This Gazette may contains Multiple Subjects

रजिस्ट्रीसं० डी एल ( एन ) 04/0007/2003-05

REGD. No. DL (N) 04/0007/2003-05 भारत का राजपत्र The Gazette of India

प्राधिकार से प्रकाशित

PUBLISHED BY AUTHORITY

साप्ताहिक

WEEKLY

सं. 24]

No. 24]

नई दिल्ली, जून 5 जून 11 , 2005 शनिवार/ज्येष्ठ 15-ज्येष्ठ 21 , 1927 NEW DELHI, JUNE 5 JUNE 11 , 2005 SATURDAY/JYAISTHA 15-JYAISTHA 21 , 1927 इस भाग मेंभिन्न पृष्ठ संख्या दी जाती है जिससे कि यह अलग 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 StatutoryOrders and Notifications Issued by the Ministries of the Government of India (Other than the Ministry of Defence)

विधि और न्याय मंत्रालय

(विधि कार्य विभाग )

(न्यायिकअनुभाग)

नई दिल्ली, 31 मई, 2005

का. आ. 2039.- केन्द्रीय सरकार, दंड प्रक्रिया संहिता, 1973 (1974का 2 ) की धारा 24 की उपधारा ( 1 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए, -

( 1 ) श्री मनोरंजन साहू, अधिवक्ता, मुम्बई; और ( 2 ) श्री किरण कृष्ण कपूर, अधिवक्ता, मुम्बई

को मुम्बई उच्च न्यायालय में भारत संघ या केन्द्रीय सरकार के किसी कार्यालय या केन्द्रीय सरकार के किसी विभाग द्वारा या उसके विरुद्ध सभी दांडिक मामलों का, जिसके अन्तर्गत सभी दांडिक रिट याचिकाएं, दांडिक अपीलें, दांडिक पुनरीक्षण , दांडिक निर्देश और दांडिक आवेदन भी हैं, संचालन करने के प्रयोजन के लिए इस शर्त के अध्यधीन किश्री मनोरंजन साहू, अधिवक्ता और श्री किरण कृष्ण कपूर, अधिवक्ता 1636 GI/ 2005

अपर लोक अभियोजक के रूप में अपनी नियुक्ति के दौरान भारत संघ या केन्द्रीय सरकार के किसी विभाग या केन्द्रीय सरकार के किसी कार्यालय केविरुद्ध ऊपर निर्देशित किसी दांडिक मामले में मुम्बई उच्च न्यायालय में उपसंजात नहीं होंगे, तीन वर्ष की अवधि के लिए या अगले आदेश तक, इनमें से जो भी पहले हो, अपर लोक अभियोजक के रूप में नियुक्तकरती है ।

[फा. सं. 23( 1 ) /2005 - न्या. ] डी.आर. मीणा, संयुक्त सचिव और विधि सलाहकार MINISTRY OF LAW AND JUSTICE (Department ofLegal Affairs) (Judicial Section)

New Delhi , the 31st May, 2005

S. O. 2039. In exercise of the powers conferred by sub -section ( 1 ) of Section 24 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1973 (2 of 1974), the Central Government hereby appoints,-

(1) Shri Manoranjan Sahu , Advocate, Mumbai ; and

(5655) 5656

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 11 , 2005/ JYAISTHA 21 , 1927

(2) Shri Kiran Krishan Kapoor , Advocate, Mumbai IsAdditional Public Prosecutor, for the purpose of conducting all criminal cases including Criminal Writ Petitions, Criminal Appeals, Criminal Revisions , Criminal References and Criminal Applications by or against the Union of India or any Department ofOffice of the Central Government , in the High Court of Judicature at Mumbai , foraperiod ofthree years or until further orders , whichever is earlier, subject to the condition that Shri Manoranjan Sahu, Advocate and Shri Kiran Krishan Kapoor, Advocate, shall not appear against the Union of India or any Department or Office of the Central Government in any Criminal case referred to above in the High Court of Judicature at Mumbai during the period of their appointments as Additional Public Prosecutor.

[F. No. 23 (1 )/2005 -Judl. ] D. R. MEENA, Jt . Secy . & Legal Adviser

गृह मंत्रालय नई दिल्ली, 1 जून , 2005

का.आ. 2040.-केन्द्रीय सरकार, राजभाषा ( संघ के शासकीय प्रयोजनों के लिए प्रयोग ) नियम, 1976 के नियम 10 के उप नियम (4 ) के अनुसरण में, गृह मंत्रालय के निम्नलिखित कार्यालयों में हिन्दी का कार्यसाधक ज्ञान रखने वाले कर्मचारियों की संख्या 80 % से अधिक हो जाने के फलस्वरूप उन्हें एत‌द्वारा अधिसूचित करती है: - 1. 145 बटालियन, सीमा सुरक्षा बल

2. 91 बटालियन , सीमा सुरक्षा बल

3. सैक्टर मुख्यालय, सीमा सुरक्षा बल , सुंदरबनी 4. 27 बटालियन , सीमा सुरक्षा बल

5. सैक्टर मुख्यालय, सीमा सुरक्षा बल, जैसलमेर- II1

[सं. 12017/1/2004- हिन्दी]

राजेन्द्र सिंह, निदेशक( राजभाषा) MINISTRY OF HOME AFFAIRS New Delhi , the 1st June, 2005

S. O. 2040. In pursuance of sub - rule (4) of Rule 10 ofthe Official Languages (Use for Official Purposes ofthe Union) Rules , 1976 the Central Government hereby notifies the following offices of the Ministry of Home Affairs where the percentage of Hindi knowing staff has gone above 80% :

1. 145 Bn. , Border Security Force

2. 91 Bn. , Border Security Force

3. Sector Headquarter , Border Security Force , Sunderbani

4. 27 Bn. , Border Security Force

5. Sector Headquarter, Border Security Force, Jaisalmer - 11 .

[No. 12017/1/2004-Hindi ]

RAJENDRA SINGH, Director (OL)

[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii) ] कार्मिक, लोक शिकायत तथा पेंशन मंत्रालय (कार्मिक और प्रशिक्षण विभाग ) नईदिल्ली, 30 मई, 2005

का.आ. 2041.-केन्द्रीय सरकार, एतद्वारा दिल्ली विशेष पुलिस स्थापना अधिनियम, 1946 ( 1946 का अधिनियम सं. 25 ) की धारा 6 के साथ पठित धारा 5 की उप धारा ( 1 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए, पश्चिम बंगाल सरकार के गृह विभाग द्वारा दिनांक 20-4-2005 की अधिसूचना सं. 584-पी. एस. के माध्यम से दी गई सहमति से श्री सी. के. प्रधान, पार्षद की हत्या के मामले में भारतीय दंड संहिता 1860 ( 1860 का अधिनियम सं. 45 ) की धारा 302 के अनुसार कलिमपोंग पुलिस स्टेशन में दर्ज अपराध संख्या 86/2002 और उपर्युक्त अपराध के संबंध में अथवा उससे संसक्त प्रयत्न, दुष्प्रेरण और षडयंत्र तथा उसी संव्यवहार के अनुक्रम में अथवा उन्हों तथ्यों से उद्भूत किसी अन्य अपराध का अन्वेषण करने के लिए दिल्ली विशेष पुलिस स्थापना के सदस्यों की शक्तियों और अधिकारिता का विस्तार सम्पूर्ण पश्चिम बंगाल राज्य पर करती है ।

[सं. 228/20/2005 - ए.वी.डी.- II ]

चन्द्र प्रकाश, अवर सचिव MINISTRY OF PERSONNEL, PUBLIC GRIEVANCES AND PENSIONS

(Department of Personnel & Training) New Delhi , the 30th May, 2005

S. O. 2041. In exercise of the powers conferred by Sub - section ( 1 ) of Section 5 read with Section 6 of the Delhi Special Police Establishment Act, 1946 ( Act No. 25 of 1946), the Central Government with the consent of the State Government of West Bengal vide Home Department Notification No. 584 -P.S . , dated 20-4-2005 hereby extends the powers and jurisdiction of the members of the Delhi Special Police Establishment to the whole of the State of West Bengal for investigation into the case of murder of Councillor Shri C.K. Pradhan registered in Crime No. 86/ 2002Kalimpong Police Station West Bengal under section 302of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (Act No. 45 of 1860 ) and attempt, abetment and conspiracy in relation to or in connection with the said offence and any other offences committed in the course of the same transaction or arising out of the same facts .

[No. 228/20/2005-AVD - II] CHANDRA PRAKASH , Under Secy.

वित्त मंत्रालय ( राजस्व विभाग ) केन्द्रीय प्रत्यक्ष कर बोर्ड नई दिल्ली, 12 मई, 2005 (आयकर)

का.आ. 2042.- आयकर अधिनियम, 1961 ( 1961 का 43) कीधारा 10 के खंड ( 23 ग ) के उप- खंड ( iv ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए, केन्द्र सरकार एतद्वारा " पेरियार सेल्फ रिस्पेक्ट प्रोपेगेंडा [भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : जून 11 , 2005/ज्येष्ठ 21 , 1927

इंस्टीट्यूशन, पेरियार, चैन्नई" को कर- निर्धारण वर्ष 2001-2002 से 2003-2004 तक क्रे लिए निम्नलिखित शर्तों के अधीन रहते हुए उक्त उप -खंड के प्रयोजनार्थ अधिसूचित करती है , अर्थात्: - (i ) कर निर्धारिती अपनी आय का इस्तेमाल अथवा अपनी आय का इस्तेमाल करने के लिए उसका संचयन पूर्णतया तथा अनन्यतया उन उद्देश्यों के लिए करेगा जिनके लिए इसकी स्थापना की गई है;

( ii ) कर निर्धारिती उपर्युक्त कर निर्धारण वर्षों से संगत पूर्ववर्ती वर्षों की किसी भी अवधि के दौरान धारा 11 की उपधारा (5 ) में विनिर्दिष्ट किसी एक अथवा एक से अधिक ढंग अथवा तरीकों से भिन्न तरीकों से उसकी निधि (जेवर- जवाहिरात , फर्नीचर आदि के रूप में प्राप्त तथा अनुरक्षित स्वैच्छिकअंशदान से भिन्न) का निवेश नहीं करेगा अथवा उसे जमा नहीं करेगा;

(iii ) यह अधिसूचना किसी ऐसी आय के संबंध में लागू नहीं होगी , जो कि कारोबार से प्राप्त लाभ तथा अभिलाभ हो जब तक कि ऐसा कारोबार उक्त कर निर्धारिती के उद्देश्यों की प्राप्ति के लिए प्रासंगिक नहीं हो तथा ऐसे कारोबार के संबंध में अलग से लेखा- पुस्तिकाएं नहीं रखी जाती हों;

(iv) कर निर्धारिती आय- कर अधिनियम, 1961 के प्रावधानों के अनुसार अपनी आय विवरणी नियमित रूप से आय कर प्राधिकारी के समक्ष फाइल करेगा;

(v ) विघटन की स्थिति में इसकी अतिरिक्त राशियां और परिसम्पत्तियां समान उद्देश्यों वाले धर्मार्थ संगठन को दे दीजाएंगी ।

[अधिसूचना सं. 141/2005/फा. सं. 197/20/2005- आयकर नि. -1 ]

5657 etc.) for any period during the pervious years relevant to the assessment years mentioned above otherwise than in any one or more of the forms or modes specified in sub -section ( 5) of Section 11;

(iii) this notification will not apply in relation to any income being profits and gains of business , unless the business is incidental to the attainment of the objectives of the assessee and separate books of account are maintained in respect of such business;

(iv) the assessee will regularly file its return of income before the Income - tax authority in accordance withthe provisions of the Income- taxAct, 1961;

(v) that in the event of dissolution , its surplus and the assets will be given to a charitable organisationwith similar objectives .

[Notification No. 141/2005/F. No. 197/20/2005 -ΙΤΑ - I] DEEPAK GARG, Under Secy.

नई दिल्ली, 17 मई, 2005 (आयकर)

का.आ. 2043.-आयकर अधिनियम , 1961 ( 1961 का 43) की धारा 10 के खंड ( 23 ग ) के उप -खंड ( iv ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए, केन्द्र सरकार एतद्वारा " इंडियन पार्लियामेन्टरी ग्रुप, नई दिल्ली" को कर- निर्धारण वर्ष 2005-2006 से 2007-2008 तक केलिए निम्नलिखित शर्तों के अधीन रहते हुए उक्त उप- खंड के प्रयोजनार्थ अधिसूचित करती है, अर्थात्: -

दीपक गर्ग, अवर सचिव

MINISTRY OF FINANCE (Department ofRevenue) CENTRAL BOARD OF DIRECT TAXES New Delhi , the 12th May, 2005 (Income-Tax)

S. O. 2042.-In exercise of powers conferredby the sub -clause ( iv) ofclause (23C) of Section 10 of the Income- tax Act , 1961 (43 of 1961 ) , the Central Government hereby notifies the "Periyar Self Respect Propaganda Instituion, Periyar , Chennai " for the purpose of the said sub -clause for the assessment year 2001-2002 to 2003-2004 subject to the following conditions , namely :-

(1) the assessee will apply its income , or accumulate for application, wholly and exclusively to the objects for which it is established;

(ii) the assessee will not invest or deposit its fund (other than voluntary contributions received andmaintained in the form ofjewellery , furniture (i ) कर निर्धारिती अपनी आय का इस्तेमाल अथवा अपनी आय का इस्तेमाल करने के लिए उसका संचयन पूर्णतया तथा अनन्यतया उन उद्देश्यों के लिए करेगा जिनके लिए इसकी स्थापना की गई है;

(ii ) कर निर्धारिती उपर्युक्त कर निर्धारण वर्षों से संगत पूर्ववर्ती वर्षों की किसी भी अवधि के दौरान धारा 11 की उपधारा (5) में विनिर्दिष्ट किसी एक अथवा एक से अधिक ढंग अथवा तरीकों से भिन्न तरीकों से उसकी निधि ( जेवर- जवाहिरात , फर्नीचर आदि के रूप में प्राप्त तथा अनुरक्षित स्वैच्छिकअंशदान से भिन्न ) का निवेश नहीं करेगा अथवा उसे जमा नहीं करवा सकेगा;

(iii) यह अधिसूचना किसी ऐसी आय के संबंध में लागू नहीं होगी, जो कि कारोबार से प्राप्त लाभ तथा अभिलाभ हो जब तक किऐसा कारोबार उक्त कर निर्धारिती के उद्देश्यों की प्राप्तिके लिए प्रासंगिक नहीं हो तथा ऐसे कारोबार के संबंध में अलग से लेखा- पुस्तिकाएं नहीं रखी जाती हों;

(iv) कर निर्धारिती आयकर अधिनियम , 1961 के प्रावधानों के अनुसार अपनी आय विवरणी नियमित रूप से आय कर प्राधिकारी के समक्ष दाखिल करेगा;

5658

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 11 , 2005 /JYAISTHA 21 , 1927

[आधसूचना सं. 143/2005/फा.सं. 197/48/2005- आयकर नि. -I ]

दीपक गर्ग, अवर सचिव New Delhi , the 17th May, 2005

(Income-Tax)

S. O. 2043. In exercise of powers conferred by the sub -clause ( iv ) of clause (23C) ofSection 10 of the Income- taxAct , 1961 ( 43 of 1961 ) , the Central Government hereby notifies the " Indian Parliamentary Group , New Delhi " for the purpose of the said sub- clause for the assessment year 2005-2006 to 2007-2008 subject to the following conditions , namely :-

(i) the assessee will apply its income, or accumulate for application, wholly and exclusively to the objects for which it is established;

(ii) the assessee will not invest or deposit its fund (other than voluntary contributions received and maintained in the form ofjewellery, furniture etc.) for any period during the pervious years relevant to the assessment years mentioned above otherwise than in any one or more ofthe forms or modes specified in sub -section (5 ) of Section 11;

(iv) the assessee will regularly file its return of income before the Income - tax authority in accordance with the provisions of the Income- tax Act, 1961 ;

(v) that in the event of dissolution, its surplus and the assets will be given to a charitable organisationwith similar objectives .

[NotificationNo. 143/2005/F. No. 197/48/2005 - ITA-I]

DEEPAK GARG, Under Secy.

नई दिल्ली, 31 मई, 2005

का.आ. 2044.- सर्वसाधारण की जानकारी के लिए यह अधिसूचित किया जाता है कि केन्द्र सरकार ने आयकर नियमावली, 1962के नियम 2ङ के साथ पठित आयकर अधिनियम, 1961 की धारा 10 (23छ ) के प्रयोजनार्थ उद्यम/उपक्रम, स्वर्ण टालवे प्रा. लि. , पंजीकृत कार्यालय , प्लाट सं. 85 , मार्ग सं. 72 , प्रशासन नगर, जुबली हिल्स, हैदराबाद-500034 को उनकी निम्नलिखित परियोजनाओं के लिए भारतीय राष्ट्रीय राजमार्ग प्राधिकरण के साथ निष्पन्न दिनांक 27-3-2001 के रियायत करार और दिनांक 29-6-2001 के समानुदेशन

[PART II-SEC. 3 (ii)] करारके अनुसार निर्माण , प्रचालन, हस्तांतरण ( बी.ओ.टी. ) के आधार पर दिनांक 27-3-2001 के करार में यथा निर्दिष्ट दिनांक 20-3-2002 सेदिनांक 19-3-2032 तक 30 वर्षों की अवधि के लिए अथवा उपर्युक्त करार की शर्तों के उल्लंघन की स्थिति से पहले अनुमोदित किया है :-

(क ) आन्ध्र प्रदेश में राष्ट्रीय राजमार्ग सं. 5 के टाडा- नेल्लौर खण्ड पर मौजूदा 2 लेन राजमार्ग को 52.8 कि.मी. से 163.6 कि.मी. में चार लेन में परिवर्तित करके चौड़ा करना और पुनर्निर्माण करना, तथा

(ख) आन्ध्र प्रदेश में राष्ट्रीय राजमार्ग सं 9 के नन्दीगामा- इब्राहीम पटनम खण्ड पर मौजूदा 2 लेन राजमार्ग को 217 कि.मी. से 252 कि.मी. में चार लेन में परिवर्तित करके चौड़ा करना और पुननिर्मािण करना ।

2. केन्द्र सरकार यह अनुमोदन वापिस ले लेगी यदि उद्यम/ उपक्रम : -

(क) आयकर नियमावली, 1962 का नियम 2 ङ के साथ पठित आयकर अधिनियम, 1961 की धारा 10 (23 छ ) के उपबंधों के अनुरूप नहीं होगा और उनका अनुपालन करना बंद कर देगा;

(ख) आयकर नियमावली, 1962 के नियम 2ङ के स्पष्टीकरण (ख) में यथा परिभाषित पात्र कारोबार को जारी रखना बन्द कर देता है;

(ग ) खाता- बहियों का रख - रखाव करने में असफल रहता है तथा आयकर नियमावली, 1962 के नियम 2 ङ के उप-नियम (6 ) द्वारा अपेक्षित किसी लेखाकार द्वारा ऐसे खातों की लेखा परीक्षा नहीं करवाता है;

(घ) आयकर नियमावली, 1962 के नियम 25 के उप - नियम (6 ) द्वारा यथा अपेक्षित लेखा परीक्षा रिपोर्ट प्रस्तुत करने में असफल रहता है ।

[अधिसूचना सं. 158/2005/फा. सं. 205/39/2002- आयकर नि.- II ]

निधिसिंह, अवर सचिव New Delhi , the 31st May , 2005

S.O. 2044. It is notified for general information that the enterprise/undertaking, Swarna Tollway Private Limited , Regd. Office, Plot No. 85 , Road No. 72 , Prashasan Nagar , Jubilee Hills , Hyderabad - 500034 for their following projects:

(a) widening and rehabilitation of the existing 2-Lane Highway into four lane from Km 52.8 to Km. 163.6 on the Tada -Nellore Section of the National Highway No. 5 in Andhra Pradesh , and (b) widening and rehabilitation of the existing 2 Lane Highway into four lane from Km . 217 to Km. 252 on the Nandigama - Ibrahimpatnam Section ofthe National Highway No. 9 in Andhra Pradesh .

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : जून 11 , 2005 /ज्येष्ठ 21 , 1927

Onbuild , operate , transfer (BOT) basis as per concession agreement dated 27-03-2001 and assignment agreement dated 29-06-2001 entered into with the National Highway Authority of India, has been approved by the Central Government for the purpose of Section 10(23G) of the Income-Tax Act, 1961 , read with rule 2E of the Income- taxRules, 1962 for the period of 30 years from 20-03-2002 to 19-03-2032 as specified in the agreement dated 27-03-2001 , or earlier in the event of violation of the terms ofthe aforesaid agreement.

2. The Central Government shall withdraw this approval ifthe enterprise/undertaking :

(a) ceases to conform to and comply with the provisions of Section 10(23G) ofthe Income -tax Act, 1961 , read with rule 2E of the Income -tax Rules, 1962;

(b) ceases to carry on the eligible business as defined in Explanation (b) to Rule 2E of I.T. Rules, 1962;

(c) fails to maintain books of account and get such accounts audited by an accountant as required by sub-rule(6) ofrule 2E ofthe Income-taxRules , 1962;

(d) fails to furnish the audit report as required by sub -rule (6) of rule 2E of the Income-taxRules , 1962.

[NotificationNo. 158/2005/F. No. 205/39/2002 - ITA- II ]

NIDHI SINGH, Under Secy.

आदेश

नई दिल्ली, 19 मई , 2005

स्टाम्प

का.आ. 2045.- भारतीय स्टाम्प अधिनयम , 1899 ( 1899 का 2) की धारा 9 की उप - धारा ( i ) के खंड ( ख ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए, केन्द्रीय सरकार एत‌द्वारा पावर फाइनेंस कारपोरेशन लिमिटेड, नई दिल्ली को मात्र सोलह लाख पचपन हजार नौ सौ पैंतीस रुपए का समेकित स्टाम्प शुल्क अदा करने की अनुमति देती है, जो उक्तनिगम द्वारा निम्नलिखित पर स्टाम्प शुल्क के कारण प्रभार्य है :

( i ) 15-2-2005 को आबंटित मात्र ग्यारह करोड़ छिहत्तर लाख नब्बे हजार रुपए के समग्र मूल्य के प्रत्येक दस - दस हजार रुपएके 00002855 से 00014623 तक की विशिष्ट संख्या वाले ऋणपत्रों के स्वरूप वाले 6.00 % असुरक्षित, विमोच्य, गैर- परिवर्तनीय, संचयी कराधेय आधारभूत ढ़ांचा संबंधी बंधपत्र ( श्रृंखला- I) ;

(ii) 15-2-2005 को आबंटित मात्र बत्तीस करोड़ छियानवे लाख अस्सी हजार रुपए के समग्र मूल्य के प्रत्येक दस- दस हजार रुपए के 00009933 से 00042900 तक की विशिष्ट संख्या वाले ऋणपत्रों के स्वरूप वाले 6.00 % असुरक्षित , विमोच्य, गैर- परिवर्तनीय, संचयी कराधेय आधारभूत ढांचा संबंधी बंधपत्र (श्रृंखला- I ) ;

(iii) 15-1-2005 को आबंटित मात्र नब्बे हजार रुपए के समग्र मूल्य के प्रत्येक दस - दस हजार रुपए के 00002846 से

5659 00002854 तक की विशिष्ट संख्या वाले ऋणपत्रों के स्वरूप वाले 6.00 % असुरक्षित, विमोच्य, गैर - परिवर्तनीय, संचयी कराधेय आधारभूत ढ़ांचा संबंधी बंधपत्र ( श्रृंखला- I) ;

(iv) 15-1-2005 को आबंटित मात्र नब्बे हजार रुपए के समग्र मूल्य के प्रत्येक दस - दस हजार रुपए के 00009924 से 00009932 तक की विशिष्ट संख्या वाले ऋणपत्रों के स्वरूप वाले 6.00 % असुरक्षित , विमोच्य, गैर- परिवर्तनीय, संचयी कराधेय आधारभूत ढ़ांचा संबंधी बंधपत्र ( श्रृंखला- I ) । [सं. 17/2005 - स्टाम्प/फा. सं . 33/20/2005- एस टी ] आर. जी. छाबड़ा, अवर सचिव

ORDER

New Delhi , the 19th May , 2005 STAMPS

S.O. 2045. In exercise of the powers conferredby clause (b) of Sub - section ( 1 ) of Section 9 of the Indian Stamp Act, 1899 (2 of 1899 ) , the Central Government hereby permits Power Finance Corporation Limited, New Delhi to pay consolidated stamp duty of rupees sixteen lakh fifty five thousand nine hundred thirty five only chargeable on account of the stamp duty on-

(i) 6.00% unsecured, redeemable , non - convertible, cumulative taxable infrastructure Bonds in the nature of debentures ( series - I ) bearing distinctive numbers from 00002855 to 00014623 of rupees ten thousand each aggregating to rupees eleven crore seventy six lakh ninety thousand only allotted on 15-2-2005;

(ii) 6.00 % unsecured, redeemable, non - convertible , cumulative taxable infrastructure bonds in the nature of debentures ( series - I ) bearing distinctive numbers from 00009933 to 00042900 of rupees ten thousand each aggregating to thirty two crore ninety six lakh eighty thousand only allotted on 15-2-2005;

(iii) 6.00% unsecured , redeemable , non - convertible, cumulative taxable infrastructure bonds in the nature of debentures ( series - I ) bearing distinctive numbers from 00002846 to 00002854 of rupees ten thousand each aggregating to rupees ninety thousand only allotted on 15-1-2005; and

(iv) 6.00% unsecured , redeemable, non - convertible, non- cumulative taxable infrastructure Bonds,in the nature of debentures ( series - I ) bearing distinctive numbers from 00009924 to 00009932 of rupees ten thousand each aggregating to rupees ninety thousand only allotted on 15-1-2005;

by the said corporation.

[No. 17/2005-Stamp/F . No. 33/20/2005 - ST] R. G. CHHABRA, Under Secy.

5660

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 11 , 2005 / JYAISTHA 21 , 1927

केन्द्रीय उत्पाद शुल्क, कोलकाता- IV आयुक्तालय कोलकाता, 31 मई, 2005

सं. 01 /2005-सीमाशुल्क ( अधि. )

का.आ. 2046.- सीमाशुल्क अधिनियम, 1962 की धारा 9 के अधीन प्रदत्त अधिकार के तहत अधिसूचना सं. 33/94-सीमाशुल्क (अधि. ) दिनांक 1 जुलाई, 1994 के साथ पठित वि. भ. ( रा. वि. ) परिपत्र सं. 31 /2003- सीमाशुल्क दिनांक 07-04-2003 द्वारा प्रत्यायोजित अधिकार के अनुसार सीमाशुल्क अधिनियम, 1962 की धारा 9 के अधीन मोजा- माखला, डाकघर उतरपाड़ा, जिला-हुगली, पश्चिम बंगाल को इसके साथ मालगोदाम स्टेशन के रूप में घोषित किया जाता है, ताकि वहाँ विकास आयुक्त, फलता एक्सपोर्ट प्रोसेसिंग जोन , वाणिज्य एवं औद्योगिक मंत्रालय , भारत सरकार द्वारा अनुमोदन प्राप्त केवल शत - प्रतिशत निर्यात उमुखी स्थापित की जा सके ।

[सी. सं. 1 / IV(II) 1/सीई/पी आर ओ/कोल- IV/ 2004 ]

ए. के. दास, आयुक्त OFFICE OF THE COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE , KOLKATA- IV

Kolkata, the 31st May, 2005 No. 01/ 2005 - CUSTOMS (NT)

S. O. 2046. In exercise of the powers conferred by under Section 9 of the Customs Act, 1962 as delegated by Notification No. 33 / 94- Customs (NT) dated 1st July, 1994 read with M. F. ( D. R. ) Circular No. 31 /2003- Customs dated 7th April, 2003, Mouza-Makhla , P.O. UTTARPARA, Dist . Hooghly, in the State of West Bengal is hereby declaredto be Warehusing Station under Section 9 of the Customs Act, 1962 for the limited purpose of setting up 100 % Export Oriented Unit as approved by the Development Commissioner, Falta Export Processing Zone , Ministry of Commerce and Industry, Government of India .

[C. No. IV ( II) 1/ CE/PRO/KOL - IV/2004 ]

A. K. DAS , Commissioner कार्यालय: आयुक्त, केन्द्रीय उत्पाद शुल्क, जयपुर- द्वितीय जयपुर, 3 जून, 2005

(सीमाशुल्क)

संख्या 1 /सीमाशुल्क ( एन.टी. ) जे पी- II /2005 का.आ. 2047.- भारत सरकार वित्त मंत्रालय , राजस्व विभाग , नई दिल्ली की अधिसूचना संख्या 33/ 94 - सीमाशुल्क ( एन. टी. ) दिनांक 1 जुलाई, 1994 के अन्तर्गत प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए मैं, जे. चतुर्वेदी, आयुक्त केन्द्रीय उत्पाद शुल्क जयपुर- II एतद्वारा राजस्थान राज्य के उदयपुर जिला, ग्राम - नइ में जाडोल फलासीया रोड के पास अराजी संख्या 3396 एवं 3414 , को सीमा शुल्क अधिनियम 1962( 1962 का 52 ) की धारा 9 के अन्तर्गत शत प्रतिशत ई. ओ. यू. स्थापित करने के उद्देश्य से भण्डागार स्टेशन ( वेयरहाउसिंग स्टेशन ) घोषित करता हूं ।

[सी. सं. V ( 100 % ई ओ यू) जे पी- II /30 / 6 / 2005 ]

जे. चतुर्वेदी, आयुक्त

[PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii) ] OFFICE OF THE COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE , JAIPUR- II

Jaipur, the 3rd June , 2005 (CUSTOMS)

No. 1/ CUS (NT) JP - II/2005

S.O. 2047.- In exercise of the powers conferred by Notification No. 33/ 94 -Customs (NT) dated 1st July, 1994 of the Government of India, Ministry of Finance, Department of Revenue , New Delhi , I , J. Chaturvedi , Commissioner, Central Excise, Jaipur - II hereby declare Place at Araji No. 3396 & 3414 , Jhadol Falasia Road Village Nai , Distt . Udaipur in the State of Rajasthan to be Warehousing Station under Section 9 of the Customs Act , 1962 ( 52 of 1962) for the Limited purpose of setting up of 100% Export Oriented Undertakings .

[C. No. V ( 100 % EOU) JP - II/30 /6 /2005 ] J. CHATURVEDI, Commissioner

आदेश नई दिल्ली, 3 जून, 2005

का.आ. 2048.- अतः संयुक्त सचिव, भारत सरकार जिन्हें विदेशी मुद्रा संरक्षण और तस्करी निवारण अधिनियम , 1974 ( 1974 का52) की धारा 3 की उपधारा ( 1 ) के अन्तर्गत विशेष रूप से शक्ति प्रदान की गई है , ने उक्त उप - धारा के अधीन आदेश फाइल सं. 673/10/2005 - सी.यू.एस. VIII, दिनांक 02-05-2005 को जारी किया और यह निर्देश दिया कि श्री सैय्यद हुसैन मदर @ चॉद, सुपुत्र श्री हुसैन मदर, निवासी मनेका बिल्डिंग न. 175 , द्वितीय तल, कमरा सं. 23, जेल रोड पूर्व , डोंगरी , चार नाल, मुम्बई -400009 को निरुद्ध कर लिया जाए और केन्द्रीय कारागार, मुम्बई में अभिरक्षा में रखा जाए ताकि उन्हें भविष्य में चीजों की तस्करी करने से रोका जा सके । 2. अतः केन्द्रीय सरकार के पास यह विश्वास करने का कारण है किपूर्वोक्त व्यक्तिफरार हो गया है या स्वयं को छिपा रखा है जिससे यह आदेश निष्पादित नहीं किया जा सकता ।

3. अतः अब उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 7 की उप- धारा ( 1 ) के खण्ड ( ख ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्ति का प्रयोग करते हुए केन्द्रीय सरकार एतद्वारा पूर्वोक्त व्यक्ति को यह निर्देश देती है कि वह शासकीय राजपत्र में इस आदेश के प्रकाशित होने के 7 दिन के भीतर पुलिस आयुक्त, मुम्बई के सम्मुख उपस्थित हो ।

[फा. सं. 673/ 10/2005- सी.यू.एस.- VIII ]

एन. एम. कृष्णन, उप- सचिव ( कोफेपोसा) ORDER

NewDelhi , the 3rd June , 2005

S.O. 2048. Whereas the Joint Secretary to the Government of India , specially empowered under Sub- section ( 1 ) of Section 3 of the Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974 (52of1974) issued order F. No. 673/10/2005 -Cus . VIII, dated [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : जून 11 , 2005/ज्येष्ठ 21 , 1927

02-05-2005 under the said sub - section directing that Shri Sayyed Hussain Madar@ Chand S/o Shri Hussain Madar , R/ o Maneka Building No. 175 , 2nd Floor, Room No. 23 , Jail Road East, Dongri, Char Nal , Mumbai -400009 be detained and kept in custody in the Central Prison, Mumbai with a viewto preventing him from smuggling goods in future.

2. Whereas the Central Government has reasons to believe that the aforesaid person has absconded or is concealing himself so that the order cannot be executed;

3.Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by Clause (b) of sub -section ( 1) of Section 7 of the said Act, the Central Government hereby directs the aforesaid person io appear before the Commissioner of Police, Mumbai within 7 days of the publication of this order in the Official Gazette.

[F. No. 673/10/2005 -Cus. VIII] N. M. KRISHNAN , Dy Secy . (COFEPOSA)

आदेश नई दिल्ली, 3 जून , 2005

का.आ. 2049.-अतः संयुक्त सचिव, भारत सरकार जिन्हें विदेशी मुद्रा संरक्षण और तस्करी निवारण अधिनियम, 1974 ( 1974 का 52 ) की धारा 3 की उपधारा ( 1 ) के अन्तर्गत विशेष रूप से शक्ति प्रदान की गई है , ने उक्त उप - धारा के अधीन आदेश फाइल सं. 673/14/2005- सी.यू.एस. VIII, दिनांक 02-05-2005 को जारी किया और यह निर्देश दिया कि श्री सदरू‌द्दीन बसर खान, सुपुत्र श्री बसर लाल खान, निवासी पारसिक हील, सेक्टर -26 , प्लॉट नं . 93, नवी मुम्बई को निरूद्ध कर लिया जाए और केन्द्रीय कारागार, मुम्बई में अभिरक्षा में रखा जाए ताकि उन्हें भविष्य में माल की तस्करी का दुष्प्रेरण करने के साथ तस्करित 'माल के परिवहन या छिपाने या रखने का काम करने से अन्यथा तस्करित माल का व्यवहार करने जैसे कार्यों से रोका जासके ।

2. अतः केन्द्रीय सरकार के पास यह विश्वास करने का कारण है किपूर्वोक्त व्यक्ति फरार हो गया है या स्वयं को छिपा रखा हैजिससे यह आदेश निष्पादित नहीं किया जा सकता ।

3. अतः अब उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 7 की उप- धारा ( 1 ) के खण्ड ( ख ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्ति का प्रयोग करते हुए केन्द्रीय सरकार एतद्वारा पूर्वोक्त व्यक्ति को यह निर्देश देती है कि वह शासकीय राजपत्र में इस आदेश के प्रकाशित होने के 7 दिन के भीतर पुलिस आयुक्त, नवी मुम्बई के सम्मुख उपस्थित हो ।

[फा. सं. 673/14/2005- सी.यू.एस.-VIII ] एन. एम. कृष्णन, उप सचिव ( कोफेपोसा)

ORDER

New Delhi , the 3rd June, 2005

S.O. 2049.- Whereas the Joint Secretary to the Government of India, specially empowered under Sub- section ( 1 ) of Section 3 of the Conservation of Foreign Exchange andPrevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974 (52of 1974) issued order F. No. 673/ 14/2005 -Cus. VIII , dated

5661 02-05-2005 under the said sub - section directing that Shri SadruddinBasar Khan S/o Shri Basar Lal Khan, R/o Parsik Hill, Sector 26 , Plot No. 93 , Navi Mumbai be detained and kept in custody in the Central Prison , Mumbai with a view to preventinghim from abetting the smuggling of goods as well as dealing in smuggled goods otherwise than by engaging in transporting or concealing or keeping smuggled goods in future.

2. Whereas the Central Government has reasons to believe that the aforesaid person has absconded or is concealing himself so that the order cannot be executed;

3.Now, therefore, in exercise ofthe powers conferred by Clause (b) of sub-section ( 1 ) of Section 7 of the said Act, the Central Government hereby directs the aforesaid person to appear before the Commissioner of Police, Navi Mumbai within 7 days of the publication of this order in the Official Gazette.

[F. No. 673/ 14/2005 -Cus-VIII] N. M. KRISHNAN, Dy. Secy. (COFEPOSA) (आर्थिक कार्य विभाग ) (बैंकिंग प्रभाग ) नईदिल्ली, 1 जून , 2005

का.आ. 2050.- राष्ट्रीयकृत बैंक ( प्रबंध एवं प्रकीर्ष उपबंध ) योजना, 1970 के खंड 3 के उपखंड ( 1 ) के साथ पठित बैंककारी कंपनी ( उपक्रमों का अर्जन एवं अंतरण ) अधिनियम , 1970 की धारा १ की उप- धारा ( 3 ) के खंड ( ग ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए, केन्द्रीय सरकार, एत‌द्वारा भारतीय रिजर्व बैंक, मुम्बई के मुख्य महाप्रबंधक श्री जी. श्रीनिवासन को भारतीय रिजर्व बैंक, चंडीगढ़ के मुख्य महाप्रबंधक श्री वी. रामचन्द्रराव के स्थान पर तत्काल प्रभाव से औरअगला आदेश होने तक केनरा बैंक के निदेशक के रूप में नामित करती है ।

[एफ. सं . 9/18/2000-बीओ -1 ] जी.बी. सिंह, अवर सचिव (Department of EconomicAffairs) (BANKING DIVISION) New Delhi , the 1st June, 2005

S.O. 2050. In exercise of the powers conferredby clause (c) of sub- section ( 3 ) of Section 9 of the Banking Companies (Acquisition and Transfer of Undertakings ) Act, 1970 , read with sub -clause ( 1 ) of Clause 3 of the Nationalised Banks (Management and Miscellaneous Provisions) Scheme, 1970 , the Central Government, hereby nominates Shri G. Srinivasan , Chief General Manager , Reserve Bank of India , Mumbai as a Director of Canara Bank with immediate effect and until further orders vide Shri V. Ramachandra Rao , Chief General Manager, Reserve Bank of India, Chandigarh .

[F. No. 9/18/2000-BO- I] G.B. SINGH, Under Secy.

5662

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 11 , 2005/ JYAISTHA 21 , 1927

(बीना प्रभाग)

नईदिल्ली, 7 जून, 2005

का.आ. 2051.-जीवन बीमा निगम अधिनियम, 1956 ( 1956 का 31 ) की धारा 4 द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए, केन्द्रीय सरकार, एतद्वारा निदेश देती है कि श्री ए.के. शुक्ला, भारतीय जीवन बीमा निगम के प्रबंध निदेशक, पदभार ग्रहण करने की तारीख से दो महीने की अवधि अथवा नियमित पदधारी की नियुक्ति अथवा अगले आदेश तक, जो भी पहले हो , प्रबंध निदेशक के अपने कर्त्तव्यों के अतिरिक्त निगम के अध्यक्ष पद का वर्तमान प्रभार वहन करेंगे तथा वे निगम के अध्यक्ष की सभी शक्यिों का प्रयोग और कार्य करेंगे ।

[फा. सं. 14/11/2004-बीमा- IV ]

जी. भुजबल, निदेशक ( INSURANCE DIVISION)

New Delhi , the 7th June , 2005

S.O. 2051. In exercise of the powers conferred by Section 4 of the Life Insurance Corporation Act, 1956 (31 of 1956 ) the Central Government hereby directs that Shri A. K. Shukla, Managing Director of the Life Insurance Corporation of India will hold current charge of the post of Chairman of the Corporation , in addition to his duties as Managing Director, and he shall exercise all the powers and the functions of the Chairman of the Corporation , for a period of two months from the date of assumption of charge ofthe post or till the date of appointment of a regular incumbent or until further orders , whichever event occurs earliest.

[F. No. 14/11/2004- Ins . IV] G. BHUJABAL , Director स्वास्थ्य और परिवार कल्याण मंत्रालय

(स्वास्थ्यविभाग )

नई दिल्ली, 31 मई, 2005

का.आ. 2052.- भारतीय आयुर्विज्ञान अधिनियम, 1956 (1956 का 102) की धारा 3 की उप- धारा ( 1 ) के खण्ड ( ख ) के अनुसरण में, डा. वी.के. जैन आचार्य एवं अध्यक्ष , त्वचा एवं रतिज रोग विभाग , पं. बी. डी. शमां स्नातकोत्तर आयुर्विज्ञान संस्थान, रोहतक, हरियाणा को एम.डी. यूनिवर्सिटी, रोहतक की सभा द्वारा इस अधिसूचना के जारी होने की तारीख से भारतीय आयुर्विज्ञान परिषद् के एक सदस्य के रूप में निर्वाचित किया गया है ।

[PART II-SEC. 3 (ii)] अतः अब, उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 3 की उप- धारा ( 1 ) के उपबंध के अनुसरण में केन्द्र सरकार एत‌द्वारा भारत सरकार के तत्कालीन स्वास्थ्यमंत्रालय की दिनांक 9 जनवरी , 1960 की अधिसूचना संख्या का. आ. 138 में निम्नलिखित और संशोधन करती है , अर्थात्:-

उक्त अधिसूचना में " धारा 3 की उप- धारा ( 1 ) के खण्ड (ख) के अधीन निर्वाचित " शीर्षक के अंतर्गत क्रम संख्या 54 और उससे संबंधित प्रविष्टियों के स्थान पर निम्नलिखित क्रम संख्या और प्रविष्टियां प्रतिस्थापित की जाएंगी , अर्थात्:-

" 54. डा. वी.के. जैन,

एम डी यूनिवर्सिटी" आचार्य एवं अध्यक्ष,

त्वचा एवं रतिज रोग विभाग ,

पं. बी.डी. शर्मा स्नातकोत्तर आयुर्विज्ञान संस्थान, रोहतक, हरियाणा

[सं. वी -11013/2/2004-एम.ई . (नीति-1 ) ]

अरविंद कुमार , अवर सचिव MINISTRY OF HEALTH AND FAMILY WELFARE (Department of Health)

New Delhi , the 31st May, 2005

S. O. 2052. Whereas in pursuance of clause (b) of Sub- section ( 1 ) of Section 3 of the Indian Medical Council Act, 1956 (102 of 1956) Dr. V. K. Jain, Professor & Head , Department of Skin & V.D. Pt . B.D. Sharma Postgraduate Institute ofMedical Sciences , Rohtak , Haryana , has been electedby the Court of the M.D. University, Rohtak to be a member of the Medical Council of India with effect from the date of issue of this notification .

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

In the said Notification, under the heading, ' Elected under clause (b) of Sub - section ( 1 ) of Section 3 ' , for serial number 54 and the entry relating thereto the following serial number and entry shall be substituted, namely:---

M.D. University " "54. Dr. V. K. Jain, Professor& Head , Department of Skin & V.D. Pt . B.D. Sharma Postgraduate Institute of Medical Sciences , Rohtak, Haryana

[No. V- 11013 /2/2004- ME(Policy - I) ] ARVIND KUMAR, Under Secy.

5663 [ भाग-1 खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : जून 11 , 2005/ज्येष्ठ 21 , 1927

भारत मौसम विज्ञान विभाग

मौसम विज्ञान के महानिदेशक का कार्यालय

नई दिल्ली, 3 जून , 2005

का.आ. 2053.- राष्ट्रपति, केन्द्रीय सिविल सेवा ( वर्गीकरण, नियंत्रण और अपील ) नियम, 1965 के नियम १ के उप- नियम (2 ) और नियम 12 के उप - नियम ( 2 ) के खंड ( ख ) और नियम 24 के उप- नियम ( 1 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए और भारत सरकार के विज्ञान और प्रौद्योगिकी मंत्रालय में भारत मौसम विज्ञान विभाग की अधिसूचना सं . का.आ. 790 तारीख 4 मार्च, 1991 को अधिक्रांत करते हुए, यह निदेश देते हैं कि इससे उपाबद्ध अनुसूची के भाग 1 , 2 , 3 और 4 के स्तंभ 1 में विनिर्दिष्ट भारत मौसम विज्ञान विभाग में, भारत मौसम विज्ञान सेवा-समूह ' ख ' राजपत्रित , साधारण केन्द्रीय सेवा समूह " ख " राजपत्रित और अराजपत्रित , समूह " ग " और समूह " घ " के पदों की बाबत स्तंभ 2 में विनिर्दिष्ट प्राधिकारी नियुक्ति प्राधिकारी होंगे और स्तंभ 3 और 5 में विनिर्दिष्ट प्राधिकारी स्तंभ 4 में विनिर्दिष्ट शास्तियों के संबंध में क्रमशः अनुशासन प्राधिकारी और अपील प्राधिकारी होंगे ।

अनुसूची

भाग -1 भारत मौसम विज्ञान सेवा - समूह " ख " राज्जपत्रित

भारत मौसम विज्ञान विभाग

पद का विवरण

अपील प्राधिकारी नियुक्तिप्राधिकारी शास्तियां अधिरोपित करने के लिए सक्षम प्राधिकारी और वे शास्तियां जिन्हें अधिरोपित किया जा सकता है ( नियम 11 में मद संख्यांकों के प्रतिनिर्देश से)

शास्तियां

प्राधिकारी

(2)

(3)

(5) (1)

(4)

भारत मौसम विज्ञान

सेवासमूह " ख" . राजपत्रित

सभी

राष्ट्रपति

मौसम विज्ञान महानिदेशक

सहायक मौसम विज्ञानी श्रेणी-1

मौसम विज्ञान महानिदेशक

(i ) से ( iv)

मौसमविज्ञान महानिदेशक

मौसम विज्ञान उप महानिदेशक

वही

(प्रशासन और भंडार)- मौसम विज्ञान महानिदेशक के कार्यालय , केन्द्रीय भूकम्प वेधशाला, शिलांग और खगोल विज्ञान केन्द्र, कोलकाता के स्थापनों में धारित पदों के लिए ।

1636GI/2005-2 5664

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 11 , 2005 /JYAISTHA 21 , 1927

अनुसूची

[PART II- SEC . 3 ( ii ) ,

भाग -2 साधारण केन्द्रीय सेवा-समूह " ख " राजपत्रित

भारत मौसम विज्ञान विभाग

पद का विवरण

नियुक्ति प्राधिकारी

प्राधिकारी

(2)

(3) (1)

साधारण केन्द्रीय

सेवा समूह " ख "

राजपत्रित

प्रशासनिक अधिकारी मौसम विज्ञान

महानिदेशक

वरिष्ठनिजी सचिव

निजी सचिव

हिन्दी अधिकारी

सहायक मौसम विज्ञानी

श्रेणी- II

मौसम विज्ञान महानिदेशक मौसम विज्ञान अपर महानिदेशक/मौसम विज्ञान उप महानिदेशक, जो कार्यालय के या प्रादेशिक मौसम विज्ञान केन्द्र के प्रधान के रूप में कार्यरत हों, अपने- अपने स्थापनों में धारित पदों के लिए ।

सहायक मौसम विज्ञानी

श्रेणी- II (फोरमैन ) (औद्योगिक)

सहायक मौसम विज्ञानी

श्रेणी- II ( फोरमैन ) (गैर- औद्योगिक)

मौसमविज्ञान उप महानिदेशक (प्रशासन और भंडार)-मौसम विज्ञान महानिदेशक के कार्यालय, केन्द्रीय भूकम्प वेधशाला, शिलांग और खगोल विज्ञान केन्द्र, कोलकाता के स्थापनों में धारित पदों के लिए । समूह " ख"

अराजपत्रित

मौसम विज्ञान महानिदेशक ज्येष्ठ अनुवादक

मौसम विज्ञान महानिदेशक

आशुलिपिक

श्रेणी- I

अधीक्षक

वैज्ञानिक सहायक

मौसम विज्ञान अपर महानिदेशक/मौसम विज्ञान उप महानिदेशक, जो कार्यालय केया प्रादेशिक मौसम विज्ञान केन्द्र के प्रधान के रूप में कार्यरत हों, अपने- अपने स्थापनों में धारित पदों के लिए । मौसम विज्ञान उप महानिदेशक (प्रशासन और भंडार )- मौसम विज्ञान महानिदेशक के कार्यालय , केन्द्रीय भूकम्प वेधशाला, शिलांग और खगोल विज्ञान केन्द्र,. कोलकाता के कार्यालयों में धारित पदों के लिए ।

अपील प्राधिकारी

शास्तियां अधिरोपित करने के लिए सक्षम प्राधिकारी और वे शास्तियां जिन्हें अधिरोपित किया जा सकता है ( नियम 11 में मद संख्यांकों के प्रतिनिर्देश से) शास्तियां

(4)

(5)

सभी

(i) से ( iv)

राष्ट्रपति मौसम विज्ञान महानिदेशक वही

वही

सभी

(i) से ( iv)

राष्ट्रपति मौसम विज्ञान महानिदेशक

वही

वही [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : जून 11 , 2005/ज्येष्ठ 21 , 1927

भाग-3 साधारण केन्द्रीय सेवा-समूह " ग "

अनुसूची

भारत मौसम विज्ञान विभाग

पद का विवरण

नियुक्तिप्राधिकारी

प्राधिकारी (1)

(2)

(3) साधारण केन्द्रीय सेवा समूह " ग "

आशुलिपिक श्रेणी- II

मौसम विज्ञान उप महानिदेशक

मौसम विज्ञान उप महानिदेशक (प्रशासन और भंडार)

(प्रशासन औरभंडार)

पुस्तकालय तथा सूचना सहायक कनिष्ठअनुवादक प्रशासनिक सहायक सुरक्षा निरीक्षक प्रबंधक(कैंटीन)

यांत्रिक सहायक

मौसम विज्ञान अपर महानिदेशक, (अनुसंधान) , पुणे स्थित कार्यालय में मौसम विज्ञान उप महानिदेशक और मौसम विज्ञान उप महानिदेशक जो कार्यालयों/प्रादेशिक मौसम विज्ञान केन्द्रों के प्रधान के रूप में कार्यरत हों, अपने-अपने स्थापनों में धारित पदों के लिए ।

मौसम विज्ञान महानिदेशक का कार्यालय, नई दिल्ली के लिए मुख्यालय में निदेशक/ मौसम विज्ञानी (स्थापन) अन्य पद जिसके अंतर्गत कैन्टीन कर्मचारीवृन्द भी हैं ।

मौसम विज्ञान उप महानिदेशक (प्रशासन और भंडार)

(क) मौसम विज्ञान महानिदेशक के कार्यालय, भूकम्प विज्ञान वेधशालाओं,

निदेशक या मौसम विज्ञानी केन्द्रीय भूकम्प वेधशाला, शिलांग जो कार्यालय के प्रधान के रूप में कार्यरत हों, अपने कार्यालयों में पदों के लिए।

मुख्यालय कार्यालय में निदेशक/मौसम विज्ञानी (स्थापन) नागर विमानन प्रशिक्षणकेन्द्र, बमरौली से संबंद्ध मौसम विज्ञान एककों और जल मौसम वेधशालाओं, जो मौसम विज्ञान महानिदेशक, केन्द्रीय भूकम्प वेधशाला शिलांग, खगोल विज्ञान केन्द्र, कोलकाताके स्थापनों के धारित पदोंके लिए ।

5665

अपील प्राधिकारी

शास्तियां अधिरोपित करने के लिए सक्षम प्राधिकारी और वे शास्तियां जिन्हें अधिरोपित किया जा सकता है ( नियम 11 में मद संख्यांकों के प्रति निर्देश से ) शास्तियां

(4)

(5) सभी

मौसमविज्ञान महानिदेशक (i ) से ( iv)

मौसम विज्ञान महानिदेशक वही

वही सभी

मौसमविज्ञान महानिदेशक (i)से ( iv)

मौसम विज्ञान उप महानिदेशक (प्रशासन और भंडार) 5666

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 11 , 2005/JYAISTHA 21 , 1927

(1)

(2)

(3) (ख) ऊपर ' क' में उल्लिखित्त स्थापनों से भिन्न स्थापनों के लिए ।

मौसम विज्ञान अपर महानिदेशक (अनुसंधान ) , पुणे स्थित कार्यालय में मौसम विज्ञान उप महानिदेशक और मौसम विज्ञान उप महानिदेशक जो कार्यालयों/ प्रादेशिक मौसम विज्ञान केन्द्रों के प्रधान के रूप में कार्यरत हों, अपने-अपने स्थापनों में धारित पदों के लिए ।

मौसम विज्ञान अपर महानिदेशक (अनुसंधान) , पुणे के कार्यालय में मौसम विज्ञान उप- 'महानिदेशक और मौसमविज्ञान उप महानिदेशक जो कार्यालयों/ प्रादेशिक मौसम विज्ञान केन्द्रों के प्रधान के रूप में कार्यरत हों, अपने- अपने स्थापनों में धारित पदोंके लिए ।

प्रशासन का भारसाधक प्रशासनिक अधिकारी/सहायक मौसम विज्ञानी श्रेणी- I

भाग-4 साधारण केन्द्रीय सेवा-समूह " घ "

अनुसूची भारत मौसम विज्ञान विभाग

पद का विवरण

नियुक्ति प्राधिकारी

प्राधिकारी

(2)

(3) (1)

साधारण केन्द्रीय सेवा समूह " घ" कैन्टीन कर्मचारीवृन्द सहित

मौसम विज्ञान महानिदेशक के कार्यालय में मौसम विज्ञानी ( प्रशासन )

मौसम विज्ञान महानिदेशक के कार्यालय में मौसम विज्ञानी (प्रशासन)

मौसम विज्ञान महानिदेशक के कार्यालय में प्रशासन का भारसाधक प्रशासनिक अधिकारी/सहायक मौसम विज्ञानी श्रेणी- I 1. मौसम विज्ञान महा- निदेशक के स्थापन में धारित सभी पद और मौसम विज्ञान महा- निदेशक के स्थापन द्वारा धारित जल मौसम विज्ञान और भूकम्प विज्ञान एककों के स्थापनों के सभी पद ।

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

(5) सभी

मौसम विज्ञान महानिदेशक (i ) से ( iv)

सम्बन्धित मौसम विज्ञान उप महानिदेशक

अपील प्राधिकारी

शास्तियां अधिरोपित करने के लिए सक्षम प्राधिकारी और वे शास्तियां जिन्हें अधिरोपित किया जा सकता है ( नियम 11 में मद संख्यांकों के प्रति निर्देश से) शास्तियां

(4)

(5) सभी

मौसम विज्ञान उप महानिदेशक (प्रशासन और भंडार)

(i ) से ( iv )

मौसमविज्ञान उप महानिदेशक (प्रशासन और भंडार) 5667 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : जून 11 , 2005/ज्येष्ठ 21 , 1927

(2)

(1)

(3)

(4)

(5)

सभी

2. केन्द्रीय भूकम्प वेधशाला (शिलांग ) में सभी पद ।

केन्द्रीय भूकम्प वेधशाला शिलांग

का भारसाधक निदेशक/मौसम

विज्ञानी

मौसम विज्ञान उप महानिदेशक (प्रशासन और भंडार) केन्द्रीय भूकम्प वेधशाला शिलांग का भारसाधक निदेशक/मौसम विज्ञानी

सभी

प्रशासन का भारसाधक प्रशासनिक

अधिकारी/सहायक मौसम विज्ञानी

श्रेणी- I

3. अन्यकार्यालयों में सभी पद (जिसके अंतर्गत खगोल विज्ञान केन्द्र, कोलकाता भी है )

प्रशासन का भारसाधक प्रशासनिक अधिकारी/ सहायक मौसम विज्ञानी श्रेणी- I

(i ) मौसम विज्ञान अपर महानिदेशक, (अनुसंधान) , पुणे स्थितकार्यालय में मौसमविज्ञान उप महानिदेशक तथा मौसम विज्ञान उप महानिदेशक जो कार्यालयों/प्रादेशिक मौसम विज्ञान केन्द्रों के प्रधान के रूप में कार्यरत हों, अपने- अपने स्थापनों में धारित पदोंके लिए ।

(ii ) निदेशक या मौसम विज्ञानी, जो खगोल विज्ञान केन्द्र कोलकाताके कार्यालय के प्रधान के रूप में कार्यरत हों, खगोलविज्ञान केन्द्रकोलकाताके पदों की बाबत ।

[सं. सी-11012/ 1/00 ]

भूकन लाल, मौसम विज्ञान अपर महानिदेशक ( जल मौसम एवं कृषि) INDIA METEOROLOGICAL DEPARTMENT

(OFFICE OF THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF METEOROLOGY)

New Delhi , the 3rd June, 2005

S.O. 2053. In exercise of the powers conferred by sub -rule (2) of rule 9 and clause (b) of sub - rule (2) of rule 12 and sub -rule ( 1 ) of rule 24 of the Central Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal ) Rules , 1965, and in supersession of the notification of the Government of India, in the Ministry of Science and Technology, India Meteorological Department No. S. O. 790 dated 4th March, 1991 , the President hereby directs that in respect of the posts inthe IndiaMeteorological Department, Indian Meteorological Service, Group ' B ' Gazetted, General Central Services Group 'B ' Gazetted and Non - Gazetted, Group ' C ' and Group ' D ' , specified in column 1 of Parts I , II , III and IV of the Schedule annexed herewith, the authority specified in column 2 shall be the Appointing Authority and the authorities specified in columns 3 and 5 shall be the Disciplinary Authority and the Appellate Authority respectively in regard to the penalties specified in column 4.

5668

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 11 , 2005 / JYAISTHA 21 , 1927 [PART II- SEC . 3 ( ii) ]

SCHEDULE

Part- I Indian Meteorological Service Group ' B ' Gazetted

India Meteorological Department

Appellate Authority Description of the post

Appointing Authority

Authority competent to impose penalties and penalties which it may impose ( with reference to item numbers in Rule - 11)

Penalties

Authority

INDIAN METEOROLOGICAL SERVICE- GROUP ' B ' GAZETTED

President

Director General of Meteorology All

Assistant Meteorologist Gr. I

Director General

ofMeteorology

( i) to ( iv) Director General of Meteorology

Additional Director General of Meteorology/Deputy Director General ofMeteorology working as Head of the office or Head of Regional Meteorological Centre for the posts borne in their respec- tive establishments .

-do-

DeputyDirector General of Meteorology (Administration and Stores) for the posts borne in the establishment of Director General ofMeteorology , Central Seismological Observatory Shillong and Positional Astronomy Centre Kolkata.

GENERAL CENTRAL SERVICE- GROUP ' B ' GAZETTED

All President

Director General of Meteorology

Administrative Officer Senior Private Secretary

Director General

of Meteorology

(i) to ( iv)

Private Secretary Hindi Officer

Director General of Meteorology Asstt.Meteorologist Gr. II

Additional Director General of Meteorology /Deputy Director General ofMeteorology working as Head of the office or Head of Regional Meteorological Centre for the posts borne in their respec- tive cstablishments .

Asstt.Meteorologist Gr. II ( Foreman) (Industrial)

-do-

Asstt.Meteorologist Gr. II ( Foreman) (Non- Industrial )

Deputy Director General of Meteorology (Administration and Stores) for the posts borne in the establishment of Director General ofMeteorology , Central Seismological Observatory Shillong and Positional Astronomy Centre, Kolkata .

5669 [भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : जून 11 , 2005/ज्येष्ठ 21 , 1927

GROUP ' B ' NON -GAZETTED

President

Director General of Meteorology All

Senior Translator, Stenographer Gr . I,

Director General ofMeteorology

(i) to ( iv)

Superintendent, Scientific Assistant

Director General of Meteorology

Additional Director General of Meteorology/Deputy Director General ofMeteorology working asHead of the Office or Head of Regional Meteorological Centre for the posts borne in their respéc- tive establishments .

-do-

Deputy Director General of Meteorology(Administration and Stores) for the posts borne inthe Office of the Director General ofMeteorology , Central Seismological Observatory Shillong and Positional Astronomy Centre , Kolkata.

PART - III , GENERAL CENTRAL SERVICE- GROUP ' C '

SCHEDULE

IndiaMeteorological Department

Appellate Authority Description of the post

Appointing Authority

Authority competent to impose penalties and penalties which it may impose (with reference to item numbers in Rule - 11 )

Penalties

Authority

GENERAL CENTRAL SERVICE -GROUP ' C '

All

Director General ofMeteorology

Deputy Director General of

Meteorology (Administration

and Stores)

(i) to ( iv)

DeputyDirector General of Meteorology (Adıninistration and Stores)

Director General of Meteorology Stenographer GRII . , Library and Information Assistant, Junior Translator Administrative Assistant . Security Inspector , Manager ( Canteen) , Mechanical Assistant

Deputy Director General of Meteorology in the Office of the Additional Director General ofMeteorology (Research ) , Pune and Deputy Director General of Meteorology working as Head ofthe offices/Regional Meteorological Centres for the posts borne in their respective establishments.

-do-

Director/Meteorological (Establishment) at Head Quarter, Office of the Director General ofMeteorology, New Delhi .

5670

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 11 , 2005/ JYAISTHA 21 , 1927

3 OTHER POSTS INCLUDING CANTEEN STAFF

Deputy Director General of Meteo- rology ( Administration and Stores)

Deputy Director General ofMeteo- rology (Administration and Stores)

Director or Meteorologist working as Head of Office , Central Seismological Obser- vatory, Shillong for posts in their offices.

Director/Meteorologist (Establishment ) at Head QuarterOffice.

(a) In the Office of the Director General of Meteorology, Seismo- logical Observatories , Meteorological Units attached to Civil Aviation Training Centre , Bamrauli and Hydro -Meteorological Observatories which are borne on the establishment of the Director General ofMeteorology , Central Seismological Observatory, Shillong and Positional Astronomy Centre , Kolkata .

(b) For the establishments other than mentioned above at (a)

Deputy Director General of Meteorology in the Office of the Additional Director Gene- ralofMeteorology (Research) , Pune and Deputy Director of Meteorology working as Head of the Offices/Regional Meteoro- logical Centres for the posts borne in their respective establishments .

Administrative Officer/Assistant Meteorologist Gr . I, In charge of the Administration.

/ Deputy Director General ofMeteo- rology in the Office of the Additional Director General ofMeteorology (Research), Pune and Deputy Direc- torGeneral of Meteorology working as Head ofthe Offices/ Regional Meteorological Centres for the posts borne in theirrespective establishments .

PART- IV GENERAL CENTRAL SERVICE- GROUP ' D '

SCHEDULE

India Meteorological Department

Description of the post

Appointing Authority

Authority competent to impose penalties and penalties which it may impose ( with reference to item numbers in Rule- 11 )

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

All Director General ofMeteorology

(i ) to ( iv)

General of Meteoro- logy (Administration and Stores) Deputy Director All

Director General of Meteorology (i) to ( iv) Deputy Director General of Meteorology concerned .

Appellate Authority Penalties

Authority

3 GENERAL CENTRAL SERVICE - GROUP ' D ' INCLUDING CANTEEN STAFF

Meteorologist (Administration) in the office of the Director General of Meteorology .

