , The management has examined MW - 1 , S. K. Gupta , MW - 2 , Sajal Kumar Roy Chaudhary , and MW - 3 , promod KumarRoy.

The Management has filed documents marked as Exts.M - 1 , M - 2 , M - 3 , M - 3 / 1 , M3 / 2 , M3 / 3 . M - 3/4 and ' X' , ' X/ 1 ' and ' M/ 2 ' for identification .

6. The argument advanced on behalf of the concerned workman is that other employees , namely, Ashok singh , Sudhir Yadav and Raghunath Rahbidas , who were dismissed on same changes from the service by the management have been taken into service but he was not taken into service . It was also argued that he was Branch President of Lal Jhanda Union , so he was victimised by the management as the initiation of rival union . It has also been argued that he was residing at my residence at Jamadoba about 4 K.M. away from place of incident and he was not present at the time of incident . It has also been argued that P. K. Roy , MW- 3 has stated nothing against the concerned workman about injury which has been caused on him .

7. Regarding the fact whether the other concerned workmen Ashok Singh and Raghunath Rabidas who were dismissed from their services , have been taken back into their services has been accepted by the management . This fact all the management's witnesses including S. K. Gupta , MW- 1 has stated that I cannot say that Ashok Singh has been taken into service back after the alleged occurrence . I cannot say whether the workman , Chandrabhan Yadav had written petition to G. M. for getting enquiry the incident dated 20-9-92 . MW- 2 , S. K. Roy Chaudhary stated in cross - examination that I do not know that Chandrabhan

8. In the present case there is no enquiry . The concerned workman was dismissed under clause 28 of the Standing Orders of the Company which has been utilised by the C.M.D. But order passed as per Ext.M - 1 shows that it was passed by the General manager , G. S. Gill . In this Ext.M- 1 it has been written C.M.D. , BCCL, Koyla Bhawan and itwas simply signed . As per Ext.M - 2 order of summarily dismissal from service by General Manager , Sri G. S. Gill and this approval of dismissal was also moved on 22-9-92 . There is overwriting in Ext.M - 2 which shows that " 23 " was cut down and " 22 " was written . This shows manipulation onwhich date order has been passed for removal of service to the concerned workman . The application for enquiry of the concerned workman which has been given just after incident and received by the management on 29-9-92 which has been marked as ' X ' for identification . That was not done . This application of the concerned workman shows its malafide intention about enquiry . MW - 1 , S. K. Gupta management's witness stated that I cannot say as to whether any domestic enquiry was held or not . MW - 2 , S. K. Roy Choudhary has stated in cross - examination that I cannot say that the statement was taken by the police in the criminal case . MW- 3 , P. K. Roy stated in cross- examination that I do not know whether any reasonable apportunity was given to the concerned workman to explain the allegation before his dismissal . It shows that no reasonable opportunity was given to the concerned workman . F.I.R shows that there is no direct relation with the incident in any herm caused by the concerned workman to the management . The order has been filed by the concerned workman regarding CWJC No. 723 of 2000 ( R) of Jharkhand High Court . The order for reinstatement of services on the ground that in criminal case F.I.R. was lodgal and other workmen had been taken into service , but the concerned workman who was even not named in the F.I.R. was not reinstated. The workman filed writ application before Hon'ble Jharkhand High Court and the Hon'ble Court held that the petitioner/workman is entitled to be reinstated in service with effect from the date when the other workman have been reinstated in service on the same terms and conditions . In the present case the others have been taken into service against whom F.I.R. has been lodged . So in this circumstances this concerned workmen should also be taken into service by the management .

8471 भारत का राजपत्र : दिसम्बर 4, 2010/अग्रहायण 13 , 1932

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

संख्या 3/2007 ) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 3-11-2010 को प्राप्त हुआ था।

[सं. एल-20012/109/2006- आईआर ( सी- I ) ] डी. एस. एस. श्रीनिवास राव , डेस्क अधिकारी

New Delhi , the 3rd November , 2010 The management referred AIR 1996 Supreme Court 1065 in which Hon'ble Supreme Court laid down that Arts . 14, 21 & 15 of the Constitution will not apply in the Oil Corporation involved in theft of Oil and termination of service without holding enquiry subject to result of criminal trial . In the present case no domestic enquiry was conducted but the concerned workman was dismissed from services straightway .

S.O. 2968. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award ( Ref. No.3 / 2007) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal- cum- Labour Court- No.1 , Dhanbad now as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of M/ s . Tata Steel Ltd. and their workman , which was received by the Central Government on3-11-2010.

[No. L- 20012/ 109 / 2006 - IR ( C - I ) ] D. S. S. SRINIVASA RAO , Desk Officer ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT

INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNALNO . 1 AT DHANBAD

In the matter of a reference U / s . 10 ( 1 ) (2A) of the I.D. Act . REFERENCE NO . 3 of 2007

Parties:

Employers in relation to the management of M/ s . Tata Steel Limited .

9. Another argument advanced on behalf of the concerned workman is that for major penalty as per S.O. 27.2 termination must have been given but the management violated its own Standing Order No.27.2 . In this respect the management's counsel argued that the management have dismissed the concerned workman under S.O. No.28 . In this respect the workman's representative argued that such S.O. No.28 has been deleted from the Certified Standing Orders as per order of the Appellate Authority . The management or the concerned workman have not filed any copy of the Certified Standing Orders . Moreover the Chairman- cum- Managing Director has not given any delegation of power under S.O. No.28 to the General Manager for using against the concerned workman . So the order passed by the management under S.O. No.28 and 27.2 is not legal. Moreover , the F.I.R. which has been lodged by the management against the concerned workmen in which he was acquitted in the Criminal Case vide order dated 21-10-2003 in GR. Case No.3630 /92 , T.S.No.598/93 .

AND Their workmen

PRESENT: Shri H.M. SINGH, Presiding Officer

APPEARANCES :

Forthe Employers : Shri D. K. Verma , Advocate

Forthe Workman : Shri Biswanath Chatterjee . Concerned workman .

10. Considering the above facts and circumstances I hold that since the other two workmen concerning this case , namely Ashok Singh and Raghunath Rabidas , who were dismissed from their services , have been reinstated in their services , the concerned workmen , Chandrabhan Yadav is entitled for reinstatement because there is no direct relation with the incident or any harm caused by the concerned workman to the management .

Industry: Coal

State: Jharkhand

11. In the result, I render the following award-

Dated, 14th October , 2010 ) AWARD ( Through Lok Adalat ) The action of the management of M/ s.BCCL , Bhowra Area No.XI in dismissing the concerned workmen , Chandrabhan Yadav w.e.f. 23-9-1992 is notjustified . Hence , the concerned workman is entitled to be reinstated in service with 50 % back wages from the date of his dismissal . The management is directed to reinstate the concerned workman in service within 30 days from the date of publication of this award.

This is my Award.

By Order No. L - 20012 / 109/ 2006 - IR ( CM - I ) dated 24-1-07 the Central Government in the Ministry of Labour has , in exercise of the powers conferred by clause ( d) of sub - section ( 1 ) and sub - section ( 2A ) of Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 , referrod the following dispute for adjudication to this Tribunal :

H.M. SINGH , Presiding Officer नई दिल्ली, 3 नवम्बर , 2010

"Whether the action of the management of TISCO in dismissing Shri Biswanath Chatterjee from service w.e.f. 21-10-98 justified & legal ? If not , to what relief is the workman entitled ? "

2. A Memorandum of Settlement has been filed before this Tribunal duly settled and signed by both the का.आ. 2968.-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में , केन्द्रीय सरकार मैसर्स टाटा स्टील लिमिटेड 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 8472

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 4 , 2010/AGRAHAYANΑ 13 , 1932 [PART II- SEC . 3 ( ii ) ]

of following terms & conditions which have been mutually agreed upon .

TERMS AND CONDITIONS parties . I have gone through the terms and conditions of the settlement and I find that the same to be fair and reasonable. Accordingly , I accept the same and pass an Award in terms and conditions mentioned in the memorandum of settlement. The memorandum of settlement shall from part of the Award .

H.M. SINGH , Presiding Officer

1. That , Sri Biswanath Chatterjee shall be employed as a Miner at Jharia Division ofTata Steel Co. Ltd. Jamadoba , the substantive post held by him at the time of his dismissal .

FORM -H

[Rule 58 of Industrial Dispute ( Central ) Rules , 1957 ]

MEMORANDUM OF SETTLEMENT

2. That , on re -employment as in terms of this settlement . Sri Biswanath Chatterjee will be entitled to receive the basic wage as per the TCWS - II the wage agreement in vogue .

Representing Management :

1. Sri S. S. Hota Chief HR/IR - Jharia Division M/ s . Tata Steel Ltd. Jamadoba , Dhanbad

3. That , the period of idleness i.e. from 22-10-1998 till the date of his resumption of duties , shall be treated as dies-non on the principle of " no work no pay " and he will not be entitled for any wages and allowances or any other benefit for the said period.

2. Sri Sumit Sharma Manager HR/IR - Central M/ s . Tata Steel Ltd. Jamadoba , Dhanbad

4. That , as matter of compassion however the intervening period stated in Para 3 above will be treated as his continuity of service for the purpose of Payment of Gratuity to him and for no other purpose .

Representing Workmen:

5. That, since the workman had been away from work for fairly long time , he will have to appear before the Melical Board at TCH , Jamadoba for ascertaining his fitness before he is allowed to resume duty.

1. Sri Biswanath Chatterjee Ex. Miner Ex . P. No. 213457 Digwadih Colliery

6. That , Sri Biswanath Chatterjee will not repeat commission of similar act in future on which he was dismissed from service .

2. Sri S. S. Zama Secretary, RCMS Digwadih Colliery Jamadoba, Dhanbad

SHORT RECITAL

7. That , the settlement will be treated as full and final in respect of all claims arising out of the industrial dispute , referred to above and no further claim will be made by the workman upon the management in this regard .

Sri Biswanath Chatterjee , Ex- P.No. 213457 was appointed as Cat- I Mazdoor w.e.f. 24-1-1981 and was subsequently dismissed from company's services w.e.f. 21-4-1995 . On the request of the union he was re- employed as a miner w.e.f. 6-12-1996 .

8. That , both parties file a petition before the Central Government Industrial Tribunal No.1 , Dhanbad in the Reference Case No.3 / 2007 for passing Award in " Terms of Settlement " .

This settlement is signed on the day 1st September , 2010 .

Sri Biswanath Chatterjee was again dismissed from company's services w.e.f. 22-10-1998 under clause 19 ( 16) ofCompany's Certified Standing Orders i.e. " Continuous absence without permission and without satisfactory cause for more than 10 days " vide letter AJG / 17 / 1856 / 98 dated 17/20-10-1998 after conducting a domestic enquiry.

Representing Management : 1. Sri S. S. Hota Chief HR/IR - Jharia Division M/ s Tata Steel Ltd. Jamadoba, Dhanbad 2. Sri Sumit Sharma Manager HR/ IR - Central M/ s Tata Steel Ltd. Jamadoba , Dhanbad

Representing Workmen:

Subsequently , an Industrial Dispute was raised by Sri Biswanath Chatterjee under section 2 ( A) before the Assistant Labour Commissioner (C) , Dhanbad in the year 2005. The dispute was seized into conciliation and due to divergent views of the parties , the same ended in failure . The Ministry of Labour , Government of India referred the dispute for adjudication to Central Government Industrial Tribunal No. 1 as reference case no . 3 of 2007 .

Sri Biswanath Chatterjee approached management and submitted his application dated 26-12-2009 for amicabie settlement .

After having a detailed discussion with the concerned workmen it has been decided by both the workman and the management to have a out of court settlement on the basis

1. Sri Biswanath Chatterjee Ex . Miner Ex . P. No. 213457 Digwadih Colliery 2. Sri S. S. Zama Secretary , RCMS Digwadih Collicry Jamadoba , Dhanbad 8473

भारत का राजपत्र : दिसम्बर 4, 2010/अग्रहायण 13 , 1932

[भाग II- खण्ड 36 ]

Witnesses

RepresentingManagement:

1. Sri S. P. Sinha

PA to HR/IR - Jharia Jamadoba, Dhanbad

Representing Workmen:

1. Sri D. K. Sharma

Head Clerk

Office ofChief HR/IR, Jamadoba

Under Reg. Post withA/D .

Copy forwarded to:

1. The Asst . Labour Commissioner ( Central ) , Government ofIndia, Ministry of Labour , Shram Bhawan , New Colony, P.O.- Jagjiwan Nagar, Dhanbad -III .

2. The Regional Labour Commissioner ( Central) , Government of India, Ministry of Labour, Shram Bhawan , New Colony, P.O.- Jagjiwan Nagar , Dhanbad.

3. The Chief Labour Commissioner ( Central) , Shram Shakti Bhawan, Rafi Marg, New Delhi .

4. The Presiding Officer, Central Government Industrial Tribunal No. 1 , Dhanbad.

Partof the Award

नई दिल्ली, 8 नवम्बर , 2010

का.आ. 2969,-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम 1947 (1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में , केन्द्रीय सरकार रायलासीमा ग्रामीण बैंक 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 43/2006 ) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 18-10-2010 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल-12012/245/2005- आईआर( बी-1 ) ]

रमेश सिंह , डेस्क अधिकारी New Delhi , the 8th November, 2010 S.O. 2969. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 43/2006) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal - cum- Labour Court , Hyderabad as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the management of Rayalaseema Grameena Bank and their workmen, received by the Central Government on 18-10-2010 .

[No. L - 12012/245 /2005 - IR ( B - I ) ] RAMESH SINGH, Desk Officer ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL- CUM- LABOUR COURTAT HYDERABAD

PRESENT : SHRIV OPRAKASH GAUR, Presiding Officer

Dated the 2nd day of September, 2010 INDUSTRIAL DISPUTE No. 43/2006 4548GI/10-30

BETWEEN

The General Secretary,

Rayalaseema Grameena Bank,

Employees Union ,

C/o Rayalaseema Grameena Bank ,

Near Govt. ITI , Kagitalapenta ,

Petitioner Cuddapah - 516003

AND

The Chairman,

Rayalaseema Grameena Bank ,

Rayachoti Road,

....Respondents Cuddapah - 516003

APPEARANCES

Sri William Burra, Advocate For the Petitioner

For the Respondent : Sri K. Sreenivasa Murthy,

Advocate

AWARD

This claim has been registered on the basis of the reference received from the Government of India , Ministry of Labour by its order No. L - 12012 /245 /2005 - IR ( B - I ) datod 1-8-2006 under section 10 ( 10 ) ( d) of the 1. D. Act , 1947 10 adjudicate the dispute between the workman Sri . M. Rajasekhar, clerk- cum- cashier of and the management , Chairman , Rayalascema Grameena Bank and their workman. The reference is as follows:

SCHEDULE

"Whether the action of the Management of Rayalaseema Grameena Bank modifying the earlier punishment of ' stoppage of five annual increments which shall have the effect of postponing future increments to stoppage of the annual increment available in his incremental scale and the stoppage of the two future stagnation increment/increments which will have the effect of postponing the future stagnation increment/increments in r/o Shri M. Rajasekhar is legal and justified ? If not , what relief the workman is entitled to ? "

The reference is numbered in this Tribunal as I.D. No.43 /2006 and notices were issued to the parties .

2. Parties were directed to file their respective claim statements . Petitioner has filed claim statement stating threin that management of Rayalaseema Grameena Bank , initiated proceeding against Petitioner workman Sri M. Rajasekhar , clerk- cum- cashier alleging threin that he committed misconduct detrimental to the interest of the bank and main allegation was that Sri M. Rajasekhar has fraudulently withdrawn a sum of Rs.5000 and another Rs.2500 from the Savings Bank Account of account holders by forging the signatures of the accountholders and affixing the thumb impression and misappropriated the aforesaid amounts in violation of regulation No.30 ( 1 ) of Rayalaseema Grameena Bank (Staff) Services Regulations 1980. Keeping in view the gravity of the misconduct and past record of the employee following punishment was 8474

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 4 , 2010 / AGRAHAYANA 13 , 1932

proposed vide management letter No. 1.2.73 / A/ 0240 / STF / 97 dated 21-10-1997:

" Stoppage of five annual increments which shall have the effect of postponing future increments . " 3.Aggrieved by the proposal punishment the charge sheeted employee approached the Appellate Authority i.c. , the Chairman of the Rayalaseema Grameena Bank for reducing the punishment . However, the Chairman confirmed the punishment proposed by manаgеniеnt ,

4. While confirming the punishment the Chairman also passed an order for lifting the suspension order with effect from the date of joining of the office to which the Petitioner will be posted . The order further stated that the workman will not be entitled to any back wages and other benefits for the period of suspension except the subsistence allowance which he has already drawn and the priod of suspension shall be treated as period not spent on duty.

5. The workman has further submuted that he was under suspension from 16-9-97 to 31-10-97 and the competent authority proposed punishment of five annual increments which shall have effect of postponing future increments . It was taken up in appeal to the Board and Board also confirmed the same punishment . While doing so, in implementing the above punishment the management has impounded the earned leave and released the increment also . It has been submitted by the Petitioner that the Petitioner is entitled for annual merement from 1-9-97 whereas the charge sheeted employce was put under suspension on 16-9-97 and remained as such upto 31-10-97 . The increment was released but the matter was placed before the Board to release the increment w.e.f 1-9-97 , the Board modified the punishment from stoppage of five annual increments which shall have effect of postponing furture increments to stoppage of annual increments available in his incremental scale and the stoppage of two future stagnation increments which shall have the effect of postponing tutore stagnation increments .

6. The workman has submitted that modification of the above punishment by board is arbitrary, unilateral and without any notice to charge sheeted employee . Said modification has taken place on 8-8-2002 but it was intimated to charge sheeted employee on 24-10-2003 . The action of the management to place the punishment order before the board for a second time is against the principles and rules because the Petitioner has not made any appeal to the Appellate Authority i.c. , Board but he accepted the quantum of the punishment confirmed by the Board . In case Board wished to modify the punishment it was required to serve a notice to the charge sheeted employee before making such modification . The Petitioner has further challenged the competence of the Board stating threin that the Board is not competent to make modification as per Ravalaseema Grameena Bank Service Regulation, 1980 and the punishment imposedby the Board does not find its place under Regulation No.38 1113 of S S.R. 2001.As

[PARI II Sic . ( 10 ) ] such, the Petitioner has challenged the punishment order without notice to the Petitioner and competence of the punishing authority.

7. No. counter has been filed in the present case and the matter was set ex - parte against the Respondent management . The Petitioner workman has filed his own affidavit through which he reiterated the allegations made in his claim statement and he also filed , xerox copy of Rayalaseema Grameena Bank Staff Service Regulations , 1980 .

8. 1 have heard Learned Counsel for the Petitioner workman who has argued that Sec.30 of Staff Service Regulation , 1980 provided the clause of penalties and as per Soc.30 ( 1 ) of the said clause following punishment have been enumerated:

a. reprimand;

b . delay or stoppage of increments or promotion:

c. degradation to a lower post or grade or to a low stage in his incremental scale ;

d. recovery from pay of the whole or part of any pecuniary loss caused to the Bank by the officer or employee ;

e . removal from service which shall not be a disqualification for future employment :

f. dismissal .

9. He bas further argued that under Sub- Sec.2 of Sec.30 it has been provided that no officer or employee shall be subjected to the penalties refferred to in clause (b ) , ( c ) , ( d ) , ( e ) or ( f ) of sub - regulation ( 1) except by an order in writing signed by the Chairman being formulated in writing and given to the said officer or employee so that he shall have reasonable opportunity to answer them in writing or in person , as he prefers and in the latter case his defence shall be taken down in writing and read to him . He has argued that no notice was given by Board to alter the punishment which was already imposed by the Board and Chairman, as such , the order of stopping of annual increments available in incremental scale and the stoppage of two future stagnation increment which will have effect of postponing the future stagnation increments in the incremental scale is arbitary and illegal . He has filed the affidavit of the workman who has stated that no notice was given to him for imposing the second punishment in place of first punishment which was already confirmed by the Board . This statement of the workman through his affidavit has not been controverted by the management . The management has not chosen to appear before this tribunal or to filed his counter statement or evidence as such , this tribunal has no other option but to accept the uncontroverted affidavit of the workman that the second punishment which was passed by the Board in place of first confirmed punishment was passed without hearing or giving opportunity to Petitioner and thus , this tribunal is of the opinion that the action of the management of Rayalaseema Grameena Bank modifying the earlier punishment of ' stoppage of live annual increments which भारत का राजपत्र : दिसम्बर 4, 2010/ अग्रहायण 13 , 1932

भाग 11- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

shall have the effect of postpoing future increments to stoppage of the annual increment available in his acremental scale and the stoppage of the two future Stagnation increment/increments which will have the effect of postponing the future stagnation increment/ increments in respect of Shri M. Rajasekhar is illegal , unjustified and fit to be quashed . Accordingly it is quashed and previous punishment is restored .

Award Passed accordingly . Transmit .

Dictatedto Smt P. Phani Gowri , Personal Assistant transcribed by her corrected by me on this the 2nd day of September , 2010 ,

VED PRAKASH GAUR, Presiding Officer Appendix of evidence

Witnesses examined for the Petitioner

WWT : Sri M. Rajasekhar

itnesses examined for the Respondent

NEXT : NIL

Documents marked for the Petitioner

NIL

Documents marked for the Respondent

NIL

नई दिल्ली , 8 नवम्बर , 2010

का.आ. 2970. औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में , केन्द्रीय सरकार दक्षिण मध्य रेन्स के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच , अनबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण श्रम न्यायालय , हैदराबाद के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 16/2008 ) की प्रकाशित करतो हे , जां कंन्द्रीय सरकार को 18-10-2010 को पारन हुआ था।

[ सं. एल-41012/23 / 2008 आईआर ( बी -1 ) ] रमेश सिंह , डेस्क अधिकारी New Delhi , the 8th November , 2010 S.O. 2970- In pursuance of Section 17 of the ndustrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) , the Central sament hereby publishes the award ( ID No. 16/2008 ) the Central Government Industrial Tribunal - cum- aboa Court . Hyderabad as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute betw management of S. C. Railway and their worknan , received by the Central Government on 18-16-2010 ,

[No. L -41012/ 23 / 2008 - IR ( B - 1 ) ] RAMESH SINGH , Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL CUM LABOUR COURTAT HYDERABAD

PRESENT : Sin VED PRAKASH GAUR, Presiding Officer

Dated the 3rd August , 2010 INDUSTRIAL DISPUTE No. 16/2008

8475

BETWEEN

Sri Ketharaju Rajaram,

Ex . Vendor,

Rajahmundry Railway Station ,

2-12-19/3 , Gudla Vari Stica ,

.... Respondents Alcot Gardens , Rajahmundry . AND 1. The Sr. Divisional Commercial Manager , S. C , Railway, Vijayawada. 2. The Sr. D.P.Ο. , S. C. Railway , Vijayawada. Petitioner

APPEARANCES

For the Petitioner : NIL

For the Respondent : NIL

AWARD

The Government of India , Ministry of Labour by its order No. L - 41012/ 23 / 200 - IR ( B - 1) datod 9-6-2008 referrol the following dispute under section 10 ( 1 ) ( d ) of the I.D. Act, 1947 for adjudication to this Tribunal between the management of S. C. Railway and their workman . The reference is ,

SCHEDULE

"Whether the action of the Management of Sr. D.C.M. , S. C. Railway, Vijayawada in terminating the services of Sri K. Raja Ram , Ex- Vendor w.e.f. 17-3-2006 is justified . To what relief is the workman concerned is entitled ?"

The reference is numbered in this Tribunal as 1. D. No. 16/2008 and notices were issued to the parties .

2. On 3-8-2010 case called out . Petitioner absent . On perusal of the order sheet it appears that though reference has been received in July, 2008 the Petitioner workman did not turn up , nor filed claina statement even after two years of receipt of reference , as such the matter shall be decided accordingly. In view of non - representation by the Petitioner , a Nil Award is passed .

Award Passed accordingly . Transmit.

Dictated to Sot P. Phani Gowri , Personal Assistant transcribed by her corrected and pronounced by me on this the 3rd day of August, 2010 .

VED PRAKASH GAUR , Presiding Officer

Appendix of evidence

Witnesses examined for the Petitioner NIL

Witnesses examined for the Respondent NIL

Documents marked for the Petitioner NIL

Documents marked for the Respondent NIL 8476

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 4, 2010/ AGRAHAYANA 13 , 1932

नई दिल्ली , 9 नवम्बर , 2010

का.आ. 2971.-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार दक्षिण रेलवे के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच , अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधि- करण/ श्रम न्यायालय , चैन्नई के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 70/2009 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 27-10-2010 को प्राप्त हुआ था।

[ सं. एल-41012/06/ 2009- आई आर( बी 1 ) ] रमेश सिंह , डेस्क अधिकारी New Delhi , the 9th November , 2010 S.O. 2971. - In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the Award ( ID No. 70/2009 ) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal - Cum - Labour Court , Chennai as shown in the Annexure , in the Industrial Dispute between the management of Southern Railway and their workman , received by the Central Government on 27-10-2010 .

[No. L -41012 /06/ 2009 - IR( B - I ) ] RAMESH SINGH , Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

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

Friday, the 22nd October , 2010

PRESENT : A. N. JANARDANAN, Presiding Officer INDUSTRIAL DISPUTE No. 70/2009 ( In the matter of the dispute for adjudication under clause ( d ) of sub - section ( 1 ) and sub - section 2 (A ) of Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) , between the Management of Southern Railway and their Workman )

BETWEEN

Sri E. Harikrishnan

: 1st Party/ Petitioner

Vs.

2nd Party / Respondent The Chief Administrative : Officer ( Construction ) , Southern Railway,

Egmore, Chennai - 600008

APPEARANCE :

For the Petitioner

M/ s . Row & Reddy, For the Management :

Sri G. Kalyan .

Advocates Advocate

[ PART II- SEC.3 ( ii ) ]

AWARD

The Central Government , Ministry of Labour vide its Order No. L -41012 /06 /2009 - IR ( B - 1 ) dated 2-7-2009 referred the following Industrial Dispute to this Tribunal for adjudication .

The schedule mentioned in that order is :

"Whether the action of the management of Southern Railway in terminating the services of Sri E. Harikrishnan , is justified ? If not , to what relief the workman concerned is entitled ? " 2.After the receipt of Industrial Dispute , this Tribunal has numbered it as ID 70/2009 and issued notices to both sides . Both sides entered appearance through their respective counsel and filed their Claim, Counter and Reply Statement as the case may be

3. The Claim Statement contentions bereft of unnecessary details are as follows :

Petitioner joined the Metropolitan Transport Project . Railways , Chennai on ELR basis as Staff Car Driver on 5-9-1984 . He was given temporary status on 31-8-1985 per Railway Board letters dated 1-6-1984 and 11-9-1986 . He was promoted as Senior Driver on 79 1990 and absorbed against de - casualization of post of Drivers in the Engineering Branch on 24-12-1996 . He belongs to Reddiar Community and his parents are illiterate and indigent . Pentioner's father, a coolie with extreme difficulty to make both ends meet entrusted the petitioner to one Gowrisan who brought him up . Gowrisan belonged to Scheduled Caste Community . He was issueless . After some years , Gowrisan left Madras and his whereabouts were not known thereafter . Gowrisan had left the petitioner with his parents while leaving . His parents were not aware that in the School Certificate his community was mentioned as Hindu Adi-Dravidar , the impact of wrong mentioning of which was not to the adequate knowledge of the petitioner who studied only upto 8th Standard. He never availed any benefits due to Scheduled Caste. On in: istence of Community Certificate from the petitioner, the Certificate issued by the authority was showing him as Scheduled Caste. He was not appointed , absorbed or promoted on the basis of any SC / ST quota The seniority list of Automobile Drivers was issued on 1-1-1997 . On enquiry by a Scrutiny Committee on a certain complaint at the request of the petitioner on 6-1-2001 his Community Certificate was cancelled on an undertaking given by the petitioner on his own volition . The 3rd Respondent on Scrutiny Committee instructions dated 29-11-1999 and 28-9-1999 without Show Cause Notice abruptly terminated his service , certainly not for a misconduct . He filed appeal to R2 on 24-11-2003 and OA No. 388/2004 before Central Administrative Tribunal which directed disposal of the departmental appeal within 2 months after which R2 mechanically confirmed the order of R3 which was confirmed भारत का राजपत्र : दिसम्बर 4, 2010/ अग्रहायण 13 1932

[ भाग 1-खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

by R2 contrary to natural justice . Review preferred by the petitioner is still pending . Hence petitioner has approached this forum though with some delay which is due to his non - employment . The impugned order is illegal , arbitrary , unconstitutional and contrary to the principles of natural justice . Before termination notice should have been given to the petitioner and a regular enquiry conducted to find out whether the petitioner was appointed against SC / ST quota . Out ofhis own volition he requested for cancellation of SC certificate. Only by reason of long service rendered petitioner was absorbed based on de casualization scheme . The petitioner has not been a recipient of any benefits given to SC/ST . His employment is not based on community status . The 2nd Respondent only mechanically confirmed the order of the 3rd Respondent , which again was being representing the 2nd Respondent , contrary to principles of natural justice and who are not the appointing authorities . Ist Respondent is appointing authority. 2nd and 3rd Respondents also do not have jurisdiction to terminate service . The action is violative of Article - 14 and 21 of the Constitution . Termination amounts to retrenchment rendering it vitiated due to non- compliance of Section - 25F . There is no application by 2nd and 3rd Respondents . Petitioner has not thereafter been employed . Section - 11A of the I.D. Act has to be invoked by the Court , the termination being excessive , punitive etc. Hence the prayer for reinstatement with full backwages and all other benefits .

4. Counter Statement contentions bereft of unnecessary details are as follows:

ADDITIONALCOMMISSIONER , TRIBAL DEPARTMENT Appellate Authority is High Court only. This forum has no jurisdiction . Termination was based on production ofbogus certificate . The action after 6 years is also barred by limitation. The orders are not illegal, arbitrary or contrary to the principles of natural justice . He never submitted Community Certificate on his own volition . He produced false Community Certificate after complaint to vigilance. He confessed before the Scrutiny Committee that with SC Community Certificate obtained he tried to avail the benefit ofReddiar Community , a forward community . Petitionet cannot disown the grave mistake of concealing his real status at the time of entry into Railway Service and thereafter . He had opportunity to prove innocence before the Scrutiny Committee . It was a preventive action taken to foreclose grant of further promotion to him on community basis . Section - 25F or 11A cannot at all be applied . False declaration itself is a reason for unbecoming a Railway employee . As per the decision of the Supreme Court m PUNIT RAJ VS. DINESH CHOWDHARY ( 2003-8 - SC - 204 ) " a person in fact not belonging to SC, if claims to be a member thereof by procuring a bogus Caste Certificate would be committing fraud on the Constitution. No Court ofLaw can encourage commission of such fraud . The reason statod viz . being an act of his guardian without any intention is difficult to be believed after the detection of the fraud " . At least at the time of the Community Certificate before the Administration he could have corrected the mistake . At no point of time petitioner had stated the entries as SC in the records were wrong . Even if he had not directly attained any benefit he had not taken steps to correct the same . Petitioner was not a workman . Petition is to be dismissed .

5. Reply Statement contentions in a nutshell are as follows:

The Service Book of the petitioner maintained by the Respondent is never shown to him for verification except for signing . The details in the Service Register are in English language , of which the petitioner is not having sufficiem knowledge . Only the officials obtain his signature in the Service Register . To the complaint received regarding the community status by the Respondent on 9-1-1994 no action was taken by them for more than 6 years seeking his explanation . This shows Respondent's awareness that the petitioner was absorbed based on a scheme for absorption of casual labours engaged from 1984. Aggrieved at the representation of the petitioner to the Minister regarding earth work to Taramani - If of MRTS Phase -II , the Respondent wanted the petitioner to be terminated . They kept quiet for 3 years after cancellation of Community Certificate . If petitioner wanted the benefit of SC status he would have insisted before the Scrutiny Committeeto sustain the validity of the certificate , which again shows bona fides of the petitioner. On 24-11-2003 Railway Minister recommended petitioner's reinstatement , his appointment not being against SC quota . In school record community In the Service Register , the petitioner is mentioned as belonging to SC Community under his signature , which is based for his future benefits including promotion signifying no dispute by him as to his community as SC . In the School Certificate he was mentioned as SC based on which Community Certificate is issued by the authorities . On an enquiry from Railways conducted by the Government he was proved to be not SC and therefore Community Certificate was cancelled . Based on that he was terminated from service on 17-11-2003 . His appeal , and mercy appeal to Railway Board were dismissed . Petitioner's story regarding the Community as recorded in his certificates is imaginary for sympathy and is not acceptable . He had knowingly suppressed the facts and misled the authorities for treating him as an SC candidate . He was not possible to say what benefits he had obtained due to the community status as SC . The action taken is in line with extant instructions in such cases . He had not come forward to correct his community voluntarily before . His innermost intention is to avail the benefits . His claim is an after thought to escape from the clutches of the law. As per PBC No. 175 / 99 no enquiry is warranted since sufficient opportunities were given by the Scrutiny Committee under District Collector. As per Supreme Court guidelines in the case of KUMARI MADHURI PATIL AND ANOTHER VS.

8478

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA . DECEMBER 4, 2010/ AGRAHAYANA 13 , 1932

therefore unreasonable and arbitrary and

It was following a complaint of the SC Ass

that the certificate was cancelled on 6-1-2001

termination order only on 17-1-2003 . Peuter

among the complainants who sent letter to this kaits :

Minister pointing out poor quality of work done ai Farmst

MRTS Phase - Il which annoyed the railway authorities.us

the same has been a cause for his termination

9. Contra arguments on behalf of the Respe ndes

the signature of the petitioner has been a criterion status record was on the information of Gowaisan and not of petitioner . Instructions are to be applied on the basis of facts and circumstances of cach case . Respondent faiiod 10 see that the petitioner was not appointed against post for SC community. The enquiry by the Scrutiny Committee was regarded for the veracity of the Conmmunity Certificate and not an enquiry under Railway Ruies . Fetmoner is not challenging the order of the Scrutiny Committee but only the termination order . For challenging the order of the Scrutiny Committce , remedy is before the High Court . Judgment mentioned in the Counter Statement is not applicable to this case .

6. The evidence consists of the oral evidence of WW ! and Ex . WI to Ex . W56 markod on the side of the petitioner and that of MW1 and Ex . M1 to Ex . M7 on the side of the Respondent .

7. Points for consideration are :

( i) Whether the termination of the petitioner from the service of the Respondent Management is justified?

( ii) To what relief the concernel workman is entitled?

Points ( i) & ( ii )

are that the Service Register entry as SC Community de future benefits . That he has not seen the Service Regist is not correct . His bio - data including caste status hari ba entered in the Service Register after ascertaining Lateini the details . He is therefore intentionally misgiving ... Nit The background story put forward by the petitioner mistaken Community Certificate is not believable only raised for sympathy . He suppressed the real l to caste and misled all concerned for benefits , it is t possible to say the benefits obtained by him un Community status . In a case like this as per clear inside under PBC 175/99 penalty of removal from service even without notice . The innermost intention of petitioner is to avail SC Community benetits . With fes.de raised his attempt is to escape from the clutches of He has had sufficient opportunities before the wor Committee to prove his innocence . The petitioner ... challenge termination . His remedy lies in the Hol He has approached this forum after a lapse of amounting to latches . He admitted before the co that he wied to avail the benefit of SC Community Ph submission of false declaration it is unbecomin be a Railway en ployee . Petitioner could have at l time of production of Ex . W 14 Community Certite 11-4-1997 corrected the mistake but it was not con

never stated that the service records entries are

10. What is impugned herein is the terminante 8. This is ad instanceofa workman who entered into the service of the Respondent/Management who was thereafter terminated from service for allegedly producing certificate in which he is shown as belonging to SC Contamme tv whereas admittedly he belongs to Reddiar Communit. In the wake of a complaint there was a District Level Senainy Committee by which an enquiry was held head the District Collector as per which petitioner is proved to be not a SC . The paramount contentions challenging the termination from ser , ice of the petitioner and not the cancellation of the Community Certificate are that he never claimed benefits of Scheduled Caste that his neighbour Thiru Gowrisan who admitted petitioner in School stated him as Hindu Adi Dravida who also belongod to SC . In Ex. W6 , list of Casual Labour there is no mention as SC against his name in sharp contrast against S.No. 11 ( R. Venkatesan ) , S No. 24 ( N. Mukundaraj ) , etc. where word SC has been mentioned . Due to the act of Gowrisan in the School Certificate his community has been noted as SC . He entered as Casual Labour on 5-9-1984 whereafter on 31-8-1985 he was giver temporary status , on 7-9-1990 he was promoted as Senior Driver ( Ad - hoc ) and on 24-12- 1996 he was de- casualized as Driver , which promotion/ postings are purely based on seniority. The Counter Statement averments to the effect that even if he has not directly obtained any benefits of SC he was aware that he had produced false Community Certificate , which fact throws light of the fact that petitioner has not claimed any benefit of SC. Railway merely acted on the basis of the cancellation of the Community Certificate without taking into consideration relevant facts . The termination is

service of the petitioner and not the cancellati Community Certificate . His case is that he never eblani any benefits dueto the SC Community fo al commencement of casual service , absorption , proe etc. It is under a de - casualization scheme that he goed regularized under the Management . His comman , s happened to be noted as SC in the School Certificate Community Certificate and also in the Service Repe without much advertence from him as to his combat... status . His guardian one Gowrisan in whose care a protection his indigent and illiterate parents left hrin Caust the entry of SC to be made in the school record, whh. by way of construction as on the time petitioner пай explain away saying that it was due to the said GovIs affection towards him . It is only common knowledge . ata tender age of admission at school a child may notb advertent enough to know what are the entries record... relation to his bio - data at the school records . The fac 8479 भारत का राजपत्र : दिसम्बर 4, 2010/अग्रहायण 13 , 1932

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

in the school records his community name happened to be noted as SC may not for any reason be attributable to him . He is shown to have studied only up to 8th standard with no workable knowledge of English language . His case is that he was not knowing things to be comprehended well by means of English language and that as regards the entries in the Service Register he was totally a stranger . The register had been to him only for obtaining his signature upon entries entered by the school staff . He has had no occasion for any keenly felt need of having to verify the entries then and there . With this state of affairs time passed . He came into service under the Respondent/Management as a casual driver of staff car . He got to his credit the relevant service benefits like promotion , regularization , etc. under de- casualization scheme which is invariably for all the casual labours who are eligible for being absorbed . He has not had any consideration in priority by reason of his status wrongly shown as SC community either for initial appointment or for career enhancement .

of the rights or benefits due to the SC Community. The scrutiny was held on being enabled under Ex.M3 PB Circular No. 175/99 . From the opening clause of the circular what is stated is that action is to be taken against Railway employees who are found to have secured appointment by producing false community status certificate . In this case it is not proved case that the petitioner got appointment or his subsequent service benefits by reason of a false certificate produced showing him wrongly as belonging to SC community . The same circular provides for the termination of the employee where the certificate is found to be false . In this case , it is relevant to consider that it is not proved to be with the aid of any false certificate that the petitioner gained entry into service under the Respondent or obtained the service benefits . The circular understandably is to relate to termination from appointment secured on the basis of a false certificate . Here it is not proved that petitioner gained the appointment with the support of the same Community Certificate does not stand substantiated . On this aspect even the Respondent is at dark. Obviously by reason of the tender age of the petitioner during his school days , the responsibility for his caste being wrongly noted in the school register cannot invariably be attributed with the petitioner . Thus , the entry could be regarded as having been caused to be entered innocently and without any deliberate intention on the part of the petitioner . If one should be punished the same should be for real guilt or misconduct and not for any apparent guilt or misconduct . Though it is noted in some records that community of the petitioner is SC that by itself does not bring out any fact that the benefit of SC community was extended to him . The action taken to cancel the Community Certificate is preventive in nature for avoiding future conferment of any benefits to the workman on the basis of the wrong community status . The said purpose is well achieved with the cancellation of the Community Certificate . That does not show that the petitioner has had been extended any service benefits as per the SC community status . While it is blameworthy for the petitioner to have had not reported his actual caste status and thereby suppressed it there is nothing to show that by reason thereof anybody has been misled to do anything prejudatal or causing disrepute to the Management .

12. Merely with the cancellation of the Community Certificate therefore an action for termination of service could not legally , legitimately, reasonably fairly or in according with the principles of natural justice , have been taken by the Management straightaway against the petitioner . Despite the clause in the circular that in the event of it being proved that the certificate is false the pseudo beneficiary could be terminated forthwith in the case on hand the said provision seldom fits in with . A departmental enquiry should have been conducted by the Management before finally stigmatizing the petitioner to have been an outright delinquent . The proceeding before 11. According to the Respondent the petitioner did know that he belonged to Reddiar Community. But he is stated to be belonging to SC in the records , that he was suppressing that fact and thereby misleading the authorities for benefits accruing therefrom . In fact it is also stated that he made submissions to that effect before the Scrutiny Committee as well . That is not a material before this forum to enter a finding against the petitioner. Even so , it is expressly admitted by the Respondent that it is not possible to say that the petitioner has had derived any benefits out of such falsified description of himself as belonging to SC community. An individual belonging to a certain community other than SC /ST but described as SC /ST cannot be expected for any length of time to have believed himself to be of a community other than actually to which he belongs . Petitioner's case is that has not availed any benefits of the SC/ ST communities . It is alien to comprehension why in spite of his having had a knowledge of a false entry being there in the records regarding his community why he had been refraining from getting it corrected until he has had to admit it before the Scrutiny Committee upon a thrust and which cannot be said to be voluntary admission as claimed by him . A pertinent question is why he did not come forward to rectify the mistake before hand. Only with a complaint , Ex. M2 purportedly lodged by the SC / ST Railway Employees Association in the end of the year 1994 this was allowed to be brought to light . Accordingly the Scrutiny Committee enquired into the matter and finding him to be not belonging to SC the certificate was cancelled . A look at the Ex.M2 complaint allegations show that it is only expressing some doubt as to whether the petitioner belongs to SC or OC since somediscrepant entries were found regarding his caste as in OC list . What the complainant sought for was just to make it known the community to which the petitioner belongs . There is no allegation of any kind against the petitioner that for any reason he has caused to usurp any 8480

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 4, 2010/AGRAHAYANA 13 , 1932 [ PART II- SEC . 3 ( ii) ]

continuity of service and all attendant benefits . Thereafter, theManagement may impose upon him a lesser punishment short of actual termination from service .

14. 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 22nd October , 2010) .

A. N. JANARDANAN, Presiding Officer

Witnesses Examined:

Forthe 1st Party/Petitioner : WW1 , Sri E. Harikrishnan

For the 2nd Party /Manage- : MW1 , Sri B. Karthikeyan ment

Documents Marked :-

Onthe petitioner's side

Ex. No. Date

Description

Ex. WI

School Certificates of the petitioner regarding community status .

Ex . W2 18-6-2004 Circular issued by the 2nd Respondent regarding terms of employment .

Ex. W3 5-09-1984 Register of temporary employees .

Ex. W4 11-09-1986 Circular issued by the Respondent Railways regarding terms of employment of casual labour.

Ex. W5 23-09-1986 Identity Card issued to the petitioner.

Ex. W6

List of casual labour granting temporary status to the petitioner.

Ex. W7 16-05-1990 List of casual labours en- panelled for Class - IV vacancies .

Ex . W8 7-09-1990

Office Order at the 2nd Respondent Railways regarding grant of temporary status .

Ex. W9

Provisional seniority of automobile drivers in the Respondent Railways .

Ex. W10 16-02-1995 Departmental instruction regarding verification of community certificate .

Ex. W11 24-12-1996 Office Order issued by the Respondent regarding absorption of the petitioner.

the Scrutiny Committee is discernibly for deciding the veracity of the community status and to nothing more with a decision as to the falsity of the Community Certificate, termination from service of the petitioner is not to be automatic . A disciplinary action has to satisfy the test of fairness and reasonableness , among other. The disciplinary action in each case is to depend upon the facts and circumstances of each case . Though against the cancellation of the Community Certificate the remedy may lie in the High Court, the remedy against termination lies in this forum under a due reference . Here there is no challenge against the cancellation . That the petitioner is also prejudiced in his claim by delay and latches is out of place for the reason that sometime after his actual termination he has been resorting to various remedies in different forums for redressal of his grievances . The delay on the part ofthe Management for 6 years as claimed by the petitioner to terminate from service after the cancellation of the certificate looks strange and does not stand justified with any plausible explanation . In this context the apprehension of the petitioner that the Management has been ill - motivated against him for issuing the termination order cannot be said to be out of place . Though the petitioner is guilty of some suppression of real fact in relation to his community and for not taking remedial measures to rectify the mistake still he could not be found to have had obtained employment by producing the false certificate with the very knowledge that with that alone he could obtain the employment . What is culpable is the guilty intention , if any, nursed by the petitioner for which there is no proof. The said intention is to be followed by the act complained of. In other words there should be proof of mens - rea ' coupled with proof of actus reus to fasten liability upon the petitioner which are really lacking . Converself a state of being negligent also may have given rise to the impugned conduct of the petitioner . Different persons react differently in the same or similar circumstances . It is not proved that his career progression is also occasioned due to conferment of any benefits of SC to him . Though the petitioner's community certificate has been cancelled that is notto persuade the Management to automatically take a stand that the petitioner is to be terminated from service in an unrealistic perception of a verbatim clause in the circular providing for the extant instructions . Therefore , I am of the view that the Management committed excesses in terminating the petitioner from service . He could have been allowed to continue in service after imposing appropriate punishment short of an outright termination from service , after a proper enquiry. It is the paramount duty of administrative authorities to see that when an action is taken under a direction or rule or law it is done harmoniously so as to tally with the difference between laws in the book and the law in reality with proper application of mind to the given facts and circumstances in order to meet the ends of justice .

Ex. W12 30-12-1996

13. In the result the petitioner is directed to be reinstated into service forthwith with backwages ,

Order of the 1st Respondent repatriating the petitioner to the 2nd Respondent .

8481 भारत का राजपत्र : दिसम्बर 4, 2010/अग्रहायण 13 , 1932

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ,

Ex. W29 18-06-2009

Ex. W13

Order issued by the Respondents under RTI Act .

Identity Card issued to the petitioner.

Ex. W30 24-07-2009

Ex. W14 11-04-1997

Order issuad by the Respondents under RTI Act. Community Certificate issued to the petitioner.

Ex. W31 10-03-2008

Ex. W15 17-04-1999

Dispute raised by the petitioner before the Conciliation Officer .

Confirmation order issued to the 1stRespondent.

Ex. W32 01-09-2008

Ex. W16 24-6-2000

Counter Statement filed by the Respondent Conciliation Officer. before the

Ex. W33 05-09-2008

Letter from the 2nd Respondent to the Collector of Chennai regarding verification of Community Certificate.

Ex. W17 03-11-2000

Reply Statement filed by the petitioner before the Conciliation Officer.

Ex. W34 20-09-2008

Show Cause issued by the District Collector to the petitioner regarding verification ofCommunity Certificate.

Rejoinder Statement filed by the Respondents before the Conciliation Officer.

Ex. W18 06-01-2001

Ex. W35 10-12-2008 Failure submitted by the Conciliation Officer .

Ex. W36

Order passed by the District Collector cancelling the Community Certificate of the petitioner.

Ex. W19 04-04-2001

Medal issued by Respondents Photograph. the alongwith

Ex. W37 15-04-1986

Provisional seniority of Automobile Drivers in the Respondent Railways .

Merit Certificate issued to the petitioner.

Ex. W20 18-11-2002

Ex. W38 28-04-1988 Merit Certificate issued to the petitioner.

Order passed by the 2nd Respondent regarding transfer ofpetitioner .

Ex. W39 28-04-1988

Ex. W21 03-02-2003

MeritCertificate issued to the petitioner.

Ex. W40 29-06-1990

Order passed by the 2nd Respondent regarding taking back to duty.

Cash reward issued to the petitioner.

Ex. W22 17-11-2003

Ex. W41 March 1996

Termination Order issued by the 3rdRespondent to the petitioner

Merit Certificate issued to the petitioner.

Ex. W23 24-11-2003

Ex. W42 17-04-1998 Merit Certificate issued to the petitioner.

Appeal submitted by the petitioner to the 2nd Respondent regarding Termination Order.

Ex. W43 17-04-1998

Ex. W24 27-04-2004

Merit Certificate issued to the petitioner.

Order passed in OA No. 380 of 2004.

Ex. W44 14-03-2003

Ex. W25 14-06-2004

Letter from the PA to Minister of State for Railways to the General Manager, Southern Railways regarding earthwork in MRTS with photographs .

Representation from the petitioner to the 2nd respondent enclosing a copy of the order by Central Administrative Tribunal Madras Bench ,

Ex. W45 21-03-2003

Ex. W26 24-06-2004

Letter from the Railway Boardto the GM, Southern Railways calling for report.

Order passed by the 2nd Respondent confirming the . Termination Order .

24-11-2003

Ex. W46

Ex. W27 24-06-2006

Letter from the PA to Minister of State for Railways to reinstate the petitioner.

Order passed by the 2nd Respondent confirming the Termination Order

Ex. W47 03-11-2000

Ex. W2811-06-2009oradesівавет

English translation of the Show A Cause Notice issued by the District Vigilance Committee.

the toi Respondents ander RTI ACHI 25

454801/10-31 8482

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 4 , 2010/ AGRAHAYANA 13 , 1932

Ex. W48 06-01-2001 English translation of the proceedings of the District Vigilance Committee cancelling the Community Certificate.

Ex. W49 05-06-2009 RTI Application filed by the petitioner requesting certain information.

Ex. W50 13-07-2009 RTI Application filed by the petitioner requesting certain information .

Ex. W51 03-08-2009 RTI Application filed by the petitioner requesting certain information.

Ex. W52 10-06-2009 RTI Application filed by the petitioner requesting certain information .

Ex. W53 12-11-2009 Appeal filed by the petitioner under the RTI Act .

Ex . W54 18-11-2009 Appeal filed by the petitioner under the RTI Act .

Ex. W55 Sep 2003 Salary slip of the petitioner .

Ex. W56 Nov 2003 Salary slip of the petitioner .

On the Management's side

Ex. No. Date

Description

EX. MI

Service register first page copy.

Ex. M2 Sept, 2004 Complaint from SC/ ST association .

Ex.M3 24/29-09-1999 PBC No. 175/1999.

Ex. M4 17-11-2003 Termination Order .

Ex. M5 24-11-2003 Appeal to Chief Administrative Officer/MTP.

Ex. M6 24-06-2004 Disposal of the appeal .

Ex. M7 01-03-2006 Disposal letter .

नई दिल्ली , 9 नवम्बर , 2010

का. आ. 2972.- औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में , केन्द्रीय सरकार डब्ल्यू, सी. एल. के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच , अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालय , जबलपुर के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 38/2000 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 9-11-2010 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल -22012/ 368/1999- आई आर ( सी- II ) ] डी. एस. एस. श्रीनिवास राव , डेस्क अधिकारी

[ PART II- SEC . 3 ( ii ) ] New Delhi , the 9th November , 2010 S.O. 2972. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) , the Central Government hereby publishes the Award ( Ref . No. 38/2000 ) ofthe Central Government Industrial Tribunal - cum - Labour Court , Jabalpur as shown in the Annexure , in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of WCL and their workmen , which was received by the Central Government on 9-11-2010 .

[No. L - 22012 /368 / 1999 - IR( C - II ) ] D. S. S. SRINIVASA RAO , Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

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

No. CGIT /LC/ R/38 / 2000

Presiding Officer : SHRI MOHD . SHAKIR HASAN

.Workman /Union The General Secretary, P. K. K. K. K. Sangh , PO Damua , Distt . Chhindwara ( MP) Chhindwara

Versus

WCL , Kanhan Area , PO Dungaria , Distt. Chhindwara (MP) The Chief General Manager , Chhindwara

...Management

AWARD

Passed on this 22nd day of October , 2010 The Government of India , Ministry of Labour vide its Notification No.L - 22012 /368 / 99 / IR ( CM - II ) dated 31-1-2000 has referred the following dispute for adjudication by this tribunal :-

"Whether the action of the Chief General Manager , WCL, Kanhan Area , PO : Dungaria , Distt . Chhindwara ( MP ) in dismissing the service of Shri Ishtaq S / o Isaque , Driver of Ghorawari Colliery is justified ? If not , to what relief the workman is entitled ? "

2. The case of the Union/workman in short is that the workman was working as a Driver in Kanhan Area ofWCL . He was suffering from Perupherial Niropathy, sciatica and deafness and was under treatment of the company Hospital w.e.f. 11-3-74 . The said disease was of permanent nature and was liable to declare unfit for the post . The workman was issued chargesheet dated 14-8-94 for his absence from 8-5-97 without any sanction of leave or without sufficient cause . It is stated that the workman was absent with reasonable cause and in the knowledge of the management as the Manager had referred him for treatment in Kanhan AreaHospital and Medical College, Nagpur . The Manager , भारत का राजपत्र: दिसम्बर 4, 2010/अग्रहायण 13 , 1932

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

Ghorawari Colliery of WCL appointed Shri Sanjay Joshi as Enquiry Officer (in short E.O ) . The E.O proceeded the enquiry exparte on 3-11-98 when the workman was on leave . TheE.O hurriedly concluded the proceeding and submitted enquiry report . The Diciplinary Authority mechanically and without application of mind passed the order of dismissal w.e.f. 4-12-98 . The copy of the enquiry report was also not supplied to the workman and he was prejudiced as the workman had failed to defend himself before the Disciplinary Authority . It is stated that the principle of natural justice was violated . It is submitted that the workman be reinstated with full back wages .

3. The management appeared and contested the reference by filing Written Statement . The case of the management, interalia, is that the workman was admittedly Driver at Ghorawari Colliery of WCL . He was habitual absentee from duty without any information and without prior sanction of leave . On number of occasions , he was served with warning on his absence . He was again absent from 2-5-97 to 2-8-98. As such the management issued charge sheet dated 2-8-98 . His reply was not satisfactory and therefore the Competent Authority initiated a departmental proceeding against him and appointed Shri Sanjay Joshi Asstt . Survey Officer as E.O and Shri N.S.Thakur Office Superintendent as Management Representative ( in short M.R) . The E.O noticed the delinquent workman to appear in the proceeding who appeared on 22-9-98 and sought time . The proceeding was adjourned for other dates but the workman did not appear . The E.O again issued notice to appear on 3-11-98 butinspite of receipt of the notice , he did not appear and therefore the E.O proceeded the enquiry exparte against him . The M.R. adduced oral and documentary evidence to prove habitual absentee without any information and leave of the workman . The E.O considering the evidence found that the charge was proved against the workman and submitted his enquiry report . The Disciplinary Authority after receipt of the enquiry report satisfied himself that there was sufficient evidence and the principle of natural justice was followed, passed the order of dismissal on 30-11-98 . On the above ground , the reference be answered .

4. The Union/workman after submitting statement of claim absented . It appears that the workman died during the pendency of the reference . The legal heirs were therefore brought on the record vide order dated 12-10-2001 . Thereafter the legal heirs became absent . Lastly the then Tribunal proceeded the reference exparte against the legal heirs on 27-12-2006 .

5. On the basis of the pleadings of both the parties , the following issues are framed for adjudication- I. Whether the departmental proceeding conducted bythe management is legal , proper and valid ?

8483 II. Whether the management has able to prove misconduct against the workman ?

III . To what relief, the legal heirs are entitled to ?

6. Issue No. I

Since the Union/ legal heirs are absent , all the issues are taken up together for adjudication . To prove the case , the management has adduced oral and documentary evidence . Management witness Shri Lalji Indurkar is Dy. Personnel Manager in Ghorawari Colliery of WCL . He has stated that the workman was habitual absentee from duty unauthorisedly without permission . He remained absent from 2-5-97 to 2-8-98 and therefore chargesheet dated 2-8-98 was issued . On his unsatisfactory reply, the departmental enquiry was initiated . Initially he appeared in the enquiry proceeding but subsequently he did not appear on different dates . As such the E.O proceeded exparte against him . He was found guilty of misconduct in the proceeding and the Disciplinary Authority after considering materials on record passed the order of dismissal .

7. The management has filed papers of the enquiry proceeding . The papers shows that he was chargesheeted for unauthorized absence . It is clear that the workman gave reply ofhis illness but no document was filed in support of his evidence. The papers of the proceeding further show that the workman appeared in the proceeding but subsequently he became absent without informing the E.O. Thedocuments filed in the departmental proceeding show that he was on attendance in the year 1995 for 103 days , in 1996 for 116 days and in 1997- nil days . It is also clear that from the documents that he was on several occasions warned for his absence . The proceeding further shows that the opportunity was provided to him to defend himself but he himself absented without any sufficient cause . I find and hold that the departmental proceeding conducted bythe management is legal , proper and valid . This issue is accordingly answered.

8. Issue No. II & III

On the basis of the discussion made above and evidence produced before the Tribunal , it is clear that misconduct was proved against the workman . The order of punishment appears to be just and proper . I do not find any reason to interfere in the order of punishment . Accordingly both the issues are decided in favour of the management and against the workman / Union . The reference is , therefore , answered .

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

10. 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 8484

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: DECEMBER 4, 2010/ AGRAHAYANA 13 , 1932

नई दिल्ली, 9 नवम्बर , 2010

का.आ. 2973 , औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 (1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में , केन्द्रीय सरकार एवं एफ.सी.आई. के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच , अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण न. 1 चण्डीगढ़ के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 1376/08 , 1377/08 , 1379/08 , 1381/08, 1383/08 , 1384/08 , 1386/08 , 1387/08 , 1388/08 , 1390/08,1391 /08 , 1392/08 , 1393/08 , 1395/08 , 1396/08 , 1397/ 08,1398/ 08,1400 / 08,1403 / 08,1404/ 08 , 1405/08 , 1407/08 , 1408/08 , 1410/08 , 1411/08 , 1413/08 , 1415/08 , 1416/08 , 1418/08 , 1419/08 , 1420/08 , 1421/08 , 1422/08 , 1423/08,1424/08, 1426/08,1428 /08 , 1431/08, 1436/ 08, 1437/08, 1439/08 , 1440/08 , 1442/08 , 1443/08 , 1444/08 , 1446/08 , 1447/08 , 1450/08 , 1456/08 , 1459/08 , 1460/08 , 1463/08 , 1464/08, 1467/08 , 1471/08 , 1472/08 , 1479/ 08, 1482/08 , 1485/08 , 1493/08 , 1494/08 , 1495/08 , 1497/08 , 1499/08 , 1500/08 , 1501/08 , 1503/08 , 1504/08 , 1507/08 , 1514/08 , 1520/08 , 1521/08, 1523/08 , 1524/08 , 1525/08 , 1534/ 08 , 1535/08 , 1557/08 , 1568/08 , 1569/08 , 1573/09 , 1575/09 144/05 , 148/05 , 151/05, 154/05 , 155/05 , 156/05 , 157/05 161/ 05, 1173/05 , 1174/05 , 1178/05 , 1181/05 , 1184/05 , 1186/05 , 1187/05 , 1191/05 , 1192/05 , 1193/05 , 1194/05 , 1199/05 , 1208/ 05 , 1209/05 , 1210/05 , 1211/05 , 1212/05 , 1213/05 , 1214/05 , 1215/05 , 1516/05 , 1238/05 , 1239/05 , 1242/05 , 1243/05, 1245/ 05, 1246/05 , 1247/05 , 1248/05 , 1249/05 , 1250/05 , 1251/06, 1253/06 , 6/09 , 7/09 , 8 / 09,1378/08 , 27/09 , 9/09 , 10/09 , 11/09, 30/09, 34/09, 35/09 , 37/09, 38/09 , 2/09 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 09-11-2010 को प्राप्त हुआ था । डी.एस.एस. श्रीनिवास राव , डेस्क अधिकारी [सं एल -22012/335/2006- आई आर ( सी- II) , एल-22012/337/2006- आई आर ( सी- II ) , एल-22012/334/2006- आईआर ( सी- II ) , सं एल-22012/316/2006- आई आर ( सी- II) , एल-22012/315/2006- आई आर ( सी- II ) , एल-22012/318/2006- आई आर ( सी- II ) , सं एल-22012/37 /2007- आई आर ( सी- II) , एल-22012/319/2006- आई आर ( सी- II) , एल-22012/320/2006- आई आर ( सी- II ) , सं एल-22012/ 19/2007-आई आर ( सी- II) , एल-22012/ 21/2007- आई आर ( सी- II ) , एल -22012/288 /2006- आई आर ( सी- II ) , सं एल -22012/ 287/2006- आई आर ( सी- II) , एल-22012/31 /2007- आई आर ( सी- II) , एल-22012/23 /2007- आई आर ( सी- II ) , सं एल-22012/22/2007- आई आर ( सी- II) , एल-22012/335/2006- आई आर ( सी- II ) , एल -22012/317/2006- आई आर ( सी- II ) , सं एल -22012/280/2006- आई आर ( सी- II) , एल-22012/ 276/2006- आई आर ( सी- II ) , एल -22012/ 140/2007- आई आर ( सी- II ) , सं एल -22012/ 141/2007- आई आर ( सी- II) , एल-22012/278/2006- आई आर ( सी- II ) , एल -22012/ 277/2007- आई आर ( सी- II ) ,

[ PART II- SEC . 3 ( ii ) ] सं एल-22012/314/2006- आई आर ( सी- II) , एल-22012/313/2006- आई आर ( सी- II), एल-22012/39/ 2006- आई आर ( सी- II ) , सं एल -22012/290/2006- आई आर ( सी- II) , एल-22012/ 146/2007- आई आर ( सी- II ) , एल-22012 / 144/2007- आई आर ( सी- II ) , सं एल-22012/ 143/2007-आई आर ( सी- II) , एल-22012/ 321/2006- आई आर ( सी- II) , एल -22012/ 126/ 2007- आई आर ( सी- II ) , सं एल -22012/ 125/2007-आई आर ( सी- II) , एल -22012/ 124/2007- आई आर ( सी- II) , एल-22012/ 122/2007- आई आर ( सी- II ) , सं एल-22012/ 119/2007-आई आर ( सी- II), एल-22012/ 139/2007- आई आर ( सी- II ) , एल-22012/ 216/2007- आई आर ( सी- II) , सं एल-22012/61/2007-आई आर ( सी- II), एल-22012/ 62/2007 - आई आर ( सी- II ) , एल-21012/ 72/2007-आई आर ( सी- II) , सं एल-22012/ 219/2007- आई आर ( सी- II ) , एल-22012/70/2007- आई आर ( सी- II ) , एल -22012/71 /2007-आई आर ( सी- II ) , सं एल -22012/238/2007- आई आर ( सी- II) , एल-22012/316/2007 - आई ओर ( सी- II ) , एल-22012/237/2007- आई आर ( सी- II ) , सं एल -22012/315/2007- आई आर ( सी- II) , एल 22012 / 180/2007- आई आर ( सी- II ) , एल-22012 / 284/ 2007- आई आर ( सी- II ) , सं एल -22012/285 /2007- आई आर ( सी- II) , एल -22012/ 232/ 2007- आई आर ( सी- II) , एल-220 12/235/2007- आई आर ( सी- II) , सं एल- L- 22012/ 231/2007-आई आर ( सी- II) , एल-220 12/80/2007- आई आर ( सी- II) , एल-22012/81/2007-आई आर ( सी- II ) , सं एल -22012/213/2007- आई आर ( सी- II) , एल-22012/ 195/2007- आई आर ( सी- II) , एल-220 12/ 65/2007-आई आर ( सी- II ) , सं एल- L- 22011/28/ 2008- आई आर ( सी- II) , एल-22011 /27/2008- आई आर ( सी- II ) , एल-22012/321/ 2007-आई आर ( सी- II ), सं एल -22012/320/2007- आई आर ( सी- II) , एल-22012/ 327/2007- आई आर ( सी- II ) , एल-22012/319/2007- आई आर ( सी- II) , सं एल-22012/ 318 /2007- आई आर ( सी- II ) , एल-22012/ 349/2007- आई आर ( सी- II ) , एल-22011/ 9/2008- आई आर ( सी- II ), सं एल-22012/332/2007- आई आर ( सी- II ) , एल-22011/ 21 / 2008- आई आर ( सी- II ) , एल-22012/ 385/2007- आई आर ( सी- II ) , सं एल -22012/353/2007-आई आर ( सी- II ) , एल-220 12/352/ 2007- आई आर ( सी- II ), एल-22011 /20/2008- आई आर ( सी- II ) , सं एल -22011 /26/2008- आई आर ( सी- II ), एल-22011/ 25/ 2008- आई आर ( सी- II ) , एल-22011/41 / 2008- आई आर ( सी- II ), सं एल -22011 / 70/2008- आई आर ( सी- II ) , एल-22011 / 71 / 2008- आई आर ( सी- II ) , एल-22011 / 74/ 2008- आई ओर ( सी- II ), सं एल -220 11/59/ 2008- आई आर ( सी- II ) , एल-22012/ 292/2004- आई आर ( सी- II ) , एल -22012/ 291 /2004- आई आर ( सी- II ) , 8485 भारत का राजपत्र: दिसम्बर 4, 2010/अग्रहायण 13 , 1932

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

सं एल-22012/290/2004- आई आर ( सी- II), एल-22012/293/2004- आई आर ( सी- II ) , एल-22012/ 294/2004- आई आर ( सी- II ) ,

सं एल -22012/295/2004- आई आर ( सी- II) , एल-22012/296/2004- आई आर ( सी- II) , एल-22012/302/2004- आई आर ( सी- II),

सं एल -22012/420/2004- आई आर ( सी- II), एल-22012/419/2004- आई आर ( सी- II ), एल -22012/423/2004- आई आर ( सी- II ),

सं एल-22012/434/2004- आई आर ( सी- II) , एल-22012/439/2004- आई आर ( सी- II) , एल-22012/437/2004- आई आर ( सी- II) ,

सं एल-22012/436/2004- आई आर ( सी- II), एल-22012/435/2004- आई आर ( सी- II ) , एल-22012/424/2004- आई आर ( सी- II ) ,

सं एल-22012/425/ 2004- आई आर ( सी- II), एल-22012/422/2004- आई आर ( सी- II ) , एल-22012/432/2004- आई आर ( सी- II ) ,

सं एल -22012/ 135/2004- आई आर ( सी- II ), एल-22012/132/2004- आई आर ( सी- II ) , एल-220 12/ 131/ 2004- आई आर ( सी- II ) ,

सं एल -22012/ 130/2004- आई आर ( सी- II), एल-220 12/ 134/2004- आई आर ( सी- II ) , एल-22012/ 127/2004- आई आर ( सी- II ),

सं एल -22012/ 129/2004- आई आर ( सी- II), एल-22012/ 128/2004- आई आर ( सी- II ) , एल -22012/ 133/2004- आई आर ( सी- II ),

1396/08 , 1397/08 , 1398/08 , 1400/08 , 1403/08, 1404/08, 1405/08 , 1407/08 , 1408/08 , 141 0/08 , 1411/08 , 1413/08 , 1415/08 , 1416/08,1418 /08,1419/ 08 , 1420/ 08,1421 /08,1422/08 , 1423/08,1424/08 , 1426/08 , 1428/08 , 1431/08 " 1436/08 , 1437/08 , 1439/08 , 1440/08 , 1442/08, 1443/08 , 1444/08 , 1446/08 , 1447/08 , 1450/08 , 1456/08 , 1459/08 , 1460/08 , 1463/08, 1464/08 , 1467/08 , 1471/08 , 1472/08 , 1479/08 , 1482/08 , 1485/08 , 1493/08 , 1494/08 , 1495/08 , 1497/08 , 1499/08 , 1500/08 , 1501/08 , 1503/08 , 1504/08 , 1507/08 , 1514/08 , 1520/08 , 1521/08 , 1523/08 , 1524/08 , 1525/08 , 1534/08 , 1535/08 , 1557/08 , 1568/08 , 1569/08 , 1573/09 , 1575/09, 144/05 , 148/05 , 151/05 , 154/05 , 155/05 , 156/05 , 157/05 , 161/05 , 1173/05 , 1174/05 , 1178/05 , 1181/05, 1184/05, 1186/05 , 1187/05 , 1191/05 , 1192/05 , 1193/05 , 1194/05 , 1199/05 , 1208/05 , 1209/05 , 1210/05 , 1211/05 , 1212/05 , 1213/05 , 1214/05 , 1215 / 05,1516/05 , 1238/05 , 1239/05 , 1242/05,1243/05,1245/ 05,1246/ 05,1247/05,1248/05 , 1249/05 , 1250/05 , 1251/06, 1253/06; 6/09 , 7/09, 8/09 , 9/09 , 10/09 , 11/ 09,30/09 , 34/09 , 35/09 , 37/09 , 38/09 , 2/09 , 27/09) ofthe 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 Food Corporation of India and their workman , which was received by the Central Government on09-11-2010 .