Meteorologist (Administration) in the office of the Director General ofMeteorology . Administrative Officer/Assistant Meteorologist Gr. I In charge of the Administration in the office of the Director General ofMeteorology .

1. All posts borne on the establishment of the Director General of Meteorology and Hydro -Meteorго- logical and Seismo- logical Units borne on the establishment ofthe Director General ofMeteorology .

All DeputyDirector General ofMeteoro- logy (Administration and Stores) .

(i) to

(iv)

Deputy Director General ofMeteoro- logy (Administra- tion and Stores ) [भाग II- खण्ड 3( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : जून 11 , 2005/ज्येष्ठ 21 , 1927

2. All posts in Central Seismological Observa- tory Shillong.

Director/Meteorologist Incharge, Central Seismological Observa- tory Shillong.

Director/Meteoro- logist In charge, Central Seismo- logical Observatory, Shillong.

5671 4

All DeputyDirector General of Meteoro- logy (Administrtion and Stores) .

All

Administrative Officer/Assistant

Meteorologist Gr. I Incharge of the

Administration

3. All posts in other offices (including Positional Astronomy Centre, Kolkata. )

Administrative Officer/Assistant Meteorologist Gr.I Incharge ofthe Administration.

(i) Deputy Director General of Meteo-. rology in the office of the Additional Director General of Meteorology (Re- search), Pune and DeputyDirector General of Meteoro- logyWorking as Head of Office/ Regional Meteoro- logical Centres for the posts borne in theirrespective establishments .

(ii) Director/Meteoro- logist working as Head ofOffice for Positional Astronomy Centre, Kolkata in respect of posts in Positional Astro- nomy Centre Kolkata.

[No. C- 11012 /1/00 ]

BHUKAN LAL , Addl . Director General of Meteorology (H&A)

सूचनाऔर प्रसारण मंत्रालय

शुद्धिपत्र

नई दिल्ली , 3 जून, 2005

.का.आ. 2054.- भारत सरकार के सूचना और प्रसारण मंत्रालय की अधिसूचना सं. का. आ. 311 ( अ ) , तारीख 11 मोर्च, 2005 में, जो भारत के राजपत्र, असाधारण, भाग II , खंड 3 , उपखंड ( ii ) में प्रकाशित हुई थी, " न्यायमूर्ति श्री जी. एन . रॉय " के स्थान पर " न्यायमूर्ति श्री गनेन्द्र नारायण रॉय " पढ़ें ।

MINISTRY OF INFORMATION AND BROADCASTING

CORRIGENDUM [फा. सं. 4/14/2004-प्रेस ] पी. के. त्रिपाठी, संयुक्त सचिव

New Delhi , the 3rd June, 2005

S.O. 2054. In the notification of the Government of India in Ministry of Information and Broadcasting, vide number S.O. 311 (E) dated the 11th March, 2005 and published in Part II , section 3 , Sub-section ( ii ) of the Gazette of India, Extraordinary , for " Shri Justice G.N. Roy " , read " Shri Justice Ganendra Narayan Ray " .

1636GI/2005-3

[File No. 4/ 14/2004-Press] P. K. TRIPATHI , Jt . Secy .

5672

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 11 , 2005 / JYAISTHA 21 , 1927 [PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii) ]

इस्पात मंत्रालय

नई दिल्ली, ५ जून, 2005

का.आ. 2055.- राजभाषा ( संघ के शासकीय प्रयोजनों के लिए प्रयोग ) नियम, 1976 ( यथा संशोधित , 1987 ) के नियम 10 के उप नियम (4 ) के अनुसरण में केन्द्रीय सरकार एत‌द्वारा इस्पात मंत्रालय के प्रशासनिक नियंत्रणाधीन फैरो स्क्रैप निगम लिमिटेड की भिलाई इकाई जिसके 80 प्रतिशत से अधिक कर्मचारीवृन्द ने हिन्दी का कार्यसाधक ज्ञान प्राप्त कर लिया है , को अधिसूचित करती है ।

[ सं. ई.- 11011/6/2001- हिन्दी]

अनीता प्रवीण, निदेशक

MINISTRY OF STEEL

New Delhi , the 1st June, 2005

S.O. 2055.- In pursuance of sub - rule (4) of Rule 10 of the Official Language (Use for official purpose of the Union) Rules , 1976 (as amended, 1987 ) the Central Government hereby notifies the Bhilai Unit of Ferro Scrap Nigam Limited, Bhilai under the administrative control of Ministry of Steel , where more than 80 % staff have acquired working knowledge ofHindi .

[No. E. - 11011/6/2001 -HINDI ] ANITA PARVEEN, Director उपभोक्तामामले , खाद्य और सार्वजनिक वितरण मंत्रालय

(उपभोक्ता मामले विभाग )

भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो

नई दिल्ली, 29 अप्रैल, 2005

का.आ. 2056.- भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो नियम , 1987 के नियम 7 के उपनियम ( 1 ) के खंड ( ख ) के अनुसरण में भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो एतद्वारा अधिसूचित करता है कि जिन भारतीय मानकों के विवरण नीचे अनुसूची में दिए गए हैं वे स्थापित हो गए हैं : -

अनुसूची

स्थापित तिथि क्रम स्थापित भारतीय मानक(कों ) की संख्या वर्ष और शीर्षक संख्या

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

(2)

(1)

(4)

(3)

आई एस 3971 : 1999

28फरवरी, 2005 1. आई एस 3971: 2005/ आई एस ओ 445 1996 सामग्री प्रहस्तन के लिए पैलेट- शब्दावली ( दूसरा पुनरीक्षण )

28फरवरी , 2005 2. आई एस 15547 2005 स्वचल वाहन-चार पहिये वाले वाहनों के लिए प्लास्टिक की ईंधन टंकी

28फरवरी , 2005 3. आई एस 15563 2005/आई एस ओ 17269 : 2000 यात्री कार टायर-रोलिंग परिधि को मापने की पद्धतियां- भारित नएटायर

इस भारतीय मानक की प्रतियां भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो , मानक भवन, १ बहादुर शाह जफर मार्ग, नई दिल्ली -110002, क्षेत्रीय कार्यालयों, नई दिल्ली, कोलकाता, चण्डीगढ़ , चेन्नई, मुम्बई तथा शाखा कार्यालयों अहमदाबाद, बंगलौर, भोपाल , भुवनेश्वर, कोयम्बतूर , गुवाहाटी, हैदराबाद, जयपुर, कानपुर, पटना, पूणे तथा तिरूवनन्तापुरम में बिक्री हेतु उपलब्ध हैं ।

[संदर्भ टी ई डी/जी-16 ]

पी. सी. जोशी, निदेशक एवं प्रमुख ( परिवहन इंजीनियरिंग विभाग ) 5673 [भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र: जून 11 , 2005 /ज्येष्ठ 21 , 1927

MINISTRY OF CONSUMER AFFAIRS , FOOD AND PUBLIC DISTRIBUTION

(Department of Consumer Affairs)

BUREAU OF INDIAN STANDARDS

New Delhi , the 29th April, 2005

S.O. 2056.-In pursuance of clause (b ) of sub -rule ( 1 ) of Rule (1 ) of Rule 7 of the Bureau of Indian Standards Rules, 1987 , the Bureau of Indian Standards hereby notifies that the Indian Standards, particulars of which are given in the Schedule hereto annexed have been established on the date indicated against each :

SCHEDULE

Sl . No. Year & title of the Indian No. Standards Established

Date of Established

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

(1)

(2)

(3)

(4)

IS 3971 : 1999

28 Feb. , 2005 1. IS 3971 : 2005/ISO 445 : 1996 Pallets for Materials Handing-Vocabulary (Second Revision)

28 Feb. , 2005 2. IS 15547 : 2005 Automotive Vehicles Plastic fuel tank for four wheelers .

28 Feb. , 2005 3. IS 15563 : 2005/ISO 17269 : 2000 Passenger car tyres Methods for measuring rolling circumference -Loaded new.

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

[Ref. TED/G - 16]

P.C. JOSHI , Director & Head (Transport Engg .)

नई दिल्ली, 26 मई , 2005

का.आ. 2057.- भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो नियम 1987 के नियम 7 के उपनियम ( 1 ) के खंड ( ख ) के अनुसरण में भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो एतद्वारा अधिसूचित करता है कि जिन भारतीय मानकों के विवरण नीचे अनुसूची में दिए गए हैं वे स्थापित हो गए हैं : -

अनुसूची

स्थापित तिथि

नये भारतीय मानक द्वारा

क्रम स्थापित भारतीय मानक( कों ) की संख्या वर्ष और शीर्षक संख्या

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

(2)

(3)

(4)

(1)

आई एस 774 : 1984

1 जुलाई, 2005 1. आई एस 774: 2004 अंग्रेजी टट्टियों व मूत्रालयों के लिए प्रधावन टंकियां (प्लास्टिक की टंकियों को छोड़कर)

-विशिष्ट ( पांचवा पुनरीक्षण)

इस भारतीय मानक की प्रतियां भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो , मानक भवन, १ बहादुर शाह जफर मार्ग, नई दिल्ली-110002 , क्षेत्रीय कार्यालयों, नई दिल्ली, कोलकाता, चण्डीगढ़ , चेन्नई, मुम्बई तथा शाखा कार्यालयों अहमदाबाद, बंगलौर, भोपाल , भुवनेश्वर, कोयम्बतूर, गुवाहाटी, हैदराबाद, जयपुर, कानपुर, पटना, पूणे तथा तिरूवनन्तापुरम में बिक्री हेतु उपलब्ध हैं ।

[संदर्भ सीईडी 3 /गजट ]

सतीश कुमार जैन, निदेशक एवं प्रमुख ( सिविल इंजीनियरी ) 5674

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 11 , 2005/ JYAISTHA 21 , 1927 [PART II-SEC. 3 ( ii) ]

New Delhi , the 26th May, 2005

S.O. 2057. In pursuance of clause (b) of sub - rule ( 1) ofRule (1) of Rule 7 of the Bureau of Indian Standards Rules , 1987 , the Bureau of Indian Standards hereby notifies that the Indian Standards , particulars of which are given in the Schedule hereto annexed have been established on the date indicated against each :

SCHEDULE

Date of Established Sl . No. & Year of the Indian No. Standards Established

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

(2)

(4)

(1)

(3)

IS 774 : 1984

1 July, 2005 1. IS 774 : 2004 Specification for Flushing Cisterns for Water Closets and Urinals (Other than Plastic Cisterns) (Fifth Revision)

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

[Ref. CED 3 /Gazette]

S.K. JAIN, Director & Head (Civil Engineering)

नई दिल्ली, 27 मई , 2005

का.आ. 2058.- भारती// मान६, ब्यूरो नियम , 1987 के नियम 7 के उपनियम ( 1 ) के खंड ( ख ) के अनुसरण में भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो एतद्वारा अधिसूचित करता है कि नीचे अनुसूची में दिये गये मानक ( कों ) में संशोधन किया गया/किये गये हैं :-

अनुसूची

संशोधन की संख्या और तिथि संशोधन लागू होने की तिथि क्रम संशोधित भारतीय मानक( कों ) की संख्या और वर्ष संख्या

(2)

(3)

(1)

(4)

4जनवरी 2005 1. 303 : 1989

3दिसम्बर 2004

9 मई 2005 2. 14587 : 1998

3मार्च , 2005

इस संशोधनों की प्रतियां भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो , मानक भवन, १ बहादुर शाह जफर मार्ग , नई दिल्ली-110002, क्षेत्रीय कार्यालयों, नई दिल्ली, कोलकाता, चण्डीगढ़ , चेन्नई, मुम्बई तथा शाखा कार्यालयों अहमदाबाद, बंगलौर, भोपाल, भुवनेश्वर, कोयम्बतूर, गुवाहाटी, हैदराबाद, जयपुर, कानपुर, पटना, पूणे तथा तिरूवनन्तापुरम में बिक्री हेतु उपलब्ध हैं ।

[संदर्भ सीईडी/राजपत्र ]

सतीश कुमार जैन , निदेशक एवं प्रमुख ( सिविल इंजीनियरी ) 5675 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : जून 11 , 2005/ज्येष्ठ 21 , 1927

New Delhi , the 27th May , 2005

S.O. 2058. In pursuance of clause (b) of sub - rule ( 1 ) of Rule ( 1 ) of Rules 7 of the Bureau of Indian Standards Rules , 1987, the Bureau of Indian Standards hereby notifies that amendments to the Indian Standards , particulars of which are given in the Schedule hereto annexed have been issued :

SCHEDULE

Sl . No. and year of the Indian Standards

No.

No. and year of the amendment

Date from which the amendment shall have effect

(3)

(4)

(1) (2)

1. 303 1989

3 , December , 2004

4, January , 2005 2. 14587 : 1998

3, March , 2004

9, May 2005 Copy of this Standard is available for sale with the Bureau of Indian Standards , Manak Bhavan , 9 , Bahadur Shah Zafar Marg , New Delhi - 110002 and Regional Offices: New Delhi , Kolkata, Chandigarh , Chennai , Mumbai and also Branch Offices : Ahmedabad, Bangalore , Bhopal , Bhubaneshwar , Coimbatore , Guwahati , Hyderabad , Jaipur, Kanpur, Nagpur , Patna , Pune , Thiruvananthapuram .

[ Ref. CED/Gazette]

S.K. JAIN , Director & Head ( Civil Engineering )

नई दिल्ली, 2 जून , 2005

का.आ. 2059.- भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो नियम 1987 के नियम 7 के उपनियम ( 1 ) के खंड ( ख ) के अनुसरण में भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो एतद्वारा अधिसूचित करता है कि नीचे अनुसूची में दिये गये मानक ( कों ) में संशोधन किया गया/किये गये हैं : -

अनुसूची

संशोधन की संख्या और तिथि संशोधन लागू हाने की तिथि क्रम संशोधित भारतीय मानक की संख्या और वर्ष संख्या

(3)

(4)

(1) (2)

2अप्रैल 2005

31मई 2005 1. 2083 : 1991- क्षणदीप विशिष्टि । दूसरा पुनरीक्षण

इस संशोधनों की प्रतियां भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो, मानक भवन, १ , बहादुर शाह जफर मार्ग, नई दिल्ली-110002 , क्षेत्रीय कार्यालयों, नई दिल्ली, कोलकाता, चण्डीगढ़ , चेन्नई, मुम्बई तथा शाखा कार्यालयों अहमदाबाद, बंगलौर, भोपाल , भुवनेश्वर, कोयम्बतूर, गुवाहाटी, हैदराबाद, जयपुर, कानपुर, पटना, पूणे तथा तिरूवनन्तापुरम में बिक्री हेतु उपलब्ध हैं ।

[संदर्भ ईटी 10/टी-7 ]

पी.के. मुखर्जी, वैज्ञा. एफ एवं प्रमुख ( विद्युत तकनीकी )

New Delhi , the 2nd June , 2005

S.O. 2059. In pursuance of clause (b) of sub - rule ( 1) of Rule ( 1 ) of Rules 7 of the Bureau of Indian Standards Rules, 1987 , the Bureau of Indian Standards hereby notifies that amendinent to the Indian Standards , particulars of which are given in the Schedule hereto annexed have been issued :

SCHEDULE

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

No. and year of the anmendment

Date from which the amendment shall have effect

(2)

(3)

(4)

(1)

2, April, 2005

31, May 2005 1. 2083 : 1991 Flashlights-Specification (Second revision )

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

[ Ref . ET 10 /T -7 ]

P.K. MUKHERJEE , Sc . - F & Head ( Electrotechnical ) 5676

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 11 , 2005/ JYAISTHA 21 , 1927

[PART II-SEC . 3 (i) ]

नई दिल्ली, 1 जून, 2005

का.आ. 2060.- केन्द्रीय सरकार का, विहित प्राधिकारी द्वारा उसे प्रस्तुत रिपोर्ट पर विचार करने के पश्चात् यह समाधान हो गया है कि उक्त रिपोर्ट में वर्णित मांडल ( नीचे दी गई आकृति देखें ) बाट और माप मानक अधिनियम , 1976 ( 1976 का 60 ) तथा बाट और माप मानक (मॉडलों का अनुमोदन ) नियम, 1987 के उपबंधों के अनुरूप है और इस बात की संभावना है कि लगातार प्रयोग की अवधि में भी उक्त मॉडल यथार्थता बनाए रखेगा और विभिन्न परिस्थितियों में उपयुक्त सेवा प्रदान करता रहेगा;

अतः अब केन्द्रीय सरकार, उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 की उपधारा ( 7 ) और ( 8 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए मैसर्स टेक्नोवेग इंडिया, 1/11447 , सुभाष पार्क एक्सटेंशन, गली सं. 2 , नवीन शाहदरा , दिल्ली-110032 द्वारा विनिर्मित मध्यम यथार्थता ( यथार्थता वर्ग- III ) वाले " टेक्नोवेग " श्रृंखला के स्वतः सूचक, अस्वचालित , अंकक सूचन सहित तोलन उपकरण ( टेबल टाप प्रकार ) के मॉडल का, जिसके ब्राण्ड का नाम " टेक्नोवेग " है ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/09/ 2004/514 समनुदेशित किया गया है, अनुमोदन प्रमाण- पत्र जारी और प्रकाशित करती है;

उक्त मॉडल विकृति गेज प्रकार का भार सेल आधारित अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण है । इसकी अधिकतम क्षमता 24 कि. ग्रा. और न्यूनतम क्षमता 100 ग्रा. है । सत्यापन मापमान अन्तराल ( ई ) का मान 5 ग्रा . है । इसमें एक आधेयतुलन युक्ति है जिसका शत- प्रतिशत व्यवकलनात्मक धारित आधेयतुलन प्रभाव है । प्रकाश उत्सर्जक डायोड ( एल ई डी ) प्रदर्श परिणाम उपदर्शित करता है । उपकरण 230 वोल्ट, 50 हर्ट्ज प्रत्यावर्ती धारा विद्युत प्रदाय पर कार्य करता है ।

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

[फा. सं० डब्ल्यूएम -21 ( 12) /2002 ]

पी. ए. कृष्णामूर्ति , निदेशक, विधिक माप विज्ञान 5677 [भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र: जून 11 , 2005/ज्येष्ठ 21 , 1927

New Delhi , the 1st June, 2005

S.O. 2060.- Whereas the Central Government , after considering the report submitted to it by the prescribed authority, is satisfied that the Model described in the said report (see the figure given below) is in conformity with the provisions of the Standards of Weights and Measures Act , 1976 ( 60 of 1976 ) and the Standards of Weights and Measures ( Approval of Models) Rules , 1987 and the said Model is likely to maintain its accuracy over periods of sustained use and to render accurate service under varied conditions;

Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by Sub- sections (7) and ( 8) of Section 36 of the said Act , the Central Government hereby issues and publishes the certificate of approval of the Model of non - automatic (Table top type ) weighing instrument with digital indication of " Technoweigh " series of medium accuracy ( Accuracy class- III) and with brand name " Technoweigh " ( herein referred to as the said model) , manufactured by M/ s. Technoweigh India , 1/11447 , Subhash Park Extension , Street No. 2 , Naveen Shadara , Delhi - 110032 and which is assigned the approval mark IND/09/2004/514;

In addition to sealing the stamping plate , sealing shall also be done to prevent the opening of the machine for fraudulent practices .

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

[ F. No. WM -21 ( 12)/ 2002 ]

P. A. KRISHNAMOORTHY , Director of Legal Metrology 5678

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 11 , 2005/ JYAISTHA 21 , 1927

[PART II- SEC . 3 ( ii) ]

नई दिल्ली, 1 जून, 2005

का.आ. 2061.- केन्द्रीय सरकार का, विहित प्राधिकारी द्वारा उसे प्रस्तुत रिपोर्ट पर विचार करने के पश्चात् यह समाधान हो गया है कि उक्त रिपोर्ट में वर्णित मॉडल ( नीचे दी गई आकृति देखें ) बाट और माप मानक अधिनियम, 1976 ( 1976 का 60 ) तथा बाट और माप मानक (मॉडलों का अनुमोदन) नियम, 1987 के उपबंधों के अनुरूप है और इस बात की संभावना है कि लगातार प्रयोग की अवधि में भी उक्त मॉडल यथार्थता बनाए रखेगा और विभिन्न परिस्थितियों में उपयुक्त सेवा प्रदान करता रहेगा ;

अतः अब केन्द्रीय सरकार, उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 की उपधारा ( 7 ) और ( 8 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए मैसर्स टेक्नोवेग इंडिया, 1/11447 , सुभाष पार्क एक्सटेंशन, गली सं. 2 , नवीन शाहदरा, दिल्ली -110032 द्वारा विनिर्मित मध्यम यर्थाथता ( यथार्थता वर्ग- III ) वाले " टेक्नोवेग " श्रृंखला के स्वतः सूचक, अस्वचालित , अंकक सूचन सहित तोलन उपकरण ( प्लेटफार्म प्रकार ) के मॉडल का, जिसके ब्राण्ड का नाम " टेक्नोवेग " है ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/09/2004/ 515 समनुदेशित किया गया है, अनुमोदन प्रमाण- पत्र जारी और प्रकाशित करती है;

उक्तमॉडल विकृति गेज प्रकार का भार सेल आधारित अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण है । इसकी अधिकतम क्षमता 2000 कि. ग्रा. और न्यूनतम क्षमता 4 कि.ग्रा . है । सत्यापन मापमान अन्तराल ( ई ) का मान 200 ग्रा. है । इसमें एक आधेयतुलन युक्ति है जिसका शत - प्रतिशत व्यवकलनात्मक धारित आधेयतुलन प्रभाव है । प्रकाश उत्सर्जक डायोड ( एल ई डी) प्रदर्श परिणाम उपदर्शित करता है । उपकरणा 230 वोल्ट , 50 हर्ट्ज प्रत्यावर्ती धारा विद्युत प्रदाय पर कार्य करता है ।

स्टाम्पिंग प्लेट को मुद्रांकित करने के अतिरिक्त कपटपूर्ण व्यवहारों के लिए मशीन को खोलने से रोकने के लिए सीलबंद भी किया जाएगा । और केन्द्रीय सरकार उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 की उप - धारा ( 12 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए यह घोषणा करती है कि उक्त मॉडल के अनुमोदन के इस प्रमाणपत्र के अंतर्गत उसी विनिर्माता द्वारा उसी सिद्धान्त , डिजाइन के अनुसार और उसी सामग्री से जिससे अनुमोदित मॉडल विनिर्मित किया गया है , विनिर्मित उसी श्रृंखला के वैसे ही मेक, यथार्थता और कार्यपालन के तोलन उपकरण भी होंगे जो 5 ग्रा . या उससे अधिक के " ई " मान के लिए 500 से 10,000 तक की रेंज में सत्यापन मान अंतराल ( एन ) सहित 50 कि.ग्रा. से अधिक और 5000 कि.ग्रा. तक की अधिकतम क्षमता वाले हैं और " ई " मान 1 × 10 , 2 × 10* या 5 × 10* , के हैं, जो धनात्मक या ऋणात्मक पूर्णांक या शून्य के समतुल्य हैं ।

[फा. सं ० डब्ल्यूएम-21 ( 12 )/2002 ] पी. ए. कृष्णामूर्ति, निदेशक, विधिक माप विज्ञान 5679 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : जून 11 , 2005 /ज्येष्ठ 21 , 1927

New Delhi , the 1st June , 2005

S.O. 2061. Whereas the Central Government , after considering the report submitted to it by the prescribed authority, is satisfied that the Model described in the said report ( see the figure given below) is in conformity with the provisions of the Standards of Weights and Measures Act , 1976 ( 60 of 1976 ) and the Standards of Weights and Measures (Approval of Models) Rules , 1987 and the said Model is likely to maintain its accuracy over periods of sustained use and to render accurate service under varied conditions ;

Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by Sub- sections ( 7) and (8) of Section 36 of the said Act , the Central Government hereby issues and publishes the certificate of approval of the Model of the self indicating non -automatic (Platform type ) weighing instrument with digital indication of " Technoweigh " series of medium accuracy ( Accuracy class - III ) and with brand name " Technoweigh " (herein referred to as the said model) . manufactured by M/ s Technoweigh India , 1/11447 , Subhash Park Extension , Street No. 2 , Naveen Shahdara , Delhi - 110032 and which is assigned the approval mark IND / 09 /2004 / 515 ;

The said model ( see the figure given below ) a strain gauge type load cell based weighing instrument with a maximum capacity of 2000kg . and minimum capacity of 4kg . The verification scale interval ( e) is 200g . It has a tare device with a 100 percent subtractive retained tare effect . The Light Emitting Diode (LED) display indicates the weighing result. The instrument operates on 230V, 50Hertz alternative current power supply .

In addition to sealing the stamping plate , sealing shall also be done to prevent the opening of the machine for fraudulent practices .

Further, in exercise of the powers conferred by Sub- section ( 12 ) of Section 36 of the said Act , the Central Government hereby declares that this certificate of approval of the said model shall also cover the weighing instrument of same series with maximum capacity above 50 kg . and up to 5000kg and with number of verification scale interval (n ) in the range of 500 to 10,000 for ' e' value of 5g or more and with ' e ' value of 1 × 10k , 2 × 10k or 5 × 10k , k being the positive or negative whole number or equal to zero manufactured by the same manufacturer with the same principle , design and with the same materials with which , the said approved model has been manufactured.

[F. No. WM-21 ( 12)/2002 ]

P. A. KRISHNAMOORTHY, Director of Legal Metrology 1636GI/20054 5680

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 11 , 2005/ JYAISTHA 21 , 1927

[PART II-SEC. 3 ( ii) ]

नई दिल्ली, 1 जून, 2005

का.आ. 2062.- केन्द्रीय सरकार का, विहित प्राधिकारी द्वारा उसे प्रस्तुत रिपोर्ट पर विचार करने के पश्चात् यह समाधान हो गया है कि उक्त रिपोर्ट में वर्णित मॉडल ( नीचे दी गई आकृति देखें ) बाट और माप मानक अधिनियम , 1976 ( 1976 का 60 ) तथा बाट और माप मानक (मॉडलों का अनुमोदन ) नियम , 1987 के उपबंधों के अनुरूप है और इस बात की संभावना है कि लगातार प्रयोग की अवधि में भी उक्त मॉडल यथार्थता बनाए रखेगा और विभिन्न परिस्थितियों में उपयुक्त सेवा प्रदान करता रहेगा;

अतः अब केन्द्रीय सरकार, उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 की उपधारा ( 7 ) और ( 8 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए मैसर्स टेक्नोवेग इंडिया , 1/11447 , सुभाष पार्क एक्सटेंशन , गली सं. 2 , नवीन शाहदरा , दिल्ली -110032 द्वारा विनिर्मित मध्य यथार्थता ( यथार्थता वर्ग- III ) वाले " टेक्नोवेग " श्रृंखला के स्वतः सूचक, अस्वचालित, अंकक सूचन सहित तोलन उपकरण ( तुला चौकी के लिए संपरिवर्तन प्रकार ) के मॉडल का, जिसके ब्राण्ड का नाम " टेक्नोवेग " है ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/09/2004/516 समनुदेशित किया गया है, अनुमोदन प्रमाण- पत्र जारी और प्रकाशित करती है;

उक्त मॉडल विकृति गेज प्रकार का भार सेल आधारित अस्वचालित ( तुला चौकी के लिए संपरिवर्तन किट ) प्रकार का तोलन उपकरण है । इसकी अधिकतम क्षमता 50 टन और न्यूनतम क्षमता 100 कि.ग्रा . है । सत्यापन मापमान अन्तराल ( ई ) का मान 5 कि.ग्रा. है । इसमें एक आधेयतुलन युक्ति है जिसका शत-प्रतिशत व्यकलनात्मक धारित आधेयतुलन प्रभाव है । प्रकाश उत्सर्जक डायोड ( एल ई डी ) प्रदर्श परिणाम उपदर्शित करता है । उपकरण 230 वोल्ट, 50 हर्ट्ज प्रत्यावर्ती धारा विद्युत प्रदाय पर कार्य करता है ।

म्टाभ्यिंग प्लेट को मुद्रांकित करने के अतिरिक्त कपटपूर्ण व्यवहारों के लिए मशीन को खोलने से रोकने के लिए सीलबंद भी किया जाएगा । मन्द्राय सरकार उक्त अधिनियम की

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

[फा. सं. डब्ल्यूएम -21 ( 12) / 2002 ] पी. ए. कृष्णामूर्ति, निदेशक, विधिक माप विज्ञान 5681 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : जून 11 , 2005/ज्येष्ठ 21 , 1927

New Delhi , the 1st June, 2005

S.O. 2062. Whereas the Central Government , after considering the report submitted to it by the prescribed authority , is satisfied that the Model described in the said report (see the figure given below) is in conformity with the provisions of the Standards of Weights and Measures Act , 1976 ( 60 of 1976) and the Standards of Weights and Measures ( Approval of Models) Rules , 1987 and the said Model is likely to maintain its accuracy over periods of sustained use and to render accurate service under varied conditions;

Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by Sub - sections (7) and ( 8) of Section 36 of the said Act , the Central Government hereby issues and publishes the certificate of approval of the Model of the self indicating , non - automatic ( Conversion kit for weigh bridge type ) weighing instrument with digital indication of " Technoweigh " series of medium accuracy (Accuracy class - III ) and with brand name " Technoweigh " (herein after referred to as the said model ) , inanufactured by M/ s . Technoweigh India , 1/11447 , Subhash Park Extension , Street No. 2, Naveen Shadara , Delhi - 110032 and which is assigned the approval mark IND/ 09/ 2004/ 516 ;

The said inodel ( see the figure given below) a strain gauge load cell based type (conversion kit for weigh bridge) weighing instrument with a maximum capacity of 50 tonne and minimum capacity of 100 kg . The verification scale interval ( e) is 5kg . It has a tare device with a 100 per cent subtractive retained tare effect . The Light Emitting Diode display indicates the weighing result . The instrument operates on 230 Volts , and 50 Hertz alternative current power supply.

In addition to sealing the stamping plate , sealing shall be done to prevent the opening of the machine for fraudulent practices .

Further, in exercise of the powers conferred by Sub- section ( 12) of Section 36 of the said Act , the Central Government hereby declares that this certificate of approval of the said model shall also cover the weighing instrument of similar make , and performance of same series with maximum capacity above 5 tonne and up to 100 tonne and with number of verification scale interval ( n) in the range of 500 to 10,000 for e ' value of 1 k or more and with ' e ' value 1 × 10k , 2x10 or 5 × 10k , k being positive or negative whole number or equal to zero , manufactured by the same manufacturer in accordance with the same principle , design and with the same materials with which , the said approved model has been manufactured .

[F. No. WM -21 ( 12)/2002

P. A. KRISHNAMOORTHY, Director of Legal Metrology 5682

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 11 , 2005 /JYAISTHA 21 , 1927

[PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii) ]

नईदिल्ली, 1 जून , 2005

का.आ. 2063.-केन्द्रीय सरकार का, विहित प्राधिकारी द्वारा उसे प्रस्तुत रिपोर्ट पर विचार करने के पश्चात् यह समाधान हो गया है कि उक्त रिपोर्ट में वर्णित मॉडल ( नीचे दी गई आकृति देखें ) बाट और माप मानक अधिनियम, 1976 ( 1976 का 60 ) तथा बाट और माप मानक (मॉडलों का अनुमोदन ) नियम , 1987 के उपबंधों के अनुरूप है और इस बात की संभावना है कि लगातार प्रयोग की अवधि में भी उक्त मॉडल यथार्थता बनाए रखेगा और विभिन्न परिस्थितियों में उपयुक्त सेवा प्रदान करता रहेगा;

अतः अब केन्द्रीय सरकार, उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 की उपधारा ( 7 ) और ( 8 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए मैसर्स बजरंग दास स्केल , शिवाजी नगर, सावरकुंडला-364515 गुजरात द्वारा विनिर्मित यांत्रिक काउंटर के मॉडल का, जिसके ब्राण्ड का नाम " बजरंग दास स्केल " है (जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/09/ 2005 / 15 समनुदेशित किया गया है , अनुमोदन प्रमाण- पत्र जारी और प्रकाशित करती है;

उक्त माउल (नीचे दी गई आकृति देखें ) एक यांत्रिक काउंटर मशीन है । इसकी अधिकतम क्षमता 10 कि.ग्रा . है ।

Bajarangdas Scale

और, केन्द्रीय सरकार उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 की उप - धारा ( 12 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए यह घोषणा करती है कि उक्त मॉडल के अनुमोदन के इस प्रमाणपत्र के अंतर्गत उसी विनिर्माता द्वारा उसी सिद्धान्त, डिजाइन के अनुसार और उसी सामग्री से, जिससे उक्त यांत्रिक मशीन का भी निर्माण किया गया है , विनिर्मित उसी श्रृंखला के वैसे ही मेक, यथार्थता और कार्यपालन के तोलन उपकरण भी होंगे जो 500 प्रा. से 50 कि.ग्रा . तक की अधिकतम रेंज में है ।

[ फा. सं. डब्ल्यू एम -21 ( 277) /2004 ] पी. ए. कृष्णामूर्ति, निदेशक, विधिक माप विज्ञान 5683 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) 」

भारत का राजपत्र : जून 11 , 2005 /ज्येष्ठ 21 , 1927

New Delhi , the 1st June , 2005

S.O. 2063.- Whereas the Central Governnient , after considering the report submitted to it by the prescribed authority, is satisfied that the Model described in the said report ( see the figure given below) is in conformity with the provisions of the Standards of Weights and Measures Act , 1976 ( 60 of 1976 ) and the Standards of Weights and Measures (Approval of Models) Rules , 1987 and the said Model is likely to maintain its accuracy over periods of sustained use and to render accurate service under varied conditions ;

Now, therefore , in exercise of the powers conferred by Sub - sections ( 7) and ( 8) of Section 36 of the said Act , the Central Government hereby issues and publishes the certificate of approval of the Model of mechanical counter machine (hereinafter referred to as the said model ) , with brand name " BUJRANG DAS SCALE " , manufactured by M/ s . BUJRANG DAS SCALE , Shivaji Nagar , Savarkundla - 364515 , (Gujarat ) and which is assigned the approval mark IND/09/2005/ 15 ;

kg. The said model ( see the figure given below ) is a mechanical counter machine with a maximum capacity of 10

Bajarangdas Scale

[F. No. WM - 21 ( 277 ) /2004 ]

P. A. KRISHNAMOORTHY , Director of Legal Metrology 5684

[PART II-SEC. 3 (ii) ] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 11 , 2005 /JYAISTHA 21 , 1927

पेद्रोलियम और प्राकृतिक गैस मंत्रालय

नई दिल्ली, 3 जून , 2005

का. आ. 2064.- केन्द्रीय सरकार ने पेद्रोलियम और खनिज पाइपलाइन (भूमि में उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन) अधिनियम 1962 (1962 का 50) (जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात उक्त अधिनियम कहा गया है ) की धारा 3 की उपधारा ( 1 ) के अधीन जारी की गई भारत सरकार के पेद्रोलियम और प्राकृतिक गैस मंत्रालय की अधिसूचना संख्या का . आ . 434 तारीख 04 फरवरी , 2005, जामनगर भोपाल और काकीनाडा हैदराबाद- गोवा पाइपलाइन को आपस में जोडने के लिए गैस द्रान्सपोर्टेशन एंड इन्फ्रास्ट्रक्चर कम्पनी लिमीटेड द्वारा एक पाइपलाइन बिछाने के प्रयोजन के लिए उक्त अधिसूचना के संलग्न अनूसूची में विनिर्दिष्ट भूमि में उपयोग के अधिकार के अर्जन के अपने आशय की घोषणा की थी;

और , उक्त राजपत्र अधिसूचना की प्रतियाँ जनता को तारीख 26 फरवरी , 2005 को उपलब्ध करा दी गई थी;

और पाइपलाइन बिछाने के संबंध में जनता की ओर से प्राप्त आक्षेपों पर सक्षम प्राधिकारी द्वारा विचार कर लिया गया है और अननुज्ञात कर दिया गया;

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

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

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

और, केन्द्रीय सरकार उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 6 की उपधारा (4) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए , यह निदेश देती है कि उक्त भूमि में पाइपलाइन विछाने के संबंध मे उपयोग का अधिकार इस घोपणा के प्रकाशन की तारीख से केन्द्रीय सरकार मे निहित होने के वजाए, सभी विल्लंगमों से मुक्त, गैस द्रान्सपोर्टेशन एंड इन्फ्रास्ट्रक्चर कंपनी लिमिटेड में निहित होगा । 5685 [भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र: जून 11 , 2005 /ज्येष्ठ 21 , 1927

तहसील : हांसोट

राज्य : गुजरात

जिल्ला : मरुच

उत्तर ओ यु अजित करने के लिये क्षेत्रफल गांव का नाम

सर्वे नंबर / ब्लोक नं

हेकटर

आरे

886

1ओम्त

885

884

889

870

838

883

839

840

842

843

844/

823

822

819

621

808

805

804

803

1001

1002

1003

1005

1007

1018

1017

1016/अ

1016/व

1034

1014

1015

1036

1037

653

652

651

679

680

648

647

646

645

462

484

485

486

499

1004

500

424

422

18-

423/अ

421

44-

247

260

259

250

258

253

00 5686

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 11 , 2005/ JYAISTHA 21 , 1927

251 ओभा ( निरंतर)

286

204

192

191/अ

190

123 2पर्यंत

124

125

141

120

143

118

117

218

220

221

222

227

228

233/ब

232

258

264

256

266

271

272

273

330

274

329

280

285

287

288

291

413

415/1

415/2

411

410/

409

408

109 3कुडादरा

108

107

108

104

121

122

120

119

125

561 4 रोहीद

200

199

198

197

195

194

193

192

191

190

189/अ

[PART II-SEC . 3 (1) ] 4

49 [भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : जून 11 , 2005/ज्येष्ठ 21 , 1927

188/ तैशीय ( निरंतर )

187/अ

185

184/अ

153

159

150

149

145/अ

134/अ

133/

135

107/3/1

108/अ

108/

105/

104/4/1

104/4/2

109/г

109/

103/व

103/अ

104/अ

550

538

534

533

532/

532/अ

520

609

507

167

167 अ

166

168

169

72/

72/ज

170

171

202

203

205

204

217

216

223

224

235

230

234

231/अ

231/

232/

233

219

253

252

251

250

249

4 1636GI/2005-5

5687 3

00 ,

22 5688

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 11 , 2005/JYAISTHA 21 , 1927

28/अ कलम (निरंतर)

143 7 मांगरोल

100

112

114/

114/अ

115

96/अ

125

127/ व

139/

137

136

160

159

197

201

202

203

204

193

192

190

189

182

184

183

42 6 शढेरा

132

136/

133

135

134

160

161

165

166

200

197

198

199

196

251

254

265

266

267

281

279

278

269

290

291

293

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

18 5689 [भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र: जून 11 , 2005/ज्येष्ठ 21 , 1927

295

शंकेरा (निरंतर)

296

00-

347

208

334

335

333.

331

327

321

318

316

410

9उत्राज

411

412

401

तहसील: भरच

जिल्ला: मशुच

राज्य: गुजरात

आर ओ यु अजित करने के लिये क्षेत्रफल गांव का नाम

सर्वे नंबर / ब्लोक नं

हेकटर आरे

432

1 भाडभूत

428

429

430

382

405

404

391

32.

386

393

392

331/अ

331/ब

327

332

333

334

321

317

319

312

313

248/व

248/

248/प्र

246/ अ

247

245

244

204

205

168

185

164

170

172

173

156/14

156/24

156/3

158

157

155

142/

142/ अ

49 5690

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 11 , 2005 / JYAISTHA 21 , 1927

144 मारुमूत ( निरंतर)

37 2 नवेधा

170 3मुवा

159

158/4/1

31 4 मदडा

146

101

102

127

128

132

133

135

131

130

167/

168

169

170

171 (५)

171 (4)

219(4)

220

233

221

222

229

-228

227

226/अ

226/व

224

816 5 ડૉમનેસ્વર

256- 6कुरना

257

258-अ

258-

259

260

263

270

271

289

80 7चोलाद

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

80 [भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : जून 11 , 2005 /ज्येष्ठ 21 , 1927

79 चोलाद(निरंतर)

64/ज

66/

66/अ

32/प्र

19/५

261

279

257 अ

257

262/ तहसील: वागरा

जिल्ला: मगुच गांव का नाम

सर्वे नंबर / ब्लोक नं 1 मेरसम

480

472

473

421

422/अ

422/व

423

428

429

430

432

427

433

434

406

403

405

380

261

260

259

258

252

233

223

222

189

190

191

180

179

178

161

160

162

163

137/2

136

5691 3

राज्य : गुजरात

आर ओ यु अजित करने के लिये क्षेत्रफल

हेकटर आरे

00 5692

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 11 , 2005/ JYAISTHA 21. 1927

138 मेरसम ( निरंतर)

131

132

133

40 2जुनेद

260

257/1

258

70 3 आंकोट

68/प्र

75श्र

77/

79/अ

79/

64/

64/अ

31/

17/ -2

33/9 4वस्ती खंडाली

340

338

342

343

344/अ

344/

347

350

349

351/41

351/2

353

356

362

361/

367/ अ + द + 8

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

42 [भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ].

5693

भारत का राजपत्र: जून 11 , 2005/ज्येष्ठ 21 , 1927

61 क्स्ती खंडाली (निरंतर)

85/अ

85/

82 5ओरा

392/ज

392/ -1

398

397

409

399

402

403

404

408

406/1

490

345अ

343अ

343

342// 1

344/

344/ अ/ 1

344/ अ/ 2

326/

328

329

332/4/2

275

274

273

272

205/अ

205/

208/

206

202

207

200

212

218

217

222

215

182

181

180

179

178

177

176

175

174

172

171

170

169

10 3

48.

00 ′

03 5694

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: JUNE 11 , 2005 / JYAISTHA 21 , 1927

168 ओरा ( निरंतर)

187

166

165

164

163

182

161

160

159

158

157

155

154

138अ

138

139

141

143

144 तहसील : आमोद

जिल्ला: भरच गांव का नाम

सर्वे नंबर / ब्लोक मं

80 1 समीयाला

54/व

55/

55/अ

67/अ

181 2 तणछा

182

184

185/

268

269

267

266

263

265

262

261

248

333/ अ

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

राज्य: गुजरात

आर ओ यु अजित करने के लिये क्षेत्रफल

हेकटर आरे

चो.मी

86 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र: जून 11 , 2005 /ज्येष्ठ 21 , 1927

2 तमसा (निरंतर)

334

335

362

363

36.

365

359

374

375

192 3बोडका

194

198

187

188

186

185

146 4 आसनेरा

133

135

140

138

143

141

142

149

166

165

164

163

323

322

320

319

321

317

316

315

314

262

264

263

265

266

267

268

135/प 5 तेगवा

136

137

142

134/प

133/प

3 6 सोनामा

40 /प

12 1636GI/ A

5695 4

40 5696

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 11 , 2005 / JYAISTHA 21 , 1927

18 सोनामा (निरंतर)

74 7 श्रीकोठी

71/अ

71/

100 8 रोढ

101

102

103

302

303/प

303/

304

305

308/अ

268

266 9 अदवाला

134

133

175

135

136

173/ अ

137

138

139

140

141

159

147

148

157

150

151

156

152

155

205

202

[PART II-SEC . 3( ii) ]

58 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र: जून 11 , 2005/ज्येष्ठ 21 , 1927

203 अदवाला (निरंतर)

204

207

208

209

210

219

224

225/

231

237

236

235

248

247

248 10चकलाद

374

375

376

373

361

360

363

357

136 11 दादापोर

141

142

147

148

149

151

107

106

102

101

55/अ

29 तहसील: जंबूसर

जिल्ला: भरुच गांव का नाम

सर्वे नंबर / ब्लोक नं 1

32 1 बोजादरा

35/अ

5697 3

राज्य : गुजरात

आर ओ यु अजित करने के लिये क्षेत्रफल

आरे

हेकटर

51 [PART II S. 3 (ii ) ] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: JUNE 11 , 2005 /JYAISTHA 21. 1927

5698

मार (पिकर)

141

132

138

133

134

135

124

1572

158

562

583

581

553/

554

527

532

529

530

499

498

440

434

435

427

423

428

421

419

420

418

409

410

411

[फा. सं. एल-14014/54/2004-जी.पी. ]

एस. बी. मण्डल , अवर सचिव MINISTRY OF PETROLEUM AND NATURAL GAS

New Delhi , the 3rd June , 2005

S. O. 2064.- Whereas by notification of the Government of India in the Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Gas number S.O. 434 , dated the 04th February, 2005 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) (hereafter referred to as the said Act), the Central Goverment declared its intention to acquire the right of user in the land , specified in the Schule appended to that notification for the purpose of laying pipeline for transportation of natural gas through an interconnection between Jamnagar Bhopal and Kakinada Hydrabad -Goa Pipeline by Gas Transportation and Infrastructure Company Limited;

And , whereas the copies of the said Gazette notification were made available to the public at the 26th February , 2005 ;

The objection received from the public to the laying of the Pipeline have been considered anddissolved by the Competent Authority;

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

[भाग II- खण्ड 3( ii ) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : जून 11 , 2005/ज्येष्ठ 21 , 1927

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

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

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

SCHEDULE

District: Bharuch Tehsil: Hansot

SurveyNo./BlockNo.

NameoftheVillage

2 1

886 1.Obha

885

884

869

870

838

863

839

840

842

843

844/B

823

822

819

821

806

805

804

803

1001

1002

1003

1005

1007

1018

1017

1016/A

1016/B

1034

1014

1015

1036

1037

653

652

651

679

680

648

647 State:Gujarat

Area to be acquired for ROU Hectare Are

Sq.m

5 3

30 00

25 00

50 00

59 .00

99 00

20 00

17 00

34 00

22 00

17 00

40 00

50 00

00 00

59 00

15 00

76 00

91 00

47 00

51 00

00 5700

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 11 , 2005 / JYAISTHA 21 , 1927

2 Obha( Cont'd)

646

645

482

484

485

486

499

1004

500

424

422

423/A

421

247

260

259

250

258

253

251

286

204

192

191/A

190

123 2.Parvat

124

125

141

120

143

118

117

218

220

221

222

227

228

233/B

232

258

264

256

266

271

272

273

330

274

329

280

285

287

288

291

413

415/1

415/2

411

410/B

409

408

109 3. Kudadara

108

107

106

104

121

122

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

00 [भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

5701

भारत का राजपत्र: जून 11 , 2005/ज्येष्ठ 21 , 1927

120 3.Kudadara (contd.)

119

125

561 4.Rohid

200

199

198

197

195

194

193

192

191

190

189/A

188/A

187/A

185

184/A

153

159

150

149-

145/A

134/A

133/B

135

107/A/1

108/A

108/B

105/B

104/B/1

104/B/2

108/A

109/B

103/B

103/A

104/A

550 5.Walner

538

534

533

532/B

532/A

520

509

507

167 C 6.Kalam

167 A

166

165

168

169

172/B

172/A

170

171

202

203

205

204

217 3

80 5702

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 11 , 2005/JYAISTHA 21 , 1927

[PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii) ]

216

6. Kalam ( contd .)

223

224

235

230

234

231/A

231/B

232/B

233

219

253

252

251

250

249

28/A

143

07 7.Mangrol

100

112

114/B

114/A

115

96/A

125

127/B

139/P

137

136

160

159

197

201

202

203

204

193

192

190

189

182

184

183

8. Shahera

132

136/B

133

135

134

160

161

165

166

200

197

03 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii ) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : जून 11 , 2005/ज्येष्ठ 21 , 1927

5703

198

Shahera( Cont'd )

199

196

251

254

285

286

287

281

279

278

289

290

201

293

295

206

347

298

334

335

333

331

327

321

318

410

9.Utraj

411

412

401

District : Bharuch

State:Gujarat

Tehsil:Bharuch

Area to be acquired for ROU

Sürvey No Block No.

NameoftheVillage

Are

Hectare

Sq.m

432

1.Bhadbhut

428

429

430

382

405

404

391

386

393

392

331/A

331/B

327

332

333

334

321

317

319

312

313

246/B

248/B

248/A

246/A

247

245

244

204

205

166

165

164

1636GI/2005-7 5704

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 11 , 2005/JYAISTHA 21 , 1927

[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii) ]

5 Bhadbhut( Cont'd)

170

172

173

156/1P

156/2P

156/3 P

158P

157

155

142/B

142/A

144

2.Navetha

170

34 3.Bhuva

159

158/P/1

4.Aamdada

148

101

102

127

128

132

133

135

131

130

167/B

168

169

170

171(P)

171( P)

219(P)

220

233

221

222

229

228

227

226/A

226/B

224

816

66 5. Amleshwar

256-A

90 6. Kurla

257

258-A

258-B

00 भारत का राजपत्र: जून 11 , 2005 /ज्येष्ठ 21 , 1927

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

259 6. KURALA( Cont )

260

263

270

271

260 7.Cholad

80/P

81 Cholad

64/A

66/B

66/A

32/A

19/A

261

279

257A

257 B

262/B

District: Bharuch Tehell: Vagra

Name ofthe Village

SurveyNo./BlockNo.

480 1. Bherasam

472

473

421

422/A

422/B

423

428

429

430

432

427

433

434

406

403

405

380

261

260

259

258

252

233

223

222

189

190

191

180

179

178

161

5705 4

.00

State:Gujarat

Area to be acquired for ROU

Hectare Are

Sq.m

00 5706

[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii ) ] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 11 , 2005/ JYAISTHA 21 , 1927

160

Bherasam( Cont'd)

162

163

137/2

136

138

131

132

133

2.Juned

260

257/1

256

3.Ankot

68/A

75B

77 /B

59.

79/A

79/B

64/B

64/A

31/P

17/ P- II

4.Vasti Khandall

339

340

336

342

343

344/A

344/B

347

350

349

351/P1

351/P2

353

356

362

361/B

367/A+B +C

60 5707 [भाग II-खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र: जून 11 , 2005/ज्येष्ठ 21 , 1927

Vasti Khandali ( Cont'd )

85/A

85/B

10 5.Ora

392/A

392/B- 1

398

397

409

399

402

403

404

408

406/1

.70

490

345A

343 A

343B

342/ B/1

344/B

344/A/1

344/A/ 2

326/B

328

329

332/ P / 2

275

274

273

272

205/A

205/B

208/B

206

202

207

200

212

218

217

222

215

182

181

180

179

178

177

178

175

174

172

171

170

169

03 5708

[PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii ) ] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 11 , 2005/ JYAISTHA 21 , 1927

168

Ora( Cont'd)

167

166

165

164

163

162

161

160

159

158

157

156

155

154

138A

136B

139

141

143

144

District: Bharuch

Tehsil:Amod

State:Gujarat

Area to be acquired for ROU NameoftheVillage

Survey No./Block No.

Hectare Are Sq.m

1.Samlyala

54/B

55/B

55/A

57/A

181

2.Tanchha

182

184

185/B

268

269

267

266

263

285

262

261

248

333/A [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

5709

भारत का राजपत्र: जून 11 , 2005/ज्येष्ठ 21 , 1927

333/B Tanchha( Cont'd)

334

335-

362

363

361

365

359

374

375

192 3.Bodka

194

196

187

188

186

185

146 4.Asnera

133

135

140

138

143

141

142

149 P

166

165

164

163

323

322

320

319

321

317

316

315

314

262

264

263

265

266

267

268

135/P 5.Tegwa

136

137

142

134/P

133/P

3 6.Sonama

40/P

37 3

.86

09 5710

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 11 , 2005/ JYAISTHA 21 , 1927

18 Sonoma( Cont'd )

62.

74 7.Shree Kothi

71/A

71/B

100 8.Rodh

101

102

103

302

303/P

304

305

308/A

268

266

91 9.Advala

134

133

175

135

136

173 /A

137

138

139

140

141

159

147

148

157

150

151

156

152

155

205

202

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

58 5711- [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

भारत का राजपत्र: जून 11 , 2005/ज्येष्ठ 21 , 1927

203

Advala( Cont'd )

204

207/P

208

209

210

219

224

225/B

231

237

236

235

246

247

248

374

10.Chaklad

37.5

378

373

361

360

363

357

136

11.Dadapor

141

142

147

148

149

151

107

106

102

101

55/A

District: Bharuch

State:Gujarat

Tehsil : Jambusar

Area to be acquired for ROU NameoftheVillage

SurveyNo Block No.

Hectare Are

Sq.m

5 1

1.Bojadara

35/A

1636GI/2005-8 5712

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: JUNE 11 , 2005 / JYAISTHA 21 , 1927

[PART II- SEC . 3 ( ii ) ]

Bojadara( Cont'd)

141

132

138

133

134

135

124

157/P-2

158

59 2.Kaharva

582

583

581

553/B

553/A

554

527

532

529

530

499

496

440

434

435

427

423

428

421

419

420

418

409

410

411

[ F. No. L - 14014/54/2004-G.P. ]

S. B. MANDAL , Under Secy.

नई दिल्ली, 3 जून , 2005

का. आ. 2065.- केन्द्रीय सरकार ने पेद्रोलियम और खनिज पाइपलाइन (भूमि में उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन ) अधिनियम 1962 (1962 का 50 ) ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात उक्त अधिनियम कहा गया है ) की धारा 3 की उपधाग (1) के अधीन जारी की गई भारत सरकार के पेद्रोलियम और प्राकृतिक गैस मंत्रालय की अधिसूचना संख्या का. आ . 433 तारीख 4 फरवरी, 2005 जामनगर भोपाल और काकीनाडा हैदराबाद गोवा पाइपलाइन को आपस में जोडने के लिए गैस द्रान्सपोर्टेशन एंड इन्फ्रास्ट्रक्चर कम्पनी लिमीटेड द्वारा एक पाइपलाइन बिछाने के प्रयोजन के लिए उक्त अधिसूचना के संलग्न अनूसूची में विनिर्दिष्ट भूमि में उपयोग के अधिकार के अर्जन के अपने आशय की घोषणा की थी; और , उक्त राजपत्र अधिसूचना की प्रतियाँ जनता को तारीख 28 फरवरी , 2005 को उपलब्ध करा दी गई थी;

और, सक्षम प्राधिकारी ने उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 6 की उपधारा ( 1 ) के अधीन केन्द्रीय सरकार को अपनी रिपोर्ट दे दी है ; और केन्द्रीय सरकार ने, उक्त रिपोर्ट पर विचार करने के पश्चात, और यह समाधान हो जाने पर कि उक्त भूमि में पाइपलाइन बिछाने के लिए अपेक्षित है , उसमें उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन करने का विनिश्चय किया है;

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

और , केन्द्रीय सरकार उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 6 की उपधारा (4 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए, यह निदेश देती है कि उक्त भूमि में पाइपलाइन बिछाने के संबंध मे उपयोग का अधिकार इस घोषणा के प्रकाशन की तारीख से केन्द्रीय सरकार मे निहित होने के बजाए , सभी विल्लंगमों से मुक्त, गैस द्रान्सपोर्टेशन एंड इन्फ्रास्ट्रक्चर कंपनी लिमिटेड में निहित होगा । [ भाग II- खण्ड 3( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : जून 11 , 2005/ज्येष्ठ 21 , 1927

5713

अनूसूची

बोरसद

जिला : आणंद

मंडल/तेहसिल/तालुक :

गाँव का नाम

राज्य : गुजरात

सर्वे नंबर/ब्लॉक नंबर

2 1

333

1 ) गाजना

334/1

334/2

332/ पी

327

325

324/1

323

322/ पी / 1

322/ पी / 2

314/2

314/3

320/1

320/2

319

318/1

318/2

293

292/ 1 / अ

292/ 1 /

285/ पी

286

284/3

287/2

265/ 1 / पी

265/ 1/ पी

265/2

264

266/ पी

254/1

254/2

253

252/ 2 / पी

215/ पी

215/ पी आर.ओ.यु.अर्जित करने के लिए क्षेत्रफल

सि-आर हेक्टर

आर

07 00

41 00

04 00

33 00

15 00

19 00

0.1

92 00

25 00

74 00

37 00

52 00

84 00

54 00

01 00

71 00

76 00

79 00

35 00

38 00

70 00

96 00

20 00

09 4 5714

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 11 , 2005 / JYAISTHA 21 , 1927

215 / पी 1) गाजना (निरंतर ... )

215/ पी

234/4

233/ 1 / पी

235/1

235/2

237/1

237/2

236/1

236/ 2/ पी

236/ 2 / पी

223

222/1

224/1

200

199/1

199/2

196/1

196/ 2/ पी

196/3

196/4

197

191

195

194

151

185/ पी

152/ पी / 1

164/ 1 / पी

164/2

166/ पी

167/ पी

168

169/ पी [PART II-SEC . 3 (ii) ] 3

5 00

62 00

00 00

30 00

31 00

80 00

96 00

40 00

08 00

76 00

42 00

28 00

70 00

00 00

13 00

98 00

16 00

51 00

26 00

46 00

86 00

00 00

96 00

78 00 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

5715

भारत का राजपत्र: जून 11 , 2005/ज्येष्ठ 21 , 1927

169/

1) गाजना (निरंतर ...)

170

749/2

2) सारोल

748/2/

748/2/ व

748/1

742/2

742/1

721/1

722/1

722/2

730/2

730/1

730/3

731

641/पी

643/1

644

644/पी

645/1

628

627

618/1

618/2

617

605

609/1/ पी

610

611/1

434

3) वालवोड

436

435

441

442

443

446

458/2

465

459/2

464

463

480

20 00

00 00

50 00

27 00

80 00

42 00

01 00

58 00

74 00

45 00

59 00

43 00

22 00

02 00

99 00

19 00

91 00

50 00

68 00

06 00

31 00

36 00

25 00

01 00

09 00

75 00

93 00

90 00

37 00

04 00

85 00

84 5716

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 11 , 2005/JYAISTHA 21 , 1927

462

3) वालवोड ( निरंतर ...)

1321

557/पी

558

559

561

562

572

573

574

582

581

577

592

471

4) सिस्वा

470

465/1

464/1

464/2

466

461/1

461/2

404/2/2

406/1

406/2

407

371

372

377/1

373

376/2

376/1

321

322

328

329

327

326/1

325

290/पी

287

288

286/1

[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii) ]

5 00

30 00

65 00

26 00

95 00

39 00

83 00

87 00

68 00

36 00

71 00

54 00

69 00

31 00

40 00

54 00

78 00

77 00

52 00

00 [ भाग II - खण्ड 3 (ii ) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : जून 11 , 2005 /ज्येष्ठ 21 , 1927

2 1

286/2

4) सिस्वा (निरंतर ...)

265

285

266/1

266/2

406/3

270

5) वधियल

268/अ

268/ब

267

266

265.

254

255

256

259

258

217

216

206

218

219

220

221

222

206/ पी

222 पी

204

132

129

130

542

6) यडेली

543

544

545

547

585/ पी

584/ पी

591

594

593

633

5717

5 3

90 00

92 00

25.

22 00

17 00

63 00

15 00

47 00

30 00

31 00

20 00

55 00

70 .00

60 00

23 00

92 00

.09

24 00

23 00

12 00

58 00

11 00

47 00

50 00

23 00

40 00

20 00

42 00

54 00

43 00

34 00

77 00

19 5718

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 11 , 2005 /JYAISTHA 21 , 1927

630

6) वडेली ( निरंतर ... )

696

697

700/ पी

399

701

702

703

704

706

705

708

709

709/ पी

710

711

712

539/पी

7) झरोला

539/3

538

492

493

1791

1736

514/पी

494

513/1

513/2

513/3

500

503/1

503/2/पी

503/3

501/1

502

475/1

475/2

465/पी

464

463

462

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

5 00

97 00

39 00

21 00

51 00

18 00

20 00

56 00

24 00

28 00

11 00

15 00

81 00

85 00

21 00

56 00

82 00

53 00

06 00

11 00

55 00

62 00

22 00

57 00

95 00

37 00

00 00

67 00

42 00

93 00

00 भारत का राजपत्र : जून 11 , 2005 /ज्येष्ठ 21 , 1927

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

502

8) रूदेल

503

508

505

507

511

512

513

373

372

371

367

368

357

359

358/पी

291

292

297

298

299

306-

307

310

314

312

311

253

252

251/ पी

250/अ

250

249

187

248

188

190

200

191

198

199

125

1636GI/2005-9

5719 3

5 00

03 00

75 00

07 00

80 00

48 00

31 00

26 00

43 00

03 00

44 00

05 00

2.1

45 00

77 00

43 00

50 00

32 00

55 00

12 00

01-

35 00

76 00

80 00

93 00

61.

23 00

06 00

50 00

99 00

73 00

00 00

05 00

74 00

04 00

10 00

21 00

78 00

43 00

06 00

17 5720

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 11 , 2005/ JYAISTHA 21 , 1927

126

रूदेल (निरंतर ...)

133

132

139

140

141

138

2475/1

9) बोरसद

2475/2

2475/3

2475/4

2476/2

2470

2469/ पी

2441

2442/1

2442/3

2443

2438/ 1 / पी

2438/ 1/ पी

2438/ 2/ पी

2438/ 2 / पी

2438/3

2438/5

2436/2

2436/3

45/2

10) डभासी

46/1

43/ पी

47/3

42/1

29/2

27/1

25/1

25/2

25/3

22/1

23/2

23/3

21/1

21/2

[PART II- SEC . 3 ( ii) ]

5 3

40 00

44 00

20 00

01 00

48 00

43 00

52 00

88 00

99 00

00 00

84 00

77 00

72 00

10 00

25 00

40 00

16 00

20 00

85 00

16 00

65 00

04 00

35 00

16 00

61 00

86 00

56 00

51 00

61 00

97 00

34 00

44 00 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

5721

भारत का राजपत्र: जून 11 , 2005/ज्येष्ठ 21 , 1927

18/4

10) डभासी ( निरंतर ...)

18/5

18/8

18/9

19/1

19/2

11/2

2/1

532

557

555/1

533/3

554

534/2

553/2

535/1

535/2

525/3

523/3

524/5

524/4

524/6

524/7

501/3

501/1

522/2

521/1

502/1

502/2

503

504/2

504/3

505/1

505/2

413/2

413/ / 3

413/4

414

5 00

48 00

82 00

53 00

89 00

46 00

19 00

65 00

45 00

22 00

99 00

29 00

89 00

75 00

30 00

49 00

10.

47 00

08 00

12 00

31 00

89 00

59 00

83 00

00.

50 00

20 00

95 00

42 00

25 00

30 00

59 00

42 00

82 00

36 00

69 00

95 00

26 5722

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 11 , 2005 / JYAISTHA 21 , 1927

415

10) डमासी ( निरंतर ...)