सं एल-22012/46/2005- आई आर ( सी- II) , एल-22012/47/2005- आई आर ( सी- II ), एल-22012/44/2005- आई आर ( सी- II ),

[No.L- 22012/335 /2006- IR( C -II) , L- 22012/337/2006- IR(C- II ) , L- 22012/334/2006- IR(C - II) ,

सं एल-22012/29/2005- आई आर ( सी- II) , एल-220 12/48/2005- आई आर ( सी- II ) , एल-22012/31/2005-आई आर ( सी- II ) ,

No.L- 22012/316/2006- IR( C- 11 ) ' / L- 220 12/315/2006- IR( C- II) , L- 220 12/318/2006 - IR( C- II ) ,

सं एल-22012/43/2005- आई आर ( सी- II), एल-220 12/34/2005- आई आर ( सी- II) , एल -22012/33/ 2005- आई आर ( सी- II) ,

No.L- 22012/37/2007 - IR( C - II ) , L- 22012/319 / 2006- IR ( C- II) , L-22012/320/2006- IR( C- II) ,

सं एल -22012/49/2005- आई आर ( सी- II) , एल-22012/36/2005- आई आर ( सी- II ) , एल-220 12/30/2005- आई आर ( सी- II ),

No.L- 22012/ 19 /2007 - IR( C- II) , L- 220 12/ 21 /2007 - IR( C- II), L- 220 12/ 288 / 2006- IR( C- II) ,

सं एल-22011 / 5/2009- आई आर ( सी- II) , एल-22011 /3/2009- आई आर ( सी- II ) , एल -22011/2/ 2009- आई आर ( सी- II ) ,

No.L- 22012/ 287 / 2006- IR( C- II) , L- 22012/ 31 / 2007 - IR( C- II) , L - 220 12/ 23 /2007 - IR( C- II ) ,

सं एल -22011/ 1/ 2009- आई आर ( सी- II) , एल-22011 /4/2009-आई आर ( सी- II ) , एल-22011/7/2009- आई आर ( सी- II) ,

No.L- 22012/ 22/ 2007 - IR( C- II ) , L- 22012/335 / 2006- IR( C - II), L-22012/317/2006- IR(C - II) ,

सं एल-22011/ 14/2009- आई आर ( सी- II) , एल-22011 / 13 /2009- आई आर ( सी- II ) , एल-22011/16/ 2009- आई आर ( सी- II ) ,

No.L- 22012/ 280/2006- IR( C - II) , L - 220 12/ 276/2006- IR( C- II) , L- 220 12/ 140/2007- IR( C- II) ,

सं एल-22011/ 24/2009- आई आर ( सी- II ), एल-220 11/18/2009- आई आर ( सी- II ) , एल-22011 / 17/2009- आई आर ( सी- II) ,

No.L- 22012/ 141 /2007 - IR( C - II) , L - 22012/ 278 / 2006- IR( C- II ), L- 22012/ 277/2006- IR (C - II) ,

No.L - 220 12/314/ 2006 - IR( C- II) , L - 22012/313 /2006- IR( C- II) , L- 220 12/ 39 /2006 - IR( C - II) ,

सं एल- L- 22011/64/2007- आई आर ( सी- II ) , एल-22011 /40/2008- आई आर ( सी- II) ]

No. L- 220 12/ 290 /2006- IR( C- II) , L - 220 12/ 146/2007 - IR(C- II) , L- 220 12/ 144/2007 - IR(C- II ) ,

D.S.S. SRINIVASA RAO , Desk Officer New Delhi , the 9th November , 2010

No.L- 22012/ 143 /2007 - IR( C- II), L - 22012/ 321 / 2006- IR( C- II) , L - 22012/ 126/2007 - IR(C- II) ,

No.L- 22012/ 125 / 2007 - IR( C- II ) , L- 220 12/ 124/2007 - IR( C- II) , L- 220 12/ 122/ 2007 - IR ( C- II) ,

S.O. 2973. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Dispute Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award ( Ref. Nos . 1376/08 , 1377/08 , 1378/08 , 1379/08 , 1381/08 , 1383/08, 1384/08, 1386/08 , 1387/08 , 1388/08 , 1390/08, 1391/08 , 1392/08, 1393/08 , 1395/08 , 8486

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 4, 2010/ AGRAHAYANA 13 , 1932

No.L- 220 12/ 119/2007 - IR( C - II) , L- 220 12/ 139/2007 - IR( C- II), L- 220 12/216/2007 - IR( C- II) ,

L- 220 12/ 61/ 2007- IR( C - II) , L - 220 12/ 62/ 2007 - IR( C- II) , L-22012/ 72/2007 - IR( C- II) ,

L- 22012/ 219/2007- IR( C- II), L- 22012/70/2007 - IR( C- II) , L-220 12/71/2007 - IR( C- II) ,

No.L- 220 12/238/2007 - IR( C- II) , L- 220 12/316/2007 - IR( C- II), L - 220 12/237/2007 - IR(C- II) ,

No.L- 220 12/315 /2007 - IR( C- II), L- 220 12/ 180/2007 - IR(C- II) , L - 220 12/ 284/2007 - IR( C- II) ,

No.L- 220 12/ 285 /2007 - IR( C- II) , L- 220 12/232/2007 -IR(C- II) , L - 220 12 / 235/2007- IR(C- II ) ,

No.L- 22012/231 /2007 - IR( C- II) , L- 22012/80 /2007 - IR(C - II) , L-22012/ 81 /2007- IR( C- II) ,

No.L - 22012/213 /2007 - IR( C - II) , L - 22012/ 195 /2007- IR( C- II) , L - 22012/ 65/2007 - IR( C- II) ,

No.L - 22011 / 28 / 2008 - IR( C- II) , L- 22011 / 27/ 2008 - IR ( C- II) , L- 22012/321 /2007 - IR(C - II) ,

No.L - 22012/ 320/ 2007 - IR( C- II) , L- 22012/327/2007 - IR( C- II) , L- 22012/319 /2007 - IR( C- II) ,

No.L- 22012/ 318 /2007 - IR( C - II ) , L - 22012/349/2007 - IR( C- II) , L- 22011 / 9/2008- IR( C- II ),

No.L- 22012/332/2007 - IR( C- II) , L- 22011 /21 /2008 - IR( C- II) , L- 22012 /385/2007 - IR( C- II) ,

No.L - 22012/ 353 /2007 - IR( C- II) , L- 22012/352/ 2007 - IR( C- II) , L - 22011 /20/2008 - IR( C- II) ,

No.L - 22011 / 26/ 2008 - IR( C - II) , L - 22011 /25 / 2008 - IR( C - II) , L- 22011/41/2008 - IR( C- II) ,

No.L - 22011 / 70 /2008 - IR( C - II ), L- 22011 /71 / 2008 - IR (C - II ) , L-22011 /74 /2008 - IR(C- II) ,

No.L- 22011 /59/2008 - IR( C- II) , L- 220 12/ 292/2004- IR( C - II) , L- 220 12/291/2004- IR( C- II) ,

No.L - 22012/ 290/2004- IR( C- II) , L - 22012/ 293 /2004- IR( C- II) , L- 22012/294/2004 .. IR( C- II) ,

No.L - 22012/295 /2004- IR( C- II) , L- 220 12/296/2004- IR( C- II) , L - 22012 / 302/2004- IR( C - II) ,

No.L- 22012/ 420/2004- IR( C- II) , L - 220 12/ 419/2004- IR( C- II) , L - 22012/ 423/2004- IR( C- II)

No.L -- 22012/ 434/2004- IR( C- II ) , L- 22012/ 439 / 2004- IR( C- II), L - 22012/437 /2004- IR(C- II) ,

No.L - 22012/ 436/2004- IR( C- II) , L - 220 12/435 /2004- IR( C- II) , L- 2-012/424/ 2004- IR( C- II) ,

[ PART II- SEC . 3 ( ii ) ] No.L- 22012/425/2004- IR( C- II) , L- 22012/ 422/2004- IR( C - II) , L-22012/432/2004- IR( C- II) ,

No.L- 22012/ 135 /2004- IR( C- II) , L- 22012/ 132/ 2004- IR( C- II), L- 22012/ 131 /2004- IR( C- II) ,

No.L- 22012/ 130 /2004- IR( C - II ), L- 22012/ 134/2004- IR( C- II) , L- 22012/ 127 /2004- IR( C- II) ,

No.L- 22012/ 129 / 2004- IR(C - II) , L- 22012/ 128/ 2004- IR( C - II) , L-220 12/ 133 /2004- IR( C- II) ,

No. L- 22012/ 46/2005 - IR( C- II) , L- 22012/ 47/2005 - IR( C- II), L-220 12/44/2005 - IR( C- II) ,

No. L- 22012/29 /2005 - IR( C- II) , L- 22012/ 48 /2005- IR( C - II) , L-22012/31 /2005 - IR( C- II) ,

No. L- 220 12/ 43/2005 - IR( C- II ) , L- 22012/34/ 2005 - IR ( C- II) , L- 22012/ 33 /2005 - IR( C - II) ,

No. L- 22012/ 49/ 2005 - IR( C - II) , L - 22012/36/ 2005 - IR( C - II ), L- 22012/30/2005 - IR( C- II) ,

No. L - 22011 / 5 / 2009 - IR( C - II) , L - 22011 /3 / 2009 - IR( C- II ) , L-220 11 /2/2009 - IR( C- II) ,

No.L - 22011 / 1 / 2009 - IR( C - II) , L - 22011 /4/2009 - IR( C - I ! ) , L-22011 /7 /2009 - IR( C- II),

No.L - 22011 / 14/ 2009 - IR( C- II) , L- 22011 / 13 /2009 - IR( C- II ) , L-220 11 / 16/2009 - IR( C- II) ,

No.L- 22011 /24/2009 - IR ( C - II ) , L- 22011 / 18 / 2009 - IR(C - II ) , L- 22011 / 17/2009 - IR(C - II) ,

No.L- 220 11/64/2007 - IR( C- II), L- 22011 / 40/2008 - IR( C - II) ] D.S.S. SRINIVASA RAO , Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

BEFORE SHRI GYANENDRA KUMAR SHARMA, PRESIDING OFFICER, CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL - CUM - LABOUR COURT- 1 , CHANDIGARH

Shri Harpal Singh & Others ( as mentioned in the list below)

Applicants

Versus

The District Manager , Food Corporation of India , Patiala, Sangrur and Ferozepur ,

Respondents APPEARANCES

For the workman Workmenin person & S.K. Bawa For the Management Sh . N.K. Zakhmi & Parminder Singh , Advocates भारत का राजपत्र : दिसम्बर 4 , 2010/ अग्रहायण 13 , 1932

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

AWARD

8487

Passed on 29-10-10

This award shall dispose off and answer following 137 references as follows referred by the Central Government by different orders :-

Name of the Parties CaseNo.

Sl . No.

(3)

(2)

(1)

1376/08

Lakhwinder Singh Vs.FCI 1377/08

Shingara Singh Vs. FCI 1378/08

Surjit Singh Vs. FCI 1379/08

Sanjeev Kumar Vs. FCI 1381/08

Bakhsis Singh Vs. FCI 5.

1383/08

Jarnail Singh Vs. FCI 6.

1384/08

Dalip Singh Vs. FCI 1386/08

Krishan Singh Vs. FCI

Ramesh Kumar Vs. FCI 1387/08

1388/08

Ashit Kumar Vs. FCI 10.

1390/08

Sandeep Kumar Vs. FCI 11.

1391/08

12.

Satnam Singh Vs. FCI 1392/08

Malla Singh Vs. FCI 13.

1393/08

14.

Satnam Singh Vs. FCI

Ashwani Kumar Vs. FCI 1395/08

15.

1396/08

Joginder Singh Vs. FCI 16.

1397/08

17.

Dalip Singh Vs. FCI

Surinder Kumar Vs. FCI 1398/08

18.

1400/08

Gurnam Singh Vs.FCI 19.

1403/08

20.

Mangat Ram Vs.FCI 1404/08

21.

Darshan Singh Vs. FCI 1405/08

22.

Butta Singh Vs. FCI 1407/08

23.

Raj Bali Vs. FCI 1408/08

24.

Dalbir Singh Vs. FCI 1410/08

25.

Raj Kumar Vs. FCI 1411/08

26.

Jaswant Singh Vs. FCI

Om Parkash Vs. FCI 1413/08

27.

1415/08

28.

Fouja Singh Vs. FCI 1416/08

29.

Baljinder Singh Vs. FCI 1418/08

30.

Rajesh Kumar Vs. FCI 1419/08

Mehal Singh Vs. FCI 31.

Reference No. & Date

(4)

L-22012/ 335 /2006/IR(CM - II ) Dated 28-4-2008 L- 22012/337/ 2006/IR( CM - II ) Dated 28-4-2008 L- 22012/ 334/2006/IR( CM - II ) Dated 28-4-2008 L-22012/316/2006/IR( CM - II) Dated 28-4-2008 L- 22012/ 315 / 2006/IR( CM - II) Dated 28-4-2008 L- 22012/ 318 /2006/IR( CM - II ) Dated 28-4-2008 L-22012/ 37/2007/ IR ( CM - II) Dated 28-4-2008 L-22012/319/2006/IR( CM - II) Dated 28-4-2008 L- 22012/ 320 /2006/IR( CM - II ) Dated 28-4-2008 L-22012/ 19 /2007 /IR ( CM - II) Dated 28-4-2008 L- 22012/ 21 /2007IR (CM - II) Dated 28-4-2008 L- 22012/288 /2006/IR( CM - II ) Dated 28-4-2008 L- 22012/ 287 /2006/IR (CM - II) Dated 28-4-2008 L- 22012/ 31 /2007 / IR (CM- II) Dated 28-4-2008 L- 22012/ 23 /2007 / IR (CM - II) Dated 28-4-2008 L- 22012/ 22/ 2007 /IR (CM - II) Dated 28-4-2008 L- 22012/ 335 /2006/ IR (CM - II) Dated 28-4-2008 L-22012/317/2006/IR( CM - II) Dated 28-4-2008 L- 22012/ 280 /2006/ IR( CM - II) Dated 28-4-2008 L- 22012/276/2006/IR (CM - II ) Dated 28-4-2008 L- 22012/ 140 /2007 / IR (CM - II) Dated 30-4-2008 L-22012/ 141 / 2007/IR( CM - II) Dated 30-4-2008 L- 22012/ 278 /2006/IR( CM - II) Dated 28-4-2008 L- 22012/ 277 /2006/IR( CM - II) Dated 28-4-2008 L- 22012/314 /2006/IR( CM - II ) Dated 28-4-2008 L- 22012/ 313 /2006/IR(CM - II) Dated 28-4-2008 L- 22012/ 39/ 2006/IR ( CM - II) Dated 28-4-2008 L- 22012/ 290/ 2006/ IR( CM - II) Dated 28-4-2008 L- 22012/ 146/2007/IR(CM - II ) Dated 30-4-2008 L- 22012/ 144 /2007/IR( CM - II) Dated 30-4-2008 L- 22012/ 143/ 2007 /IR (CM - II) Dated 30-4-2008 8488

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 4 , 2010 / AGRAHAYANA 13 , 1932

(1)

(2)

(3)

32.

1420/08

Diwan Singh Vs. FCI 33.

1421/08

Mukhtiyar Singh Vs. FCI 34.

1422/08

Surinder Pal Vs. FCI 35.

1423/08

Shamsher Singh Vs. FCI 36.

1424/08

Gurdev Lal Vs. FCI 37.

1426/08

Ajay Kumar Vs. FCI 38.

1428/08

Kuldeep Singh Vs. FCI 39.

1431/08

Pardeep Kumar Vs. FCI 40.

1436/08

Avtar Singh Vs. FCI 41.

1437/08 :

Angrej Singh Vs. FCI 42.

1439/08

Gurnam Singh Vs. FCI 43.

1440/08

Mukhtiar Singh Vs. FCI 44.

1442/08

Balbir Singh Vs. FCI 45.

1443/08

Manjinder Singh Vs. FCI 46.

1444/08

Balwinder Kumar Vs. FCI 47.

1446/08

Harchand Singh Vs. FCI 48.

1447/08

Magat Singh Vs. FCI 49.

1450/08

Major Singh Vs. FCI 50.

1456/08

Chander Kishore Vs. FCI 51 .

1459/08

Nand Kishore Vs. FCI 52.

1460/08

Balbir Singh Vs. FCI 53.

1463/08

Harpinder Singh Vs. FCI 54.

1464/08

Balwinder Singh Vs. FCI 55.

1467/08

Kashmir Singh Vs. FCI 56.

1471/08

Raj Kumar Vs. FCI 57 .

1472/08

Om Parkash Vs. FCI 58 .

1479/08

Gurjeet Singh Vs. FCI 59.

1482/08

Harbhajan Singh Vs.FCI 60.: 1485/08

Rakesh Kumar Vs. FCI 61.

1493/08

Chhinder Pal Singh Vs.FCI 62.

1494/08

Teja Singhs Vs. FCI 63 .

1495/08

Kashmir Singh Vs. FCI 64.

1497/08

Jogesh Kumar Vs. FCI 65.

1499/08

Jagdish Lal Vs. FCI 66.

1500/08

Arun Shigh Vs. FCI 67. 1501/08 - Ясurcharan Singh Vs. FCI 68.1503 /08 -MO ) Sona Singh VS FCI 6901504/08 (11 - Моят Balkan Singh Vs. FCI 70-1507408 (0-140 ) Я Jagdish Lal Ms. FCI 7101544/08 (1-2 ) Sanjeev Kumar Vs. FCI

[PART II- SEC . 3 ( ii ) ]

(4)

L- 22012/ 321 / 2006/ IR ( CM - II) Dated 28-4-2008 L- 22012/ 126/2007/IR( CM - II ) Dated 30-4-2008 L -22012/ 125 / 2007/ IR( CM - II ) Dated 30-4-2008 L- 22012/ 124/ 2007 /IR( CM - II ) Dated 30-4-2008 L- 22012/ 122 /2007 /IR( CM - II) Dated 30-4-2008 L- 22012 / 119 / 2007 / IR( CM - II ) Dated 30-4-2008 L - 22012 / 139/ 2007 /IR ( CM - II) Dated 30-4-2008 L- 22012/ 216/ 2007 /IR( CM - II) Dated 2-5-2008 L- 22012/ 61 / 2007/ IR ( CM - II) Dated 30-4-2008 L- 22012/ 62/2007 / IR ( CM - II) Dated 30-4-2008 L- 22012 / 72/ 2007 /IR( CM - II) Dated 30-4-2008 L- 22012/ 219/ 2007 /IR ( CM - II) Dated 2-5-2008 L - 22012/ 70/ 2007 / IR ( CM - II) Dated 30-4-2008 L- 22012/ 71 / 2007 /IR( CM - II) Dated 30-4-2008 L -22012/ 238 / 2007 /IR( CM - II ) Dated 2-5-2008 L - 22012/ 316 / 2007 /IR( CM - II ) Dated 2-5-2008 L22012 / 237 /2007 /IR( CM - II ) Dated 2-5-2008 L- 22012/ 315 / 2007 /IR( CM - II ) Dated 2-5-2008 L- 22012 / 180 / 2007 /IR( CM - II ) Dated 30-4-2008 L- 22012/284/ 2007 /IR ( CM - II ) Dated 2-5-2008 L- 22012/ 285/ 2007 / IR( CM - II ) Dated 2-5-2008 L- 22012/ 232/ 2007 /IR ( CM - II ) Dated 2-5-2008 L -22012/ 235 /2007 /IR ( CM - II ) Dated 2-5-2008 L- 22012/ 231 / 2007 / IR ( CM - II ) Dated 2-5-2008 L- 22012 / 80/ 2007 /IR ( CM - II) Dated 29-4-2008 L- 22012 / 81 / 2007 /IR ( CM - II) Dated 29-4-2008 L- 22012/ 213 / 2007 /IR ( CM - II) Dated 2-5-2008 L- 22012 / 64/ 2007 /IR ( CM - II) Dated 30-4-2008 L- 22012/ 195/ 2007 / IR ( CM - II) Dated 30-4-2008 L- 22012/ 65 / 2007 /IR ( CM - II ) Dated 30-4-2008.

L - 22011 / 28 / 2008 /IR ( CM - II ) Dated 5-5-2008 L- 22012 /27 / 2008 /IR ( CM - II ) Dated 5-5-2008 L - 22012/ 321 / 2007 /IR ( CM - II ) Dated 2-5-2008 L - 22012 /320 / 2007 /IR ( CM - II ) Dated 2-5-2008 1071-22012 /327/ 2007 / IR ( CM - II ) Dated 2-5-2008 -22012/319/2007 / IR ( CM - II ) Dated 2-5-2008 -22012/318/2007/IR ( CM - II ) Dated 2-5-2008 10122012/349/2007/IR ( CM -II) Dated 2-5-2008 L22011/ 9/ 2008 /IR ( CM - II) Dated 5-5-2008 DL- 22012/332/2007 /IR ( CM - II ) Dated 2-5-2008 भारत का राजपत्र: दिसम्बर 4, 2010/अग्रहायण 13 , 1932

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3( ii) ]

(3)

(2)

(1)

1520/08

72.

Baljeet Singh Vs. FCI

Raman Kumar Vs. FCI 1521/08

73.

1523/08

74.

Jagdish Singh Vs. FCI 1524/08

75.

Sanjeev Kunar Vs. FCI 1525/08

Makhan Singh Vs.FCI 76.

1534/08

Sukhdev Singh Vs. FCI 77.

1535/08

Raghbir Vs. FCI 78.

1557/08

Tarsem Singh Vs. FCI 79.

1568/08

80.

Pargat Singh Vs. FCI 1569/08

81.

Raj Kumar Vs. FCI 1573/09

Harbans Singh Vs. FCI 82.

1575/09

Jagtar Singh Vs. FCI 83.

144/05

84.

Baghu Singh Vs. FCI 148/05

85.

Bogha Singh Vs. FCI 151/05

Raja Singh Vs. FCI 86.

154/05

87.

Bachitar Singh Vs. FCI 155/05

88.

Major Singh Vs. FCI 156/05

Malkiat Singh Vs. FCI 89.

157/05

90.

Jupa Singh Vs. FCI 161/05

Narsi Singh Vs. FCI 91.

1173/05

Bant Singh Vs. FCI 92.

Sukhdev Singh Vs. FCI 1174/05

93.

1178/05

Darshan Singh Vs. FCI 94.

1181/05

95.

Gurjant Singh Vs. FCI 1184/05

96.

Bharpur Singh Vs. FCI 1186/05

Piara Singh Vs. FCI 97.

1187/05

Dalwar Singh Vs. FCI 98.

1191/05

ManjitPal Vs. FCI 99.

1192/05

Amarjit Singh Vs. FCI 100.

1193/05

Mukhmar Singin Vs. FCI 101.

1194/05

102.

Naranjan Singh Vs. FCI 1199/05

Nand Singh Vs. FCI 103.

1208/05

104.

Ukar Singh Vs. FCI 1209/05

Goga Singh Vs. FCI 105.

1210/05

106.

Laloo Singh Vs. FCI 1211/05

Gajji Singh Vs. FCI 107.

4548GI /10-32

8489

(4)

L-22011/21 /2008/IR (CM- II) Dated 5-5-2008 L- 22012/385/2007/IR (CM- II) Dated 2-5-2008 L- 22012/353 /2007/IR (CM- II) Dated 2-5-2008 L- 22012/352/ 2007/IR (CM -II) Dated 2-5-2008 L-22011 /20/2008/IR (CM - II) Dated 5-5-2008 L- 22011/26/2008/IR (CM -II) Dated 5-5-2008 L-22011 /25/2008/IR (CM - II ) Dated 5-5-2008 L- 22011 /41/ 2008 /IR (CM- II) Dated 29-7-2008 L- 22011 / 70/2008 /IR ( CM - II) Dated 6-11-2008 L- 22011 / 71 /2008 /IR (CM- II) Dated 6-11-2008 L-22011 / 74/ 2008 /IR (CM - II) Dated 29-12-2008 L- 22011/59/2008/IR (CM - II) Dated 29-12-2008 L-22012/292/ 2004/IR (CM - II) Dated 15-7-2005 L-22012/291 / 2004/IR (CM - II) Dated 15-7-2005 L-22012/290/2004/IR (CM - II) Dated 15-7-2005 L- 22012/293 /2004/IR (CM - II) Dated 15-7-2005 L-22012/294/2004/IR (CM - II) Dated 15-7-2005 L-22012/ 295/2004/IR (CM- II) Dated 15-7-2005 L- 22012/ 296/2004/IR (CM - II) Datod 15-7-2005 L-22012/302/2004/ IR (CM - II) Dated 15-7-2005 L- 22012/420/2004/IR (CM - II ) Dated 29-8-2005 L-22012/419/2004/IR (CM - II ) Dated 29-8-2005 L- 22012/423/2004/IR (CM - II) Dated 29-8-2005 L-22012/ 434/2004/ IR (CM- II ) Dated 29-8-2005 L-22012/439/2004/IR ( CM - II) Dated 29-8-2005 L- 22012/437/2004/IR (CM - II) Dated 29-8-2005 L-22012/436/2004/IR (CM - II) Dated 29-8-2005 L-22012/435 /2004/IR ( CM- II) Dated 29-8-2005 L-22012/424/ 2004/IR ( CM - II) Datod 29-8-2005 L-22012/425/2004/IR (CM - II) Datel 29-8-2005 L- 22012/422 /2004/IR (CM - II) Datol 29-8-2005 L- 22012/432/2004/IR ( CM - II) Dated 29-8-2005 L-22012/135/2004/ IR (CM - II) Dated 14-9-2005 L-22012/ 132/2004/IR (CM - II) Dated 14-9-2005 L- 22012/ 131 /2004/IR (CM - II ) Dated 14-9-2005 L- 22012/ 130/2004/IR (CM - II) Datexl 14-9-2005 8490

THE GAZETTE OF INDLA: DECEMBER 4, 2010/AGRAHAYANA 13 , 1932

(1)

(2)

108.

1212/05

Amriks.FC !

109.

1213/05

Sukhdeepb Vs. FCI 110.

1214/05

Jarnail Srogh Vs. FCI 111 .

1215/05

Kanta Sigh Us.FCI 112.

121605

Dan

114

1239/05

BhagwanthighVis , PCI 1242405

Naomi Vs. FCI 1243,05

Tarww Vs. FCI 1245/05

Gurtha Hugh Vs. FCI 1746/05

Eukaran atgh Vs. FCI 119.

1247/05

Mohinder Singh Vs. FCI 120. 1248/05

Surjit Singh Vs.FCI 121.

1249/05

Bachen Singh Vs. FCI 12.2

1250/05

Ajma Singh FO 123

1251406

Karen Singh ' s . FCI ( Sangrur)

124

1253/06

Jagroup Strogh Vs. FCI ( Sangrur)

125.

ID6/09(1)

Pritam Singh Vs. FCI 136.

ID7/09

Satish Kumar Vs. FCI 127.

ID 8/09

Dalhir Singh Vs. FCI 28.

ID 9/09

Rupinder Pal Singh Vs.FCI 129.

ID 10/09

Swaran Singh Vs. FCI ID11/09

Hira Lal Vs. FCI 131 .

ID 27/09

Bhupinder Singh Vs. FCI 132.

ID 30/09

Gurinect Singh Vs. FCI 133.

ID 34/09

Gurmit Singh Vs. FCI 134.

ID 35/09

Sukhwinder Singh Vs. FCI 135.

ID37/09

Gurmit Singh Vs. FCI 136.

ID 38/09

Daljit Singh Vs. FCI 137.

ID 2/2009

Harpal Singh & ( 86 ) others Vs.FCI

CE facstions of ha un involved in all times. Hence the all the cases wer Glid for add you .The ences are in

the Central Сапамога clemed thewipetesseer the workmen As want wat worka,whereas in ance of industrial de , daar is regarding thempinyer- employee ralpsutam pitcheon the worknuo antanagement of Tel. The .cf ... ferences and

[PART II- SEC . 3 ( ii ) ]

(4)

L- 22012/134/2004 /IR ( CM - J ) Datod 14-9-2005 L- 22012/ 127/2004/IR ( CM - 11 ) Datexl 14-9-2005 L- 22012/ 129 /2004/ IR. ( CM - II ) Dato 14-9-2005 L- 22012 / 128/2004/ IR ( CM -JJ) Dated 14-9-2005 L-220123 ( CM - II) Dated 14-9-2005 L -22012 / 40/2005S19 (CM - II) Dated 1-12-2005 L-22017/47/405/AR CM - II) Dated 1-12-2005 1/22012/44/2005AP: CM - 11 ) Datod 1-12-2005 1-2004/ 29/ 3000- AR CM - II) Dated 1-12-2005 L- 22012/4205AF CM - ID) Dated6-12-2005 L- 27012 /1005 /AK( CM - II ) Datod 6-12-2005 L-2203243-2F ( M- 1 ) Dated 1-12-2005 L-220 / 2/ 3 / 2005 Dated 1-12-2005 221420 ) Dated 1-12-2005 ٧٥٠إمامة M - II ) Dated 14-12-2005 L2R ( CM - II ) Dated 1-12-2005 1-220237205AR ( CM - 11) Dated1-12-2005 L- 22011/5/ 2009/AR ( CM - 11 ) Dated 13-4-2009 L-22011/3 /2009 /AR ( CM - I) Datal 13-4-2009 L-22011/ 2 /2009 /IR ( CM - II ) Dated 13-4-2009 L-22011 / 1 /2009 /AR ( CM - II ) Dated 13-4-2009 L-22011 / 4/2009/ IR ( CM - II ) Dated 13-4-2009 L-22011 / 7/ 2009 /IR (CM - II ) Dated 13-4-2009 L-22011 / 14/2009 / IR ( CM - 11 ) Dated 14-5-2009 L-22011/ 13/ 2009 / IR ( CM - 11 ) Dated 14-5-2009 L-22011 / 16/2009 /IR ( CM - 11) Dated 14-5-2009 L-22011 /24/2009 /1R ( CM - 11 ) Dated 14-5-2009 L-22011 / 18/ 2009 /IR ( CM - II ) Datol 14-5-2009 L-22011 / 17/2009 /IP ( CM - II ) Dated 14-5-2009 L-22011 /40/2008 / IR ( CM - II ) Dated 24-3-2009 pleadings in all the reference is that the main issue before this Tribunal for adjudication is whether the workmen were the employees of management of FCI or their services were provided with through contractor . Thereafter , consequential issue is regarding the relief, if any ?

It is the contention of the workmen in the sets of industrial disputes and references , which were referred to by Central Government on nature of contract supplying the contractual labour to the management of FCI, that every 349, भारत का राजपत्र: दिसम्बर 4, 2010/ अग्रहायण 13 , 1932

[ भाग 11- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

Abolition ) Act , 1970. If there is a violation of the provisions of the said Act, the workmen shall not be treated the direct employees of the management of Food Corporation of India , but it will resulted into the criminal action against the concerned authorities under the penal provisions of the saidAct .

workman was doing the work under the administrative control of the management . Payment was also made good by the management and contract was camouflage and sham. In rest ofthe industrial disputes every workmen has raised the same plea that they were directy engaged by the management of FCI and the coutractor shown in between the management and the workmen is shen : and camouflage because the same was introduced as the paper anangement to make the payment good .

the So far as the relationship between the workmen and management of Food Corporation of India is concerned, itis a matter of fact and will be adjudicated on perusal of the pleadings filed and evidence adduced by the parties .

On the other hand the manasement of respondent FCI has challenged the employer and employee relationship by contending that services of every workman were provided with to the management through contractor and none of the workman was employee of the management of FCI . On the basis of above , I am of the view that main issues for adjudication before this Tribunal are as follows: -

(i) Whether the workmen were/ are the employees of the management of FCI ?

In few of the references , it is challenged that contractor rendered the services but the contract was shame and camouflage . In another reference , it is also challenged by the workmen that the work of Class -IV employees was taken from them, whereas , they were said to be engaged as security guards through a contractor . It is contended by learned counsel for the workmen that for the working of Class - IV employee , the workmen became the direct employee of the Food Corporation of India .

(ii) To what relief/ reliefs , if any, they are cutitled?

It is hereby made clear that considering common questions of law and facts and similar nature of all the references involved in all the references , the same were consolidated and evidence of few workmen was recorded on behalf of all. Likewise , two witnesses on behalf of the management were also recorded in all the cases in Ferozepur Camp Court on 22-09-2010 . Evidence of the parties was recorded in detail . Documents were also filed by the parties .

Almost in all the reference , it is admitted that no appointment letter was issued by the management . No doubt , it is denied by the workmen that payment of wages were made good by the contractor but the documentary evidence filed by the management proved that payment to the workamen were made good by the contractor and not by the management of Food Corporation of India . Hon'ble Supreme Court in 2008 LLR 801 , GM , ONGC Shilcher Vs. ONGC Contractual Workers Union , has laiddown the criteria to establish the direct employee - employer relationship between the workman and the management of any organization . If we apply the ratio of GM, ONGC Shilcher's case ( supra ) the workmen have to prove the following facts to establish the employee - employer relationship:-

(1) That there existed a relationship of master and servant , ( Workmen were directly engaged by management of FCI)

(2) That there was no contractor appointed by the management of Food Corporation of India .

I have heard the parties and their learned counsels at length . The main arguments of learned counsel / representative of the workmen were that all the workmen were engaged by the management of Food Corporation of India directly their appointment through contractor as shown by management is illegal , being against the provisions of the Contract Labour ( Regulation and Abolition ) Act , 1970. It has also been argued by learned counsel for the workmen that all the workmen were directly under the adminstrative control of the management . They were paid the wages by the management of Food Corporation of India and in fact they were the employees of the management of Food Corporation of India and not of the contractor.

(3) The management of Food Corporation of India used to supervise the alleged work assigned to anbvidual workers .

(4) Thai the management of Food Corporation of hyti took disciplinary action and called tor capianations from the workers .

(5) the workers were paid wages by the masagement of Food Corporation of India betely and not through the contractor .

(0) As the cost of repetition , the wages were paid directly to the workers by the management Food Corporation of India and ti acquaintance role were prepared banc On the other hand , c. for the 30 VOKLICE and the adia . The services of tcentfactors . was paid to the management submitted that thet of employer -employee betwee management of Food Corporatio the workmen were provided by The consolidated contracted contractors by the managemennod Cogrotation of India , and thereafter, the wages: Aya Yanet were paid by the contractors and not by Food Corporation of India . It has further been subinmitthal sand sound for the management that there has been no violation of any provisions of the Contract Labour ( Regulation and 8492

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 4, 2010/AGRAHAYANA 13 , 1932

management of Food Corporation of India to make the payment to the workers .

If above mentioned ratio of GM , ONGC , Shilchar's case is applied in all the reference, it is clear that workmen have failed to prove that they were appointed/ engaged by the management of Food Corporation of India . There is not a single iota of evidence on record to prove that they were directly under the administrative control of the management ofFood Corporation of India . No doubt , it is contended by the workmen that their attendence were marked by the officers / officials of the management of Food Corporation of India , but it will not be sufficient to prove the administrative control over them . They were supposed to file/ adduced some cogent evidence like sanction of leave application, disciplinary action taken by the management ofFood Corporation of India, if any, etc. Thus , the workmen have failed to prove that they were under the administrative control of the management of Food Corporation of India . On the payment of wages the management of Food Corporation of India has filed the documentary evidence which proved that consolidated amount on the basis of number of days worked by the workmen were given to the contractor, and contractor on the other hand , used to pay the wages to the workmen . The management has field all the relevant documents such as attendance sheet signed by the officers of the management of Food Corporation of India, order of payment based on the attendance of the workmen to the contractor and thereafter the payment of wages by the contractor to the workmen .

On perusal of all the evidence oral and documentary givenby the workmen officer of the management of Food Corporation of India and the contractor , I am of the view that payment of wages to all the workmen were made good by the contractor and not by the management of Food Corporation of India.

The above discussion proves that neither the workmen were appointed/ engaged by the management of Food Corporation of India nor they were under the administrative control of the management of Food Corporation of India . They were also not paid the wages by the Food Corporation of India . Hence their existed no master - servant relationship between the management of Food Corporation of India and all the workmen .

In few of the references as stated earlier it was contended that the workmen worked as Class - IV employee whereas they were shown as the security guards by the so called contract . It was further contended by the workmen that the working as Class - IV employee was against the terms of the contract , the workmen shall be treated as the direct employee of the Food Corporation of India.

Now the question before this Tribunal is whether the change in the nature of work will be sufficient to make the workmen under the direct administrative control of the

[ PART II - SEC . 3 ( ii ) ] management of Food Corporation of India . For all purposes except the change in the nature of the work , it is established that the services of the workmen were provided by a contractor to the management as security gurads . In my view, it was a perfect contract and in violation of any term ofcontract by any officer of the Food Corporation of India , it will not resulted to treat workmen as Class - IV employee under the direct administrative control of the management of Food Corporation of India as no workmen was appointed as Class - IV employee . There is no such evidence on record to prove the intention of the management to engage the workmen directly as Class - IV employees . There are rules for appointment/ engagement of Class - IV employee . The rules regarding the engagement/ appointment of Class - IV employee were not complied with while engaging the present workmen . The Legislative does not permit any person to by pass the rules relating to public appointment . Public appointments have to be made strictly as per the rules and new channel cannot be permitted to be opened . Moreover , it is contended that pervious engagement was made by a contractor as security guard but thereafter , few officers of the Food Corporation of Inge them for Class - IV employee . Thus , by engaging the security guards as Class- IV employee , in my view, the officer of the management of Food Corporation of India has commisked the wrong for violation of the terms of the contract . But the law connot permit any officer to violate any rule or procedure of public appointment by such change of nature of work. If it is permitted, it will result into lawlessness in the organization . Hon'ble the Supreme Court in State of West Bengal and others Vs. Banibrata Ghosh and others 2-2-2009 has propounded the same principle of law that a teacher appointed against the leave vacancy cannot deemed or directed to be appointed against the permanent vacancy. For the appointment against the permanent vacancy procedure laid down in rules and regulations of the department have to be followed. on Accordingly, if the ratio of Banibrata Ghosh's case (supra) is applied to the instant cases , the workmen , cannot be considered as Class - IV employees working with the management of Food Corporation of India just on the basis of the fact that they, instead of working as security guard , worked as Class - IV employce . For their working as Class- IV employee they may claim a reasonable compensation under the appropriate law against the officers who have changed their nature of work in violation of the terms of the contract , but this change of nature of work cannot create the relationship of employer and employee between the workman and the management of Food Corporation of India.

In , GM , ONGC , Shichar's Case ( supra ) the conditions under which a contract can be treated a camouflage and shams are mentioned . Hon'ble the Supreme Court in this case has relied upon the law down in Steel Authority of 8493 भारत का राजपत्र : दिसम्बर 4, 2010/अग्रहायण 13 , 1932

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii ) ]

Government under Section 10 ( 1 ) . of the Contract Labour (Regulation and Abolition) Act, 1970 .

(2) There may be an issue regarding the registration of establishment of principal employer under Section 7 of the Contract Labour ( Regulation and Abolition) Act, 1970 .

(3) There may be an issue regarding the license by the contractor under Section 12 of Contract Labour (Regulation and Abolition ) Act , 1970.

The issue to be decided is whether in the case of violation of any of the provisions mentioned under Section 10 (1 ) , Section 7 and Section 12 of the Contract Labour (Regulation and Abolition ) Act 1970 , the contract labour shall be deemed to be an employee ofthe principal employer .

India Ltd. , & Others Vs Nation Union Water Workers & Others AIR 2001 Supreme Court 3527 ( 1 ) . The question before this Tribunal is under what circumstances a contract between the management of Food Corporation of India and the workmen can be held to be sham and camouflage ? In case the contract has been held to be sham or camouflage , the contract labour working in the management of the principal employment are held to be employees of principal employer himself. It depends on the facts and circumstances of each case whether the contract executed in between the management and the contractor is camouflage and sham . It is also a issue of facts and has to be decided on the basis of the facts and circumstanes of the case . The court has to look into whether these facts emerged in reality or there was some paper arrangement to make the payment good to the workmen through contractor?

Inthese reference , it is challenged by the workmen that contract is sham and camouflage. It is proved beyond doubt that the workmen were not appointed/ engaged directly by the management of Food Corporation of India as per its rules and regulations . They were not under the administrative control of the Food Corporation of India nor paid the wages directly by the Food Corporation of India . It is contended by the management that they were engaged through the contractor under a valid contract . The term contract is defined in the Indian Contract Act . All the agreements enforceable by law are contracts . Agreements are made by two persons when they agree on the same thing in the same sence . The contract may be oral or written . To declare a contract a camouflage or sham , as stated earlier, it is to be seen whether a paper arrangement was made to make the payment good on considering the facts and circumstances of the case , I am of the view that this is not the case in these references . Unless and until the terms and conditions as laid down in GM , ONGC Shilchar's case (supra ) are not complied with , no workmen can be treated as the direct employee of the Food Corporation of India .

This issue has been decided and settled by Hon'ble the Apex Court in Steel Authority of India Ltd's case (supra) . Moreover , Punjab and Haryana High Court in Food Corporation of India & Others Vs Presiding Officer , Central Government Industrial Tribuanl- cum- Labour Court - 1 , Chandigarh and others 2008 LLR 391 , has decided this issue after relying the ratio of Steel Authority of India Ltd. , case (supra) . Without mentioning the relevant paras of Steel Authority of India Ltd. , case ( supra ) , and Central Government Industrial Tribunal- cum- Labour Courts's case (supra), I am relying the ratio of both of the judgments , and the ratio of both of the judgments is that if there is any violation of Section 7 , Section 10 and Section 12 of the Contract Labour (Regulation and Aboliton ) Act , then only penal provisions of Section 23 and Section 25 of the said Act are attracted. Hence , it is nowhere provided that such employees , employed through the contractor would become employees of the principal employer. I have gone through the facts and circumstances of the case . Almost in all the references the registration and the license have been produced by the management of Food Corporation of India . It may only resulted in penal actions under Section 23 and Section 25 of the Contract Labour ( Regulation and Abolition ) Act, 1970 , if there is any violation of any provisions of the Contract Labour ( Regulation and Abolition) Act .

Accordingly, I am of the view that none of the workmen was the employee of the management . There was no relationship of master - servant and employer and employee between the workmen and the management of Food Corporation of India . Thus , no questions for termination of the services of the workmen by Food Corporation of India arise .

The next issue for the disposal before this Tribunal iswhether the workmen will be deemed to be in the services ofthe management of Food Corporation of India on account of violation of any of the provisions of Contract Labour (Regulation and Abolition) Act , 1970. It is issue of law and has limited concern with the facts . On the issue of facts , I have already given my view that the workmen are not employees of the management of Food Corporation of India but their services were provided by the different contractors to the management . As this issue of law is also raised by the parties , it is the duty of this Tribunal to decide it as well . On this issue there may be three circumstance: -

This contract system for providing the services of the workmen to the management really personally pained me. In all the references relating to Patiala and Ferozepur it has came before the Tribunal that this contract system was abolished for advantage of workmen . But in practice this resulted into the most disadvantage to each workmen (1) There may be a case where the practic of contract labour is prohibited by the appropriate 8494

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 4 , 2010/AGRAHAYANA 13 , 1932 [PART II- SEC . 3 ( in ) ]

Court - 1 , Chandigarh as shown in the annexure , in the industrial dispute between the management of Northern Railway and their workman , received by the Central Government on 08-11-2010 .

[No. L- 41011 /39/99 - IR ( B - 1 ]

RAMESH SINGH, Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

BEFORE SHRI GYANENDRA KUMAR SHARMA , PRESIDING OFFICER, CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL- CUM- LABOUR COURT ,-1 , CHANDIGARH .

Case I.D. No- . 143/2000

TheDivisional Secretary, Uttar Railway Karamchari Union , Ambala Division , A.C. Kapoor Ahata , Ambala Cantt . (Haryana) .

...Applicant

Versus

because the services of each workmen were terminated by the outsourcing Agency. Prior to abolition of contract system, every workmen was getting the job and he was earning for his and his family's survival. But on abolition of contract system, no such work was available to any workman . So a beneficial scheme to the workman when executed and practiced became the most disadvantageous to those workman who were serving the department through a contractor on outsource basis . This Tribunal has tried to raise this issue in conciliation proceedings before the officers of the department and this fact came to the notice of the Tribunal that this issue has never been raised before the Board of Directors of FCI . The issue is relating to policy decision and could not be taken up at individual level by the officers of the department in the conciliation proceedings . This issue can be raised before the Board of Directors of F.C.I. that a beneficial scheme should not be permitted to become disadvantageous , if practiced and implemented. This issue can be raised by Secretary Labour before the Board of Directors of F.C.I. being a member of the Board.

The Divisional Railway Manager , Northern Railway, Ambala Cantt. (Haryana) .

..Responden!

APPEARANCES

For the Workman

Shri R.P. Rana

For the Management

Shri R.S. Rana

AWARD

Passed on: - 12-10-10 Inspite of it , I am of the view that personal pain and judicial conscience of this Tribunal cannot override the principle of law . It is established that every workman was serving through a contractor and had no relationship of master and servant with the management of respondent F.C.I. Personal views of any adjudicatory authority cannot guide the judicial conscience , which is to be regulated strictly by provisions of law. What this Tribunal can do at this stage is that a copy of award be sent to the Secretary Labour , after its publication, who is the member of Board of Directors ' of FCI to consider the issue raised by this Tribunal in this award . All the references are accordingly answered . The workmen are not entitled for any relief. Central Government be informed for publication of award and thereafter , file be consigned .

Government of India vide Notification No. L - 41011 / 39/99 /IR ( B - I ) , dated 24-03-2000 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: -

GK. SHARMA , Presiding Officer नई दिल्ली , 10 नवम्बर , 2010

"Whether the action of the Divisional Railway Manager Northern Railway, Ambala Cantt . in denying the under mentioned demands of Uttar Railway Karamchari Union , Ambala Cantt . , is just and legal ? "

(1) 47 workmen of Telecommunication section of Northern Railway, Ambala Cantt . listed in Annexure ' A' may be give benefits of screening from the year 1980 instead of 23-07-1990 .

का.आ. 2974, औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में , केन्द्रीय सरकार उत्तर रेलवे के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच , अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधि करण/ श्रम न्यायालय , चण्डीगढ़ के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 143/2000 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 08-11-2010 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[ सं. एल 41011/39/99- आई आर ( बी -1 ) ]

(2 ) Shri Bhajan S/o Shri Hari Ram, Gangman may be given wages for the period 7-09-1984 to 7-02-1987.

रमेश सिंह , डेस्क अधिकारी

New Delhi , the 10th November, 2010

(3) Shri Ashok Kumar S/ o Shri Bal Mukand , Gangman may be given wages for the period 7-09-1984 to 7-02-1987 , if not,to what relief the workmen are entitled ?

S.O. 2974. In pursuance of Section 17of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) , the Central Government hereby publishes the Award ( ID No. 143/2000 ) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal - cum- Labour

Afterreceiving the reference parties were informed Parties appeared and filed their respective pleadings . Ou 8495 भारत का राजपत्र : दिसम्बर 4, 2010/अग्रहायण 13 , 1932

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

careful perusal of the pleadings of the parties there are three issues to be answered by this Tribunal :-

(1 ) Whether the 47 workmen as per list annexure A may be given the benefit of this screening from the year 1980 instead of 23-07-1990 .

(2) Whether Shri Bajhna Singh S /o Shri Hari Singh Gangman is entitled for the wages for the period 7-09-1984 to 7-02-1987 .

between 1992 to 1999. It is true that management was guilty of the administrative inaction and laxity by upholding the result for abnormal period but it is the settled principle of service jurisprudence that merely conducting the screening does not create any vested interest and right of the workman to claim any benefit of the post for which he was screened . After bifurcation of the Office Ambala Division has again screened the workman and their services have been regularized. Thus , this part of the reference is answered in negative that none of the workmen is entitled to take any benefit of screening conducted in the year 1980.

(3 ) Whether Shri Ashok Kumar S/ o Shri Bal Mukand is also entitled for the wages for the period 7-09-1984 to 7-02-1987 ?

Regarding the issue No. 1 the claim of every workmen it that they were working as S & T Grade - D employee in Ambala Division . They were screened in the year 1980 but their result was declared on 23-07-1990 . Every workman through union has demanded that all the service benefits should be given to the employees from the date of screening .

The management raised the objections on the claim of the workmen. It is admitted that screening was conducted in the year 1980. As more as 1438 candidates were screened. The result of 300 was declared . The result of the rest screened worker was not declared . On bifurcation of Delhi and Firozepur Divisional office of Northern Railway, Ambala division came into existance in the year 1987. The order of Divisional office Delhi reaches the Ambala office on 23-07-1990 that the services of those workmen who were screened in the year 1980 be regularized but prior to it , the Ambala Division has screened all the employees again who join Ambala Division and their services were regularization in January 1990.

The another two issues which are relating to the Shri Bajhna Singh S /o Shri Hari Singh Gangman and Ashok Kumar are taken together because both of the issues are related to each other . It is admitted that a FIR was lodged against both of the workmen on 7-9-80 under Section 120 and 121 of the Railway Act read with Section 506 of Indian Penal Code . Both of the workmen remain in the police and judicial custody for substantial period but both of them were acquitted by the Judicial Magistrate on 12-6-1986 . It is the claim of every workman that just after releasing on bail they tried to join the services but they were prevented to join the same on account of pending criminal cases against them . Even after acquittal the management did not permit to join them for substantial period and finally they were permitted to join on 23-02-1987. Every workman has claimed the wages for the period they were not permitted to work with the management . The witness of the management Shri Roshan Lal has categorically stated in his cross - examination that record to prove the fact that both of the workmen have reported to join the duties is not available with the Ambala Division of Railway Department . It is hereby made clear that during the pendency of the industrial dispute number of opportunities were afforded to the management to bring the record from Delhi itself. Even on one occasion a Camp Court was conducted by this Tribunal at Delhi . But no record was filed . Meaning thereby, no record was filed by the Ambala Division or Delhi Division relating of the contention of each workman that they tried to join the services after releasing on bail . The approach of Presiding Officer , responsible for adjudication of grievances of two imbalance person, should not be technical . In the ordinary course of the nature no workman shall wait for disposal of criminal proceeding just to approach the management for joining and that too in the scenario where the judicial life of any criminal case is uncertain depends on so many constraints prevailing in the Courts . Moreover , the witness of the management has not denied that none of the workmen has approached for joining to the department . He has only stated that record relating to this act is not available in the office . The witness has also shown his ignorance about conducting any enquiry against any of the workmen . It is only admitted

that each workmen was charge sheeted but he is unable to The question before the Tribunal is that if test is conducted and result is not declared , the benefit of test without declaration of the result can be given to the workman. Every workman was screened in the year 1980 but result was not declared . The right to hold the post and to get the benefit of the post is based on the declaration of the result of the screening . Screening is just like the examination to see the suitability of every workman . If the result of the suitability is not declared , I am unable to understand how any right to get the benefit of the post can accrue ? The virus of the policy under which every workman was screened and result of 300 candidates was declared is not in question before this Tribunal . The simple reference referred by the Central Government is whether the benefit of screening should be given to every workman from 1980 . In my view this does not empowered this Tribunal to see the ratio of the policy under which result was uphold for the abnormal period . Nodoubt , it was not without explanation . The witness of the management has specifically mentioned that only 300 vacancies were available at that time and the result of 300 employees was doclared in the year 1982. But the witnesses has shown the ignorance regarding the availability of the vacancies in 8496

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 4, 2010/ AGRAHAYANA 13 , 1932

state whether any enquiry was conducted . Giving charge sheet is not an enquiry . On giving charge sheet the misconduct cannot be presumed to be proved . It was on the management to prove the misconduct of each workmen and then to prevant workman to join the services or declined the payment of wages . There is no order of competent authority by which joining was refused . There is no order regarding the conduction of any enquiry . Thus , just after giving charge sheet the management kept mum and even has not given heed to the request of any workmen for joining . This act of the management is against the settled law of principle of natural justice. Without affording any opportunity, without conducting any enquiry both of the workmen were punished. No doubt , right to work is not the fundamental right but it is recognized constitutional right . Rightto work cannot be denied without any authority of law and the management has failed to prove such authority. Accordingly the management has illegally restrained each workman Shri Bhajna & Shri Ashok Kumar to join after their releasing on bail even has permitted them to join after a substantial period from the date of their acquittal . It is true that acquittal in criminal proceedings has no nexus with the departmental proceedings but no department proceedings were conducted by the management . Everything was against the principle of natural justice . It was a so called punishment without passing any order and without conducting any enquiry . Thus , both of the workmen shall be considered to be in service and are entitled for the benefit of wages of that period i.e. from the date they were released on bail. Accordingly, the management is directed to pay the wages for the period in question mentioned above to every workman within a month from the date of publication of this award .

The cumulative affect on issues No. 1 & 2 and 3 is that the case of 47 workmen is not tenable . They are not entitled for the benefit of screening held in the year 1980 but of the workmen namely Shri Bhajna & Shri Ashok Kumar are entitled for the wages for the period in question i.e. from the date they were released on bail . The management is again directed to pay the wages for the period in question mentioned above within one month from the date of publication , of the award . The reference is accordingly answered . Let Central Government be approached for publication of the award , and thereafter , file be consigned to record room .

GK . SHARMA , Presiding Officer नई दिल्ली, 10 नवम्बर , 2010

का.आ. 2975 ,-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 न्यायालय , दिल्ली के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 30/2005 )

[PART II -SEC . 3 ( ii ) ] को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 9-11-2010 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[ सं. एल.- 12012/ 294/2004- आई आर ( बी -1 ) ]

रमेश सिंह , डेस्क अधिकारी New Delhi , the 10th November , 2010 S.O. 2975. In pursuance of Section 17of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) , the Central Government hereby publishes the Award ( ID No. 30/2005) ofthe Central Government Industrial Tribunal - cum- Labour Court -1 , Delhi as shown in the annexure , in the Industrial dispute between the management of State Bank of Patiala and their workman, received by the Central Government on 9-11-2010.

[No. L- 12012/ 294/2004- IR ( B - I ] RAMESH SINGH , Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

BEFORE R. K. YADAV, PRESIDING OFFICER, CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL No. 1 , KARKARDOOMA COURTS COMPLEX, DELHI .

I.D. No. 30/2005

Shri Basant Lal S/ o Shri Mir Singh , Village-Dungar , Post Office- Khas Pooth , District Meerut (U.P. )

...Workman

Versus

1. The Managing Director , State Bank of Patiala , Head Office- the Mall , Patiala .

2. The Assistant General Manager , State Bank of Patiala , Regional Office - III ( D) Chandralok Building , 1st Floor , 36 Janpath , New Delhi .

...Management

AWARD

A Branch Manager , deployed at Connaught Place , New Delhi branch of State Bank of Patiala , asked his counter -part working at Hapur branch of the bank to deploy his brother as watermen on casual basis . Accordingly , the claimant was engaged as waterman at Hapur branch , State Bank of Patiala ( hereinafter referred to as the bank ) and paid at the rate of Rs . 15 per day for actual days he worked . A post of Kahar ( waterman ) was created for Hapur branch ofthe bank , vide letter dated 14-6-97. Employment Exchange, Ghaziabad, was requested to sponsor names of five eligible candidates of O.B.C. category , so that the post may be filled . In pursuance of requested so made , names of five 8497 भारत का राजपत्र : दिसम्बर 4 , 2010 / अग्रहायण 13 , 1932

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ,

lieu thereof and retrenchment compensation was paid to him . He seeks reinstatement in service with continuity and fullbackwages .

persons were sponsored by the Employment Exchange , Ghaziabad . Since the claimant does not belong to O.B.C. category, his name was not there in the list , so sponsored. Influence of his brother was operating upon the Branch Manager , who opted not to select anyone out of those five persons , whose , names were sponsored by the Employment Exchange . On the other hand Banch Manager wrote letter dated 25-7-97 to the competent authority to accord sanction for payment of wages at 1 / 3rd of the scale wages to the claimant . On 3rd of December , 98 , post of waterman at Hapur Branch of the bank was abolished . Consequently services of the claimant were done away w.e.f. 8th of December , 98. After a lapse of six years , he raised an industrial dispute seeking his reinstatement on the post . Since conciliation proceedings failed , the appropriate Government referred the disputeto Central Government Industrial Tribunal , Dhanbad , vide order No. L- 12012/ 294/ 2004 - IR (B - I) , New Delhi dated 24th ofAugust , 2005 , with following terms of reference:

4. Claim was demurred by the management pleading that the claimant was engaged on daily wage basis for exigencies of work . His disengagement does not amount to retrenchment . He was paid @ Rs . 15 per day which amount was subsequently enhanced to Rs . 20 per day . No post of waterman was there at Hapur branch of the bank . On 14-6-97 post of waterman was created for Hapur Branch of the bank . A candidate of O.B.C. category was to be appointed for that post . Names of five candidates were sponsored by the Employment Exchange , wherein name of the claimant did not figure since he does not belong to O.B.C category . None from those persons was found suitable to be appointed as waterman . It has been denied that the claimant was paid his wages @ Rs . 350 PM w.e.f. 1-4-94 . It has further been denied that the continuously worked from 30-8-93 to 7-12-98 . His services were disengaged when there was no exigency for his engagement . His claim for reinstatement is unfounded , hence it may be dismissed.

"Whether the person Shri Basant Lal S /o Shri Mir Singh was engaged as Waterman (Kahar ) w.c.f. 30-8-1993 to 7-12-1998 continuously in the Hapur Branch of State Bank of Patiala ? If so , his disengagement/ termination from the service w.e.f. 8-12-1998 without following the provisions of Section 25 F, G & H is legal and justified ? If not , to what relief the concerned workman is entitled to ? "

5. Claimant has examined himself in support of his claim. Shri Ashok Kumar Jain tendered his affidavit Ex . MWI / A as evidence on behalf of the bank . He was cross examined at length on behalf of the claimant . Subsequently claimant again entered the witness box , after seeking permission from this Tribunal and proved letter dated 25-7-97 as Ex . WW 1/1 .

2. Vide corrigendum issued on the strength of order No. L- 12012/294/ 2004 - IR ( B - I) , New Delhi , dated 17-9-2005, the appropriate Government had clarified that the dispute was to be referred to this Tribunal for adjudication and inadvertently it was referredto Central Government Industrial Tribunal , Dhanbad . Therefore , typographical mistake was corrected and it was sent to this Tribunal for adjudication.

6. Arguments were heard at the bar , Shri Aditya Aggarwal , authorised representative , assisted by Shri Vipin Chohan advanced arguments on behalf of the claimant . Shri Narinder Pal , authorised representative , raised his submissions on behalf of the bank . Written submissions were filed by the parties . I have given my careful considerations to the arguments advanced at the bar and cautiously perused the record. My findngs on issues involved in the controversy are as follows :

7. Engagement of the claimant as water boy at Hapur Branch of the bank is not a disputed fact . Claimant asserts that he was engaged for the first time in 1993. He worked in the said branch up to 7-12-98 . On these facts Shri Ashok Kumar Jain unfolds that the claimant was engaged to serve as waterman as and when there was exigency of work . He presents that the claimant was engaged intermittently and was paid @ Rs . 15 per day for actual days of work . Subsequently he was paid @ Rs . 210 per day .

8. This Tribunal has to ascertain as to whether the claimant had worked continuously for a year, to get protection of Section 25 - F of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( in short the Act ) . What continuous service for an year means ? For an answer to this proposition we have to 3. Claim statement was filed by Shri Basant Lal pleading that there was a vacancy of waterman at Hapur branch of the Bank . He was working in the said branch as waterman since 30-8-93 . No appointment letter was issued to him . He was paid @ Rs . 350 PM w.e.f. 1-4-94 . On 25-7-97 the Branch Manager wrote to the Regional Manager that he has been continuously working with the branch for the last 4 years and sanction may be accorded to pay him wages at 1 / 3rd of minima of the scale . Post of Kahar was created on 7-8-97 and steps were taken to fill that post by way of getting names sponsored from Employment Exchange . His name was sponsored by the Employment Exchange . He was selected for that post. He worked continuously for more than 240 days in each calendar year . However, on 3-12-98 Regional Manager asked Branch Manager , Hapur Branch of the bank to disengage him . It was a decision taken with ulterior motives . His services were terminated w.e.f. 8-12-98 . Neither notice nor pay in

4548 GI/10-33 8498

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 4, 2010 /AGRAHAYAΝΑ 13 , 1932

advert to the provisions of section 25 - B of the Act which defines " continuous service " . Under sub - section ( 1 ) of the said section, " continuous service for a period " may comprise of two periods viz . ( i ) uninterrupted service , and ( ii ) interrupted service on account of ( a ) sickness , (b ) authorized leave , ( c) an accident , ( d) a strike which is not legal , ( e) a lock - out , and ( f) a cessation of work that is not due to any fault on the part of the workman . Sub- section (2) of the said section introduces a fiction to the effect that even if a workman is not in " continuous service " within the meaning of clause ( 1 ) for a period of one year or six months , he shall be deemed to in continuous service for that period under an employer if he has actually worked for the days specified in clauses ( a) and (b ) thereof. In Vijay Kumar Majoo ( 1968 Lab . I.C.1180 ) it was held that one year's period contemplated by sub - section ( 2 ) furnished a unit of measure and if during that unit of measure the period of service actually rendered by the workman is 240 days , then he can be considered to have rendered one year's continuous services for the purpose of the section . The idea is that if within a unit period of one year a person had put in at least 240 days of service, then he must get the benefit conferred by the Act . Consequently, an enquiry has to be made to find out whether the workman has actually worked for not less than 240 days during a period of 12 calendar months immediately preceding the retrenchment .

9. Onus lies on the claimant to establish that he worked continuously for 240 days in a calendar year , preceding the date of retrenchment. To discharge the onus the claimant asserts that he served the bank for 7 years . Whenpost of water boy came to an end he was made to go home . However, he admits that documents Ex . WW1 / MI , Ex . WW1 /M2 , Ex . WW1 / M3 and Ex . WW /M 4 were relied by him before the Conciliation Officer . On perusal of these documents it came to light that initially the claimant was paid @ 15 per day and for subsequently @ 20 per day actual days of his work . Ex. WWI / M1 speaks that his wages for six days , from 2nd April to 27-4-96 amounting to Rs . 90 , were sactioned in his favour. Ex . WWI / M2 highlights that his wages ,from 26-5-97 to 31-5-97 , amounting to Rs . 90, were sanctioned in his favour . Ex . WW1 / M3 makes it clear that a his wage for 7th of December, 98 amounting to Rs . 20 was sanctioned in his favour . Ex. WW1 / M4 crystalises that a sum of Rs . 120 was sanctioned in favour of the claimant as his wages . These documents make it apparent that claimant was engaged intermittently as and when exigency arose . He was paid for the days of work , for which he was engaged. His services were never availed continuously for a period of one month , not to talk of for a period of 240 days .

10. Ex. WW1 / 1 has been proved by the claimant , which document purports to have been written by the Branch Manager to Regional Manager of the bank , on 25-7-97 . Contents of this letter are vehemently relied by the

[ PART II- S .3 ( ii ) ] claimant to prove that he had served the work continuously for a period of 240 days in each calendar year . Therefore, it becomes expedient to construe this letter. First limb of Ex . WW1 / 1 reads as follows :

"The above named ( Basant Lal S / o Mir Singh ) is working as Kahar in our branch since last four years and we are paying him Rs . 15 per day for the job continuously. "

Name and perentage of the claimant have been supplied out of the subject of that letter.

11. Now an exercise would be undertaken to ascertain as to whether the claimant had rendered four years continuous service with the bank. First limb of the letter consist of two parts , namely, ( i) the above named is working as Kahar in our branch since last four years , and ( ii ) we are paying him Rs . 15 per day for the job continuously. As projected above , Branch Manager reports to the Regional Manager that the claimant was working as Kahar in their branch since last four years . The words " last four years " nowhere project that the Branch Manager presents that he was working continuously for last four years . The words " since last four years " project the duration for which the claimant was engaged in the bank . Duration of four years spells that the claimant only was engaged . The proposition that his engagement was continuous or otherswise docs not emerge at all . Therefore , to give meaning to these words one has to see contents of the second part of the said paragraph . In the second part , it has been explained that he was paid at Rs . 15 per day for the job continuously . It has been explained therein that his payment at Rs . 15 per day has not changed , since the date of initial engagement till the date when Ex . WW1 / 1 was written . Word "continuously " classifies the rate of payment and not the duration for which he worked. It nowhere have any relation with the words " since last four years " . Therefore , the contents of letter Ex . WW 1/1 , referred above , nowhere give an idea that the Branch Manager made an admission in Ex. WW 1/1 that the claimant was working with the bank from last four years continuously .

12. Ex . WWI / Mlto Ex.WWI / M4 are the documents which give clue for interpretation of Ex . WW1 / 1. These documents explain that wages of the claimant , for the period he was engaged intermittently, were sanctioned in his favour . It is implicit out of these documents that the job , for which claimant was engaged intermittently, was not for a longer duration . As and when there was exigency for engaging the claimant as waterman , he was engaged and paid for that very period soon thereafter . Bank had not waited even for the end of the month , to calculate the period for which he worked in that month for releasing his wages . Therefore , it is obvious that the words " since last four years ", referred in Ex . WW1 / 1 nowhere project that his service remained continuous for spell of four years .

8499 भारत का राजपत्र : दिसम्बर 4, 2010/अग्रहायण 13 , 1932

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii ) ]

termination , if any, the wage register , the attendance register etc. Drawing of adverse inference ultimately would depend thereafter on facts of each case . The above decisions however make it clear that mere affidavits of self- serving statements made by the claimant/workman will not suffice in the matter of discharge of the burden placed by law on the workman to prove that he had worked for 240 days in a given. The above judgments further lay down that mere non - production of muster rolls per se without any plea of suppression by the claimant workman will not be the ground for the tribunal to draw an adverse inference against the management . Lastly , the above judgments lay down the basic principle , namely that the Hight Court under Article 226 ofthe Constitution will not interfere with the concurrent findings of fact recorded by the labour court unless they are perverse . This exercise will depend upon facts of each case ."

13. Subsequently sections of Ex . WW1 / 1 explain the auxasty of the Branch Manager to release wages to the claimant at 1 / 3rd of minimum of scale wages . He details that he has come to know that post of Kahar has been Created in Hapur branch and accordingly as per banks policy minimum wages at 1 /3rd of the scale wages may be sanctioned for the claimant. In Ex. WW1 / 1 . Branch Manager , nowhere explains source of his information for creation of post of water boy at Hapur branch of the bank . It gives an inference that the brother of the claimant, who was working as Branch Manager at Connaught Place, New Dehli branch of the bank , used to push the authority in favour of the claimant . He might have informed the Branch Manager in respect of creation of post of waterman at Hapur branch of the bank. Ex. WW1 / 1 seems to have been generated at his instance, which makes a proposal for sanction of wages at 1/3rd of minima of scale wages in favour of the claimant . When Branch Manager was moved with motives , he wrote that the claimant was working in the branch since last four years . Therefore, contents of Ex . WW1 / 1 nowhere clinches the issue , in favour of the claimant . It was for the claimant to discharge onus to establish that he served the branch continuously for 240 days , preceding the date of his disengagement . Intermittent periods , which emerge out of Ex . WW1 / M1 to Ex . WW1 /M4 , no where bring it to light that the claimant worked for 240 days in any calendar year .

14. There is other facet of the coin . The claimant may project that thedocuments were not in his possession . He may place reliance in the precedent in R.M. Yellati [ JT 2005 ( 9 ) SC 340 ] and request this tribunal to draw an adverse inference for non production of the vouchers , through which payments were released in his favour for the days he worked . It would be expedient to extract the observation made by the Apex Court in the said precedent in that regard , which are reproduced thus:

15. Whether above precedent comes for rescue of the claimant ? Facts of the present controversy project a strange story . The brother of the claimant , who works as a Branch Manager , pushes the authorities and gets hith engaged as waterman at Hapur branch of the bank , even though no post was sanctioned . When a post was created in the said branch on 14-6-97 , it could not warm cockles of his heart . Reasons were apparent , since the post so created was to be filled from amongst condidates of O.B.C. category. A letter was written to employment exchange getting names of the candidates of O.B.C. category sponsored . Five persons were sponsored by the employment exchange , whose names are detailed in Ex.MW 1/6 . Since the claimant does not belong to O. В. С. category, his name could not find place in that list . The persons whose names were sponsored by the employment exchange were 8th standard pass , except Krishan Pal who was 9th standard pass . None of them were seclected, since their relations were not working in the bank. Thus it is emerging over the record that the claimant's brother used his influence and vacancy of waterman was not filled at Hapur branch of the bank . Not only this , photo copy of letter Ex . WW1 / 1 was supplied to the claimant , who presents that original of Ex . WW 1/1 was furnished to him by the bank . When bank is ready to oblige the claimant in the manner he likes , in that situation if cannot be said that the bank opted not to produce vouchers for the days the clamantworked in the bank . These circumstances persuade me to conclude that it would be far fetching situation to say that the claimant was not in a position to produce entire vouchers , to prove that he worked continuously for 240 days in a calendar year. Under these circumstances , I find that the claimant has not been able to discharge onus resting on him and prove that he worked for 240 days continuously preceding the date when his services were disengaged or in any calendar year prior to that period .

"Analysing the above decision of this court , it is clear that the provisions of the evidence Act in terms do not apply to the proceedings under section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act . However , appling general principles and on reading the aforestated judgments , we find that this court has repeatedly taken the view that the burden of proof is on the claimant to show that he had worked for 240 days in a given year. This burden is discharged only upon the workmen adducing cogent evidence stepping in the witness box. This burden is discharged upon the workman adducing cogent evidence , both oral and documentary. In cases of termination of services of daily waged earner, there will be no letter of appointment or termination. There will also be no receipt or proof of payment . Thus in most cases , the workman ( claimant ) can only call upon the employer to produce before the court the nominal muster roll for the given period, the letter of appointment or 8500

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 4, 2010 / AGRAHAYANA 13 , 1932

16. It is not a disputed fact that post of waterman was abolished on 3rd of December , 98. Claimant concedes that when post of waterman came to an end, he was made to go home . It is obvious that when there was no job available with the bank , claimant could not be engaged any further . His casual employment for intermittent period would not accord him protection of Section 25 - F of the Act . On the other hand , the claimant testified that on account of acquaintance ofAjit Singh with his Brother , Ajit Singh offered job of waterman to him in Hapur branch of the bank . Out of the facts so unfolded , it is evident that when claimant was engaged as a waterman , usual procedure for recuitment was not followed . Though no post of waterman was available in the bank, yet the claimant was engaged as a casual employee and paid @ Rs . 15 per day for actual days of work . Consequently it is emerging over the record that the engagement of the claimant was dehors the rules . Such an engagement nowhere creates a right of continuance in service as held by the Apex Court in Uma Devi [ 2006 ( 4 ) S.C.C. 1 ) . The Apex Coust considered the proposition as to whether the persons who got employment , without following of a regular procedure or even from the back door or on daily wages can be ordered to be made permanent in their posts , to prevent regular recruitment to the posts concerned . Catena of decisions over the subject were considered and the court declined the submissions of the workmen to be made permanent on the posts which were held by them in temporary or ad- hoc capacity for a fairly long spell . The Court ruled thus:

"With respect , why should the State be allowed to depart from the normal rule and indulge in temporary employment in permanent posts ? This Court , in our view, is bound to insists on the State making regular and proper recruitments , and is bound not to encourage or shut its eyes to the persistent transgression of the rules of regular recruitment . The direction to make permanent - the distinction between regularization and making permanent , was not emphasized here- can only encourage the State , the model employer to flout its own rules and would confer undue benefits on a few at the cost of many waiting to compete . With respect the directions made in Piara Singh [ 1992 (4 ) SCC 118 ] is to some extent inconsistent with the conclusion in para 45 of the said judgement therein . With great respect , it appears to us that the last of thedirections clearly runs counter to the constitutional scheme of employment recognized in the earlier part of the decision . Really , it cannot be said that this decision has laid down the law that all ad -hoc, temporaty or casual employees engaged without following a regular recruitment procedure should be made permanent."

17. In P. Chandra Shekhara Rao and Others [ 2006 ( 7) SCC 488 ] the Apex Court referred Uma Devi's Case ( supra)

[PART II-- Sec. 3 ( i ) ] with approval . It also relied the decision in a Uma Rani [ 2004 ( 7) SCC 112 ] and ruled that no regularization is permissible in exercise of statutory powers conferred in Article 162 of the Constitution if the appointments have been made in contravention of the statutory rules . In Somveer Singh [ 2006 ( 5 ) SCC 493 ] the Apex Court ruled that appointment made without following due procedure cannot be regularized . In Indian Drugs & Pharmaceuticals Ltd. [ 2007 ( 1 ) SCC 408 ] the Apex Court reiterated the law and announced that the rules of recruitment can not be relaxed and court can not direct regularisation of temporary employees dehors the rules , nor can it direct continuation of service of a temporary employee ( whether called a casual , ad - hoc or daily rated employee) or payment of regular salaries to them .