418

417

426/2

427

428/2

407/1

406

405/1

405/2

404

403/4

390

392/1

392/2

388

387/3

384/3

351/4

351/1

352/1

353

354/2

354/4

355

356/2

357/1

357/2

361/3

366/4

1879

11) बोचासन

1878

1877

1868

1850/ पी

1849

1848

1847

1846

1193

12) कावेठा

1192

1194

1199

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

5 00

15 00

06 00

36 00

05 00

27 00

45 00

68 00

57 00

92 00

29 00

55 00

65 00

30 00

76 00

60 00

36 00

79 00

41 00

37 00

08 00

62 00

81 00

50 00

56 00

94 00

96 00

01 00

03 00 [भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : जून 11 , 2005/ज्येष्ठ 21 , 1927

1195

12) कावेठा ( निरंतर ... )

1198

1197

1217

1220

1216

1229

1228

1227

1226

1225

1238/2

1238/1

1241

1239/1

1240/1

1248

1247

1253

1252

1269

1268

1266/2

1267

1266/1

1306

1307

1305

1304

1314

1315

1316

1317

1293

1292

1291

1359

1360

5723

5 00

82 00

89 00

43 00

29 00

25 00

75 00

10.

68 00

57 00

38 00

22 00

47 00

79 00

24 00

00 00

70 00

16 00

57 00

45 00

60 00

66 00

09 00

32 00

79 00

94 00

49 00

जिला : आणंद

मंडल/तेहसिल/तालुक : पेटलाद

198

1)विरोल (सी)

197

196

191

192

राज्य : गुजरात

21 00

03 00

13 5724

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 11 , 2005 / JYAISTHA 21 , 1927

193

1) विरोल (सी) ( निरंतर ...)

187/2

186/2

186/1

187/1

188/1

180

179

178

175

174

173

172

840

2) सीमरडा

830

831

832

829

828

692

693

694

698

699

610

609

607/पी

619

618

617

606 / अ

606

620

605

1153

622

621

1152

604

475

471

471/अ

473

472

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

5 00

99 00

85 00

48 00

37- 00

57 00

1.2 00

33 00

30 00

03 00

15 00

07 00

81 00

79 00

04 00

34 00

70 00

03 00

19 00

65 00

82 00

17 00

20 00

86 00

24 00

16 00

00-

70 00

80 00

57 00

50 00

78 00

00 भारत का राजपत्र : जून 11 , 2005/ज्येष्ठ 21 , 1927

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

440

2) सीमरडा ( निरंतर ...)

439

438

434

183

182

181

184

180

178

179

177

176

176/अ

176/ब

174

170

173

171

169

165

165/अ

154

153

152

140

139

383/पी

3) दंताली

384

409

410

411

412

413

414

415

416

417

418

419

420

421

422

424

57257 3

5 00

08 00

14 00

41 00

58 00

80 00

16 00

10 00

52 00

40 00

38 00

.02

75 00

31 00

04 00

98 00

05 00

94 00:

38 00

99 00

61 00

87. 00

87 00

09 00

57 00

27 00

49 00

7.2

81 00

08 00

10 00

69 00

51 00 5726

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 11 , 2005/ JYAISTHA 21 , 1927

423

3) दंताली (निरंतर... )

467

476

475

478

479

474

473

472

471

256

244

237

243

239

238

637

4) फांगनी

628

630

632

631

625

622

621

478

479

480

577

576

483

491

574

492

571

494

568

567 / पी

567

557

556

555

548

547/पी

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

5 00

00 00

45 00

96 00

08 00

49 00

01 00

71 00

13 00

42 00

09 00

64 00

84 00

04 00

37 00

44 00

19 00

71 00

75 00

61 00

02 00

60 00

66 00

32 00

82 00

11 00

92 00

52 00

27 00

21 00

29 00

00 भारत का राजपत्र जून 11 , 2005/ज्येष्ठ 21 , 1927

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ].

534 4) फांगनी ( निरंतर ... )

535

529

521

522

520

139 5) बटाव

144

145

146

148

149

153

151

152

165

167

169

169/अ

170

171

173

181/पी

180/पी

181/अ

180/

180/अ

181

182

183

184

185

207

204

216

217

229/

229

228

230

283

283/पी

284

285

5727 3

5 00

10 00

83 00

02-

02 00

15 .

16 00

57 00

79 00

77 00

0.8

58 00

17 00

90 00

97 00

53 00

78 00

35 00

00.

15 00

86 00

53 00

06 00

55 00

58 00

30 00

05 00

80 00

13 00 5728

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 11 , 2005/ JYAISTHA 21 , 1927

291

5) वटाव ( निरंतर ... )

290

288

184

6) विश्नोली

186

285

284

278

279

282

277

280

281

287

288

289

787

290

292

291

293

294

297

298

299

260

259

257

303

304

306

313

314

318

320

319

343

344

345

347

348

349

350

351

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

5 00

07 00

04 00

65 00

72 00

32 00

00 .

21 00

02 00

96 00

01 00

88 00

21 00

10 00

69 00

38 00

31 00

01 00

35 00

01 00

17 00

31 00

60 00

74 00

01 00

33 00

52 00

89 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : जून 11 , 2005/ज्येष्ठ 21 , 1927

2 1

356

6) विश्नोली ( निरंतर ... ).

359/पी

361/पी

3:60

738/ पी 7) सुनाव

737/1

737/2

736

302

8) पोरडा

303.

301

304

305

274

273

268

269

267

266

264

2.65

253

254

251

255

249

248

257

835/1

9) बाधणी

840

839/ पी

841/ पी

841/पी

841/ पी

843/पी

842/ पी

860/ पी

859/ पी

861/ पी

863

866 / पी

866/पी

5729 3

37 00

19 00

56 00

83 00

04 00

64 00

52 00

90 00

24 00

90 00

84 00

86 00

82 00

24 00

37 00

01 00

26 00

41 00

94 00

79 00

84 00

00 .

39 00

52 00

76 00 %

10 5730

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 11 , 2005/ JYAISTHA 21 , 1927

867/1 पी 9) वाघणी (निरंतर ...)

867/1 पी

868/2

868/1 पी

867/2

872/2

872/3

873/1

873/3

873/2

874/2

874/1 पी

875

876

877/1

1538

10) महेलव

1539

1537

1540

1541

1542

1543

1544

1552

1553

1433

1434

1432

1400

1402

1401

1403

1407

1406

1408

1387

1386

1385

1699

1700

1706/1

1706/2

1695

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

15 00

40 00

25 00

36 00

35 00

32 00

73 00

55 00

09 00

96 00

34 00

39 00

01 00

11 00

38 00

44 00

79 00

43 00

18 00

69 00

57 00

35 00

97 00

10 00

24 00

80- 00

01 00

06 [भाग II - खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र: जून 11 , 2005/ज्येष्ठ 21 , 1927

2 1

1694

10) महेलव (निरंतर...)

1693/1

1743

1740

1742

1741

1754

1753

1752

1770

1771

1769

1766

1765

1773/ पी

2434

2438

2433

2443

2442

2444

2454

2455

2453

2470/2

2468/1

2470/1

2468/2

2467/1

2592

2591

2602

2603

2605

2606

2607

2789

2788

2787

2786

2785

2778

2694

2777

5731 3

5 00

61 00

41 00

90 00

07 00

53 00

79 00

40 00

65 00

69 00

93 00

91 00

26 00

12 00

76 00

09:

24 00

$00

59 00

55 00

90 00

42 00

36 00

85 00

68 00

67 00

26 00

95 00

14 00

41 00

93 00

32 00 5732

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 11 , 2005/ JYAISTHA 21,1927

2695

10) महेलव ( निरंतर ...)

2759

2745

2746

2747

2750

2751

2753

2752

2988

2987

2986

2990

2992/1

2991

2993/1

2993/2

2992/2

2994

1336/ पी

11) चांगा

1336 / पी

1335

1334

1324/1/पी

1333

1332

1325

1326

1321

1322/1

1320

1319/3

1319/पी/2

1467/1

1467/2

1469/3

1469/2

1470

1477/ पी

1495/3

1495/2

1495/1

1497/2

1498/1

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

33 00

98 00

04 00

48 00

62 00

02 00

90 00

32 00

27 00

47 00

65 00

89 00

58 00

13 00

86 00

46 00

55 00

11 00

06 00

73 00

68 00

63 00

99 00

02 00

83 00

29 00

62 00

03 00

15 00

35 00 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र: जून 11 , 2005 /ज्येष्ठ 21 , 1927

1499/2

11) चांपा ( निरंतर... )

1498/2

1499/1

1500/पी

1500 / पी

1489/2

1489/1

1488/2

1488/1

1535

1535/

1535-श्री

1536

1537/1

1741

1740 /पी

1740/ पी

1733/पी.

1734

1729

1735

1727

1728

17.26

1705

1706

1711

1712

1710

1719/1

1716/पी

1718/पी

1717

1869

1866

1868

1961

1962

1963/ पी

1963/पी

1964

1976/1 पी

1976/1

5733 3

5 00

08 00

85 00

04 00

15 00

14 00

22 00

84 00

37 00

63 00

17 00

48 00

41 00

57 00

63 00

48 00

90 00

83 00

13 00

10 00

90 00

82 00

93 00

97 00

12 00

03 00

46 00

05 00

01 00

39 00

06 5734

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 11 , 2005/JYAISTHA 21 , 1927

1976/2

11) धांगा (निरंतर ...)

1978

1980 / पी

1980/ पी

1993

1992

1991

826

12) डेमोल

827/ पी

829/ पी

829/पी

827

840

844

863

862

860

858

865

[PART II- SEC . 3 (ii)]

5 00

69 00

71 00

05 00

14 00

22 00

40 00

41 00

02 00

64 00

95 00

जिला : आणंद

मंडल/तेहसिल/तालुक : सोजित्रा

650

1) पेटली

648/2

647

637

646/ पी

638

642

643/1

643/2

624/1

624/2

624/3

624/4

625

623

626

613

614

611

585

610

586

587

राज्य : गुजरात

00 .

54 00

76 00

50 00

17 00

05.

85 00

83 00

16 00

58 00

21 00

66 00

00 00

48 00

12 00

22 00

91 भारत का राजपत्र: जून 11 , 2005/ज्येष्ठ 21 , 1927

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

2 1

588

1) पेटली (निरंतर ...)

589

592

594/1/अ

593

563

562/1

562/2

561

560

559/2

392

393/1

393/2

393/पी

396/1

394/3

394/2/

396/2

395

396/3

403

397

400

401/1/अ

401/1/

415/2

343/1

343/1पी

345/1

345/3

345/5

345/6

321

322

320

323

324

317

316

315/1

314

248/पी

2) देवावांटा

249/पी

1636GI/2005-11

5735 3

5 00

57 00

17 00

89 00

18 00

37 00

69 00

38 00

15 00

08 00

98 00

04 00

83 00

33 00

05 00

: 01 .

44 00

11 00

06 00

04 00

07 00

23 00

83 00

38 00

18 00

17 00

87 00

17 00

27 5736

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 11 , 2005/ JYAISTHA 21 , 1927

249/पी/1 2) देवावांटा ( निरंतर ...)

251

250/पी

128/2

129/1

129/2

130/1पी

130/1

130/2

131/2

137/3

137/4

137/5

137/7

216/6

216/3

216/4

216/5

218/पी

215/1

215/2

222

223/2

223/1

224/पी

227/1/11

227/1/2

228

229/1/2

229/1/4

229/1/1

229/1/5

452

232/पी

231पी/1/1

231पी/1/2

231/2/1

231/2/2

42/1/7

3)स्रूण

42/1/6

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

5 00

09 00

65 00

60 00

97 00

04 00

96 00

15 00

37 00

60 00

90 00

54 00

24 00

92 00

85 1

18 00

25 00

47 00

82 00

28 00

06 00

94 00

40 00

19 00

28 00

62 00

48 00

04 00

88 00

76 00 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

भारत का राजपत्रः जून 11 , 2005/ज्येष्ठ 21 , 1927

42/1/5

3) (निरंतर ...)

42/1/4

42/1/3

42/1/2

42/1/1

42/1

46/पी

47/पी

109

108

110

107/पी

107/

106/1

105

105/1

105/2

105/3

105/4

105/5

105/6

104/पी

165/पी

164/1

166

185/1/2/

185/1/3/

177

181

182

185/1/3/

1248/3

4) देवातकपद

1231/2

1231/1

1222

1223

1221

5737 3

5 00

63 00

98 00

36 00

39 00

81 00

27 00

90 00

83 00

49 00

19 00

39 00

22 00

18 00

27 00

92 00

40 00 .

37 00

60 00

65 00

52 00

23 00

92 00

05 00

19 00

30 00

70 00

49 00

11 00 5738

[PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii) ] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 11 , 2005/ JYAISTHA 21 , 1927

1220

4) देवातडपद ( निरंतर...)

[फा. सं. एल-14014/53/2004- जी.पी . ] एस. बी. मण्डल, अवर सचिव

New Delhi , the 3rd June , 2005

S. O. 2065.- Whereas by notification of the Government of India in the Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Gas No. S.O. 433 , dated the 04th February , 2005 , 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) (hereafter referred to as the said Act ), the Central Government declared its intention to acquire the right of user in the land, specified in the Schedule appended to that notification for the purpose of laying pipeline for transportation of natural gas through an interconnection between Jamnagar Bhopal and Kakinada Hydrabad - Goa Pipeline by Gas Transportation and Infrastructure Company Limited;

And, whereas the copies of the said Gazette notification were made available to the public on28th February, 2005;

The objection received from the public to the laying of the Pipeline have been considered and dissolved by the Competent Authority;

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

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

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

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

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii ) ]

5739

भारत का राजपत्र: जून 11 , 2005/ज्येष्ठ 21 , 1927

Schedule Mandal /Thesil/Taluk : BORSAD

District : ANAND

Survey No./Sub-Division No.

NameofVillage

2 1

333

1) GAJNA

334/1

334/2

332/ P

332/P

327

325

324/1

323

322/P/1

322/P/2

314/2

314/3

320/1

320/2

319

318/1

318/2

293

292/1 /A

292/1/B

285/P

286

284/3

287/2

265/1/P

265/2

264

266/P

254/1

254/2

253

252/2/P

215/P

State : GUJARAT

Areatobe acquired for ROU

Are

Hectare

C-Are 3

07 00

06 00

84 00

41 00

50 00

33 00

15 00

19 00

92 00

74 00

22 00

52 00

26 00

84 00

54. 00

01 00

69 00

76 00

79 00

42 00

10 00

04 5740

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 11 , 2005/ JYAISTHA 21 , 1927

215/P

1) GAJNA(Contd....)

215/P

234/4

233/1/P

235/1

235/2

237/1

237/2

236/1

236/2/P

223

222/1

224/1

200

199/1

199/2

196/1

196/2/P

196/3

196/4

197

191

195

194

151

185/P

152/P/1

>164/1/P

164/2

166/P

167/P

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

20 00

00 00

20 00

00 00

30 00

92 00

00 00

80 00

57 00

96 00

19 00

40 00

23 00

08 00

00.

76 00

42 00

83 00

28 00

70 00

53 00

62 00

48 00

13 00

33 00

16 00

51 00

26 00

86 [भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र: जून 11 , 2005/ज्येष्ठ 21 , 1927

167/P

1) GAJNA ( Contd.... )

168

169/P

170

749/2

2) SAROL

748/2/A

748/2/B

748/1

742/2

742/1

721/1

722/1

722/2

30/2

730/1

730/3

731

641/P

643/1

644

644/P

645/1

628

627

618/1

618/2

617

605

609/1/P

610

611/1

434

3) VALVOD

436

435

441

442

443

446

458/2

5741

5 3

00 00

78 00

11 00

20 00

00 00

50 00

80 00

01 00

58 00

74 00

45 00

69 00

43 00

10.

22 00

09-

02 00

44 :

45 00

91 00

50 00

08 00

92 00

31 00

25 00

01 00

88 00

93 00

90 00

37 5742

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 11 , 2005 / JYAISTHA 2.1 , 1927

465

3) VALVOD ( Contd.... )

459/2

464

463

480

462

1321

557 /P

558

559

561

562

572

573

574

582

581

57.7

592

471

4) SISWA

470

465/1

464/1

464/2

466

461/1

461/2

404/2/2

406/1

406/2

407

371

372

377/1

373

376/2

376/1

321

322

328

329

327

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

5 00

04 00

85 00

37 00

84 00

30 00

58 00

88 00

38 00

25 95 00

39 00

83 00

09 00

87 00

09 00

68 00

55 00

71 00

46 00

54 00

69 00

39 00

28 00

12 00

99 00

08 00

40 00

25 00

54 00

78 00

48 00

13 00

77 00

14 [भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र: जून 11 , 2005/ज्येष्ठ 21 , 1927

326/1

4) SISWA ( Contd.. )

325

290/P

287

288

286/1

286/2

265

285

266/1

266/2

406/3

270

5)WACHHIEL

268/A

268/B

267

266

265

254

255

256

259

258

217

216

206

218

219

220

221

222

206P

204

132

129

130

542

6)WADELI

543

544

545

1636GI/ 2005

5743 3

5 00

17 00

27 00

45 00

52 00

38 00

90 00

92 00

24 00

12 00

63 00

97 00

47 00

49 00

31 00

20 00

18 00

62 00

70 00

23 00

92 00

23 00

11 00

38 00

47 00

23 00

40 00

00 5744

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 11 , 2005/ JYAISTHA 21 , 1927

547

6) WADELI (Contd....)

585/P

584/P

591

594

593

633

630

696

697

700/P

699

701

702

703

704

706

705

708

709

709P

710

711

712

539/P

7) JHAROLA

539/3

538

492

493

1791

1736

514/P

494

513/1

513/2

513/3

500

503/1

503/2/P

503/3

[PART II-SEC. 3 ( ii)]

5 3

42 00

54 00

05 00

34 00

51 00

77 00

97 00

39 00

78 00

84 00

21 00

64 00

18 00

20 00

56 00

28 00

58 00

11 00

95 00

65 00

15 00

55 00

85 00

21 00

85 00

56 00

82 00

53 00

11 00

85 00

22 00 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : जूम 11 , 2005/ज्येष्ठ 21 , 1927

501/1

7) JHAROLA(Contu.....)

502

475/1

475/2

465/P

464

463

462

502

8) RUDEL

503

508

505

507

511

512

513

373

372

371

367

368

357

359

358/P

291

292

297

298

299

306

307

310

314

312

311

253

252

251/P

5745

5 00

88 00

36 00

57 00

95 00

99 00

42 00

03 00

80 00

31 00

26 00

43 00

44 00

05 00

45 00

77 00

50 00

32 00

55 00

08.

07 00

35 00

76 00

93 00

23 00

08 00

76 00

99 00

73 00

00 5746

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 11 , 2005/JYAISTHA 21 , 1927

250/A

8) RUDEL(Contd....)

250

249

187

248

188

190

200

191

198

199

125

126

133

132

139

140

141

138

2475/1

9) BORSAD

2475/2

2475/3

2475/4

2476/2

2470

2469/P

2441

2442/1

2442/3

2443

2438/1/P

2438/2/ P

2438/3

2438/5

2436/2

2436/3

45/2

10) DABHASI

46/1

43/P

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

05 00

82 00

04 00

21 00

78 00

06 00

17 00

40 00

44 00

77 00

20 00

01 00

48 00

18 00

52 00

88 00

99 00

20 00

00 00

84 00

77 00

72 00

10 00

25 00

18 00

20 00

03 00

14 [भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : जून 11 , 2005/ज्येष्ठ 21 , 1927

47/3

10) DABHASI (Conad....)

42/1

29/2

27/1

25/1

25/2

25/3

22/1

23/2

23/3

21/1

21/2

18/4

18/5

18/8

18/9

19/1

19/2

11/2

2/1

532

557

555/1

533/3

554

534/2-

553/2

535/1

535/2

525/3

523/3

524/5

524/4

524/6

5747 3

5 00

04 00

35 00

16 00

55 00

56 00

68 00

51 00

34 00

48 00

82 00

53 00

89 00

46 00

65 00

45 00

22 00

99 00

60 00

29 00

89 00

75 00

30 00

72 00

49 00

/ 08 00

12 00

89 00

02 00

83 00

09 5748

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 11 , 2005 /JYAISTHA 21 , 1927

524/7

10) DABHASI (Cor.id ....)

501/3

501/1

522/2

521/1

502/1

502/2

503

504/2

504/3

505/1

505/2

413/2

413/3

413/4

414

415

418

417

426/2

427

128/2

407/1

406

405/1

405/2

404

403/4

390

392/1

392/2

388

387/3

384/3

351/4

351/1

352/1

353

354/2

354/4

355

356/2

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

50 00

20 00

95 00

42 00

96 00

30 00

59 00

42 00

00 00

36 00

69 00

15 00

95 00

05 00

27 00

45 00

05.

66 00

56 00

57 00

92 00

55 00

30 00

96 00

60 00

79 00

83 00

09 [भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : जून 11 , 2005/ज्येष्ठ 21 , 1927

357/1

10) DABHASI (Con ....)

357/2

361/3

366/4

1879

11) BOCHASAN

1878

1877

1868

1850/P

1849

1848

1847

1846

1193

12) KAWETHA

1192

1194

1199

1195

1198

1197

1217

1220

1216

1229

1228

1227

1226

1225

1238/2

1238/1

1241

1239/1

1240/1

1248

1247

1253

1252

1269

1268

1266/2

1267

5749 3

02 00

91 00

08.

75 00

55 00

96 00

01 00

37 00

03 00

89 00

43 00

25 00

63 00

75 00

38 00

47 00

79 00

40 00

70 00

21 00

57 00

39 00

03 5750

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 11 , 2005/ JYAISTHA 21 , 1927

1266/1

12) KAWETHA (Cuntd....)

1306

1307

1305

1304

1314

1315

1316

1317

1293

1292

1291

1359

1360

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

44 00

60 00

09 00

15 00

75 00

32 00

94 00

49 00

04 00

District : ANAND

Mandal/Thesil/Taluk : PETLAD

198

1) VIROL(C)

197

196

191

192

193

187/2

186/2

186/1

187/1

188/1

180

179

178

175

174

173

172

840

2) SIMARADA

830

831

832

829

828

692

693

694

State : GUJARAT

57 00

48 00

75 00

37 00

14 00

22 00

12 00

30 00

03 00

07 00

04 00

34 00 [भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र: जून 11 , 2005/ज्येष्ठ 21 , 1927

698

2) SIMARADA (Contd ....)

699

610

609

607/P

619

618

617

606/A

606

620

605

1153

622

621

1152

604

475

471

471 /A

473

472

440

439

438

434

183

182

181

184

180

178

179

177

176

176/A

176/B

174

170

173

171

169

1636G1/2005-13

5751 3

5 00

86 :

70 00

03 00

19 00

65 00

45 00

17 00

20 00

10 00

24 00

44 00

80 00

57 00

50 00

84 00

96 00

08 00

07 00

58 00

24 00

73 00

16 00

19 00

52 00

38 00

75 00

31 00

04 00

98 00-

05 5752

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 11 , 2005 /JYAISTHA 21 , 1927

165

2) SIMARADA ( Contd.... )

165/A

154

153

152

140

139

383/P

3) DANTALI

384

409

410

411

412

413

414

415

416

417

418

419

420

421

422

424

423

467

476

475

478

479

474

473

472

471

256

244

237

243

239

238

637

4) FANGANI

628

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

5 00

94 00

38 00

99 00

61 00

87 00

09 00

57 00

27 00

88 00

95 00

35 00

81 00

69 00

10 00

51 00

97 00

08 00

83 00

01 00

41 00

71 00

13 00

42 00

09 00

64 00

00 [भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : जून 11 , 2005/ज्येष्ठ 21 , 1927

630

4) FANGANI (Contd ....)

632

631

625

622

621

478

479

480

577

576

483

491

574

492

571

404

568

567/P

567

557

556

555

548

547/P

534

535

529

521

522

520

139

5) VATAV

144

145

146

148

149

153

151

152

165

5753 3

5 00

84 00

04 00

37 00

44 00

60 00

71 00

75 00

61 00

02 00

37 00

32 00

82 00

11 00

92 00

27 00

47 00

19.

48 00

06 00

52 00

07 00

10 00

25 00

83 00

16 00

57 00

79 00

79 00.

26 00

77 00

12 5754

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 11 , 2005 /JYAISTHA 21 , 1927

167

5) VATAV ( Contd .... )

169

169/A

170

171

173

181/P

180/P

181/A

180/B

180/A

181

182

183

184

185

207

204

216

217

229/P

229

228

230

283

283/P

284

285

291

290

288

184

6) VISHNOLI

186

285

284

278

279

282

277

280

281

287

[PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii ) ]

5 00

69 00

58 00

52 00

17 00

97 00

74 00

51 00

78 00

35 00

65 00

44 00

55 00

58 00

20 00

30 00

09 00

80 00

25 00

07 00

31 00

04 00

65 00

04 00

21 00

02 00

96 00

37 00

34 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र: जून 11 , 2005/ज्येष्ठ 21 , 1927

288

6) VISHNOLI (Contd ....)

289

787

290

292

291

293

294

297

298

299

260

259

257

303

304

306

313

314

318

320

319

343

344

345

347

348

349

350

351

356

359/P

361/P

360

738/P

7) SUNAV

737/1

737/2

736

302

8) PORDA

303

301

304

5755

5 3

52 00

01 00

88 00

21 00

10 00

69 00.

38 00

33 00

31 00

81 00

76 00

01 00

20 00

11 00

31 00

:00

60 00

74 00

01 00

72 00

89 00

66 00

52 00

40 00

19 00

56 00

83 00

04 00

02 00

40 00

90 00

63 5756

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 11 , 2005/ JYAISTHA 21 , 1927

2 1

305

8) PORDA( Contd ....)

274

273

268

269

267

266

264

265

253

254

251

255

249

248

257

835/1

9) BANDHINI

840

839/P

841/P

843/P

842/P

860/P

859/ P

861/P

863

866/P

867/1P

868/2

868/1P

867/2

872/2

872/3

873/1

873/3

873/2

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

5 00

90 00

84 00

86 00

82 00

24 00

11 00

37 00

01 00

26 00

08 00

41 00

94 00

79 00

84 00

39 00

76 00

16 00

30 00

90 00

76 00

40 00

25 00

36 00

35 00

32 00

76 00

55 00

09 00

01 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3( ii ) ]

5757

भारत का राजपत्र: जूत 11 , 2005/ज्येष्ठ 21 , 1927

874/2

9) BANDHINI (Contd....)

874/1P

875

876

877/1

1538

10) MAHELAV

1539

1537

1540

1541

1512

1543

1544

1552

1553

1433

1434

1432

1400

1402

1401

رفة

1403

1407

1406

1408

1387

1386

1385

1099

1700

1706/1

1706/2

1695

1694

1693/1

1743

1740.

1742

1741

1754

1753

95 00

52 00

34 00

39 00

68 00

01 00

11 00

44 00

38 00

44 00

79 00

43 00

66 00

91, 00

56 00

69 00

02 00

22 00

93 00

57 00

35 00

47 00

87 00

97 00

63 00

10 00

80 00

19 00

01 00

06 00

61 00

78 00

41 00

71 00

07 00

53 00

79 5758

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 11 , 2005/JYAISTHA 21 , 1927

1752

10) MAHELAV (Contd ....)

1770

1771

1769

1766

1765

1773/P

2434

2438

2433

2443

2442

2444

2454

2455

2453

2470/2

2468/1

2470/1

2468/2

2467/1

2592

2591

2602

2603

2605

2606

2607

2789

2788

2787

2786

2785

2778

2694

2777

2695

2759

2745

2746

2747

2750

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

5 00

43 00

40 00

55 00

91 00

26 00

12 00

21 00

76 00

24 00

13 00

71 00

95 00

91 00

41 00

42 00

88 00

67 00

26 00

95 00

77 00

67 00

41 00

93 00

32 00

33 00

98 00

04 [ भाग II- खण्ड ( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : जून 11 , 2005 /ज्येष्ठ 21 , 1927

2 1

2751

10) MAHELAV (Contd.... )

2753

2752

2988

2987

2986

2990

2992/1

2991

2993/1

2993/2

2992/2

2994

1336/P

11) CHANGA

1336/P

1335

1334

1324/1/P

.1333

1332

1325

1326

1321

1322/1

1320

1319/3

1319/P/2

1467/1

1467/2

1469/3

1469/2

1470

1477 /P

1495/3

1495/2

1495/1

1497/2

1498/1

1499/2

1498/2

1499/1

1500/P

136GI/2005-14

5759 3

48 00

62 00

90 00

99 00

27 00

47 00

13 00

54 00

46 00

11 00

.17

73 00

69 00

36 00

99 00

02 00

27 00

36 00

00 5760

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 11 , 2005 / JYAISTHA 21 , 1927

1500/P

11 ) CHANGA (Contd .... )

1489/2

1489/1

1488/2

1488/1

1535/P

1536

1537/1

1741

1740/P

1733 /P

1734

1729

1735

1727

1728

1726

1705

1706

1711

1712

1710

1719/1

1716/P

1718/P

1717

1869

1866

1868

1961

1962

1963/P

1964

1976/1P

1976/1

1976/2

1978

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

5 00

15 00

22 00

84 00

63 00

54 00

17 00

48 00

41-

57 00

63 00

48 00

04 00

90 00

27 00

83 00

13 00

10 00

82 00

48 00

93 00

34 00

12 00

44 00

03 00

46 00

75 00

89 00

93 00

05 00

01 00

39 00

16 00

71 00

07 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : जून 11 , 2005/ज्येष्ठ 21 , 1927

1980/P

11) CHANGA (Contd .... )

1980/P

1993

1992

1991

826

12) DEMOL

827/P

829/P

827

840

844

863

862

860

858

865

District : ANAND Mandal/Thesil/Taluk : SOJITRA

650

1) PETLI

648/2

647

637

646/P

638

642

643/1

643/2

624/1

624/2

624/3

624/4

625

623

626

613

614

611

585

610

586

587

5761

5 00

80 00

05 00

34 00

22 00

40 00

66 00

64 00

07 00

95 00

56 State : GUJARAT

54 00

94 00

76 00

12 00

50 00

17 00

96 00

83 00

72 00

16 00.

21 00

66 00

48 00

12 00

22 00

91 00 5762

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 11 , 2005 /JYAISTHA 21 , 1927

2 1

588

1) PETLI ( Contd .... )

589

592

594/1 /A

593

563

562/1

562/2

561

560

559/2

392

393/1

393/2

393/P

396/1

394/3

394/2/B

396/2

395

396/3

403

397

400

401/1 /A

401/1/B

415/2

343/1

343/1/P

345/1

345/3

345/5

345/6

321

322

320

323

324

317

316

315/1

314

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

5 3

17 00

95 00

89 00

40 00

37 00

46 00

69 00

30 00

08 00

98 00

60 00

42 00

04 00

83 00

33 00

01 00

98 00

44 00

11 00

59 00

03 00

00 00

07 00

69 00

23 00

83 00

65 00

38 00

18 00

17 00

33 00

48 00

04 भारत का राजपत्र : जून 11 , 2005 /ज्येष्ठ 21 , 1927

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

248/P

2) DEVAVANTA

249/P

249/P/1

251

250/P

128/2

10014

129/2

130/1P

130/1

130/2

131/2

137/3

137/4

137/5

137/7

216/6

216/3

216/4

216/5

218/P

215/1

215/2

222

223/2

223/1

224/P

227/1/11

227/1/2

228

229/1/2

229/1/4

229/1/1

229/1/5

452

232/P

231P/1/1

231P/1/2

5763 3

17 00

06 00

09 00

65 00

60 00

97 00

15 00

60 00

24 00

85 00

18 00

61 00

47 00

96 00

44 00

52 00

40 00

79 00

43 00

84 00

35 00

62 00

87 00

48 00

05 5764

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 11 , 2005/ JYAISTHA 21 , 1927

231/2/1 2) DEVAVANTA (Contd .... )

231/2/2

42/1/7 3) RUN

42/1/6

42/1/5

42/1/4

42/1/3

42/1/2

42/1/1

42/1

46/P

47/P

109

108

110

107/P

106/1

105

105/1

105/2

105/3

105/4

105/5

105/6

104/P

165/P

164/1P

166

185/1/2/P

185/1/3/P

177

181

182

185/1 /3/P [PART II SEC . 3 ( ii) ] 3

5 00

22 00

04 00

88 00

76 00

63 00

98 00

36 00

89 00

01 00

90 00

61 00

49 00

04 00

19 00

18 00

27 00

75 00

37 00

78 00

00.

44 00

08 00

52 00

23 00

05 00

19 00

30 5765 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

भारत का राजपत्र: जून 11 , 2005/ज्येष्ठ 21 , 1927

1248/3

4) DEVATALPAD

1231/2

1231/1

1222

1223

1221

1220

[F. No. L-14014/53/2004-G.P . ] S. B. MANDAL , Under Secy .

नई दिल्ली, 7 जून, 2005

का. आ 2066 . -केन्द्रीय सरकार को लोकहित में यह आवश्यक प्रतीत होता है कि मुन्द्रा ( गुजरात ) से दिल्ली तक पेट्रोलियम उत्पादों के परिवहन के लिए हिन्दुस्तान पेट्रोलियम कॉरपोरेशन लिमिटेड द्वारा एक पाइपलाइन बिछाई जानी चाहिए:

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

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

कोई व्यक्ति, जो उक्त अनुसूची में वर्णित भूमि में हितबद्ध है , उस तारीख से जिसको इस अधिसूचना से युक्त भारत के राजपत्र की प्रतियाँ साधारण जनता को उपलब्ध करा दी जाती हैं, इक्कीस दिन के भीतर भूमि के नीचे पाइपलाइन बिछाए जाने के लिए उसमें उपयोग के अधिकार के अर्जन के सम्बन्ध में श्री शिवदत्त गौड़ , सक्षम प्राधिकारी , मुन्द्रा-दिल्ली पेट्रोलियम उत्पाद पाइपलाइन, हिन्दुस्तान पेट्रोलियम कॉर्पोरेशन लिमिटेड , डी-7 लालबहादुर नगर ( पूर्व ) क्लार्क्स आमेर होटल के सामने, जवाहरलाल नेहरु मार्ग, मालवीय नगर, जयपुर-302017 (राजस्थान) को लिखित रुप में आक्षेप भेज सकेगा । 5766

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 11 , 2005 /JYAISTHA 21 , 1927

अनुसूची तहसील : बाली

[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii) ]

जिला : पाली

क्रम सं.

गाँव का नाम

खसरा सं.

9 1. आमलीया

37 2. नाना

राज्य : रामस्यान

क्षेत्रफल

वर्ग मीटर हेक्टेयर एयर

6. 4

09 0

67 0

82 0

47 0

2185 (स.भूमि)

2169

12 0

80 0

2424(स.मगरी)

2417 (स.मगरी)

2477(वनविभाग)

77 3. कागदड़ा

79 4. भन्दर

4038

3439 5. सेन्दला

661 0

60 0

09 0

97 0

98 0

695(स.भूमि)

557

562

471

438 0

85 0

11 0

22 0

20 0

401 (स.भूमि)

491 6. बेडा

3418

3433 0

68 0

61 0

6.8 0

3930/4814(स.भूमि)

3940(स.नाला)

2490 7. भादुन्द

2354

2207

2203

2201

2143

2161

1411

1347 0

06 0

44 0

92 0

47 0

34 0

10 0

51 0

1210 (पी.डब्ल्यू.डी . सड़क)

1143 0

67 [भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : जून 11 , 2005 /ज्येष्ठ 21 , 1927

5767

जिला: पाली

तहसील: बाली

क्रम सं.

खसरा सं.

गाँव का नाम

1140 7. भाटुन्द (जारी... )

1139

1172

178 8. बीजापुर

180

187 राज्य: राजस्थान

क्षेत्रफल

हेक्टेयर एयर वर्ग मीटर 4

0.0

60 0

12 0

277 (स.भूमि)

278

576 9. पादरला

577

578

590

595

240 10. सेवाड़ी

42/1 11. पातावा

549 12. बारवा

577

291 13. लुणावा

261

244

52 0

ว

39 0

44 0

00 35 0

78 0

94 0

986- 0

371 (पी.डब्ल्यू.डी . सड़क)

468

499

502

598 14. पुनाडिया

542 15. लालराई

147

152

155

241 16. डूंगली

242

256

255 1636GI/2005-15

01.

0 [PART II- SEC . 3 ( ii)] 5768

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: JUNE 11 , 2005 / JYAISTHA 21 , 1927

जिला : पाली

तहसील : बाली

राज्य : राजस्थान

क्षेत्रफल

हेक्टेयर एयर वर्ग मीटर

खसरा सं.

क्रम सं.

गाँव का नाम

1248

17. मुंहारा

1307

1306/1808

1305

1386

[फा. सं. आर-31015/45/2004-ओ. आर- II ]

हरीश कुमार , अवर सचिव

New Delhi , the 7th June , 2005

S.O. 2066. Whereas it appears to the Central Government that it is necessary in the public interest that for transportation of the petroluem products from Mundra (Gujarat) to Delhi , a pipeline should be laid by Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Limited;

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

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

Any person, interested in the land described in the said Schedule, may , within twenty one days from the date on which copies of the Gazette of India containing this notification are made available to the public , object in writing to the acquisition of the right of user herein for laying of the pipeline under the land to Shri Shivdutt Gaur , Competent Authority , Mundra- Delhi Petroleum Product Pipeline Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Limited , D-7, Lal Bahadur Nagar (East ) , Opp. Clarks Amer Hotel , Jawaharlal Nehru Marg , Malviya Nagar , Jaipur - 302017 ( Rajasthan) [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : जून 11 , 2005 /ज्येष्ठ 21 , 1927

5769

SCHEDULE

Tehsil : BALI

State : RAJASTHAN

District : PALI

Sr. No

Khasara No. Name of the Village

3 1

9 1. AMLIA

37 2. NANA

Area

Are

Hectare

Sq.mtr .

6 0

02 09 0

13 95

00 97 0

47 0

2185(G/L)

2169 0

01 12 0

01 80

2424 (G/ L Magri )

0 01 56

2417 (G /L Magri )

2477( Forest Deptt . )

3. KAGDARA

79 4. BHANDAR

4038

4039

661 5. SENDALA

92 0

02 09

97 0

00 98 0

01. 95

695(G/L)

557

562

471

438

00 85 0

09 11 0

02 22 0

01 20 0

04 08

401(G/L)

491

3418 6. BERA

00 68 0

00.

02 30

3930/4814 (G/L)

3940(G /L Nala )

7. BHATUND

2490

2354

2207

2203

2201

2143

2161

1411

1347

06 0

44 0

00 92

34 0

00 60 0

01 10

51 0

1210 ( P.W.D Road)

1143 0

00 67 5770

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 11 , 2005/ JYAISTHA 21 , 1927

[PART II - SEC . 3 ( ii ) ] State : RAJASTHAN

District : PALI

Tehsil : BALI

Khasara No. Sr. No

Name of the Village

1140 7. BHATUND ( Contd ... )

1139

1172

178 8. BEEJAPUR

180

187

Area

Are

Hectare

Sq.mtr.

02 22 0

60 0

05 54 0

12 0

71 0

00 67 0

277(G/L)

278

576 9. PADARLA

577

578

590

595

240 10. SEWARI

42/1 11. PATAWA

549 12. BARWA

577

291 13. LUNAWA

261

244

00 88 0

00 39 0

35 0

00 78 0

12 94 0

12 0

13 0

00 68 0

02 00 0

01 90 0

01 10 0

03 98

371 ( P.W.D Road)

468

499

502

598 14. PUNADIYA

542 15. LALRAI

147

152

155

241 16. DUNGALI

242

256

255 0

01 93 0

01 70 0

32. 0

00 93

87 0

12 0

01 44 0

00 94

01 0

00 86 0

00 60 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

भारत का राजपत्र: जून 11 , 2005/ज्येष्ठ 21 , 1927

5771 Tehsil : BALI

District : PALI

State : RAJASTHAN

Area Sr. No

Khasara No.

Name of the Village

Are

Hectare

Sq.mtr. 1

6 17. MUNDARA

1248

01 97

1307

02 71

1306/1808

02 15

1305

00 20

1386

00 34

[No. R-31015/45/2004- O.R. -II ] HARISH KUMAR , Under Secy .

नईदिल्ली, जून , 2005

का. आ. 2067.- केन्द्रीय सरकार ने पेट्रोलियम और खनिज पाइपलाइन ( भूमि में उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन ) अधिनियम, 1962 (1962 का 50 ) (जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात उक्त अधिनियम कहा गया है ) की धारा 3 की उपधारा ( 1 ) के अधीन जारी की गई भारत सरकार के पेट्रोलियम और प्राकृतिक गैस मंत्रालय की अधिसूचना संख्या का . आ . 2673 तारीख 18 अक्तूबर 2004 , जो भारत के राजपत्र तारीख 23 अक्तूबर, 2004 में प्रकाशित की गई थी, द्वारा उस अधिसूचना से संलग्न अनुसूची में विनिर्दिष्ट भूमि में महाराष्ट्र राज्य में लोणी (पुणे ) से पकनी (सोलापुर ) तक हजारवाडी के रास्ते पेट्रोलियम उत्पादों के परिवहन के लिए विस्तार पाइपलाइन परियोजना के माध्यम से हिन्दुस्तान पेट्रोलियम कॉर्पोरेशन लिमिटेड द्वारा पाइपलाइन बिछाने के प्रयोजन के लिए उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन करने के अपने आशय की घोषणा की थी ;

और उक्त राजपत्र अधिसूचना की प्रतियां जनता को तारीख 2 दिसंबर , 2004 , को उपलब्ध करा दी गई थीं ;

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

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

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

और केन्द्रीय सरकार उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 6 की उपधारा (4 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए, यह निदेश देती है कि उक्त भूमि में उपयोग का अधिकार इस घोषणा के प्रकाशन की तारीख से केन्द्रीय सरकार में निहित होने की बजाए , सभी विल्लंगमों से मुक्त, हिन्दुस्तान पेट्रोलियम कॉर्पोरेशन लिमिटेड में निहित होगा ;

5773

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 11 , 2005/ JYAISTHA 21 , 1927

अनुसूची

[PART II-SEC. 3(ii) ]

जिला : सांगली

तालूका : कडेगाँव

सर्वे नंबर

राज्य : महाराष्ट्र

क्षेत्रफल

उप-खण्ड

गट नंबर

भाव का नाम

सं.

4 1 उपाले वांगी

121

120

सर्वे नंबर 120 और

119 के बीच का नाला

119

सवे नंबर 119/13

और 2 अ के बीच का

नाला

119

सर्वे नंबर 119 और

118 के बीच का

रास्ता

118

143

सर्वे नंबर 143 और

148 के बीच का नाला }

148

147

146

145

158

156

159

सर्वे नंबर 159/2 में

का अस्फालटेड रास्ता }

160

हेक्टर एयर वर्ग मीटर सं.

8 5

6 7

00 41 23

47 20

00 01 88 1अ + 2अ

00 01

2क

00 10 80 2ड

01 50

2जा

2 एच

07 2 के

00 09

2 एल

00 06

00 02

45 26 1

00 21 28 2

06 1

00 31

47 2

3/ब + 4/1 00 09 07 4 ब

00 07 34

00 02

06 39

08 94

00 23 87 3

00 19

00 21 81 1

00 30

00 31 67 3

कुल 03 [भाग II- खण्ड 3( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : जून 11 , 2005 /ज्येष्ठ 21 , 1927

5773

जिला : सांगली

तालूका : कडेगाँव

राज्य : महाराष्ट्र

क्षेत्रफल

गट नंबर

गाव का नाम

सर्वे नंबर

कम सं.

4 2

2 उपाळे मायणी

160

158

157

156

146

एयर वर्ग मीटर

हेक्टर

उप-खण्ड सं.

6 7 8 5

42 15

00 32 17

00 14 43

00 13 65

00 34 67

गट नंबर 146 और

200 के बीच

का नाला

199

200

00 02 76 }

00 11 10

गट नंबर 200 के बीच

में नाला

203

204

247

246

के

00 01 81

00 08

00 00 16 अ

15 90

अ

00 67

गट नंबर 246 (अ)

00 02

बीच का रास्ता

269

281

279

277

278 3 तोंडॉली

224

225

226

222

220

219

217

216

215

214

213

212

241

161

261

264

00 72 67

00 10 92

00 10 22

00 11

00 18 75

03 72 14 कुल

00 05 53

00 19 22

00 00 87

00 09 98

00 04 55

00 11

00 09

00 08

00 17

00 08

00 10

00 04

00 06

00 19

00 05 5774

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 11 , 2005/ JYAISTHA 21 , 1927

[PART II-SEC. 3 (ii) ]

जिला : सांगली

तालूका : कडेगाँव

सर्वे नंबर

भाव का नाम

गट नंबर कम सं.

4 1

262 तौंहोती (निरंतर)

263

284

285

286

287

290

291

292

297

293

295

294

गट नंबर 294 और

307 के बीच का

अस्फालटेड रास्ता

307

277

311

310

309

314

315

403

404

402

408

400

399

398

397

396

395

375

380 राज्य : महाराष्ट्र

क्षेत्रफल

हेक्टर एयर वर्ग मीटर उप-दण्ड सं.

6 7

00 00 67

00 13 73

00 05 27

00 04 79

00 05

00 04

00 20

00 16 90

00 14

00 19 65

00 01 73

00 03

00 36 73

00 12

00 03

00 20

00 13 41

00 02

00 06

00 05 59

00 02 51

00 08

00 26

00 02

00 01

00 06

04 09

00 03

00 04

00 10 71 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : जून 11 , 2005 /ज्येष्ठ 21 , 1927

5775

जिला : सांगली

तालूका : कडेगाँव

राज्य : महाराष्ट्र

क्षेत्रफल

गट नंबर

सर्वे नंबर

गाव का जोम

कम सं.

4 1

393 3 तोंडॉली (निरंतर)

381

382

383

379

2002

385

589

594

595

596

597

598

603

602

696

697

एयर वर्ग मीटर

हेक्टर

उप-खण्ड सं.

6 7

00 01 31

00 05

00 05 38

00 17 16

00 10

00 01

00 13

00 21

14 84

00 26

00 01

00 14 79

00 26 17

00 13 84

00 06 75

गर्दै नंबर 697 और

00 03

701 के बीच का रास्ता

701

692

700

691

690

689

688

687

895 4 अमरापुर

898

899

900

901

872

856

864

863

862 1636GI/2005-16

}

00 11 95

00 04 83

00 02 53

00 32 35

00 01 90

00 09

00 03 25 कूल

06 84

00 24

00 07 48

00 05 03

00 05 69

00 05 65

00 20

00 01

00 27

00 01 74

00 08 5776

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 11 , 2005/ JYAISTHA 21 , 1927

[PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii)]

जिला : सांगली

तालूका: कडेगाँव

गाव का नाम

सर्वे नंबर

राज्य: महाराष्ट्र

क्षेत्रफल

गट नंबर

कम सं.

4 1

860 4 अमरापुर (निरंतर)

859

858

834

823

925

830

827

826

825

824

929

933

1739

940

945

946

957

958

959

960

961

955

963

964

962

965

967

968

969

973

974

975

980

981

983

984

985

हेक्टर एयर वर्ग मीटर उप-खण्ड सं.

7 8

00 04 91

00 08 02

06 58

00 03

00 08 47

00 04

00 03 48

00 08

00 02 10

00 06

00 15

00 07

00 06

00 29 88

00 11

00 12

00 06 89

00 05

00 02

00 03

00 04

00 01 24

00 02

00 03

00 00 21

00 12

00 09

00 08 76

00 04 80

00 02

00 04 5777

भारत का राजपत्र: जून 11 , 2005/ज्येष्ठ 21 , 1927

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

जिला : सांगली

तालूका : कहेगाँव

सर्वे नंबर

राज्य: महाराष्ट्र

क्षेत्रफल

उप -खण्ड

गट नंबर

माव का नाम

सं.

4 2

988 4 अमरापुर (निरंतर)

989

990

991

994

995

996

1000

1001

1006

1012

1011

1015

1016

1017

1018

1030

1031

1032

1033

1036

1037

1038

1039

1040

1041

1042

1043

1044

1045

1046

1048

1049

1050

1051 5.येवलेवाडी

206

205

207

208

एयर वर्ग मीटर

हेक्टर

सं.

6 7 8 5

00 01

00 03 84

00 04 46

00 01 99

00 02

00 01

00 02 74

00 03

00 02

00 08

00 03

00 02

00 05

00 03 56

00 03

00 24 19

00 11

00 04

00 04 52

00 05 78

00 05

00 04

00 03 68

00 01

00 02

05 64

00 05

00 05 35

00 16 32

00 12 67

00 07

00 01 20

0525 60 कुल

00 04 18

00 29

00 10 11

00 03 5778

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: JUNE 11 , 2005 / JYAISTHA 21 , 1927

[PART II- SEC . 3 ( ii ) ]

जिला : सांगली

तालूका : कडेगाँव

राज्य: महाराष्ट्र

क्षेत्रफल

गट नंबर

सर्वे नंबर

गाव का नाम

कम सं.

212 5 येवलेवाडी (निरंतर)

211

204

210

213

219

220

218

221

225

226

230

231

234

236

237

245

248

249

एयर वर्ग मीटर

हेक्टर

उपखण्ड सं.

6 7

00 04 98

00 08 46

00 04

00 05 13

00 17

00 04 93

00 04

00 05 81

00 15

00 05

00 04

00 15

00 02

00 03

00 16 72

00 09

00 05 30

00 17

गट नंबर 265/5 और

249के बीच का राज्य

मार्ग 78

256

193

192

190

188

187

186

175

174

173

गट मंबर

00 07

24 6

00 05

00 04. 69

00 05 41

02 93

00 02 76

00 03 30

00 06 22

00 11 05

00 05

00 04 89

00 01 21

00 06

173,172,171 के बीच

का कमाल

172

171

168

167

162

00 05 30

00 04 28

00 01 50

00 05 5779

भारत का राजपत्र: जून 11 , 2005/ज्येष्ठ 21 , 1927

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

जिला : सांगली

तालुका : कडेगाँव

सर्वे नंबर

गाव का नाम

गट नंबरं कम सं.

159 5 येवलेवाडी (निरंतर)

156

155

149

148

146

134.

133

132

131

130

127

126

125

122

121

120

119 राज्य : महाराष्ट्र

क्षेत्रफल

हेक्टर एयर वर्ग मीटर उप -खण्ड सं.

6 7 8

13 42

00 03

00 06

00 10 87

00 02

00 08

00 15

00 01

00 13

00 05

05 41

00 00 38

गट नंबर 120 और

00 03

शिवणी गाँव सीमा के

बीच का रास्ता

04 08

कुल

गट नंबर 182 और

6 हणमंत वडिये

00 02 08

अमरापुर गाँव सीमा के

बीच का रास्ता

182

}

00 49

गट नंबर 182 का

00 06

गाडी रास्ता

}

गट नबर 181 का

00 01

गाडी रास्ता

181

180

179

175 7 शिवणी

209

211

00 14 94

00 30 27

00 28 55

00 32 60

01 65 41 कुल

00 13 75

00 26 58 5780

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 11 , 2005 /JYAISTHA 21 , 1927

[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii) ]

जिला : सांगली

तालुका : कडेगाँव

सर्वे नंबर

राज्य : महाराष्ट्र

क्षेत्रफल

गट नंबर

आद का बाम

कम सं.

4 1

210 7 शिवणी (निरंतर)

मीटर

हेक्टर एयर वर्ग उप-खण्ड सं.

6 7 8

00 14 94

गट नंबर 210 और

00 03 98

212 का गाडी रास्ता

212

214

171

247

249

248

264

263

262 }

00 10 69

00 07

00 49

00 02

00 16 92

00 34

00 02 55

00 05

गट नंबर 262 और

गाँव सीमा के बीच में

00 13 71

येरला नदी

कुल 02 03 05

गट नंबर 1413 और

वहिये रायबाग

गाँव सीमा के बीच में

00 14 01

येरला नदी

1413

1383

1384

1382

1381

1380

1379

1378

1377 3

00 01

75 16

00 07

35 5

00 06

02 42

85 7

10 15

00 02 90

00 03

00 05

00 20

00 04

00 11 41

00 09 14

00 02 26

00 01 31

00 02 63

00 03

00 04 22 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

5781

भारत का राजपत्र: जून 11 , 2005/ज्येष्ठ 21 , 1927

जिला : सांगली

तालूका: कडेगाँव

सर्वे नंबर

राज्य : महाराष्ट्र

क्षेत्रफल

गट नंबर

माव का नाम

कम सं.

4 2

वडिये रायबाग (निरंतर)

1374 8

1373

1372

1349

1347

1345

1344

1343

1340

1339

1338

1337

1329

1333

1332

1293

1292

1291

1290

1289

1288

1287

1277

1276

1275

1259

1261

1262

1255

1254

1253

1252

1251

1246

1247

1248

1245

हेक्टर एयर वर्ग मीटर उप-खण्ड सं.

6 7 8 5

09 49

09 04

00 04 19

00 04 88

00 02

00 03

00 01 88

00 03 21

00 04 45

00 05 31

00 03 45

12 4

00 04

22 9

00 05

21 7

00 03

00 05 39

00 05 31

00 16 55

00 04 80

00 05 33

00 04

12.

00 06

00 04

00 03

02 32

00 04

00 02

00 03 84

00 04

00 02

51.

00 08

00 03 40

00 06

00 06 09

00 02 25

00 03

00 02 59

00 01

00 12 42 5782

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 11 , 2005/ JYAISTHA 21 , 1927

[PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii)]

जिला : सांगली

तालुका : कडेगाँव

गट नंबर गाय का नाम

सर्वे नंबर

कम सं.

1244 ४ चहिये रायबाग (निरंतर)

1243

1239

1238

1237 राज्य : महाराष्ट्र

क्षेत्रफल

एयर वर्ग मीटर

हेक्टर

उप-खण्ड सं.

6 7 8 5

00 02 63

00 02 36

00 02 24

00 02 66

गट नंबर 1237 और

00 04

1235 का गाडी रास्ता

1116 }

00 01

गट नंबर 1114 और

1115 के बीच का

नाला

1109

1115

गट नबर 1114,

00 00 91

1115 और 1116 के

00 01 95 }

बीच का नाला

1114

1112

1111

1102

1118

1065

1063

1062

1120

1121 9 सलरुबाव

258

259

370

372

404

411

413

414

415

402

389

388

384

382

00 04 49

00 06

00 06 65

00 31 13

00 57 51

00 15 95

47 70

00 12 16

00 12 50

00 08 06

04 95 37 कुल

00 50 19

00 15 20

00 16 50

00 08 64

00 10 08

00 04

00 09

00 27

00 00 54

00 00 45 [भोग II-खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

5783 भारत की राजषत्र : जून 11 , 2005/ज्येष्ठ 21 , 1927

जिला : सांगली

तालूका: कडेगाव

राज्य : महाराष्ट्र

क्षेत्रफल गाव का नाम

सर्वे नंबर

गट नंबर

कम सं.

हेक्टर एयर वर्ग मीटर

उप-खण्ड सं.

6 7 8 9 सेलकबाव (निरंतर)

566

00 12 50

566

06 50

565

00.01

567

00 23

564

00 00 68

गट नंबर 562/1 और

00 03

564 के बीच का

अस्फालटेड रास्ता

563

00 00 97

562

00 20

562

00 02 07

562

00 19

562

00 31 35

562

00 19 78

कुल

03 10 53

[फा. सं. आर-31015/29/2004- ओ.आर- II ]

हरीश कुमार, अवरं सचिव

New Delhi , the 9th June , 2005

S. O. 2067 , Whereasby notification of the Government of India In the Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Gas nümber S.O. 2673 dated the 18th October, 2004, issued under sub- section ( 1 ) of section 3 of the Petroleum and Minerals Pipelines (Acquisition of Right of User in Land) Act , 1962 (50 of 1962) ( hereinafter referred to as the said Act ) , published in the Gazette of India dated the 23rd October, 2004 , the Central Government declared its intention to acquire the right of user in the land, specified in the Schedule appended to that notification for the purpose of laying pipeline for transportation of Petroleum products through Mumbai - Pune PipelineExtension Project from Loni ( Pune) to Pakni (Solapur) (Via Hazarwadi ) in the State of Maharashtra by Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Limited;

Andwhereas copies of the said Gazette notification were made available to the public on the 2nd December , 2004;

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

Andwhereas the Central Government , after considering the sald report and on being satisfied that the said land is required for laying the pipeline, has decided to acquire the right of usertherein;

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

1636GI/2005-17 5784

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 11 , 2005 /JYAISTHA 21 , 1927

[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii ) ] And further, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub- section (4) of section 6 of the said Act, the Central Government hereby directs that the right of user in the said land for laying the pipeline shall , instead of vesting in the Central Government , vest on the date ofpublication of this declaration, in Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Limited; free from all encumbranceв .

SCHEDULE

Taluka : KADEGAON

Dist: SANGLI

GatNo.

Survey No.

Sr. No.

Name of the Village

121

1 UPALE VANGI

120

Nala in between

Survey No }

120 and 119

119

Nala in Survey No

119/1A & 2A

} .

119

Road in between

SurveyNo }

119 and 118

118

143

Nala in between

SurveyNo }

143 and 148

148

147

146

145

158

156

159

Asphalted Road in

}

Survey No 159/2

160

State : MAHARASHTRA

Area

Sub-Division No. Hectare Are Sq.mt

7 8

00 41 23

00 47 20

00 01 88

00 00 10 1A+2A

00 01 80 2C

00 10 80 2D

00 01 50

09 90 2H

00 07

00 09 00 2L

00 06 30

45 26

00 21 28 1

00 31 06 2

00 00

3/B4/A

07 34

00 02 41

00 08 94

00 23 87 3

00 19 02

00 21 81

00 50 2

00 30 79

00 02 98 3

00 31 67

03 95 22 [भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : जून 11 , 2005/ज्येष्ठ 21 , 1927

5785

Dist : SANGLI

faluka : KADEGAON

GatNo.

Survey No.

Sr. No.

Name ofthe Village

4 1

160 2 UPALE MAYNI

158

157

156

146 State : MAHARASHTRA

Area

Sub-Division No. Hectare Are Sq.mt

7 8

42 15

00 3217

00 14 43

00 34 67

Nala in between

02 }

Gat No 146 & 200

199

200

00 00 20

00 11 10

00 01 81

Nala in Gat No 200

203

204

247

246

00 08 70

00 00

00 67 68 A

Mud Road in Gat

00 02 66

No. 246 A

269

281

279

277

278

224 3 TONDOLI

225

226

222

220

219

217

216

215

214

213

212

211

161

261

264 }

00 72 67

00 10

00 10 22

00 18 75 Total

72 14

00 05 53

00 19 22

00 00 87

00 09 98

00 04 55

00 09 87

00 08 22

00 17 50

00 10 63

00 04 56

00 06

05 5786

JUNE 11 , 2005 / JYAISTHA 21 , 1927

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA :

[PART II-SEC. 3 (ii)] State : MAHARASHTRA

Dist: SANGLI

faluka : KADEGAON

GatNo.

Survey No.

Sr. No.

Name ofthe Village

262 3 TONDOLI ( Contd.)

263

284

285

286

287

290

291

292

297

293

295

294

Area

Sub-Division

No. Hectare Are Sq.mt

7 3 5

00 00 27

00 00 75

00 13 73

00 05 27

00 05 23

00 04 92

00 20 79

00 16 90

00 34

00 14 30

00 19 65

00 01 73

00 03 42

Asphalted Road in

between Gat No

294& 307

307

277

311

310

309

314

315

403

404

402

408

400

399

398

397

396

395

375

380

00 36 73

00 03 18

20 25

00 02 43

00 06 71

00 05 59

00 02 51

00 08 67

00 26 82

00 02 57

00 72

00 01 36

00 06 78

00 04 09

00 03 37

00 04 83

00 04 48

00 10 71 [भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : जून 11 , 2005/ज्येष्ठ 21 , 1927

5787

Dist: SANGLI

Taluka : KADEGAON

GatNo.

Survey No.

Sr. No.

Name ofthe Village

393 3 TONDOLI (Contd .)

381

382

383

379

2002

385

589

594

595

596

597

598

603

602

696

697

Metalled Road in between Gat No

697 & 701

701

692

700

691

690

689

688

687

895 4 AMRAPUR

898

899

900

901

872

856

864

863

862 State : MAHARASHTRA

Area

Sub-Division

No.

Sq.mt

Are

Hectare

6 7 8

00 05 38

00 10 76

00 01 61

00 73

00 13 22

00 21 03

00 14 84

00 26 45

00 01 56

00 14 79

00 26 17

00 13

00 06 75

00 03 55

00 11

00 04 83

00 02 53

00 32 35

00 01 90

00 09 49

00 03

00 00 07

06 84 69 Total

00 24 97

00 07 48

00 05 03

00 20 43

01.

00 27 64

00 01 74

00 08 5788

[PART II-SEC. 3 ( ii ) ] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 11 , 2005 /JYAISTHA 21 , 1927

Dist: SANGLI

State : MAHARASHTRA Taluka : KADEGAON

Area

GatNo.

Survey No.

Sub-Division No.

Sr. No.

Are Sq.mt

Hectare

Name of the Village

7 8 1

00 04 91

860

4 AMRAPUR (Contd.)

859

08 02

00 06 58

858

03 71

834

823

00 03 35

925

08 47

00 04

830

827

00 03 48

826

00 08 96

02 10

825

824

06 41

929

00 15 43

00 07 25

933

1739

06 56

940

29 88

945

11 62

946

12 18

957

06 89

00 05 15

958

00 05 10

959

00 05 86

960

00 02 19

961

955

00 00 79

00 03 83

963

964

03 65

00 00 10

962

00 04 19

965

01 24

967

02 15

968

969

02. 28

03 17

973

974

00 00 21

975

12 23

00 09 10

980

00 08 76

981

983

00 02 28

984

00 04 23

985 [भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : जून 11 , 2005/ज्येष्ठ 21 , 1927

5789

Dist : SANGLI

Taluka : KADEGAON

GatNo.

Survey No.

Sr. No.

Name ofthe Village

4 2

988 4 AMRAPUR (Contd.)

989

990

991

994

995

996

1000

1001

1006

1012

1011

1015

1016

1017

1018

1030

1031

1032

1033

1036

1037

1038

1039

1040

1041

1042

1043

1044

1045

1046

1048

1049

1050

1051

206 YEVELEVADI

205

207

208 State : MAHARASHTRA

Area

Sub-Division No. Hectare Are Sq.mt 5

6 7 8

00 01 43

00 04 46

00 01 99

00 02 73

00 02 74

00 0347

00 02 65

00 03 01

00 02 80

05 23

00 03 56

00 03 90

00 24 19

00 11 05

00 04 50

00 04

00 05 78

00 05 00

00 01 80

00 02 14

00 02 48

00 02

00 05 64

00 06 55

00 05 02

00 05 35

00 16 32

00 12 67

00 07 82

00 01 20 Total

05 25 60

00 04

00 29 25

00 10 11

00 03 69 5790

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 11 , 2005 /JYAISTHA 21 , 1927

Taluka : KADEGAON

[PART II-SEC. 3 (ii)] State : MAHARASHTRA

Dist : SANGLI

GatNo.

Survey No.

Sr. No.