18. The Apex Court had to consider thos very propositions in Daya Nand and Others ( 2008 ( 10) FCC1 ] wherein the above proposition was reaffirmed . The cont ruled as follows:

" 68. The above noted judgments and , onders encouraged the political set - up and bureaucracy 10 violate the soul of Articles 14 and 16 as also the provisions contained in the Employment Exchanges (Compulsory Notification of Vacancies ) Act , 1959 with impunity and the spoils system which pres ailed in the United States of America in the sixteenb aud seventeenth centuries got a firm foothold in tlas country. Thousands of persons were employed engaged throughout the length and breadth of the country by backdoor methods . Those who could pull strings in the power corridors at the higher and lower levels managed to get the cake of pubht employment by trampling over the rights of otheT eligible and more meritorious persons registered with the employment exchanges . A buge illegal employment market developed im different pans of the country and rampant corruption afflicted the whole system . This was recognized by the Court in Delhi Development Horticulture Employees ' Umen v. Delhi Admn . in the following words ( SCCpp.111. 12 page 23 )

"23. Apart from the fact that the petitioners cam be directed to be regularized for the reasons given above , we may take note of the pernicious consequences to which the direction for regularization ofworkmen on the only ground that they has e put in work for 240 or more days , has been leading . Mrough there is an Employment Exchange Act which requires recruitment on the basis of registration in the employment exchange , it has become a common pratice to ignore the employment exchange and the persons registered in the employment exciranges and to employ and get employed directly those wh AG दिसम्बर 4, 2010/अग्रहायण 13 , 1932

कोड 300 ) !

aproper proccdure or selection ti ale

consultation with the public service con . то

the theory of legitimate expectation cannot suc

advanced by temporary, contractual or camal employers .

It cannot also be held that the State held out any piorase

while engaging these persons either to continue theraне

they are or to make them permanent . The State cannot

constitutionally make such a promise. It is also bes

that the theory cannot be invoked to seek dief of trong

made permanent in the post . Ia view of those pocedent

neither continuance not reinstatement of the claimant in

services can be ordered , since it would amount to back

door entry into Governmentjob .

21. Precedent in S.Rajulu [2008 ( 11 ) L. J. 1061] Redhey Shyam [2008 ( III ) L.L.J. 562 ] . A. Shankanalingam [2009 (1 ) L.L.J. 602 ] and Kaishan Singh ( S.L.P. ( C ) No. 11487 of2009 decided by the Apex Court on 12th of March, 2010 ] nowhere grant accolades to the claimant on account of different and distinct facts . Claimant is not entitled for protection of Section 25 - F of the Act . In such a situation his disengagement, being retrenchment even under clause ( oo ) of Section 2 of the Act, would not entitle him to any relief. The sequence of events make it cicar that the claimant has not been able to stablish that he was engaged waterboy continuously w.e.f. 30-8-93 to 7-12-98 at Hapur branch of the bank . His disengagement is found to be violative of the provisions of Section 25 - F 25-GoftheAct . Action initiated by the management while disengaging his services is legal and justified, sier av was disengaged when post was abolished . Under these circumstances the claimant is not entitled to any relict , anot to talk of relief of reinstatement in service with contumaty and full back wages .

are either not registered with the bumployment Exchange or who though registered are lower in the long waiting list in the employment register. The courts can take judicial notice of the fact that such employment is sought and given directly for various illegal considerations including money . The employment is given first for temporary periods with technical breaks to circumvent the relevant rules , and is continued for 240 or more days with a view to give the benefit of regularization knowing the judicial trend that those who have completco 240 or more days are directed to be automatically regulanzod . A good deal of illegal employment market has developed resulting in a new source of corruption and frustration of those who are wajung at the Employment Exchanges for years .Not all those who gain such backdoor entry in the employment are in need of the particular jobs . Though already employed elsewhere , they join the jobs for better and secured prospects . That is why most of the cases which come to the courts are of employment in government departments , public undertakings or agencies . Utimately it is the people who bear the heavy burden of the surplus labour . The other qually injurious eifcet of indiscriminate regularisation has been that many of the agencies have stopped undertaking casual or temporary works though they are argent and essential for fear that if those who are employed on such works are required to be continued for 240 or more days they have to be absorbed as regular employees although the works are time - bound and there is no need of the workman beyond the completion of the works undertaken. The public interests are thus jeopardized on both courts . "

19.In subsequent sections of the judgment , the declined the request for absorption of casual mployees . It ruled thus:

detailed above post of kahar stands abolished. The es

entered service not only by unfair means bus is a back de

appointee . A good deal of illegal employment marka bas developed in this country. Number of uncanploycai yula wait in queues to get entry in public appoiutinom, shu less meritorious persons cat cake of employmaconhe " 116. In our opinion , any direction by the court for absorption of all company - paid staff would be determental to public interest in more than one ways . Firstly, it will compel the Government to abandon the policy decision of reducing the direct recruitment to various services . Secondly, this will be virtual abrogation of the statutory rules which envisage appointment to different caders by direct recruitment . "

22. Assuming that the claimant render continuous service for 240 days in a calendar y cas, in the situation too it is not a case of reinstatement ins is beneficiary of fraudulent system of employmeat Abe unlawful means . In such instances , this Tribunal lad t refuse reinstatement to an employee who got entry inpaibe employment by fraudulent means or a beneficiary ci favourtism or a back door appointee . The clainant ir used all doblus as detailed above . His Jaina is discsaders An award is , accordingly passed. It be sent to appropriate Government for publication .

Dr. R K. YADAV, Presidid OML

Dated: 24-9-2010

20. In Uma Devi ( supra ) it was laid that when a pason entres a temporary employment or get engagement as contractual or casual worker and the engagement is not based on a proper selection as recognized by the relevant sules or procedure , he is aware of the consequence of the appointment being temporary , casual or contractual in nature. Such a person cannot invoke the theory of legitimate expectation for being confirmed for the post when an appointment to the post could be made only by following 8502

THE GAZETTE OF INUREMBER 4, 2010 /AGRAHAYAN

नई दिल्ली, 10 नवम्बर, 201

का.आ. 2976.---औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनिय ণ , 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में , केन्द्रीय उत्तर मध्य रेलवे के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और वो बोच , अनुबंध में निर्दिर ओद्योगिक चिदाद में धिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालय कानपुर क पंचाट ( संग सख्या 29/05 ) को प्रकाशित करतो है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 9 : 2010 को प्राप्त हुआ था।

[सं. एल- 41012/5/20 भाई आर ( बी -1 ) ] the post

22-02

Points

95 on 1

prowe...

on 11-01

5. The claimmat sought incal transt Sri Mahendra Poчнoчassowe claimant and we wrongs Stuntman Gr Onaccount of munal consilier , it is alleged the claimant , that both of them ges scParty Loca other . The claimant alleges that his work , m

रमेश सिंह डस्क अधिकारी

New Delhi , the 10th November, 2010 S.O. 2976. In pursuance of Schon 17 of the industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1247 ) , the Central Government hereby publishes the Award ( 11 ) No. 29/05 ) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal Cum- Labour- Court , Kanpur as shown in the annexure , in the Industrial Dispute between the management of Northern Central Railway and their workmen, received by the Central Government on 9-11-2010,

[No. L-41012/ 5 / 2005 - IR (B - 1 ) ] RAMESH SINGH, Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

BEFORE SKI RAM PARKAS , HJS , PRESIDING OFFICER, CENTRAL GOVERNMENT IND , TRIAL TRIBUNAL - CUM-LABOUR- COURT,

KANPUR

Industrial Dispute No. 29/05

The Branch S وارعده

North Central Railway Men's nion Shikohabad

Versus

The Divisional Manager , Northern Central Railway, Allahabad .

AWARD

1. Central Government , Mo !, New Delhi , vide notification L- 41012 / 5 / 2005 - IR ( B - I dated 8-9-05 has referred the following dispute for adjudication to this tribunal-

2. Whether the action of the managenicant , Divisional Railway Manager , North Cent: al Railway , Allahabad , denying promotion to Sh . Doodh Nath S/ o Sh . N. R. Yadav and promoting his juniors is legal and fair ? If not , what relief the workman concerned is entitled to ?

3. Brefracts are

4. The chandant is employed at the pot. Shuntman under the opposite party. He was appointed at the same post from 11-02-79 , contaran sov Br the last 27 year's , halso prended

that the opposite paty

juniors to be appo

Jamadar but he

getting training and promothe

party on 10-03-99 arcal -am prommen !

i and according to that nemotio

Shunting Zamadacisti dhah

the basis of senianity

Sri Suresh Chaoch

Sri Ashiq Ali nice :

who where junior Retr

whereas the clam

promotion nor promu .

despite the fact that

the last 20 years . This

unf ir labour pr. ticente ble ut

to be given promotion

Ali , Suresh Chandra

for scale and difference

Shunting Zamadar .

6. The claim of the clan

the opposite party on

alia , that on mutual

his seniority in the senincity is

claim the seniority over and above to his

who is admittedly see to iro 4.2 admitted by the opposte party That घो

being only qualified up 19 Vilth Class appointed a group Deployer and granted promotion twet According

party for promotion weten extende interview is conducted and those who

suitable were sent for Training Progra

scale of Rs . 4000-6000. Later on the po Shunting Zamadar / Shunting Me declared as non selecies , pesc NE

decision of the Government of fudio , A.

list was prepared for sharing mester only senior employees were set for

of thejunior to the claimantas hel course . According to SOP भारत का राजपत्र: दिसम्बर 4, 2010/अग्रहायण 13 , 1932

administration the post of shunting Jamadar wonld be filled only on the promotion basis considering seniority only . The claimant was not semor to those employees who were sent for training for promotion at the post of Shunting Zmadar . The seniority list filed by the claimant has beca denied by the opposite party. In the end it is pleaded by the opposite party that the claim of the claimant is devoid of merit and liable to be rejected.

7. The claimant along with his affidavit has filed ceram photocopics of the documents but they are not sufficient to be read in evidence as neither the same has been proved by the claimant nor claimant ever tried to summon the originals from the opposite party.

8. No evidence has cen adduced by the opposite party wirereas the claimant has adduced himself as W.W./ in support of his case .

9. I have heard the arguments in detail and perused the record of the case carefully.

10. Main point of dispute is whether Sri Doodh Nath whe has sought the mutual transfer with Sri Mahendra Pratap Pandey who was admittedly senior to him can claim the seniority of Sri Pandey on mutual transfer . The contention of the opposite party is that the seniority of junior employee shall remain intact at the same place and merely on the basis of mutual transfer the claimant cannot claim the seniority over his senior. Whereas the claim of the claimant is that he should be gyven seniority of Sri Mahendra Pratap Pandey .

11. I have given due consideration to the contention of the claimant on the basis of his oral evidence . Claimant has not filed any rules in support of his claim that he should be regarded senior on the basis of autual transter with some employee who according to his own case was senior to him . The contention of the claimant appears to be against all canons of rules of natural justice . If the contention of the claimant is accepted , then seniority of employees will be disturbed and this cannot be allowed to be happened in public employment as it is opposite to rules of seniority framed by ine administration. From this point of view, ter oma absolutely no force in the contention of the clairaant and therefore , is turned down .

12. if the contention is perruitted then it will damage the seniority of these persons who are in between Mir. Pandey and Senior to Sri Dood Nam who had not been made a party, which cannot be gerentied ,

8503 13. It has next been argued by the claimant that junior to him were sent for training ignoring his claim. But on this point there is no documentary evidence on record . Mere statement on oath is not sufficient to belief the stand of the claimant that junior to him were sent for training . The documents filed by him cannot be said to be genuine because the claimant had not made any prayer before the tribunal to summon the original records from the custody of the opposite party . Therefore , initially the burden lies on the shoulder ofthe claimant to prove his case which he has failed .

14. No other point has been argued before me by the representative for the claimant .

15. For the reasons discussed above , it is concluded that there is no merit in the claim of the claimant and accordingly the claimant is not entitled to get any relief pursuant to the present reference order.

Dated: 27-10-2010

RAM PARKASH , Presiding Officer नई दिल्ली , 10 नवम्बर , 2010

का.आ. 2977. औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में , केन्द्रीय सरकार भारतीय स्टेट बैंक के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच , अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण / श्रम न्यायालय , चेत्रई के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 42/2009 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 8-11-2010 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[ सं. एल -12012/151/ 2008- आईआर ( बी -1 ) ] रमेश सिंह , डेस्क अधिकारी New Delhi , the 10th November , 2010 S.O. 2977. - In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) , the Central Government hereby publishes the Award ( ID No. 42/2009) ofthe Central Government Industrial Tribunal- cum- Labour Court , Chennai as shown in the annexure , in the Industri dispute between the management of State Bank of and their workman , received by the Central Govern on 8-11-2010 .

[No. L - 12012 / 151 / 2008 - IR( B - I ) ] RAMESH SINGH , Desk Officer ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL - CUM - LABOUR COURT CHENNAI

Wednesday , the 20th October , 2010 Present : A. N. JANARDANAN , Presiding Officer INDUSTRIAL DISPUTE No. 42/2009 8504

THE GAZETTE OF THOR FEMBER 4, 2010 / AGRAHAYAΝΑ 13 , 1932 [PART SEC. (0 ) In the matter of the dispute for adjudication purder clause D of sub- su tron ( 1 ) and sub - section (Are Rection 10 the Induct ful Disputes Act , 1947 (14 of between Ban Managrauent of State Bank of India and the Workmanl

BETWEEN

C. Kumar

: 1st ! ay

The Chief Generalnager

State Bank of India

: 2nd Parts : Resporlent

real Head Office

раі - 600006

EARANCE.

the ist Party/ Petitioner

M/s . Baba Baidas , Advocates

Har the 2nd Party /Management : Sri V.R.

Gopaleratiparn.

AWARD

The Central Government , Ministry of Labour vide As Order No. L - 12012/ 151 /2008 - IR ( B - 1) date : 20-05-2009 Fered the following Industrial Disputetishi Tribunal adjudication .

The sche Jule mentioned in that onler

"Whether the action of the managenum of State Bank of India in terminating service Kumar is justified ? If not , what reliefhe is ended to ? "

2. After the receipt of Industrial Dispute, this Tribunal has numbered it as ID 42/2009 and isen notices to both sides . Both sides entered appearance auch their advocates and filed their Claim , Counted Reply Statements as the case may be .

hereft of

3. The Claim Statement content meessary details are as follows :

The petitioner joined the Respondent/ Bank as a Clerk on 9-07-1979 and thereafter was promoted as Senior Assistant on 1-7-2001 with allowance of Sinode Window Operator w.e.f. 1-10-2002 . He was issued ChorgeMemo on 1-07-2002 relating to an incident when he was at Tirumangalarm Branch . The memo was issued vile he was in Koodakoil Branch of Respondent/ Band: He gave explanation to the memo denying the charges, in number which are as follows ( i ) On 2-04-2002 while as Feller he made a payment of Rs . 2,000 to Mr. S. Varuudes an on a Cheone No. 023 in respect of SBA/ C No. 0110019048 of Smt. su osht without reference to the auth signed by Vasudevan insicad of his wife Meenakshi ( is ) to ratify the illegality he made insertion in Cheque Return Register but did not repot the matter to the Branch Manager after the payment ( iii ) petitioner in spite of being provided with a node did not verify the name of the Account Holder and har bara negligent in his duties ( iv) petitioner refused order to Koodakoil branch on 16-05 2012 and left

the branch at 0345 PM without permission . Mr. Vasudevan and Smt . Meenakshi ate couple having two separate SB Accounts in Tirumangalam branch for a long period . When the cheque was hauded over by S. Vasudevan drawer's signature was missing which was pointed out by the petitioner . Vasudevan being found in tense on being asked by the petitioner he was informed that he was withdrawing money for his wife's treatment at the Hospital . Vasudevan signed the omitted signature . The petitioner was under a mistaken impression that Vasudevan was withdrawing from his account , occasioned by heavy transaction in the counter . The petitioner had handled 365 transactions against a usual transaction of 85 a day . Petitioner was also under a notion of having to help a senior citizen as well as a valued customer , S. Vasudevan . Later it was noticed that the cheque was to the account of Meenakshi . Then the customer was called and remedial transactions were done. There was no intention of any sort against bank's interest . Charges are to victiraize the petitioner. On 3-01-2003 , he was charged by another Memo alleging him to have had guaranteed for the loans obtained by M / s Indian Food Product Company of which his wife is the proprietrix without permission from Bank . The loan was from Indian Bank . As having become non -performing asset and the petitioner's action is in breach of bank business rule and violative of Section 39 of Reference Book on Staff Members , indirect engagement of petitioner in the business being there and as causing disrepute to the bank dueto non repayment of the loan by the Company the charge was issued . The petitioner had sought for and obtained No Objection Certificate from the Respondent / Bank making clear all relevant aspects which was granted by the Bank after due consideration on 11-06 1992 permitting him to be guarantor on conditions . Allegation of non payment of lean by his wife is not correct His wife's company viz . Indian Food Product Company is a uuit sponsored by Government of India . Repayment of its loan was guaranteed by the Modern Food Industries ( india ) Ltd. ,Government of India Enterprise under the mmimum guaranteed offtake . The outstanding loan from his wife was Rs . 15.00 Jaklıs and request was being made by her for adjustment of excess interest. The Company did not pay Indian Bank as per the agreed commitmená owing to Government policy of disinvestment and also due to its sickness . In the commen enquiry report the 1st Charge was held proved and 2nd and 3rd Charges beld not proved , 4th Charge is also held proved . Under 2nd Charge Alumo a single charge in substance was split in 3 parts and held 1st and 2nd part as not proved and 3rd part proved and found the 2nd Charge Memo as a whole as partly proved . By communication dated 15-03-2005 Disciplinary Authority expressed dissent in respect of the 3rd Charge and held it as proved . The petitioner demonstrated in his comments dated 23-03-2005 the perversity and absence of evidence in holding the Ist Charge as proved as well as the perversity in the 2nd Charge Memo recorded pertly 8505 भारत का राजपत्र: दिसम्बर 4, 2010/अग्रहायण 13 , 1932

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (

against him thus discriminating against the petitioner . The Respondent/Bank waived charges in the 1st Charge Memo . Mere intimation from Indian Bank about a loan transaction with petitioner's wife could not be a cause of disrepute to the Respondent/Bank. For the alleged absence of prior permission for petitioner from bank to stand as guarantor for the loan for his wife by producing NoC the Enquiry Officer deviated from the charge, split up the charge and concluded as if one of the conditions for grant of NoC was violated and the allegation of bringing disrepute to the bank is proved, which power to split up of charge is not there to the Enquiry Officer . This would not amount to amisconduct under Clause- 5 (j ) . The Disciplinary Authority arbitrarily disagreeing with the Enquiry Officer held that availing leave by petitioner was to assist his wife in her business . There is no application of mind . In the case of one Sri A. Ramanaiah , Commercial Branch, Chennai and Mr. Udaya Kumar, Chennai Main Branch who had not given leave letter, Respondent imposed only censure. One V. Hema, Sengapadi Branch , an absence for more than 1000 days without leave application in whose case even no disciplinary proceedings were initiated . For a misconduct allegedly committed prior to 10-4-2002 , Memorandum of Settlement dated 10-4-2002 cannot be applied. The charge is invalid . The Enquiry Officer was biased in the enquiry. Capital punishment is based on perverse finding . The entire service of the petitioner is without any blemish . His past clean record of service has not taken into account . He is without employment from the date of removal . The Respondent has not given petitioners wages for October, 2003 , November, 2003 , May and June , 2004 and January, 2005 despite requests . The petitioner is innocent . The punishment is grossly disproportionate to the charges . Punishment is to be interfered with under Section - 11A. Hence the punishment is to be set aside .

4. The Counter Statement contentions briefly read

as follows :

proved as well as holding as proved the 3rd Charge being contrary to evidence. In the 3rd Charge Memo the 1st Charge that petitioner absented from duty unauthorizedly without prior sanction of leave from 1-12-1993 to 25-11-2003 for a period exceeding 30 days on 7 occasions , the 2nd Charge that during 2004 he absented unauthorizedly without prior sanction of leave from 1-1-2004 to 28-5-2004 ( 149 days ) and 5-6-2004 to 21-8-2004 (78 days ) and 3rd Charge that during his absence heindirectly looked after the business ofhis wife are denied in his explanation dated 1-11-2004, it is baseless . He submitted leave application for all leave availed . His leave has been recommended for sanction as extraordinary leave . Under Para- 5 (p) of Memorandum of Settlement dated 10-4-2002 remaining unauthorizedly absent without intimation continuously exceeding 30 days is misconduct. Mostof the recommendations for sanction of leave have been approved and recoded leave particulars in the Service Register thereby meaning that leave has been sanctioned. While so , after sanctioning leave on medical grounds , the Management has no power to frame charge for un- authorized absence . When Medical Certificate is doubted he could have been sent before Medical Board . The period prior to promotion of petitioner on 1-7-2001 cannot be taken into account for misconduct as the same has effaced withthe promotion . The charge framed is after a decade of availing the leave manifesting Respondent's intention to harass the petitioner. The details in the annexure to the Claim Statement will show that the petitioner has not committed any misconduct of unauthorized absence .At Koodakoil Branch on 3-10-2003 , the Branch Manager issued order not to give any work relating to cash dealings to the petitioner. His password operating Single Window System was deleted . He was made to sit idle without assigning any work putting him to great mental agony. Hence, he had to avail leave on proper applications but which were rejected. The 2nd Charge is therefore meritless . The petitioner's wife's business was closed in 2002. It is baseless to allege that he was taking care of her business . In the dissenting note communicated by letter dated 14-10-2005 enclosing the enquiry report by the Disciplinary Authority, perverse reasons are assigned to hold Charge No. 3 as proved against the enquiry report . The petitioner also attended personal hearing on 30-12-2005 whereafter without considering his objections on 30-3-2006 punishment of removal from service was imposed . Appeal preferred was rejected on 22-9-2006 in an arbitrary manner. I. D. was raised which on failure the reference is occasioned . Disciplinary Authority's disagreement to the enquiry finding in respect of Charge No. 3 is without semblance of evidence, which was without indication of such intention giving his tentative reasons for disagreement . This is in violation ofnatural justice which has led to prejudice to the petitioner . The enquiry is thus grossly illegal and against natural justice . When the

In the 1st charge- sheet dated 1-7-2002 he was confronted with 3 charges , one is of payment of Rs . 2,000 to Vasudevan over a cheque in the SB Account of his wife Meenakshi signed by him . Second is of insertions being made by petitioner in the cheque and in the Return Register and not reporting the matter to the Branch Manager . Thirdly, failure to verify by the petitioner thee name of the Account Holder with the person authorized sign the cheque , all in breach of the rule of the business of the bank by being negligent in his duties and acting prejudicial to the bank and the refusal by petitioner to accept the transfer order to Koodakoil Branch on 16-5-2002 and leaving the branch at 0345 PM. The 2nd Charge Sheet dated 3-1-2003 alleges petitoner to have had guaranteed loans obtained by M/s . Indian Food Products Company ofwhich his wife K. Lakshmi was propriertor , due to default in repayment of the loan the account with Indian Bank became a non-performing asset with total outstanding as cheque was passed by Head Assistant no action was taken

4548Gl/10-34 8506

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECCEMBER 4 , 2010/ AGRAHAYANA 13 , 1932

[PART II- SEC . 3 ( ii) ]

the finding that the petitioner has utilized his absence indirectly to look after the trade of his wife . Petitioner failed to disprove unauthorized absence and has not rebutted the evidence of the Respondent . The statement thatpetitioner availed leave on account of no work being assigned to him shows the natural attitude of the employce towards the bank and his lack of interest in service . There is no violation of natural justice . There is no discrimination against the petitioner, whose case cannot be equated with other case which may be different . The punishment is not disproportionate . The Bipartite Settlement dated 10-04-2002 is having effect of amendment to earlier awards . The punishments are the same in all . The Enquiry Officer has not acted in a biased manner . It is denied that the findings are perverse . There was application of mind by the authorities . The past record of service of the petitioner has been taken into consideration . It is denied that the petitioner has not been paid wages due to him. The claim may be dismissed.

5. The Reply Statement contentions in a nutshell are as follows :

Unauthorized absence is not proved by the Respondent with the production of service records which are withheld by the Respondent . The reference to proof of petitioner's engagement in his wife's business by way of circumstances and preponderance of probability is without substance . When there is no iota of evidence there is no question of proving by assumption. It is for the bank to prove the charge and not for the delinquent to disprove . Rebuttal arises only when charge is proved by any legal evidence . Newly incorporated provision in Bipartite Settlement is only from the date when it is incorporated which being prospective .

6. The evidence consists of the oral evidence of WW1 and Ex.W1 to Ex . W28 marked on the side of the petitioner and the testimony of MW1 and Ex.M1 to Ex M14 on the side of the Respondent .

7. Points for consideration are :

( i) Whether the removal of the petitioner irom service of the Respondent/ Bank is justified ?

( ii) To what relief the concerned workman is entitled ?

Points ( i ) & ( ii )

on 30-09-2002 as Rs . 2,56,17,674 thus violating Para - 39.09 of Reference Book and he was engaged in business indirectly as well as causing disrepute to the bank affecting the bank prejudicially. Third Charge Sheet dated 28-8-2004 contains ist Charge relating to unauthorized absence from duty without prior sanction of leave hom ! 12-1993 to 31-12-1993 . The unauthorized absence is without intimation continuously for a period exceeding 30 days on 7 occasions . It is a gross misconduct under Para - 5 (p ) of Memorandum of Settlement dated 10-4-2002 . The 2nd Charge is unauthorized absence for 149 days from 1-1-2004 to 28-5-2004 and 78 days from 5-6-2004 to 21-8-2004 . It amounts to gross misconduct as per Memorandum of Settlement dated 10 4.2002 . He is also charged of having utilized the period indirectly to look after his wife's business , a misconduct undor Para - 5 ( a ) of Settlement dated 10-04-2002 . The enquity was conducted and Charge No. 1 was proved and Charges No. 2 to 3 were held not proved. With respect to 2ad Charge Sheet dated 3-01-2003 , Enquiry Officer split un chauge relating to guaranteeing the loan of his wife without permission and the petitioner had engaged in business without prior permission due to non - payment of the dues to the extent to Rs . 2.57 crores by the Company ton by his wife he caused a disrepute to the bank and acted prejudicial to the interests of the bank into two parts . The Enquiry Officer found the 2nd part only as proved that he had acted prejudicial to the bank and he had not fulfilled a condition put forth in the letter granting administrative clearance caused disrepute to the bank as proved . The 3rd Charge Sheet dated 28-8-2004, the Enquiry Officer found that the petitioner committed act of unauthorized absence without intimation continuously for a period encore ling 30 days on 7 occasions as proved . The 2nd Charge of continuous absence for a period of 30 days without intimation from 1-1-2004 to 28-5-2004 and 5-6-2004 to 21-8-2004 also held proved. The 3rd Charge that the petitioner had indirect control in the business of his wife helds not proved . The Disciplinary Authority differed from the finding with respect to Charge No. 3 in the 1st Charge Sheet who found that Chargerlo . 1 and 3 were similar and beure the logical reasons and finding of Enquiry Officer in bolding the Charge No. 1 as proved would peturally be applied to Charge No. 3. The reasons were assigned by him . Disciplinary Authority found the following charges as proved ( a) negligence in effecting wiong payment as Teller (b) causing disrepute to the bank by nor payment of loans of which he is guarantor ( c) remaining unauthorizedly absent for a long period and ( d) utilizing the period indirectly looking after the business in the name of his wife . On 30-03-2006 he was imposed with the punishment of removal from service . Appellate Authority on 22-9-2006 concurred with the finding . Except the specifically admitted allegations in the Claim Statement others are denied . Only after considering petitioner's explanation , Disciplinary Authority differed front the finding of the Enquiry Officer as regards

8. Heard both sides . Perused the documents and records . The arguments on behalf of the petitioner advanced by the learned counsel are that whenever the petitioner availed leave he has submitted leave application as is evident from the extracts of leave register , which were recommended for sanction as extraordinary leave . When once the absence has been treated as leave the charge of unauthorized absence abates . When leave is sanctioned , which too on medical grounds the same cannot 8507 भारत का राजपत्र : दिसम्बर 4, 2010/ अग्रहाय 13 , 1932

[ भाग II - खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

right . Even renensis made for extension of leave is without

absence by subsequent sunction of leave is only for regularization of the teave position and to set the record mentioning foxsons de Jou. Even if no work is allotted or assigned it is not for the petitioner to choose to be absent unauthorizodiy. On a proponderance of probability it is just to infer that the petitioner assisted his wife in her work . To the petitioner seems that to be on leave or be absent is the role ane to attend duty is the exception. By his erratic conduct he became an incorrigible delinquent . The other employees made metion of in relation to whom , he has been allegedly discriminated against are inferior staff with less responsibilities . An equal alone is entitled to be treated equally with his counterpart equal . The punishment is not disproportionate and there is no scope for interference , the learned counsel continue to argue .

10. From both sides reliance was placed on a number of decisions in support of their respective contentions . The learned counsel for the petitioner invited my attention to the decision of the Supreme Court in M.V. Wigilane Vs. Union of India and Others (2006 - SCC - L & S - 919 ) wherein it is held that relevant testimony of witnesses cannot be rejected only on the basis of surmises and conjectures .

11. In Man Singh Vs. State of Haryana and Others (2008-4- LLN - 113 ) Supreme Court held that as a matter of fact the doctrine of equality is now termed as a synonym of fairness in the concept of justice and stands as the most accepted methodology of a governmental action . The administrative action is to be just on the test of fair play and reasonableness .

12. In Anil Kuraar Vs Presiding Officer and Others (1985-3 - SCC-378 ) Supreme Court held that a satisfactory decision of a disputed claim may be reached only if it be supported by the most cogent reasons that appealed to the authority. It should also more be so where the quasi- judicial enquiry may result in deprivation or attach a stigma to the character.

be treated as unauthorized absence . Most of the recommendations for sanction of leave being approved the charge cannot properly be laid . Charge under Section- 5(p) of the Memorandum of Settlement dated 10-04-2002 will not lie for unauthorized absence from 01-12-1993 . Further since the petitioner who stands promoted from 01-07-2001 , any period prior to that date cannot be taken into account since the same stands effaced with the promotion . Regarding his unauthorized absence at Koodakoil branch it is contended that at that branch petitioner was not given work relating to cash dealings and his password for operating the Single Window System was deleted . He was not assigned any work and thus feeling wounded of being disgraced , he proceeded to avail leave where leave was rejected . Regarding his indirect involvement in his wife's business it is contended that the business was closed in 2002 and there is no question of his involvement in the said business . The Disciplinary Authority's differing from the finding of the Enquiry Officer and holding that the petitioner was involved in his wife's business without any material and without putting it on notice to the petitioner for giving a reply is liable to be set aside . Similarty situated delinquents were either not punished so gravely as that of the petitioner or were even allowed to continue in service without any punishment quoting instances of Sri A. Ramanaiah, Commercial Branch and Sri Udhaya Kumar of Chennai Main Branch . One Mrs. Hema was not punished at all . Their cases were inclusive of absenting without leave for over 1000 days and so, which fact is not refuted . One Ramasamy was punished only with censure . The petitioner is meted out with hostile discrimination . Disciplinary Authority cannot blow both hot and cold . The petitioner is without employment . The charge that the petitioner made insertion in the Cheque Return Register is disproved in view of the admission by the Head Assistant that it is he who had made the insertion in the Register and who stands without being proceeded against by way ofdisciplinary action whereas the petitioner is proceeded against . It is in evidence that the petitioner obtained permission for standing as a guarantor to the loan of his wife's company . So there is no illegality or irregularity on that aspect . For non - production of documents in regard to the unauthorized absence of A. Ramanaiah, Udhaya Kumar and Hema adverse inference is to be drawn against the Management. The punishment is not justifiable which is to be interfered with under Section - 11 A of the ID Act

13. In Yoginath D. Bague Ve, State of Maharashtra and Another ( 1999-8 - Sipreme 129 ) Supreme Court held that since thedisciplinary committee did not give any opportunity of hearing the appellant before taking a final decision in the matter relating to the findings on the two charges framed against him the principles of natural justice as laid down in Punjab National Bank and Others Vs. Kunj Behari Misbra were violated .

14. I S. Pounaiah Vs. The secretary to the Government and 3 ounets ( 2008-4- CTL - 734 ) High Court ofMadras held that as the effect of unauthorized absence being regularized delinquent is to be given proichon from date of promotion given to his junior, it is further held 9. The contra arguments on behalf of the Respondent advanced by the learned counsel are that the Head Assistant Mr. Subramaniam had just rectified the mistake committed by the petitioner . The petitioner has been unauthorizedly absent without permission . Recommendation for leave is not sanction of leave . For the various spells of unauthorized absence , leave application is given only rarely. Treating unauthorized 8508

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 4 , 2010 /AGRAHAYAΝΑ 13 , 1932

unauthorized absence period having been regularized as leave period proceeding based on Charge Memo for unauthorized absence cannot be proceeded and the same should be dropped . It is again held ; subsequent regularization of unauthorized absence period as leave period would absolve charges of unauthorized absence and it is to entail in un - sustainment of imposed punishment .

15. In Ayyappan Vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Police and 2 Others . Madras High Court by judgment dated 12-04-2006 delivered by Hon'ble Mr. Justice P. Jyothimani held that if the punishment imposed by the Disciplinary Authority shocks the conscience of the Court it would appropriately mould the relief by directing the authority to reconsider the penalty imposed , or to shorten the litigation, it may itself, in exceptional and rare cases , impose appropriate punishment with cogent reasons thereof.

16. The rulings relied on by the learned counsel for the Respondent are :

InBalbir Chand Vs. Food Corporation of India (CDJ - 1996- SC- 354) Supreme Court held "merely because one ofthe Officers was wrongly given the lesser punishment compared to others against whom there is a proved misconduct, it cannot be held that they too should also be given the lesser punishment lest the same mistaken view would be repeated . Omission to repeat same mistake would not be violative of Article- 14 and cannot be held as arbitrary or discriminatory leading to miscarriage ofjustice . It may be open to the appropriate higher authority to look into the matter and take appropriate decision according to law" .

In Mahindra and Mahindra Ltd. Vs. N.V. Naravade ( CDJ - 2005 - SC - 215 ) Supreme Court held that "the discretion which can be exercised under Section - 11 A is available only on the existence of certain factors like punishment being disproportionate to the gravity of misconduct so as to disturb the conscience of the Court, or the existence of any mitigating circumstances which requires the reduction of the sentence , or the past conduct of the workman which may persuade the Labour Court to reduce the punishment . In the absence of any such factor existing the Labour Court cannot by way of sympathy alone exercise the powerunder Section - 11 A of the Act and reduce the punishment" .

In M/s Obette Pvt . Ltd. Vs. Mohammad Shafiq Khan ( CDJ - 2005 - SC - 695 ) Supreme Court held "when all the persons did not stand on the same

[PART II-SEC. 3 ( ii ) ] footing , same yardstick cannot be applied. Similar is the position in the present case . Therefore , the High Court's order is clearly unsustainable and is set aside " .

In Sri Krishnan Singh Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation and Another , High Court of Delhi by judgment dated 05-02-2007 delivered by Hon'ble Mr. Justice Kailash Gambhir held " unauthorized leave can be treated as misconduct. Conclusions regarding negligence and lack of interest can be arrived at by looking into the period of absence, more particularly, when same is unauthorized . Burden is on the employee who claims that there was no negligence and/or lack of interest to establish it byplacing relevant materials ; So , the expression "leave without pay is only a misnomer in context of the instant case and is used only for record purposes" .

In Firestone Tyre and Rubber Company of India Pvt . Ltd. Vs. Workman ( CDJ - 1981 - SC -035 ) Supreme Court held Section 10 (4) of the Industrial Disputes Act lays down " Where in an order referring an industrial dispute to a Labour Court , Tribunal or National Tribunal under this section or in a subsequent order, the appropriate Government has specified the points of dispute for adjudication , the Labour Court or Tribunal or National Tribunal as the case may be , shall confine its adjudication to those points and matters incidental thereto" .

In Delhi Transport Corporation Vs. Sardar Singh (CDJ - 2004 - SC - 904 ) Supreme Court held " as was observed by this Court in State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Harihar Gopal [ 1969 ( 3 ) SLR 274 ] by a three -judge Bench of this Court , even when anorder is passed for treating absence as leave without pay after passing an order of termination that is for the purpose of maintaining correct record of service. The charge in that case was , as in the present case , absence without obtaining leave in advance . The conduct of the employees in this case is nothing but irresponsible in extreme and can hardly be justified . The charge in this case was misconduct by absence . In view of the Governing Standing Orders unauthorized leave can be treated as misconduct " .

In Durga Prasad Vs. Government ofthe National CapitalTerritory of Delhi (CDJ -2002 - DHC- 1138 ) Supreme Court held that "previous absences without prior leave can be taken into consideration for imposition of an order of dismissal in punishments as also minor भारत का राजपत्र: दिसम्बर 4, 2010/ अग्रहायण 13 , 1932

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii ) ]

punishments . Even if his earlier period of absence had been condoned and/ or had been regularized by grant of " leave without pay " or " extraordinary leave " , the same by itself need not be excluded from consideration for the purpose of awarding punishment . Even if the same is done , no different result would be reached . It is a well - settled principle of law that even if the period of absence, which had been regularized , is excluded, the same remains a misconduct which , in order opinion , would be sufficient to award dismissal of punishment ' .

In Regional Manager Bank of Baroda Vs. Anita Nandra Jog ( 2009- STPL- WEB - 2 - SC- 1 ) Supreme Court held "the behavior of the respondent remaining absent without leave for such long periods was clearly regrettable and unfortunate. We are fortified by the view we are taking by the decision of this Court in Syndicate Bank vs. General Secretary , Syndicate Bank Staff Association 2000 (5 ) SCC 65 as well as the decision in Punjab & Sind Bank & Ors . vs. Sakattar Singh 2001 ( 1 ) SCC 214 ; No establishment can function if it allows its employees to behave in such a manner . We , therefore, uphold the order of the , appellant Bank dated 25-8-1989 terminating the services of the respondent as a voluntary cessation of herjob" .

In Maan Singh Vs. Union of India and Others (2003 - RD - SC - 97 ) Supreme Court held " the decision of this Court in Bakshish Singh's case is not an authority for the proposition that the order terminating the employment cannot be sustained inasmuch as in the later part of the same order'the Disciplinary Authority also regularized unauthorized absence from duty by granting an employee leave without pay; if the delinquent officer proved to be incorrigible and found completely unfit to remain the service then in order to maintain discipline in the service appropriate punishments can be given . Therefore , when the charge against the appellants in each of these case is habitual absence for long periods on several occasions unauthorisedly, the view taken by the Disciplinary Authority is justified' .

In the Administrator , Union Territory of Dadra and Nagar Haveli Vs. Gulabhiar M. Lad (JT- 2010- 4- SC) Supreme Court held "the scope ofjudicial review is limited to the deficiency in decision- making process and not the decision" .

In State of Rajasthan and another Vs. Muhammad Ayub Naz ( 2006-1 - SCC - 589 )

8500 Supreme Court held " role of administrative authority is primary and that of court is secondary, to be exercised only on well - settled Wednesbury principles "

In Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd. Vs. Sanchar Nigam Executive Association ( India) and another (2005 - II - LLJ - 507) High Court ofAndhra Pradesh held "The recidivist conduct of the petitioner in resorting to continual spells of unauthorized absence is inconsistent with the conduct required to a public servant . Leave is regular only when sanctioned or when the absence is determined to be justified for some medical or other such reason , on proof of legitimizing circumstances for the absence having been submitted by the employee to establish that his absence without prior sanction of leave is justified ; in the case on hand , the petitioner absented himself on a number of occasion for a total period of 172 days , as per his own admission , without due sanction of the period of absence . Such a conduct does constitute misconduct of sufficient gravity as to warrant the penalty of removal from service . "

17. Provoking my thoughts on and on an anxious consideration of the crux of the dispute , centering around a number of charges the present concern is whether the finding reached on all the charges or any of them and the punishment imposed are just , fair and proper. While I am to stamp approval to the findings of the Enquiry Officer as confirmed by the Disciplinary and Appellate Authorities as being done in substantial compliance of the rules , principles of natural justice and hence not assailable as being illegal , irregular , arbitrary , biased etc. so as to vitiate it the finding as to the petitioner's indirect involvement in his wife's business cannot be approved of for the reason that the conclusion arrived at is purely based on inference gathered from surmises and conjectures without even any material , say logically probative to a prudent mind. The Disciplinary Authority has come to the finding that the petitioner has involved himself indirectly in the business of his wife which is differing with the finding entered to the contra by the Enquiry Officer . Therefore , the said finding is only to be regarded as perverse . But that perse is not a ground to hold that the Management meted out hostile discrimination towards the petitioner for any reason . There is no material brought on record to show that the so - called similarly situated delinquents like Ramanaiah, Udhaya Kumar, V. Hema, etc. were in all respects and status similarly placed with the petitioner so as to entitle petitioner for the same treatment like them , But MWI has admitted in the box that he could have produced the records relating to Hema but which has not been produced. There is no explanation also offered by the Management 8510

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 4 , 2010/ AGRAHAYANA 13 , 1932

PART II- SEC. 3 ( ii ) ] for the non -production of records relating to Hema . Therefore, there is nothing wrong in drawing an adverse inference against the Management regarding the aspect of discriminative treatment towards the petitioner in the matter of imposing punishment .

have supervened in or in relation to tus near and Lear relatives , the time he has had to engage himself for their causes and the expenses he has had to neur in conTOCHON with such casualities . True they have not been found with any weighing consideration by the Disciplinary Authority or the Appellate Authority who were ultimately deciding to terminate him from service . The case of the Management is that though petitioner has had a case of being sick at least for some time during the periods of unauthorized absence , he has not substantiated that ground . Respondent has no case that the case of the petitioner on that aspect is not true . If it were true, it implies that some considerations should have been extended to the petitioner . Anyway regarding that aspect the arca is still grey to determine whether such a plea is true or not . It is not disputed that the petitioner has had been commented upon meritoriously during his past service as being a sincere and honest employee who sponsored deposits for the bank and has been well acclaimed by some of the officials of the Management . Though the petitioner's conduct of unauthorized absence for different durations not permitted by Bipartite Settlement stares against him and dissuades me from being inclined to favour him with an order of reinstatement after inflicting a lesser punishment yet still refined thoughts persuaded by some positive factors in favour of the petitioner mentioned supra compel me to hold that the punishment imposed is a bit shockingly disproportionate to the gravity of the offence committed by him and he should have been imposed some lesser punishinient allowing him to continue in service and thus affording him an opportunity to correct himself ifhis case of sickness and other tragic family situations were really the causative factors which made him commit the misconduct of being unauthorizedly absent in the bank to perform his regular duty. I am fortified in holding se for another reason as well that when with the charges proved according to the Management the impugned punishment of removal was imposed in a cumulative reckoning of all the charges proved with the non - approval of one among the charges as being perverse as herein found a lesser punishment rather than the one imposed is reasonabic and justified. A view as above according to me would be expedient to harmonize the distinction between the laws in the books and actual laws in reality in relation to its true impact intended on the Society, which is often lost sight of by the administrative and adjudicating authorities . think that the petitioner is to be given some lesser punishment after his reinstatement into service . The petitioner is entitled to the relief accordingly.

Regarding the encashment of cheque produced by Vasudevan in the name of his wife that the petitioner acted in breach of the rule of business of the bank , the petitioner has thereby been negligent , the case though tends to be with some substance could have been considered by the Management in view of the explanation given by the petitioner which is not traversed showing that the day of incident was a day of heavy business and that the customer Vasudevan who came for the transaction as well being an account holder that the susceptibility of the petitioner being under a mistaken impression as claimed by him is apt to be true and is not to be disbelieved . It is well to remember that to err is human . The instant conduct of the workman in the given facts and circumstances is only to be qualified as an innocent minor error committed by him which is worthy to be condoned as being trivial and as not being an instance causing any loss or prejudice to the bank . The other charge of his being on unauthorized absence without permission or leave continuously for more than 30 days for a number of occasions is a matter to be dealt with seriously. His contention that he has been sick for some period is not substantiated satisfactorily. However there are some indications with the production ofmedical certificates etc. to show that he has been sick during some periods of the different spells during which he was unauthorizedly absent . His application for extension of leave is also not seen mentioned with any reason therefor and he seems to have given only mediocre importance to his duty in the Respondent/Bank where he is working as an Award Staff in the category of Senior Asstt. The fact that he also got promotion after his erring conduct of absenting without leave or that the subsequent sanction of leave treating his unauthorized absence as on loss of pay could be legitimately held to be , alidating circumstances to undo his mistakes of unauthorized absence etc. cannot be heard or countenanced. Discipline is very essential for the smooth functioning of a commercial institution where integrity and honesty are a few of the essential features which no employee can lose sight of. If for the reason that the Management has lost confidence in him the only course left with it is to terminate him from service . In this case , such a case has not been pleaded by the Management . He has been sent out by way of removal and he is entitled to the superannuation benefits . However , the question is whether the punishment imposed on him is shockingly disproportionate to the gravity of the offence . In his explanation submitted before the Disciplinary Authority, he has delineated regarding his illness during a few occasions of the different spells of the periods ofhis unauthorized absence , family or domestic tragedies that

18. Resultantly, the Management is directed to reinstate the petitioner into service forthwith whereafict they may inflict him with appropriate punishment short of termination from service . After his reinstatement , he will be entitled to continuity of service and all other attendant benefits but not backwages .

8511

भारत का राजपत्र: दिसम्बर 4 , 2010/अग्रहायण 13 , 1932

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

19. 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 20th October , 2010)

A. N. JANARDANAN, Presiding Officer Witnesses Examined:

WW1 , Sri C. Kumar For the 1st Party / Petitioner :

MW1 , Sri S. For the 2nd Party /Management :

Muthuraman Documents Marked:

On the petitioner's side

Date

Ex.No.

Description 01-07-2002

Ex.W1

1st Charge Sheet issued by the Respondent 14-09-2002

Ex.W2

Explanation to Charge Sheet

03-01-2003

Ex.W3

2nd Charge Sheet 05-01-2003

Ex.W4

Explanation to 2nd

Charge Sheet

Ex. W5

Extract of the enquiry proceedings

Ex.W6

Enquiry Report 15-03-2005

Ex. W7

Personal hearing notice issued by the Respondent alongwith dissent note

23-03-2005

Ex.W8

Reply to dissent note 09-04-1992

Ex.W9

11-06-1992 Documents were marked inthe Enquiry Froceedings

15-05-2002 of 1st and 2nd Charge Sheet

31-12-2003

28-08-2004

Ex.W10

3rd Charge Sheet 01-11-2004

Ex.W11

Reply to the Charge Sheet

Ex. W12

Enquiry proceedings of 3rd Charge Sheet 04-08-2005

Ex.W13

Enquiry Report 04-10-2005

Ex.W14

Notice issue by the Respondent regarding personal hearing alongwith dissent note 03-12-2005

Ex.W15

Reply to dissent note 30-12-2005

Ex. W16

Personal hearing for proposed punishment 24-10-2006

Ex. W17

Written submission given by the petitioner in the personal hearing 30-03-2006

Ex.W18

Order of the Disciplinary Authority (Removal from service)

13-07-2006

Ex.W19

Appeal filed by the petitioner before the Appellate Authority 22-09-2006

Ex.W20

Order of the Appellate Authority

17-02-2003

Ex. W21

24-03-2003

06-12-2003

10-06-2003

26-01-2004

07-12-2004

09-01-2004

Documents marked in the enquiry proceedings of 3rd Charge Sheet 28-01-2004

20-02-2004

04-03-2004

03-05-2004

July/2004

11-06-2004

03-08-2004

11-08-2004

23-10-1998

16-06-2000

23-07-2001

2004 to 2005 ( Leave Register of the petitioner)

Office Order

03-10-2003

Ex.W22

01-12-2003

Ex.W23

Letter issued by the promotion Respondent regarding the information about the examination for 01-08-2002

Ex. W24

Settlement Memorandum of 04-10-2005

Ex.W25

Punishment imposed by the Respondent to an other employee for un- authorised absent 04-10-2005

Ex.W26

Punishment imposed by the Respondent to an other employee for un- authorised absent (Paulpandi)

04-10-2005

Ex.W27

Punishment imposed by the Respondent to an other employee for un- authorised absent (Paulpandi)

15-07-2005

Ex.W28

30-08-2005

Punishment imposed by the Respondent to an other employee for un- authorized absent 8512

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 4 , 2010/AGRAHAYANA 13 , 1932

On the Managements side

Ex.No.

Date

Description Ex.W1

15-07-2005 Charge Sheet to Smt . B. Asothai

Ex.W2

04-08-2005 Reply to Charge Sheet by B. Asothai

Ex.W3

04-10-2005 Orderof Disciplinary Authority to B. Asothai Ex.W4

15-07-2005 Charge Sheet to A. Arul Pandi

Ex. W5

04-08-2005 Reply ofA. Paul Pandi to Charge Sheet Ex. W6

04-10-2005 Orderof Disciplinary Authority to A. Arul Pandi

Ex. W7

15-07-2005 Charge Sheet to R. Ramaswamy

Ex.W8

04-08-2005 Reply by R. Ramasamyto the Charge Sheet Ex.W9

30-08-2005 Orderof Disciplinary Authorityto R. Ramasamy

Ex.M10

12-10-2001 Letter of Dy . General Manager to V. Ramanaiah Ex.M11

29-03-2005 Letter of Disciplinary Authorityto Ramanaiah containing order of punishment

Ex.M12

Draft of the charge sheet to Udhaya Kumar Ex.M13

06-08-2005 Reply of Udhaya Kumar to the Charge Memo Ex.M14

03-06-2006 Orderof Disciplinary Authority issued to Udhaya Kumar नई दिल्ली , 11 नवम्बर , 2010

का.आ. 2978.-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में , केन्द्रीय सरकार दूर संचार विभाग के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच , अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण नं. - 1 , चण्डीगढ़ के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 427/2000 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 11-11-2010 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल- 40012/372 / 2000- आईआर ( डी.यू. ) ]

रमेश सिंह , डेस्क अधिकारी

[PART II- SEC . 3 ( ii ) ] New Delhi , the 11th November , 2010 S.O. 2978.- In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) , the Central Government hereby publishes the Award ( Ref. No. 427/ 2000) 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 Department of Telecom and their workman, which was received by the Central Government on 11-11-2010.

[ No. L- 40012/372/ 2000 - IR ( DU) ]

RAMESH SINGH , Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

BEFORE SHRI GYANENDRA KUMAR SHARMA, PRESIDING OFFICER, CENTRAL GOVT . INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL- CUM - LABOUR COURT- 1, CHANDIGARH

Case I.D. No. - 427/ 2000

Shri Dara Singh C/ o Shri R. K. Sharma , H. No. 372 , Sector- 20 -A, Chandigarh - 160001 .

Applicant

Versus

( 1 ) The Chief General Manager , Telecom , Punjab Circle, Sector - 34 , Chandigarh - 160001 .

(2) The Principal General Manager , Telecom, Sector- 18 , Chandigarh.

Respondents APPEARANCES

For the Workman :

Shri Arun Batra .

Shri Anish Babbar .

For the Management :

AWARD

Passed on : 28-10-10

Government of India vide notification no . L - 40012/ 372 / 2000 / IR ( DU ) , dated 31-10-2000 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 Chief General Manager , Telecom , Punjab Circle , Chandigarh and the Principal General Manager , Telecom , Chandigarh Distt . In ordering disengagement /termination of services of Shri Dara Singh a workman engaged through contractor Shri R.K. Mittal w.e.f. 27-02-1999 is just and legal ? If not , to what relief the workman is entitled and from which date ?" 8513 भारत का राजपत्र : दिसम्बर 4, 2010/अग्रहायण 13 , 1932

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 (

(2) That the workman was under the administrative control of the management .

(3) That the payment of wages was made good directly by the management to the workman.

(4) That there was no contractor or intermediary in between the management and the workman .

(5) At the cost of repetition , bill for the payment were prepared by the management and the management has directly paid the same to the workman.

After receiving the reference parties were informed. Parties appeared and filed their respective pleadings . The main contention in this dispute is that he was appointed as Peon by the management ofrespondent on 05-04-1997 and his services were terminated without any notice or onemonthwages in lieu ofnotice and without payment of retrenchment compensation in violation of Section 25 F oftheAct on 27-02-1999 . He was shown working through a contractor but contract is shame and camouflage . In fact he was directly engaged by the management and he was also paid salary directly by the management . He has completed 240 days ofwork in the preceding year from the date ofhis termination and his termination was bad in law.

The services of many persons have been regularized bythe department vide its order dated 20-04-2000, whereas , no heed was given to his request. On the basis of the above the workman has requested for setting aside the termination order and for further order reinstating his services with all consequential benefits .

The management appeared and denied any relationship with the workman . It is specifically contended in the written statement that workman was not appointed by the management nor any wages were paid to him . The master and servant relationship has also been challenged by the management . It is further contended that services ofseveral Group D employees were taken on outsourcing and the services of workman Shri Dara Singh might have been taken on outsourcing .

It is further contended by the management that similar nature of cases were filed before the Central Administrative Tribunal and the same were disposed of by the Tribunal vide order dated 24-01-2001 . As the workman was not working with the management directly, he was not entitled for the protection of provisions of theAct.

Parties were afforded the opportunity for adducing evidence. The evidence of Shri Dara Singh was recorded on oath in open court on 27-07-2009 , whereas , Shri Bhupinder Singh, SDO Telecom, Chandigarh filed his affidavit on behalf of the management . Shri Bhupinder Singh was cross - examined by learned counsel for the workman on 09-12-2009 . Parties were heard at length . I have perused the entire file and entire materials on record . The main issue before this Tribunal is whether the workman was directly engaged by the management and there existed any employer employee relationship between them . The issue of employer employee relationship has been elaborately discussed by Hon'ble the Apex court in ONGC Shilcher case . In this case, Hon'ble the Apex Court has held that to establish the employer employee relationship between the workman and the management of any organization , it is mandatory on the part of the workman to prove the following facts :---

In this case it is contended by the workman that he was directly engaged and was paid wages directly by the management . On the other hand, the management denied it. The management has filed certain documents to prove thatthere was a contract in between the management and the workman. Copy of the contract has been filed by the management . No document relating to the contractor has been filed by the management . Instead of it, as per the settled law of service jurisprudence, the burden is on the workman to prove that he was working directly with the management , he was paid wages directly by the management and he was under the administrative control ofthe management. In his cross - examination the workman has admitted that he was working through a contract . A person use to visit in the office for payment. The payment ofwages was made good in the presence of the SDO . The facts admitted need not to be proved . It is the admission ofthe workman that he was paid wages by the contractor inthe presence of the SDO . It also proves that there was a contractor in between the workman and the management . No doubt, fewdocuments have been filed by the workman to prove the direct payment of wages to him by the management . There are certain notings in which the name ofthe workman does not figure . Two copies of the bills and two copies of the attendance register have been filed by the workman . If these copies are considered to be correct instead of that workntan has failed to prove that he was worked 240 days in the preceding year from the date of his termination .. The workman has worked for 240 daysin the proceding year from the date ofhis termination. The workman has challenged the nature of contractor but inhis cross - examination has admitted the very existence and the activity of the contractor. At the cost of the repetition , it is mentioned that workman has admitted not only the presence of the contract but also the fact that he was paid wages by the contract in the presence of the SDO . The workman has also failed to prove any administrative control of the management over him. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case , I am of the view that workman has failed to prove his case regarding the nature of the contract . He has failed to prove thatcontract was shame and camouflage . The industrial dispute is accordingly answered . The workman is not entitled for any relief. Let Central Government be approached for publication of the award, and thereafter, file be consigned to record room .

G.K. SHARMA , Presiding Officer (1) That there was a master servant relationship between the workman and the management (meaning thereby, workman was directly appointed by the management) .

4548 GI/10-35 8514

THE GAZETTE

MBER 4 , 2010 / AGRAHAYANA 13 , 1932

[PART 15 3 ( i ) ) नई दिल्ली, 11

a workman engaged through contractor Shri Ashok Kumar Sharma w.e.f. 01-03-1999 is legal and justific!? If not to what relief the workman is entitled aud from which date ? "

का. आ. 2979, और 1947 (1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरणदूरसंचार विभाग के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध घरों के बीच , अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औधोगिना विद अधिकरण नं. - 1 , अण्डीगढ़ के ट प्रकाशित करती है , जो की हुआ था । 3 ) को 2010 को प्राप्त

[सं. गृहा -4001 / A

(डीयू) ]

New Delhi , the lith Nay 2010

S.O. 2979. - In pursuance of Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 Government hereby publishes thessa 2000) of the Central Government bon Labour Court , No. 1, Chandigarh in the Industrial Dispute betw to the management of flopers workman, which was by on 11-11-2010 17 of the the Contral (Pof. No. 207/ rimbonal -cum- Annexure, relation their ment

After receiving the reference parties were intermed. Parties appeared and filed their respective pleadings . On perusal of the pleadings of the parties , the case of the workman in nut shell is that he was engaged as workman on permanent job on 01-04-1996 anddrawing a monthly salary of Rs . 2,139 . The services of the workman were terminated on 28-02-1999 without notice or one month wages in lieu of notice and without payment of retrenchment compensation. The termination of the workman is against the provisions of the Industrial Disputes Act . His juniors were retained in the services . New hands were engaged but no heed was givento the request of the workman . The services of the workman were terminated illegally . On the basis of the above contezuons the workman has prayed for an order of this Titul setting aside the termination order and for a conse protial order regarding the reinstatement of his services with all the benefits.

icer

RAMES ANNEXU

ARMA

ENT

BEFORE SHRI GYANHEMMA : PRESIDING OFFICER CRO INDUSTRIAL TRIBUN

Case L.D. No. 207/2000

Nepr

scom Road,

The management of respondent Telecommune.ion Department appeared and opposed the claim of the workman by filing written statement . The master and servant relationship between the workman and the management has been challenged by the managens nt . It is contended that the workman was not engaged by the management of respondent Telecommunication department and not a single penny was paid to hint by the management . He might have served the managerient through a contractor and the management has filed the relevant documents relating to the contractor to prove bis contention .

Shri Ram Singh C/ o SH Labour Union , Mohalla, Bhatinda (Punjab)

plicant

The General Manager , Department of Telecom , Houst

Parties were afforded the opportunity for adducing evidence . The statement of the workman was recorded on 07-03-2006 . One Shri Sewa Singh was also cross - examined for the workman . On behalf of the management oue Shri V.S. Theti filed his affidavit. He was cross - exam by learned counsel for the workman . No documents was filed by the workman .

Appearances

For the Worlyban

For the Management Shri

Fasset

Govermeneut of hidia vel , nep 110012/ 66/2000 - IR ( DU ) , dated 31-0002es powers under Section 10 of the Industrial Dispute (the Act in short) has referred the following this : spete for adjudis ation to this Tribusal

Parties were heard at length . The main issue before this Tribunal for adjudication is whether their existe Fan employer and employce relationship between the management and the workman ? The issue of master and servant relationship has been dealt with and decides ! by Hon'ble the Apex Court inGM , ONGC Shilchar us ONGC Contractual workers union , 2008 ULR 800the above case Hon'ble the Apex Court as held that to establish the employer and employee relationship between the workman and the management , the workman as to prove the following facts: -

(1) That their existed a master and sees ant relationship between the workman and the "Whether the action of the ral Manager, Teh , Hosbimur ing disen- Singh 8515

2012 ウン

भारत का राजपत्र : दिसम्बर

মুমার (ii) ]

Aveo ( ket. No. 56/2006)

Pamat cum - Labour management (workman was directly engaged by be management) .

Comdy Costuman bora in the Lonexure , in the

Indus nai lovers in relation to That the workman was under the administrative control of the management .

the arc of Posts and their

work , wie Wanyine Central Government That there was no contractor in between the managemend and the workmen .

今日も 40012/120 / 2005 - IR (DU) ]

PAMENH SINGH , Desk Officer That the payment of wages were made good by the management to the workman directly and not by the contractor.

HEOL OF STAIPEIKA KUMAR SHARMA, At the cost of the repetition the remittance rolls for the payment of wages were made by the magagement and not by the contractor .

PRESIDENT SICER CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUCTSSAABIN.COM- LABOUR COURT- 1 ,

CHANDIGARH

CaseLib k

Shri Ven ad linge Ste The Jaarial Singh , Rio Dhamote

Kalan , Tehsii Payal, Lucaha

..Applicant

Dio Post , Marinesl sine radhiena

Respondent

For the Wor

GeoN Shiga

For the Managerment Seduced Singh

70 2700

GL notification No.

140317/22053ed 20-09-2006 by exercising

its poravnade Secunde Industrial Disputes Act ,

(the oth ned the following industrial

His Tibmal :-

dispare fade

of the management of Post stated earlier, the workman has not filed any Ps . It is the oral contention of the workman and other witness that he was directly engaged by the ficat, was paid wages directly by the management was under the administrative control of the imane ment. For getting the relief under the provisions of the Industrial Disputes Act , the workman has to prove by some cogent evidence that he was engaged directly by We saanagement , was paid wages directly by the management and was under the administrative control of 20 nagement . In failure of providing these facts , the werkwan shall not be entitled for any relief. It is once tade clear that oral contentions of the workman are ouificient to prove the above issues . Some cogent evidace such as attendence register , documents relating payment of wages and any disciplinary action taken bemanagement against the workman was necessary fle by the workman. But the workman has not filed any chocuments and his oral contention is not sufficient bove the above facts . Accordingly , this industrial pic and reference lacks the proper evidence which sopposed to be filed by the workman . Thus , there is love in the clam of the workman and the claim is ogly dismissed . Let Central Government be chod for publication of award , and thereafter , file igned to record room.

Odb es, that in terminating the services of

Siri Guna Arizeh z chowskidar wef 03-01-2004 is

what relief the workman is GK. SHARMA , Presiding Officer नई दिल्ली , ।। भवम्बर , 2010

Abareddaula Meka partes were informed.

Patres appears and the der respective pleadings . The

mam case of the workom in nut shell is that he was

appointed by the resposities Chov kadar and has worked

as such w.c.f. 01-12-98-05-01 2004. His average pay was आ. 2980.--औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 ( 1947 की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में , केन्द्रीय सरकार डाक विभाग तंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच , नव निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक कण नं. -1, चण्डीगढ़ के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 56/2006 ) को काशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 11-11-2010 को प्राप्त Rs . 2,470 per month . The services of the workman were

cally antica.cowthat any notice , payment

Saisotice and without payment

pensation The workman has [ सं. एल -40012/ 120/ 2005 - आई आरडीयू) ] रमेश सिंह , डेस्क अधिकारी

In the par ding year from the

antal appominent was lawful .

New Delhi , the 11th November, 2010

fin was appobusporianan basis and his services

vos Ramibaba rail against the provisions of the 3. 2980. In pursuance of Section 17 of the plusrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) , the Coral 8516

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: DECEMBER 4, 2010 /AGRAHAYANA 13 , 1932 [PART II- SEC . 3 ( ii ) ] Act. On the basis ofthe above, workman has prayed for an order ofthis Tribunal declaring his termination order illegal and for subsequent order for his reinstatement into the services with consequential relief.

The management appeared and admitted the appointment of the workman as termporary chowkidar and the period of work as alleged by the workman. It is denied that it was a permanent appointment as no appointment letter was given to the workman . It is further contended that in the year 1998 there was a policy of the department not to engage any part time chowkidar and the engagement of the workman was against the policy of the department . Ifisfurthermore contended by the management that even if the workman has completed 240 days of work in the preceding year from the date of his termination , he has no right to the protection of provisions of the Industrial Disputes Act as his initial appointment was not lawful .

rights of the workman under the provisions of Industrial Disputes Act. The Industrial Disputes Act protects certain basic rights of every workman . The first protection is regarding the illegal termination . This case relates only to this right . The Industrial Disputes Act does not bar the termination of any workman . It only regulates it . The termination is regulated in the sense that if the workman has completed 240 days of work in the preceding year from the date of his termination and his services were no more required the management has right to terminate his services as per the provisions of the law. Meaning thereby, one month notice or payment of one month wages in lieu of notice and the payment of lawful terminal dues is a condition precedent for terminating the services of the workman. In this case it is not contended by the management that the services of the workman were no more required because as per the information given by the management under Right to Information Act, 22 other persons are still working in the same position and capacity. At the cost of the repetition , it is not the case of the management that work was no more available . Meaning thereby, work was available with the management and the workman has completed 240 days of work in the preceding year from the date of his termination . It is also admitted that no notice or one month wages in lieu of notice and lawful terminal dues were paid to the workman before terminating his services . This makes the termination of the workman illegal and void being against the provisions ofthe Act . All the 22 workers are also working in the same position in which the workman was working before the termination of his services , I am of the view that reinstatement of the workman on the same position he was working prior to his termination is appropriate remedy. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the workman shall also be entitled for the back wages subject to enhanced rates . Accordingly , the management is directed to reinstate the services of the workman with back wages on the same position , he was working prior to his termination , within one month from the date of publication of the award . The industrial dispute and reference is accordingly answered . Let Central Government be approached for publication of award , and thereafter , file be consigned to record room.

The evidence of both of the parties was recorded . I have perused the evidence oral and documentary . I have heard the parties and their learned counsel at length . In his cross - examination MW1 Kulwant Singh , Superintendent of Post office, Ludhiana has admitted on oath that workman has worked w.e.f. 01-12-1998 to 31-01-2004 at temporary chowkidar. He has also stated that no appointment letter was given to him . Before termination of his services no notice, one month wages in lieu of notice and retrenchment compensation was paid . It is further stated in his evidence by MW 1 , the witness of the management that in the year 1998 there was a policy which restrains the department for appointment of any part time chowkidar . His appointment was against the policy. The management has failed to file any such policy. Opportunity for filing the policy was not availed by the management . Moreover , the documents filed by the workman proved that on 30-04-2007 as more as 22 temporary chowkidar were working in different offices of the management . Where the primary evidence (the document itself) lying with the management the Tribunal should not rely on oral information given by the witness . As stated earlier, on perusal of the file , I am unable to trace out the policy if any which prohibits the management to appoint any temporary chowkidar from1998 .

G K. SHARMA , Presiding Officer

नई दिल्ली , 11 नवम्बर , 2010

का.आ. 2981.- औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में , केन्द्रीय सरकार डाक विभाग 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 22/2006 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 11-11-2010 को प्राप्त हुआ था।

[ सं. एल- 40012/77/2005- आई आर ( डीयू) ] रमेश सिंह , डेस्क अधिकारी It is the settled principle of service jurisprudence that even if the initial appointment was not within the parameters of law, a temporary employee has a right to get the protection of the provisions of the Industrial Disputes Act . It is the only contention of the management that appointment of temporary chowkidar was prohibited by the circular letter of the department. The circular letter has not been filed by the management. In absentia of such material documents , the Court shall believe that there is no such circular letter . Even if it is considered that there has been a circular letter , the Court is not going to discuss and consider the nature of initial appointment of the workman only for the purpose of the protection of 8517 भारत का राजपत्र : दिसम्बर 4, 2010/अग्रहायण 13 , 1932

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

New Delhi , the 11th November , 2010

has worked with the bank continuously for 14 years from 1984 to 1998. Her services were terminated without any notice , one month wages in lieu of notice and without payment of retrenchment compensation . The fresh hands were engaged after the termination of her services . On the basis of the above facts the workman has prayed for an order of this Tribunal setting aside the termination order and for consequential order reinstating her services with all the consequential benefits .

S.O. 2981. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 22/2006) ofthe 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 Department of Posts and their workman, which was received by the Central Government on 11-11-2010 .

[No. L-40012/77/ 2005 - IR(DU) ]

RAMESH SINGH , Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

The management appeared and opposed the claim by filing written statement . Preliminary objection was raised that the claim is bad by delay and latches . On merits , it was contended by the management that Smt . Darshana Devi had not worked with the management , so , there was no employer and employee relation between the workman and the management .

BEFORE SHRI GYANENDERA KUMAR SHARMA, PRESIDING OFFICER, CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL- CUM - LABOUR COURT- I, CHANDIGARH

Case I. D No. 22/2006

Smt . Darshana Devi , W/ o Shri Manohar Lal , C/o Shri S. D. Marwah , Durga Mandir , 79, Street No. 4 , Old Bisan Nagar , Patiala (Punjab)

.Applicant

Versus

In the claim statement itself the workman has desired the management to file the documents relatingto the period in question . The management replied that no documents for the period in question as desired by the workman are lying with the management as the same have been destroyed as per the rules of the department . Letter relating to the destruction of the document by the competent department in question has been filed by the management .

The Chief Post Master General. Department of Posts , PbCircle , Sector - 17, Chandigarh

Respondent

APPEARANCES

Shri S. D. Marwah .

For the Workman :

Shri Namit Kumar .

For the Management :

AWARD

Both of the parties were afforded the opportunity for adducing evidence . Smt . Darshana Devi filed the affidavit and she was cross- examined by learned counsel for the management in detail. Shri K. K. Jain filed his affidavit in support of the workman and he was cross- examined by learned counsel for the management . On behalf of the management Shri P. C. Sharma, SSP Patiala filed his affidavit and he was cross - examined by learned legal representative of the workman on two dates namely 06-07-2010 and 28-07-2010.

Passed on 25-10-10

The Government of India vide notification No. L- 40012/ 77 / 2005 - IR( DU) , dated 19-05-2006 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 Postal Department , Patiala in terminating the services of Smt . Darshana Devi W / o Shri Manohar Lal , Ex- Sweepress w.e.f. 30-11-1998 without complying with the statutory provisions of the I. D. Act , 1947 is legal and justified ? If not , to what relief the concerned workman is entitled to and from which date?"

On the request of the workman , the witness was directed to come up with all the records for the period in question. The recording of evidence of Shri P.C. Sharma was deferred to 06-07-2010 to 25-07-2010 . On 28-07-2010 he witness has come with the representation of the workman which was decided by the management on 23-12-2004 . Smt . Darshana Devi was accordingly informed on 04-02-2005 . The witness has come again without any documents and as stated on oath that all the documents for the period in question have been weeded out . On the issue of cash book, the witness of the management Shri P. C. Sharma has deposed on oath that he has no idea whether the cash book for the period in question has also been destroyed . The cash book is a permanent document which is never destroyed . If this register ( cash book ) for the period in question was available there is no iota of evidence filed or adduced by the management why this document was not filed before this Tribunal ? Morcover , in its written statement the management has contended After receiving the reference parties were informed . Parties appeared and filed their respective pleadings . The workman has challenged her termination on the ground of violation of the provisions of the Industrial Disputes Act . It is contended by the workman that she 8518

THE GAZETTE OF INDECEMBER 4 , 2010/AGRAHAYANA 13, 1932 PART اور

moved to the managents authority and the same was also dispute wit direction that documents the available to prove that during the period in question News De proces authority has disposed off the representation of the workman in light of the cash book nor the same has bere filed before this Tribunal . Of course some of thedocumen might have destroyed as per law out what about the book for the period in question ? Why the same has been filed and was withhold is known to the managemk.er orto the God Almighty ? But it reflects that for the purpose of denying the benefit to the workman , the manageme with twisting attitude has withheld such documents .