Name of the Village

4 1

212 5 YEVELEVADI ( Contd. )

211

204

210

213

219

220

218

221

225

226

230

231

234

236

237

245

248

249

Area

Sub-Divialon No. Hectare Are Sq.mt

6 7 8

00 04 98

00 05 13

00 17 09

00 04 93

00 04 99

00 05 81

00 15 93

00 05 32

00 04 04

00 15 54

00 02 66

00 02 97

00 03 75

16 72

00 09 26

00 05 30

00 17 61

SH - 78 in between

GatNo

00 0711 ,

256/5 & 249

256

193

192

190

188

187

186

175

174

173 6

00 05 24 5

00 04 69

00 05 41

00 02 93

00 02 76

00 03 30

00 06 22

00 11 05

00 05 99

00 04 89

00 01 21

Unlined Canal in

06 97

GatNo 173 ,

172&171

172

171

168

167

162 }

00 05 30

00 04 28

00 01 50

00 05 39 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : जून 11 , 2005/ज्येष्ठ 21 , 1927

Taluka : KADEGAON

5791

Dist: SANGLI

GotNo.

Survey No.

Sr. No.

Name ofthe Village

159 5 YEVELEVADI ( Contd. )

156

155

149

148

146

134

133

132

131

130

127

126

125

122

121

120

119 State : MAHARASHTRA

Area

Sub-Division No. Hectare Are Sq.mt 5

7 8

00 02 95

00 13

00 04 27

00 03 47

00 06 32

00 02

00 08 22

00 08 11

00 08 76

00 15 18

00 01 71

00 05 36

00 05 09

00 05 41

00 00 38

00 03 63

Metalled Road in

between Gat No

120& V.B ofShivni

6 HANMANT VADIYE

Total

08 94

00 02 08

Metalled Road in

between V.B of

Amarapur &Gat

No 182

182 }

00 06 11 }

CartTrack in Gat

No 182

00 01 71

CartTrack in Gat

No 181

181

180

179

175

209 7 SHIVNI

211 1636GI/2005-18

}

00 14 94

00 30 27

00 28 55

Total

65 41

00 26 58 5792

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 11 , 2005 / JYAISTHA 21 , 1927

Taluka: KADEGAON

[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii)]

Dist: SANGLI

GatNo.

Survey No.

No Sr. Name ofthe Village

4 2

210 7 SHIVNI ( Contd .)

State: MAHARASHTRA

Area

Sub-Division

No. Hectare Are Sq.mt

6 7 8 5

00 14 94

00 03 98

CartTrackinGat

No 210 & 212

212

214

171

247

249

248

264

263

262

00 10

00 49 50

00 02 69

00 00 10

00 16 92

00 34 91

00 02 55

00 05 54

00 13 71

Yerla River

between Gat No

262& V.B

8 VADIYE

RAYBAGH

02 03 05 Total

00 14 01

Yerla River

between GatNo

1413 & V.B

1413

1383

1384

1382

1381

1380

1379

1378

1377 3

00 00 10 4

00 01 79

00 07 75 16

00 06 35 6

00 02 42

00 85 7

00 10

00 02 90

00 03 12 18

05 00 20

00 04 00 21

00 00 30

00 11 41

00 00 03

00 09 14

00 02 26

00 01 31

02 63

00 03 87

00 04 22 [भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : जून 11 , 2005/ज्येष्ठ 21 , 1927

5793 State : MAHARASHTRA

Dist : SANGLI

Taluka: KADEGAON

GatNo.

Survey No.

Sr. No.

Name ofthe Village

1374 8 VADIYE RAYBAGH ( Contd. )

1373

1372

1349

1347

1345

1344

1343

1340

1339

1338

1337

1329

1333

1332

1293

1292

1291

1290

1289

1288

1287

1277

1276

1275

1259

1261

1262

1255

1254

1253

1252

1251

1246

1247

1248

1245

Area

Sub-Division

No. Hectare Are Sq.mt

7 8 5

00 04

00 04 88

00 02 77

00 03 61

00 01 88

00 03 21

00 04

00 05 31

00 03 45 4

00 04 9

00 05 22 7

00 03 21

39 14

00 05 31

00 16 55

00 04 80

00 05 33

00 06 12

00 03 50

02 32

00 04 23

00 0281

00 03 84

00 00 10

00 04 51

02 32

00 08 51

00 03 40

00 06 74

00 06. 09

02 25

00 03 29

00 02 59

01 99

00 1242 5794

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 11 , 2005 /JYAISTHA 21 , 1927

[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii)]

Dist: SANGLI

Taluka: KADEGAON

GatNo.

Survey No.

Sr. No.

Name ofthe Village

1244 8 VADIYE RAYBAGH ( Contd. )

1243

1239

1238

1237 State : MAHARASHTRA

Area

Sub-Division

No.

Are Sq.mt

Hectare

7 8

00 02 63

00 02 36

02 24

00 02 66

00 00 21

CartTrackbetween

00 04 99

GatNo 1237 &

1235

1116 '}

00 01 11

Nala in between

00 00 89

GatNo 1114 &

1115

1109

1115 }

00 00 37

00 00 91

Nala in between

GatNo1114,

00 01 95

1115 & 1116

1114

1112

1111

1102

118

1065

1063

1062

1120

1121 SHELEGBAV

258

259

370

372

404

411

413

414

415

402

389

388

384

382 }

00 06 65

00 31 13

00 57 51

00 15 95

00 47 70

12 16

00 12

00 08 06

Total

95 37

00 50 19

00 15 20

00 08

00 10 08

04 32

00 14 76

00 10 08

00 27 36

00 00 41

00 00 54

00 34

00 00 45 [भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii ) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : जून 11 , 2005/ज्येष्ठ 21 , 1927

Taluka : KADEGAON

5795

Dist : SANGLI

GatNo.

Survey No.

Sr. No.

Name ofthe Village

566 9 SHELEGBAV(Contd.)

566

565

567

564 State: MAHARASHTRA

Area

Sub-Division No.

Are

Hectare Sq.mt 5

6 7 8 1

00 12

50 2

00 06 50

00 23 25

00 00 68

00 03 67 }

Asphalted Road in

Between Gat No

562/1& 564

563

562

00 00 97 1

20 5

02 07 6

18 47 9

00 00 04 10

00 31 35 3

00 19 78 Total

03 10 53 [No. R-31015/29/2004-O.R. - II ] HARISH KUMAR , Under Secy.

नईदिल्ली, 7 जून, 2005

का. आ. 2068.- केन्द्रीय सरकार को लोकहित में यह आवश्यक प्रतीत होता है कि गुजरात राज्य में कोयली से दहेज तक पेट्रोलियम उत्पादन के परिवहन के लिए इंडियन ऑयल कार्पोरेशन लिमिटेड द्वारा , एक पाइपलाइन बिछाई जानी चाहिए;

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

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

कोई व्यक्ति, जो उक्त अनुसची में वर्णित भूमि में हितबद्ध है, उस तारीख से जिसको उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 3 की उपधारा (1 ) के अधिन भारत के राजपत्र में यथा प्रकाशित इस अधिसूचना की प्रतियां साधारण जनता को उपलब्ध करा दी जाती है, इक्कीस दिन के भीतर, भूमि के नीचे पाइपलाइन बिछाए जाने के संबंध में, श्री पी. आर. भट्ट, सधाम प्राधिकारी , इंडियन ऑयल कार्पोरेशन लिमिटेड, मकान नं. 3/122, रिफाइनरी ठाउनाशेप , पो.ओ. जवाहरनगर, वडोदरा -391320 ( गुजरात) को लिखित रुप में आक्षेप भेज सकेगा । 5796

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 11 , 2005/ JYAISTHA 21 , 1927

[PART II-SEC . 3( ii ) ]

अनुसूची

जिला: भरूच

तालुका : आमोद

गाँव का नाम

उप-खण्ड सं.

सर्वेक्षण सं.-खण्ड सं.

23-वासना

P/2

P/1

Total

24- मजोला

371

--P

160

159

190

191

195

192

193

Total

123

25-कोबला

127

126

148

147

146

राज्य : गुजरात क्षेत्रफल

वर्ग मीटर हेक्टेयर एयर

6 00

37 00

63 00

92 00

04 00

26 00

52 00

80 00

08 00

62 00

49 00

46 00

29 00

57 01

04 00

19 00

76 00

06 00

17 00

08 00

17 00

38 00

19 00

50 00

59 00

92 00

34 00

49 02

21 00

88 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : जून 11 , 2005/ज्येष्ठ 21 , 1927

3 1

145

25. कोबला (जारी..)

144

189

190

196

192

194

193

292

293

Total

321

26-वडेचा

319

320

322

323

324

330

331

332

333

Total

124

27-चकलाद

123

122

119

120

118

117

112

115

113

114

510

505

504

503

482

476

477

475

474

431

436

5797 4

6 00

26 00

20 00

52 00

59 00

17- 00

80 00

36 00

21 00

47 00

23 00

01 00

06. 00

57 00

48 00

07 00

31 00

38 00

93 00

19 00

40 00

94 00

16 00

73 00

25 00

91 00

42 00

25 00

39 00

13 00

02 00

22 00

32 00

69 00

99 5798

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 11 , 2005/ JYAISTHA 21 , 1927

3 1

435

27- चकलाद (जारी)

434

428

415

413

Total

182

28-अडवाला

119

122

123

124

125

102

Total

267

29-रोघ

271

272

273

274

275

276

277

278

279

280

281

Total

278

30-आमोद (1 )

278

279

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

6 00

50 00

68 00

19 00

54 00

39 00

05 00

73 00

39 00

19 00

66 00

76 00

11 00

81 00

69 00

60 00

01 00

36 00

40 00

27 00

35 00

97 02

01 00

72 00

46 00

07 00

80 00

55 00

89 00

74 00

77 00

63 00

60 00

58 00

37 00

95 02

13 00

91 00

80 00

06 00

09 00

66 00

27 [भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : जून 11 , 2005/ज्येष्ठ 21 , 1927

281

३० -आमोद ( क )

280

284

Total

31-भीमपुरा

281

282

320

319

317

316

315

314

313

332

469

467

464

465

Total

32-आमोद(2)

383

-1332

383

385

1636GI/2005-19

5799 4

6 00

16 00

54. 00

44 00

79 00

41 00

39 00

1.1

75 00

08 00

54 0021

83 00

14.

92 00

23 00

22 00

65 00

12 イ 97 00

12 00

75 00

10.

00.

90 00

05 00.

86 00

67 00

25 00

00-

13.

04 5800

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 11 , 2005/JYAISTHA 21 , 1927

32- आमोद (2)जारी

386

391

392

435

393

434

433

432

411

413

408

407

Total

1596

33-आछोद (1 )

1595

1591

1592

1594

1593

1563

1565

1566

1585

1570

1555

1554

1552

1551

1573

1574

1576

1575

1633

1632

1631

1634

1635

1636

1637

1638

1640

1639

1641

1642

1334

1332

1331

1316

1312

1313

[PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii)]

6 00

58 00

33 00

21 00

64 00

27 00

75 03

25 5801

भारत का राजपत्र: जून 11 , 2005/ज्येष्ठ 21 , 1927

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

3 1

1314

33-आछोद (1 ) (जारी)

1308

1282

1283

1284

1285

1286

1290

1289

Total

857

33-आछोद(2)

854

855

849

848

847

846

837

836

823

822

806:

804

803

801

795

793

790

789

788

766

787

786

785

784

782

781

780

779

778

777

776

774

773.

467

466

465

14 00

06 00

50 00

22 00

$ 00

100

00,

06.

00 5802

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 11 , 2005/ JYAISTHA 21 , 1927

463

33-आछोद(2)(जारी)

462

486

456

461

460

459

458

408

424

425

423

355

321

358

359

316

320

317

315

314

313

Total

165

34-इंटोला

166

173

177

P/2

177

178

179

191

190

189

187

207

217

216

210

213

211

212

226

227

290

269

272

270

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

78 00

22 00

53 00

29 00

94 00

63 00

67 00

59 00

12 00

47 00

53 00

63 00

54 00

03 00 5803

भारत का राजपत्र: जून 11 , 2005/ज्येष्ठ 21 , 1927

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

271

34- इटीला (जारी )

264

277

260

259

403

404

408

409

410

Total

201

35-रोजा टंकारीया(1 )

201

200

157

199

159

160

162

163

164

167

165

170

-150

149

148

147

146

145

144

105

106

107

108

110

111

112

114

113

119

6 4

80 00

22 00

15 00

26 00

99 00

39 00

94 00

00 .

26 00

19 00

75 00

83 00

44 00

68 00

55 00

79 00

96 11

64 00

03- 00

0.0

00 5804

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 11 , 2005/JYAISTHA 21 , 1927

3 1

35- रोजा रकारिया (१ ) ((जारी)

Total

1317

35--रोजा टंकारीया(2)

1316

1312

1311

Total

1137

35-रोजा टंकारीया(3)

1138

1135

B/1

1135

1133

1131

1000

1001

997

1002

985

984

980

981

978

977

974

973

972

964

937

938

939

941

942

Total

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

[फा. सं. आर-25011/3/2005 - ओ.आर-1 ] एस. के. चिटकारा, अवर सचिव [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

5805

भारत का राजपत्र : जून 11 , 2005/ज्येष्ठ 21 , 1927

New Delhi , the 7th June , 2005

S. O. 2068.-Whereas it appears to the Central Government that it is _necessary in the public interest that for the transportation of Petroleum Products from Koyali to Dahej in the State of Gujarat , a pipeline should be laid by the Indian Oil Corporation Limited;

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

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

Any person interested in the land described in the said Schedule may, within twenty one days from the date on which the copies of the 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 laying of the pipeline under the land to Shri P. R. Bhatt , Competent Authority, Indian Oil Corporation Limited , at office Qtrs . No. 3/122 , Refinery Township , P.O.. Jawaharnagar, Vadodara -391320 (Gujarat).

SCHEDULE

Taluka: Amod

Dist: Bharuch

State: Gujarat

Area

Name of Village Survey / Block No. Sub- Division No.

Hectare. Are Centiare 1

6 83

23 - VASNA

37 84

63 82

92 81

04 80

26 68

52 67

80 62

08 61

P/2

62 61.

P/1

49 57

46 54

29 55..

57 Total

04 5806

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 11 , 2005/ JYAISTHA 21 , 1927

24 - MANJOLA

371

--P

160

159

190

191

195

192

193

Total

25- KOBLA

123

127

126

148

147

146

145

144

189

190

196

192

194

193

292

293

Total

321

26- VEDCHA

319

320

322

323

324

330

331

332

333

Total

[PART II-SEC. 3 ( ii )]

6 4

19 00

76 00

06 00

17 00

38 00

00 [भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii ) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : जून 11 , 2005 /ज्येष्ठ 21 , 1927

2 27 - CHAKLAD

124

123

122

119

120

118

117

112

115

113

114

510

505

504

503

482

476

477

475

474

431

436

435

434

428

415

413

Total 28- ADWALA

182

119

122

123

124

125

102

Total 1636GI/ 2005-20

5807

6 3

03 00

73 00

91 00

40 00

54 00

25 00

39 00

65 00

13 00

02 00

22 00

29 00 .

69 00

54 00

05 00

39 00

66 00

69 1

60 2

66 00

27 00

35 00

01 02 5808

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 11 , 2005 / JYAISTHA 21 , 1927

3 29- RONDH

267

271

272

273

274

275

276

277

278

279

280

281

Total

278

30- AMOD ( 1)

278

279

281

280

284

Total

31 - BHIMPURA

281

282

320

[PART II-SEC. 3 ( ii) ]

6 4

72 00

26 / 46 00

80 00

55 00

77 00

63 00

95 00

91 00

27 00

16 00

95 00

54 00

79 00

41 00

75 00

54 00

92 00

22 00

65 00

12 00

75 00

97 00

27 00

22 00

05 00

86 00

67 00

00 [भाग II-खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : जून 11 , 2005/ज्येष्ठ 21 , 1927

3 131-BHIMPURA (contd..)

319

317

316

315

314

313

332

469

467

464

465

Total

2 32-AMOD(2)

-3

383

1 .

385

386

391

392

435

393

434

433

432

411

413

408

407

Total

1596

33 - ACHHOD ( 1 )

1595

1591

1592

1594

1593

1563

1565

1566

1585

1570

1555

5809

25 00

46 00

12 00

29 00.

15 00

85 00

00.

26 00

48 00

82 00

17 00

32 00

04 00

58' 00

;

99 00

97 00

84 00

61 00

80 00

97 00

20 00 5810

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 11 , 2005/ JYAISTHA 21 , 1927

1554

33 -ACHHOD ( 1 ) (Contd .)

1552

1551.

1573

1574

1576

1575

1633

1632

1631

1634

1635

1636

1637

1638

1640

1639

1641

1642

1334

1332

1331

1316

1312

1313

134

1282

1283

1284

1235

1286

1290

1289

Total

857

23 ACHHOD - 2

854

855

849

848

847

846

837

836

823

[PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii) ]

84 00

87 00

56 00

53 00

47 00

66 00

37 00

27 00

91 00

08 00

49 00

36 00

52 00

37 00

44 00

14 00

38 00

85 00

11 00

22 00

87 00

29 03

33 00

98 00

76 00

75 00

33 00

35 00

25 00

64 00

04 5811

भारत का राजपत्र: जून 11 , 2005/ज्येष्ठ 21 , 1927

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

3 1

ACHHOD - 2

822

806

804

803

801

795

793

790

789

788

766

787

786

785

784

782

781

780

779

778

777

776

774

773

467

466

465

463

462

486

456

461

460

459

458

408

424

425

423

355

321

358

359

316

320

317

57 00

72 00

83 00

32 00

11 00

35 00

00 00

50 00

30 00

35 00

56 00

23 00

77 00

58 00

37 00

47 00

09 00

39 00

00 5812

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 11 , 2005 /JYAISTHA 21 , 1927

3 ACHHOD -2

315

314

313

Total

165

34. INTOLA

166

176

177

P/2

178

179

191

190

189

187

207

217

216

210

213

211

212

226

227

290

269

272

270

271

264

277

260

259

403

404

408

409

410

Total

1 35 - ROZA

201

TANKARIYA ( 1 )

200

157

199

[PART II SEC. 3 (ii) ]

94 00

12 00

94 00

00 भारत का राजपत्र : जून 11 , 2005/ज्येष्ठ 21 , 1927

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

159

35- ROZA

160

TANKARIYA (1)

162

163

164

167

165

170

150

149

148

147

146

145

144

105

106

107

108

110

111

112

114

113

119

Total

35 ROZA

1317

TANKARIYA - 2

1316

1312

1311

Total

5813

44 00

68 00

90 00

34 00

32 00

55 00

62 00

91 00

86 00

77 00

33 00

96 00

64. 00

47 00

80 00

23 00

10 00

76 00

11 00

68 00

63 00

35 00

22 00

53 00

10 04

57 00

24 00

06 5814

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 11 , 2005/ JYAISTHA 21 , 1927

1137

35 ROZA TANKARIYA -3

1138

1135

B/1

1133

1131

1000

1001

997

1002

985

984

980

981

978

977

974

973

972

964

937

938

939

941

942

Total

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

27 00

43 00

68 00

73 00

78 00

04 00

37 00

74 00

61 00

34 00

94 00

09 00

91 03

[No. R -25011/3/2005-0.R. - I ] S. K. CHITKARA , Under Secy.

नई दिल्ली, 7 जून , 2005

का. आ. 2069.-केन्द्रीय सरकार को लोकहित में यह आवश्यक प्रतीत होता है कि गुजरात राज्य में कोयली से दहेज तक पेट्रोलियम उत्पादन के परिवहन के लिए इंडियन ऑयल कार्पोरेशन लिमिटेड द्वारा , एक पाइपलाइन बिछाई जानी चाहिए;

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

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

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र: जून 11 , 2005/ज्येष्ठ 21 , 1927

5815 कोई व्यक्ति, जो उक्त अनुसची में वर्णित भूमि में हितबद्ध है, उस तारीख से जिसको उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 3 की उपधारा (1 ) के अधिन भारत के राजपत्र में यथा प्रकाशित इस अधिसूचना की प्रतियां साधारण जनता को उपलब्ध करा दी जाती है, इक्कीस दिन के भीतर, भूमि के नीचे पाइपलाइन बिछाए जाने, के संबंध में, श्री पी. आर . भट्ट, सक्षम प्राधिकारी , इंडियन ऑयल कार्पोरेशन लिमिटेड, मकान नं. 3/122, रिफाइनरी ठाउनशिप , पो.ओ. जवाहरनगर, वडोदरा -391320 (गुजरात) को लिखित रुप में आक्षेप भेज सकेगा ।

अनुसूची

तालुका: वागरा

जिला: भरूच

गाँव का नाम

उप-खण्ड सं.

सर्वेक्षण सं.- खण्ड सं

36- बदलपुर

---

214

185

214

A/2

AABM

187

190

209

PPPP-

206

Total

1636 GI/05-21

राज्य : गुजरात क्षेत्रफल

हेक्टेयर

एयर वर्ग मीटर 4

60.

31 5816

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 11 , 2005 /JYAISTHA 21 , 1927

1293/23

37- पडलपुर

1294/24

1295/25

1299/29/B

1318/48

1315/45

1314/B/44/A

1314/A/44/B

1323/53

1313/43

1312/42

1325/55/B

1327/B/57/B

1327/A/ 57 /A

1326/56

Total

300

38-केशवान(1 )

299

298

291

292

290

288

289

312

311

313

310

415.

414

425

430

412

431

411

433

435

434

394

393

388

385

387

375

[PART IISEC. 3 (ii)] 4

6 00

38 00

39 00

53 00

66 00

06 00

46 00

71 00

31 00

20 00

56 00

85 00

71 00

73 02

12 00

27 00

44 00

15 00

99 00

58 00

62 00

64 00

36 00

77 00

95 00

67 00

99 00

42 00

48 00

11 00

64 00

30 00

56 00

65 00

79 00

76 +00

86 00

85 ) [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : जून 11 , 2005/ज्येष्ठ 21 , 1927

3 38- केशवान (1)

376

373

372

Total

1043

A 38-केशवान(2)

1021

1020

1023

1026

1025

1024

893

892

891

890

875

877

878

879

874

880

871

870

930

931

932

947

946

945

Total

181

39-ट्रंकाल

186

185

188

187

Total

264

40-अंभेल

265

270

271

P/2

268

289

288

374

5817 4

34 00

92 00

90 05

73 00

97 00

75 00

96 00

02 00

-13

35 00

51 00

14 00

61 00

60 00

63 00

49 00

64 00

13 00

98 03

00:

40 5818

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 11 , 2005/ JYAISTHA 21 , 1927

3 1

375

५० - अंगेल (जारी... )

376

379

378

377

....--A-B

----A

Total

277

41-गोलाद्रा

274

275

269

--BA-

267

268-

268

229

228

226

215

227

208

206

207

143

-BA--

144

142

139

140

Total

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

6 00

84 00

21 00

70 00

20 00

13 00

18 00

49 00

31 00

24 00

70 00

18 00

20 00

88 00

56 00

51 00

26 00

29 04

71 00

60 00

36 00

65 00

12 00

38 00

74 00

37 00

78 00

10 00

42 00

95 00

02 00

88 00

35 00

90 00

92 00

09 00

43- 00

68 03

47 भारत का राजपत्र : जून 11 , 2005/ज्येष्ठ 21 , 1927

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii ) ]

42-नरनावी

P/2

102

100

200

P/2

201

P/ 1

201

204

243

242

241

240

239

238

237

208

229

228

Total

164

[43- पादरीयाजलालपुर

165

166

AAR

166

178

169

170

168

171

175

174

172

5819

67 00

47 00

30 00

01 00

25.

57 00

37 00

12 00

25 00

46 00

55 00

02 00

19.

44 00

51 00

15 00

37 00

33 00

Ου

11 00

14 OC

16 00

93 04

69 00

46 00

94 00

29 00

27 00

61 00 5820

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: JUNE 11 , 2005/ JYAISTHA 21 , 1927

3 1

43- पादरीयाजलालपुर (जारी...) 173

Total

790

44-कटोदरा

791

789

681

682

--P-B

684

683

684

-A

685

P/2

673

688

671

669

668

665

664

663

662

661

656

612

613

614

615

P/2

394

608

607

582

605

604

585

599

P/1

586

P/2

586

587

588

458

457

[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii) ]

24 00

32 00

85 00

72 02

47 00

45 00

10 00

62 00

40 00

01 00

33 00

25 00

67 00

58 00

29 00

61 00

16 00

59 00

65 00

24 00

04 00

17 00

98 00

42 00

27 00

30 00 5821

भारत का राजपत्र: जून 11 , 2005/ज्येष्ठ 21 , 1927

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

459

44-कटोदरा(जारी)

460

455

452

437

436

405.

409

408

209

207

206

205

193

Total

1380

45- दहेज

1393

1392

1391

1390

1389

1388

1504

1304

1303

1305

1306

1307

1308

1311

1275

1312

1313

1314

1315

1247

12:48

1249

1261

1257

1250

1251

945

944

943

04 00

25 00

69 00

32 00

89 00

23 00

82 00

43 00

95 00

48 00

45 00

11 00

09 00

85 00

36 00

57 00

85 00

00 5822

[PART II- SEC . 3 ( ii ) ] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 11 , 2005/JYAISTHA 21 , 1927

6 145 - दहेल (जारी ) 1504

97 1504

1532

1530

1529

Total

61 46-लखीगाम

Birla Copper Land

Road

PowerCorridor

30 Power Corridor

PipelineCorridor

59 Total

[फा. सं. आर-25011/2/2005-ओ.आर-1 ]

एस. के. चिटकारा, अवर सचिव

New Delhi , the 7th June , 2005

S. O. 2069.- Whereas it appears to the Central Government that it is necessary in the public interest that for the transportation of Petroleum Products from Koyali to Dahej in the State of Gujarat, a pipeline should be laid by the Indian Oil Corporation Limited;

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

Any person interested in the land described in the said Scnedule may, within twenty one days from the date on which the copies of the 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 laying of the pipeline under the land to Shri P. R. Bhatt, Competent Authority , Indian Oil Corporation Limited , at office Qtrs . No. 3/122 , Refinery Township , P.Ο. Jawaharnagar , Vadodara -391320 (Gujarat) .

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : जून 11 , 2005 /ज्येष्ठ 21 , 1927

5823

SCHEDULE

Dist: Bharuch

Taluka: Vagra

Nameof Village Survey / Block No. Sub- Division No.

3 1

36- BADALPUR

214

185

214

-AAB10

A/2

187

190

209

-PPPP:

206

Total

1293

37- PADALPUR

1294

1295

1299

29/B

1318

1315

44/A

1314/B

44/B

1314/A

1323

1313

1312

1325

55/B

57/B

1327/B

1327/A

57 /A

1326

Total 1636 GI/05-22

State: Gujarat

Area

Hectare. Are Centiare 4

6 00

16 00

28 00

38 00

69 00

26 00

78 00

47 00

53 00

20 00

80 00

23 00

99 00

87 00

72 GO

42 00

60 00

67 00

09 00

42 .00

82 00

63 00

97 00

33 C4

31 00

38 00

39 00

53 00

66 00

06 00

46 00

71 00

31 00

20 00

56 00

19 00

85 00

71 00

73 02

12 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 11 , 2005 /JYAISTHA 21 , 1927

5824

300

38 - KESHWAN (1 )

299

298

291

292

290

288

289

312

311

313

310

415

414

425

430

412

431

411

433

435

434

394

393

388

385

387

375

376

373

372

Total

1043

38- KESHWAN (2)

1021

1020

1023

1026

1025

1024

893

892

891

890

875

877

[PART II-SEC. 3 ( ii ) ]

6 4

27 00

44 00

99 00

58 00

64 00

36 00

77 00

26 00

95 00

67 00

64 00

56 00

65 00

05 00

79 00

92 00

90 00

73 05

97 00

96 00

02 00

35 00

51 00

14 00

63 00

49 00

00 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

5825

भारत का राजपत्र: जून 11 , 2005/ज्येष्ठ 21 , 1927

2 1

878

879

874

880

871

870

930

931

932

947

946

945

Total

181 39- TRANKAL

186

185

188

187

Total

264 40- AMBHEL

265

270

271

268

289

374

375

376

379

378

377

74.

Total 3

6 00

13 00

19 00

32 00

75 00

19 00

38 00

68 00

61΄ 00

65 00

57 00

86 00

98 03

99 00

78 00

20 00

59 00

75 00

80 00

12 00

90 00

14 00

80 00

18 00

P/2

62 00

86 00

63 P

36 00

84 00

21 00

70 00

20 00

13 00

18 00

49 00

31 00

24 00

70 00

18 00

20 00

88 00

56 00

51 00

08 00

29 04

71 5826

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 11 , 2005/ JYAISTHA 21 , 1927

3 1

277

41 - GOLADRA

274

275

269

267

268

229

228

226

215

227

208

206

207

143

144

142

139

140

Total

42- NARNAVI

P/2

102

100

200

P/2

201

P/1

201

204

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

6 00

38 00

60 00

36 00

65 00

40 00

12 00

38 00

74 00

37 00

78 00

10 00

42 00

95 00

88 00

35 00

90 00

09 00

43 00

47 03

67 00

47 00

30 00

26 00

14 00

01 00

08 00

57 00

37 00

12 00

25 00

24 00

99 00

46 00

55 00

02 00

44 00

08 00

94 00

51 00

15 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

5827

भारत का राजपत्र: जून 11 , 2005/ज्येष्ठ 21 , 1927

243

42- NARNAVI (cont .)

242

241

240

239

238

237

208

229

228

Total

164

43- PADARIYA

165

JALALPUR

166

AAB A

166

178

169

170

168

171

175

174

172

173

Total

790

44- KATODARA

791

789

681

682

684

683

684

--P--B-A

685

P/2

673

688

671

669

668

665

664

6 00

37 00

08 00

33 00

55 00

11 00

08 00

37 00

14 00

16 00

92 04

93 00

81 00

69 00

46 00

94 00

29 00

52 00

02 00

43 00

27 00

61 00

73 CO

42 00

32 00

85 02

72 00

09.

47 00

45 00

50 00

10 00

40 00

98 00

60 00

01 00

23 00

60 00

33 00

87 5828

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 11 , 2005 /JYAISTHA 21 , 1927

44- KATODARA(Contd.)

663

662

661

656

612

613

614

615

P/2

394

608

607

582

605

604

585

599

P/1

586

P/2

586

587

588

458

457

459

460

455

452

437

436

405

409

408

209

207

206

205

193

Total

1380

45- DAHEJ

1393

1392

1391

1390

1389

1388

1504

1304

1303

[PART 11- SEC . 3 (ii) ]

6 00

25 00

67. 00

58 00

35 00

76 00

29 00

61 00

59 00

10 00

00 00

24 00

00 00

04 00

42 00

27 00

04 00

35 00

05 00

24 00

69 00

32 00

11 00

42 00

24 00

99 00

30 05

72 00

89 00

61 00

06 00

50 00

38 00

45 00

67 00 [भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : जून 11 , 2005 /ज्येष्ठ 21 , 1927

1305

45 -DAHEJ Leonid.)

1306

1307

1308

1311

1275

1312

1313

1314

1315

1247

1248

1249

1261

1257

-PP

1250

1251

945

944

943

1504

1532

1530

1529

Total

46- LAKHIGAM Birla Copper Land

Road

Power Corridor

PowerCorridor

Pipeline Corridor

Total

5829 4

6 00

10 00 :

44 00

38 00

28 00

02 00

95 00

48 00

21 00

11 00

09 00

85 00

36 00

68 00

39 00

57 00

21 00

63 00

85 00

96 02

97 01

67 00

98 00

52 00

43 09

61 01

65 00

11 00

30 00

60 02

59 03

25 [No. R-25011 /2/2005 -O.R. -I ] S. K. CHITKARA , Under Secy.

नईदिल्ली, 7 जून, 2005

का. आ. 2070.- केन्द्रीय सरकार को लोकहित्त में यह आवश्यक प्रतीत होता है कि गुजरात राज्य में कोयली से दहेज तक पेट्रोलियम उत्पादन के परिवहन के लिए इंडियन ऑयल कार्पोरेशन लिमिटेड द्वारा , एक पाइपलाइन बिछाई जानी चाहिए ;

5830

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 11 , 2005 / JYAISTHA 21 , 1927

[PART II-SEC . 3( ii ) ] अतः अब , केन्द्रीय सरकार, पेट्रोलियम और खनिज पाइपलाइन ( भूमि में उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन) अधिनियम, 1962 ( 1962 का 50) की धारा 3 की उपधारा (1 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए, उस भूमि में उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन करने के अपने आशय की धोषणा करती है;

कोई व्यक्ति, जो उक्त अनुसची में वर्णित भूमि में हितबद्ध है, उस तारीख से जिसको उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 3 की उपधारा (1 ) के अधिन भारत के राजपत्र में यथा प्रकाशित इस अधिसूचना की प्रतियां साधारण जनता को उपलब्ध करा दी जाती है, इक्कीस दिन के भीतर, भूमि के नीचे पाइपलाइन बिछाए जाने के संबंध में, श्री पी. आर. भट्ट, सक्षम प्राधिकारी, इंडियन ऑयल कार्पोरेशन लिमिटेड, मकान नं: 3/122, रिफाइनरी ठाउनशिप, पो.ओ. जवाहरनगर, वडोदरा -391320 (गुजरात) को लिखित रुप में आक्षेए भेज सकेगा ।

अनुसूची

जिला : वडोदरा

तालुका: वडोदरा

उप-खण्ड सं.

गाँव का नाम

सर्वेक्षण सं.-खण्ड सं

3 1

1017

1-कोयली

1017

1022

1019

1020

1018

1013

1014

891

909

892

889

888

848

852

853

840

584

84.1

585

581

573

594

राज्य: गुजरात क्षेत्रफल

वर्ग मीटर हेक्टेयर एयर

6 00

05 00

85 00

67 00

19 00

63 00

88 00

18 00

38 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3( ii) ]

2 1

3 1-कोयली-(जाét)

577

579

623

624

-P3

547

530

536

532

535

Total

389/225 2-शेरखी

389/222

392/221

393/227

394/227

395/219

396/227

399/230

399/228

399/229

399/232

439/233

441/233

442/235

446/235

445/234

464/259

458/260

460/266

459/266

728/424

731/426

733/426

732/426

696/400

697/401

700/402

701/403

702/403

703/404

684/393

683/393

669/390

669/391

671/392

672/392 1636 G1/05-23

5831

भारत का राजपत्र : जून 11 , 2005/ज्येष्ठ 21 , 1927

6 00

45 00

08 00

07 00

16 00

89 00

77 00

ου

64 00

79 00

14 03

10-

10 5832

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 11 , 2005/ JYAISTHA 21 , 1927

673/440

8 2-शेरखी(जारी)

674/377

676/377

801/451

802/451

803/451

804/451

805/452

806/452

807/452

809/454

808/453

837/473

838/473

839/473

3+4

840/473

841/473

842/474

843/474

844/476

946/518

955/528

961/528

962/530

963/530

968/530

969/530

968/529.

Total

794

3-सेवासी

793

792

791

795

Total

P/1P

4-महापुरा

P/1P

1(b)

1(a)

Total

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

6 00

46 00

01 [भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : जून 11 , 2005/ज्येष्ठ 21 , 1927

174

5-अंपाड

206

207

209

208

213

212

216

215

218

234

235

236

238

237

265

Total

1347

6-भायली

1345

1344

Total

405

7-रायपुरा

404

406

407

403

402

413

414

415

416

417

418

383

376

377

374

373

342

341

343

344

5833 4

6 00

30 00

90 00

48 00

68 00

13.

00 5834

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 11 , 2005 /JYAISTHA 21 , 1927

3 1

345

7-रायपुरा(जारी)

337

336

328

329

323

299

317

P/1

316

311

315

313

312

246

P1/2

246

P1/3

246

244

4/B /P2

246

3/P/1

245

238

23.

23:

235

234

230

229

228

205

Total

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

[फा. सं. आर-25011/4/2005- ओ.आर-1 ]

एस. के. चिटकारा , अवर सचिव भारत का राजपत्र : जूम 11 , 2005/ज्येष्ठ 21 , 1927

[भाग II-खण्ड 3( ii) ]

5835

NewDelhi , the 7th June , 2005

S. O. 2070.-Whereas it appears to the Central Government that it is necessary in the public interest that for the transportation of Petroleum Products from Koyali to Dahej in the State of Gujarat, a pipeline should be laid by the Indian Oil Corporation Limited;

Now, therefore , in exercise 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 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 the 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 laying of the pipeline under the land to Shri P. R. Bhatt , Competent Authority, Indian Oil Corporation Limited , at office Qtrs. No. 3/122, Retinery Township , P.Ο. Jawaharnagar , Vadodara -391320 (Gujarat) .

SCHEDULE

Dist: Vadodara

Taluka: Vadodara

Survey/ Block No. Sub - Division No.

Nameof Village

1017

4 1 - KOYALI

1017

1022

1019

1020

1018

1013

1014

891

909

892

889

888

848

State: Gujarat

Area

Hectare. Are Centiare 4

6 00

05 00

85 00

67 00

19 00

09 00

88 00

18 00

80 00

40 00

.00

93 00

13 00

35 00

51 00

14 5836

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 11 , 2005/ JYAISTHA 21 , 1927

3 1

852

1- KOYALL

853

840

584

841

585

581

573

594

577

579

623

624

-P3

547

530

536

532

535

Total

389/225

2- SHERKHI

389/222

392/221

393/227

394/227

395/219

396/227

-23-5

399/230

399/228

399/229

399/232

439/233

441/233

442/235

446/235

445/234

464/259

458/260

460/266

459/266

728/424

731/426

733/426

732/426

696/400

697/401

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

6 00

09 00

12 00

75 00

26 00

12 00

66 00

17 00

38 00

45 00

08 00

07 00

16 00

77 00

43 00

64 00

79 00

14 03

18 00

89 00

03 00

11 00

27 00

47 00

91 00

02 00

26 00

85 00

44 00

45 00

76 00

80 00

92 00

57 00

39 00

01 00

74 00

01 00

23 00

35 00

80 5837

भारत का राजपत्र: जून 11 , 2005/ज्येष्ठ 21 , 1927

[भाग II-खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

700/402

2-SHERKHI (Contd.)

701/403

702/403

703/404

684/393

683/393

669/390

669/391

671/392

672/392

673/440

674/377

676/377

801/451

802/451

803/451

804/451

805/452

806/452

807/452

809/454

808./453

837/473

838/473

839/473

3+4

840/473

841/473

842/474

843/474

844/476

946/518

955/528

961/528

962/530

963/530

968/530

969/530

968/529

Total

794

3- SEVASI

793

792

791

795

Total

02 00

35 00

28 00

34 00

69 00

20 00

69 00

70 00

57 00

44 00

04 00

07 00

82 00

52 00

23 00

74 00

26 00

63 00

38 00

57 00

96 00

84 00

38 00

37 00

45 00

01 00

35 5838

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: JUNE 11 , 2005 /JYAISTHA 21 , 1927

P/1P 4- MAHAPUR

P/1P

1(b)

1(a)

Total

174

a 5- AMPAD

206

207

209

208

213

212

216

215

218

234

235

236

238

237

265

Total

1347

6- BHAILI

1345

1344

Total

405

7- RAIPURA

404

406

407

403

402

413

414

415

416

417

418

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

6 00

06 00

77 00

84 00

92 00

14 00

16 00

86 00

94 00

67 01

36 00

52 00

76 00

18 00

48 00

72 00

70 00

11 00

74 :

45 00

98 00

70 00

59 00

05 01

28 00

90 00

48 00

68 00

22 00

58 00

50 00

97 00

17 00

94 00

59 00

18 00

84 00

82 00

86 00

75 5839

भारत का राजपत्र: जून 11 , 2005/ज्येष्ठ 21 , 1927

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii ) ]

383

7- RAIPURA (Contd. )

376

377

374

373

342

341

343

344

345

337.

336

328

329

323

299

317

P/ 1

316

311

315

313

312

246

P1/2

246

P1/3

246

244

4/B /P2

246

3/P/1

245

238

237

235

234

230

229

228

1636 G1/05-24

47 00

76 00

88 00

96 00

-92 00

01 00

96 00

05 00

68 00

49 00

65.

39 00

06 00

67 00

27 00

96 00

55 00

64 00

38 00

00 5840

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 11 , 2005 / JYAISTHA 21 , 1927

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

228

7- RAIPURA(Contd. )

56 228

205

56 Total

[No. R -25011 /4/2005 -O.R. - I ] S. K. CHITKARA, Under Secy .

नई दिल्ली, 7 जून , 2005

का. आ. 2071.- केन्द्रीय सरकार को लोकहित में यह आवश्यक प्रतीत होता है कि गुजरात राज्य में कोयली से दहेज तक पेट्रोलियम उत्पादन के परिवहन के लिए इंडियन ऑयल कार्पोरेशन लिमिटेड द्वारा , एक पाइपलाइन बिछाई जानी चाहिए ;

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

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

कोई व्यक्ति, जो उक्त अनुसची में वर्णित भूमि में हितबद्ध है, उस तारीख से जिसको उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 3 की उपधारा (1 ) के अधिन भारत के राजपत्र में यथा प्रकाशित इस अधिसूचना की प्रतियां साधारण जनता को उपलब्ध करा दी जाती है, इक्कीस दिन के भीतर, भूमि के नीचे पाइपलाइन बिछाए जाने के संबंध में, श्री पी. आर. भट्ट, सक्षम प्राधिकारी , इंडियन ऑयल कार्पोरेशन लिमिटेड, मकान नं. 3/122, रिफाइनरी ठाउनशिप, पो.ओ. जवाहरनगर, वडोदरा -391320 ( गुजरात) को लिखित रुप में आक्षेप भेज सकेगा ।

अनुसूची

जिला: वडोदरा

तालुका: पादरा

राज्य: गुजरात

क्षेत्रफल

गाँव का नाम

उप-खण्ड सं.

सर्वेक्षण सं. -खण्ड सं.

वर्ग मीटर

एयर

हेक्टेयर

35 371

8 -जासपुर

385

388

35 387

390

54 391

400

404 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र: जून 11 , 2005/ज्येष्ठ 21 , 1927

405

1 8-जासपुर (जारी)

414

409

410

A/1/P1

411

B/1/P1

Total

1095

9 - पादरा (1 )

1098

1097

1100

Total

1064

P-1 9-पादरा(2)

1064

P-2

1063

1062

1061

1060

1059

1058

1053

1052

1050

1049

1048

944

945

950

952

938

937

929

930

833

Total

832

9-पादरा(3)

829

827

771

755

762

5841

82 00

28 00

78 00

21 01

28 00

97 00

00 00

79 00

53 00

83 00

56 00

73 00

83 00

85 00

07 .

73 00

49 00

50 00

07 00

30 00:

27 00

36 00

00 5842

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 11 , 2005 /JYAISTHA 21 , 1927

758

१ -पादश ( 3 ) (जारी)

761

760

642

645

651

Total

522

9-पादरा(4)

516

514

512

513

469

470

471

472

473

461

Total

10-ताजपुरा

144

Total

516

11-लतीपुरा

517

498

497

496

538

537

539

536

541

542

487

484

[PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii ) ]

6 4

65 00

12.

58 00

80 00

74 02

15 00

63 00

22 00

89 00

47 00

13 00

02 00

19 00

63 01

61 00

87 00

88 00

19 00

06 00

56 00

06 00

46 00

98 00

06 00

81 00

09 [भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : जून 11 , 2005/ज्येष्ठ 21 , 1927

477

11-लतीपुरा (जारी)

480

479

478

449

396

398

399

400

395

P/P1

394

393

AAB

393

392

120

121

122

373

568

371

369

370

569

368

365

345

346

361

354

357

356

355

276

280

281

279

283

Total

12-पिपली

125

126

127

123

131

132

A/P1

143

142

141

146

5843

00.

14 5844

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: JUNE 11 , 2005 / JYAISTHA 21 , 1927

145

12- पिपली(जारी)

152

153

186

B/P1

186

184

183

A/P1

182

179

180

232

231

240

241

278

277

282

275

274

290

289

291

293

292

296

295

317

490

318

Total

2211

13-साधी

2216

2219

2228

2223

2227

2224

2225

2142

2093

2141

2094

2089

2088

2114

[PART 11-SEC . 3 (ii) ]

66 00

53 00

25 00

37 00

59 00

27 00

18 00

81 00

48 00

40 00

19 00

76 00

19 00

02 00

67 00

46 00

27 00

00 [भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

2083 13- साधी (जारी)

2085

2084

2048

2049

2050

2046

2051

2054

2475

2063

2062

2057

2058

2059

2038

2036

2035

2030

Total

1369 14-आंती(1 )

1371

1373

1367

1388

1389

1390

1391

1248

1247

1246

1245

1244

1242

1243

927

928

929.

931

932

936

937

935

933

934

Total

5845

भारत का राजपत्र : जून 11 , 2005/ज्येष्ठ 21 , 1927

6 4

83 00

13 00

29 00

71 00

49 00

51 00

09 00

07 00

49 00

36 00

77 00

95 00

00 .

64 00

88 00

00 02

40 00

68 00

52 00

34 00

00 00

35 00

36- 00

32 00

61 00

22 00

18 01

93 5846

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 11 , 2005/JYAISTHA 21 , 1927

860

14 -आंती (2)

859

858

846

851

850

849

703

709

708

707

706

705

693

692

713

691

516

517

521

608

607

606

605

597

603

599

598

595

594

584

586

585

553

554

555

578

560

14-आंती (2) से)

561

562

563

Total

[PART II- SEC. 3 ( ii) ]

92 00

30 00

37 00

46 00

33 00

36 00

09 00

04 00

59 00

92 00

43 00

12 00

88 00

93 00

49 00

21 00

59 00

53 03

96 [भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र: जून 11 , 2005 /ज्येष्ठ 21 , 1927

3 15-भदारा

241

240

Total

328

16-अंबाडा(1 )

329

Total.

330

16-अंबाडा(2)

331

383

382

388

419

418

429

--A

430

431

444

443

455

454

456

458

459

460

461

462

475

476

517

516

515

501

Total

17- गयापुर

-P

Total

1636 G1 /05-25

5847

6 4

36 00

89 CO

89 00

55 00

04 00

13 00

52 00

00.

32 00

88 00

89 00

01 5848

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 11 , 2005/ JYAISTHA 21 , 1927

3 18-ठीकरीया

Total

19-कांदा

350

348

358

357

355

Total

20-सोखडा राघु

101

102

103

114

157

118

116

121

120

125

126

148

164

165

[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii)]

74 00

5.8 00

37 00

63 00

67 00

81 00

75 00

17 00

31 00

63 00

34 00

85 00

40 00

47 00

00 00

50 00

28 00

06 00

72 00

42 00

00 00

38 00

03 00

60 00

39 00

67 00

45 00

30 00

86 00

43 00

75 00

46 [ भाग II - खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : जून 11 , 2005/ज्येष्ठ 21 , 1927

सर्वेक्षण सं.- खण्ड

गाँव का नाम

उप-खण्ड सं.

सं

252

20-सोखडा राघु(जारी)

251

250

249

248

244

267

268

273

271

270

272

293

292

291

288

287

Total

5849 क्षेत्रफल

हेक्टेयर एयर वर्ग मीटर 4

05 00

60 00

30 00

20 00

09 00

98 00

14 00

49 00

28 00

09 04

05 [फा. सं. आर-25011/4/2005- ओ. आर-1 ]

एस. के. चिटकारा , अवर सचिव

New Delhi , the 7th June, 2005

S. O. 2071. Whereas it appears to the Central Government that it is necessary in the public interest that for the transportation of Petroleum Products from Koyali to Dahej in the State of Gujarat , a pipeline should be laid by the Indian Oil Corporation Limited:

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

Any person interested in the land described in the said Schedule may, within twenty one days from the date on which the copies of the 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 laying of the pipeline under the land to Shri P. R. Bhatt, Cornpetent Authority, Indian Oil Corporation Limited , at office Qtrs . No. 3/122 , Refinery Township , P.Ο. Jawaharnagar, Vadodara -391320 (Gujarat).

5850

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 11 , 2005 / JYAISTHA 21. 1927

[PART II-SEC. 3 ( ii))

SCHEDULE

Taluka: Padra

Dist: Vadodara

Name of Village Survey/ Block No. Sub - Division No.

3 8- JASPUR

371

385

388

387

390

391

400

404

405

414

409

410

411

A/ 1 /P1

411

B/1/P1

Total

1095

9- PADRA(1)

1098

1097

1100

Total

1064

P-1 9 - PADRA ( 2)

P-2

1064

1063

1062

1061

1060

1059

1058

1053

1052

1050

1049

1048

944

945

950

952

State: Gujarat

Area

Are Centiare Hectare.

6 4

35 00

97 00

35 00

37 00

54 00

17 00

53 00

45 00

47 00

28 00

78 00

21 01

28 00

83 00

73 00

41 00

85 00

51 00

57 00

00 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र: जून 11 , 2005 /ज्येष्ठ 21 , 1927

938

1 9 -PADRA (2) Contd.

937

929

930

833

Total

832

9- PADRA( 3)

829

827

771

755

762

758

761

760

642

645

651

Total

522

9- PADRA (4)

516

514

512

513

469

470

471

472

473

461

Total

10 - TAJPURA

Total

5851

6 4

50 00

07 00

27 00

36 00

18 02

40 00

45 00

57 00

53 00

50 00

20 00

65 00

58 00

43 00

74 02

92 00

63 00

22 00

01 00

35 00

19 00

63 01

85 00

61 00

43 00

04 00

87 00

88 00

35 00

79 5852

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: JUNE 11 , 2005/ JYAISTHA 21 , 1927

516

11 - LATIPURA

517

498

497

496

538

537

539

536

541

542

487

484

477

480

479

478

449

396

398

399

400

P/P1

395

394

393

AAB

393

392

120

121

122

373

568

371

369

370

569

368

365

345

346

361

354

357

356

355

276

[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii) ]

56 00

06 00

60 00

67 00

98 00

81 00

09 00

85 00

18 00

02 00

44 00

94 00

53 00

72 00

59 00

98 00

39 00

60 00

92 00

90 00

86 00

00 भारत का राजपत्र : जून 11 , 2005 /ज्येष्ठ 21 , 1927

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

3 1

280

11 - LATIPURA ( Contd. )

281

279

283

Total

125

12- PIPLI

126

127

128

131

A/P1

132

143

142

141

146

145

152

153

B/P1

186

184

A/ P1

183

182

179

180

232

231

240

241

278

277

282

275

274

290

289

291

293

292

296

5853

84 00

05 00

18 00

40 00

19 00

00 5854

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 11 , 2005/ JYAISTHA 21 , 1927

295

A 12-PIPLI ( Contd. )

317

490

318

Total

13- SADHI

2211

2216

2219

2228

2223

2227

2224

2225

2142

2093

2141

2094

2089

2088

2114

2083

2085

2084

2048

2049

2050

2046

2051

2054

2475

2063

2062

2057

2058

2059

2038

2036

2035

2030

Total

[PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii ) ]

76 00

86 00

94 00

14 00

21 03

35 00

87 00

67 00

46 00

09 00

85 00

27 00

30 00

16 00

00-

13 00

29 00

21 00

73 00

71 00

49 00

66 00

09 00

07 00

01 00

64 00

00 02

47 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : जून 11 , 2005 /ज्येष्ठ 21 , 1927

1369

14 - ΑΑΝΤΙ ( 1 )

1371

1373

1387

1388

1389

1390

1391

1248

1247

124€

1245

1244

1242

1243

927

928

-929

931

932

936

937

.935

933

934

Total

860

14- ΑΑΝΤΙ (2)

859

858

846

851

850

849

703

709

708

707

706

705

693

692

713

691

516

517

1636 GI /05-26

5855

68 00

03 00

04-

00.

Ου

00 5856

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 11 , 2005 / JYAISTHA 21 , 1927

521

14 -AANTI ( 2) ( Contd .)

608

607

606

605

597

603

599

598

595

594

584

586

585

553

554

555

578

560

561

562

563

Total

15- BHADARA

241-

240

Total

328

16 - AMBADA ( 1 )

329

Total

16- APIBADA (2 )

330

331

383

382

388

419

418

429

430

431

444

443

455

454

456

[PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii) ]

02 00

37 00

16 00

58 00

16 00

42 00

21 00

00-

21 00

59 00

89 00

25 00

00 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

भारत का राजपत्र: जून 11 , 2005 /ज्येष्ठ 21 , 1927

3 16 -AMBADA ( 2 ) Contd. 458

459

460

461

462

475

476

517

516

515

501

Total

17 - GAYAPUR

Total

18 - THIKARIYA

Total

19- KANDA

350

348

358

357

355

Total

20-SOKHADA RAGHU

5857

32 00

34 00

99 00

88 00

10.

54 00

35 00

45 03

33 00

75 00

47 00

98 00

23 00

68 00

85 00

93 00

05 00

33 00

00 .

81 00

00 5858

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 11 , 2005/ JYAISTHA 21 , 1927

20-SOKHADA RAGHU ( Contd.)

101

102

103

114

157

118

116

121

120

125

126

148

164

165

252

251

250

249

248

244

267

268

273

271

270

272

----

293

292

291

288

BA--י

287

Total

[PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii) ]

6 4

85 00

50 00

28 00

06 00

42 00

00 00

38 00

39 00

67 00

75 00

46 00

00 00

62 00

[No. R -25011 /4/2005 -O.R. -I ] S. K. CHITKARA , Under Secv [ भाग II- खण्ड 3( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र: जून 11 , 2005 /ज्येष्ठ 21 , 1927

5859

नईदिल्ली, 7 जून, 2005

का. आ. 2072.- केन्द्रीय सरकार को लोकहित में यह आवश्यक प्रतीत होता है कि गुजरात राज्य में कोयली से दहेज तक पेट्रोलियम उत्पादन के परिवहन के लिए इंडियन ऑयल कार्पोरेशन लिमिटेड द्वारा , एक पाइपलाइन बिछाई जानी चाहिए ;

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

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

कोई व्यक्ति, जो उक्त अनुसची में पर्णित भूमि में हितबद्ध है, उस तारीख से जिसको उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 3 की उपधारा (1 ) के अधिन भारत के राजपत्र में यथा प्रकाशित इस अधिसूचना की प्रतियां साधारण जनता को उपलब्ध करा दी जाती है, इक्कीस दिन के भीतर, भूमि के नीचे पाइपलाइन बिछाए जाने के संबंध में, श्री पी. आर. भट्ट, सक्षम प्राधिकारी , इंडियन ऑयल कार्पोरेशन लिमिटेड, मकान नं. 3/122, रिफाइनरी ठाउनशिप , पो.ओ. जवाहरनगर, वडोदरा -391320 (गुजरात) को लिखित रुप में आक्षेप भेज सकेगा ।

अनुसूची

जिला: वडोदरा

तालुका : करजन

उप-खण्ड सं.

गाँव का नाम

सर्वेक्षण सं. -खण्ड सं

3 1

21-वीरजइ(1 )

272

271

274

275

270

290

291

292

289

293

321

राज्य: गुजरात क्षेत्रफल

हेक्टेयर

वर्ग मीटर

एयर

55 00

96 5860

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 11 , 2005 /JYAISTHA 21 , 1927

3 1 1

318

-वीरजइ(1) (जारी )

317

316

319

363

350

359

361

369

375

B/2

377

378

433

426

433

425

Total

1466

21-वीरजइ(2)

1463

-A

1464

1459

1475

1455

1458

-A-B

1455

1456

1454

1453

1452

1450

1451

1429

1427

1428

1512

1513

1519

1517

1514

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

6 1

42 00

97 00

26 00

78 00

45 00

21 00

40 00

06 00

99 00

88 00

37 00

75 00

83 00

02 00

05 00

56 00

40 00

13 00

71 00

86 00

00 5861

भारत का राजपत्र: जून 11 , 2005/ज्येष्ठ 21 , 1927

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

1516

2 -वीरजइ(2 )(जारी )

1539

1283

1276

1275

1274

1272

1247

1255

1252

1251

1250

1239

1238

1237

1235

1232

1233

1234

1196

1197

1198

1199

1191

1190

1189

1188

1187

1583

1172

1173

1171

1162

1161

1160

1159

1158

1157

1156

6 00

87 00

88 00

02 00

30 00

19 00

05 00

66 00

93 00

00 00

54 00

39 00

96 00

47 00

57 00

48 00

52 00

83 00

81 00

60 00

04 00

93 00

39 00

13 00

00 5862

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 11 , 2005/JYAISTHA 21 , 1927

21- बारजई (2 ) 1141

1142

जारी..)

1153

1143

1144

1146

1145

1108

1107

1110

1111

1112

1113

1100

1099

1098

1643

1448

1644

1647

1646

1634

1635

Total

1 /A

105

22-उमज

106

1/B

106

1/A

106

1/B

105

3/P1

105

107

105

104

114

175

204

202

203

201

200

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

6 00

83 00

03 00

71 00

41 00

11 00

70 00

07 00

32 00

38 00

03 00

06 00

57 00

37 00

61 00

89 00

98 05

18 00

36 00

24 00

50 00

18 00

42 00

07 00

43 00

33 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ].

भारत का राजपत्र : जून 11 , 2005/ज्येष्ठ 21 , 1927

5863 1

C 200

22. उमज जारी

43 198

47 199

33 194

22 94

82 193

64 195

57 214

06 215

03 215

-00

02 216

84 216

42 218

06 Total

[फा. सं. आर-25011/4/2005- ओ.आर-1 ]

एस. के. चिटकारा , अवर सचिव

New Delhi , the 7th June , 2005

S. O. 2072. Whereas it appears to the Central Government that it is necessary in the public interest that for the transportation of Petroleum Products from Koyali to Dahej in the State of Gujarat , a pipeline should be laid by the Indian Oil Corporation Limited:

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

Any person interested in the land described in the said Schedule may, within twenty one days from the date on which the copies of the 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 laying of the pipeline under the land to Shri P. R. Bhatt , Competent Authority, Indian Oil Corporation Limited , at office Qtrs . No. 3/122 , Refinery Township , P.O. Jawaharnagar, Vadodara -391320 (Gujarat ) .

1636 GI/05-27 5864

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 11 , 2005/ JYAISTHA 21 , 1927

[PART II-SEC. 3 (ii ) ]

SCHEDULE

Dist: Bharuch

Taluka: Karjan

Name of Village Survey / Block No. Sub- Division No.

21 - VIRJAI ( 1 )

272

271

274

275

270

290

291

292

289

293

321

318

317

316

319

363

358

359

361

369

B/2

375

377

378

433

426

433

425

Total

State: Gujarat

Area

Centiare

Are

Hectare.

6 4

55 00

25 00

44 00

99 00

50 00

96 00

19 00

26 00

78 00

.08

21 00

06 00

99 00

75 00

22 00

95 03

43 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3( ii ) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : जून 11 , 2005 /ज्येष्ठ 21 , 1927

1466

21- VIRJAI ( 2)

1463

1464

1459

1475

1455

1458

1455

1456

1454

1453

1452

1450

1451

1429

1427

1428

1512

1513

1519

1517

1514

1516

1539

1283

1276

1275

1274

1272

1247

1255

1252

1251

1250

1239

1238

1237

1235

1232

1233

1234

1196

1197

1198

1199

1191

5865

17 00

02 00

40 00

93 00

91 00

71 00

16 00

86 00

58 00

33 00

87 00

83 00

88 00

84 00

40 00

19 00

05 00

77 00

93 00

54 00

96 00

48 00

09'

87 00

00 5866

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 11 , 2005/ JYAISTHA 21 , 1927

1190

2.J- VIRJAI ( 2) ( Contd . )

1189

1188

1187

1583

1172

1173

1171

1162

1161

1160

1159

1158

1157

1156

1141

1142

1153

1143

1144

1146

1145

1108

1107

1110

1111

1112

1113

1100

1099

1098

1643

1448

1644

1647

1646

1634

-BA A

1635

Total

[PART II- SEC. 3 ( ii ) ]

6 4

78 00

08 00

39 00

88 00

64 00

83 00

03 00

24 00

11 00

07 00

38 00

06 00

61 00

95 00

98 05 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

5867

भारत का राजपत्र: जून 11 , 2005/ज्येष्ठ 21 , 1927

Nameof Village Survey / Block No. Sub- Division No.

3 22- UMAJ

105

1/A

106

1/B

105

1 /A

105

1/B

105

3/P1

107

105

104

114

175

204

202

203

201

200

198

199

194

193

195

214

215

216

218

Total

Area

Centiare

Are

Hectare.

33 00

24 00

50 00

02.

96 00

84 00

42 00

07 00

[No. R-25011/4/2005-O.R. -I ] S. K. CHITKARA, Under Secy.

5868

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 11 , 2005/ JYAISTHA 21 , 1927

श्रम मंत्रालय

नई दिल्ली, 13 मई, 2005

का. आ. 2073.- औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार हिन्डालको इंडस्ट्रीज लि. के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण धनबाद नं. - 1 के पंचाट ( औद्योगिक विवाद धारा 33 ए के अंतर्गत औद्योगिक विवाद संख्या 8/2000 ) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 6-5-2005 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल. - 29025/18/2005 - आई.आर. ( विविध ) ]

बी. एम. डेविड, अवर सचिव MINISTRY OF LABOUR

New Delhi , the 13th May, 2005

S.O. 2073. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Dispute Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal - cum-Labour Court , Dhanbad No. I Filed under Section 33 - A in the matter of (Ref. No. 8/2000) as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of Hindalco Ind . Ltd. and their workman , which was received by the Central Government on 6-5-2005.

[No. L- 29025 / 18/ 2005 - IR(M) ] B.M. DAVID , Under Secy.

ANNEXURE

[PART II-SEC. 3 (ii) ]

AWARD

In this Complaint case the parties have amicably settled the dispute outside the Tribunal. A memorandum of settlement has been filed duly signed by both the sides . I have gone through the settlement and I find that the terms of settlement are proper and reasonable.

2. Accordingly, the Award is passed on the basis of the terms of settlement . The terms of settlement shall form part of the Award.

S. PRASAD , Presiding Officer फार्म-एच

हिन्डालको इंडस्ट्रीज लिमिटेड, खान प्रभाग ( झारखण्ड) , पोस्ट एवं जिला लोहरदगा, झारखण्ड पिन कोड -835 302 एवं उनके श्रमिकों के मध्य औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 की धारा 12 ( 3 ) एवं नियम 58 के अंतर्गत समझौता ।

समझौता काज्ञापन

पक्षकारों के नाम

श्रमिक प्रतिनिधि

सेवायोजन प्रतिनिधि

हिन्डालको इंडस्ट्रीज लिमिटेड छोटानागपुर बाक्साइट वर्कस

खान प्रभाग ( झारखण्ड ) , यूनियनलोहरदगा

लोहरदगा

श्री धीरज प्रसाद साहू

महा सचिव

श्रीअशोक कु. सिन्हा महाप्रबन्धक ( खान परिचालन ) श्री मलिक सेराजुल हक.

अध्यक्ष

श्री एस. के. त्रिवेदी, महाप्रबन्धक ( इ. आर. )

श्री आर. एल. मोदी,

श्री भुखला भगत

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL NO . I, DHANBAD In the matter ofa Complaint U/ S. 33 A of the I. D. Act, 1947 .

Complaint No. 7 of 2000

(Arising out of Reference No. 8 of2000) Parties : General Secretary, C.B. V. Union ,

Lohardaga.

....Complainant उपाध्यक्ष

अपर महाप्रबन्धक ( वित्त एवं लेखा)

श्री आर. बी. सिंह,

श्रीप्राण प्रसाद जयसवाल

उपाध्यक्ष

प्रशासन) उप महाप्रबन्धक ( कार्मिक एवं

श्री ए.के. डॉन

श्री अशोक कुमार यादव ,

कार्यालय सचिव

VS.

....Opp. Party M/ S . Hindalco Industries Ltd. , Lohardaga.

सहायक महाप्रबन्धक ( खान ) श्री साबिरखान,

श्री राजीव कुमार,

प्रबन्धक ( प्रशासन)

संयुक्त सचिव

PRESENT :

Shri S. Prasad, Presiding Officer APPEARANCES :

: Shri S. Paul , Advocate For the Complainant

: Shri G. Prasad, For the Opp . Party

Advocate

State : Jharkhand

Industry: Almunium Dated, the 29th April , 2005

श्री फकीर मोहम्मद,

कार्यकारिणी सदस्य

श्रीशिवव्रत दुबे ,

कार्यकारिणी सदस्य

समझौते का संक्षिप्त विवरण

छोटानागपुर बाक्साइट वर्कस युनियन, लोहरदगा झारखण्ड ने अपने पत्र सं. 32/02 दिनांक 23-12-2002 द्वारा एक 28 सूत्री माँग पत्र [भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : जून 11 , 2005/ज्येष्ठ 21 , 1927

कामगारों के वेतन पुनरीक्षण एवं अन्य सेवा शर्तों में सुधार से संबंधित प्रबन्धन, हिन्डालको इंडस्ट्रीज लिमिटेड, खान प्रभाग ( झारखण्ड) के समक्ष प्रस्तुत किया । विभिन्न तिथियों पर लम्बी वार्ताएँ हुई और अंततः दिनांक 24-04-2003 को पक्षकारों के मध्य यह समझौता निम्नलिखित शर्तों पर सम्पन्न हुआ एवं पक्षकारों ने समझौते पर हस्ताक्षर किये । Regional Labour Commissioner (Central)

Ranchi

Part of the Award

समझौते के उद्देश्य

1. सदभावपूर्ण , सौहार्दपूर्ण एवं शाश्वत औद्योगिक संबंध विकसित करना ।

2. खनन तथा अन्य सेवाओं के कुशल, निर्बाध तथा सुचारू संचालन द्वारा , श्रेष्ठतम कार्य संपादन, कुशलता, उत्पादकता तथा उत्पादन के लिए प्रयत्न करना तथा श्रम शक्तिके बेहतर उपयोग के साथ उन्नत कार्य प्रणाली और मशीनों के उपयोग द्वारा समस्त सम्भव मितव्ययिता को बढ़ावा देना ।

3. संयुक्त प्रयास द्वारा गुणवत्ता, कुशलता, उत्पादन तथा उत्पादकता सहयोग में सुधार करना तथा इस प्रकार के सुधारों के लिए उपयुक्त वातावरण उत्पन्न करना । 4. प्रबन्धतंत्र तथा कामगारों के बीच पारस्परिक भरोसे तथा विश्वास पर आधारित मधुर नियोक्ता कर्मचारी संबंध विकसित करना तथा उसे बनाये रखना ।

समझौते कीशर्तें

5869 2. प्रत्येक पुनरीक्षित वेतनमान में एक मुश्त बढ़ोत्तरी (क) प्रत्येक वेतनमान में एक मुश्त बढ़ोत्तरी निम्न अनुसार होगी श्रेणी

क्रमांक

एक मुश्त बढ़ोत्तरी ( रुपया)

150 अ. अकुशल श्रमिक

क

160 ब. अर्धकुशल श्रमिक

ख

165

175 स. कुशल श्रमिक

200 द. अति कुशल श्रमिक

प्रत्येक वेतनमान में कार्यरत कामगारों को दी गई एक मुश्त वृद्धि फिटमेंट हेतु वेतनमान में समाहित की जायेगी जो इसी में सम्मिलित है । Regional labour Commissioner ( Central)

Ranchi

(ख) पुनरीक्षित वेतनमान:

पक्षों के मध्य यह तय हुआ कि जो कामगार इस समझौते की परिधि में आवर्त हैं, उसका पुनरीक्षित वेतनमान दिनांक 1-1-2003 से निम्नवत होगा ।

प्रबंधक एवं श्रम संगठन के मध्य यह भी तय हुआ कि पूर्व समझौता दिनांक 5-8-1998 की परिधि में आने वाले कामगार ( परिशिष्ट क ) का मूल वेतन एवं वार्षिक बड़ोत्तरी इस समझौते के प्रभावी होने की तिथि से नीचे दिये गये पद/ श्रेणी को वेतनमान में .समायोजित कर दिया जायेगा । और किसी प्रकार की वित्तीय हानि नहीं होगी एवं समय - समय पर परिवर्तनशील महंगाई भत्ता इस समझौते के अनुसार देय होगा ।

वर्तमान वेतनमान

श्रेणी एवं पदनाम

1. प्रास्थिति एवं विस्तार अ . यह पारस्परिक समझौता औद्योगिक

विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 की धारा 12(3) एवं नियम 58 के अन्तर्गत है ।

दिनांक 1-1-2003 से देय पुनरीक्षित वेतनमान 1

3 अकुशल श्रमिक

1600-30-1900- 650-25.00 ( 10 ) -900

मजदूर/चौकीदार/

ब. यह समझौता दिनांक 01-01-2003 से प्रभावी होगा एवं 4( चार ) वर्षों के लिए दिनांक 31-12-2006 तक प्रभावशील रहेगा ।

35-2250-40- सफाईकर्मी

28.00( 10 ) -1180-

2650 31.00(10) -1490-

34.00( 10) -1830

अर्धकुशल श्रमिक

स. यह समझौता हिन्डालको इंडस्ट्रीज लिमिटेड, खान प्रभाग ( झारखण्ड ) लोहरदगा में कार्यरत समस्त स्थायी श्रमिकों पर लागू होगा । यह समझौता स्टाफ की श्रेणी में आने वाले कर्मचारियों पर प्रभावशाली नहीं होगा ।

1670-35-2020- अ. खनिक

(10 ) -1030 710-32.00( 10 ) -103

40-2420-45- 35.00( 10)-1380-

2870 38.00( 10) -1760-

41.00( 10)-2170 5870

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 11 ,-2005/ JYAISTHA 21 , 1927

3 ब. हेल्पर/मुंशी/ 795-35-00(10) -1145 1760-40-2160-

45-2610-50- अप्रमाणित मेट/बावर्ची 38.00 ( 10 ) -15.25-

3110-55-3660 स्टोर बॉय/ट्रान्सपोर्ट 41.00( 10 ) -19.35-

बॉय/मेस बॉय/टूल 44.00( 10) -23.75

शार्पनर/डिस्पेंसरी

सहायक/गेस्टहाउस

एटेंडेंट/ड्रिलर/

सहायक/ड्रिलर/प्यून/

माली/सुरक्षाकर्मी

कुशल श्रमिक

1810-45-2260- 835-42.00( 10 ) -

ड्राईवर/ऑपरेटर/

1255-45.00 ( 10 ) - 50-2760-55- इलेक्ट्रीशियन/

फिटर/वेल्डर/

3310-60-3910 1705-48.00 ( 10 ) -

ब्लास्टर/मेकेनिक/ 2185-51.00( 10 ) -

2695

सहायक/मेकेनिक/

*सहायक ड्रिलिंग

ऑपरेटर/ब्लेक

स्मिथ/नर्स/

कम्पाउण्डर

अतिकुशल श्रमिक

पोकलेने ऑपरेटर/ 945-49 ( 10 ) -1435-1945-55-2495-

60-3095-65-

52.00( 10) -1955-

टेरेक्स/आपरेटर एच.ई.

3745-70-4445-

55.00( 10 ) -2505-

एम.एम. ऑपरेटर/

80-5245-85- 58.00( 10) -3085

*ड्रिलिंग ऑपरेटर/

6095 सिनियर मेकेनिक/ माइनिंग मेट/

*वे श्रमिक जो अन्वेषण कार्य से जुड़े हैं ।

3. महंगाई भत्ता:

महंगाई भत्ता औसत अर्धवार्षिक ( माह जुलाई 2002 से दिसंबर 2002 तक के ) सूचकांक 2391.05 आधार वर्ष 1960 = 100 के अनुसार रुपये 2.00 प्रति अंक की घटत बढ़त के आधार पर रुपये 2485.25 प्रति माह होता है । इस समझौते के अनुसार 1 जनवरी 2003 से महंगाई भत्ते की गणना 2391.05 सूचकांक के ऊपर प्रतिअंक रुपये 2.00 से बढ़ाकर 2.20 रुपये घटत बढ़त के आधार पर होगी।

दिनांक 1-1-2003 को औसत अर्धवार्षिक सूचकांक 2315.33 पर देय परिवर्तनशील महंगाई भत्ता रु. 2333.80 प्रतिमाह में से रु. 800 पुनरीक्षित वेतनमान के मूल वेतन में समायोजित किया जायेगा ।

[PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii) ] 4. अवकाश यात्रा भत्ता:

वर्तमान में देय वार्षिक अवकाश यात्रा भत्ता में श्रमिक संगठन द्वारा की गयी वृद्धि की माँग पर प्रबन्धन द्वारा सहानुभूतिपूर्वक विचार करते हुए सेवा अवधि के अनुसार निम्नलिखित वृद्धि पर उभय पक्षों की सहमति हुई:

यात्रा भत्ता क्र. सेवाकाल की अवधि

सं.

वार्षिक अवकाश वर्तमान

(रुपये) पुनरीक्षित

1500

1200

अ. 1से 10 वर्ष

1300

1700 ब. 11से 20 वर्ष

1800

1400

स. 21 वर्ष एवं उससे अधिक

अवकाश भत्ता की पात्रता हेतु केलेण्डर वर्ष अर्थात् 1 जनवरी से 31 दिसम्बर तक 230 दिन की वास्तविक उपस्थिति ( काम पर उपस्थित होकर कार्य करना ) अनिवार्य होगी ।

5. श्रमिक गणवेश ( यूनीफार्म ):

समस्त स्थायी श्रमिकों को वर्ष में एक बार निम्नानुसार दो जोड़ा (कमीज और पैंट ) टेरीकॉटन गणवेश दिया जायेगा । परंतु गणवेश रुल्स के अनुसार ही देय होगा । कम्पाउण्डर को एक ऊनी कोट तीन वर्ष में एक बार दिया जायेगा तथा नर्स को एक ऊनी फुल स्वेटर तीन वर्ष में एक बार दिया जायेगा ।

6. ( क ) कैंटीन कूपन:

खदान में कार्यरत श्रमिकों को वर्तमान में दी जाने वाली कैंटीन कूपन की राशि रुपये 45 प्रति माह से बढ़ाकर रुपये 55 प्रति माह होगी । कैंटीन कूपन पर केवल खाद्य पदार्थ ( चाय , नास्ता एवं खाना ) का उपयोग खदान तथा कैंटीन के अंदर ही किया जायेगा तथा किसी भी स्थिति में कैंटीन कूपन को दूसरे सामान के लिए उपयोग करना शख्त मना है और दुरुपयोग करने पर कामगार तथा कैंटीन ठेकेदार दोनों के विरुद्ध कड़ी कार्रवाई की जायेगी ।

( ख ) हाथ धोने हेतु साबुन की व्यवस्था

प्रबन्धन वर्कशॉप में कार्यरत प्रत्येक श्रमिक को 600 ग्राम प्रतिमाह से बढ़ाकर प्रतिमाह 800 ग्राम धुलाई का साबुन देगा ।

7. ( क ) पहाड़ी भत्ता

श्रम संगठन ने पहाड़ी भत्ता को संशोधित करने का प्रबन्धनतंत्र से आग्रह किया जिस पर पक्षकारों के मध्य वार्ता में विचारोपरांत यह तय हुआ कि श्रमिकों को देय रुपया 4 प्रतिदिन से बढ़ाकर रुपया 5 प्रतिदिन वास्तविक उपस्थिति पर ( काम पर हाजिर होना व काम करना ) होगी परंतु वैसे श्रमिक जिन्हें कम्पनी द्वारा आवंटित आवास उपलब्ध करायी गयी है वे पहाड़ी भत्ता के पात्र नहीं होंगे । 5871 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : जून 11 , 2005/ज्येष्ठ 21 , 1927

(ख) साइकिल भत्ता

कार्रवाई की जायेगी एवं 1 वर्ष के लिए चिकित्सा सुविधा से वंचित कर दिया जायेगा ।

सहायता

साइकिल भत्ता रुपये 50 प्रतिमाह से बढ़ाकर रुपया 65 प्रतिमाह निर्धारित किया गया है जिसकी पात्रता के लिए श्रमिक की माह में कम से कम 18 कार्य दिवस वास्तविक उपस्थिति अनिवार्य है तथा जो श्रमिक साइकिल एडवांस लेना चाहेंगे उन्हें साइकिल खरीदने हेतु एडवांस रुपया 1200 दिया जायेगा जिसका समायोजन रुपया 100 प्रति माह की दर से मजदूरी से किया जायेगा । साइकिल खरीद की रसीद देनी होगी । यह एडवांस सेवाकाल में एक बार ही लिया जा सकेगा ।

प्रबन्धन प्रत्येक स्थायी श्रमिक के स्कूल में पढ़ने वाले दो बच्चों को प्रति बच्चा प्रति वर्ष शिक्षा सहायता के रूप में पुनरीक्षित धन राशि निम्नवत देनें को सहर्ष सहमत है जिसके लिए सभी को शुल्क भुगतान का साक्ष्य मूल रूप में प्रस्तुत करना होगा । इसका भुगतान वर्ष में एक बार किया जायेगा ।

8. चिकित्सः तुविधा

वर्तमान शिक्षा सहायता धन राशि प्रति वर्ष

पुनरीक्षित शिक्षा सहायता धन राशिप्रतिवर्ष स्थायी श्रमिकों को चिकित्सा सुविधा में दी गयी पुनरीक्षित वृद्धि निम्नवत है :

कक्षा 1 से 5 तक 250 रु.

कक्षा 5 से 7 तक 170 रु.

* भोजन भत्ता रुपया 30 प्रतिदिन से बढ़ाकर रुपया 40 प्रतिदिन दिया जायेगा।

कक्षा 8 से 10 तक 215 रु.

कक्षा 6 से 8 तक 500 रु .

कक्षा 11 से 12 तक 340 रु.

कक्षा 9 से 12 तक 750 रु.

अस्पताल में कमरे का किराया अधिकतम रुपया 40 प्रतिदिन से बढ़ाकर रुपया 50 प्रतिदिन दिया जायेगा ।

स्नातक एवं स्नातकोत्तर 450 रु . स्नातक एवं स्नोतकोत्तर 1000 रु .

स्थायी श्रमिकों के आश्रितों के लिए भोजन भत्ता रुपया 20 प्रतिदिन से बढ़ाकर रुपया 30 प्रतिदिन दिया जायेगा ।

10. पक्षोंके मध्य यह तय हुआ कि खनन कार्य हेतु जिन अ थायी श्रमिकोंसे लीज पर जमीन ली गई है। ली जानी है उन्हें पद की रिक्तता, कार्यकुशलता एवं क्षमता के आधार पर मात्र उनके प्रकरण में स्थायीकरण हेतु आवश्यक कार्यवाही चरणबद्ध रूप से करने का प्रयास किया जायेगा जिनकी कुल संख्या 51 से अधिक नहीं है । पहले उन श्रमिकों के स्थायीकरण की कार्यवाही होगी जिनकी जमीन खनन कार्य हेतु ली जा चुकीहै । कम्पनी के नयी खदान में अस्थायी कर्मचारियों को आवश्यकता, कार्यकुशलता, अनुभव एवं क्षमता के आधार पर स्थायीकरण हेतु अनुशंसा कीजायेगी ।

* स्थायी श्रमिकों के माता- पिता यदि जीवित हों एवं पूर्णतया श्रमिकपर ही निर्भर/ आश्रित हों एवं उनकी पूर्व में कोई सर्विस या आजीविका का साधन नहीं हो तो कम्पनी द्वारा आंतरिक चिकित्सा सुविधा ( Indoor Hospital Facility ) केवल पैथालोजी/एक्स- रे तथा कंसलटेशन एवं दवाईयों की कीमत रसीद Original देने पर तथा कम्पनी के डाक्टर द्वारा प्रविष्ट (refer) किये गये मामलों में ही देय होगा तथा कम्पनी मेडीकलेम या अन्य कोई स्कीम देती है तो उसके अन्तर्गत ही क्लेम नियमानुसार मान्य होगा तथा श्रमिक को चिकित्सा संबंधी सभी कागजात जमा करना बाध्यकारी होगा । श्रमिक संघ एवं श्रमिक दोनों ही पूर्ण जिम्मेदारी के साथ श्रमिक के आश्रित माता-पिता की पहचान पत्र/चिकित्सा कार्ड बनवाये जोकि कम्पनी के मुख्य चिकित्सा पदाधिकारी द्वारा प्रमाणित हीमान्यहोगा।

11. प्रबन्धन ऐसे कर्मकार को जो अपनी डयूटी पर काम पर उपस्थित हुआ हो और कार्य के दौरान जिसकी मृत्यु हो गयी हो के पल उसके आश्रित को जो हर प्रकार से कुशल , सक्षम व योग्य हो उसको आजीविका प्रदान करने को सहमत है । परन्तु यदि कर्मकार की मृत्यु उसकी कार्य के प्रति लापरवाही, सुरक्षा नियमों की उपेक्षा, नशे की अवस्थामें अथवा आपसी रंजिश व संघर्ष आदि में होती है तो प्रबन्धन ऐसी परिस्थितियों में कर्मकार के आश्रित को आजीविका प्रदान करने में समर्थ नहीं होगा । किसी प्रकार का विवाद होने पर पोस्टमार्टम की रिपोर्ट अंतिम व मान्य होगी ।

उभय पक्षों के मध्य यह तय हुआ कि उपरोक्त चिकित्सा व्यय की प्रतिपूर्ति लोहरदगा के बाहर राँची तक हुए चिकित्सा पर ही मान्य होगा एवं राँची के अतिरिक्त अन्य स्थान पर प्राप्त उपरोक्त चिकित्सा सुविधाव्यय की प्रतिपूर्ति कम्पनी के मुख्य चिकित्सा अधिकारी के रेफर करने पर/ अनुशसा करनें पर ही की जायेगी ।

यह भी स्वीकार किया गया कि कम्पनी के चिकित्सक द्वारा पूर्वनिर्दिष्ट नहीं किये जाने पर किसी भी चिकित्सा व्यय की प्रतिपूर्ति नहीं होगी।

12. भूमण्डलीकरण के वर्तमान दौर में जहां विश्व बाजार में अल्यूमिनियम की दर में लगातार गिरावट हो रही है वहीं दूसरी ओर कम उत्पादन एवं उत्पादकता तथा लागत में निरंतर वृद्धि हुई है । श्रम संगठन कायह दायित्व है कि इस समझौते के प्रभावी रहने की अवधि में कोई भी अव्यवहारिक कार्य/मांग नहीं करेंगे जिससे कम्पनी को अतिरिक्त वित्तीय बोझ उठाना पड़े ।

किसी भी कामगार द्वारा चिकित्सा सुविधाओं का अनुचित लाभ प्राप्त करने के लिए दुरुपयोग किया जाता है तो उनके विरुद्ध कड़ी

1636G1/05-28 5872

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 11 , 2005/ JYAISTHA 21 , 1927

13. सर्वोच्च उपस्थिति पुरस्कार

प्रबन्धन ने स्वीकार किया कि वैसे श्रमिक जो पूरे माह खनन कार्य पर उपस्थित रहेंगे और उत्पादन में अपना प्रत्यक्ष रूप से योगदान देंगे उन्हें प्रत्येक कैलेंडर वर्ष पूरा होने पर अगले कैलेंडर वर्ष की 26 जनवरी को सर्वोच्च उपस्थिति पुरस्कार से सम्मानित किया जायेगा । 14. प्रबन्धन एवं मान्यताप्राप्त श्रमिक संघ निम्नलिखित सामान्य शर्तों पर सहमत हैं :

( 1 ) श्रमिकों को देय भुगतान की संगणना 50 पैसे या उससे अधिक को एक रुपया मान लिया जायेगा एवं 50 पैसे से कम की राशि को शून्य मान लिया जायेगा ।

(2) श्रम संगठन द्वारा प्रस्तुत मांग पत्र में वर्णित अन्य समस्त मांगें वापस ली हुई समझी जायेंगी एवं समझौते के प्रभावी रहने की अवधि में कोई नयी माँग नहीं उठायी जायेगी जिससे कम्पनी पर किसी भी प्रकार का आर्थिक बोझ पड़े।

(3) यदि किसी कानूनी प्रावधान या अन्य किसी कारणवश इस समझौते की शर्तें अवैध ( इनवेलीड) तथा/अथवा कार्यान्वयन केअयोग्य तथा/अथवा अवक्रमिक ( सुपरसीडेड ) हो जाये तो इस प्रकार की अवैधता अकार्यान्वयनशीलता (अनएनफोर्सियेबल ) या अवक्रमण इस समझौते के अवशेष प्रावधानों को प्रभावित नहीं करेंगे किन्तु इस समझौते के फलस्वरूप जो भी लाभ प्राप्त हुए हैं उन्हें उन समस्त वर्तमान तथा भावी लाभों में समायोजित कर लिया जायेगा जिन्हें उपर्युक्त अवैधता, अकार्यान्वयनशीलता तथा अवक्रमण के फलस्वरूप लागू किया जाना अपेक्षित होगा ' (4) श्रम संघों ने यह स्वीकार किया एवं आश्वासन दिया कि वे औद्योगिक न्यायाधिकरण , श्रम न्यायालय , उच्च न्यायालय एवं अन्यविधि विहित किसी भी प्राधिकारी के समक्ष उनके द्वारा लगाये गये समस्त वाद जो सेवा से संबंधित/लाभ आदि हैं वह समाप्त समझा जायेगा और वे पृथक से सक्षम न्यायालय के समक्ष जहां वाद लंबित है में आवेदन पत्र देकर उसे वापस ले लेंगे । भविष्य में इस समझौते के प्रभावशील रहने कीअवधिमें किसी प्रकार का कोई औद्योगिक विवाद/मांग अथवा लाभ हेतु कोई वाद किसी न्यायालय में प्रस्तुत नहीं करेंगे ।

(5.) श्रम संघ यह सुनिश्चित करेगा कि समस्त श्रमिक कार्य स्थल एवं कार्य के दौरान पूर्ण अनुशासन बनाये रखेंगे । श्रमिकों का यूनियन कार्य से कार्य स्थल छोड़कर लोहरदगा या अन्य स्थान आने- जाने पर उपस्थिति पाने के हकदार नहीं होंगे एवं ऐसी स्थिति में श्रम संघ भी श्रमिक के उपस्थितिके लिए खान प्रबन्धन से मांग नहीं करेगी । केवल श्रम संघ के लिखित आग्रह पर केवल कार्यकारिणी के सदस्योंके मामले को छोड़कर ।

[PART II- SEC . 3 (ii) ] (6 ) श्रम संघ श्रमिकों द्वारा निजी आवश्यकता पर लिये जाने वाली अग्रिम राशि वित्तीय वर्ष में किस्तवार अदा किये जा पाने की सीमा से अधिक की राशि के लिए प्रबन्धन से आग्रह नहीं करेंगे ।

(7) वैसे श्रमिक जो आदतन कार्य निष्ठापूर्वक नहीं करते हैं एवं कार्य स्थल में मात्र उपस्थिति दर्ज कर निजी कार्यों में लिप्त रहते हैं उनके विरुद्ध अनुशासनात्मक कार्रवाई की जायेगी एवं श्रमिक संघ ऐसे ऋषिकों की पैरवी नहीं करेगा । (8 ) श्रम संघ श्रमिकों को खदान में सुरक्षा संबंधी नियमों के पालन के लिए प्रेरित करेंगे । श्रमिक भी कम्पनी द्वारा उपलब्ध कराये गये सुरक्षा उपकरण एवं गणवेश में ही कार्य पर आयेंगे ।

(१ ) प्रबन्धन एवं श्रम संगठन पर्यावरण के संरक्षण एवं प्रदूषण नियंत्रण हेतु सामूहिक प्रयास करेंगे । श्रम संगठन संस्थान की पर्यावरण नीति एवं आई . एस. ओ . 14001 के मानकों के अनुरूप पर्यावरण संरक्षण हेतु हर स्तर पर जागरुकता बढ़ाने का कार्य करेंगे ।

(10 ) उभय पक्षों के मध्य यह तय हुआ कि वर्तमान में खदानोंके इर्द- गिर्द बिगड़ती विधि- व्यवस्था के कारण प्रशासनिक सहायता उपलब्ध नहीं होने के कारण कामगारों के वेतन का भुगतान खदान के समीप स्थित बैंक से किया जायेगा । श्रम संगठन भी कामगारों को बैंक में उनका खाता खुलवाने के लिए प्रेरित करेंगे ।

( 11 ) प्रबन्धन द्वारा उत्पादन को निरन्तरता बनाये रखने के लिए श्रमिक संघ श्रमिकों/रैयतों से लीज श्रेत्र में उपलब्ध खनन योग्य भूमि अधिग्रहण में सहयोग करेंगे ।

(12) कर्मकार पूरी ईमानदारी, निष्ठा एवं अपनी पूरी क्षमता से कम्पनी के हितवर्द्धन में कार्य करेंगे । कोई भी कामगार एक पाक्षिक अवधि के दौरान तीन दिन 10 मिनट से ज्यादा विलंब से अपनी ड्यूटी के लिये आने पर प्रबन्धन उस कामगार के एक दिन के वेतन की कटौती श्रम अधिनियम के अंतर्गत करेगी ।

(13) अपने अधीन या कब्जे में अनाधिकृत रूप से रखे गये प्रतिष्ठान के क्वार्टर, जमीन, सम्पत्ति, आहाते या दस्तावेजों को प्रबन्धन द्वारा खाली करने या सौंपे जाने के आदेश को न मानना दुराचरण होगा ।

( 14) श्रमिक संघ तथा प्रबंधतंत्र संबंधित अधिकारियों को इस समझौते के पंजीयन के लिए संयुक्त रूप से प्रार्थनापत्र प्रस्तुत करने को सहमत हैं । [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : जून 11 , 2005 /ज्येष्ठ 21 , 1927

5873 1 2

ह./-

एस. के. त्रिवेदी,

मलिक सेराजुल हक

( 15 ) श्रमिकों के प्रशिक्षण द्वारा ज्ञान , कार्य कुशलता एवं सर्वांगीण विकास हेतु संयुक्त रूप से प्रयास किया जायेगा एवंविभागीय कार्य को सुचारू रूप से चलाने के लिए श्रमिकों का अन्तर्विभागिय/अन्तर्खान स्थानान्तरण एवं अभिनवीकरण आवश्यकतानुसार समय - समय पर किया जायेगा । ( 16 ) कम्पनी में मान्यता प्राप्त श्रमिक संघों ने यह आश्वासन दिया कि वे प्रतिष्ठान में उत्पादकता बढ़ाने में व अनुशासन बनाये रखने में अपना सक्रिय सहयोग प्रदान करेंगे साथ ही भविष्यमें उत्पन्न विवाद/मतभेदों का निराकरण वैधानिक प्रक्रिया के माध्यम से ही करना सुनिश्चित करेंगे । ( 17 ) पक्षों द्वारा उत्पादन, उत्पादकता बढ़ाने , लाभ का उच्च स्तर अर्जित करने तथा औद्योगिक शांति एवं स‌द्भाव के लिए निम्नक्षेत्रों में संयुक्त प्रयास करने का संकल्प लिया गया:

* कच्चे माल ( बाक्साइट ) का संरक्षण करना एवं अपव्यय नहींकरना ।

* उत्पादन में वृद्धि करना एवं लागत में कमी लाना । * कार्य में गुणवत्ता को बढ़ाना ।

अध्यक्ष

महाप्रबन्धक ( इ. आर. ) ह./-

ह./-

आर. एल. मोदी,

भुखला भगत

उपाध्यक्ष

अपर महाप्रबन्धक ( वित्त एवं

लेखा)

ह./-

प्राण प्रसाद जयसवाल

आर. बी. सिंह

उपाध्यक्ष

उप महाप्रबन्धक ( कार्मिक एवं प्रशासन)

ह./-

ए. के. डॉन,

अशोक कुमार यादव,

कार्यालय सचिव

* कार्य स्थिति एवं सुरक्षा में सुधार के प्रति निरंतर सचेत और सतत् प्रयास करना ।

अनाधिकृत अनुपस्थिति को शून्य करने के लिए प्रयास करना ।

सहायक महाप्रबन्धक (खान , ह./-

ह./-

राजीव कुमार

प्रबन्धक ( प्रशासन) साबिर खा, संयुक्तसचिव

* पानी एवं ऊर्जा का अपव्यय न करना ।

मशीन एवं उपकरणों का अनुरक्षण एवं सदुपयोग करना ।

ह./-

फकीर मोहम्मद,

कार्यकारिणी सदस्य

* प्रशिक्षण द्वारा ज्ञान एवं कुशलता बढ़ाना एवं सर्वांगीण विकास करना ।

ह./--

शिवव्रत दुबे,

कार्यकारिणी सदस्य

15. पक्षों के मध्य यह आपसी समझौता प्रतिष्ठान में औद्योगिक शांति, सद्भाव परिवार भावनाएँ, सुरक्षा बढ़ाने और श्रमिकों के कल्याण और निरंतर प्रगति के उद्देश्य से आज दिनांक 24-4-2003 को सौहार्दपूर्ण वातावरण में सम्पन्न हुआ ।

साक्षीगण

नाम

पद क्र. एम्पलाई

पक्षकारों के नाम

श्रमिक प्रतिनिधि

सेवायोजक प्रतिनिधि

हिण्डाल्को इण्डस्ट्रीज लिमिटेड

खान प्रभाग ( झारखण्ड) , छोटानागपुर बाक्साइट वर्कस यूनियन लोहरदगा , झारखण्ड

लोहरदगा

ह./-

अशोक कु. सिन्हा

धीरज प्रसाद साहु

महाप्रबन्धक (खान परिचालन ) महा सचिव

सं. कोड

4 1 2

1. 0828 श्रीउपेन्द्रशर्मा

माइनिंग मेठ 2. 0869

सुरक्षा कर्मी श्री पूरन बहादुर थापा

3. 0870 श्री पदम सिंह

सुरक्षा कर्मी

माइनिंग मेठ-सह- 4. 0285 श्री राजेश्वर पाण्डे

ब्लास्टर 5. 0783 श्रीवीरेश्वर भगत

सुरक्षा कर्मी 5874

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 11 , 2005/ JYAISTHA 21 , 1927

4 2

6. 031

माइनिंग मेठ श्री मंजूर अहमद

7. 0899

ड्राइवर श्री शिशिर कुमार सिन्हा

8. 0488

माइनिंग मेठ श्री रामानुज प्रताप देव

9. 0059 श्रीविश्वनाथ भगत

माइनिंग मेठ सह ब्लास्टर 10. 0073 श्री राजेन्द्र नाथ मण्डल माइनिंग मेठ सह ब्लास्टर श्रीजेरोम तिर्की

11. 0120

माइनिंग मेठ 12. 127

माइनिंग मेठ श्री बलदेव महतो

13. 0128

माइनिंग मेठ श्रीबुधनाथ उराँव

14. 0129 श्री सनिया भगत

माइनिंग मेठ 15. 0522

माइनिंग मेठ श्री अरुण कुमार शर्मा

16. 0769 श्री रामायण राम

सुरक्षा कर्मी 17. 0614

सुरक्षा कर्मी श्री बल बहादुर गुरुंग

18. 0787

टेरेक्स ऑपरेटर श्री हवलदार गुप्ता

19. 0768

ड्राइवर श्रीमथुरा प्रधान

20. 0755

टेरेक्सऑपरेटर श्री शिव राम भट्टाचार्या

21. 0525 श्रीजोसफ मिंज

ड्राइवर 22. 0723 श्रीरामचन्द्र सिंह

ड्राइवर 23. 0516

ड्राइवर श्री क्रिस्टोफर कुजूर

24. 0286 श्री गम प्रसादपुन

सुरक्षा कर्मी 25. 0279 श्री राम नरेश यादव

सुरक्षा कर्मी

मेकेनिक 26. 0802 श्री सत्यनारायण झा

27. 0788

पोकलेन ऑपरेटर श्री दिलिप कुमार चक्रवर्ती

28. 0498 श्रीमती कलिस्ता टोप्पो

ए.एन.एम.

29. 0281

सुरक्षा कर्मी श्री कृष्ण बहादुर थापा

30. 0228

कम्पाउण्डर श्री सुरेश साहु

31. 0495 श्री एम. ए. मल्लिक

ड्राइवर 32. 0513 श्री भोजा उराँव

ड्राइवर

टेरेक्स ऑपरेटर 33. 0493 श्रीअब्दुल रब्बानी

34. 0611 श्री अवधेश सिंह

पोकलेन ऑपरेटर 35. 0490 श्रीसहदेवगोप

शवल ऑपरेटर

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

4 36. 0521 श्रीकिशन यादव

पोकलेन ऑपरेटर 37. 0519

पोकलेन ऑपरेटर श्री समीर कुमार बनर्जी

नई दिल्ली , 13 मई, 2005

का. आ. 2074- औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार मै. एम.एम.टी.सी. के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण कोलकाताके पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 40/2003 ) को प्रकाशित करती है, जोकेन्द्रीय सरकार को 13-05-2005 को प्राप्त हुआ था । [सं. एल. - 29012/30/2003- आई.आर. ( विविध) ] बी. एम. डेविड, अवर सचिव New Delhi , the 13th May, 2005

S.O. 2074. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 40/2003 ) ofthe Central Government Industrial Tribunal-Cum- Labour Court , Kolkata as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of M/ s . M.M.T.C. and their workmen , which was received by the Central Government on 13-05-2005.

[No. L- 29012/30/2003 - IR ( M)] B.M. DAVID , Under Secy .

ANNEXURE

CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL AT KOLKATA

Reference No. 40 of 2003

Parties:

Employers in relation to the management of M/ s . M.M.T.C. Non- Ferrous Metal Handling Workers Pool

AND

Their Workmen

PRESENT:

Mr. Justice Hrishikesh Banerji . Presiding Officer APPEARANCES :

Mr. M. Dutta, Advocate On behalf of Management :

Onbehalf of Workmen :Ms. G. Varalakshmi , Advocate

Industry: Port and Dock State : West Bengal

Dated: 2nd May , 2005 5875 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : जून 11 , 2005 /ज्येष्ठ 21 , 1927

AWARD

By Order No. L - 29012/30/ 2003 - IR ( M) dated 14-11-2003 the Central Govt . in exercise of its powers under Section 10 ( 1 ) (d) and (2A) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 referred the following dispute to this Tribunal .

3. That the dispute had been settled by mutual settlement dated 12-04-2004 by the concerned parties to their satisfaction before witnesses and Sri Jai Kishore Tiwari had joined back his service withM/ s . M.M.T.C. Non -Ferrous Metal Handling Workers ' Pool since then i.e. 12-04-2005 .

foradjudication :

4. That the copy of the Mutual Settlement dated 12-04-2005 duly notorified is enclosed for the necessary consideration of the Hon'ble Court and may be treated as part of this petition.

5. That the Hon'ble Court may be prayed for passing a necessary order disposing of the referred Reference case being Ref. 40/03 on the mutual settleinent of the either party.

"Whether the removal of Mr. J. K. Tiwari , Ex- Supervisor witheffect from 20-12-2002 by the management of MMTC handling pool , Kolkata without issuing any chargesheet , without conducting any enquiry and without issuing a termination order is justified or not ? If not , whether he is entitled for reinstatement of his service with all attendant benefits and back wages or not ? If not , to what relief he is entitled ? "

6. This petition is made bona fide and for ends of justice.

2. When the case is called out today , Advocates for both the parties state that the matter under reference has been settled between the parties out of the Court . They file a joint petition enclosing therewith the settlement dated 12-04-2005 duly signed by the parties . They pray for an Award in terms of the above settlement .

Itistherefore prayed Your Honour be graciously pleased to pass a necessary order disposing of the dispute in the referred case no . 40 of 2003 on mutual settlement between the parties and no dispute exists any further for the ends ofjustice .

And for this Act of kindness Your petitioners as in duty shall ever pray .

VERIFICATION

3. On consideration of the submission of the parties and also the settlement as filed, I find that the terms of the settlement is bona fide , reasonable and in the interest of the parties . I , therefore , accept the same and pass an Award in terms of the said settlement . The joint petition and the settlement dated 12-4-2005 is made part of this Award as Annexure -A.

This is my Award .

HRISHIKESH BANERJI , Presiding Officer

Dated, Kolkata ,

The 2nd May , 2005

I , Sri Sahabuddin , the President of M/ s . M.M.T.C. Non-Ferrous Metal Handling Workers ' Pool , on behalf of the Pool ,do hereby solemnly verify that the statement contained in paragraphs 1 to 5 are all true to the best of my knowledge and rests are my humble submissions , before the Hon'ble Court .

ANNEXURE-A

Sd/- PRESIDENT BEFORE LD . PRESIDING OFFICER CENTRAL, INDUSTRIAL TRIBINAΑΙ , AT CALCUTTA

VERIFICATION

Reference Case No. 40/2003

An Industrial Dispute

BETWEEN

Workman

Jai Kishore Tiwari

I , Sri Jai Kishore Tiwari , the workman in the referred case do hereby solemnly affirm that the averments made in the foregoing paragraphs are all true to the best of my knowledge and are humble submission before this Hon'ble Court.

V/s.

Sd/- WORKMAN M.M.T.C. Non -Ferrous Metal Handling Workers ' Pool

...Employer/Management

Prepared in my office Sd/-

The humble petition by both the parties named herein above with prayer for disposal of the referred dispute on mutual settlement between the parties.

Advocate

MostRespectfully Sheweth:

1. That today 27-04-2005 is fixed for hearing .

This Settlement made on 12th day of April , 2005 between M/ s . M.M.T.C. Non-Ferrous Metal Handling Workers' Pool of 28/B , C.G.R. Road ( Karl Marx Sarani ) , Calcutta - 700023 of the First Part .

2. That in the mean time a mutual settlementhad come forth and entered into by the parties concerned to the dispute .

5876

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 11 , 2005/ JYAISTHA 21 , 1927

AND

Sri Jai Kishore Tiwari , S/ o . Late R.A. Tiwari , Supervisor (Booking No. 5) of M/s. M.M.T.C. Non-Ferrous Metal Handling Workers ' Pool , residing at 49/5 , Karl Marx Sarani , Calcutta - 700 023 of the Second Part.

Whereas party of the 2nd part is one of the worker ofthe party of the first part working as Supervisor with Booking No. 5.

And whereas the said workers of the party of the first part including Jay Kishore Tiwari were originally working with M/ s . M.M.T.C. ( Minerals and Metals Trading Corporation of India Ltd.).

And whereas on the closing of the business of M/ s. M.M.T.C. of India Ltd. the workers handling non ferrous Metal were/ are doing Metal Handling job of the Dock and Port of Calcutta and various godowns within Dock area and other Dock and Port related area and workers group are sharing the income arising out of their services under the Pool, equally under the said First party-the Pool.

And whereas a dispute arose between the First Party with the second party and the managementment of the First party stopped the booking of the second party whereupon the second party had to move the appropriate legal foruın. The Regional Labour Commissioner, Central , Calcutta for his relief, on the failure of the conciliation process, the Assistant Labour Commissioner, Central , Calcutta filed his failure report. Thereby reference case No. 40/2003 was initiated by the Central Government before the Central Industrial Tribunal , Calcutta. The party of the second part Jay Kishore Tiwari also initiated a Writ petition being W.P.- 15493 ( W) of 2003 before the Hon'ble High Court , Calcutta . Both the litigations are pending for Hearing .

Whereas to avoid further litigation and financial losses the parties concerned decided to settle the issue ( dispute ) among themselves mutually to the satisfaction of either party under the following terms and conditions .

Terms and Conditions

1. That the party of the 1st part and the party of the 2nd part mutually agree to withdraw any and every allegation against each other.

2. That the party of the 2nd part would be allowed to join his duties with immediate effect from the date of signing of this Agreement .

3. That the 2nd party would forego the back wages for the period, he had not been in service i.e. from 20-12-2002 to 12-04-2005 .

4. That neither party would make a fresh issue of present dispute/disputes settled herewith , in the future.

5. That second party on signing this settlement shall not pursue with the legal cases filed on his behalf cither in the Central Tribunal and/or in the High Court . Calcutta.

6. A xerox copy of this settlement shall be filed before the Ld . Central Industrial Tribunal , Calcutta and also in the High Court, Calcutta for their necessary orders in dispossing of the same .

In witnesseth whereof the parties hereto put their

[PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii) ] signature herein below after reading and understanding the contents of paragraphs made herein above on the date , month and year first written above.

Signature of the 1st party Signature of the 2nd party Witnesses:

1. The General Secretary , Cal . Dock Workers Union .

2. 3. 4. 5. 6.

नई दिल्ली, 13 मई, 2005

का.आ. 2075.- औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार ई. एस. आई. हॉस्पिटल के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण , नई दिल्ली-1 के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 62/99 ) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 13-05-2005 को प्राप्त हुआ था । [सं. एल. - 15012/4/98- आई. आर. ( विविध ) ] बी. एम. डेविड, अवर सचिव New Delhi , the 13th May , 2005

S.O. 2075.-In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award ( Ref. No. 62/99 ) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal -cum -Labour Court, New Delhi No. 1 as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of E. S. I. Hospital and their workman, which was received by the Central Government on 13-05-2005 .

[No. L - 15012/4/98 - IR (M) ] B. M. DAVID , Under Secy .

ANNEXURE

IN THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM - LABOUR COURT , NEW DELHI

Presiding Officer: SHRI SANT SINGH BAL L.D. NO . 62/99

In the matter of dispute between :

Smt. Maya Gupta w/o Slıri Umesh Kumar Gupta, r/ o A- 135 , Ashok Vihar , Phase - 2, Delhi - 52

Workman

Versus

E.S.I. Hospital,

TheDy. Director (Admn) ,

Basaidarapur, Ring Road,

NewDelhi - 110015

Management [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

APPEARANCES :

None forparties.

AWARD

The Central Goverment in the Ministry of Labour vide its Order No. L- 15012/4/98 - IR (M) dated 10-2-1999 has referred the following Industrial Dispute to this Tribunal foradjudication:

"Whether the action of the Medical Superintendent , E.S.I. Hospital , Basaidarapur , New Delhi , in terminating from service Ms. Maya Gupta , Staff Nurse w.e.f. 25-2-95 by their order dated 26-11-96 is proper and justified ? If not, to what relief and benefits are the said workmen entitled to? "" 2. Briefly stated the facts of this case are that she (the workman) was appointed as Staff Nurse on 6-10-90 and declared permanent vide order dated 17-9-91 . She was admitted for delivery in the same hospital during August , 93 and was granted Maternity Leave up to Feburary, 94 andthereafter she joined duty while she sustained injuries in her spinal cord while returning from duty and remained bed ridden and applied for medical leave from 25-2-95 to 3-5-95 but despite any sympathetic view of her grave illness the management started enquiry proceedings and her services were terminated w.e.f. 25-2-95 vide letter dated 24-11-96 without giving any opportunity ofbeing heard at her back . It is further stated that the hospital asked her to appear before standing medical board but she could not . She requested vide their letter dated 16-5-95 to the manatement/department to take her from her home for medical examination as she was bed ridden and unable to nove but the department decided the enquiry exparte which was misconceived . She was not given any opportunity. Hence in view of the above it is avered that order dated 26-11-96 was illegal and the same is sought to be quashed with a claim for appointment to the post.

3. The claim was contested by the management respondent by filing written statement stating therein that the applicant workman has suppressed material fact . She started absenting herself from duty from 25-2-95 and produced medical certificates indicating backache. She was directed to appear before medical board for 2nd medical opinion vide letter dated 12-5-95 . Applicant neither appeared before the board nor reported for duty . She was issued charge sheet dated 4-5-96 and she asked for two years further leave on the following grounds namely that hermother in law died; that there was no female member to look after her young children aged 4 years and 2 years and her father in law was too old . It is further stated that fair and impartial enquiry was held as per Statutory Regulations giving adequate and ample opportunity to the applicant ; and the applicant was given copy of the enquiry report dated 16-8-1996 and Disciplinary Authority accepted findings of the Enquiry Officer and ordered termination of services ofthe applicant by order dated 26-11-96. Applicant filed an appeal before the Appellate Authority which was rejected. It is further admitted that the applicant was

5877

भारत का राजपत्र: जून 11 , 2005 /ज्येष्ठ 21 , 1927

appointed as Staff Nurse and regularised vide order dated 17-9-91 . The contention that the applicant was made permanent by order dated 17-9-1991 is factually incorrect and denied . In view of the above reference is sought to be rejected.

4. Written statement was followed by rejoinder wherein the facts mentioned in the written statement were controverted and those of the claim statement were reiterated to be correct .

5. Therafter case was fixed for evidence of the workman after admission denial and framing of issues workman filed her affidavit in evidence and the matter was posted for cross - examination of the workman . As per order sheetworkman filed her affidavit on 15-3-2001 . Thereafter case was fixed for cross - examination of the workman on 2-3 hearings and thereafter case was fixed for cross- examination of workman on 8-2-2002 and on subsequent many hearings on 18-4-2002 , 15-7-2002 , 9-10-2002. 2-12-2002, 27-1-2003 , 11-2-2003, 31-3-2003, 24-6-2003. 26-8-2003, 29-10-2003 , 27-1-2004 and on 10-3-2004 when the workman was present with her A/R Shri Prem Parkash and thereafter case was again fixed for cross -examination on 6-4-2004 and then 16-6-2004, 13-7-2004 , 30-9-2004 , 20-12-2004 and on 4-4-2005 when father in law of workman Shri K. L. Gupta appeared and submitted that the workman would not produce herself as she had appeared previously herself. However he was unable to produce his authority letter. Hence case was again adjourned to 5-5-2005 for cross - examination of the workman but workman failed to appearfor cross - examination and was proceeded exparte .

6. Perusal of the record shows that the workman was the employee of the management as she was appointed by the management respondent as Staff Nurse and have beenregularised. She was employee of the management and even regularised by the Management. However , she remained absent from duty and for a very long period of more than two years and an enquiry was conducted against her and she was given amble opportunity . Enquiry report was also furnished to her according to the management and her services were terminated by disiplinary authority after conclusion of proper and fair enquiry . The burden to prove the issue in reference is on the applicant workman claimant that the action of her termination of service was illegal and improper but the workman has filed her affidavit dated 26-2-2001 in her evidence which cannot be read as she did not produce herself for cross - examination by the management . Therefore , under these circumstances , I have no option but to hold that the claimant workman has failed to prove or show that the action of the management in terminating her services is illegal or unjustified. In the absence of any evidence , the action of the manageınent cannot be held to be unjustified i.e. to say that the action of the management respondent is held to be legal and justified. Award is accordingly passed. File be consigned to record room .

Dated: 5-5-05 SANT SINGH BAL, Presiding Officer 5878

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 11 , 2005/ JYAISTHA 21 , 1927

नई दिल्ली, 16 मई, 2005

का.आ. 2076.-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 (1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार स्टेट बैंक आफ बीकानेर एण्ड जयपुर 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 आई.डी.- संख्या/ 165 /2000 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 13- 05-2005- को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल-12012/ 237/ 2000 - आई.आर. ( बी-1 ) ]

[PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii) ] ofSri Veer Singh w.e.f. 8-3-1985 is legal and justified? If not , to what relief the workman is entitled to ? "

अजय कुमार, डैस्क अधिकारी

New Delhi , the 16th May, 2005

S.O. 2076.- In pursuanceuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes . the award ( ID . No. 165/ 2000) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal/ Labour Court , Lucknow now as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the Management of State Bank of Bikaner & Jaipur and their workman , which was received by the Central Government on 13-05-2005.

[No. L - 12012/237/2000- IR (B - 1 ) ] AJAY KUMAR, Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM- LABOUR COURT, LUCKNOW

Present :

SHRIKANT SHUKLA, Presiding Officer I.D. No. 165/2000

Ref. No. L - 12012/237/2000 - IR (B -I) Dt. 16-10-2000 BETWEEN

Sh .Veer Singh C/o Radheysham Tewari , 107/76/ Jawahar Nagar , Kanpur

AND The General Manager , State Bank of Bikaner & Jaipur H.O. Tilak Marg. Jaipur Kaushalpuri , Kanpur (U.P. )

AWARD

The Government of India , Ministry of Labour referred the following dispute for adjudication to Presiding Officer, CGIT-cum-Labour Court, Lucknow:

"Whether the action of the management of State Bank of Bikaner & Jaipur in terminating the services The worker's case in brief is that the worker Veer Singh worked as Peon/Godown Watchman during 18-12- 84 to 7-3-85 in Kaushalpuri branch of State Bank ofBikaner &Jaipur, Kanpur and his services were terminated on 8-3- 85 without observing the provisions of I.D. Act. The worker moved an application before Asstt . Labour Commissioner (C) Kanpur and thereafter aggrieved from order of Asstt. Labour Commissioner (C) Kanpur the U.P. Bank Employees Federation including Sri Veer Singh filed a Writ Petition No. 45884/92. In the Hon'ble High Court of adjudicature at Allahabad , Hon'ble High Court passed a writ of mandamous and again the worker filed the application before Asstt . Labour Commissioner ( C) Kanpur and thereafter the case has been referred vide order No. L- 12012 /237/2000 /IR(B - 1 ) dated 16-10-2000 . Worker has alleged that he only reads and write and he was never sent any letter by the opposite party to take him back in the service . The worker has also alleged that juniors to him were retained in the service who also did not complete 90 days ofwork but they were put in service to complete 90 days and thereafter they were regularised. Worker has thereforeprayed that court may declare that the termination order dt . 8-3-85 is illegal and improper. The worker has also prayed that he be reinstated back in service with all backwages .

The opposite party has denied the claim of workman that since the workman has not worked for 240 days in a year therefore the worker is not entitled to any benefit under section 25B of I.D. Act . The worker was appointed for a specific period and thereafter his services were terminated and there is no need to give any notice to the worker . The worker has never been appointed by competent officer instead he was appointed for specific period in absence of regular employee proceeding on leave . Itispointed out that the worker was not appointed after prescribed procedure and according to the procedure the names are invited from the Employment Exchange and after interview they are appointed on merit and without adopting above procedure no one can be employed in the subordinate cadre in the bank . It is also alleged that whenever the work increases in the bank and the permanent employee goes on leave in the circumstances to meet the administrative exegencies the bank is compelled to appoint some persons to meet the needs so that there is no adverse effect in the interest of customers and Bank . The worker's cade does not fall within the perview of retrenchment it is covered under section 2(00) (bb ) in the I.D. Act. 1947. The worker does not get any right for regular appointment and in case the case of the worker is admitted it will violative of Article 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India. The opposite party has also alleged that the bank vide its letter No. per./42/87 dt . 23-4-87 provided the opportunity to all those temporary employees who were [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

5879 भारत का राजपत्र: जून 11 , 2005/ज्येष्ठ 21 , 1927

2. Photo copy of appointment letter dt.. 17-1-85 which shows the extension of his employment till 15-2-85 .

2. Photo copy of appointment letter dt . 16-2-85 which shows that his employment is extended up to 7-3-85 .

4. Photo copy of statement of service of Veer Singh .

5. Photo copy of receipt dt. 25-6-87.

Opposite party has filed the photo copies of the following documents;

1. Circular regarding recruitment in subordinate staff No. PER/ 27/78 dt. 16-5-78 .

2. Circular of the Opposite party regarding temporary appointment dt . 1-11-79 .

3. Circular dt. 30-3-01 regarding part time sub staff Sweeper on consolidated salary basis .

4. Circular No. PER/24/87 dt . 12-3-87 regarding subordinate staff age limitation for recruitment.

5. Govt. of India, Ministry of Finance order No. F -3-2/ 104/87 dt . 16-8-90 regarding recruitment and absorption of temporary employees in public sector banks.

6. Approach paper on issue of temporary employees .

7. Circular No. PER/REC/Temp/6 dt. 20-10-90 .

8. Facts regarding ex -temporary employees who had put 90 or more days after 1-3-82 with prescribed proforma English and Hindi .

9. Notice of the bank dt. 24-10-90 .

10. Circular No. PER/ 812/ 87 dt . 23-4-87 in English and Hindi.

11. Letter addressed to Manager (P& A) State of Bikaner & Jaipur, H.O. Jaipur.

12. Prescribed proforma of application form English & Hindi.

13. Circular PER -41/87 dt. 22-4-87.

engaged in the bank under the direction of the Govt . of India , Ministry of Finance , New Delhi and the bank also invited for the proposed test to all , casual labours by publishing notice in Hindi and English News papers , published in the country and therefore the bank followed the provision of section 25H of the I.D. Act . After test the result was declared and the workers were appointed. Opposite party has also alleged that the claim is highly belated and the worker did not raise the dispute before the Tribunal . The Opposite party has alleged that it has not violated the provsion of section 25G and H of the I.D Act . It is admitted that the worker has not worked for 240 days and therefore the case of worker is not covered under section 25F and 25G of the Act . The dispute pertains to year 1984-85 where as the worker has filed the statement ofclaim after lapse of 16 years and in case the worker has any complaint he could have immediately approached to the court and since the claim has not been filed in time and therefore it is barred by time. The worker was never appointed on regular permanent post . It was made clear in the appointment letter that the period for which he was employed if the same is over, his services was automatically came to an end and no notice shall be needed for termination of service . The worker after understanding the contents of the appointment letter that his services for limited period , he joined the duties and now he can not raise the dispute . The worker has not filed necessary documents in support of his case and therefore it is not possible to reply the statement of claim fully. It is also stated that the worker in spite of the orders of the Hon'ble High Court passed in Writ Petition No. 45884/92 dt. 12-3-92 did not approached the competent officer within the stipulated period . It is denied that the Veer Singh was appointed on the post of Peon instead he was appointed as Godown Watchman during the period 18-12-84 to 7-3-85 when the watchman proceeded on leave . The worker never discharged the duties of the Peon. It is stated that the U.P. Bank Employees Federation was not authorised to raise the dispute of Veer Singh even then the bank vide their circular dt . 23-4-87 offer the opportunity to all causal and temporary employees to get them absorbed in the regular services . With a view to give information of test thebank notified the notice in all English and Hindi News Papers of the country and all those who completed 90 days of services after 1-1-82 but Sri Veer Singh was not qualified since he did not complete 90 working days . Regarding the details of the worker who were retained in service the Opposite party has alleged that in case the worker gives full evidence, the Opposite party can give appropriate reply . According the Opposite party has requested that the worker is not entitled to any relief.

The worker has produced his affidavit and he has been cross examined by the Opposite party. The Opposite party has filed the affidavit of Sri Brijender Lal Manager of State Bank of Bikaner & Jaipur , Kaushalpuri Branch, Kanpur, Sri Brijender Lal has also been cross examined.

The worker has filed the photo copies ofthe following documents;

Opposite party has also filed the photo copy of appointment letters and the statement of service.

1. Photo copy of appointment letter dt . 18-12-84 which shows his employment till 16-1-85.

1636 GI /05-29 5880

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 11 , 2005 /JYAISTHA 21 , 1927

Heardworker'srepresentative. The opposite party's representative could not be heard and perused the record.

Itisadmitted fact that the worker has not put in more than 90 working days prior to his termination or during whole of his service . The appointment letters filed by the worker also prove that the worker Veer Singh was engaged as Godown Watchman and not as Peon. The photo copies of the appointment letters filed by the worker are best evidence of the nature of his appointment . The appointment letters proves that the worker's services came to an end on 7-3-85. The appointment letter dt . 16-2-85 makes it clear that the worker's appointment was purely temporary till 7-3-85 and his services were terminable without any notice whatsoever . It has also stripulated in the appointment letter that the bank reserves its right to terminate his services before as provided in the award . Veer Singh was directed to return duplicate of the memorandum duly signed by him as token of his acceptance on appointment on above terms and conditions . Section 2( oo)(bb) defines retrenchment as under: " retrenchment " means the termination by the employer of the service of a workman for any reason whatsoever , otherwise than as a punishment inflicted by way ofdisciplinary action but does not include- (a) voluntary retirement of the workman; or (b) retirement of the workman on reaching the age of superannuation if the contract of employment between the employer and the workman concerned contains a stipulation in that behalf; ог

(bb) termination of the service of the workman as a result of the non - renewal of the contract of employment between the employer and the workman concerned on its expiry or of such contract being terminated under a stipulation on thatbehalf contained therein; or

Section 25F defines conditions of retrenchment as under:

No workman employed in any industry who has been in continuous service for not less than one year under an employer shall be retrenched by that employer until:

( a) the workman has been given one month's notice inwriting indicating the reasons for retrenchment and the period of notice has expired , or the workınan has been paid in lieu of such notice wages for the period of the notice ;

(b) the workman has been paid , at the time of retrenchment , compensation which shall be

[PART II- SEC. 3 ( ii) ] equivalent to fifteen days average pay ( for every completed year of continuous service) or any part thereof in excess of six months ; and (c) notice in the prescribed manner is served on the appropriate government ( for such authority as may be specified by the appropriate government by notification in the official gazette) .

Terms and conditions of the 1st apointment letter dated 18-12-84 contains following facts:

(a) The worker was for the fixed period of 30 days terminable on 16-1-85 .

(b) Appointment was for the fixed consolidated of Rs. 430 plus D.A.

(d) Appointment contained the condition that the worker's services could be terminated before the fixed period by serving notice;

(e) The worker shall return the duplicate copy of appointment with duly signed by him as token of hisacceptance.

2nd appointment letter of appointment cum extension letter is refers to 1st one dt . 18-12-84 , by which the appointment period is extended upto 15-2-85 with specific clause that the services shall be terminated without notice on 15-2-85 . The said letter is followed by 3rd letter in the nature of extension of service till 7-3-85 with clear stipulated that his services shall be terminated on 7-3-85 without any further notice whatsoever.

Photo copies of appointment letter has been filed by the worker himself, the originals of which must be in hispossession . From the above appointment letters it is proved that he worker was appointed as Godown watch- man during the period of 18-12-84 to 7-3-85 for a total of80 days only contrary to the documentary evidence it can not be believed that he was employed as peon as well . He has alleged that his services were terminated on 8-3-85.

The simple issue before the court is whether the termination is illegal & unjustified.

The worker has stated in the statement of claim at para 11 ofthe statement of claim that his employment illegal and unjustified on the following grounds :

(1) Bank is indulged in unfair labour practice by employing the class IV employees for a period of less than 90 days , so that the worker may not have opportunity to gain temporary status in the service under bipartite settlement .

5881 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : जून 11 , 2005 /ज्येष्ठ 21 , 1927

(2) The worker ofpeon & chowkidar is ofpermanent nature , but workers have been engaged as temporary on daily wage basis .

(3) The worker was paid Rs . 1000 per month when s regular workers more wages.

(4) Hon'ble Supreme Court has declared that the practice of employing the temporary worker is unfair labour practice.

confer any right upon the workman for claiming his permanent or regular employment or alleging termination. It is also pointed out in the affidavit that even names from Employment Exchange were not called although for making regular or permanent appointments such process is necessary. In para 8 of the affidavit the Manager has stated thatit is always open to any person fulfilling the conditions & qualification etc. to apply for the post for which applications are invited. In para 9 of the affidavit it is stated thatthe exigency of work & also due to temporary increase in the work or on account of leave vacancy etc. engagements are made on daily wages or fixed wages or even in the regular pay scales for such period .

(5) That the juniors to the worker were allowed to complete 90 days work to get regularisation in service.

(6) In case the worker did not complete 90 days work , they were employed to complete 90 days inotherperiod.

(7) Termination of service comes under unfair labour practice.

Inpara 10 of the affidavit Manager has stated that concerned workman had worked for temporary period of 80 days for which no procedure for regular appointment was adopted & the workman cannot equate himself with those who had applied against permanent post on regular basis and if any person after having gone through the prescribed procedure for regular appointment is appointed, there upon the workman cannot raise any grievance .

Worker has not claimed that he has been terminated even though he was completed the 240 days work prior to hisdisengagement .

Worker claims that he ought to have been engaged for90 days .

Ihave perused circular of the Bank PER/ 66/79 dated 12-11-79 . By this circular the Head Office of the Bank has barred theManagers for appointing any employee for more than 80 days , as the Branch Managers were enabling some workman to complete 240 days .

Theissue referred is not that whether the engagement ofthe worker for a period of 80 days illegal and unjustified & whether the non - employment of worker for 90 days is illegal or unjustified. This court has to confine itself to the issue referred to it by the government for adjudication . It is established law that the Tribunal can not go beyond the terms of reference made to it. Labour Court cannot travel beyond the reference made to it .

Government of India , Ministry of Finance under its order F - 3 / 3/ 104/87 - IR dated 16-8-90 circulated approach paper to all public sector banks asking banks to utilise their existing panel of temporary employees and in case these employees were not taken from Employment Exchange the bank would be requested to approach to DGET directly seeking ex- employees . Government also directed that until the problem of existing temporary employees is fully redressal, no bank will be permitted to make temporary appointments. It was on the approach letter it was provided thatthose temporary employees who had put in minimum temporary service of 90 days more days after the cut off date i.e. 1-1-1982 will be eligible for considering under the scheme.

From the evidence on record it is proved that the worker was appointed by the Branch Manager , Kasuhal Puri Branch of the Bank . No instance has been shown that any one was engaged the said branch after the worker left thejob on 8-3-85 . From perusal of the initial appointment letter dt . 18-12-84 , it is made out that it was on the application ofthe worker Branch Manager of Kaushalpuri appointed him for fixed period . There is no allegation to the effect that the worker after 8-3-85 applied to the Branch Manager , Kaushalpuri Branch for further engagement or he requested any other Branch Manager for engagement .

Thus the scheme was floated on the year 1990 & it was also after the 1990, that the workman thought that if he couldhave completed 90 days, he could have been eligible to get regułar job. It is in these circumstances the worker after leaving the job kept silence . There appears to be nothing on the part of the management that it induldged onunfair labour practice .

Manager of the bank Sri Brijendra Lal has in para 6 of affidavit stated that there has been no unfair labour practice on the part of bank management .

Manager of the bank has stated in para 13 of the affidavit that worker after having submitted to the terms and conditions of his engagement for a short period which comes to an end automatically , the workman is estopped from challenging alleged termination of his service w.e.f. 8-3-85 . The workman also did not raise any protest at the time of acceptance of his wages after the termination of In para 7 of the affidavit stated that the engagement ofworkman was not made by adopting prescribed process or procedure for engaging or appointing an employee in the bank and as such on the basis of such engagement which may also be termed as back door entry . Cannot 5882

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 11 , 2005 /JYAISTHA 21 , 1927

service. Not a single question is put to manager to the above facts in his cross examination by the representative ofthe worker.

It isadmitted by the workman in his cross -examination thathis name was not forwardedby Employment Exchange for employment in the Bank . It is also admitted that he was not subjected to test or interview.