The witness of the management has also adnered that there are four workers working in time office at presure . He was also directed by this Tribunal to come up with Ph record of the four persons who are working as Safa Karamchari in the Post Office presently but the sante was not supplied . Accordingly, adverse inference once again shall be taken against the management . The nature of the adverse inference shall be that all the four persons wise engaged after the termination of the service of de workman.

that Smt . Darshana Devi has never worked with the management from 1984 to 1998 as contended in the claim petition but at later stage the management has not denied that the workman has ever worked with the management . It is only contended that there is no doommment available in the branch to show that Smt . Darshana Deci has work from 1984 to 1998 in Patiala . Thus , there is no specific denial about the working of Smt . Darshana Devi but there is denial regarding the availability of the documents . As stated earlier , the management has not responded on the cash book which is a permanent document and can never be destroyed . The management was directed to file the cash book as well but the management failed , reasons known to it . Accordingly, the adverse inference shall be taken against the managernent that the management has deliberately withheld the documents to deprive the workman claiming any benefit under the Industrial Disputes Act . The workman is an illiterate lady . She has stated that she has continuously worked for 14 years with the management. The Tribunal should not undermine the socio -economic disparity and imbalance between the workman and management . The workman belongs to socio economic backward class whereas , the management is always in a position to dominated her will . The management has infact dominate the will by withholding the cash book which is the permanent document and can prove the very existence and working of the workman with the management during the period in question . The witness residing in the same vicinity in the neighourhood of the Post Office has proved the contention of the workman . It is true that oral contention of the workman and his witness is not sufficient to prove that she has comple 240 days of services in the preceding year from the date her termination . The cumulative effect of the entir idence and the failure of the management to file the cash book prove it that there has been some relation of the management with the workmai . The workman has worked with the management but has on false pretext has not filed the documents being destroyed . It is admitted that cash book is such a document which is never destroyed and the witness has shown his ignorance about the existence of the cash book . It is the contention of the workman that she was paid wages through vouchers . This cash book certainly contains the entries of the vouchers but managemcan fai's to produce the same . Accordingly, adverse inference against the management sh " ll be taken.

The nature of the adverse inference shall be that the contention of the workman that she has worked with the management for 14 years from 1984-1998 shall be considered to be correct and it will be presumed that she has completed 240 days of work in the preceding year from the date of her termination . There is twisting in the fact and proof of the management. In pleadings the management flatly refused the workman has ever worked with it. But during cross - examination when the witness was asked to come up with the documents , it was not totally denied but only said that documents to prove that she has worked during the period in question are not available . Moreover , the representation of the workman

The preliminary objections have to boon takva ne the management that the reference is beat by dober 3 latches . The services of the workman were terminau the year 1998. She has moved a representation to management in the year 2003. The same was disposed off in the year 2004. The industrial dispute was raised A year 2004 and the reference was referred to du : Tribuc in the year 2006. As stated earlier that justi to any socio - economic backward class person account of failure to raise the dispute for grievances in time . No limitation is prescrit a the dispute under the Industrial Disputes AC 34 become the settled law of service jurisprudunu thon dispute should be raised within a reasonal Considering the socio -economic conditions of t . e workman and the status of the managemem , or management having the position to dominate the wil the workman and other facts and circumstances of g case, I am of the view that the representation, novidad industrial dispute raised was not so abnormal deiay that justice should be denied to the workman just מס ground . The management has also raised the iss industry. It is settled law of service jurisprudence t PostOffice is an industry . The issue of industry has settled by Hon'ble the Apex Court in Bangalore War Supply and Sewerage V/ s A. Rajappa 1978 Lab , I As per the ratio of the said judgement , the nat industry has to be assessed on the basis of the wo discharged by the workman and entrusted by the management . On the basis of the work carried on wed discharged by the workman which was entrusted by th management ( cleaning work) the management is an industry [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

Thus, from the above observations , it is held that management is an industry. There is no abnormal delay in raising the industrial dispute . The workman was working with the management from 1984 to 1998. Her services were terminated without notice , one month wages in lieu of notice, and without payment of retrenchment compensation . Fresh persons were engaged after her termination . The above facts make the termination of the workman bad , void and illegal being against the provisions of the Act .

It is hereby made clear that the above discussion is regarding the protection for illegal termination and not regarding the regularization of the services of the wokman . Regularization of the services of the workman is absolutely within the legal domain of the management . The management has to regularize the services strictly as per the rules .

The last line of the evidence of the witness of the management is as follows : --

"No notice is required to be given as per the rules of the department to the part time contingent paid workers ."

It means that the workman was a part time paid contingent worker. It is settled law of service jurisprudence that rights of any workman are protected against the illegal termination even if she or he is working part time or few minutes in a day for any industrial work . The evidence of the witness of the management proved two things . The workman was working with the management and she was working as a part time sweeper .

As stated earlier , the services of even a part time paid contingent worker are protected from illegal termination . The services of the workman were illegally terminated as held by this Tribunal in preceding paragraphs.

8519

भारत का राजपत्र : दिसम्बर 4, 2010/अग्रहायण 13 , 1932

Accordingly , management is directed to reinstate the services of the workman within one month from the date of publication of this Award. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case , she will also be entitled for the back wages subject to enhanced rates . Let Central Government be approached for publication of award, and thereafter, file be consigned to record room.

GK. SHARMA, Presiding Officer नई दिल्ली , 11 नवम्बर , 2010

का.आ. 2982.- औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार व्हिकल फैक्ट्री 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 सी जी आई टी/ एल सी/ आर/ 81/04 ) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 11-11-2010 को प्राप्त हुआ था।

[ सं. एल -14012 /13/2004 - आई आर ( डीयू) ] रमेश सिंह , डेस्क अधिकारी New Delhi , the 11th November , 2010 S.O. 2982. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) , the Central Government hereby publishes the Award ( Ref . No. CGIT/ LC/R/81 /04) 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 Vehicle Factory and their workman , which was received by the Central Government on 11-11- 2010.

[No. L- 14012/ 13 /2004 - IR (DU ) ] RAMESH SINGH , Desk Officer

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

No. CGIT /LC / R/ 81 / 04

Workman/ Union Presiding Officer : SHRI MOHD . SHAKIR HASAN Shri Pritam , S / o . Shri Damdilal , C/o Shri Arvind Srivastava , Civil Lines , Opp . Police Station , Jabalpur

Versus

.Management The General Manager , Vehicle Factory, Jabalpur

Whenever the termination of any workman has declared to be void and illegal being against the provisions of the Act, there are two possible remedies available to the workman. The first remedy is the reinstatement of the services of the workman , whereas , the second remedy is a reasonable compensation . It is the principle of service jurisprudence that priority should be given to the reinstate- ment of the services of the workman . Moreover , when after the illegal termination of the services of the workman new hands were engaged without affording her the opportunity to work, the only remedy lies is the reinstatement of the services of the workman . It is admitted by the witness of the management that at present four persons for the purpose of cleaning/ sweeping is working in the post office . When the management was directed to provide with the particulars of these four persons , the management failed, accordingly adverse inference has been taken by the Tribunal.

AWARD

Passed on this 19th day of October , 2010 1. The Government of India , Ministry of Labour vide its Notification No. L - 14012 / 13 / 2004 - IR ( DU ) dated 8520

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 4, 2010 / AGRAHAYANA 13 , 1932

22-6-2004 has referred the following dispute for adjudication by this tribunal :-

"Whether the action of the management of Vehicle Factory , Jabalpur , MP in terminating the services of Shri Pritam S. O. Shri Damdilal , Ex - Sweeper , T. No. 6229 /MIE w.e.f. 19-8-94 is justified ? If not, to what relief the concerned workman is entitled to ? " 2. The case of the workman in short is that the workman was employed as a Sweeper in the Vehicle Factory, Jabalpur . On 19-8-1994 the charge- sheet was issued for alleged misconduct for taking alcohol during duty hours . He refuted the charges though he was terminated by punishment of removal from service vide order dated 24-7-97 . The workman preferred appeal but the same was rejected on the ground of limitation . The workman is said to have not given opportunity to defend himself. The copy of charge- sheet was not given to him . He had not been given opportunity to engage Defence Assistant nor allowed to cross - examine the witnesses . The punishment imposed on him was harsh and disproportionate. It is submitted that the reference be answered in his favour .

3. The management appeared and contested the reference by filing Written Statement . The case of the management , interalia is that the workman Pritam was creating nuisance in the Pump House under the influence of liquor on 3-8-92 . The Pump House incharge informed the Security Officer . The said workman was apprehended and was examined by the Medical Officer . He was found unfit for duty on that day . He was suspended on 17-8-92 and a departmental proceeding was initiated against him for committing gross misconduct . He denied the charges . Shri S. K. Jetli , Asstt . Works Manager was appointed as Enquiry Officer ( in short E.O) . Shri K. R. Mohan Das , chargeman was appointed as Presenting Officer ( P. O. ) . The workman did not opt for any Defence Assistant . The E.O. gave full opportunity to the workman to defend himself. The workman admitted the charges that he had consumed alcohol in the previous night and also on the day before coming for duty but denied the allegation of any nuisance committed by him. He did not cross - examine the management witness though the E.O. gave him opportunity to cross - examine the witness . The E.O. after completion of the enquiry found the charges proved and therefore submitted enquiry report . The sciplinary Authority supplied the copy of the enquiry report but the workman did not submit any reply. Thereafter the Disciplinary Authority passed the order of dismissal . He preferred appeal but the same was also rejected . On number of occasion , he was previously warned for such misconduct. It is submitted that the workman is not entitled to any relief. However , if the departmental enquiry is not found proper and fair , the management submits to give opportunity to prove before the Tribunal .

[PART II- SEC . 3 ( ii) ] 4.On the basis of the pleadings , the following issues are settled-

I. Whether the departmanal proceeding conducted by the management against the workman is proper and legal ?

II . Whether the management is to prove misconduct before the Court ?

III . Whether the punishment awarded to the workman is harsh and disproportionate ?

5. Issue No. I

The workman has not adduced any evidence in the case and is absent since long . As such all the issues are taken up finally . The management has examined one witness Shri Sandeep Jain and has filed papers of departmental proceeding . The papers of departmental proceeding shows that the workman participated in the proceeding . The Medical report shows that he was examined and found unfit . Workman was examined before O. He admitted that he had consumed liquor in late night and in the morning he felt headache as such he took further liquor before coming on duty . The management had examined Shri S. R. Prajapati before E. O. The enquiry proceeding shows that the workman was asked to cross- examine the witness but he declined to cross - examine him. This, shows that the opportunity was provided to him . He had also declined before the E.O. to examine any witness in defence . The Paper Exhibit M/ 9 Page 35 shows that the Disciplinary Authority supplied the enquiry report and asked to show cause before punishment . It appears that the E.O. had given full opportunity to the workman to defend himself. I find that the departmental enquiry conducted by the management is legal and proper . This issue is accordingly decided.

6. Issue No. II

On the basis of discussion made above , it is clear that the management had examined sufficient evidence before the E.O. to prove the charge of misconduct . I find ' hat the findings of the E.O. is not perverse . Therefore there is no reason to interfere in it . There is no evidence in rebuttal of the findings of the E.O. I , therefore , hold that here is no need to prove misconduct in Court . Accordingly this issue is decided .

7. Issue No. III

It is evident that the misconduct had been proved against the workman who came at the work place in the influence of alcohol and committed nuisance . I find that the punishment is just and proper and there is no need to interfere in the order of punishment. Accordingly the reference is answered .

8. In the result, the award is passed and parties are directed to bear their own costs .

भारत का राजपत्र: दिसम्बर 4, 2010/अग्रहायण 13 , 1932

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

9. Let the copies of the award be sent to the Government of India, Ministry of Labour and Employment asperrules.

MOHD. SHAKIR HASAN, Presiding Officer नई दिल्ली, 11 नवम्बर , 2010

का.आ. 2983.-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में , केन्द्रीय सरकार दूर संचार विभाग के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालय नं.- II , चण्डीगढ़ के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 308/2005 ) को प्रकाशित करती है जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 11-11-2010 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल-40012/88/ 98- आई आर( डी.यू. ) ] रमेश सिंह , डेस्क अधिकारी New Delhi , the 11th November, 2010 S.O. 2983.-In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 308/ 2005) ofthe Central Government Industrial Tribunal - cum- Labour Court No. II , 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 Government on 11-11-2010.

[No. L-40012/88 /98 - IR(DU) ] RAMESH SINGH, Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

IN THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM - LABOUR COURT- II, CHANDIGARH

Present : Sri A. K. Rastogi, Presiding Officer Case No. L.D. 308/2K5

Registered on 11-08-2005

Sh . Tek Chand S/ o Kanhiya Ram R/ o Vill. Maing , PO . Karsog, Distt . Mandi (HP)

8521 Central Government vide Notification No. L -40012/ 88/98 - IR( DU) Dated 26-04-1999 read with corrigendum Dated 08-07-99, by exercising its powers under Section 10 sub section ( 1 ) Clause ( d) and sub section 2(A) of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 (hereinafter referred to as Act) has referred the following Industrial dispute for adjudication to this Tribunal :-

"Whether the action of the Telecome Distt . Manager , Mandi (HP) in terminating the services of Sh . Tek Chand S/ o Sh. Kanhiya Ram is legal and justified ? If not, to what reliefthe workman is entitled ?" As per claim statement the workman was employed by respondent through Employment Exchange as Daily wager Belder in January 1990. He continuously worked up to 31-08-1996 and he was disengaged arbitrarily with effect from 01-09-1996 orally. In the year 1996 the applicant had worked for more than 240 days and his services were terminated without compliance of Section 25F of theAct . The respondent had sufficient work and while disengaging the workman, the employees junior to him were retained and fresh recruitment was also made . Full wages were also not paid to him . He was paid wages up to 23-08-1996. Не has claimed his reengagement with continuity of service and back wages .

The claim was contested by the respondent and it was stated that the workman had been engaged on day today basis for casual nature of work with effect from 13-10-1995 till the work was available or DRMs (Daily Rated Mazdoors ) were engaged through regular selection process . It was further stated that on availability of D. R. Ms. through regular selection process no work remained available and the workman was asked not to come further on 23-08-1996 . As the name of the workman was not sponsored by the Employment Exchange therefore, he was not considered during selection process . He has no right for retention. It was denied that the workman worked for 240 days during the year 1996 and a notice under the Act to the workman was required to terminate his service . It was also denied that the department of Telecommunication is an industry.

On the pleadings ofthe parties following issues arise forconsideration :-

...Applicant

Versus

1. Whether the department of Telecommunication is not an industry, if it is its effect ?

2. Whether the workman worked for 240 days in the year 1996, if so , its effect ?

.Respondents

The Telecom Distt . Manager, Telecom, Distt . Mandi (HP)-175001

APPEARANCES

Forthe Workman : Sh . V. K. Diwan, Advocate. For the Management : Sh. Sanjeev Sharma , Advocate

AWARD

Passed on 2nd November 2010

4548Gl/10-36

3. Whether the action of the management/respondent in terminating the services of the workman is legal andjustified ?

4. to what relief the workman is entitled to ?

In evidence the workman has tendered his own affidavit , while on behalf of management/ respondent the 8522

THE GAZETTE OF

CEMBER 4 , 2010/AGRAHAYANA 13 , 1932

-vidence. I management witness has not cate

the days the workman worked in ti

made an evasive statement by sas..

affidavit of Raj Kumar, S. D.O. have heard the learned coum the evidcact on record . My Godiny are as follows : -

Gid not work for 240 days during ...

Issue No. 1

opinion according to the law cited above.

of the workman in his affidavit , the bad of s

: to respondent/management to prov

the workman in the year 1996 was

hence, tue provision of the Adhanic. Out

The management/ respondent w . in pus of

relevant record to prove the workinies O GM Telocem Versus S. S. Sonivasm Pro Уна 1999(1)

From the record the date of the termoco い !

SC SLJ 106 this plea does not hold cable

of the workman could also have been elabo Apex Court has held Tereceret of the

management /respondent neither proaned in Government of India to be en indane held

record nor gave any reason for not prodaong it thatjudgments in Theyyam Josh SOC 489

Singh Verma Versus Reserve , Baneasa and Bombay Telephone Canteen Eupiosociction

1985 ( 2 ) AISLJ 457 wherein no record at atteeth .

produced by the bank and it was in the inde The respondan / manager department of Teleonmesi-cu va that industry in view of the decision of the Hun CAR Court in, AIR 1997 S.C. 2817 cannot be trea Cottont fay down the

petitioner that he worked 202 days the you

Sundays and 17 Holidays are added.ne

and as such he was entitled to the bestesit of st

the petitioner's case that he worked more tin " Accordingly, it i bake t Telecocomuraication is an indusay ari the Act are Applicablete it . Issuerte . the respondent/ management . novisions of Grand against

was held true.

ISGNO No. 2

Therefore , in the circumsta the sam workman that his services were terminaci wideo data 01-09-1996 and he worked for more than 246 days. the year 1996 is true . It is important to note clause embodied in Section 254B aworknesshaibuasued to be in continuous service under an emptor mod

of one year if during a period of a niendas coohs

preceding the date of his retrenchimentas awarly

worked for not less than 240 days and as ad y

Section 25F of the Act no workar

industry who has been in continuous

than one year under an employer shall be rem

that employer until the workman bu been

month's notice in writing or has been

1 period ofnotice in lieu of such notice

the time of retrenchment , compensate

held that the workman has complete: one than wys

service before termination of his savu op.96

and he was entitled to the benefit of

Issue no . 2 is decided in favour of he workmu .

Issue No. 3

terminated orally and without any rice and payroΟΥ

retrenchment compensation as provicai under Seco

of the Act . Clearly the respondentsch Hod

the provisions of Section 25F of the Awaiti

of the workman was not legal and sha It is the case of the workman and the latter has deposed in his affidavit that his services waterminated orally on 31-08-1996 and in 1996 alone head worked for more than 244 days . It means that according to the workman he had worked for more than 240 days in the twelve calendar months preceding to his termination . The management does not dispute that the workman worked continuously till his termination but disputes the date of termination . According to the management the scrvices of the workman were not terminated with effect from 01-09.1996 but on 23-08-1996 . It is important to note that 1996 aleop year having a February of 29 days and if the date of termination of the workman is taken to be 31-08-1990 then werking days comes to 244 days but 23-08-1996 as alleged by the managun days of the workraan comes less . The question is who is to prove the days it this worn worked and who is in possession of the Levidence in this regard . In Director Fisheries Tomis vision Versus Bhikubhai Meghajibhai Chavde 201110110 1689 the respondent was a workman hired ou Guides and deposed to bave completed working tome da 240 days in a year . The Hon'ble Supreme he would have difficulty in having au icial documents , rustur collcetine and held that the bunden of proof sains .pk / appellants to prove that he tid not com 2 days service in the requisite periud to service.

Admittedly , the services of workman were the action of the management in teasing the decided against the managemen

Issue No. 4

The workman has claimed insta continuity of service and back to the prerend case the womanh be davit stated that in the year 1996 ha had waded Gr 244 Engys Hewas not cross - examined or this point. davit the 8523

भारत का राजपत्र दिसम्बर 2010 अापण 13 , 1932

nous employed through Employment bad that no appointment letter had been witness Raj Kumar during stated that the workinan nad not through Employment Exchange went engages persons on day to day basis dy pisowhire. It is clear from the evidence on Par aoramas was a daily wager and was not 00002anding to any procedure . Hence , the re- engagement and coutinaity of services and back wages cent claimaxi as a matter of right . The workman in his Aleavet har that after his disengagement ho vandrepnyed and is without any subsistence . The This was ass -examined on this point . However, chome or bettered that after the termination of his 1956 workman remained unemployed til SIWALAY BRAs of livelihood though , it may be gainful employment . Considering safar bat bewasx daily wage worker and is not gainfully am withe view that a compensation of Ps . buff will best and proper in lieu of re - engagement , елем за and back wages .

tammys fold that the action of the Tef.ccom Matici Manager, andi ( HP) in terminating the servicen of the worlunaat legal and justified . The workmanis 17 to remorsten ent , continuity of service and back sunicato a compensation of Rs . 60,000 esbic by the tospondent/ management . The respondem / mwageus in the amount of compensation to the تایسواد conth of receiving the copy of the www Themais answered accordingly , in favour of Conductive copios of award after due compliance Tsed to de el Government for further necessary ASHON KUMAR RASTOGI, Presiding Officet माईरेल्ली, 11 नवम्बर, 2010

३८. 1984 औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 ( 2017 चातको अनुसरण में , केन्द्रीय सरकार दूरसंचा नसरुद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों को ২২.৬. কালিক धोगिक विवाद में कन्द्रीय सरकार औधोगिজ सांघकरण/ तम भाल . 1 , चण्डीगढ़ के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 2.24 1205/2004 ) प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 1-100 को आप्त हुआ था ।

[५७. उ -40012/217 , 216 , 215 / 2003- आई आर( डीयू)

रमेश सिंह , डेस्क अधिकारी Now thi , the 11th November, 2010 SAL 2904 - o pursuance of Section 17 of the Барыта бер1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) , the Contrai Go-chastien hereby publishes the Award ( Rer . No. 2.3 , 24 25/2004) anthe Contral Government Industrial Tribunal Moda Coo N 1 Chandigarh as shown to the techndustrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the manageriem of Departmem of Telecom and their workman , wide , was received by the Central Government on 11-11-2010 ,

[ No. L-40017 /217 , 216, 215 /2003 - IR(DU) ] RAMESH SINGH , Desk Officer

AMNEXURE

BEFORE SHRI GYANENDRA KUMAR SHARMA , PRESIDING OFFICER, CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL - CUM - LABOUR COURT- 1 , CHANDIGARE

Case I.D. No. 23 , 24 and 25/2004

(1) Shri Rajinder Kumar S/ o Shri Bhagwan Dass , #642/2 , Ward No. 8, Karari , Mohalla - Kalka , Dist. Panchkula, Haryana.

(2) Shri Kishori Lal ,

#642/2, Ward No. 8 , Karari , Mobaila- Kalka, Diso . Panchkula , Haryana .

(3) Shri Rajnees'i S /c Shri Nanak Chand,

Ex-Security Quard

C/o Shri Rajinder Singh ,

R/ o Tippra Colony, Kalka,

Panchkula (Haryana)

...Applicam TheGeneral Manager,

Telecome, BENL, Ambala Cantt .

(Haryana)

...Respondent

APPEARANCES

For the Workman : Shi K. K. Chaudhary

Shri GC Babber.

For the Management :

AWARD

Passed on 29-10-10

This award shall disposed cif three industrial disputes and references . The industrial dispute and ferons whion shall be disposed off and waswered by the arvani are ID Ne 23/2004 , Shri Rajinder Kurnar versus Adecom No. 24/2001 , Shri Kishori Lal versus Telecom and ID No. 25/2004 , Shri Rajneesh Singh versus Telecom. Common questions of laws and facts are involved in all the industrial disputes and references , hence for ends ofjustice all the industrial disputes and references are adjudicated answered by this common award.

The industrial dispute and references referrexi by the CentralCoverumiont are as follows:

(1) ID No. 23/2004, Ref. No. 40012/217/2003- IR(DU) , dated 24-05-2004 , Whether the action of the management of Department of Telecom now known as BSNL, Ambala Cantt. in terminating the services of Shri Rajinder Kumar, 8524

[PART II- SEC . 3 ( ii ) ] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 4, 2010/ AGRAHAYANA 13 , 1932

Ex- Security Guard w.e.f. 03-01-2003 without complying with the provisions of the ID Act, is just and legal ? If not , to what relief the concerned workman is entitled and from which date?

(2) ID No. 24/2004 , Ref. No. 40012/ 216/2003- IR(DU) , dated 24-05-2004, Whether the action ofthe management of Department of Telecom now known as BSNL , Ambala Cantt . in terminating the services of Shri Kishori Lal , Ex- Security Guard w.e.f. 15-01-2003 without complying with the provisions of the ID Act, is just and legal ? If not , to what relief the concerned workman is entitled and from which date?

(3) ID No. 25/2004 , Ref. No. 40012/ 215 /2003- IR(DU) , dated 24-05-2004 , Whether the action of the management of Department of Telecom now known as BSNL , Ambala Cantt . in terminating the services of Shri Rajneesh, Ex- Security Guard w.e.f. 04-01-2003 without complying with the provisions of the ID Act , is just and legarl ? If not, to what relief the concerned workman is entitled and from which date?

After receiving the references parties were informed .

Parties appeared and filed their respective pleadings . It is the common contention of every workman that they were engaged through different contractors in the Telecommunication Department and had served for more than 240 days in the preceding year from the date of their termination. Even every workman has also named the contractor through which they worked with the department . The only controversy is regarding the date of appointment . The common contention of each workman is that their services were terminated without notice or without payment ofone month wages in lieu of notice and without payment of lawful terminal dues .

The management appeared and contested the reference by filing written statement . It is the contention of the management that no workman was directly appointed by them . They were not paid wages directly by the management and there had been no administrative control of the management over any of them . They were the employees of the contractor and had no employer and employee relationship with the management .

Both of the parties were afforded the opportunity for adducing evidence . The evidence of each workman was independently recorded . The witness of the management was also recorded . The workman has filed certain documents relating to the attendance sheet and payment of wages . The management has also filed the documents relating to supply of the contact labour by the contractor. Both of the parties were heard at length .

The main issue before this Tribunal in all the three references is the employer and employee relationship between the workman and the management of respondent bank . For employer and employee relationship between the management and the workman . Hon'ble the Apex Court has laid down the law in GM, ONGC Shilchar versus ONGC Contractual workers union , 2008 LLR 80. In the above case Hon'ble the Apex Court has held that to establish the employer and employee relationship between the workman and the management , the workman has to prove the following facts:-

(1 ) That their existed a master and servant relationship between the workman and the management (workman was directly engaged by the management ) .

(2) That the workman was under the administrative control of the management .

(3) That there was no contractor in between the mangement and the workmen .

(4) That the payment of wages were made good by the management to the workman directly and not by the contractor .

(5) At the cost of the repetition , the remittance rolls for the payment of wages were made by the mangement and not by the contractor.

If the ratio of the ONGC Shilcher's case ( surpa ) is applied in all the references and industrial disputes , it is established that workmen have admitted that their services were provided with to the department through a contractor . It is not the case of any of the workmen that the contract by which the services of each workman were provided with to the management was shame and comouflage . It is also not the case of the workmen that it was just a paper arrangement for the payment of wages to each workman . Inpleadings every workmen has clearly stated that their services were provided with to the management through contractor . In affidavit the same contention has been repeated . But in cross - examination every workman has stated that they were directly engaged by the management of respondent without raising the plea of validity and executability of the contract supplying the labour to the management . Moreover , all the documents filed by each workman are relating to the contractor and not relating to the management . Thus , non of the workman has provel thatthey were directly engaged by the management , their wages were paid directly by the management and they were under the administrative control of the management . Accordingly, in all the three industrial disputes and references the workmen lack employer and employee relationship with the management . None of the workman is entitled for any relief. All the three industrial disputes are accordingly answered . Let Central Government be aproached for publication of award, the thereafter, filed be consigned to record room .

G. K. SHARMA , Presiding Officer भारत का राजपत्र : दिसम्बर 4, 2010/ अग्रहायण 13 , 1932

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

नई दिल्ली , 11 नवम्बर , 2010

का.आ. 2985.-- औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार दूर संचार विभाग के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच , अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण नं. 1 , चण्डीगढ़ के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 254 , 249 , 251 , 252 , 255 तथा 257/2001 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 11-11-2010 को प्राप्त हुआ था।

[सं. एल -40012 / 103 , 93 , 95/2001 - आईआर ( डीयू) , सं. एल -40012/96 , 104 , 106/ 2001- आईआर ( डीयू) ]

रमेश सिंह , डेस्क अधिकारी New Delhi , the 11th November , 2010 S.O. 2985.- In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award ( Ref. No 254, 249, 251 , 252 , 255 & 257/2001 ) 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 workmen, which was received by the Central Government on 11-11-2010 .

[No. L -40012/ 103 , 93 , 95 / 2001 - IR (DU) , No. L -40012/96 , 104, 106/2001 - IR (DU) ] RAMESH SINGH, Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

BEFORE SHRI GYANENDRA KUMAR SHARMA, PRESIDING OFFICER, CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL - CUM - LABOUR COURT- L, CHANDIGARH

Case I. D. No. 254 , 249 , 251 , 252 , 255 & 257/2001 ( 1 ) Smt . Anju Bala W/ o Shri Ashok Kumar , C/ o Shri N. K. Jeet , 27349 , Lal Singh Basti Road , Bhatinda ( Punjab ) .

(2) Shri Karam Chand C/ o Shri N. K. Jeet , 27349 , Lal Singh Basti Road , Bhatinda ( Punjab ) .

(3) Shri Suresh Kumar C / o Shri N. K. Jeet , 27349 , Lal Singh Basti Road, Bhatinda ( Punjab ) .

(4) Smt . Rani C/ o Shri N. K. Jeet , 27349 , Lal Singh Basti Road , Bhatinda (Punjab) .

(5) Smt . Krishna Devi W/ o Shri Sher Singh , C/ o Shri N. K. Jeet , 27349 , Lal Singh Basti Road , Bhatinda ( Punjab ) . (6) Shri Rajesh Kumar C/ o Shri N. K. Jeet , 27349 , Lal Singh Basti Road , Bhatinda ( Punjab )

....Applicants

Versus

The General Manager , Telecom, Bhatinda -151001 (Punjab)

...Respondent

8525 APPEARANCES :

For the workman :

Workmen in person .

Shri Anish Babbar .

Forthe Management :

AWARD

Passed on 12-10-2010

This award shall answer and disposed off six industrial disputes . Vide order dated 22-09-2010 passed by this Tribunal in Camp Court , Ferozepur all the industrial disputes were consolidated . The evidence of workmen was recorded independently and separately in every industrial disputes but common evidence of the managemerit was recorded as the witness of the management in all the industrial disputes was same . The references referred by the Central Government in all the six industrial disputes are as follows :-

(1) ID No. 254/2001 , Ref . No. 40012/ 103 / 2001 - IR (DU) , dated 26-06-2001 , Whether the action of the management of General Manager , Telecom , Bhatinda in terminating the services of Smt . Anju Bala W/ o Shri Ashok Kumar is just & legal ? If not , to what relief the workman is entitled to and from which date ? "

(2) ID No. 249/2001 , Ref . No. 40012/ 93 /2001 - IR (DU), dated 26-06-2001 , " Whether the action of the management ofGeneral Manager , Telecom , Bhatinda in terminating the services of Shri Karam Chand S/o Shri Jagtu Ram is just & legal ? If not, to what relief the workman is entitled to and from which date ?"

(3 ) ID No. 251/2001 , Ref . No. 40012/ 95 / 2001 - IR (DU ), dated 26-06-2001 , " Whether the action of the management ofGeneral Manager , Telecom , Bhatinda in terminating the services of Shri Suresh Kumar S / o Shri Charan Dass is just & legal ? If not , to what relief the workman is entitled to and from which date ? "

(4) ID No. 252/2001 , Ref. No. 40012/ 96/2001 - IR (DU) , dated 26-06-2001 , " Whether the action of the management ofGeneral Manager , Telecom , Bhatinda in terminating the services of Smt . Rani W/ o Shri Charan Dass is just & legal " If not , to what relief the workman is entitled to and from which date ? "

(5) ID No. 255/2001 , Ref. No. 40012/ 104/2001 - IR (DU) , dated 26-06-2001 , " Whether the action of the management of General Manager , Telecom , Bhatinda in terminating the services of Smt . Krishna Devi W/ o Shri Sher Singh is just & legal ? If not, to what relief the workman is entitled to and from which date ? "

(6) ID No. 257/2001 , Ref . No. 40012/ 106/2001 - IR (DU) , dated 26-06-2001 , " Whether the action of the management of General Manager , Telecom , Bhatinda in terminating the services of Shri Rajesh Kumar S/ o Shri Hukam Chand is just & legal ? If not , to what relief the workman is entitled to and from which date ? " TRE GAZETTE OF ILL .

the cost of repetition , commoti

vhebt of every workman that they were any tim Facts are involval in all the industrial d pataion as tt- fine sweeper on dificul

Sminded on 1-3-1999

Licafmag BCH 3. montit wages in lieu of non . pomen of stenchment compensation . Thes of Suat . Age Bal were terminated on 75 merchy , savicef five workmen exceptiju Bala wore tenmnated by one stok of pan , whereas, tee services of Anju Bala were terminated on 7-5-1999 . It is claim of ury workman that they have completed 240 Jays of work in every calendar year including the year pre ling to the date of thei termination . Their services wer icroplasted without notice as one month wages in licutice and without payment of retrenchment compasan On the basis of above, workman has pleaded reinstatome of reir set vices on the ground that their termination int gar and voids abinitio being against the provisions Time Act. The management appeared and deniodd lainit of tay workinan by filing written statement . Ir pa minay objections were raised that initial appon that of every workman was against the law . The head office of the bank has barred appointment of every casual work and the appointment of very worn was against tha policy Every workman as per the contention of the management was part- time sweeper and was not appointed as per the rales of the department and as per time principle of law laid down Hon'ble the Apex Court in Strei Homazhal Pradesh Jus Suresh Kumar Verma AIT 1996 1565 on ded for appointment against existing vacancies . gement has cited two more judgments on the grond that none of the workmen can claim regularization of services . The master servant relationship was also challenged by the management . Thu

Both of the parties were afforded the opponity for adducing evidence . Every workman has filed the affidavit in support of his contention to prove his claim and the same was cross - examined by learned counsel for the management . On the other hand , in ID No. 254/2001 Anju Bala versus Teiccom one Shri Ashok Kumar DET ( Legal ) appeared and his chier - examination and cross camination was recorded in this Tribunal . The management has filed the policy barring the appointment of casual corkers . On the other hand , every workman has filed number of documents to prove their worl.ing as part - time sweeper with the management . The documents include order of the wanagement for enhancing the wages of workman from time to time . In thedocument W3 & W4 the naine of every workman exists and their wages were increased by the masagemom of the bank.

at there The management has raised the ou bas been no master servant relayonship won the Laanagement and any of the worknion . The Last of this

14. 210AGRAHAYANA

workman vД АПУГОВИ

LLR 801. Eon bic the Art CONG

( supra) has dealt wuh tematrsaintsmetano elaborately. As ou te nas of

Shilcher cose (sopra ) for showing fic master relationship hetwel sy worktose and the mo management ba orkman . Te been dealt with r Shilchar versu C of any organizatio : Pollowup Pots

Cheworkman

( 1) lationship be (workman was death dysgol by the

(2) That control of the види

(3 ) Tirat management and he wou

(4) The scraper by the manager through the contracu..

(5) Althofcriptihon Burian foi de payamon of vaja wee dalo by the ag and not by the confracor

If the docuntonis filed by the meta perused , it is proved beyond doule pe

was engaged by the management dire de contractor in between ADAPT Payment of wages were made good by Premie every workman . Every workst

administrative contis the manager Telecommunication becue there met administrative ordets passal by the managсари и such administrative consol . The managemer taj the order regarding the service onditions , oman of waged etc. which rondgend dochi thang under the administraustastrol of me managemen there is no force in the certanton of the maker oo there was no master vant refaceshop יבשה orkman and the managerican

The management has siso contended S workman is entitled for regalarization of's aceto a daily waged workers noraght to anst . The bang has also cited as more to taree jucanems of the Rur theApex Court in plesngs chuch For Webs a daily waged workersvorgationese, Tus. T. beyond follow the rated ardamomla 8527 का राजपत्र : दिसम् 2310 /अग्रहायण 13 , 1932

reinstatement has no concern with the regularization of the services of each workman or their absorption into the Cervices . This is the prerogative of the management . The absorption or regularization has to be made strictly as per law, rules and regulations of the department. All the workmen are entitled for reinstatement on the same position they were working prior to termination of their services . This Tribunal is hopeful that management shall act honestly regarding the implementation of the any scheme for absorption and regularization of their services . Considering the facts and circumstances of the case all the workers will be entitled for the back wages subject to the cohanced rates .