In the circumstances and discussions above it is explecitly clear that the worker was engaged by the Branch Manager for a fixed period as stated earlier and his services came to an end on the expiry of 7-3-85 . His services were further not extended by the Branch Manager , Kaushalpuri branch of the bank had not authority to extend it further.

Following case law are relevant on the facts of the present case :

Hon'ble High Court of Allahabad in O.M. Writ Petition No. 953/86 decided between the Manager , State Bank of India , Kanpur and Presiding Officer of Industrial Tribunal (Central ) Kanpur and others has laid down the principle that where a clerk/ cashier was employed only for period of 75 days , in exigencies of work and additional requirement of the bank provisions of Section 25G & 25H would not be applicable ( 1990 Vol . 60 FLR 672).

In another case 2002 (95) FLR 533 Hon'ble Allahabad High Court between Mohd . Islam Vs. Presiding Officer , Labour Court Agra and others has held . After considering the respective cases evidence produced by the parties . Labour Court recorded the findings that workman was employed by the employer w.e.f. 3 July 1990 and on 9-3-91 he left the job as he already got the job of Asstt . Ward Boy where he is still working . Labour Court has further recorded the findings that workman has not disputed the aforesaid fact workman absented and did not come to join the job , employer has not terminated the services and also he has completed 240 days in the calendar year , thus he is not entitled for any relief under Section 6N and 25F of the I.D. Act, 1947.

In this view of the matter , the findings recorded by the Labour Court the workman has not completed 240 days in an celandar year and further the workman is not entitled for any reliefis also affirmed.

Hon'ble High Court of Punjab & Haryana between Rajesh Sharma& Presiding Officer, Labour Court & another (2000/87 FLR 767 ) has held where petitioner was not appointed in accordance with rules governing recruitment but engaged on the basis of need of work , his dis- engagement can not be termed as retrenchment as he was appointed for specific period of 89 days . Facts were thatthe worker was appointed for 89 days from March 16, 1989 to 13 March 1989 , on expiry of 89 days , his appointment was extended to further 89 days from 15th June 89 to Sept. 11 , 1989 and on the expiry of this period his services automatically came to an end .

[PART II-SEC. 3 (ii) ] Hon'ble High Court of Kerala between President Peroorkada Service Cooperative Bank Ltd. Trivendrum and S. Sheena & others (2000 III LLJ 459) has held [ ( Sec 2( oo) (bb) ] engagement of person for casual work to audit &accounts on daily wages for intermittent period-Denial to such persons held, could not be held retrenchment .

Hon'ble Karnataka High Court (F.B. ) between Narwdaya Vidayalaya Vs. Smt. K. R. Hemavalli (2000 Lab/C 3745) has held while dealing with Section 2( oo ) (bb ) , 25F of I.D. Act , has held that Clerk appointed on temporary basis under fixed term contract of service-Her discontinuation from service can not be treated as retrenchment even though she had worked for continuous period 240 days . While laying down the principle of law the Hon'ble Court referred following case laws;

1. Bhiklm Ram Vs. Industrial Tribunal- cum-Labour Court , Rohtak 1995 Lab . I.C. 2448 (P & II ) : 1996 Lab . LR 259 .

2. M. Venegopal Vs. Div . Manager LIC of India AIR 1994 SC 1343 .

3. Anand Bitare Vs. Rajasthan SRTC 1991 Lab IC 494 AIR 1999.

4. H.D. Singh Vs. Reserve Bank of India 198 Lab IC 1733; AIR 1986 SC 132 .

Delhi High Court also in Amit Yadav & others Vs. Delhi Vidyut Board (2000 Lab IC 626) has held contractual appointment comes to an end by efflux of time on completion offixed duration . Appointee has no right to remain as post beyond contract period.

Again Hon'ble Supreme Court in Harmohndeo Singh Vs. Kharga Canteen Ambala Cantt. (2001 Lab . I.C. 2391 ) has laid down " In Section 2 ( oo) (bb) which expressly excludes termination of the service of a workman as a result of non renewal of the contract of employment between the employer and the workman concerned on its expiry of or such contract being terminated under a stipulated in that behalf contained there on " . Contract of service for a fixed term are therefore excluded . This court in Uptron case ( 1998 AIR SCC 1447) 1998 SC/ 681 : 1998 Lab . I.C. 1543 : 1998 ALL LJ 1099 (Supra) has also held that the principle of natural justice are not applicable where the termination takes place on the expiry of contract .

In this regard it is necessary to high light the latest case law 2003 (99) FLR 97 of Allahabad High Court between State of U.P. & Presiding Officer , Labour Court , Agra & others has held while dealing with Sec. 2( oo) (bb ) of I.D. Act, 1947 that Non - renewal of contractual employment , does not amount to retrenchment .

Hon'ble Supreme Court in Escorts Ltd. Vs. Presiding Officerand another ( 1998 Supreme Court cases L& S 235 ) has laid down that since the service of the workman were terminated as per the terms of contract of employment it [भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

5883 भारत का राजपत्र : जून 11 , 2005 /ज्येष्ठ 21 , 1927

does not amount to retrenchment under section 2(00) of the I.D. Act . the Labour Court was in error in holding that it constituted retrenchment & was protected by section 25F & 25G of the Act.

Worker Veer Singh although in para 2 of the statement of claim has stated that he worked w.e.f. 18-12-84 to 7-3-85 in para 3 of the statement of claim he has stated that he was terminated on8-3-85 but in the cross -examination he falsely states " 18-12-84 से 7-3-85 " तक ही मैने काम नहीं किया बल्कि अधिक दिनों तक किया"

Similarly on there are following case laws have laid down that termination for non renewal of contract of employment is not retrenchment.

SirBrijendra Lal was produced by the management for cross - examination but the worker's representative did not give any suggesation that any one else was appointed intemporary capacity after 7-3-85.

1. 2000 (86) FLR 142 Kerla High Court (DB) between Manager Jai Bharat Printers & Publisher Ltd. Calcutta & Labour Court , Kozhikode & another.

It can not be said that the worker worked in any other capacity then Godown watchman during 18-12-84 to 7-3-85.

2. 20003 Lab I.C. No. 70 (Ori ) Divisional Manager Orissa State Cashew Development Corporation Vs. Presiding Officer , Labour Court .

3. 2000 (84) FLR 410 Madhya Pradesh High Court, IndaneBench Between M.P. Electricity Board & Presiding Officer & others .

This is admitted fact that the worker was not appointed against any permanent vacancy of Godown watchman . The worker could not be believed that he worked aspeon also.

4. 2001 (90) FLR 873 between M.P. Electricity Board & another and Dinesh Kumar Agrawal ( Supreme Court)

5. 2001 (90 ) FLR 528 Gujrat High Court between Naresh Kumar Man Lal Parmar Vs. ONGCLtd. & another.

The worker has admitted in the cross - examination that his name was not sent by the Employment Exchange neither he was subjected to test and interview where as the worker's are appointed by the bank after complying the prescribed procedure and no procedure for regular appointment was followed . From the evidence on record and I also come to the conclusion that the exigencies of . work he was given contractual appointment .

Worker Veer Singh was appointed by the Branch Manager , Kaushalpuri Branch of State Bank of Bikaner & Jaipur. In such circumstances Branch Manager Kaushalpuri branch ofthe bank became employer of Veer Singh. It has not been alleged that any one else in his place has been appointed as Godown Watchman. After his contractual employment came to an end . In case there was a single instance any one else has been appointed as Godown watchman after 7-3-85 Veer Singh could have a chance. In para 11 (5) of the statement of claim that any others were juniors to him were retained in the service is not clear. The worker has example of Sham Nath . According to worker himself Sham Nath worked in 1980-81 and he was again employed on 1986-87. It is not disclosed to on what post and inwhichbranch of the bank he was employed in 1980- 81. On worker's own statement Sham Nath was employed in 1980-81 he can therefore be not junior to the worker Veer Singh .Worker has cited an example of Ram Chandra Savita and has stated the his 90 days worked was got completed in 1986-87 of Geeta Nagar branch of the bank. When Ram Chandra Savita was first employed is not mention more over it is not alleged that he was employed in Kaushalpur Branch of the bank .

Onbehalf of the worker 1997 (76 ) FLR page 393 Oriental Bank of Commerce and Union of India & others hae been cited where in worker's case was that there was permanent vacancy of clerk on which they were appointed for idefinite period their appointment was to made the work of permanent nature those appointment was temporarily and they were entitled to continue of the post . The clerks worked in the bank 80 to 90 days . In that case it was proved that new hands were recruited inplace ofthe clerk and no opportunity to the concerned workman was given and this fact was not disputed. In the present case firstly it is not a case of clerk but of watchman secondly it is not alleged nor proved that any one else was appointed as Godown watchman in the Kaushalpuri branch of the bank . In the circumstances the said case law does not help the worker. There are many case laws which have been cited above in page No. 10 to 12 by which guides us to conclude that worker's employment was for a fixed period & the services were terminable on 7-3-85 and it did not need any termination order . Issue is accordingly answered. Worker is not entitled to any relief.

Lucknow:

6-5-2005

SHRIKANT SHUKLA, Presiding Officer Veer Singh has given example of some other persons in the same para but has not stated the relevant period of work . Even in the affidavit it is not alleged that any one else was appointed as Godown watchman after 7-3-85 .

5884

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 11 , 2005/ JYAISTHA 21 , 1927

[PART II-SEC. 3 ( ii) ] नई दिल्ली, 16 मई, 2005

birth of Shri Ranjit Singh w.e.f. 10-3-1944 just one year before retirement is illegal and unjustified ? If not, to , to what relief the concerned workman is entitled to and from which date ?"

का.आ. 2077.- 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- I , चण्डीगड़ के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या आई.डी.सं. 302/2004) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 13-05-2005 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल-12012 /125/2004- आईआर ( बी- I ) ]

अजय कुमार, डेस्क अधिकारी

New Delhi , the 16th May, 2005

S.O. 2077.-In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award ( ID . No. 302/ 2004) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal/ Labour Court- I , Chandigarh now as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the Management of State Bank of India and their workman , which was received by the Central Government on 13-05-2005 .

2. Advocate of the management requested for dismissal of this case as workman not taking interest and has not filed the claim statement. Shri J.G. Verma advocate submits that workman Ranjit Singh has not contacted him in this case at all . He submitted that in the reference the workman Ranjit Singh has given the address as H. No. 3030 , Sector 44/D , Chandigarh and registered A.D. notice was received by the office as AD is on record . But Shri Verma submitted that workman has not contacted him inthis case and he also cannot find out the present address as not available with him and learned court may take any decision. In view of the above submission and my perusal of the record , I found that address of the workman has beengiven, to which is address of Shri J.G. Verma and is residing and the address of workman is not available and Shri Verma stated that the workman has not contacted him for this case . It appears that workman is not interested to contest this reference . In view of the above , the present reference is returned to the Central Govt . for want of prosecution Central Govt. be informed . File be consigned to record.

[No. L- 12012 / 125 /2004- IR (B - 1 ) ] AJAY KUMAR, Desk Officer

Announced

RAJESH KUMAR, Presiding Officer ANNEXURE

Dated4-5-2005

नई दिल्ली, 16 मई , 2005

BEFORE SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, PRESIDING OFFICER, CENTRAL GOVT . INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM- LABOUR COURT- 1 , CHANDIGARH

Case No. I.D. 302/2004

The General Secretary , SBI Staff Congress , HouseNo. 3030/44- D, Chandigarh

Applicant

Versus

का.आ. 2078.- औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 (1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार स्टेट बैंक ऑफ बीकानेर एंड जयपुर के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण जयपुर के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या केस सं. सी जी आई टी 32/2004 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 13-5-2005 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल-12012/ 288/2003- आई.आर. ( बी-1 ) ] अजय कुमार, डेस्क अधिकारी

Respondents

The Chief General Manager , State Bank of India , LocalHead Office , Sector- 17 , Chandigarh

Appearances :

New Delhi , the 16th May , 2005 Forthe workman : Workman not present, his advocate J.G Verma is present .

For the management : Shri Sanjiv Kumar Advocate

AWARD

Passed on 4-5-2005

S.O. 2078.-In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Case No. CGIT- 32/2004) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal / Labour Court , Jaipur now as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the Management of State Bank of Bikaner & Jaipur and their workman , which was received by the Central Government on 13-5-2005.

Central Govt . vide notification No. L- 12012/ 125/2004/ IR (B- 1 ) dated 21-10-2004 has referred the followingdispute to this Tribunal for adjudication :

"Whether the action of the management of State Bank of India, Chandigarh to alter accepted date of

[No. L - 12012/288 /2003 - IR (B -I) ] AJAY KUMAR , Desk Officer [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : जून 11 , 2005 /ज्येष्ठ 21 , 1927

ANNEXURE

CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM -LABOUR COURT, JAIPUR Case No. CGIT-32/ 2004

Reference No. L- 12012/288/2003 (IR(B-1) ThePresident,

AllBank Safai Karamchari Sangh,

50/138 , Rajat Path,

Mansarovar,

Jaipur- 302001

Applicant-Union

Versus

The General Manager (Operation) ,

State Bank ofBikaner & Jaipur,

HeadOffice,

TilakMarg, C- Scheme,

5885 29 hours a week, who is entitled to get the wages in full scale w.e.f. 1-6-2003. He has urged that the difference from the period 1-3-92 to 1-6-2003 be awarded to him.

3. Disputing the claim, the non -applicant in his written statement has stated that since the workman had not raised the demand before the management, therefore, he is not entitled to get the said relief. It has been further stated that the pay - scale of the workman was revised from1/3 to 3/4 w.e.f. 1-3-93 which was accepted by the workmanwithout any objection and after a lapse of about 6years , he has raised the dispute. It has been denied that theworkmanwas cleaning an area of more than 5000 sq . ft. and has stated that he never worked for more than 6 hours perday.

Non-applicant

Jaipur.

Present

: Sh. R.C. Sharma

PresidingOfficer

: None

Forthe applicant

Sh . Anurag Agarwal .

For the non - applicant :

: 21-4-2005

Date of award

AWARD

1. The Central Government in exercise of the powers conferred underClause ' D ' of sub - sections 1 & 2(A) to Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (hereinafter referred to as the ' Act ' ) has referred the following industrial dispute for adjudication to this Tribunal which runs as under:-

"Whether for the union of full scale of wages to Shri Rajkumar working in State Bank of Bikaner & Jaipur atShekhawat Branch, Sikar as PTS since 1-3-1992 is justified? If so , what relief the workman is entitled to and from which date ?"

2. The applicant -union in its claim statement has pleaded that the workman Sh . Rajkumar is working with the non-applicant bank as a part - time Sweeper w.e.f. April , 1988 and in the year 1992 , a bipartite settlement was held between SBBJ Employees Coordination Committee and the management of non -applicant bank and the norms for fixation of the wages were settled . The workman was discharging his duties as part - time Safaiwala on one- third pay-scale from April 1988 and after issuance of the circular by the bank management, his pay - scale was revised from one-third to three- fourth w.e.f. 1-3-1993 . In terms ofthis circular , a Sweeper who has to clean an area of more than 5000 sq. ft. and has to work for more than 29 hours per week was made entitled to full- time Sweepers w.e.f. 1-3-1992 . It is further stated that the workman was cleaning more than 5000 sq. ft. at the ground floor and the first floor of the branch regularly and is working for more than 4. The case was fixed for filing the affidavit of the workman on 23-3-2005 . On this date, none appeared on behalf of the workman and the case was again posted for filing the affidavit of the workman on 13-4-2005 and thereafter on 21-4-2005 . On all these three consecutive dates scheduled for filing the affidavit of the workman in evidence , he did not put his appearance and no reason couldbe assigned for his non - appearance. Therefore, on 21 :4-2005 , his evidence was closed . The non -applicant has chosen not to adduce any evidence .

5. I have heard that ld. representative for the non- applicant and have scanned the record.

6. Evidently , the workman has not endeavored to bring any material on record to substantiate his plea and has not even filed his affidavit in the evidence. Therefore , it is a case of no evidence and the workman has failed to establish his right . Accordingly, he is entitled to no relief.

7. Consequently, the reference is answered in the negative against the workman and in favour of the management and it is held that the demand of the Union forfull scale of wages to the workman Sh.Rajkumar since 1-3-1992 is not justified. The claim of the workman is dismissed. An award is passed in these terms accordingly.

8. Letras copy of the award be sent to the Central Government forpublication under Section 17( 1) of the Act.

R. C. SHARMA, Presiding Officer नई दिल्ली, 16 मई, 2005

का.आ. 2079.-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार उत्तरी रेलवे के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण जयपुर के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या केस सं. सी जी आई टी 59/2003 ) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 13-5-2005 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल -41012/196/2003 - आई.आर. ( बी-1 ) ]

अजय कुमार, डैस्क अधिकारी 5886

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 11 , 2005 / JYAISTHA 21 , 1927

New Delhi , the 16th May, 2005

S.O. 2079. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ), the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Case No. CGIT- 59/2003 ) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal/ Labour Court , Jaipur now as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the Management of Northern Railway and their workman, which was received by the Central Government on 13-05-2005.

[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii)]

[No. L-41012/196/2003 - IR (B.I) ]

AJAY KUMAR, Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL- CUM - LABOUR COURT, JAIPUR

Case No. CGIT- 59 / 2003

Reference No. L-41012/ 196/2003- IR(B- 1) Sh . Karni Singh,

R/o Rampura Basti , Gali No. 19 ,

S/o Sh . Prabhati Lal , Bikaner (Raj .) - 334001

12-3-99 Challenging his termination order the workman has further stated that he suddenly fell sick on 24-4-97 and it was intimated to the Station Superintendent, Suratgarh . After recovery of his illness heappeared before the Station Superintendent , Suratgarh and submitted his sickness certificate from 24-4-97 to 25-11-97 , who was referred to the Divisional Medical Officer, Suratgarh , in whose treatment he remained from 3-12-97 to 15-5-98 . When he reported for duty on 16-5-98 before the railway authority he was declined to join the duty and was orally intimated that his service was terminated . The workman has further averred that the charge levelled against him that he had never replied to the notices dated 18-6-97 and 3-7-97 is totally worng and it is stated that these notices were not served upon him . He has urged that his terminated order be set aside and he be reinstated in service with its cotinuity and all other consequential benefits .

Applicant

Versus

Divisional Railway Manager,

Northern Railway,

Bikaner - 334001 .

Non-applicant

Present :

: Sh . R.C. Sharma

Presiding Officer

Forthe applicant : Sh . Shiv Avtar Singh Forthe non - applicant : Sh . Balvinder Singh Date of award

: 12-4-2005

AWARD

1. The Central Government in exercise of the powers conferred under Clause ' D ' of sub - Sections ( 1 ) and (2A) to Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 (hereinafter referred to as the ' Act ' ) has referred the following industrial dispute for adjudication to this Tribunal which runs as under :-

"Whether the action of the Northern Railway, Bikaner in removing from the services of Shri Karni Singh w.e.f. 12-3-1999 is legal and justified ? If not , what relief the workman is entitled and from which date?"

2. The workman in his statement of claim has pleaded that he was appointed on 19-5-1980 as a Cleaner in the North West Railway, who was chargesheeted on 28-9-97 with the allegation that he remained on unauthorized leave w.e.f. 24-4-97 and after holding the disciplinary enquiry against him, his service was terminated vide order dated 3. Resisting the claim, the non - applicant in his written counter, has averred that the workman remained unauthorisedly absent from 24-4-97 without prior intimation to the authority and the disciplinary proceeding was initiated against him , whose service was terminated vide order dated 12-3-99 . It has been further pointed out that during the period of his absence no residential address was furnished on behalf of the workman , who continuously absented himself from 24-4-97 and even did not put his appearance before the railway doctor on 15-5- 98. Resultantly, he was discharged by the railway doctor and without any intimation to the railway authority he approached to the private doctor for his medical treatment .

4. In the rejoinder, the workman has reiterated the same facts as stated in the statement of claim.

5.After hearing both the parties on the preliminary issue of fairness of domestic enquiry , this Court vide its order dated 4-10-2004 declared the domestic enquiry to be defective and unfair . The management was permittedto lead the evidence to justify the chrages levelled against theworkman.

6. Onbehalf ofthe railway, the affidavits of MW- 1 , Hussan Abbas , MW -2 , Rajeev Balia, MW-3 , Badri Prasad, MW-4 , CR Kumawat have been brought on the record. The workman has submitted his counter - affidavit and has examined himself as WW- 1 . All these witnesses were cross - examined by the oppsite representatives respectively.

7. I have heard both the parties and have scanned the record.

8. The Id. representative for the non - applicant railway contends that the Station Superintendent Sh. Rajeev Balia had issued a letter to the higher authorities regarding the absence of the workman and the show -cause notice was served at his permanent address as well as it [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

was pasted on the notice board in the officer. The Ld . representative further contends that the charges levelled against him are fully proved and the earlier officer under whose the workman was posted has been retired. His submission is that MW -3 , Rajeev Balia is fully aware of the facts of the case who has proved the charges . The next contention of the Id . representative is that the workman had never given any information regarding his leave and when he appeared before the concerned Station Master he was asked to get himself medically examinedby the railway doctor, but he never turned up before him and the sickness certificates produced by the workman are afterthought.

9. Countering these submissions , the 1d. representative for the workman contends that two charges were levelled against the workman regarding his unauthorized absence from 24-4-97 onwards and that he had not replied to the notices of the railway management . His contention is that subsequent charge has not been proved on the count that the notices were not served on the workman. So far as the charge relating to unauthorized absence is concerned, the Ld . representative contends that the report dated 8-8-97 of the Station Superintendent has not been filed which was the basis of the charge and the then Station Superintendent , Suratgarh has also not been examined in support of the charges . His further contention is that the officers , who have been examined by the railway , are those officers under whose subordination the workman had never been posted. Thus , as per his contention the material documents and witnessses have not been examined . The Ld . representative then has contended that the workman in order to prove his defence plea that he was sick during this period, had filed his sickness certificates and this fact has been admitted by the non - applicant that he was ill . Lastly , the Ld . representative has contended that looking to the unblemished service record of the workman, the punishment of termination from the service imposed upon him is disproportionate .

10. I have given my anxious consideration to the rival contentions and have gone through the judicial verdicts cited before me .

11. The chargesheet dated 28-9-97 levels two charges against the workman. Firstly , that the workman remained on unauthorized leave w.e.f. 24-4-97 onwards and that had not replied to the show cause notices dated 18-6-97 and 3-7-97 .

12. MW - 1 Hussan Abbas is the Sr. Railway Clerk, Suratgarh Railway Station, who has stated that 1636 GI /05-30

5887

भारत का राजपत्र: जून 11 , 2005/ज्येष्ठ 21 , 1927

the workman absented himself from the duty w.e.f. 24-4-97 and the notice was pasted on the notice board an 28-9-98 . MW - 2 , Rajeev Balia is the Station Superintendent , Suratgarh who has stated that the workman had worked under his subordination who absented homself from 24-4-97 without prior intimation and the report Ex - P - 1 was submitted by him to the higher authorities . He has also deposed that the notices were pasted on the notice board in the office . In his cross - examination this witness has admitted that he is not personally aware of the facts of the present controversy. MW - 3 , Badri Prasad is the Traffic Inspector , Hanumangarh who was appointed as the Enquiry Officer in this case and who has deposed as to how the enquiry was conducted by him . His testimony has no relevancy since the domestic enquiry was declared defective and unfair by this Court . MW- 4 , CR Kumawat is the Divisional Railway Manager who has deposed that information Ex . M - 1 , in respect of the workman's absence was received in his office .

13. Thus , MW - 1 , Hussan Abbas , MW-3 , Badri Prasad and MW - 4, CR Kumawat are the formal witnesses .

14. So far as the service of the notices dated 18-6-97 and 3-7-97 on the workman is concerned , no material evidence could be led by the non - applicant railway indicating that these notices were served on the workman, In the absence of the service of these notices on the workman, he was not legally bound to reply them . Hence , this charge could bot be proved by the management in the absence of relevant evidence .

15. Now, I switch over the another charge regarding unauthorized absence of the workman .

16. Although the Id . representative for the workman has rightly contended that the report dated 8-8-97 of the Station Superintendent has not been brought on the record. yet on facts as narrated supra, it is not in dispute that the workman had absented himself from his duty w.e.f. 24-4-97 onwards . This fact has been categorically deposed by MW-2 , Rajeev Balia who happens to be the Station Superintendent , Suratgarh and whose deposition is based on the official record.

17. Now, the next question which I am called upon to adjudicate is whether the workman has been able to render an explanation of his absence from the duty ?

18. The workman's stand is two fold. Firstly, that he had addressed postcards to the concerned authorities 5888

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 11 , 2005 / JYAISTHA 21 , 1927

about his illness and secondly , that he has submitted the medical certificates to substantiate his plea that he was sick during the period in question .

19. So far as writing postcards to the concerned authorities is concerned, admittedly the workman has failed to bring any proof therof on the record . Regarding his illness the workman has submitted five medical certificates in his favour . Ex . W - 1 is the certificate issued by one Vaidya named Sh. Vdyasagar of Bikaner, which says that he is sick from 23-4-97 to 2-5-97 and is fit report onduty w.e.f. 3-5-97 . It does not carry the date of its issuance in it . The second medical certificate Ex . W - 2 was issued by one doctor named Sh. Vasudev Singh , Physician and Surgeon at Bikaner , which indicates his sickness from 2-5-97 to 23-11-97 ans was issued on 23-11-97. Ex. W-3 , medical certificate was issued by Dr. Vasudev Singh on 22-2-2000 showing him to be ill from 27-12-98 to 22-2-2000 and the medical certificate Ex. W -4 issued by the same doctor exhibits the workmans's sickness from 16-5-98 to 22-2-2000. The period of both these certificates is nearly the same , which were issued by Dr. Vaudev on 22-2-2000 respectively . The last medical certificate Ex . W- 5 was again issued by Dr. Vasudev Singh on 9-3-2000 showing the period of workman's illness from 1-3-2000 to 9-3-2000.

20. Thus , these certificates have been issued by the private medical practioners who have not been examined on behalf of the workman nor the workman has brought on the record the prescription slips and medical bills to strengthen his plea that he was ill during these spells . These medical certificates are also silent on the ailment the workman had suffered from . Therefore , these are shrouded with doubts and cannot be presumed to be genuine documents .

21. On behalf of the workman , it has also been contended that he had remained under the medical treatment of the medical officer , Suraigarh from 3-12-97 to 15-5-98 . But in support of this plea, no sickness certificate/ fitness certificate issued by the medical officer, Suratgarh couldbe placed on the record on befalf of the workman. As stated earlier , the averment made by the workman in this respect has been denied on befalf of the railway management by categorically stating that he never turned up before the medical officer, Suratgarh for his medical treatment . The averment of the workman that he reported for duty on 6-5-98 but he was declined to join the duty , also stands uncorroborated from the record.

22. On an analytical examination of the materials available on the record , the workman has failed to satisfy

[PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii) ] the Court regarding his unauthorised absence from the duty w.e.f. 24-4-97 and he could not be able to render any reasonable explanation of his absence . Resultantly , the factual position of his unauthorized absence as depicted above , which is undisputed , stands proved against the workman.

23. Now, I advert to the question whether the punishment imposed on the wokman is disproportionate looking to the gravity of the misconduct levelled against him.

24. The ld. representative for the workman submits that the workman has unblemished service record and the punishment of termination is harsh and disproportionate . On the other had , the ld. representative for the non- applicant while referring to the decisions RLW 1998 ( 3 ) Rajasthan 1479 ; 2001 (2 ) WLC (Rajasthan ) UC 227 and 2001 WLC Rajasthan UC 780 has contended that the punishment oftermination inflicted on the workman is not disproportionate looking to the nature of the misconduct levelled against him .

25 I have carefully gone through all these judicial verdicts wherein the Hon'ble Rajasthan High Court has considered the unauthorized absence of the workman from the duty as a grave misconduct and in these cases the punishment of the termination imposed on the peitioners was not interfered with . Hence , looking to the facts of the case the submission set forth on behalf of the non- applicant railway is supported by the views expressed by the Hon'ble Court in the decisions supra and no interference is warranted in the impugned punishment order.

26. On a carefully examination of the evidence and materials available on the record, the non-applicant railway has succeeded in establishing the misconduct of unauthorized absence from duty levelled against the workman and no interference is warranted in the punishment order .

27. Consequently , the reference is answered in the negative against the workman and in favour of the railway management and it is held that the removal of the workman from the service w.e.f. 12-3-99 is legal and justified . The claim ofthe workman is rejected. An award is passed in these terms accordingly .

28. Let a copy of the award be sent to the Central Government for publication under Section 17 ( 1 ) of the Act .

R. C. SHARMA, Presiding Officer 5889 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र: जून 11 , 2005/ज्येष्ठ 21 , 1927

SCHEDULE

नई दिल्ली, 16 मई, 2005

"Whether the action of the management ofAll India Radio, Bhagalpur in terminating the services of the following workmen is legal and justified ? If not , to what relief the workmen are entitled ? "

1. Laxmi NarayanYadav

2. Haldhar Prasad Choudhary

3. Bankim Chandra Sinha

का.आ. 2080.-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार ऑल इंडिया रेडियो के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालय नं. 2, धनबाद के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 193/98 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 16-05-2005 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

4. Anil Mehetar

5. Pavan Kumar Ram

6. Pradip Kumar Sah

7. Mahesh Paswan

[सं. एल -42011/10/92- आई.आर. ( डी.यू.) ] कुलदीप राय वर्मा, डेस्क अधिकारी New Delhi , the 16th May, 2005

8. Dilip Kumar Sah

9. Bhagwan Pandey

10. Pradip Lal

11. Charan Murmur

12. Basuki Mitra

S.O. 2080.- In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 193/ 98) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal/Labour Court, No. 2, Dhanbad now as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the Management of All India Radio and their workman, which was received by the Central Government on 16-05-2005.

2. The case of the concerned workmen according to the Written Statement submitted by them in brief is as follows:

[No. L -42011 /10/ 92 -IR/ (DU) ] KULDIP RAI VERMA, Desk Officer

ANNEXURE BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL (NO . 2) AT DHANBAD PRESENT :

SHRI B. BISWAS , Presiding Officer In the matter of an Industrial Dispute under Section 10(1) (d) of the I.D. Act . , 1947

Ref. No. 193 of 1998

PARTIES :

Employers in relation to the management ofAll IndiaRadio , Bhagalpur and their workman.

APPEARANCES :

Onbehalfofthe workmen : Mr. D. Mukherjee Advocate

Onbehalf of the employers : Mr. C.M. Prasad, Advocate

State : Jharkhand Industry: All India Radio Dated, Dhanbad, the 19th April , 2005 .

AWARD

Ithas been submitted that the concerned workmen viz . Laxmi Narayan Yadav, Haldhar Prasad Choudhary, Bankim Chandra Sinha , Anil Mehetar, Pavan Kumar Ram, Pradeep Kumar Sah , Mahesh Paswan, Dilip Kumar Sah , BhagwanPandey, Pradip Sah, Charan Murmur and Basuki Mitra were engaged by the management as permanent workmen against permanent vacancy w.e.f. 1-6-84 , 1984 , 1-2-87 , 1985 , 1989, 1987, 1980, August, 1987 November , 1988 , June, 1989 , 1985 and 1-12-1988 respectively. They submitted that since their joining under the management they worked continuously till 1-12-1990 and during the said period they put their attendance for more than 240 daysineach calendar year. They alleged that management illegally and arbitrarily terminated their services orally w.e.f. 1-12-90 without assigning any reason and also without complying the mandatory provision of Section 25F of the I.D. Act , 1947. It has been submitted that after their termination they submitted representation to the management with prayer for their reinstatement in service but that went in vein. Accordingly they raised an Industrial dispute before the Conciliation Officer for conciliation but in the said conciliation proceeding no fruitful result yielded . Hence , the instant reference case was initiated . Accordingly the concerned workmen submitted their prayer to pass award directing the management to reinstate the concernedworkmen with full back wages .

3.Management on the contrary after filing Written Statement-cum - rejoinder have denied all the claims and allegations which the concerned workmen asserted in their Written Statement . They submitted that the concerned workmen were engaged as daily rated workers as and when The Government of India , Ministry of Labour, in exercise of the powers conferred on them under Section 10 ( 1 ) ( d) of the I. D. Act . , 1947 has referred the following dispute to this Tribunal for adjudication Vide their Order No. L-42011/ 10/ 92 - IR(DU) , dated, the 27th October, 1998.

5890

[PART II-SEC. 3 ( ii) ] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 11 , 2005/ JYAISTHA 21 , 1927

selected and appointed as Peon w.e.f. 28-9-1994. He was the senior most casual labour engaged from 1984. Again Anil Mehetar (Sl . No.4) was engaged as casual Sweeper at Doordarshan Maintenance Centre and is still working there as casual sweeper. So also Mahesh Paswan (Sl . No.7) is working as Casual Peon at Doordarshan Maintenance Centre at Bhagalpur after establishment of that Centre was separated from All India Radio from 1992. They submitted thatworkmanCharan Murmu ( Sl . No. 11 )joined at Bhagalpur Head Post office as Class IV employee and he is still continuing his service there . He was relieved by the management and provided with the certificate for providing him as Class IV employee .

Theydisclosed that workmen Bankim Chandra Sinha (S.No.3 ) , P.K. Sah ( S.No. 6) and Bhagwan Pandey ( S.No.9) were engaged for carrying temporary electrical works during the period from 1988 to 1990 as they possess Wireman's certificate . They disclosed that as they have competent technicians possessing diploma in Electrical Engineering as well as supervisory certificate and Wireman's permit they could not provide these three workmen on casual jobs and for which they were unable to engage them in their establishment . However, they are performing electrical jobs in the market regularly. They submitted that they did not terminate the services of these thrée electricians any day. They are not in a position to provide them jobs due to non - availability of the same . However, they consider their engagement if future jobs are available under them . The rest three workmen, they submitted, were purely unskilled labours who were engaged in daily rated basis purely for performing the jobs like digging earth, watering the plants and the grass anddoing other miscellaneous jobs only at the initial stage ofpreparation of soil , ground and establishment of the garden. As they have permanent gardener and other stafff for doing day to day maintenance of the garden lawn and buildings the scope for their engagement is limited. However, there is no bar on their part to engage them in future if and when casual nature ofjob are available .

In conclusion they submitted that casual and temporary workers have no right for demand of regular employment and the management have no obligation to provide regular employment to such persons . As per conditions of employment they were provided jobs as and when available and some of them were engaged against future vacancies . They categorically denied the fact that they never terminated the services of the concerned workmen and for which the claim which they have made is notjustified in the eye of law and for which they are not entitled to get any relief in view of their prayer .

4. POINTS TO BE DECIDED

required for performing casual nature of job and accordingly question of terminating their services never arose. They submitted further that they are not running any industry and the workmen employed by the management are bound by the terms and conditions as daily rated casual . They cannot take recourse to Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 and canot raise individual disputes on the pretext that they were not provided employment on regular basis and their services were terminated arbitrarily. Management further submitted that they engaged four casual workers viz . S/ Shri Anil Mehetar (S. No. 4) Haldhar Prasad Choudhary (S. No. 2) , Mahesh Paswan ( S. No. 7) and Laxmi Narayan Yadav (S. No. 1) in the year 1984 for performing miscellaneous jobs of casual nature on daily rated basis . They disclosed that from 1984 to 1988 the establishment of All India Radio at Bhagalpur was located in a rented building and during that period the building of the establishment was under construction . They newly constructedbuilding of the management was handed over by Contractor on 12-4-88 and thereafter necessary alterations , modifications of the building , shifting of materials from the hired building to the permanent building were carried on and in that process the concerned workmen were engaged on different casual nature ofjob on daily rated basis . They submitted that after taking possession of the permanent building of the establishment management engaged casual labours for digging soil , leavelling the grounds , growing grass for the lawns and for growing various plants in the garden for beautification and improvement of surroundings . In that process, the casual labourers were engaged on plantation jobs and various incidental jobs connected with plantations , making garden and lawn etc. After completion of all such jobs there was no requirement of engagement of a large number of casual labourers and as such all the persons could not be provided engagement sufficiently to enable them to earn their livelihood . They submitted further that they owned one outdoor Broadcast Van in the year 1992 and a diesel generating set for producing electricity. They disclosed that though there was no sanctioned post of diesel engine driver for operating Diesel Generating Sets as well as for driving the outdoor Broadcast van Dilip Kumar Sah ( S. No.8) was appointed as Diesel Engine driver w.e.f. 25-11-1992 and he is continuing as such on regular basis . Accordingly there is no question of any grievance on his part against the management . They submitted that one Banarasi Ram was a regular staff under the management. As he died in harness his son Pavan Kumar Ram ( Sl . No.5) applied for his employment on compassionate ground in place of his father and he was appointed as LDC w.e.f. 26-4-95 and still he is working under the management . Again Haldhar Prasad Choudhary (Sl . NO.2 ) was initially engaged as casual labour but subsequently was engaged as Peon to work as substitute during leave and sick vacancy of permanent peons . When

a permanent vacancy of Peon occured in 1994 he was

"Where the action of the management of All India Radio, Bhagalpur in terminating the services of the following workmen is legal and justified ? If not ,tc what relief the workmen are entitled ? " 5891 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र: जून 11 , 2005 /ज्येष्ठ 21 , 1927

1. Laxmi Narayan Yadav

2. Haldhar Prasad Choudhary

3. Bankim Chandra Sinha

4. Anil Mehetar

5. Pavan Kumar Ram

6. Pradip Kumar Sah

7. Mahesh Paswan

8. Dilip Kumar Sah

9. Bhagwan Pandey

10. PradipLal

11. Charan Murmur

12. Basuki Mitra

5.Ittranspires from the record that sponsoring union with a view to substantiate their claim examined one witness as WW- 1 who is also one of the concerned workman . Management on the contrary in support of their claim examined three witnesses viz . MW- 1 , MW- 2 and MW- 3 . Considering the facts disclosed in the pleadings of both sides and also considering evidence on record and also considering documents marked as exhibits I find sufficient ground to hold that all the concerned workmen were engaged as casual workers by the management . In the Written Statement submitted by the management it transpires clearly that in the year 1984 to 1988 the establishment of All India Radio at Bhagalpur was located in a rented building and during that period the building of the establishment was under construction . They newly constructed building of the management was handed over by the contractor on 12-4-1988 and thereafter necessary alterations , modifications of the building , shifting of materials from the hired building to the permanentbuilding ofthe management were carried on and in that process the concerned workmen were engaged in different casual nature ofjob on daily rated basis . Therefore , these very facts disclosed in the Written Statement admits the claim of the concerned that they were engaged by the management as casual workers . It is also evident from the documents marked as Ext . M- 2 and M- 4 that the management called for the names of some persons from the Employment Exchange for their engagement as casual workers. In response to the said letters the Employment Exchange forwarded the names of some persons to the management which during evidence ofMW- 3 were marked asExt . M -3 and M - 4/ 1 respectively. From the list sent by the Employment Exchange I find names of some workmen who were subsequently interviewed by the management marked as Ext . M-5 to M -5/6 . It further transpires from the documents marked as Ext . M -6 and M - 7 that management published a list of 22 workmen who had been selected for casual employment as casual labour (Technical ) in the interview held on 19-12-88 at All India Radio, Bhagalpur. Outofthese lists name of Bankim Chandra Sinha, Dilip

Kumar Sah, Basuki Pd. Mitra, Bhagwan Pandey, Pawan Kumar Ram, Pradip Lai , radip Kumar Sah appears who havebeen considered as concerned workmen in this case. Order in respect of Laxmi Narayan Yadav (Ext.M -8 ) was issued seperately vide order dtd . 10-5-84. Laxmi Narayan Yadav was also one of the concerned workman in this case. From the selection list or from any other papers I do not find the name of Haldhar Prasad Choudhary, Anil Mehtar and Mahesh Paswan where they were engaged by the management to work as casual workers . Management in their written statement categorically admitted that the concerned workman Dilip Kumar Sah ( Sl . No. 8) was appointed asDiesel Engine Driver w.e.f. 25-11-92 and he is verymuch in service under the management . Again Pawan Kumar Ram Sl . No. 5 was appointed as L.D.C. w.e.f. 26-4-95 and is working in that capacity under them. It has been further admitted by the management in para- 12 of the Written Statement that Haldhar Prasad Choudhary was initially engaged as casual labour but was subsequently engaged as Peon to work as substitute during leave and sick vacancy of permanent Peon . Sebsequently w.e.f. 28-9-94 he was regularised as Peon . They further submitted that the concerned workmen Anil Mehetar ( Sl . No. 4) and Mahesh Paswan (Sl . No.7) are attached to Doordarshan Maintenance Centre and they are ill working thereas casual sweeper and casual Peon respectively. Again in respect of concerned workman Charan Mürmu ( Sl . No.11 ). Management in para- 15 of the Written Statement submitted that he joined at Bhagalpur Head Post Office as Class IV employee and he is continuing at that place . He was relieved by the management and provided the certificate for his regular employment at Bhagalpur Head Post Office as Class IV employee . Therefore, it is clear that excepting Charan Murmu five other concerned workmen named above areworking under the management and also under Doordarshan Maintenance Centre . Only concerned workman Charan Murmu leaving the job of the management joined at Bhagalpur Head Post Office as Class IV employee and that has been affirmed by the management . Sponsoring union in course of hearing did notconsider necessary to examine Charan Murmu to verify the statement of the management about his working at Bhagalpur Head Post Office as Class IV employee. As there was no rebuttal on that point there is sufficient reason to consider that Charan Murmu is now working at Bhagalpur Head Post Office as Class IV employee. In respect ofother five concerned workmen whose names I have already mentioned above , management admitted that they areworking under the management . Therefore, I think there is no scope to consider if they are entitled to get the Award in their favour or not . The representative of the sponsoring union in view of the facts admitted by the management submitted that in the circumstances it is to be looked into whether the rest six workmen viz . Laxmi Narayan Yadav (Sl . No.1 ) , Pradip Lal (Sl . No. 10) Pradip Kumar Sah (Sl . No.6), Bhagwan Pandey (Sl . No.9) , Bankim 5892

[PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii) ] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 11 , 2005/ JYAISTHA 21 , 1927

Chandra Sinha ( Sl . No.3) and Basuki Mitra (Sl . No. 12) are entitled to get any relief in view of their prayer or not ?

16 and 17 of the Written Statement it is clear that they appointed these workmen as casual worker. It is seen that end of them Laxmi Narayan Yadav was engaged as far back as in the year 1984. Therefore , if the allegation of the sponsoring union is taken into consideration in that case management stopped his work after his rendering service to the management since 1984 though it is evident that as casual worker he put his attendance for more than 240 days in each year from 1988. Other five workers also as per document marked as Ext . M- 1 /3 and M - 1/ 4 put their attendance for more than 240 days during the period 1989-90 . Considering the materials on record there is no dispute at all to hold that all these workmen were engaged bymanagement officially after taking necessary interview when their names were sponsored by the Employment Exchange. In so many words management did not disclose thatthey have stopped their work w.e.f. 31-12-90 but if the evidence of the management witness and as well as the facts disclosed in the Written Statement submitted by them are tagged together in that case there is no dispute to hold that their works have been stopped by the management . The concerned workmen in view of documents as mentioned above were officially selected by the management after taking interview in view of their names sponsored by the Employment exchange . Section 25F of the I. D. Act speaks clearly that no workman employed in any industry who has been in continuous service for not less than one year under an employer shall be retrenched by that employer until-

(a) the workman has been given one month's notice in writing indicating the reasons for retrenchment and the period of notice has expired, or the workman has been paid in lieu of such notice, wages for the period of the notice;

(b) the workman has been paid, at the time of retrenchment, compensation which shall be equivalent to fifteen days ' average pay ( for every completed year of continuous service ) or any part thereof in excess of six months ; and

(c) notice in the prescribed manner is served on the appropriate Government ( for such authority as may be specified by the appropriate Government by notification in the Official Gazette).

It is clear considering evidence of the management that before stopping work of the concerned workmen they did not serve any notice upon them .

6. Itis seen from the documents marked as Ext.M -6 and M - 7 that out of the six workmen four workmen viz . Pradip Lal , Pradip Kumar Sah , Bhagwan Pandey and Basuki Mitra were selected for casual employment as casual labour (Technical) in the interview held on 19-12-88 at All India Radio Bhagalpur. Considering the documents marked at Ext . M- 2, M - 3 , M - 4 and M -4/ 1 there is also no dispute to hold that the management not only called for the names from the Employment Exchange for appointment of casual workers but also Employment Exchange forwarded the names of suitable candidates including the concerned workmen as named above to the management in that regard . From the documents marked as Ext. M- 8 it transpires that Laxmi Narayan Yadav got his appointment as casual worker by order dt . 10-05-84 . Therefore , it is clear that four workmen named above while started working under the management as casual worker after 1988 oneworker i.e. Laxmi Narayan Yadav started working under the management since June , 1984. It is the contention of the representative of the sponsoring Union since their engagement the concerned workmen worked under the management for more than 240 days in each year. It is seen that management in support of the attendance of these six concerned workmen submitted relevant document marked as Ext . M- 1 to M - 1 /4. It is seen from the documents marked as Ext . M - 1/3 to M- 1 /4 that the six concerned workmenworked more than 240 days in each year during the period in question . It is the specific allegation of the sponsoring union that the management illegally and arbitrarily terminated their services w.e.f. 1-12-90 without assigning any reason and without complying with the mandatory provision of Section 25F of the I.D. Act. , 1947 . It is the contention of the management that the concerned workmanBankim Chandra Singh (Sl . No. 3), Pradip Kumar Sah ( Sl . No.6 ) and Bhagwan Pandey ( Sl . No. 9) were engaged for carrying the temporary electrical work during the periodfrom 1988 to 1990 as they happened to be the holders ofWireman's certificate . They submitted that they did not terminate the services of these three electricians but they are not in a position to provide them jobs due to non-availabelity of the same. However, they assured they will providejobs in future if the same is available while in respect of other three concerned workmen i.e. Laxmi Narayan Yadav (Sl . No. 1 ) , Bankim Chandra Sinha (Sl . No.3) and Basuki Mitra ( Sl . No.12) the contention of the management is that they were purely unskiled labours and engaged on daily rated basis purely for performing different jobs like digging earth , watering the plants and the grass etc. , they disclosed that as they have permanent gardener for doing day to day maintenance of the garden, lawns and the building the scope of their engagement is limited and there is no bar for their engagement in future if and when the casual nature of job will be available. Therefore, considering statement of the management as made in para-

7. Now the point for consideration is whether non- compliance of Section 25F of the Industrial Dispute act by the management should be considered as illegal or not ? Representative of the concerned workman in course of hearing relied on the decision reported in 1982 Supreme Court Cases (L & S) 124 , 1989 Lab I.C. 623 (Patna High [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

Court) , 1976 L.L.J Page 478 ( Supreme Court) , AIR 1960 Supreme Court page 610.

Inthe decision reported in 1982 Supreme Court Cases (L & S) 124 Their Lordships of the Hon'ble Apex Court observed that even a casual or seasonal workman who rendered continuous service for one year or more cannot be retrenched on such ground without complying with the requisites of Section25 -F. In the decision reported in 1989 Lab I.C. 623 Their Lordships of the Hon'ble Court observed that even oral order of termination of service amounts to retrenchment and the workman so affected is entitled to reinstatement if the management fails to comply with the provision as laid down U/ S . 25F of the I.D. Act . Again in the decision reported in 1976 LLJ Vol . I page 478 Their Lordships of the Hon'ble Apex Court observed to the effect that if the workman swims into the harbour of S. 25F, he cannot be retrenched without payment at the time of retrenchment compensation as prescribed therein read with S. 25B(2) ofthe I.D. Act. , 1947 .

The representative of the management during hearing submitted that as the management is not rendering any industry the workmen employed by them are bound by the terms and conditions of their employment as daily rated casual workers . They cannot take recourse of industrial Disputes Act, 1947 and cannot raise individual dispute on the pretext that they were not provided employment on regular basis and their services were terminated arbitrarily. Therefore, before coming into conclusion whether the concerned workmen are entitled toget any relief U/ S . 25F of the I.D. Act it has to be taken into consideration whether All India Radio which the management runs is considered as ' Industry ' or not . In this connection the decision reported in AIR 1960 SC 610 may be referredto . In the said decision Their Lordships of the Hon'ble Apex Court observed as follows :-

Section 25 -F (b ) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, which provides that no workman employed in any industry who has been in continuous service for not than one year under an employer shall be retrenched by that employer until he has been paid atthe time of retrenchment compensation which shall be equivalent to fifteen days average pay for every completed year of service or any part thereof in excess of six months lays down a mandatory condition precedent for the retrenchment of workmen. Therefore , failure to comply with the provisionwill render an order of retrenchment invalid and inoperative.

Though section 2 (j ) of the act defines ' industry' in very wide terms , a line would have to be drawn in afair and just manner so as to exclude some callings services or undertakings. As a working principle , an activity systematically or habitually undertaken for the production or distribution of goods or for the rendering of material services to the community at

5893

भारत का राजपत्र: जून 11 , 2005/ज्येष्ठ 21 , 1927

large or a part of such community with the help of employees , may be stated to be an undertaking falling within the defination . Such an activity generally involves the co - operation of the employer and the employees; and its object is the satisfaction ofmaterial human needs . It must be organised or arranged in a manner in which trade or business is generally organised or arranged and it must not be casual, nor must it be for on self, nor for pleasure . It is the character of the activity which decides the question as to whether the activity falls within Section 2 (j ) ; who conducts the activity and whether isconducted for profit or not do not make my material difference. In the case of a Government however, activities which can be properly described as legal or sovereign activities , viz . activities which a constitutional Government can and must undertake for governance and which no private citizen can undertake will be outside the scope of the definition of' industry' .

The activity of a Government in running a group ofhospitals for giving medical relief to the citizens and for imparting medical education will fall within the definition of ' industry' in Section 2(j) of the Act and would be governed by the provisions of the Act.

"Decision of the Bombay High Court reported as (1956) 13 F.J.R. 473 affirmed. "

Therefore, if the observation of the Hon'ble Courts are taken into consideration carefully, I think there will be no disputeto hold that organisation of All India Radio which isoperated by the management is to be taken as ' Industry' and the workers who work there should be considered as 'workmen' as per Section 2 (s) of the I. D. Act . , 1947. At the time ofhearing argument Ld . Advocate for the management relied on a circular issued by the Director General , All India Radio wherein a guideline has been made out a procedure regarding engagement of the casual worker . In para2 ofthe said circular it is observed as follows :-

"Ithas furtherbeen decided that existing vacancies ofGroup ' D' posts in the pay scale of Rs . 750-940 shall be filled from amongst such existing or former casual labourers of AIR who are eligible for such appointment in accordance with Department of Personnel instructions on the subject . The local employment exchange shall be requested to nominate persons for such posts only if no casual labourer is fournd eligible for appointment to these posts , under theDepartment of Personnel instructions regarding regular appointment of casual labourers.

Till the casual labourers are provided regular appointment to Group ' D ' posts in the pay scale of Rs . 750-940 their casual service shall be paid for on the scale prescribed by the Department of Personnel andTraining." 5894

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 11 , 2005/ JYAISTHA 21 , 1927

Therefore , if this circular is taken into consideration it will expose clearly that there is strict instruction that all future vacancies in Group- D posts shall be filled up from the causual workers in the pay scales as mentioned therein.

It is clear from the facts discussed above that the concerned workmen have been stopped from work w.e.f. 31-12-90 and why they did not consider to provide them in job have duly been explained in para- 16 and 17 of their Written Statement- cum - rejoinder. The ground stated therein are far from satisfactory. In course of hearing management did not show any statistics that from the date of their stoppage of work to till date no vacancies in the Group -D post came into existence and for which in spite of their best efforts they could not follow up the circular in the matter of absorption of the concerned workmen who were engaged as casual workers by way of selection in Group-D post following the direction given in the circular issued by the Director- General , All India Radio . After careful consideration of all the facts and circumstances there is sufficient reason to believe that in complete violation of Section 25F of the I. D. Act . , 1947 management stopped the work of S/Shri Laxmi Narayan Yadav Sl . No. 1 , Bankim Chandra Sinha Sl.No.3 , Pradip Kumar Sah Sl . No. 6, Bhagwan Pandey Sl . No. 9 , Pradip Lal S.No. 10 and Basuki Mitra Sl.No. 12 and for which they should be reinstated in their job . It is the contention of the management that Anil Mehetar Sl.No.4 and Mahesh Paswan Sl . No.7 are working at Doordarshan Maintenance Centre Bhagalpur as casual Sweeper and Casual Peon respectively. Their further contention is that Charan Murmur is working at Bhagalpur Head Post Office as Class IV employee leaving the service of Doordarshan Kendra . Management will be liable to reinstate the above named three concerned workmen along with six concerned workmen as named above if it is found in course of execution proceeding that their statement made in para 13, 14 and 15 are false .

The sponsoring union along with the claim of the reinstatement also placed their demand for back wages . It is admitted fact that the concerned workmen were engaged as casual workers . They were not appointed either as piece rated, time rated or monthly rated workers . Wages ofthose casual workers used to be paid as per daily rated basis i.e. on the basis of ' No work and no pay' . Engagement of casual workers depends on availability of work . It is not expected that when no work is available they will be entitled wages for the same . Therefore , ifthis aspect is considered demand of the sponsoring union claiming for back wages finds no basis and for which the same cannot be entertained.

In the result , the following Award is rendered :- "The action of the management of All India Radio , Bhagalpur in stopping the services of S / Shri Laxmi Narayan Yadav Sl . No. 1 , Pradip Lal Sl . No. 10, Pradip Sah Sl . No. 6 , Bhagwan Pandey Sl . No. 9 , Bankim

[PART II- SEC. 3 ( ii) ] Chandra Sinha Sl . No. 3 and Basuki Mitra Sl . No. 12 were not legal and justified. It is directed that management should issue the order of reinstatement of the above named casual workers within three months from the date of publication of the Award in the Gazette of India . It is further directed that management should consider their cases for regularisation as per Circular issued by the Director General , All India Radio which has been mentioned in the body of the judgement . Management also has to follow the same direction as given above in respect of concerned workmen viz . Anil Mehtar S. No. 4 , Mahesh Paswan Sl . No. 7 and Charan Murmur Sl . No. 11 if it is found that their statement made in para- 13 , 14 and 15 of their Written Statement- cum - rejoinder appears to be not correct . "

B. BISWAS , Presiding Officer नई दिल्ली, 16 मई, 2005

का. आ. 2081.- औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केद्रीय सरकार कोंकण रेलवे कारपोरेशन लिमिटेड के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण- II , मुम्बई के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या सी.जी.आई.टी -2/54/ 1999 ) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 13-05-2005 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल-41012/124/98- आई. आर (बी.- I ) ] अजय कुमार, डैस्क अधिकारी New Delhi , the 16th May, 2005

S.O. 2081. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. CGIT 2/54/1999 ) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal No. II , Mumbai now as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of Konkan Railway Corporation Ltd. and their workmen, received by the Central Government on 13-05-2005.

[No. L -41012/124/98 - IR (B - I) ] AJAY KUMAR, Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL NO . 2 AT MUMBAI

PRESENT:

B. I. KAZI, Presiding Officer REFERENCE No. CGIT. 2/54 of 1999 EMPLOYERS IN RELATION TO THE MANAGEMENT OF Konkan Railway Corporation Limited [ भाग II- खण्ड 3( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र: जून 11 , 2005 /ज्येष्ठ 21 , 1927

AND

Their Workmen (Shri Nardkishor B. Sawant)

APPEARANCES :

Forthe employer : S/ Shri S.K. Talsania, &V.H. Kantharia, Advocates .

For the Workman

: InPerson

Mumbai, dated the 26th April, 2005

AWARD PART-II

By Award Part - I dated 28-1-2002 my predecessor held that " the management was not justified to take recourse to Rule - 15 ( ii ) of the Konkan Railway Corporation (Discipline and Appeal Rules) .Management isallowed to lead evidence to justify its action. " The management challenged the said order before the Hon'ble High Court of Judicature at Bombay in Writ PetitionNo. 3220 of2002. The Hon'ble High Court admitted the Petition and granted stay of the order of this Tribunal . The parties to the dispute filed minutes of this order in the said Writ Petition on 18-3-2005 wherein the workman agreed not to pursue the Reference pending before this Tribunal . Hence the Hon'ble High Court passed an order on 18-3-2005 as under :

" 1. The minutes of the order duly signed by the respective parties and their learned counsel , areplaced on record . It appears that the present respondent has agreed not to pursue the pending reference registered as Reference No. CGIT - 2/ 1954 of 1998 and therefore , the present petitioner - Corporation seeks leave to withdrawn the petition.

2. The minutes of the order are taken on record and marked as ' X' for identification and the undertaking given is noted.

3. Petition is disposed of as withdrawn . " Onthe basis of the above order of the Hon'ble High Court, the workman filed purshis (Ex . 35) and prayed for disposal of the Reference as withdrawn. the management has no objection for withdrawal of the Reference . Hence the order :

ORDER ^

Reference stands disposal of as withdrawn.

B. I. KAZI, Presiding Officer नई दिल्ली, 17 मई, 2005

का. आ. 2082. औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 ( 1947 का14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार सी. सी. एल. के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/ श्रम 1636 G1 /05-31

5895

न्यायालय धनबाद- I के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 117/2002 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 17-05-2005 को प्राप्त हुआ था । [सं. एल.- 20012/114/99- आई. आर. ( सी. I) ]

एस. एस. गुप्ता, अवर सचिव New Delhi , the 17th May, 2005

S.O. 2082.- In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Dispute Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Governmenthereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 117/2002) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal /Labour Court, Dhanbad I now as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to themanagement of C.C.L. and their workman, which was receivedby the Central Government on 17-05-2005.

[No. L-20012/ 114/99- IR(C- 1) ] S.S. GUPTA, Under Secy.

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL NO. I, DHANBAD Inthe matter of a reference U/S . 10(i )( d) (2A) of I. D. Act, Reference No. 117 of2002.

Parties: Employers in relation to the management of Barkakana Area of M/S . C.C.L. Ltd.

AND

TheirWorkmen

PRESENT :

Shri S. Prasad, PresidingOfficer.

APPEARANCES:

For the Employers .

: Shri D.K.Verma, Advocate.

For the Workmen

: None .

State: Jharkhand

Industry: Coal.

Dated, the 6th May, 2005

AWARD

By Order No. L -20012/ 114/ 99 - IR ( C - I ) dated 18-8-1999 the Central Government in the Ministry ofLabour has, in exercise of the powers conferred by clause (d) of sub -sec . ( i) and sub -section (2A) of Section 10 of the IndustrialDisputes Act, 1947, referred the following dispute foradjudication to this Tribunal:

"Whether the demand of the Rashtriya Koyla Mazdoor Union to promote Sri P.K. Guha, SriT . Sahay, Sri V.S. Choubey, Sri S. N. Dubey and Sri P.N. Singh from the post of U.D.C. to Sr. Clerk in line with their Junior Sri Awadhesh Pandey, w.e.f. 29-8-1985 is justified and proper ? Ifyes , to what relief these workmen are entitled ?" 5896

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 11 , 2005/JYAISTHA 21 , 1927

2. In this reference case the written statement was filed on behalf of the workman on 21-11-2002 . Thereafter several adjournments were granted but even to-day none is present on behalf of the workman to take further step in this case . It, therefore , appears that neither the sponsoring union nor the concerned workman is interested to contest the case .

3. In such circumstances , I render a ' No Dispute' Award in the reference case .

S. PRASAD , Presiding Officer नई दिल्ली, 17 मई , 2005

का. आ. 2083.-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार भा.को .को.लि. के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/श्रम न्यायालय, धनबाद -1 के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 153/97 ) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 17-5-2005 को प्राप्त हुआ था । [सं. एल.- 20012/197/96- आई. आर. ( सी. 1 ) ]

एस. एस. गुप्ता, अवर सचिव New Delhi , the 17th May, 2005

S.O. 2083.- In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 (14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 153/97) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal/Labour Court, Dhanbad - I now as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of B.C.C.L. and their workman , which was received by the Central Government on 17-5-2005 .

[No. L-20012/197/96- IR(C- 1 ) ] S.S. GUPTA, Under Secy.

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL NO . I , DHANBAD In the matter of a reference U/ s . 10( 1 ) (d) (2A) of I. D. Act , Reference No. 153 of 1997

Parties : Employers in relation to the management of Amlabad Colliery of M/s . B.C.C. Ltd.

And

Their Workmen

PRESENT :

SHRI S. PRASAD , Presiding Officer APPEARANCES :

For the Employers

: Shri H. Nath , Advocate

For the Workmen

: None

State: Jharkhand

Industry: Coal Dated, the 6th May, 2005

[PART II-SEC. 3 ( ii)]

AWARD

By Order No. L - 20012 / 197/ 96 - IR ( C - 1 ) , dated , 27-7-1997 the Central Government in the Ministry ofLabour has , in exercise of the powers conferred by clause (d) of Sub- sec. ( 1 ) and Sub - section (2A) of Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, referred the following dispute foradjudication to this Tribunal:

"Whether the demand by the Union for the Assessment of the age of Shri Charan Das , H. Operator by the Medical Board is legal and justified ? If so , to what relief is the workman entitled ?"

2. This reference was received in this Tribunal on 15-7-97. Despite notice sent to the sponsoring union, even to-day none appears on behalf of the workman to file written statement . Therefore, it appears that neither the sponsoring union nor the concerned workman is interested to contest the case .

3. In such circumstances, I render a ' No Dispute' Award in the reference case .

S. PRASAD, Presiding Officer नई दिल्ली, 17 मई, 2005

का. आ. 2084.- औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में , केन्द्रीय सरकार 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, धनबाद -1 के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 155/97 ) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 17-05-2005 को प्राप्त हुआ था । [सं. एल.- 20012/191/96- आई. आर. (सी. I ) ] एस. एस. गुप्ता, अवर सचिव New Delhi , the 17th May, 2005

S.O. 2084. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 155/ 97 of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal/Labour Court , Dhanbad I now as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial.Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of C.C.L. and their workman, which was received by the Central Government on 17-05-2005.

[No. L- 20012/ 191/96 - IR(C- 1 ) ] S.S. GUPTA , Under Secy.

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL NO . I, DHANBAD In the matter of a reference U/s . 10(1) (d) (2A) of I. D. Act Reference No. 155 of 1997

Parties : Employers in relation to the management of Barkakana Area of M/ s . C.C. Ltd.

AND Their Workmen [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : जून 11 , 2005/ज्येष्ठ 21 , 1927

PRESENT:

SHRI S. PRASAD, Presiding Officer APPEARANCES :

: None

For the Employers

: None

For the Workmen

State : Jharkhand

Industry: Coal Dated, the 6th May, 2005

AWARD

By Order No. L -20012/ 191 / 96 - IR (C - I ) , dated 27-8-1997 the Central Government in the Ministry ofLabour has, in exercise of the powers conferred by clause (d) of Sub - sec . ( 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 demand of the Union for the reinstatement of Shri Bishan Munda with full back wages is legal and justified ? If so , to what relief is the workman entitled ?"

5897

the management of C.C.L. and their workman, which was receivedby the Central Government on 17-05-2005 .

[No. L-20012/ 112/2000 - IR(C-I) ]

S.S. GUPTA, Under Secy.

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL NO . I, DHANBAD Inthe matter of a reference U/ s . 10(1 )(d)(2A) of I. D. Act Reference No. 267 of 2000

Parties: Employers in relation to the management of Bhurkunda Colliery ofM/s . C.C. Ltd.

AND Their Workmen

PRESENT:

Shri S. Prasad, PresidingOfficer

APPEARANCES :

For the Employers

: Shri D.K.Verma, Advocate

For the Workmen

: None

State: Jharkhand

2. This reference case is pending since 1997. Despite notice sent to the sponsoring union, no written statement has been filed on behalf of the workman as yet . Therefore, it appears that neither the sponsoring union nor the concerned workman is interested to contest the case. Now, it is needless to keep this reference case pending.

3. Therefore , I render a ' No Dispute' Award in the present reference case.

S. PRASAD , Presiding Officer नई दिल्ली, 17 मई , 2005

का. आ. 2085.-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 ( 1947 क़ा 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार सी सी फूल के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकारण/श्रम न्यायालय, धनबाद- I के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 267/2000 ) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 17-05-2005 को प्राप्त हुआ था । [सं. एल.-20012/112/2000- आई. आर. ( सी. I ) ]

एस. एस. गुप्ता, अवर सचिव New Delhi , the 17th May, 2005

S.O. 2085.- In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 267/ 2000) ofthe Central Government Industrial Tribunal/Labour Court, Dhanbad I now as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to

Industry: Coal Dated, the 4th May, 2005

AWARD

By Order No. L - 20012/ 112/2000 -IR (C - I ) , dated 14-9-2000 the Central Government in the Ministry of Labour has , in exercise of the powers conferred by clause (d) ofSub-sec .( 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 demand of the Union for regularisation of S/Shri Krishna Mahto and Raju , GeneralMazdoor to the post ofDumper Operator isproper and justified ? If so, to what relief are the concerned workmen entitled ?"

2. In this reference case since 14-7-2003 neither the concerned workman nor the sponsoring union is appearing before this Tribunal to take any step , despite granting several adjournments . It, therefore, appears that neither the sponsoring union nor the concerned workman is interested to proceed with the case.

3. In such circumstances , I render a " No Dispute ' Award in this reference case.

S. PRASAD, PresidingOfficer 5898

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: JUNE 11 , 2005/JYAISTHA 21 , 1927

नई दिल्ली, 17 मई, 2005

का.आ. 2086.- औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार यूनियन बैंक ऑफ इंडिया के प्रबंधतत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालय लखनऊ के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 116/2001 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 16-05-2005 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल -12012/61/2001- आई.आर. ( बी. II ) ]

सी. गंगाधरण , अवर सचिव New Delhi , the 17th May , 2005

S.O. 2086. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the Award Ref. 116/2001 of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal- cum- Labour Court . Lucknow as shown in the Annexure , in the industrial dispute between the management of Union Bank of India , and their workmen , received by the Central Government on 16-05-2005.

[No. L- 12012/61 /2001 - IR (B.II) ] C. GANGADHARAN , Under Secy .

ANNEXURE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL- CUM - LABOUR COURT , LUCKNOW

Present :

SHRIKANT SHUKLA

I.D. No. 116/2001

Ref. No. L - 12012/ 61/2001 - IR (B - II) Dt . 10/16-7-2001 BETWEEN

Sh.Ram Daval , S/ o Sh . Rama Nand Vill . Gulariha , P.O. Patarka Tappa Khuthan Pargana Aveli , Tahsil Sadar Gorakhpur

AND

The Assistant General Manager Union Bank India Regional Office, Kashiya Road Gorakhpur

AWARD

The Government of India , Ministry of Labour has referred following dispute to the Presiding Officer, Central Government Industrial Tribunal - cum- Labour Court , Lucknow for adjudication.

"Whether the action of the management of Union Bank of India in terminating the services of Shri Ram Dayal w.e.f. 19-5-1999 is justified ? If not, what relief the workman is entitled for?"

[PART II -SEC. 3 (ii) ] Shri Ram Dayal has filed the statement of claim alleging there in that he was employed against the permanent vacancy of sweeper in Nausar Branch of the Bank of India w.e.f. 1-11-95. The Branch Manager used to deploy him for the work of Safai Karmi , cash peon and water boy and in return he was paid Rs . 14/- per day through petty cash . However, afterwards he was paid Rs . 50/ - per day . Last cash voucher was prepare on 11-5-99 which was subsequently torn up by the Branch Manager and promise him that payment shall be made afterwards . Workerdemanded the remuneration on 18-5-99 but he was denied the payment and ordered him not to come for work on 19-5-99 on wards . Worker orally requested and even wrote a letter but decision was not replied. Worker has alleged that the bank has terminated him without any notice or compensation and instead employed someone else in his place . Worker's allegation is that from 95 to 98 he continuously worked for 240 days and thereafter he continued working till 19-5-99 but he was terminated without any reason notice and thus the bank has violated the provisions of Section 25 G and other provisions of the Act . The worker has therefore requested that he should be reinstated as sweeper w.e.f. 19-5-99 and be paid the arrears of wages .

In the rejoined the worker has stated that the carpet area of the accominodation , which the worker was sweeping , was 250 sq .ft . and he also alleged that the working hours were in 8 AM to 6 PM.

Denying the claim of the worker the bank management has stated in its written statement that there existed no relationslıip of employer and employee between the management and worker . It is alleged that Ram Dayal was never engaged as sweeper or on , any post at the Nausar Branch of the bank at any time . The bank have prescribed procedure for all recruitments in the bank including recruitment to sub - ordinate cadre and even sub- staff cadre cannot be recruited without following the prescribed procedure . The claimant never underwent the recruitment procedure in the Bank. He is , therefore, not entitled to be appointed in the bank and his claim is liable to be rejected , being devoid of any inerit . It seems the dispute has been raised with some ulterior motive behind the same against the management . The reference order is bad in law because there is no cause of action available to the worker on any date including the date mentioned in the reference order . It is also bad in law because of joinder and non-joinder of parties . The bank has alleged that the contents of the opening paragraph under the heading written statement of the claim , are not admitted as alleged and claimed. However , the Government has ntade a reference to this Court and only reproduces the reference order . The reference order is baseless and is of no effect as the same has been referred by the Govt . without applying its mind to the fact of the case . The bank has stated that Ram Dayal was never appointed to the post of sweeper or any other post in Nausar Branch and there is no question of any assurance of any appointment letter .

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

The allegations are self sought, imaginary and concocted with ill motive . It is submitted by the bank that even ifhe worked for a few days , the same in no way caste any right upon him to claim the status or wages of employee of the bank in any manner whatsoever . For whatever work he performed, he was duly paid. The allegations of tearing out voucher by the bank manager is totally false and is concocted with ill motive. There is no question of any such payment: It is denied that Ram Dayal gave any letter to the management , which was not replied by them . Allegations about engagement of worker for 240 days and continuous working till 19-5-99 is also specifically denied and the management has said that the worker has filed the statement of claim on imaginary and baseless facts . The management has therefore submitted that the worker is not entitled to any relief.

The worker has filed the photostat copies of petty cash vouchers pertaining to year 95 to 98 , page No. 4/3 to 4/97 . The worker has also filed cash vouchers pertaining to dates 24-9-98, 24-10-98 , 3-2-99 , 27-3-99 and 17-4-99 , which are in the names of the Branch Manager . He has also filed photo copies of unauthenticated audit report .

The worker has also filed photostat copies of unsigned and unacnowledged representations of Ram Dayal dated 10-9-98 along with photostat copy of postal receipts on which date is not legible.

The worker has also filed photo state copies of undated representation with photo copy of postal receipts having no postal stamps.

The worker has examined himself, whereas the opposite party has examined Branch Manager, Sh . B. D. Agarwal.

Heard the parties and perused the entire evidence on record.

The worker, Sh. Ram Dayal has stated on oath that he was appointed on the post of safai karmchari on 4-11-95 . He has also stated that besides cleaning he also performed the duties of cash peon and provided drinking water and some times he also wrote cash supplementaries but on 19-5-99 he was terminated . The worker has stated that he continuously worked from his date of appointment , regarding remuneration he has stated that he was initially paid Rs . 14/- per day later he was from 50/- per day . He stated that he was not given any notice or compensation before termination of his service .

In cross examination the worker has admitted that he was not recruited through employment exchange nor he was given any appointment letter. On being question that how many days he worked in November, 95 he answered that he worked on 5-6 days , but he could not answer that for how many days he worked in December, 95.He also could not say in cross - examination as to what work he performed in different months . He could not reply as to whether any sweeper is working in the said branch of the bank . He also admitted that before appointment he did not give any application nor there

5899

भारत का राजपत्र: जून 11 , 2005/ज्येष्ठ 21 , 1927

was any notification of vacancy in the newspaper . He admitted that the appointment authority is AGM of the bank but , he could not say that who was the AGM . In another question he has replied that in year 98 he was paid 3 days salary in one voucher and in 99 he was paid on cash voucher and this payment used to be for 20-25 days . In another question, in cross - examination the worker has replied that he was engaged by the Branch Manager not by the AGM. He has stated that besides vouchers he did not get any official letter from the Bank. Hehas also stated that he has worked for 497 days in all . Hewas asked that how many days he worked from June 98 to May 99 , he stated that he has not counted the days. He has stated that he was appointed by Sh . B.D. Agarwal and was terminated by Sh . S.P. Chopra , Branch Manager. He has also stated that after being terminated he never went to bank . He has also stated that he is not aware whether anyone is posted on his place or not . He was specifically asked as what was carpet area of the bank. The worker replied that it was 500 to 1000 sq. ft. in the beginning and later on increased to 2000 sq.ft. The worker has admitted that while he was serving one person Jai Narayan was posted in the year 97 in the category of class IV employee as safai karmchari and peon and he has also admitted that D.P. Tiwari was Daftary who used to go for clearing and some times he ( worker ) also used togo.

The bank has examined the Branch Manager whom the worker has alleged as his appointing authority. Sh . B.D. Agarwal has denied that he had any authority to appoint any worker . He has also denied that he was a regular worker. He has affirmed that name of Ram Dayal was not sent by the Employment Exchange. Sh. Agarwal has state that according to exigencies of work Ram Dayal was engaged for providing water, tea and cleaning. He has stated that the contractor whose generator was on lease in the bank employed Ram Dayal as genereator operator and there as and when he was available he was called for work and was given remuneration/labour charges . The labour charges was either paid immediately orwas given after 2-3 days and whenever any other person was available he was engaged. Sh. B.D. Agarwal has also stated that whenever regular peon used to be absent or got out forwork, Ram Dayal was engaged and the labour chargeswere paid to Ram Dayal was depended upon nature ofwork and period of work. However , he has denied that worker was engaged regularly. He has denied that he has ever appointed Ram Dayal and according to his personal knowledge Ram Dayal never worked for 240 days in any year.

Sh . B.D. Agarwal stated that in 95-96 the branch was run in one room and its floor area was 400sq.ft . He has also stated that he never employed Ram Dayal as cash peon and writing supplementary . The Branch Manager has denied that any photostat copy of documents were permitted to be made nor he has any information . He has also stated specifically that he never 5900

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 11 , 2005/ JYAISTHA 21 , 1927

[PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii)]

There is no cash voucher after 31 March , 1998 where it could be gathered that Ram Dayal was paid any amount .

Worker has filed the cash vouchers in the name of Branch Manager of following dates and amounts:

24-9-1998 for Rs . 2750/-

24-10-1998 for Rs . 1050/-

3-2-1999 for Rs . 1450/-

17-1-1999 for Rs . 850/-

assured Ram Dayal that he will be regularised. He also stated that no casual labour is engaged by the Branch Manager and whereas the safai karamchari did not attend the duties , men were called from the market for cleaning the branch . It has also come in his evidence that in year 98 thebranch ofNausar was shifted to other place due to the flood, due to which the records were spoiled . He has also specifically denied that Ram Dayal has worked for 3 years 6 months and 14 days regularly . In an specific question Sh. Agarwal replied that contract for providing generator facility was entrusted to Ram Chandra Gupta .

It cannot be gathered from these documents that amount received against the above cash vouchers was paid to the workman only .

Sh. B.D. Agarwal while describing the procedure for payment to persons outside he stated that whenever someone is called from outside, he is paid in cash voucher or petty cash voucher . He also stated that photo state copyofpetty cash voucher filed by Ram Dayal have been issued by his official and he admits it . He admitted that labour charges paid according to the quantum of work and rate , which are not fixed. Photo state copy of petty cash vouchers which are filed in the court are of petty amount of Rs . 10 , 20 or 14/- , whereas , cash vouchers are of bigger amount which are in the name of Branch Manager and the payment is made to whose name is endorsed and the Branch Manager used to pay the persons as per the need.

The above is the entire evidence . I have carefully perused , the photo state copy of petty cash voucher . filed by the worker which shows that he has been paid in the following manner :

Yer

No. ofworking days

November , 1995

Nowork

December , 1995

Although the worker has stated in his reply to court question that he worked for 5-6 days in November 1995 but according to the vouchers field by him the working comes out to be 9 days . It does not prove that worker was engaged on 4-11-1995 as alleged by him . He has been paid Rs . 14/ -for cleaning of the branch . Worker has not filed any voucher for the month of December, 1995 , which goes to show that he has not been engaged in December , 1995 meaning these by that bank must have had some alternative. It is also noteworthy that worker has not been engaged from 16-11-95 to 30-11-95 . In January , 1996 the worker has been engaged only for 5 days . Thereafter in February, 1996 the worker was engaged for only 3 days in March , 1996 the worker was engaged for 11 days . Therefore , it can be easily inferred that the worker was not regularly engaged on each and every working day . Forclearing ofbranch office situated in a room the Branch Manager must have availed services of some one who was not on the roll and carpet area of 400 sq . ft . needs hardly half an hour to one hour job for which bank could have got any out- sider for cleaning of the bank.

January, 1996

February , 1996

March, 1996

April, 1996

May, 1996

June, 1996

July, 1996

August , 1996

September, 1996

October, 1996

November, 1996

December , 1996

InApril Ram Dayal was paid for 19 days in May 1996 for 14 days in June , 1996 for 22 days in July 1996 for 20days , in August , 1996 for 17 days , in September , 1996 for 18 days , in October , 1996 for 23 days , in November , 1996 for 21 days , in December, 1996 for 3 days. It means that in December , 1996 the worker was not available for cleaning the area after 10-12-1996 . The person who has beencalled for cleaning carpet area of 400 sq.ft. was paid @Rs. 14/- per day has no responsibility to clean floor after 10-12-1996 . However, in January , 1997 the rate for cleaning the floor area was increased from 14/- to 20/- Rs . and Ram Dayal was again paid for 22 days in February , 1997 . He was engaged for 23 days in April, 1997 but from the vouchers it does not show that he was called for cleaning ofthe branch from 3-4-1997 to 9-4-1997 and 19-4-1997 .

January, 1997

February, 1997

Nowork

March , 1997

In January , 1998 he has cleaned the branch office for 25 days, February , 1998 for 23 days, March , 1998 for 24 days and thereafter there is not a single voucher to show thatRam Dayal was paid after 31-3-1998 .

April, 1997

January , 1998

February , 1998

March , 1998

The worker cannot be relied that he was terminated on 19-5-99 . If it is taken to be true that he was terminated on 19-5-99 then 12 months preceding this date come to be 18-5-98. It is pertinent to mention here that from 1-4-98 to [भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

5901

भारत का राजपत्र: जून 11 , 2005/ज्येष्ठ 21 , 1927

23-9-1998 there is not a single voucher which could show that worker , was paid a single penny . There is no cash voucher in November, 1998 December, 1998 , January , 1999 . Thereafter the next voucher is in the name of Branch Manager dtd. 24-9-1998, 24-10-1998 , 3-2-1999, 27-3-1999 and 19-4-1999. This fact does not corroborate the story of the worker that he has continuously worked for 12 calendar months in a year preceding his date of termination, totalling to 240 days . It is not believable that whatever the Branch Manager drawn vide cash vouchers dated 24-9-1998, 24-10-1998 , 3-2-1999, 27-3-1999 and 17-4-1999 were paid to the worker alone and no one else was called orthe regular worker has not performed the work. It is the duty of the worker to prove that he worked full 240 days prior to his disengagement and worker's own testimony is not trustworthy to prove the said fact.

New Delhi , the 17th May , 2005

S.O. 2087.- In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) , the Central Government hereby publishes the Award ( Ref. No. 45/ 2003) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal -cum- Labour Court , Jaipur as shown in the Annexure, in the Industrial Dispute between the management of Bank of Baroda, and their workmen, received by the Central Government on 16-05-2005.

[No. L - 12012/35/2003 - IR (B. II)] C. GANGADHARAN , Under Secy.

ANNEXURE

CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL CUM -LABOUR COURT, JAIPUR

CASE No. CGIT-45/2003

Reference No. L- 12012/ 35/2003- IR (B- II) Sh.Motilal Jain,

S/o Sh . Laduram Jain,

C/o Sh . Manoharlal Jain , 64/173-74, Hear Path,

Mansarovar , Jaipur

.....Applicant

Versus

1. Deputy General Manager ,

Bank ofBaroda,

Anand Bhawan ,

4thFloor, Sansar Chandra Road,

Jaipur-302001 .

2.BranchManager,

Bank ofBaroda,

Tonk, Rajasthan

The way the worker has been paid by the Branch Manager of the bank shows that he was paid for branch cleaning and filling water in the cooler, providing water and rickshaw fair, shows that he had been paid job wise . The nature of the payments show that he was not on the rolls of the bank and there existed no relationship of employer and employee between the bank and Ram Dayal as Ram Dayal had no liability towords the bank. In the end I come to the conclusion that there was no relationship ofemployer and employee between Union Bank of India and Ram Dayal . It is pertinent to mention that admittedly the Branch Manager has no authority to recruit any one or appoint any one. It was AGM of the bank therefore the worker could not have been appointed as such . It is also pertinent to mention here that there was no appointment letter issued nor any termination letter issued to the worke and it could not have been issued by the Branch Manager, firstly, he was not appointing authority; secondly, because the bank hired him as and when exigencies needed and the worker was available. There is absolutely no continuity of service the worker has not proved that he has been terminated on 19-5-99 or he worked of after 1-4-98 .

In the circumstances the question of termination does not arise . The issue referred therefore is answered accordingly and the worker is not entitled to any relief whatsoever.

SHRIKANT SHUKLA, Presiding Officer Lucknow 12-5-2005

नई दिल्ली, 17 मई, 2005

का.आ. 2087.- औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में , केन्द्रीय सरकार बैंक ऑफ बड़ोदा के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालय जयपुर के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 45/2003 ) कोप्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 16-05-2005 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल-12012/35/2003- आई.आर. ( बी. II ) ]

सी. गंगाधरण , अवर सचिव

.....Non -applicants

PRESENT :

Sh . R. C. Sharma.

Presiding Officer:

Sh . R. C. Jain.

Forthe Applicant:

For the Non-applicants:

Sh . Shyam Vyas Date ofAward :

25-4-2005

AWARD

1. The Central Government in exercise of the powers conferredunder Clause 'D ' of Sub -section ( 1 ) of Section 10 ofthe Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (hereinafter referred to as the ' Act ' ) has referred the following industrial dispute for adjudication to this Tribunal which runs as under:-

"Whether the action of the management of Bank of Baroda in terminating the services of workman Shri Motilal Jain S/o Sh . Ladu Ram Jain w.e.f. 17-8-2002 was legal and justified? If not, what relief the workman is entitled to and from what date ? " 2.Theworkman in his statement of claim has pleaded that he was employed by the non - applicant bank at its NagarFort branch on 27-5-1982 where he continued up to 1-6-85 and had completed a period of 105 days . Thereafter 5902

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: JUNE 11 , 2005 / JYAISTHA 21 , 1927

he remained employed from 1-7-1993 to 31-7-1993 at its Nehru Place branch , Jaipur and lastly he was engaged in purusance of the circular dated 17-8-1993 as a temporary peon w.e.f 30-8-1993 to 16-8-2002 at Tonk branch . But his service was terminated on 17-8-2002 in contravention of Section 25 - F of the Act. The workman has further averred that at the time of his termination the junior persons to him were retained by the bank in violation of Section 25 -G of the Act and Rule 77 of the Industrial Disputes Rules (Central ) , 1958 and subsequent to his termination , fresh recruitment was made by the bank in violation of Section 25-H of the Act and Rule 78 of the Industrial Disputes Rules ( Central ) , 1958. He has urged that his termination order be declared unjustified and illegal and he be reinstated in the service with all consequential benefits.

3. The non -applicants , in their written counter, have disputed the claim and have stated that the workman had never continuously worked with the bank from 30-8-93 to 16-8-2002 , but have admitted that he had performed the work at Nehru Place branch, Jaipur . They have stated that the workman was engaged intermittently to perform the contingent work on contractual basis and have denied the applicability of Sections 25 - F, 25 -G and 25 - H of the Act on the ground that the workman was not employed after following the prescribed procedure for appointment .

4. On the pleadings ofboth the parties , the following points for determination were framed:-

BOA 1. Whether the workman had worked with the non- applicant management for two terms as stated at para No. 1 of the statement of claim and thereafter he was employed by the management as Temporary Peon on 30-8-93 , who continuously worked up to 16-8-2002 and whose service was terminated on 17-8-2002 in violation of the provision under Section 25 -F of the Act . ?

II . Whether at the time of termination of the service of the workman , his juniors were retained by the management in violation of the the provision under Section 25 -G of the Act . ? BOA III. Whether after the termination of the workman, the fresh hands were recruited by the management in violation of the provision under Section 25 -H and Rule 77 & 78 of the Act ? BOA IV. Relief.

5. In the evidence , the workman has submitted his affidavit and in the rebuttal , the counter - affidavit of MW - 1 , Sh . K. C. hans , Sr. Manager (Personnele) was brought on the record . Both the witnesses were cross- examined by the opposite representatives respectively .

6. I have heard both the parties and have scanned the record . The point -wise discussion follows as under:- Point No. I

7. The ld. respresentative for the workman contends that the workman has constinuously worked from 30-8-1993 to 16-8-2002 , whose servcie was terminated on 17-8-2002 without giving him one month's notice or pay in lieu of the notice and the retrenchment compensation .

[PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii) ] His further submission is that the workman was employed as a temporary peon whose name appears at serial No. 5 in the list of temporary 4th class prepared by the department and the workman was employed on the basis of his biodata forwarded by the Manager, Tonk branch vide his letter dated 11-2-99. The Id . representative has placed his reliance upon the attendance cum -payment-register and the details of the working days of the workman shown on behalf of thebank and has argued that from the period 1994 to 2002 , the workman has completed 240 days in each calendar year.

8. Countering the submissions , the Ld . representative for the bank contends that the workman was engaged intermittently on casual basis purely for attending the casual work in the branches of the non - applicant bank and that he was not engaged against the permanent vacancy . The ld . representative has admittted the documents placed on the record on behalf of the workman which pertain to the non - applicant bank .

9. I have bestowed my thoughtfull consideration to the rival contentions and have gone through the record.

10. Now , the question which calls for the determination is as to whether the workman has completed 240 days of actual work in each calendar year during the period in between 1994 to 16-8-2002 under the employment ofthe bank prior to his termination?

11. The workman's case is that he had performed the work during the following three spells under the employment ofthe non -applicant bank: ( i ) from 27-5-82 to 1-6-85 for 105 days at Nagar Fort branch, (ii ) from 1-7-93 to 31-7-93 at Nehru Place branch, Jaipur and ( iii ) from 30-8-93 to 16-8-2002.

12. During the course of the arguments , the ld. representative for the workman has insisted upon the completion of 240 days of actual service in each calendar year during the 3rd spell of the employment of the workman. The bank in the biodata of the workman transmitted by theBranchManager on 14-5-2001 to the Regional Manager , the working period of the workman has shown as commencing from 27-5-96 and ending on 31-3-2001.

13. On 7-5-2004 , on behalf of the workman , the documents pertaining to his employment with bank were placed on the record , which have been admitted on behalf ofthe bank. According to these documents , it is revealed that a list of those daily wagers was complied on behalf of the bank who had completed over 90 days till 1990 with the bank and at serial number 5 figures the name of the workman . Thereafter vide letter dated 14-5-2001 , the Manager, Tonk branch and transmitted the biodata of the workman along with the details of his working days to the Regional Manager and the period of work has been exhibited as commencing from 27-2-96 to 31-3-2001 . Besides, the attendance - cum - payment register contains the details of the working days of the workman and the payments of the wages made to him from 20-1-94 to 31-3-2001 . Hence , in the spell from January , 1994 to 31-3-2001 , the workman has completed 240 days of actual [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

5903

भारत का राजपत्र: जून 11 , 2005/ज्येष्ठ 21 ; 1927

service in 12 calendar months preceding to his termination and in view ofthis factual position he will be deemed to be in continuous service of the employer in view of Section 25-B(2) (a) of the Act . The Id . representative for the non- applicants has fairly and gracefully admitted this factual position as narrated above . It is undisputed that prior to the termination of the workman , one months's notice or pay in lieu thereof and the retrenchment compensation were not paid to him . Accordingly, the workman is entitled for the benefits and protection under Section 25 -B (2) (a) and Section 25 -F of the Act . As such , this point is decided infavour of the workman and against the non - applicants. Point Nos. II & III

14. The ld. representative for the workman does not press both these points , which are accordingly decided against the workman.

Relief

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT NDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL NO . 2, ATMUMBAI

Present: B. I. KAZI

PresidingOfficer

Ref. No. CGIT- 2/ 50 of 2005

Employers in relation to the Management of Corporation

Bank

AND

Their Workmen

(Representedby Corporation Bank Employees ' Union) APPEARANCES :

FortheEmployer

15. For the foregoing reasons , the claim of the workman deserves to be allowed .

: Shri S.C. Jain, Representative.

For the Workman

16. In the result, the reference is answered in the affirmative in favour of the workman and against the non- applicant bank and it is held that the termination order date 17-8-2002 of the workman is illegal and unjustified. The workman is entitled to be reinstated in the service with its continuity and 50 per cent of the back- wages . An award is passed in these terms accordingly.

17. Let a copy of the award be sent to the Central Government for publication under Section 17( 1 ) of the

R.C. SHARMA, Presiding Officer नई दिल्ली, 17 मई, 2005

का.आ. 2088.- औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार कॉरपोरेशन बैंक के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालय नं. 2 , मुम्बई के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 2/50 ऑफ 2005 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 16-05-2005 को. प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[संः एल -12011/172/2004 - आई.आर. ( बी. II ) ]

सी. गंगाधरण , अवर सचिव New Delhi , the 17th May , 2005

S.O. 2088.-In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the Award ( Ref. 2/50 of 2005) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal -cum- Labour Court , Mumbai No. 2 as shown in the Annexure , in the industrial dispute between the management of CorporationBank and their workmen, which was received by the Central Government on 16-05-2005 .

[No. L- 12011 / 172/2004 - IR (B.II) ] C. GANGADHARAN , Under Secy .

1636G1 /05-32

: Shri B.S. Mulye, Representative .

Mumbai , Dated the 25th April, 2005

AWARD

TheGovernment of India, Ministry of Labour , New Delhi by its order No.L - 12011 / 172/ 2004 - IR (B - II) dated 2-2-2005 in exercise of the powers conferred by clause(d) of sub - section ( 1 ) and sub - section 2 (A) of Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 have referred the following dispute to this Tribunal for adjudication :-

SCHEDULE

"Whether the action of the management of Corporation Bank in hot regularizing the service of Ms.Rekha Bandodkar , Part Time Sweeper working atPilerne Branch of the Bank in 1/3rd of scale wages is legal and justified ? If not , to what relief the workman is entitled for ?"

2. On receipt of the order of Reference from the Government notices were issued to the management and the Union ( Ex.1 ) . Both remained present on the date of hearing and filed ajoint compromise memo duly signed by both the parties (Ex.3 ) mentioning therein that it has been agreed between the parties to mutually settle the dispute onthe following terms and conditions :

(1) That Smt . Rekha Bandodkar shall be appointed on 1 /3rd scale wages .

(ii) That the union shall not quote the settlement as a precedent in any of the case or before any forum, whatsoever .

(iii) That the settlement shall not purport to alter the existing rule position that for the purpose ofdetermining the wages payable to Part Time Sweepers the total carpet area inside the branch/ office premises shall only be reckoned.

5904

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 11 , 2005 / JYAISTHA 21 , 1927

(iv) That the appointment of Smt. Rekha Bandodkar , the Part -Time Sweeper on 1/ 3rd graded scale wages shall come into effect from the date of passing of the Award by this Hon'ble Tribunal and no back wages or any service benefits whatsoever shall be paid for any previous period.

(v) That the implementation of the mutually accepted settlement between the parties hereinabove is subject to the Hon'ble Industrial Tribunal being satisfied with the compromise settlement and passing of award accordingly thereon.

The parties pray for passing the award in terms of the above settlement .

In my view since the parties have agreed to settle the dispute mutually and both the parties to the dispute have signed the settlement the Reference will have to be disposed of accordingly in terms of the settlement (Ex.3 ) and hence the order.

ORDER

Reference stands disposed of as settled vide joint compromise memo dated 24-3-2005 (Ex.3 ) .

B. I. KAZI , Presiding Officer BEFORE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL NO . 2 , AT MUMBAI

Ref. No. CGIT - 2 /50 of 2005

Corporation Bank

:Employer/Party I

V/s.

Corporation Bank Employees '

Union

:Union/Party II Joint Compromise memo submitted on behalf of the CorporationBank, employer/party I and the Corporation Bank employees ' union/ party II

May it please your honour

The party I employer and party II union , beg to file thisjointcompromise memo as under:

1. Whercas , the Govt . of India , Ministry of Labour vide order No. L - 12011/ 172/ 2004- IR(B - II) dated 02-02-2005, in exercise of powers conferred by clause (d) of sub -section (i ) and sub - section ( 2A) of Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947) referred the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of Corporation Bank and their workmen, for adjudication to this Ilon'ble Tribunal, in respect of matters prescribed in the Schedule annexed thereto , which is reproduced hereunder:

SCHEDULE

"Whether the action of the Management of CorporationBank in not regularising the service of Ms. Rekha Bandodkar , Part -time Sweeper working at Pilerne Branch of the Bank in 1 /3rd of the scale wages is legal and justified ? If not , to what reliefthe workman is entitled for ? "

[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii) ] 2. And whereas , the Party I management of Corporation Bank and Party II Corporation Bank Employees ' Union had a detailed joint discussion on the issue and having regard to the fact that Smt. Rekha Bandodkar, the Part Time Sweeper has been sweeping the common entrance passage to the Branch premises to keep it clean for the use of customers , it has been agreed between the parties to mutualy settle the dispute on the following terms and conditions :

(1) That Smt . Rekha Bandodkar shall be appointed on1 / 3rd scale wages .

(ii) That the union shall not quote the settlement as a precedent in any of the case or before any forum, whatsoever.

(iii) That the settlement shall not purport to alter the existing rule position that for the purpose of determining the wages payable to Part - Time Sweepers the total carpet area inside the branch/ officepremises shall only be reckoned.

(iv) That the appointment of Smt. Rekha Bandodkar, the Part time Sweeper on 1 /3rd graded scale wages shall come into effect from the date of passing of the award by this Hon'ble Tribunal and no back wages or any service benefits whatsover shall be paid for any previous period.

(v) That the implementation of the mutually accepted settlement between the parties hareinabove is subject to the Hon'ble Industrial Tribunal being satisfied with the compromise settlement and passing of award accordingly thereon.

3.Now, therefore, the parties here unto, pray that this Hon'ble Tribunal may kindly consider the compromise settlement and may be pleased to pass award accordingly .

Union/

RepresentingEmployer/ PartyI

Representing Party II

कृते कारपोरेशन बैंक

Sri S.C. Jain

Sri B. S. Mulye ,

Secretary,

Corporation Bank

SeniorManager , Corporation Bank , Zonal Office

Employees' Union , Mumbai

Mumbai

Date: 24-3-2005 Station: Mumbai

Signed before me . Sd/-

सचिव न्यायालय

Secretary to the Court [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

5905

भारत का राजपत्र: जून 11 , 2005/ज्येष्ठ 21 , 1927

नई दिल्ली, 18 मई, 2005

का.आ. 2089.-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 ( 1947 का 14) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार दक्षिणी रेलवे के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार श्रम न्यायालय, इरनाकूलम के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या आई.डी.सं. 25/1966 ( सी ) ) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 13-05-2005 को प्राप्त हुआ था । [सं. एल-41011/36/94- आई.आर. ( बी. I ) ]

अजय कुमार, डेस्कअधिकारी New Delhi , the 18th May, 2005

S.O. 2089. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award ( ID . No. 25 of 1996( c) of the Central Government Labour Court , Ernakulam now as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the Management of Southern Railway and their workman, which was received by the Central Government on 17-05-2005.

[No. L -41011 /36/ 94- IR (B. I) ] AJAY KUMAR, Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

IN THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT LABOUR COURT, ERNAKULAM

( IN THE LABOUR COURT , ERNAKULAM) (Monday , the 17th day of January , 2005)

Present:

SRI . K.K. Utharan, B.S.c. , LL . B. , PresidingOfficer

Industrial Dispute No. 25 of 1996 ( Central) BETWEEN

The Executive Engineer ( Construction) Southern Railway, Emakulam and Trichur.

And

The workman of the above concern representive by the General Secretary . Ernakulam District Engineering & Industrial Workers Union , Prakash Bhavan , Railway Station Road. Tripunithura, Kerala.

Representations :

Sri . M.C. Cherian,

Advocate .

Ernakulam.

ForManagement Sri .Ajith Prakash ,

Advocate,

Ernakulam.

For Union

AWARD

Thisreference was made by the Central Government of India , as per letter No. L -41011 /36/ 94 - IR B.I. dated 6-11-96 . The dispute is between the Management of Southern Railway and their workmen.

The dispute referred is:

" Whether the demand of the Ernakulam District Engineering and Industrial Workers Union Raised vide their strike notice dated 23rd November, 1991 (copy enclosed) is legal and justified ? If so , what relief the concerned workmen are entitled to ? " 2. The union filed claim statement raising the following:-

The union states that the workmen concerned in the above case belongs to the lowest strata of the work force engaged by the Railways for attending the work of essential nature such as maintenance of rail tracks , coubling and conversion of tracks , keeping of railway gate etc. They all started their service as casual labourers , who are indispensable in the Railway Organisation . Hence provisions have been made in the Railway Establishment Manual /Rules for granting them certain benefits on par with the regular staff doing the same work , such as grant of temporary status on completion ofa specific period of employment ( is after completion) of120 days in respect of open line and 180 days in respect ofproject casual labourers wages at the rate of 1/30th of the minimum of the pay scale of the regular staff of equivalent category etc.

Butthe respondent Management herein has always adopted an indifferent and callowes attitude , disregarding the legitimate entitlement of these poor and almost illiterate work force who have been mercilessly exploited by the local supervisors and authorities according to their whims and fancies . A major chunk of the casual labour work force was exploited for years together without regularisation under the cover of project casual labour. Finally at the intervention of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in a number of land, ark cases ( prominent among being Inderpal Yadav case) the Railways was compelled to introduce a scheme forregularisation of the casual labourers . Accordingly provisions were made in the Railway service books for granting temporary status and thereafter regularisation. Inspite of all these changes , the respondent Management herein did not care to redress the grievances of the workmen herein . The union have been agitating the issues to these workers for prolonged period without any positive result. In the above circumstances the union was compelled to 5906

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 11 , 2005/ JYAISTHA 21 , 1927

issue strike notice dated 24-11-91 through the union , which culminated in the present I.D. The issues are as follows:

Issue No. 1

Grant of Temporary Status and attendant benefits:

The workmen arrayed at serial No. 1 to 21 and 26, 30 to 48 are aggreived of the non grant of temporary status as per extent rules , though they have fulfilled all the requirements for the same. The details of their service which started as casual labour and ended up in the regularisation were furnished in the Annexure to the strike notice . A true copy of the same is appended to the statement as Annexure-A1 .

The workmen herein mentioned above are casual labourers , who were engaged continuously for more than six months . Hence they ought to have been treated as temporary employees entitled to get all the benefits as per Rule 2005 of Indian Railway Establishment Manual Vol II 1990 edition . However the respondents/ management did not granted the benefits as admissible to the temporary status attained employee such as scale rate of wages including DA & HRA. It is submitted that the respondent did not comply with the provisions of the said rule on the plea that the workmen did not come under the category of open line casual labourers but were only project casual labour. As a matter of fact they were casual labourers under the construction department and not on project .

It is submitted that these workers were part and parcel of the construction department which is a regular establishment as held on union of India Vs. Basant Lal & others 1992 ( 2 ) Sec . 679. They cannot be called as project casual labourers . It is relevant to note that all the work cannot be called as project work. Therefore they are not project casual labourers . The service records clearly prove that they were engaged in construction work which does not come under project as held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of L. Robert D ' Suza Vs. Executive Engineer Construction Southern Railway reported inAIR 1982 SC 854. Assuming without admitting it they are casual labourer then also they are entitled to get scale rate of wages 1/30 of the time scale of wages after completion of6 montla service as per the order issued by the Railway Board No. PC/ 72/RGT/ 69-3 dated 12-6-74 . Even this benefit also was not granted to the workers mentioned above . Therefore the Union prays that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to declare that the workmen cited as item 1 to 21 26, and 30 to 48 are entitled to get temporary status and arrears of wages after completion of 120 days from the date of initial engagement .

Issue No. 2 payment of gratuity :

1. With regard to the 2nd demand mentioned in paragraph 3 of the Ext . Pl notice , the disputes relating to

[PART II- SEC . 3 ( ii)] parties serial No. 22 to 25 the Union states that the gratuity amount has been paid subsequently. Therefore the union isnot pressing this item.

Issue No. 3 Non payment of awarded amounts:

1. Withregard to the dispute , the workmen mentioned in serial No. 27 to 29 the Union submits that the awarded amount in the claim petition No. 47/74 has since beenpaid.

Issue No 4- Illegal termination of service :

1. With regard to the 4th issue which relates to the illegal retrenchment of the workers mentioned in serial No. 49 to 77 , the union states that these workers were retrenched without adheraising to the procedure in the Industrial dispute Act . The respondent namely the Executive Engineer Construction / Southern Railway , Trichur and Executive Engineer Construction/ Ernakulam has not followed the provisions of the I.D. Act . These workers were retrenched from service while theirjuniors are working in the Railway . Hence the Management has violated section 25F and 25H of the Industrial Dispute Act.

2. The union is submitting the detailed statement regarding the retrenchment as follows :-

(a) Serial No 49 Sri . V.K. Dasan :

It is submitted that he was a casual labour under the Executive Engineer /Ernakulam , Southern Railway . The workmen had worked more than 180 days hence he is entitled to get temporary status as per the Railway Establishment Manual . He has also worked more than 240 days continuously. Therefore he is entitled to get the benefits under Industrial Dispute Act . The termination of the worker was without giving any notice or notice pay. He was initially engaged on 16-4-67 . In the year 1971 he wascalled for an interview to appoint him as a gang - men as per memo No. P 564 /CN/ERS dated 21-12-1977 . On medical examination he was found unfit in particular class . Itis submitted that a casual labour who was found unfit in aparticular category are entitled be considered in a lower category requiring lower medical classification as per Circular No. PAB Circular No. 3/73 dated 13-12-1972 . A similar issue has been considered by this Hon'ble Court ID 12/91 ( C) in which the workmen was directed to be reinstated in service with full wage . Against which an appeal has been filed before the Hon'ble High Court of Kerala's O.P. No. 13336/95 also in which this has been upheld by the Hon'ble High Court: Therefore in the above circumstances the workmen in serial No. 49 in the strike notice may be directed to be reinstated in service with backwages and continuity of services .

(b) Serial No. 50 P.K. Dhraw Kumari :

The union states that her service was terminated by the Executive Engineer Construction Southern Railway [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii ) ]

on 23-8-1981 . She approached the authorities concerned for re - engagement. But the management refused to take herback . It is admitted by the management that she has got continuous work for more than 285 days . Hence a notice under Section 25F is mandatory before terminating her service. Therefore the retrenchment is illegal and hence the worker may be deemed to be in service for all prupose including wages and may be directed to be reinstated in service.

The union states that the workmen was initially engaged in the year 1971 and continued till 27-5-1979. She has also worked for more than 240 days . The termination ofthe workmen was without following the procedure laid down in I.D. Act. No. notice was served . Thereafter several juniors were re - engaged by the employer . She also submitted application as per the notification issued by the Railway . Hence it is humbly prayed that the workmen may be directed to be reinstated in service with full back wages and continuity of service .

(d) Serial No. 52 K.C. Karthiyani :

The union states that the workmen belongs to a scheduled caste community. Her service were terminated in the year 20-7-1981 . Her total period of service was more than 283 days . Hence before terminating her service the management has to follow the procedure under Section 25F of the I.D. Act 1947. It is scheduled caste casual labourers by issuing notification . This is also violation of Hon'ble Supreme Court judgment , i . e. to re - engagement of casual labourers can only be from the seniority list . Hence it is prayed that the workmen may be reinstated into service with full backwages and continuity of service.

(e) Serial No 53-C. K. Bhanumathy :

Regarding the above mentioned workmen the union states that she has initially engaged in 1974 under PW1 /TCR ( conversion) . Her service was terminated without following the procedure under I.D. Act . The service particulars are with the Management i.e. XEN /TCR .

F. Regarding working in Serial No. 54 M. Padamini Thisworkman was initially engaged under the PW1 / TCR in the year 1974. She was terminated from service without following the provision of I.D. Act 1947. The service particulars are with the employer namely XEN/TCR.

G Regarding workmen in serial No. 56. K.N. Omana The above mentioned worker was engaged as a casual labourer under the inspector of work/doubling Trichur from 30-9-1979 to 15-10-1980 under the control of XEN / TCR . She was subsequently reengaged on 20-5-1983 to 10-6-1984 under the construction department of Southern Railway . Her service was terminated without following Section 25F and 25H of the I.D. Act. Her position

5907

भारत का राजपत्र : जून 11 , 2005/ज्येष्ठ 21 , 1927

in the seniority list is 807 as on 1-4-1985 . Now the management has re - engaged persons junior to the above workmen. For example ( 1) N.M. Beevathu (Position in serial No. 900. 2 P.D. Salma position in the seniority list is 1020). Hence the management has violated the scheme for absorption.

H. Serial No. 58 Pathumma

The union states that the above mentioned worker was engaged on 31-1-1977 onwards under the PW1 /Doubling TCR. Her service was terminated on 15-10-1979 . Therefore she has completed more than 240 dayswith artificial break . She has submitted her claim as perthe notification of Railway before 31-3-1987 . Therefore she has to be reinstated in service with backwages .

I. Serial No. 64. Neely . P. N.

She was a casual labourer from 4-9-1978 to 20-7-1983 under PWI/Trichur. She has completed more than 240 days . Service were terminated without following the provision of ID Act . Hence the worker has to be reinstated in service with backwages and continuity of service.

J. Serial No. 65 P. C. Chinna

The above worker was a casual labour from 4-9-1978 to 20-7-1983 under the PW1 /Trichur. Her service were terminated illegally without following the procedure under Section 25F and 25H of the I.D. Act . Therefore the management may be directed to reinstate her in service with backwages .

K. Serial No. 66 C. K. Radha

The above worker was worker under the Railway from 1974 onwards . Her service were terminated . Subsequently the management has engaged juniors in service.

L. Serial No. 68 K. Thankamany

No. 68 By mistake shown as K.N. Thankamany in serial The union states that she was engaged as women mazdoor and was working under the PW * /I/DL/TCR with effect from 8-4-1978 and finally terminated on 20-7-1981 . She has continuously worked more for more than 240 days . Her service were illegally terminated without following theprocedure under Section 25F ofthe I.D. Act. Therefore she has to be reinstated in the service with backwages .

M. Serial No. 72 K. Ammu

The union that she belongs to scheduled caste community. She was intially engaged on 8-3-1971 under PW* /Trichur and continued to work till 20-7-1981 . She was terminated without notice and without following the procedure as contemplated under Section 25F of the I.D.

5908

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 11 , 2005/ JYAISTHA 21 , 1927

Act 1947. The management has taken juniors to the above workmen subsequently . Hence she is entitled to be reinstated with backwages.

Regarding the last item mentioned as Serial No. 77 A the union is not pressing this issue .

3. The management filed written statement raising the following contentions :--This written objection is filed by the Executive Engineer ( Construction ) , Southern Railway , Ernakulam on behalf of the Management . In this connnection it is submitted that there is no office and officer as Executive Engineer ( Construction) Trichur , (shown as 2nd Management in the I.D. ) , as at present. The said office has been wound up about an year back . The residual works under the said office , are not looked after by the Executive Engineer/Construction/Guruvayoor .

At the outset it is submitted that the above I.D. is not maintainable either in law or on facts . The locus standi and right of the union itself is challenged and denied . The claims raised are very old and stale claims . They are multifarious , ambiguous and vague . They are also not dispute coming within the purview of the term ' Industrial Dispute ' as envisaged in the Industrial Disputes Act and Rules.

Inthis connection it may kindly be noted that there are specific provisions in Railway regarding recognition of Unions , their functioning and activities etc. Such provisions are contained in the Railway Establishment Manual . The above union which has raised the above dispute and which is styled as claimant herein , is not such a recognised union in Railway. Its constitution , nature of functions , membership details etc. are not known to the Opposite Parties . It is not admitted that the workmen shown in Annexure A1 , in respect of whom the above I.D. israised , were or are members of the union . The union is putto strict proof of the details regarding its constitution, registration , fanctioning , enrolement of members with date and continuancy of such memberships , Register regarding members etc.

It inay kindly be noted that in the claim statement , the claimant has made reference to Annexure A1 , Describing it as a strike notice dated 23-11-1991 . Again Annexure 'Al ' itself contain a list of 77 persons , and another person , with some brief demands in respect of them . Neither the claims statement nor the Annexure to the same contain the details of the persons referred to therein including their service details . The claims and demands made in the claim statement and the Annexure , are at varience also in respect of some aspect . Going by Annexure Al notice styled as a strike notice issue by a Trade Union , Courts and other Authorities concerned would get the impression that it is a genuine strike notice by at least 78 serving employees in Railway , for some legitimate causes , However the fact remains that none of

[PART II-SEC. 3 (ii) ] them were employees working under the Executive Engineer/ Construction/Ernakulam or Trichur in 1991 or 1992. From the vague details given in the claim statement itself, it can be seen that even according to the claimant, union, most of them have ceased to be employees in Railway, more than 10 years prior to 1991. Obviously it is without knowledge of the said factual positions and by suppressing it that the claimant union happened to get some orders regarding referring the disputes to this Hon'ble Court . It has been done without any opportunity to the opposite parties, to appraise the real factual position to the Courts and Authorities concerned . Even after the reference of the above I.D. to this Hon'ble Court the claimant union has not chosen to furnish any details capable of even identifying the individual workmen listed in the Annexure , and their service details . The claim statement would go to show that even the claimant union is not clear about the relief claimed in respect of the workmen collectively and individually.

In the nature of the multifarious and ambiguous nature of the claims and reliefs in the claim statement , as also the lack of details regarding the workmen in question, ithas become difficult and impossible to give any specific reply to the claim statement , apart from furnishing some general details .

There are two wings in Railway in respect of the works of Construction , maintenance etc. of Railway lines and buildings etc. They are construction wing and open line Engineering Wing . The construction wing is meant forcontracting new Railway Lines . construction of major bridges, Buildings etc. There are separate Chief Engineer (Construction) Deputy Chief Engineers ( Consumer Executive Engineer (construction) etc. in the said wing. After the construction of the lines , buildings etc. are over, they are transferred and handed over to the Open Line Engineering Wing . The subsequent works , day to day maintenance etc. are done and looked after by the Open Line Engineering Wing with its staff. There are separate Chief Engineers , Sr. Divisional Engineers , Divisional Engineers , Assistant Engineers , etc. in the said Wing . There are senior subordinates such as Inspector of Works , Permanent Way Inspectors , Bridge Inspectors etc. sub- ordinate to the Engineers under both the said wings . Casual Labourers were being engaged by the said Sr. Sub- Ordinataccording to the needs under their respective units and work load under them , with the sanction of Executive Engineers or Divisional Engineers , as the case may be . Such casual labourers were sent away also when the works inrespect ofwhich they are engaged, are over or on expiry of sanction for the work as the case maybe . This was being done on the basis of Seniority and duly complying with the provisions under the I.D. Act also . Therefore the question of retrenching seniors by retaining juniors will not arise in the normal course . All the works under the Construction wing were and are termed as " Project Works, 5909 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र: जून 11 , 2005/ज्येष्ठ 21 , 1927

the list of all C.Ls who were in service under the Opposite Parties , as on 1-1-1981 as envisaged in the order dated 11-9-86 mentioned above.

and the casual labourers under the construction wingwere and are termed as Project Casual Labourers . There was no provision for temporary status to such project casual labourers , however long they work. At the same time there was provision for temporary status to casual labourers whowork in open line Wing, continuously for six months without any break, which was later reduced to 4 months . This difference was because of the distinction in the nature of works of casual labourers in both wings . Thus the work of casual labourer in Open Line Wing is of a permanent and regular nature . while that is not so is the construction wing . For, when the work of a Railway line or Building, etc are over in one place , the establishment there including casual labourers locally recruited is closed and the next work may be at another place . Whatever be, the distinctionbetween Project Casual Labour ( Construction casual labour) and Open Line Casual Labour continued.

The above position continued till the decision of theApex Court in Indrapal Yadav case reported in 1995 (2) S.C.C. 648 directing to make some changes in regard the service conditions of casual labourers . On the basis of the directions contained in the said judgement , the Railway Boardhave issued order dated 11-9-1986 , making provision for granting temporary status to Project Casual Labourers also. A true copy of the said order is produced herewith as Annexure ' M1 ' . Accordingly they were also granted temporary status and attendant benefits in a phased manner starting from 1-1-1981 onwards subject to satisfying the conditions contained in the said order. It is thus that project casual labourers were able to get temporary status for the first time. The provisions regarding temporary status for Project Casual Labourers (Casual Labourers working in construction wing) are distinctly incorporated in the 1990 Edition of the Railway Establishment Manual in Chapter XX.

Again, as regards the service details of casual labourers are concerned, it is submitted that the casual labourers themselves are the custodian of the same . As already stated above , the casual labourers are engaged by the senior subordinates such as Inspector of works , Permanent way Inspectors etc. according to the needs in his unit . There will be very many such Senior Sub- ordinatesunder each Executive Engineer (Construction) orDivisional Engineers as the case maybe . At the time of such engagement a casual labour card is opened, where in the name, address, father's name, age, signature , Thumb Impression , L.T.I. Number etc. are recorded . The details regarding the work in each wage period (month) is entered inthe said card . When work under a Senior Subordinate is over or when the service ofthe casual labour is terminated, the casual labour card with such endorsement is handed over to the casual labour concerned . This is to facilitate it to be kept and used as permanent record of his service , experience etc. He can approach another senior Subordinate in the same Division or even in other Divisions , and get himself engaged there according to availability of work, duly showing the casual labour card withhim. This procedure can be repeated any number of times . There will be casual labourers with casual labour cards with endorsements of a number of Senior Sub- ordinates showing works done under each of them . It is by adding up the days of work done under each such Senior Subordinates , in a Division that the Seniority of a casual labourer is determined and entries made in the casual Labour Register maintained in the Division . This is done on the basis of the casual Labour card with the casual labourer concerned , which is the basic record . Only on thebasis ofthe entries therein, it will be possible to verify the correctness etc. in it with records , if any, available in the office ofthe Senior Subordinate or Senior Subordinates concerned.Without such basic record (C.L. card) and the details therein, the verification of service details of a perticularperson is next to impossibility. More so in respect of past details . In this connection it is also pertinent to note that as per rules regarding the subject, such records regarding working of casual labourers etc. need not be kept beyond 10 years . There is also the further fact that when a particular construction work is over, the records pertaining to it will be kept aside and the office of the Senior Subordinate concerned itself will be closed. As there were hundreds and thousands of casual labourers who have worked under Executive Engineers/ Construction/Ernakulam and Trichur, over the years starting from 1971 onwards (from which date the claim in respect of some named workmèn started , according to the claimant union) it will not be possible to get at the details, and even to make an attempt to get at the details, by In the order dated 11-9-86 of the Railway Board, referred to above, there is also provision made for preparing a comprehensive Divisionwise casual labour Register, arranged on the basis of number of days of work. In fact such a casual labour Register has been prepared and the persons contained in the said ' list ' are engaged/ absorbed inRailway according to vacancy position, or the basis of Seniority as contained in the said list in each Division of Railway. Future Engagements /absorptions are made strictly in accordance with the seniority as reflected in the said casual labour Register , except in cases where Courts/Tribunals order otherwise , and to the extent of such orders /directions only. In this connection it is also submitted that the said casual labour Register has been prepared by including a casual labourers as envisaged in the order dated 11-9-1986 of Railway Board, as modified by subsequent orders , if any, and also giving sufficient opportunity to all concerned and the Opposite Parties or construction wing have not done it . They are not enpowered to do it also . The said C.L. Register contain 5910

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 11 , 2005/JYAISTHA 21 , 1927

merely furnishing some names , as has been done by the claimant union .

Now coming to each of the issues , as contained in the claim statement , it is submitted as follows :

At the outset it may kindly be noted that even according to the claimant union , out of the 4 issues which were the subject matter of Annexure A 1 strike notice and strike in question , two issues/ claims ( issue Nos . 2 and 3) have already been satisfied and as such the same are not pressed . Thus it can be seen that the grievances as projected in the strike notice in question and which were the subject matter of consideration by Courts and other Authorities concerned , ( in referring the above I.D.) have been substantially redressed .

The statements and allegations contained in paragraphs 3 and 4 of the claim statements are misleading and not fully correct. Separate provisions are made in the Railway Establishment Manual etc. in respect of regular employees , casual labourers in Open Line , Project casual labourers etc. as already detailed herein above . Thus there was provision for temporary status in respect of Open Line casual labourers and provision was made for granting wages at the rate of 1/ 30th of the scale rate of pay in respect of Project casual labourers . Project casual labourers were being paid scale rate of wages etc. accordingly as envisaged under the rules and orders . It is afterwards that the Hon'ble Supreme Court have decided Indrapal Yadav case in 1985, containing directions regarding grant of temporary status , regularisation etc. for project casual labourers also . It is in tune with the said decision and the principles therein that the order dated 11-9-1986 mentioned above was issued by Railway Board , for temporary status , regularisation etc. of Project Casual Labourers with effect from 1-1-1981 on the basis of the principles laid down therein.Accordingly all the eligible casual labourers under the Respondents have been granted temporary status and attendant benefits from 1-1-1981 onwards in a phased manner as envisaged in the said order of the Railway Board. The position being as above, the statements and allegations against the respondent Management , are without any basis or justifications . The statements and allegations to the effect that the Claimant Union have been agitating the issues of the workers for prolonged period etc. are also misleading , incorrect and are denied. The strike notice referred to are quite unrelated to the issues and causes as detailed in paragraphs 3 and 4 of the Claim Statement , such as temporary status, principles laid down in Indrapal Yadav case , its implementation etc. The statements and allegations as contained in paragraphs 1 , 2 and 3 under Issue No. 1 in the claim statement , are vague , misleading and without any basis . It is not in consonance with Annexure Al strike notice and what has been stated earlier in paragraph 3 and 4 of the claim statement also . At some places under Issue No. 1 ,

[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii) ] the claimant union claims benefit of temporary status and at some other places it claims benefit of wages equal to 1/30th of scale rate of wages in tune with order dated 12-6-1974 of Railway Board . The strike notice annexed to the claim statement also refer to 1/30th of scale rate . In this connection it is submitted that all the eligible casual labourers under the Respondents 1 and 2 have been granted the benefit of 1 /30th of scale rate of wages in terms of the said order dated 12-6-1974 of the Railway Board, as modified by later orders dated 21-10-1980 , and 2-4-1981 etc. of Railway Board. True copies of the said orders dated 12-6-1974, 21-10-1980 , and 2-4-1981 are produced herewith as Annexures M2 , M3 and M4 respectively.

It can also be seen from the said orders that the provision regarding grant of benefit of 1 /30th of scale rate ofpay, is inconsistent with the claim for temporary status . The provision of Railway Establishment Manual 1990 Edition, referred to in the claim statement is also not applicable to the casual labourers who have been working under the Respondents at the relevant time , referred to by the Claimant union. In fact all the eligible casual labourers under the Respondents have been granted temporary status and attendant benefits , in terms of order dated 11-9-86 of Railway Board as already indicated above . The decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court referred to in paragraph 3 under Issue 1 of the claim statement , are not applicable to the casual labourers in question. It is the decision in Indrapal Yadav case and the Principles laid down therein , which is applicable to casual labourers under the Respondents .

There is also the further fact that the claim for temporary status etc. are in any case unsustainable being barred by limitation and lapses . It is a stale claim . It can be seen that in paragraph 1 under Issue No. 1, the claimant union admits that all the casual labourers /workmen in question have been regularised in service on the basis of scheme evolved in terms of the directions in Indrapal Yadav case. However the union has not chosen to give the date of such regularisation , the place of their present work , Authority under when they are presently working etc. Again from the vague allegations in the claim statement , strike notice etc. it is to be inferred that the benefits claimed must be the benefits prior to the grant of temporary status in terms of decision in Indrapal Yadav case decision etc. Again as almost all the eligible casual labourers under Respondents 1 and 2 have been granted temporary status prior to 1-1-1984 , the claim in question must be one prior to that. In this connection it is submitted that all the casual labourers under the Respondents have been paid wages etc. as per rules and orders prevalent from time to time . There is no grievance or objection raised by any of the person concerned on the claimant union regarding it . This being the position it is submitted that the claim raised for the first time in 1991 , and repeated in the Claim Statement, [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

5911 भारत का राजपत्र: जून 11 , 2005/ज्येष्ठ 21 , 1927

are all per se a lapsed and stale claim, made as an after thought.

Again on the basis of the decision in Indrapal Yadav cose and consequent orders such as order dated 11-9-86 cíway Board etc. a live list of casual labourers , From what is stated above it can be seen that the claims as contained under Issue No. 1 of the claim statement , are unjust, ambiguous , vague , contradictory, baseless and liable to be dismissed . They also amount to stale claim.

The statements , allegations and averments contained in the various paragraphs under Issue No. 4, are misleading, baseless , unsustainable, mostly incorrect, and are denied. It contain multifarious claims regarding alleged termination of service of different persons named therein, under different circumstances , by different Authorities, and on different dates in different years . Even according to the vague statements and allegations of the claimant union, it would appear that each of the alleged termination is the subject matter of an independent Industrial Disputes , having no connection with the rest of the alleged termination of services . This is apart from the fact that Issue No. 4 , as such is also unconnected with the other three issues and the subject matter dealt with therein. Thus, the above I.D. pertaining to the said Issue No. 4, is also liable to be dismissed in limine due to misjoinder of causes of action and subject matter , multifariousness multiplicity etc.

Over and above that there is also the aspect of ambiguity. Lack of details enabling identification of persons , service details etc. of each and every persons . There is also the aspect of inordinate delay , lapses etc. making the alleged disputes regarding termination, claim for reinstatement etc. a stale claim in all respects.

ing all casual labourers who were in service as on 1-1-1981 and later retrenched/ terminated , has been prepared by the Divisional Personnel Officer, Trivandrum as envisaged in the said order dated 11-9-86 , and engagement/absorption etc. is made on the basis of seniority as contained in the said list, except some changes to be made on the basis of individual court decisions etc. Ifthe names of any of the workmen concerned , are included in the said Live Casual Labour Register in the Division , they will be considered for engagement/ absorption according to the order maintained therein . As already submitted above, such live casual labour Register have beenprepared and maintained by the Divisional Personnel Officer of Trivandrum and Palghat, in respect of all casual labourers who were serving in the areas under the said Divisions . This was done with due publicity and duly calling for objections etc. Engagement absorptions from the said list are done by the Divisional Authority. The fact being as above , the various allegations ander Issue No. 4 of the Claim statement regarding terminations/ retrenchments in violation of the provisions of I.D. Act and Rules , are denied. Again , statements and allegations regarding medical fitness of casual labourers , their entitlement for appointment in categories requiring lesser medical fitness etc. as contained in Claim Statement, are denied in general . The Respondents are not able to say anything regarding individual details regarding the matter as given in the claim statement, as they are perfect , vague and not capable of identification and details required for that purpose. Anyway , on the basis of the informations indicated in para 2 ( a) under Issue No. 4 it can be seen that it pertain to a project casual labourer who has been engaged in 1975 or so and sent out of employment in 1977, due to medical unfitness .

Inthis connection it is submitted that there was no provision for engagement of casual labourers under Respondent (Project Casual Labourers) as regular gangmen in 1977 , and that too a casual labourer with such a short service. Even in the case of regular open line casual labourers , the employment and regular appointment as gangmen, was possible only after about 10-15 years service inthe normal course. From this itself the improbability of the story of the Claimant/Union will be self evident . It is also submitted that the Circular No. 3/73 , or the decisions in I.D. 12/91 , and O.P. 13336/95 referred to by the Claimant are not at all applicable to the instance as pictured by the Claimant/Union. Thus there are no orders or rules requiring engagement ofany person who is medically unfit, as casual labourer in Railway . Of course, when casual labourers are urgently required , they may be engaged locally without previously conducting such medical examination . But it does not mean that such casual labourers should be In this connection it is also submitted that casual labourers were being engaged under the Respondents in respect of specific work of construction of new lines , including conversion of existing metre gauge lines into broad gauge lines, laying of additional lines (Doubling) etc. When such constructions are tapering the casual labourers engaged for the work used to be retrenched duly complying with the provisions in the I.D. Act and Rules, regarding seniority etc. if there is no other work available for engaging them or continuing them. There are innumberable number of cases filed before the Hon'ble High Court and Hon'ble Central Administrative Tribunal , by the affected casual labourers both individually and collectively , challenging almost each of such retrenchments/terminations , and the Respondents have all along been doing everything in compliance with the directions and decisions in such cases also . It is not clear as to whether all the persons shown in the list were casual labourers working under the Respondents , whether they were retrenched, and if so when and under what circum- stances , whether they have challenged it individually or collectively etc. etc.

1636 G1/05-33 5912

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 11 , 2005/ JYAISTHA 21 , 1927

[PART II-SEC. 3 ( ii) ]

raised vide strike notice dated 23rd November , 1991 is legal andjustified?