This Tribunal also apolize for denying: imely justice. All the references and industrial disputes were pending adjudication since 2001. May be number of constraints before the Tribunal or some other reasons bun timelyjustice was denied .It was the adoption of new mechanism by this Tribunal for adjudication of critically old cases that all the cases prior to 2001 which were pending adjudication before this Tribunal has been adjudicated. At this stage this Tribunal has nothing to say but apolize for denying timely justice.

For the reasons mentioned in the body of the award every workman are entitled for reinstatement into the services on the same position they were working prior to their termination with back wages subject to enhanced wages . The management of respondent is directed to reinstatement the services of each workman and to pay the back wages within one month from the date of publication ofthe award. All 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 .

GK. SHARMA , Presiding Officer ris Apar Court , it is hoofke the settled law of service Jurisprudence that a dully wogel worker has no right to postitatue Court and pass any order for regularization of day wagri word, wie in services against the vacan post . But there is a dienace in the issue of regularization the services of'a dativ waged worker against the vacan post and the protection of right of any of the workme ander the provisions of the industrial Dispuses Act . The Court or Tribqual cannot add as the appomting authority For can regularize or appoint any daily waged worke against any subsumtion vacancy . The substantial and regular ar pointinents have to be made strictly as per the des of the department relating to the pubbe appointunen . I cannot be compromises in any situation . But a daily waged worker has the night to the protection of the provisions of the Industrial Disputes Act. The important protection is ageinsi diegal termination . If worker has completed 240 days of work and iris services are no more педитой, газпадucanas in bouny te terminate the services as per the provision of the AC . Meaning thereby, the Industrial Dispares Act uses tact barred the termination of any daily wagad worker but regulates it . The provisions of tine Industrial Displasia regulates the termination in the Mause that it shoet je succodes by a month notice or payment ofone monin wages in iica of notice and payment of lawful teriminal dues . If this condition is precedent is not comply with, the termination will be illegal and void abinitio. The witness of the management has himself adroitted that every workman right taveenmni cred 240 days of work in the precoing year from the uate of termination . Moreover , documenis filed by every workman also proved that every workman was worang sa part - time sweeper regularly with the management on fired wages paid monthly. No notice or one monta angel tieu of notice retenchment compensation was paid to any of the workinan before terminating the services . This make the termination void abinitro and illegal wing again the provisions of the Act .

नई दिल्ली , ।। नवम्बर , 2010

का.आ. 2986.- औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार दूर मंचार विभाग के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारक बीच , अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विलाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औ अधिकरण नं. 1 , चण्डीगढ़ के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 86/2005 प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 11-11-2010 को हुआ था।

The managureat has al e cerended that every workplan worowoddagte ia ing tour ivours . In the changing ermano or services junapidurk , it has become the law of the land that even partaume daily waged worker is emitted for the real protection courierated in the pro- visions of the ladustrial Disputes Act. Thus , the contention of the : msnagement is toi canvassing and all the workman whether they are working for one hour or four hoves are entitled for the protection of the provisions of the Industrist Dispute Act

[सं. एल -40011/31 / 2004 - आईआर ( डी.यु. ) ]

रमेश सिंह , डेरक अमितारी

New Delhi , the 11th November , 2010

S.O. 2986. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) , the Central Government hereby publishes the Award ( Ref . No 86/2005 ) of the Coptral Government Industrial Tribunal curbopr Evuvwerence has worked tore than 10 years with the management WithoutPotierung the provisions of Law, one fine marsing they were kep out from the department legally , Imus toto was illegally and void abinitio as poor to their termineuon ne notice, one month wages in lien of notice and retrenchiment compensation was paid. Thus , all the workman entitled for regularization oftheir services , it is forbed that this order of 8528

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 4, 2010/ AGRAHAYANA 13 , 1932

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 workmen , which was received by the Central Government on 11-11-2010 .

[No. L-40011/31 /2004- IR (DU) ]

RAMESH SINGH , Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

BEFORE SHRI GYANENDRA KUMAR SHARMA, PRESIDING OFFICER, CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL -CUM- LABOUR COURT- 1 , CHANDIGARH

Case I. D. No. 86/2005

Shri N. S. Sodhi , General Secretary, All India Telecommunication Workers Association , C / o Chamber No. 101 , Distt . Court, Sector - 17 , Chandigarh .

[ PART II- SEC. 3 ( ii ) ]

....Applicant

Versus

( 1 ) The Chief General Manager , Telecom , BSNL, Punjab Telecom Circle, SCO No. 102-103 , Sector - 34- A, Chandigarı .

(2) The General Manager, Telecom, Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd. , Ludhiana .

which still exists . Instead of appointing the workmen on regular basis , they were engaged on daily rated basis that too through an intermedatory contractor purposely to reap up undue benefit out of their weaker economical circumstances . Every workman was engaged directly by the management . No doubt their salary was paid by the respondent through intermedatory contractor which is merely a camouflage to evade compliance of various beneficial legislations so as to deprive the workmen of the benefits thereunder . The allleged contract is not genuine and merely camouflage . Every workman has completed 24() days of work in the preceding year from the date of his termination . Every workman has continuously rendered the services of 7, 6 & 5 years and is still working . The union on behalf of the workmen preferred to move four writs for regularization of their services . The writs were withdrawn for raising the industrial dispute before appropriate Forum. During the litigation before Hon'ble the High Court , the management entered into the settlement with the union petitioner regarding the regularization of the services of every workman in phased manner . The benefits of this settlement were given to several workmen except the workmen whose name figured in Annexure P - 1 . This benefit was illegally denied to them. On the basis of the above , the union petitioner has prayed for order for regularization the services of all the workman whose name figured in the annexure P 1 along with all the consequential benefits .

..Respondents

APPEARANCES :

For the Workman :

Shri N. K. Nagar .

Shri Anish Babbar .

For the Management :

AWARD

Passed on 28-10-2010

Government of India vide Notification No. L - 40011/ 31 /2004- IR (DU) , dated 24-03-2005 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 BSNL by not regularization the services of Shri Sudagar Singh and 13 others Daily Rated Labourers (As per list enclosed) and other consequential benefits even they have rendered numerous years of continuous service is legal and justified ? If not to what relief the concerned workmen are entitled to 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 all the workmen figured in Annexure P1 were engaged in the year 1995-96 & 1997 and till date have rendered the services of over 7 , 6 , 5 years . The work for each workman was of perennial nature The management of the Telecom appeared and opposed the claim of the petitioner by filing written statement . It was contended by the management that union onbehalf of the each workman filed as more as four writ petitions and all the writ petitions have been dismissed by Hon'ble the High Court . No relief was given to any of the workmen , hence , the claim is not maintainable . Regarding the settlement , it is contended by the management that none of the workman was directly engaged by the management of respondent , hence , they were not entitled for the benefit of the settlement . It was further more contended by the management that the services of the every workmen whose name figured in the Annexure Pl were provided through a contractor and they were not the employees of the management of the respondent Telecommunication Department. There was no master and servant relationship between them.

Bothof the parties were afforded the opportunity for adducing evidence . Oral evidence was recorded , whereas , the documents relied upon by the parties were filed .

I have heard the parties at length and perused the entire materials on record . The main issue for adjudication before this Tribunal is whether there existed a master and servant relationship between the management and the workmen . The services of each workman whose name figured in the enclosed list were provided with through a [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

contractor is admitted . It is challenged that the contract between the management and the contractor was camouflage and shame . It was also contended by the workman that in fact this contract was a paper arrangement just to make the payment good to the workman. The workman has tried to justify this contention on the ground that in spite of permanent vacancies , the persons were appointed on daily wages which is against the spirit of so many legislations . The management on the other hand has conceded that issue of regularization of the service of each workman has been adjudicatedby Hon'ble the High Court in several writs filed by the union on behalf ofthe workmen. Theclaim of every workman was dismissed by Hon'ble the High Court . It is contended by the management that there is no occasion for this Tribunal to heard them again on the issue of regularization of the services on the basis of the settlement as alleged .

I have also gone through the writ petitions filed by each workman before Hon'ble the High Court . It is hereby made clear that every writ petition was filed after the execution and enforcement of alleged settlement . Writ No. 8509/2000 which was filed by the workman for regularization of the services was decided with the direction to the management to decide the representation of each workmen within four months from the date of receiving the order . Accordingly, the representation of every workman was decided by the management . In its order deciding the representation of each workman it was held that none of the workman is entitled for the benefit of the settlement for the regularization of the services because the services of each workman were provided with to the management through a contractor. Meaning there by, at this stage the master and servant relationship between the management and the workman was disputed by the management .

Another writ No. 18428/2002 was dismissed by Hon'ble the High Court on 16-02-2002 . The workman preferred one more writ in the same year which was numbered as 15690/2002 which was decided and dismissed on 24-05-2004 being non - maintainable .

Inthe year 2003 the workman again filed a writ petition which was numbered as 17537/2003 which was dismissed by Hon'ble the High Court being withdrawn on 07-11-2003 without any opportunity for raising the claim before any Forum. I have also gone through the order passed by Hon'ble the High Court in every writ petition . As stated earlier, that the master and servant relationship between the management and the workman have been disputed by the management.

The issue of master and servant relationship between the management and the workman has been adjudicated and decided by Hon'ble the Apex Court in so many judicial pronouncements . in the latest judicial pronouncement Hon'ble the Apex Court inGM, ONGC, Shilchar versus ONGC Contractual workers Union, 2008 (LLR) 801, Supreme 4548GI/10-37

8529

भारत का राजपत्र : दिसम्बर 4, 2010/अग्रहायण 13 , 1932

Court Case has held that to establish the employer and employee relations , the workman has to prove the following facts before the Tribunal :-

(1 ) That their existed a master and servant relationship between the workman and the management (workman was directly engaged by the management).

(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 were made good by the management to the workman directly and not by the contractor.

(5) At the cost ofthe repetition the remittance rolls for the payment of wages were made by the management and not by the contractor .

Apart from it, Hon'ble the High Court of Punjab & Haryana in FCI and others Versus Presiding Officer Central Government Industrial Tribunal and others , 2008 LLR 1931 while relying the ratio ofthejudgment in ONGC, Shilchar's case (supra) has also held that if the workman has not taken the plea that they are contractual workers and the contract is camouflage and shame, they will be barred to raise the pleas subsequently . In this industrial dispute every workmen has challenged the contract as shame and camouflage. On the basis of the ratio of the judgment in ONGC Shilchar's case (supra ) every workman has to proved that they were engaged directly by the management , they were paid wages directly by the management and they were under the administrative control of the management . Every workman has very beautifully and in garlanding words pleaded these facts without any proff. It is further stated that only the oral contention to prove the above facts will not be sufficient . The workmen have to file some cogent evidence to prove that contract is just as a paper arrangement to make the payment good, whereas , every workman was under the administrative control of the management . It is admitted fact that no appointment letter was given to any workman . Every workman has also failed to prove any administrative control of the management over them . The workmen have filed the copies of certain circular orders and the copies of thejudgment of Hon'ble the High Court . These orders are not sufficient to prove the above facts to establish the direct employer and employee relationship between the workman the management . As stated earlier, the cogent evidence is lacking. The workmen failed to establish that they were directly engaged by the management. Their wages were paid directly by the management, shown on a paper through a contract and they were under the administrative control of the management . There may be ample of documentary evidence regarding it . But no evidence was filed by any of the workmen . At the cost of the repetition , it remains only the oral contention of the workman in garlanding words PARI 11 - SEC ( hit

EMBER 4 , 2010/AGRAHAYANA 13 , 1932

8530

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA

Government hereby publishes the award ( Ref. No. 119/20 ) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal- cum- Lab. ur Court No. 1 , Chandigarh now as shownin the Annexur the Industrial Dispute between the employees in relavar to the management of Punjab National Bank and Bey workmen, which was received by the Contest Govern on9-11-2010.

as daily cough the ar. The that in spite of permanent job they were ene wager and payment were shown to be made contractor which was shame and com conditions to establish the contract shamecardsonffage Eve been mentioned in the Steel Authority of taba Limited and anether versus National Union Waterkers and hers AIR 2001 Supreme Court 352 fotove in ONGC ilchar case ( surpa) . The conditions have been mentioned bur : Thowona o have not provodiy tmdijous woog engem a The oral conispierwit the

[No. L -17012 /6/200 /-4R ( RAMESH SINGH , Desk Offer AINNEG RE

BEFORE SEEI GYANENDRA KUMAR SHARMA PRESIDING ORICER, CENTRAL GOVERNM INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL - CUM-LABOUR COUN CHANDIGARH Cast L. D. le 119/201

Shri Kishan Chan Samai be , tige Stage

Kathur, Sompar

The Regimul Mua Neva , aphawansk GT Road, K

APPEARANCE

Shri Satydoop Bhardwaj Ad

For the Workman :

For the Management : Shri Arvind Rajotia, Advor z I am not included to accept the waurenne of the workmes that the settlement also coves theme of every kmer sovename figured in the wall every pott Harbaw the High Cean has bed that the latier- up bhawon the bara ben weled and for the germent assenen to decide the represcalator workman by speaking order within four months.The same was decided. Thereafter , one of the petition filed the workman ras dimissed being non - maintainable Thus , every work rean bas rightly prayed this Tribunal for deciding the esue whether they are entided for the beseft of the satthereont , bo my view the benefit of the suncut to t0 tuse persons who were directly angued by the Manacorni as daily wager and at the CITActual worked Every workman as stated carbo , was contractual workers taving no relationship with the gagement For all perposes they were comployees of the counactor and tractor was paid wages (consolidated ) for the services sidered by each workman on behalf of management .

AWARD Passed on 6-10-2010 Thus , on the basis of the above , I of the view est one of the workmen is entitled for are relief. The avence is accordingly answered . Let CesuralGovernment doproached for publication of award pad thereafter, file ne consigned to record room .

GK. SHARMA trading Officer

Government of India vide notification No. L- 17012 / 6/2007 - IR (M ) , dated 10-05-2007 by exercising its powers under Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Aci , 1947 (hereinafter referred to as the Act ) referred the following Industrial Dispute for adjudication of this Tribunal :

नई दिल्ली, 11 नवम्बर , 20-0

19-47 (1947

"Whether the action of the management of Punjab National Bank in terminating the services of Shri Krishan Chand Sharma , Ex -Poon- cum-Guard- cum- Daftri is just and legal ? If not so what relief the workman is entitled to ? "

का. आ. 2987.-औद्योगिक विवाद का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीसर पंजाब नेशनल रों के बीच, औधोगिक बैंक के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोकों और अनुबंध में निर्विष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में

अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालयोगार्थ सं

11 2010

( बी ) ]

एक अधिकारी

セル、 Hth Novena

on 17 of the

Both of the parties were afforded the opportunity of hearing . First of all as per the mechanism adopted by this Tribunal and as per the provisions of Industrial Disputes Act, parties were heard on the issue of fauness of enquiry. The issue of fairness of enquiry was decided and disposed of by this Tribunal vide order dated 19-02-2010 . Vide the said order , the enquiry was held to be proper , reasonable and fair . It was also held by this Tribunal and there had been no violation of any rules of principles of natural justice during departmental proceedings . vide said order , both the

the Central

भारत का रानपत्र दिसम्बर 4, 2010/াবস্থাযী 15 , 1932

accordingly answered . Let the Central Governament be approaceti for publication of award , and thereafter , file ba consign to record room .

GK . SHARMA , Presiding Officer

नई दिल्ली , 11 नवम्बर , 2010 parties were afforded fic opportunity for adducing evidence on perversity of decision making by enquir, officer and on quantum ofpunishment by the disciplinary authority . More than sufficient opportunity was afforded to both of the parties , but they failed to adduce any evidence . Order dated 06-09-2010 makes it clear that more than sever opportunities were afforded to the parties for adducing evidence on perversity if any , un decision making anci on quantum of parushment bat the parties failed.Accorfingly, this Tribunal vide order dated 06-09-2010 closed the opportunity for adducing evidence of both the parties on the said issues .

का.आ. 2988, औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धार। 17 के अनुसरण में , केन्द्रीय सरकार यूनियन बैंकक ऑफ इंडिया के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के जीव, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालय न.1 , चण्डीगढ़ के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 48/2005 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 09-11-2010 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[ सं. एल-12012 / 104/ 2005 - आईआर ( बी II ) ] रमेश सिंह , डेस्क अधिकार।

New Delhi , the 11th November , 2010

S.O. 2988.- In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) , the Central Goverzunent hereby publishes the award (Ref. No 48/2005) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal - cum - Labour Court , No. 1 Chandigarh now as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the management of Union Bank of India and their workmen , which was received by the Central Government on 09-11-2010 .

[No. L - 12012/ 104/2005 - IR (B - II ) ] RAMESH SINGH , Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

BEFORE SHRI GYANENDRA KUMAR SHARMA, FRESIDING OFFICER, CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL - CUM- LABOUR COURT- 1 , CHANDIGARH.

Case I. D. No. 48/2005

Shri Rajesh S/o Shri Ishwar Singh R/ o Uttam Nagar Colony, H. No. 691 , Ward No. 17 , Hansi , Hissar.

I have heard the learned legal representative of the management. The workman was not present even on the tate of arguments . Opportunity to argue the case was given twice on 10-09-2010 and 16-09-2010 . This Tribunal has adopted a mechanism by passing the Circular Order regarding the disposal of old references and Industrial Disputes . Considering the judicial life of this jadustrial dispute, in compliance of the mechanism adopted by this Tribunal , opportunity for argumeni was also ciosed on 16-09-2010 and the file was reserved for award . After passing said order learned legal representative of workman Barned up and argued the case . He was afforded the opportunity by this Tribunal . It seems that the workman has nothing to say on the perversity of the decision making of the enquiry officer . The cumulative effect of the pleadings and the affidavit filed by the workman is that workman has only grievances on the quantum of punishment . I have gone through the enquiry report and the punishment awaried to the workman by the disciplinary authority . The charge against the workman was cabezzlement of certain funds , fle has received the amount at least from nine persons and initially had not deposited the same in their account . It was deposited quite later. The workman has only contended the he has been acquitted in all the nine charges by the criminal court of competent jurisdiction . It is the settled law of service jurisprudence that acquittal in the criminal proceedings has no nexus with the departmental proceedings . The criminal proceedings and departmental proceedings are on different footings .

.....Applicants

Versus

The workman has failed to file any evidence on parversity in decision making of the Enquiry Officer and

has further failed to apprise this munal how the

punishment awarded to him was not propanion to tas

The Ant Guerral Manager , Union Bank of India, Sector- 17-B, Chantip w

committed misconduct . In my way the paniskuntat to the

...Respondeuts workman was proportionatsandert. The

management is a financial institore only business

APPEARANCES is the monetary and financial traprons , if by any act of

For the worko

Shri Vimal S. Mann .

the workman , the faith of the apone and public is

lost, the workman becomes lianity on the instimation and

None

For the Monagurient :

no institution to the statures lile inancial institution ie.

AWARD

Punjab Nationl Bank should worsie te presence of

Passed on 25-10-2010 workman. He was rightly shew the way out from me

organization . Thus , punishment awarded to the workinaii

was also proportionate to the misconduct . The reference is

Government of India vide notification No. 1. - 12-12 104/ 2005 - IR ( B - II ), dated 07-11-2005 by me as [PART II- SEC. 3 ( ii ) ] 8532

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : DECEMBER 4 , 2010 / AGRAHAYANA 13 , 1932

completed 240 days of work in the preceding year from the date of his termination .

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 claim of Shri Rajesh S / o Shri Ishwar Singh that he was engaged on daily wages as a Sewadar ( Peon ) by the management of Union Bank of India during the period from 18-08-1997 to 30-11-2002 is just and legal and what relief is the disputant entitled to ?"

The nature of the reference shows that following issues have to be answered by this Tribunal while adjudicating the reference: -

Both ofthe parties were afforded the opportunity for adducing evidence . The workman Shri Rajesh filed his affidavit and he was cross - examined in detail in open court on oath by learned counsel for the management on 31-03-2010 . On the other hand, one Shri Mohan Lal, Senior Manager , Union Bank of India has filed his affidavit on behalf of the management and he was cross - examined by learned counsel for the workman in detail in open court on 10-08-2010 . Both of the parties were heard at length. The workman has filed all the vouchers relating to the payment ofwages and also contains the nature of work entrusted to the workman . Management has failed to provide with the originals of these vouchers .

(1) Whether Shri Rajesh was engaged on daily wages as Sewadar (Peon) during the period w.e.f. 18-08-1997 to 30-11-2002 ?

(2) Whether the management of the bank has illegally terminated the services of the workman, Shri Rajesh , w.e.f. 30-11-2002.

(3 ) To what relief, if any the workman is entitled to ?

Before deciding the above mentioned issues , it is important to mention that management has tried to link the issue of engagement of a casual worker on daily waged basis with the appointment of class -IV employees as per the rules . These two issues amely appointment of any person as class - IV employme as per the rules of the management of the bank as quite different then engaging a casual worker on daily waged bssis . The Industrial Disputes Act not only protects the illegal termiation of the person who has been appointed on requalr basis against class - IV employee post as per the rules of the bank, but it also protects, up to some extent , the service conditions of daily waged worker . The important protections which the workman has challenged in this industrial dispute are as follows: -

The case of the workman in nut shell is that he was engaged as Sewadar (peon ) on daily wages on 18thAugust 1997. He has completed 240 days in every calendar year including in the year preceding to the date of his termmination . His services were terminated on 30-11-2002 without notice or one month wages in lieu of notice and without payment of retrenchment compensation . This act of the management terminating his services is illegal and void being against the provisions of the act . It is also contended by the workman that one Shri Jagdish S / o Shri Madhu Ram R/ o Village Khugar , Tehsil Bawani Khera , District Bhiwani was appointed after the termination of his services . It is also against the provisions of the Act .

On the basis of the above contentions the workman has prayed for setting aside the termination order and for consequential order for reinstating his services with all consequential benefits .

(1) The first protection given by the Industrial Disputes Act against the illegal termination is that if a daily waged worker has completed 240 days of work in the preceding year from the date of his termination , his services can only be terminated by giving him a month notice or paymnent of one month wages in lieu of notice along with the payment of lawful terminal dues . This is the condition precedent before terminating the services of a daily waged worker . If these conditions have not been complied with, the termination of a daily waged worker shall be void and illegal abinitio being against the provisions of the Act . Meaning hereby, Industrial Disputes Act does not prohibits and barred the termination of service of a daily waged worker but it regulates it . The termination of a daily waged worker is regulated in the sense that if work is not available and the services of a daily waged worker are no more required and he has completed 240 days of work in the preceding year from the date of his ternunation , his services can be terminated in compliance of the condition precedent by giving his one month wages or payment of one month notice in lieu of notice and by payment of lawful terminal dues . If it is not done The management of the bank opposed the claim by filing written statement. The preliminary objection has been raised that bank has its own rules relating to the recruitment of class -IV employees . The workman was not appointed as per the rules prevailing in the bank . On merits it is contended by the bank that workman was not appointed as Sewadar (peon) . However, it is admitted that Shri Rajesh rendered some miscellaneous type of work on casual / intermitent basis for which the branch paid him from petty cash expenditure account . However , the respondent has never appointed the workman against the post . In written statement it is not specifically denied that after termination of the services of the workman one Shri Jagdish S / o Shri Madhu Ram was engaged by the management . It is also contended by the management that workman has not [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

भारत का राजपत्र: दिसम्बर 4, 2010/अग्रहायण 13 , 1932

8533 the termination of a daily waged worker shall be ilegal and void abinitio being against the provisions of the Act. This issue has no concern with the fact that workman was not appointed by the management of the bank against substantial vacancy asper the rules ofthe department. As stated earlier , if a daily waged worker has been engaged by the management and hehas worked for substantial period and completed 240 days of work of similar nature, the nature ofhis initial appointment is immaterial .

workman has filed all the vouchers . Reasons known to the management original vouchers have not been place on record . The cumulative effect of the list and the vouchers is that the workman has competed 240 days of work in the preceding year from the date ofhis termination. Moreover , the management has not filed the original vouchers . Accordingly, the adverse inference shall also be taken against the management . The nature of the adverse inference in my view will be that it shall be presumed that workman has completed 240 days of work in the preceding year from the date of his termination . Accordingly, the termination of the workman was illegal and void abinitio being against the provisions of the Act as no notice or one month wages in lieu of notice or lawful retrenchment compensation was paid to the workman before the rmination of his services .

(2) The another protection given by the Industrial Dispute Act which has been mentioned by the workman in his pleadings is that if after terminating the services of a daily waged worker the similar nature of work is available with the management , the priority shall be given to the retrenches .Meaning thereby, Industrial Disputes Act also protects the work to priority of a daily waged worker who has already worked with the management on similar nature of work .

In para no.5 of this claim petition the workman has also stated that one Shri Jagdish S/ o Shri Madhu Ram R/ o Village Khugar, Tehsil Bawani Khera, District Bhiwani was appointed at his place . The management in its written statement has not denied it . In para no.5 it is only mentioned by the management that workman was not appointed as per the rules without denying the fact that Shri Jagdish was appointed after the termination of the services of the workman. In its affidavit filed by the management it was further not denied . Thus , in absentia of specific denial on the issue where the workman has given the full details of the persons appointed after the termination of his services is presumed to be true . The workman in his affidavit has specifically mentioned that Shri Jagdish was appointed after the termination of his services but not a single question was asked in the cross - examination by the learned counsel for the management . Accordingly, the management kept mum on this issue . The workman has proved it by mentioning the details of the persons which was not even denied by the management. Accordingly, it is also proved that after the termination of the services of workman one Shri Jagdish was engaged on the similar nature of work. It is also against the provisions of the Act . It is the violation ofthe right of work on priority of the workman as protected by the Industrial Disputes Act .

Now, the question arises whether the workman was engaged as a daily wager by the management for the work as mentined in the claim. Initially the management stated that the workman was not appointed but in the last line of para No.1 it is admitted that workman has worked temporarily on causal basis which was paid from petty cash . The daily wages were paid from petty cash or some other procedure is the mode of payment . It has no concern with the nature of appointment or with the nature of work entrusted to the workman . Whether he was paid from the petty cash or miscellaneous fund is a mode of payment and has no concern with the engagement of a person for some causal work . If the evidence of the witness of the management is perused , it is clear that the witness initially stated that management has not appointed the workman onany post but in the last few lines of the cross - examination he has admitted that he might work as causal worker intermitently. It is also admitted by the witness of the management that photocopies of the vouchers filed by the workman are relating to the management of the bank. It is further contended by the witness of the management that these vouchers may be relating to the engaging of the workman, for providing the water to the officials and officers of the bank . It is admitted by the witness that workman might have engaged as causal labour on daily wages . It is further stated by the witness that workman might also have done some other work then supply of water to the officials and officers of the bank .

Accordingly, the above two issues , issue no . 1 & 2 are decided with the direction that the workman was engaged as a daily waged worker and has worked for the period mentioned in the statement of claim . His services were terminated illegally by the management without notice or one month wages in lieu of notice and without payment of lawful retrenchment compensation . His termination was illegal and void abinitio being against the provisions ofthe Act. The management is also guilty of engaging person at the place of the workman on the same and similar nature of after the termination of the services of the workman .

As stated earlier , the management has not filed the original vouchers . On the basis of the vouchers filed by the workman, the list of details of vouchers has also been filed which is Ex. W116 . I have perused the list and compared this list with the vouchers which is absolutely correct . This list makes it clear that at least from 01-07-1998 to 14-07-2001

So far as the relief part is concern the similar nature of work was available and another person was given the [PART II - SEC. 3 ( i ) ) THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: DECEMBER 4, 2010 / AGRAHAYANA 13 , 1932

8534

The Executive Member NE Railway Shramik Sangh C/ o Sh . D. P. Awasthi 49, Tilak Nagar Lucknow 226004 . (Espousing case of Shri Uttam) AND

1. The Divisional Personnel Manager Ne Railway Ashok Marg Lucknow. 2. The Sr. Divisional Engincer N.E. Railway, Ashok Marg Lucknow.

AWARD

05-10-2010 chance . The remedy is the reinstatement of the workman onthe same potion he was initially working . It is hereby made clear that his reinstatement shall have no concern with the regularization of the services against the substantial post because that is prerogative of the management as per the rules . The Industrial Disputes Act only protects the right to reinstatement on the same position from which the workman was illegally terminated from the services . Moreover, in this case the workman has also prove that he has worked 240 days in the preceding year and his services were terminated without payment of retrenchment compensation , one month wages in lieu of notice and terminal dues . Thus , the management is directed to reinstated the services of the workman on the same position on which he was working within one month from the date of publication of the award , and thereafter , file be consigned to record room.

GK . SHARMA , Presiding Officer

नई दिल्ली , 11 नवम्बर , 2010

1. By order No. L - 41012 / 73 / 2007 - IR ( B - 1 ) dated: 7-11-2007 the Central Government in the Ministry of Labour , New Delhi in exercise of powers conferred by clause (d) of sub section ( 1 ) and sub section ( 2A ) of Section 10ef the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) referred this industrial dispute between the Executive Member , NE Railway Shramik Sangh , C/ o Sh . D. P. Awasthi , 49 Tilak Nagar , Lucknow (Espousing case of Shri Uttam ) and the Divisional Personnel Manager , Ne Railway , Ashok Marg , Lucknow & the Sr. Divisional Engineer , N. E. Railway Ashok Marg, Lucknow for adjudication .

का.आ. 2989.- औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में , केन्द्रीय सरकार उत्तर पूर्व रेलवे के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच , अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण लखनऊ के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 63/2007 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 9-11-2010 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

2. The reference under adjudication is [ सं. एल -41012 /73/2007- आईआर ( बी -1 ) ] रमेश सिंह , डेस्क अधिकारी

New Delhi , the 11th November , 2010

" Whether the action of the management of North East Railway , Lucknow in imposing the penalty of brought down to lower scale of pay on Shri Uttam, Chowkidar , is legal and justified ? If not so whati relief he is entitled to ? "

S.O. 2989. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No 63/2007) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal - cum - Labour Court - Lucknow as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the management of N. E. Railway and their workman , received by the Central Government on 9-11-2010.

[No. L- 41012/73 /2007 - IR (B - I ) ]

RAMESH SINGH, Desk Officer

3. The order of reference was endorsed to the Executive Member , NE Railway Shramik Sangh , C / o Sh . D. P. Awasthi , 49 , Tilak Nagar, Lucknow with direction to the party raising the disputed to filed the statement of claim along with relevant documents , list of reliance and witnesses with the Tribunal within fifteen days of the receipt of the order of reference and also forward a copy of such a statement to each one of the opposite parties involved in this dispute under rule 10 ( B ) of the Industrial Disputes (Central) , rules , 1957 .

ANNEXURE

CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL- CUM - LABOUR COURT- LUCKNOW

PRESENT

Dr. Manju Nigam, Presiding Officer

I. D. No. 63/2007

Ref . No. L - 41012/ 73 / 2007 - IR ( B - I) dated: 07-11-2007

4. The order of refcrence was registered in de Tribunal on 28-11-2007 and the office was directed to put up the file for further order on 14-12-2007 after waiting for fifteen days for the statement of claim by the workman bus no statement of claim together with documents etc. was filed. However , one Shri D.P. Awasthi appeared for the workman , without any authority, accordingly the workman's union was directed to file their statement of claim along with relevant documnets and list of reliance BETWEEN [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

8535

भारत का राजपत्र : दिसम्बर 4, 2010/अग्रहायण 13 , 1932

and witness on 18-1-2008 . Since then Shri D. P. Awasthi Entermittently appeared for the workman's union on 26-09-2008 , 02-01-2009, 06-02-2009 , 24-04-2009, 15-05- 2009 , 24-07-2009 , 04-12-2009 and 07-05-2010 ; but he neither filed his authority on behalf of the workman's union nor any statement of claim on behalf of the workman's union in spite of the several directions by the Tribunal in this regard. Moreover , Shri D.P. Awasthi , appearing for the workman's union filed two applications dated 6-02-2009 ( D - 2) and dated 7-05-2010 ( D - 3 ) on different occasions , requesting for time to file Statement ofclaim on behalf of the workman's union .

5. Thereafter , none appeared on behalf of the workman's union on 08-07-2010, 09-08-2010, 09-09-2010 , and even today i.e. on 05-10-2010 the parties are absent to pursue their respective case .

6. It is well settled that if a party challenges the legality of an order , the burden lies upon him to prove iflegality of the order and if no evidence is produced the party invoking jurisdiction of the Court must fail . In the unstant case the burden was on the workman's union to set out the grounds to challenge the validity of the action of the management of NE Railways in imposing the penalty of bringing down to lower scale of pay on the workman is illegal and unjustified . The workman's union has not filed its statement of claim.

7. In the above circumstances , it appears that the workman's union does not want to pursue its claim on the basis of which it has raised present industrial dispute ; therefore , the present reference order is decided as if there is no grievance left with the workman. Resultantly no relief is required to be given to the workman concerned . The reference under adjudication is answered accordingly.

8. Award as above .

Lucknow 05-10-2010

Dr. MANJU NIGAM , Presiding Officer नई दिल्ली , 19 नवम्बर, 2010

का.आ. 2990.-केन्द्र सरकार , राजभाषा ( संघ के शासकीय प्रयोजनों के लिए प्रयोग ) नियम , 1976 ( यथासंशोधित 1987 ) के नियम , 10 के उप - नियम ( 4 ) के अनुसरण में , श्रम और रोजगार मंत्रालय के प्रशासकीय नियंत्रणाधीन निम्नलिखित कार्यालयों को, जिनके न्यूनतम 80 प्रतिशत कर्मचारियों ने हिन्दी का कार्यसाधक ज्ञान प्राप्त कर लिया है , एतद्वारा अधिसूचित करती है :

1. खान सुरक्षा निदेशक का कार्यालय गोवा क्षेत्र , फातिमा भवन , द्वितीय तल , बर्नाडों कोस्टा रोड , मरगांव , गोवा-403601

2. खान सुरक्षा निदेशक का कार्यालय गुवाहाटी क्षेत्र, कैम्प कार्यालय डिगबोई , तिनसुकिया ( असम ) -786171

[फा.सं. ई -11017/1/2006 - रा. भा . नी. ] के. एम. गुप्ता, आर्थिक सलाहकार New Delhi , the 19th November , 2010 S.O. 2990. - In pursuance of Sub- rule (4) of Rule 10 of the Official Language ( Use for official purposes of the Union) Rules , 1976 ( as amended 1987) , the Central Government hereby notifies following offices under the administrative control of the Ministry of Labour & Employment, at least 80% Staff where of have acquired working knowledge ofHindi :--

1. Office of Director Mines Safety Goa Region , Fatima Bhawan, 2nd Floor , Barnando Kosta Road , Margaon , Goa-403601 .

2. Office of Director Mines Safety Guwahati region, Camp Office , Digboi , Tinsukhia ( Assam) -786171 .

[F.No. E- 11017/1 /2006- RBN] K. M. GUPTA , Economic Advisor Printed by the Manager , Government of India Press , Ring Road , Mayapuri , New Delhi - 110064

and Published by the Controller of Publications , Delhi - 110054 .