2. What relief the concerned workmen are entitled to?

7. Point Nos . 1 & 2 :-Even though the union has raised disputes of 77 workers , the union has raised the disputes regarding the workers V.K. Dasan (Sl . No. 49), P.K. Drawkumary (Sl . No. 50) , K.K. Pushpavathy (Sl. No. 51) , K.C. Kartheyani (Sl . No. 52) , P.K. Vasantha (Sl . No. 55), K.N. Thankamani (Sl . No. 68) . Even though name of Vasantha Sl . No. 55 is included in the list of workers containing 77 workers .

retained even if they are found medically unfit, on subsequent medical examination . The more fact that the medical examination has been conducted only later , will not give such casual labourers to be retained in service simply because they have worked for some period in spite ofmedical unfitness . However if the medical examination isunduly delayed for long number of years and till they attain sufficient long service for empanelment as regular gangmen , and medical examination is made only at the time of empanelment, some concessions are allowed as envisaged in the Circular No. 3/73 referred to by the Claimant/Union . This is also on the reasoning that due to such long service , a casual labourer who was medically fit atthe time of initial engagement , might have become unfit, due to his continuous arduous work in Railway, also . There are no such contigencies in the instance case in question even as pictured by the Claimant/Union . Even the Union has no case that there were any representations , requests forre-medical examination etc. by the workmen concerned at any time. Thus it is self evident that the claimant/union has been trying to resurrect a stale claim after about 14 years in 1991. It is also pertinent to note that even in 1991 , the Claimant/Union itself has no case that the alleged termination is due to medical unfitness etc. ( as would be self evident from Annexure Al itself) .

Again it would appear from Annexure A1 / W1 that the Claimant/Union had two more claims , such as non- implementation of order of the Hon'ble CAT/Madras , in O.A. 485/89 , and non -payment of pensionery benefits to a gangmen by Divisional Personnel Officer , Palghat . However nothing is stated about it in the claim statement. Thus it can be seen that out of the six claims which were projected as subject matter of strike and strike notice , the Claimant/Union itself virtually concedes about satisfaction of 4 claims . From what has been detailed herein above regarding the other two claims , it can be seen that they are per se unsustainable , vague , ambiguous , stale etc. and the Claimant/Union have raked up them without any bonafides and justification .

For the reasons stated above , it is respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court may kindly dismiss the above I.D.

4. Union filed rejoinder refuting the contentions in the written statement and reiterating the averments in the claim statement.

5. Evidence in this case consists of the testimony of WW1 to WW4 and Ext . W1 to W40 on the side of the union . The management has not adduced any evidence.

6. The following points that arise for consideration:

8. The learned counsel for the management would argue that this industrial dispute is not maintainable due to the lapse of locus standi for the union , ambiguity lapse and delayetc. and cited a decision in the case Nedugadi Bank Ltd. Vs. K.P. Madhavan Kutty reported in 2001 LLJ S.C. 561 to substantiate its argument with respect to delay . The learned counsel for the union would argue that the issue raised by the workman in the above cited case and inthe instant case are entirely different and therefore the principle laid down in that case is not applicable in the present case. The grievance of the workman serial No. 49 in the present case is violation of Sections 25F , 25H and 25G of the Industrial Disputes Act and the circular No. 3/ 1973 and the grievance of other workers are violation of Sections 25F, 25H and 25 G of the Industrial Disputes Act . In the above cited case the termination pursuant to misconduct extrenuous the workman's right of continuation in service . But in the present case , due to right of the workers under the Indian Railway Establishment Manual for re - engagement in preference to other fresh job signatories and due to violation of Section 25F which calls for reinstatement as a normal rule with proved . And therefore the workers have a continuing right to be re- engaged as and when vacancy arises . In the above cited case the termination of workman was subsequent to prove misappropriation of money and falsification of account . Therefore the termination in the above cited case is a punitive measure while the termination of the workman in the present case is not consequential of any criminal offence. The workman in the above cited case was served with notice after framing charges against him. While the workman in the present case were terminating without any notice as mandated by Section 25F of the I.D. Act . Termination being punitive in nature in the above cited case , the workman has no right to continue in service whereas in the present case the workman have a continuing right until their termination is incompliance with Section 25F . The continuing right being violated , as fresh period oflimitation begins to run at every moment of time their rights continued to be denied . Therefore the contention ofthe management that the I.D. is not maintainable due to 1. Whether the demand of the union (Ernakulam District Engineering and Industrial Workers Union ) 5913 [भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र: जून 11 , 2005/ज्येष्ठ 21 , 1927

delay is not sustainable . The other contention of the management that the workman involved in this I.D. are not members of the union also will not stand since the union has raised the dispute of the workman involved in this case it is irrelevant whether the workmen are the members of the union .

is violative of the above provision in the circular andhence the termination is illegal . Even though the workman was found unfit for one category, his unfitness for that particular category does preclude his right to continue in hisprevious status . Had he not been illegally terminated, by virtue of continuous service more than 360 days he would have been attend temporary status , in permanent Service. It is held in the case reported in ( 1992) 20 ATC 328 it was held that termination without complying with requirement of Section 25F of the I.D. Act and without considering for alternative posts requiring lower medical category is illegal . Therefore the workman V. K. Dasan Sl . No. 49 is entitled to reinstatement with continuity of service to a post and alternative category requiring lower medical category. The learned counsel for the union has submitted that due to over age of the workman he is not present for reinstatement . But the workman may be adequately compensated . Therefore I am of the view that the workman V. K. Dasan is entitled to get a total compensation ofRs . 25000/- from the management.

10. Sl . No. 50 Drawkumari was engaged as a casual labourer since 31-1-1977 and continued upto 23-8-1981. On 8-8-1981 she took 15 days leave for her marriage but due to severe sickness of her mother - in - law she was forced to stay back and look after their 2-1 /2 months . When reported onduty she was told that she will be re -engaged as andwhen required . Ext . W8 casual labour service card proves her continuous service from 11-9-1980 to 20-6-1981 . Having completed 240 days of continuous service her teminationwith compliance of Section 25F of the I.D. Act is illegal . Moreover, she has registered her name for inclusion in the live register and her name is reflected in the seniority list . Therefore the contention of the management that the workman Drawkumari has abandoned her service and she is not entitled for re -engagement if for unsustainable . Since there is no compliance of Section 25F ofthe Industrial Disputes Act, the termination of the workerDrawkumari Sl. No. 50 is illegal and therefore she is entitled to be reinstated with continuity of service but withoutbackwages .

9. V. K. Dasan (Sl. No. 49) was a casual labourer in Railwayfrom 16-4-1965 to 27-12-1973. Ext. Wl is the service card ofthe workman V. K. Dasan. Ext. W2 is the certificate dated 23-1-1997 issued by the Inspector of workers Southern Railway, Ernakulam which shows that Dasan was a Khalasi on 23-1-91 and Ext . W3 certificate dated 23-5-1971 shows that he was an applicant for the post of gangman . Ext . W3 dated 21-12-1971 is the call letter for interviews . Ext . W5 is the emergency duty pass issued to the workman on 17-6-1973 . Ext. W2 to W5 would show that the workman V. K. Dasan was in service till 1973. The workman V. K. Dasan was examined as WW1 in this case. He has deposed that he had put in continuous service from 1961 to 27-12-1973 and that fact remaining no disputes in cross examination which also corporates the documentary evidence of W1 to W5 that he was in continuous service for more than 240 and 360 days thereforehe could be retrenched only after compliance of the requirements laid down under Section 25F of the Industrial Disputes Act . But the management has not complainedany of the requirements laid down under Section 25F of the I.D. Act to retrench the workman V. K. Dasan. Therefore the termination of the workman Sri . V. K. Dasan is illegal . The learned counsel for the union would argue that the reinstatement to juniors like Pavithra , Kuriakose etc. no non -absorption of the workman V.K. Dasan who is much senior to them , is against the provision under Section 25G of the I.D. Act. The learned counsel for the union also argueat that the termination from service without considering for the post of requiring lower medical category is illegal . Circular No. 3/1973 stipulates as follows : " Such ofthe casual labourers as are found on medical examination to be unfit for the category for which they are sent for medical examination , despite the relaxed standard prescribed for re - examination, may be considered for alternative category requiring a lower medical classification subject to their suitability for the alternative category being adjudged by the screening committee , to the extent it is possible absorption against alternative posts requiring the lower medical classification . " Hence the workmen, when found unfit for B1 category , ought to have been considered for alternative posts requiring lower medical classification . Therefore the termination of service of Sri . V. K. Dasan without considering for the lower category is violative of the above provisions in the circular and hence the termination is illegal . Even though the workman was found unfit for one category . Ought to have been considered for alternative posts requiring lower medical classification . Therefore the termination of service of

11. The worker , K. K. Pushpavathy Sl . No. 51 has enagaged as a casual labourer in the year 1971 and continued her service still 27-5-1979 . The fact which is proved by Ext. W11 service card and admitted by the management in page 2 of the reply filed before the conciliation officer that Smt . K. K. Pushpavathy was a women Mazdoor under the permanent Way Inspector, Trichur from the year 1971 to 27-5-1979 by virtue of her 240 days continuous service she is entitled to the right under Section 25F ofthe Industrial Disputes Act. Moreover she had registered her name as per the direction of the Hon'ble Supreme Court before 31-3-1987 and her name appears in the seniority list which is not disputed by the management . The learned counsel for the union also would argue that juniors of the workman are engaged without Sri . V. K. Dasan without considering for the lower category 5914

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 11 , 2005 / JYAISTHA 21 , 1927

[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii) ]

V. K. Vasantha Sl . No. 55 as temporary casual labourers with continuity of service but without backwages . The serial No. 68 T. N. Thankamani is not entitled to get any relief.

considering her seniority in violation of Section 25G of the Industrial Disputes Act. Therefore the worker K.K. Pushpavathy. Sl . No. 51 she entitled to reinstate with continuity ofservice but without backwages.

This award will take effect one month after its publication in the Official Gazette.

Dictated to the Confidential Assistant , transcribed and typed out by her, corrected by me and passed this the 17th day of January, 2005.

Ernakulam.

K. K. UTHARAN, Presiding Officer APPENDIX

Witness examined on the side of the Management :-Nil

Witness examined on the side of the Workman:

WW1-Sri . V.K. Dasan

WW2-Smt. Draw Kumari . P.K.

12. K.C. Karthiyani , worker Sl . No. 52joined as a casual labourer on 3-4-1978 and continued upto 20-7-1981 . In the year 1978 itself she is completed 147 days and in the year 1979 she has completed 120 days in open line ofthe railway . Ext . W13 is the service card to that effect . She completed 252 days of continous service from 1-11-1980 to 20-7-81. Therefore she is entitled to get temporary status as prescribed as open line casual labourers and right under Section 25F of the I.D. Act. She was examined as WW4 in this case . WW4 has deposed that she is a member of the scheduled caste and in the year 1990, the management absorb scheduled caste labourers by issuing notification ignoring her case . She has registered her name in the live register as per the notification issued by the railway in pursuance of the decision reported in 1987 S.C. 1153. On enquiry she was informed that her name is in the seniority list. Considering all these aspects I am of the view that she is entitled to be reinstated with continuity of service but without backwages .

WW3-Smt . Pushpavathi WW4 Smt. K.C. Karthiyani .

Exhibits marked on the side of the Management :-Nil

Exhibits marked on the side of the Workman:

Ext. W 1-Casual labour service card ofV. K. Drawkumari.

Ext . W 2- Centrificate issued by the Inspector of works Southern Railway , Ernakulam.

Ext. W 3-Certificate issued to V. K. Dasan by Assistant Engineer.

Ext. W4-Letter dated 21-12-1971 to V. K. Dasan by Executive Engineer .

Ext. W 5-Emergent duty paid issued to V. K. Dasan by Southern Railway.

Ext. W 6-Postal acknowledgement card dated 10-8-73 .

Ext. W 7-Postal acknowledge card dated 10-8-79 .

Ext. W 8-Casual labour service card of P.K. Drawkumari.

Ext. W 9-Strike notice dated 23-11-91 issued by the ErnakulamDist. Engineering and Industrial Workers union .

13. The worker P.K. Vasantha Sl. No. 55 was engaged as casual labourer from 8-3-1977 to 2-7-1984 in the railway. Her evidence by her service card which is marked as W 40. She has completed 130 days continuous service in open line from 22-2-1984 to 2-7-1984 . As such she is entitled temporary status on completion of 120 days continuous service as per chapter 2001 (b) of Indian Railway Establishment Manual . Once temporary status acquired by virtue of completion of 120 days the worker are entitled to notice on termination under Section 25F of the Industrial Disputes Act . She has also registered her name in the live register for re - engagement and her name is in the seniority list . Therefore she is entitled to be reinstated with continuity of service but without backwages . The learned counsel for the union would argue that K. N. Thankamani No. 68 was engaged as casual labourer on 3-4-1988 and continued till 20-7-1981 . But no piece of evidence is produced before court to show that the worker K.N. Yhankamani Sl . No. 68 was engaged as casual laboturer in the railway . But there is no evidence to prove that she was engaged as casual labourer in the railway. The worker K.N. Thankamani failed to prove that she was engaged as casual labourer and work more than 240 days continuous service . Therefore the worker K.N. Thankamani Sl . No. 58 is not entitled to get any relief.

Ext. W 10-Seniority list of the casual worker.

Ext. W 11-Casual labour service card or Pushpavathy .

Ext. W 12-List of Casual Labour/Gangman .

Ext. W 13-Casual labour service card of K.C. Karthiyani .

Ext. W 14- Casual labour service card of P. K. Vasanthy .

In the result, an award is passed directing the management railway to pay compensation of Rs . 25000 to the workman Sri . V. K. Dasan Sl . No. 49 , instead of reinstatement . The management is also directed to reinstate Drawkumari , Sl . No. 50 , worker K.K Pushpavathy Sl . No. 51 , the worker K. C. Karthiyani Sl . No. 52 the workman [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

नई दिल्ली, 18 मई , 2005

का.आ. 2090.- औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार दक्षिणी रेलवे के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार श्रम न्यायालय, इरनाकूलम के पंचाट [ संदर्भ संख्या आई.डी.सं. 14/1995 ( सी ) ] को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 17-05-2005 को प्राप्त हुआ था । [सं. एल-41012/107/1993 - आई.आर. ( बी. 1 ) ]

5915

भारत का राजपत्र: जून 11 , 2005/ज्येष्ठ 21 , 1927

Management of Southern Railway and their workman. The dispute referred is:

"Whether the action of the management ofExecutive Engineer( Constn). Southern Railway , Podannur in terminating the services of the workman viz. Shri R. Kaladharan working under PW/Palghat WEP 3-7-84 without complying the provisions of the I.D. Act , 1947 & Indian Railway Establishment Manual is justified? If not to what relief the concerned workman is entitled to ?"

अजय कुमार, डेस्क अधिकारी

New Delhi , the 18th May, 2005

S.O. 2090.- In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the award [ ID. No. 14 of 1995 ( C) ] of the Central Government Labour Court , Ernakulam now as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the Management of Southern Railway and their workman, which was received by the Central Government on 17-05-2005.

[No. L -41012 /107/ 1993 - IR (B.1) ] AJAY KUMAR, Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

IN THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT LABOUR COURT, ERNAKULAM

(IN THE LABOUR COURT, ERNAKULAM) (Monday, the 28th day of February, 2005) PRESENT :

Sri . K. K. Utharan , B.Sc. , LL . B. , Presiding Officer Industrial Dispute No. 14 of 1995 ( Central) Between:

The Executive Engineer (Construction) , S. Railway,

Podanur, Tamil Nadu .

And

The workman of the above concern represented by the General Secretary, Dakshin Railway Casual Labour Union, Edapally North , Cochin -24.

Representations :

Sri . P.M.M. Najeebkhan,

Advocate, Addl . Central Govt . Standing Counsel CAT, Kochi -682018

2. Union filed claim statement raising the following : The concerned workman Shri R. Kaladharan was employed as casual labour under permanent way Inspector Cochin/ Palakked (PWI/ CN/POT of Southern Railway. His services wereuninterrupted and continuous ever since the date of appointment on 22-12-1983 . he was drawing Rs. 780 /- per month . While working so on 2-7-84 his service were terminated by management without stating any reason. No represtation or no notice pay was offered to the workman at the time of termination of service .. No allegations were raised against the workman at any point oftime. Hence the action of the management terminating the services of the workman is unjustified unsustainable and against the existing provisions of industrial disputes Act.

The workman is not alternatively employed any where . Since that date of termination . He is finding if very difficult to pull or his huge family without any earnings.

Itistherefore respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to pass an award directing the management to reinstate the workman with full backwages and continuity in service.

3. The management filed written statement raising the following contentions :-It is submitted that Sri . R. Kaladharan , Project Casual Labour under this respondent , ondailyrateofpayRs . 13/-perday with effect from 22-12-83 and he was retrenched from service on 2-7-84 along with the other 379 such daily rated casual labourers for want of work with L.T.I. No. 426 .

In O.P. No. 7570 of 1987 the Hon'ble High Court of Kerala defined that it is well established principle of Industrial Law . Industrial Court , Tribunal Authorities do not entertain stale'claims . According to the above decision themaximumperiod of entertaining a stale claim is 4 years. As such this stale claiın is 10 years old thus the claim is liable to be dismissed in ' limini ' . The photocopy of the said order of the Honourable High Court of Kerala is produced herewith and marked as Exhibit R.I. "

...For management

ForUnion Sri . Pauleson C. Varghese , Advocate , Ernakulam

AWARD

This reference was made by the Central Government of India as per letter No. L - 41012/107/93- IR(BI ) dated 5-5-95 . The dispute is between the The applicant of Sri . R. Kaladharan Project Casual labour hed filed a claim petition at Labour Court/Kozhikode vide No. 49/88 ( Central ) for the arrears of the Ty. status after completion of 120 days of continuous service i.e. from 1-5-84 to 2-7-84 . The respondent Railway has rejected the claim through the counter statement and submitted thatthe applicant was only a project casual labour and he was in employment in this project only for a period of 190 days . As such he is eligible for monthly rate of pay plus 5916

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 11 , 2005/ JYAISTHA 21 , 1927

[PART II- SEC. 3 (ii) ]

I.D. Act, 1947, Indian Railway Establishment Manual . He is not eligible for any relief as per I.D. Act . Under the above circumstances it is humbly prayed that this Hon'ble Court may be please to dismissed the claim petition with cost to this respondent .

Dearness allowance for two days only as envisaged in the Railway board letter No. E (NG) 11 / 83 / 1-6 /5-4 of 6-6-83 . The Hon'ble Labour Court has agreed and passed an order dated 29-1-88 Exhibit R.II to pay the difference amount of Rs. 37-90 to the applicant . The same has also paid to the applicant. The photocopy of the said order of the Hon'ble High Court of Kerala is produced herewith and marked as ExhibitR. II.

4. The management has also field additional written statement raising the following contentions . The Management deny all the material allegations made by the applicant except that are expressly admitted herein.

At the outset the respondent deny the existence of an Industrial Dispute between the applicant and the respondent .

It is humbly submitted that the above applicant is not eligible for Temporary status on completion of 190 daysof service as per with other open line casual labourers . The administration has accepted the difference in wage of two days Rs . 37-90 (i . e. ) the difference of daily rate and monthly rate after completion of 180 days .

The applicant cannot be taken as workman within the meaning of section 2 ( s) of the Industrial Dispute Act , 1947. The definition of a workman as per the I.D. Act, 1947 , is reproduced hereunder:-

Further, the applicant has filed a written petition to the Assistant Labour Commissioner ,. Ernakulam for the completion of 120 days cotinuous service , he must be allowed for Temporary status as per order of Government Labour Court/ Kozhikode vide C.P. No. 49/88 . And also his termination was made without any not and said notice was not given to him and the termination is illegal .

" workman-means any person ( including an apprentice) employed in any industry to do any manual unskilled, skilled technical , operational , clerical or supervisory work for hire or reward whether the terms of employment be expressed or implied and for the purpose ofany proceeding under this Act in relation to an Industrial dispute, includes any such person who has been dismissed, discharged or retrenched in connection with , or as a consequences of, that dispute , or whose dismissal , discharge or retrenchment has led to that dispute, but does not include any such person etc.

The attention of the Court is invited to the definition itself implies that the workman must be employed that the industry to do ( may please be noted, the stress on present tence) i.e. should be working or has been dismissed/ discharge/retrenched and whose dismisal/discharged/ retrenchment has led to the dispute .

It is submitted that , the petitioner was initially engaged as a project casual labour. Project casual labours are not eligible for Temporery Status/ CPC scale after completion of 120 days service. They are eligible only for temporary status only in the wake of Hon'ble Supreme Court 1985 (2) 648, W.P. No. 147320-69 , 559 in Indrapal Yadav and others and Railway Board Lr . No. E (NG) II/ 84/ CN/41 of 11-9-86 Exhibit R.III . The above project casual labour has not come under the purview of the above said order, he was in employment of 190 days of service only . Hence he is not eligible for retrechment compensation and notice of termination . It is clearly seen from the Railway Board order No. E ( II) 8 /AT/ 10/1-8 dated 23-2-82 that the workman ( regular or casual ) should be deemed to have completed continuous service for one year under an employer ifhehas worked for 240 days ( calculated in terms ofsection 25 B (2) of the I.D. Act ) in a period of 12 months proceeding the date with reference to whose calculation is to be made . Even though he might not have been in service ofthe employer for one whole year .

It is clear that the applicant was a workman under the respondent , but not workman now as he has not been dismissed/discharged/retrenched which has led to any dispute (The applicant has only asked for payment of assumed arrears of wages which were supposed to be due to him, and not challenged anything regarding dismissal/discharge/retrenchment) . Therefore , the applicant is not a workman as per I.D. Act 1947 and can not file a claim under I.D. Act .

The project casual labour of Sri , R. Kaladharan has completed only 190 days only in service processing the date of his retrenchment . Hence he is not eligible even for temporary status and notice of termination and retrechment compensation.

The applicant was a workman under the respondent have been retrenched in the normal circumstances adopting the establishment rules and regulations .

The definition of industrial dispute as per I.D. Act 1947 is not reproduced hereunder .

In the view of the above , it is submitted that Sri . R. Kaladharan , project Casual Labour has worked only 190 days. He had already been given monthly rates of scale after completion of 180 days and difference also paid. The Hon'ble Labour Court had not ordered to given temporary status to the petitioner and only accept counter of administration as per rules .

Industrial Dispute means any dispute or difference between employees and employers or between employers workman , or between workman and workmen , which is connected with the employment of non - employment of the terms of employment or with the conditions of labour of any person .

This also clearly says that the Industrial disputes means and dispute between employer and workman which Hence he is not eligible for any temporary status/ retrenchment compensation and notice of termination . It is also submitted that the action of this management to terminate the service of Sri . R. Kaladharan , Project Casual Labour with effect from 2-7-84 is as per the provision of 5917 [भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : जून 11 , 2005 /ज्येष्ठ 21 , 1927

is connected with employment or non - employment or terms of employment or that the conditions of labour of any person.

1987. In which it is clearly stated that it is a well established Industrial law and industrial courts , tribunals and authorities do not entertain such stale claims . Even the Industrial Dispute Act, 1947 specifies a maximum period of 1 year for making claims with a provision for relexation. But there is no sufficient grounds made out by the applicant for relaxation. According to Supreme Court the maximum period of entertaining even such claims for relaxation is only four years . Therefore the claims made by the applicant is stale as per the above court verdicts and on thses grounds alone the application is liable for dismissal as in limine .

It isbrought out that there is no evidence that the applicant as aggrieved workman ever made a representation to the respondent and it has been refused by the respondent which is necessary condition for existence of an Industrial Dispute to a be adjudicated by an Industrial Tribunal or Labour Court . Under the I.D. Act the payment of assumed arrears of wages that too based on a court verdict in an incomparable case cannot be assumed to have a nature of Industrial Dispute.

It is also brought to the notice of the court that the applicant was engaged in projects in the territorial jurisdiction of Tamil Nadu . His pay drawing office is also situated in Tamil Nadu .

The relief ifgranted, is also to be granted by General Manager/ Southern Railway/Madras whose office is at Madras. The Div. Personnel Officer, Palghat is in no -way connected with the claims and the first respondent and his superior officer are also situated in the territorial jurisdiction of Tamil Nadu . Even if any relief is grantedby the court ifitwill be executed the first respondent and his superiors in the territorial jurisdiction of Tamil Nadu only. Therefore the applicant has filed case withoutjurisdiction and on this ground also the application can be dismissed as ' without jurisdiction' .

The text for industrial dispute could be that the aggrieved party should be either workman or employer treated as a group . The dispute should be about the employment or non - employment of the terms of employment or with the conditions of labour during the course of employment or immediately after retrenchment for termination if the retrenchment or termination itself is disputed. The present application does not fall in any category of employment or non -employment. At the best it comes under terms of employment. Since the applicant has been working under the respondent with terms of employment and is not challenged it during the course of his employment it is clear that there is no dispute that existed, during the course of employment . Only it is raked un now after a court verdict in an incomparable case when the applicants themselves have ceased to be workmen.

It isalso brought to the notice of the court that all the casual labourers who are working in Railways are issued casual labour cards which is an authentic record to establish their claims . It is requested that the applicant is to be directed to produce C.L. cards for considering his application which is Issued to him .

The question at large is not connected with the employment or non- employment the terms of employment orthe conditions of labour as provided in the definition of industrial dispute , but only payment of assumed arrears of wages for persons who are not workman and the respondent ( s ) of the opinion that the Honourable Court is not the appropriate forum to discuss the issue as neither it is coming under the category of Industrial Dispute nor the applicant is workman nor any dispute existed or exists between the workman and the employer and on these grounds alone the application is liable to be dismissed .

It isalso brought to the notice of the court that the period of preservation of Master host for the casual labourers are only ten years and the applicant has filed his claim after the stated period ofpreservation, has expired, with an expectation that the Railways may not be in a position to produce any records at such as distant date and there is a possibility of getting benefits of doubt to theapplicant.

Inspite of the fact that the above objections out- lined in above paras himself is adequate to dismiss the application the respondent wish to submit further that:-

Section 33 -C ( 2 ) of the I.D. Act under which the notice has been issued to the respondent also is limited by the wording of the section itself in that the amount at which such benefits should be computed may , subject to any rules that may be made under this Act be determined by such labour court . In as much as the applicant is not workman and there is no dispute as defined in the I.D. Act, Section 33 (C) (2) of the I.D. Act also is not applicable.

The applicant was engaged as casual labour on projects (for definition of -Project Casual labourers refer below) The claims made by the applicant is on the following grounds.

(a) Claiming scale rate of wages after completion of 6months of casual labourers service.

(b) Claiming temporary status after completion of 6 months of casual labourers service .

status . (c) claiming leave salary on granting of temporary In spite of the objection made out in the above paras the respondent submit further that the applicant was engaged as casual labour in projects . He has claimed the relief by his application for consideration of which, the normal time limit, has already lapsed . It is brought to the notice of the court that the time limit for preservation ofthe records for casual labourers as per the rules ofthis department is only 10 years . But the applicant is claiming his relief for a period before 10 years on the dates of application. The notice of the court is drawn to verdict of the Hon'ble High Court of Kerala in its OP No. 7970 of 5918

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 11 , 2005 /JYAISTHA 21 , 1927

(d) Claiming interest and cost of litigation.

All the above claims revolves around the rules & procedures governing the terms of employment of project casual labourers and it is necessary to bring to the notice of the court and also the applicant the rules regarding terms of employment of project casual labourers in Railways. The respondent take this opportunity to brief the court & also the applicant about the terms of employmentof project casual labourers in Railways .

The casual labour refers to ' Labour put on employment which is essentially intermittent , aporadic , and extend over short period . Labour of those kind is normally recruited from the nearest available source . The casual labourers in Railways are of two categories namely , open line casual labourers (these who are engaged and utilised for maintenance & operation of Railway line) and project casual labourers ' those who are engaged in projects ofRailways) .

Project casual labourers are defined as seasonal iabours who are deputed for specific work of less than a month duration or on projects . Projects include construction of new lines , major bridges , restoration dismantling lines and other major improvement line works like doubling widening of tunnels , bridges etc. The Project casual labour engaged in Railway projects as defined above , are eligible for 1/30 of appropriate scale rate of wages with Dearness Allowance on completion of a month of continuous service in the same type ofwork with effect from 1-6-74 (or) on the date from which & months continuous services is completed whichever is later by authority of Railway Board letterNo. P. 372/RLT/69 - IIIdated 12-6-74 copy ofthis order enclosed asR.I.

The scheme for granting temporary status to casual labourers in Railways were introduced with retrospactive effect from 1-1-81 based on the decision of the Supreme Court rendered in the case of Indrapal Yadav & Others versu Union of India . Copy ofjudgment is enclosed as R-2.

The project casual labourers on attainment of temporary status will be eligible for the following benefits :

(a) Period of notice for termination of service subject to provision of Industrial dispute Act , 1947 .

(5) Scale of rate ofpay .

(d) Attendance

(e) Leave Rules .

( f) Provident Fund & Gratuity .

(g) Allotment of Railway accommodation & recovery ofrent.

(h) Railways Passes .

(i) Advances or any other banefits specially authorised byRailways.

[PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii) ] (1) The qualifying service for pension & gratuity purposesoses will be taken as 1/2 of total temporary status service.

Inbrief the Project casual labourers will be eligible for scale rate of wages on completion of 6 months of continuous service on or after 1-6-74 ( repeat on or before 1-6-74 only and they will eligible for temporary status on orafter 1-1-80 as per the following scheme . "

(1) Those who have completed 5 years of service as on 1-1-81 treated temporary from 1-1-81 .

(ii) Those who have completed 3 years of service but less than 5 years of service as on 1-1-81 treated temporary from 1-1-82 .

(iii) Those who have completed 360 days but less than 3 years of service as on 1-1-81 , treated temporary from 1-1-83.

(iv) Those who hav completed 360 days of service on orafter 1-1-84 , treated temporary from 1-1-84 or the date on which 360 days are completed whichever islater.

The benefits as outlined in Para 16 will accrue to casual labourers only after attaining temporary status and not before and this in any case cannot occur before 1-1-81 , repeat this in any case cannot occur before 1-1-81 .

It is clear that none of the project casual labour were granted the temporary status prior to 1-1-81 and none of the project casual labours were granted scale rate of wages before 1-6-74 . If at all any arrears is admissible it will only for the period beyond the above mentioned date and not before and also it is subject to the continuity of service .

While verifying the available records it is seen that the above project casual labour of Sri R. Kaladharan was engaged on 22-12-83 with LTI No. 426 , had worked under PW1 / CN /PGT. The above project casual labour had worked in this construction organization for 190 days and retrenched on 2-7-84. Hence , he is not eligible for temporary status and notice of termination . It is also clearly seen from Railway Board Letter No. E (II) 8 /A7 /ID/ 1 dated 23-2- 1982 that a workman ( regular or casual ) employed for a period not less than 12 calender months and an employer during these 12 calendar months he had worked for not less than 240 days ( calculated in terms of Section 25F ( 2 ) of the ID Act) in a period of 12 months preceding the date with reference to whose calculation is to be made , even though he might not have been in service of the employer one whole year .

The respondent has also carefully pursued and submitted that Sri R. Kaladharan project casual labourer had worked only 190 days and he had already been given monthly rate of scale after completion of 180 days and difference also paid upto 2-7-84 as per the provision of ID Act , 1947 and Indian Railway Establishment Manual . Further, he is not eligible for any relief as per ID Act .

Further, it is humbly stated that in reply to award passed by the Labour Court, Ernakulam in ID No. 3/95 ( C ) the respondent had filed O.P. No. 15479/97 dated 28-8-97.

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

It is respectfully stated that the same type of temporary status cases (after completion of 6 months continuous service ) has been dismissed by labour court, Kozhikode.(44 Joint terial cases , common order No. CP(C) 82/93 to 38/93 and 7 joint trial cases common order No. CP (C) 10/94 to 24/95-dismissed on 29-8-97 ( copy enclosed) (R.I. ).

In spite of the fact that the application is time barred, without jurisdiction, not following the established procedure. Invalid contentions , still the respondents have verified the application and found that the claims made are not sustainable as per the rules and provisions of railways elaborated in the proceeding paragraph and therefore , request that the application may please be dismissed. It is respectfully stated that the supreme Court ofIndia civil appeal No. 4643 of 1992 clearly stated that after completion of 360 days , the project casual labourers are eligible for Ty . status (copy enclosed) LR II and marked asfurther it is clear that the applicant has made infructous and stale application without jurisdiction which had put the railway in hardship . The railway for obeying the orders ofthe court has to bear the cost of filling counters . Legal fees, and other management expenses . It is clear that the applicantwillfully filed this petition knowing fully well thathis claim is stale and invalid without jurisdiction and as the railways have been put to tremendous hardship by such stale , inconsequential and invalid claims it is requested that the court should take notice of such attempt being made by ex - casual labourers of Railways and direct the applicant to pay the cost to Railways . Such an order will put ata full stop to such stale , inconsequential and invalid claims and relieve the Railways from attending to infructous work and concentrate on it is main duty to the public namely giving an efficient transport to the public.

5. The evidence in this case consists of the testimony of WW1 and Ext . W1 to W3 on the side of the union and the testimony of MW1 and Ext . M1 to M6 on the side of the management .

6. The point that arise for consideration are:

1. Whether the action of the management terminating the service of the workman Sri R. Kaladharan is justifiable ?

2. If not what relief the workman is entitled?

7. Points Nos . 1 & 2.-The workman joined in the management Railway on 22-12-1983 as a casual labourer under the Permanent Way Inspector , Cochin-Pkd. He work up to 2-7-1984 . On 2-7-1984 his services were terminated without stating any reason. No. notice pay or retrenchment compensation was offered at the time of termination . Therefore , the termination of employment amounts to illegal retrenchment U/s 25 (f) of the I.D. Act and the provisions of the Indian Railway establishment manual . The contention of the management is that the workman was only a project casual labourer and so he is not entitled to get temporary status as he is not completed 360 days continuous service but there is no evidence to show that the workman was project labourer . The unions 1636 G1/05-34

5919

भारत का राजपत्र : जून 11 , 2005/ज्येष्ठ 21 , 1927

case is that the workman was working in the open line and was doing the packing and other allied works . WW1 the deposed as follows :-

[MATTER NOT CLEAR]

The evidence in this case would show that the workman had worked in the open line . Therefore he is entitled to get temporary casual labour status . So the termination without payment of notice pay and retrenchment compensation is illegal . Therefore , the termination of the workman from the services of the management Railway is liable to be set aside. During the pendency of the case the union produced office order No. J/W/1 / 18/2004 dated 30-7-2003 ofthe Divisional Office ofthe management railway which is marked as Ext . W3. As per Ext. W3 office order, the management Railway appointed the workman Sri Kaladharan as temporary track man on Rs . 2510 in the scale of Rs . 2610-2540 and posted to the Kgo Station w.e.f. 23-7-2004 in the terms and condition mentioned in Ext . W3 order .

In the result, an award is passed holding that termination of the service of the workman Sri Kaladharan from the management Railways is set aside however during the pendency of this case the management appoined the workman as temporary trackman . There is no indtrial dispute pending at present for adjudicatis.n .

This award will take effect one month after its publication in the Official Gazette.

Dictated to the Confidential Assistant, transcribed and typed out by her , corrected by me and passed this the 28th day of February, 2005 .

K. K. UTHARAN, Presiding Officer Ernakulam:

APPENDIX

MW1-Sri.P . N. Chandra Sekharan .

Witness examined on the side of Management : Witness examined on the side of workman:-

WW1- Sri Kaladharan-

Marked on the side of Management :---

Ext. M1

Copy of relevant page of Register of specimen Thumb Impression for temporary , casual and substitute employer.

Ext.M2

Photo copy of circular dated 4-5-1965.

Ext. M3

Photo copy of order dated 29-8-1997 in C.P. Nos . 62/93 to 35/95 of the Labour Court, Kozhikode.

Ext.M4 Photo copy of order dated 29-8-97 in C.P. 10/04 of the Labour Court , Kozhikode.

Ext. M5 Photo copy judgment in civil Appeal No. 4643/92 dated 28-4-98 of the Supreme Court of India.

Ext. M6 Copy of Scheme framed by the Railway regarding casual Labour and Project Labour dated 11-9-1986 .

5920

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 11 , 2005 / JYAISTHA 21 , 1927

[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii)] नई दिल्ली, 18 मई, 2005

2. The workman concerned was working as a subordinate staff in the management Bank. Disciplinary proceedings were initiated against him on certain misconducts . He was served with a memo of charges on 2-11-2001 and that reads as follows:---

का.आ. 2091.-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 (1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार दी फैडरल बैंक लिमिटेड के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच , अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में औद्योगिक अधिकरण, अलाप्पुझा के पंचाट [ संदर्भ संख्या 46/03 ( सी ) ] को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 17-05-2005 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल-12012/166/03- आई.आर. ( बी-1 ) ] अजय कुमार, डेस्कअधिकारी

New Delhi , the 18th May, 2005

S.O. 2091. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award [ I. D.No. 46/ 03 (C) ] of the Industrial Tribunal Alappuzha now as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of the Federal Bank Ltd. , and their workman , which was received by the Central Government on 17-05-2005 .

[No. L - 12012/ 166/03 - IR(B - 1 ) ] AJAY KUMAR, Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

IN THE COURT OF THE INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL ALAPPUZHA

(Dated this the 16th day of April , 2005)

Present:

SHRIK . KANAKACHANDRAN Industrial Tribunal

L. D. No.46/03(C)

Between The Chairman , The Federal Bank Ltd. , Federal Towers , Post Bag No. 103 ,

Alwaye, Kerala

And

The workman of the above Bank represented by Shri M.S. Koshy , Moosariathe House , Karadanmala, Thirumoolapuram , P. O. Thiruvalla, Pathanamathitta District , Kerala

Representations :

M/s . B. S. Kishnan Associates , ...For Management Advocates , Warriam Road, Cochin - 16

..... For Workman

1. Shri V. K. Purushothaman, Advocate, Alappuzha

-do-

2. Shri A. M. Thomas , Advocate , Thiruvalla

AWARD

1. The Government of India by the reference order No.L - 12012 / 166/2003 - IR(B - 1 ) dated 12-9-03 had referred the following issues for adjudication :

." ( a) On 11-4-01 Shri Koshy received a sum of Rs. 11,716from the Cashier for remittance of electricity charges of the branch premises as ther spot bill for the month of April 2001 . Shri Koshy had signed on the back of the cash debit voucher dated 11-04-01 for having received the cash. On the same day , he produced cash receipt No. 57 of Book No. 668 for Rs . 11,716/-so as to appear that he had remitted the electricity charges . Again on 19-6-01 Shri M.S. Koshy received Rs . 896 from the cash section for remittance of electricity charges for the month of June 2001 by signing on the back of the cash debit vocuher. For the above remittance he produced cash receipt No. 115 of book No. 34652 for Rs . 9,896 . Material alterations were apparent on the above receipt produed by Sri . Koshy . He altered the consumer number, amount , dateetc. , to make it as if the receipt was related to the banks payment. the electricity bill for the month of August , 01 was collected by Shri . M. S. Koshy from the Electricity Department staff when they came for issuing the spot bill ; however this was not known to the branch and electicity charges for August, 01 was not remitted. On 3-9-01 Asst . Executive Enginneer telephoned to the branch and requested to check up whether the electricity bills were paid up to date. then the receipts submitted by Shri Koshy were taken out from the GEO file and were sent to the electricity office . It was then revealed that the bill amounts were not till then accounted in their books . The Asstt . Excecutive Engineer informed that the receipt for Rs . 11,716 was from their original book , but they had made a remark of having lost the particular receipt from their book . He also informed that the receipt for Rs. 9,896 was not related to their office and it was found to be a bogus receipt . TheAsst . Executive Engineer , Thiruvalla has givenin writting that cash receipt No. 57 of Book No. 668 is the blank receipt lost from their office and no payment had been received attheir office against the receipt. During the course of investigation, it was found out that the electrical consumer number of Shri . M.S. Koshy is 8150. On verification of the remittance made into this consumer number KSEB official at Thiruvalla office informed that a remittance of Rs . 44 was made on 4-12-2000 towards electricity charges of consumer number 8150. Receipt No. 115 of Book No. 34652 was issued from their office for the above remittance . Hence it became clear that Sri . Koshy remitted Rs . 44/ - on Whether the action of the management of the Federal Bank Ltd. , Head Office , Alwaye , Kerala in dismissing the services of Shri M. S. Koshy , Bankman of Kavumbagom Branch , Thiruvalla, Pathanamthitta District , Kerala with effect from 22-8-2002 is proper and justified ? If not, to what relief Shri M. S. Koshy is entitled to?

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

4-12-2000 towards electricity charges of his residence for the month of December 2000. He corrected the consumer number from 8150 to 2417 and amount from Rs . 44/- to Rs. 9,896/ - and put the date as 19-6-01 and produced the receipt to the branch evidencing his remittance ofbanks electricity charges for June 01. The Asstt. Executive Engineer, Electrical Major Section, Thiruvalla has given in writting the cash receipt No. 115 date 4-12-2000 for Rs .44/- contained in Book No. 34652 issued from their office is related to the payment of electricity charges of consumer No. 8150 , Thiruvalla for December 2000.

(b) Cheque No. 733674 dated 30-5-01 for Rs.70,00 issued by Sri M.S. Koshy fabouring Sri . Surendran Nair was returned on 20-9-01 with the reason " Funds insufficient " . According to the complaint letter of Sri Surendran Nair, Sri . Koshy had taken a loan of Rs . 70,000/- for a period of one month . As security for the same, he obtained a cheque for Rs . 70,000/ -drawn by Sri Koshy on his SB account with Branch Kavumbhagom . The amount was not repaid within the agreed period. Since the validity period of the first cheque wasover, it was returned to Sri . Koshy and a fresh cheque was ptained . Again one more cheque was obtained replacing the second cheque. Sri Koshy had assured to repay the amount on several occasions , but he could not fulfil his assurance . Total amount repaid by Sri Koshy so far is Rs . 7,000/- thất too by a number of installments . Finally when Sri . Surendran Nair realized that the chances to get back the money were very remote , he presented the cheque No. 733674 issued by Sri Koshy at Br. Kavumbhagom on 20-9-01 . The cheque was returned for the reason " Funds insufficient " . Subsequently, he issued lawyer's notice demanding amount within 15 days . Sri . Surendran has already initiated steps to file criminal complaint . "

3. The remaining allegations were regarding unauthorized absence from duty for the period from 6-8-01 to 8-8-01 and also irregular borrowing of money from customers of the Bank. The charges levelled against him were confined under the following heads of misconducts as envisaged in Bank's disciplinary codes:

" (1 ) doing any Act predjudicial to the interest of the bank and

(2) remaining unauthorized absent without intimation continuously for a period exceeding 30 days .

(3) breach of rule of business of the bank or instruction for running any department. (4) absence without leave and

(5) incurring debts to an extend considered by the management as excessive . "

5921

भारत का राजपत्र: जून 11 , 2005 /ज्येष्ठ 21 , 1927

4. On the Charges levelled against the workman , an elaborate domestic enquiry was conducted. The Enquiry Officer concluded the enquiry by accepting the oralanddocumentary evidence ofthe management . Based on the enquiry report and the findings , the workman was punished for serious misconducts stated to be proved . The punishment awarded was dismissal from service.

5. In the statement of claim filed by the workman, he practically disputed all the allegations . Very serious attack was also made against the domestic enquiry conducted. Because of that , the issue relating to the validity of the enquiry was treated as a preliminary issue and both sides were permitted to adduce evidence to substantiate their contentions on the validity of the enquiry . The preliminary order extracted hereunder will give the details of pleadings for and against the validity of the enquiry and therefore I am not repeating those contentions . The prelimanry order passed by this tribunal on 21-2-2005 is extracted hereunder in full:

PRELIMNARY ORDER

1. TheGovernment of India by their reference order No: L - 12012/ 166/ 2003 IR ( B.1) dated 12-9-2003 had referred the following issues for adjudication .

"Whether the action of the management of the Federal Bank Ltd. , Head Office, Alwaye , Kerala in dismissing the services of Shri ' M. S. Koshy , Bankman of Kavumbhagom Branch , Thiruvalla, Pathanamthitta Dist . Kerala with effect from 22-8-2002 is proper and justified ? If not , to what. relief Shri M. S. Koshy is entitled for ?" 2. Both parties entered appearance and filed detailed statement in support and against the punishment imposed on the workman. In the claim statement filed by the worker it is alleged that he was suspended from service on the allegation of temporary misappropriation of bank money . According to him entire money alleged to have been misappropriated by him was paid and therefore the charges framed against him based on which enquiry was conducted and punishment imposed were not sustainable . Regarding the domestic enquiry it is alleged that it was only a formality and the entire enquiry proceedings were completed in the first day of enquiry itself viz . , on 17-4-2002 by taking only 3 1/2 hrs. The Enquiry Officer completed the oral examination of two management witnesses and marked all the documents at their side within that time. When that process was goingon , the workman was simply keeping as mute witnesses in the enquiry. Nobody had asked any question to him regarding the charges levelled against him. Even the union representatives who was expected to help him in the enquiry was also behaving like the other officer of the management who were trying to establish charges against him . In order to help him in the enquiry, he made request for the help of the union's secretaryMathew George and Vice President C.M. Devassy , but against his will one Assistant Treasurer of the union P.I. Bose has represented him inthe enquiry . It is also alleged that the Enquiry 5922

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 11 , 2005/ JYAISTHA 21 , 1927

[PART II-SEC. 3 ( ii) ] Officerdid not give him any documents prior to the enquiry. The workman was also unaware about the identity of the Enquiry Officer himself. Therefore according to the workman the entire enquiry proceedings were vitiated as the same was conducted in violation of the principles of natural justice. He thus makes plea for declaration that the entire enquiry proceedings were null and void.

proofaffidavit on the preliminary issue. In the cross- examination he has admitted that he was offered to seek the assistance of any of the union representatives or even the Lawyer with the permission of the management . It is also admitted by him that his request for adjourning the enquiry on two occasions was allowed by the Enquiry Officer . To a question whether he had raised any objection against the appearance of P.I. Bose on behalf of him in the enquiry he deposed that he did not raise any objection , because , nobody had asked anything about that . We had also admitted that he had not raised any complaint for not giving copies of documents before the starting of enquiry . The enquiry files shows that at the time of domestic enquiry the delinquent workman was present throughout . Both management witnesses were cross - examined by the defence representative. After the cross -examination of two witnesses on the side ofthe management , it was informed that they would have no further evidence , when the turn of the delinquent workman came , he made only a brief submission and that was recorded by the Enquiry Officer in Malayalam. In the concluding portion he has stated that if anything untoward had happened fromhis side, the same may be excused and he may be exonerated him from the charges .

5. In view of the above , it cannot be said that the domestic enquiry was vitiated and it was conducted inviolation of the principles of natural justice. The contention that delinquent had not been given adequate time to prove his innocence on the charges levelled against him is also of no basis . In the result it is held that the domestic enquiry conducted against him is valid and there is no reason to interfere on it.Moreover nothing has been pointed out at the time of hearing to conclude that the findings were perverse and not supported by sufficient evidence. With the available evidence on records , both oral anddocumentary , it cannot be said that the findings are perverse and not supported by any logic. Therefore it is declared that the domestic enquiry conducted against the workman was fair and proper and it was conducted after giving enough opportunity to the workman. Thus the enquiry is sustained . If the workman has got any case that the punishment of dismissal was imposed on him is highly excessive and highly disproportionate to the gravity of the offence alleged and proved against him, he would have liberty to argue on such matters . Forhearing on the propriety of the punishment , this dispute shall be posted on 21-2-2005 . "

3. The management in their written statement has disputed all the allegations raised against the enquiry.According to them, the workman was charge sheeted for misconduct which were prejudicial to the interest of the Bank . His unauthorised absence without intimation for a period exceeding 30 days and incurring of debts by him to such an extent which is considered by the management as excessive are also the other misconducts noticed . On the basis of charges levelled against him he was suspended from service by an order dated 10-10-2001 . One Sri M.A. Thomas , Manager ( Administration P & IR) HeadOffice, Aluva was appointed as Enquiry Officer. The Enquiry Officer conducted the enquiry in compliance with all the principles of natural justice . In the enquiry the workman was assisted by the Assistant Treasurer of the union in which the workman was also a member. The list of witness and copies of documents produced on the side of the management were given to the delinquent in advance. The defence representative had cross - examined all the management witnesses and later opportunity was also given to the workman to adduce his evidence . It was informed by the delinquent workman and his representative at that time that they would have no witness to be examined and no documents to be marked in evidence . After recording that submission, the enquiry was closed . Based on the evidence a report was submitted later finding theworkman guilty of the charges . As there was no illegality of any kind, no interference at the hands of this Tribunal is called for . As per the service regulation applicable to the management, for doing any act prejudicial to the interest of the bank, the punishment of dismissal even without notice canbe inflicted . Similarly for unauthorized absence exceeding 30 days also , similar punishment can be given. As the workman had fully participated in the enquiry, there is no justifiable ground to interfere with the domestic enquiry conducted . The defence representative who was helping the delinquent workman was an office bearer of the union and in the course of enquiry no request had come from the delinquent's side seeking the assistance of any other office bearer for defending him in the enquiry. On the other hand the workman himself had made request to the enquiry officer to permit him to seek the assistance of P.I. Bose, Assistant Treasurer of theFederal Bank Employees Union .

4. On the preliminary issue , the management had examined the Enquiry Officer and marked in evidence the entire enquiry proceedings as Ext. M1 . The workman himself tendered evidence after filing a

6. After the passing of the preliminary order on the properiety of the punishment awarded, the both parties were heard in detail. The learned counsel for the workman vehemently argued by canvassing the position that the workman was totally innocent in all the charges levelled aginst him. According to the learned counsel , on the basis of entrustment of money to him by the Bank for paying the same towards electricity bill charges , the workman actually paid the same ; but there was only a few days 5923 [भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र: जून 11 , 2005/ज्येष्ठ 21 , 1927

delay in making payment . For that delay caused in remitting the money , the workman shall not be visited with the maximum punishment of dismissal from service . The learned counsel further argued that if at all there was any irregularity in the matter of payment and production of bogus receipts showing payment of money , that was on purely on account ofthe irregularities committed inthe office ofthe Kerala State Electricity Board where electricity bills are accepted. It is further stated that entire money said to have been lost to the bank was fully compensated because of the payment of entire amount. According to learned counsel , an amount of Rs . 22,756/-waspwaspaid onbehalf ofthe workman by his wife. Regarding the borrowing and issue of cheques for fabulous amounts and disowning of the same by Bankers , no explanations were given by the learned counsel appearing for the workman. On the allegation of availing of excess leave without prior permission, the learned counsel was very vehement in his argument that if at all the workman had availed any leave, that was only because of the fact that enough leave was available in his leave account and in view of that it cannot be said that serious misconduct was committed by the workman . However the workman does not have any case that before availing leave for more than30 days , prior applications for leave were submitted. Norwas there any explanation how the delay happened in submitting applications . Therefore , even if enough number ofdays of leave were available in the credit of the workman, the manner in which he was trying to avail leave was not at all in line with the ordinary practice or permitted by Bank guidelines.

conclusion on his very suspicious conduct on the first transaction also . In the second transaction, an amount Rs. 9,896/- was received by him from the Bank on 19-6-01 . To show the payment of that money in the KSEB , what he produced was a bogus cash receipt No. 115 for Rs . 9,896/ -. (Ext . ME3 ). The ME3 receipt marked at the time ofenquiry would show that there was alteration in the consumer number, in the amount and in the date also . Subsequently after verification , the KSEB informed the management Bank that receipt No. 115 from book number 34652 was relating to their office at Thiruvalla and that showed only the remittance of Rs . 44/-on 4-12-2000 towards Electricity charges . That receipt was initally received by the delinquent workman and that contained his domestic consumer number (8150) , Ext . ME3 would show very visible corrections or defacing or erasing so as to make it appear that the payment was made by the workman in respect ofElectricity charges payable by the management Bank .According to me this is clearly a criminal act with the ulterior intention of misappropriating the money of theBank. Even if he or his wife had paid the amount after a few days or month, that will not be little the gravity of the offence . Therefore according to me this proved charge alone will sufficient for awarding the punishment of dismissal . This particular charge which was clearly proved, his antecedents , his irregularities in money transaction with the customers and outsiders are only suggestive of the factors which make him quite unfit to continue as an employee of a Bank who will have to handle cash frequently. Therefore according to me he does not deserve any kind of consideration or sympathy. There is no justification for taking a contrary view by holding that the punishment awarded was quite disproportionate to the gravity of the offence committed by the workman.

8. The reference is answered against the workman and award is passed accordingly.

(Dated this 16th day of April 2005)

K. KANAKACHANDRAN, Industrial Tribunal

Appendix I.DNo. 46/03 (C)

Witness examined on the side of the Management: MW1 : M.A. Thomas

Witness examined on the side of the workman :-- WW1 : M.S. Koshy

Exhibits marked on the side of the Management : M1 : Enquiry Report and connected file in respect of theworkman.

Exhibits marked on the side of the workman : W1 : Charge sheet dated 10-10-2001 issued by the management to the workman

W2: Charge sheet dated 2-11-01 issued by the management to the workman

W3: Charge sheet dated 14-1-2002 issued by the management to the workman

W4: Order dated 22-8-02 issued by the management to theworkman

W5: Nil

W6: Letter dated 29-8-02 sent by the workman to the management.

W7: Letter dated 27-11-01 sent by the workman to the management .

W8: Letter dated 21-1-02 sent by the workman to the management.

7. Even assuming that no loss was actually caused to the bank, his involvement in the misappropriation of money coming to Rs . 11,760/- cannot be ruled out. His conduct is very suspicious in nature . The evidence is to the effect that the workman had received cash from the Bank on 11-4-01 for bill payment. On the same day he produced in the branch a cash receipt No. 57from the book 668 of Electricity office concerning the payment of Rs . 11,716/- . But later, the Electricity Board had informed the concerned Branch of the management Bank that such payment was not actually received in their office . How and inwhat manner receipt in that behalf could be obtained from the KSEB Office is not properly explained. According to the learned counsel for the workman , the manipulation ofrecords or defalcation of money was really at the KSEB Office and the workman had no role in it. Ext. ME2 document produced in the course of domestic enquiry is the concerned payment receipt from the KSEB and that does not contain any kind of correction . Moreover none of the Officers of KSEB had tendered evidence to the effect that Ext. ME2 receipt is not a leaf from the receipt book maintained at the KSEB's Office at Kavumbhagom. The information furnished by the KSEB is that ME2 receipt is the one which was missed from their receipt book and against such a receipt , no amount was received in the account of KSEB . Therefore the only conclusion possible is that misappropriation must have been a collusive act of theworkman and somebody handling cash in the KSEB . If there was no involvement by the workman , the receipt would not have reached in his hand. Even assuming that the workman was totally innocent in that first transaction involving an amount of Rs . 11,716/- and he had no role in the defalcation of that amount, the second charge levelled against him and proved against him will only lead to a 5924

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 11 , 2005/JYAISTHA 21 , 1927

[PART II-SEC . 3(ii) ] नई दिल्ली, 19 मई , 2005

2.This case was fixed for adducing further evidence by the management. But the concerned workman by filing apetition dated 4-5-2005 submitted that he does not intend to contest the case in this Tribunal as he wants to file his case before the Administrative Tribunal at Patna .

3. In view of the prayer made by the concerned workman himself, I render a ' No Dispute ' Award in this reference case .

का.आ. 2092.-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/श्रम न्यायालय नं. 1 , धनबाद के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 17/2001 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 19-05-2005 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

S. PRASAD, Presiding Officer नई दिल्ली, 19 मई, 2005

[सं. एल-40012/436/2000- आई आर ( डी.यू. ) ] कुलदीप राय वर्मा, डेस्क अधिकारी New Delhi , the 19th May, 2005

का.आ. 2093.- औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार ऑल इंडिया रेडियो के प्रबधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालय , जयपुर के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या सी जी आई टी-70/2004) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 19-05- 2005 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

S.O. 2092. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 17/ 2001) 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 Deptt. of POST and their workmen, which was received by the Central Government on 19-05-2005 .

[सं. एल-42012/187/87 - डी II ( बी ) ] कुलदीप राय वर्मा, डेस्क अधिकारी New Delhi , the 19th May, 2005 [No. L -40012/436/2000 - IR (DU) ] KULDIP RAI VERMA, Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL NO . I, DHANBAD

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

Ref. No. 17 2001

S.O. 2093.- In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 (14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. CGIT- 70/2004) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal- Labour Court , Jaipur now as shown in the Annexure , in the industrial dispute between the employers in relation to management of All India Radio and their workman, which was received by the Central Government on 19-05-2005 .

PARTIES : Employers in relation to the management of Supdt . of Post Offices , Vaishali Division.

[No. L -42012/187/87 -D -II(B) ] AND

Their Workmen

KULDIP RAI VERMA, Desk Officer ANNEXURE

PRESENT : Shri S. Prasad, Presiding Officer .

CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL APPEARANCES :

TRIBUNAL- CUM - LABOUR COURT , JAIPUR For the Employers : None.

For the Workman

Case No. CGIT- 70/2004 . Reference No. L -42012/ 187 /87-D.II (B) : Shri Kamal Sah, concerned workman.

State : Bihar.

Industry : Postal

Dated, the 5th May, 2005 AWARD

.....Applicant

Sh. Rajendra Prasad Vaishnav , S/o Sh . Ram Swaroop Vaishnav , Gheegra, Via : Gangwana, Distt. Ajmer

VERSUS

....Non-applicant

The Installation Officer (Assistant Engineer) . All India Radio , P.B. No. 135 , Ajmer(Rajasthan)

By Order No. L - 40012/436/2000 / IR ( DU ) dated 18-1-2001 the Central Government in the Ministry ofLabour has , in exercise of the powers conferred by clause (d) of Sub - Sec. ( 1 ) and sub-section (2A) of Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947, referred the following dispute for adjudication to this Tribunal :

PRESENT:

: Sh . R.C. Sharma

PresidingOfficer

Sh. D.P. Garg .

Forthe applicant

Forthe non -applicants

: Sh. Sanjay Pareek.

: 13-04-2005

Date of award

"Whether the action of the management of Post Offices , Vaishali Division , Hajipur in terminating the services of Sh. Kamal Sah from the post of ExtraDepartmental Delivery Agent -cum-Mail Carrier is justified ? If not , to what relief the workman is entitled ? " 5925 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : जून 11 , 2005/ज्येष्ठ 21 , 1927

AWARD

1. The Central Government in exercise of the powers conferred under Clause ' D' of sub - section 1 to Section 10 ofthe Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 (hereinafter referred to as the ' Act ' ) has referred the following industiral dispute for adjudication to this Tribunal which runs as under:-

"Whether the action of the management of All India Radio in terminating the services of Shri Rajendra Prasad S/o Shri Ram Swaroop Vaishnav , ExBeldar at their establishment at Ajmer w.e.f. 7-8-1987 is legal and justified ? If not , to what relief the workman is entitled ?"

2.This industrial dispute was received in this Court on 10-1-2005 on its transfer from the Industrial Tribunal , Jaipur as per the direction of the Ministry of Labour vide its corrigendum dated 1-10-2004 .

months of actual service with the non - applicant establishment. But his service was terminated in violation of Section 25 - F of the Act and the notice Ex. W- 1 was . served upon the non - applicants which could not be replied. The Ld. representative submits that the workman has thus completed more than 240 days of work without any break and in this context , the certificate Ex. W- 7 was issued by the non-applicant establishment . The Ld . representative has also relied upon the gate passes ex . W-8 to W - 16 issued by the non - applicant establishment. The Ld. representative adds that the establishment could notbe able to produce any document in rebuttal whereas all record was in their possession and the sole witness Sunder Lal Sharma has been examined who was not posted atthe relevant time at Gangwana. Why the record was suppressed from the Court could not be shown on behalf of the non -applicant and adverse inference should be drawn against the establishment . The Ld . representative has also assailed the impugned termination order of the workman on the ground that at the time of terminating the service the junior persons were retained by the establishment and on behalf of the establishment , whose names have not been disclosed by the establishment . It has also not placed the connected record before the Court . The next point urged by the Ld . representative is that after the retirement of Sh . Prabhu Dayal no opportunity of employment was given to the workman and the establishment has not followed the provision under Section 25-H ofthe Act. The Ld. representative has referred to the various decisions in support of his submissions which are discussed hereunder .

3.The workman in his claim statement has pleaded that he was employed as a helper (Beldar ) on 1-1-85 by the Installation Officer at Radio Station, Gangwana, District Ajmer, who continuously worked there, but whose service was terminated on 7-8-87 by an oral order in violation of Section 25 - F of the Act . He had continuously worked for a period of two years and on his termination he issued a notice (Ex. W - 1 ) to the non - applicant establishment. It is further averred that when he came to know that a post of 4thClass is lying vacant with the establishment on account ofretirement of one Sh . Prabhu Dayal on 31-10-1994 , he submitted his application Ex. W -4 before the concerned authority , but he was not appointed . The workman has urged that his termination order dated 8-8-87 be declared illegal and unjustified and his service be regularized with all consequential benefits .

4. Resisting the claim , the non - applicants in their written counter have averred that the workman was employed in aproject for installation of the radio center at Gangwana and on completion of the project the workman left the job on his own, that he was never employed as a Beldarby the establishment and that the vacant posts are filled after following the prescibed procedure for recruitment.

8. Per contra, the Ld . representative on behalf of the non -applicant contends that the workman was employed by the Installation Officer in the project, whose service was not terminated by the establishment , but on completion of the project work, the workman left the job on his own . His next submission is that local people were hired on daily wages basis to discharge the work under the project and the certificate Ex . W-7 has been issued by the Installation Officer and not by the establishment . The Ld. representative submits that basically the workman was employedby the Installation Officer and when the project was completed, the work came to an end, which was not of the permanent nature. The Ld . representative has also referred to the judicial decision in support of his submissions.

5. In the evidence , the workman has submitted his affidavit and on behalf of the non - applicant , the counter- affidavit of Sh . Sunder Lal Sharma, the Station Engineer has been placed on the record. Both the witnesses were cross - examined by the opposite representatives respectively.

9. I have bestowed my anxious consideration to the rival contentions and have carefully gone through the judicial decisions referred to before me . Out of the rival contentions , the following points emerge for determination :-

6. I have heard both the parties and have gone through the record .

(1) Whether the workman has completed over 240 days of actual work in a calendar year preceding to his termination whose service was terminated in violation of Section 25 -F of the Act ?

7. The Ld. representative for the workman contends that the workman was employed by the non - applicant establishment on 1-1-85 who continuously worked up to 7-8-87 and had thus completed two years and seven 5926

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 11 , 2005 / JYAISTHA 21 , 1927

[PART II- SEC . 3 (ii) ] ( ii) Whether at the time of terminating the service of the workman thejunior persons were retained by the non - applicant establishment in contravention ofSection 25 - G of the Act ?

( iii) Whether after terminating the service of the workman, fresh hands were recruited by the non- applicant establishment without following the provision under Section 25 -H of the Act ?

Point No. I

on completion of the installation work . Even if he has completed more than 240 days of actual work , he rendered his services to the Installation Officer under the project and there is no evidence gathered on the record which could show that he was employed in the establishment in the capacity of helper /beldar. The plea put forth on behalf ofthe non-applicant establishment has thus been adınitted by the workman in his cross - examination. Therefore , his employmentduring the spell commencing from 1-1-85 and ending on 7-8-87 , was for the project work and is attracted by the exception under clause (bb) to Section 2 (oo ) and it is established on the basis of the documentary as well as the oral evidence that the workman was employed on contractualbasis for a specified period and for a specified job i.e. for discharging the functions under the project whose service was terminated automatically when the project work came to an end . In view of these facts his termination on 7-8-87 does not amount to retrenchment .

10. The workman's case is that he was employed as ahelper by the non - applicant establishment on 1-1-85 who continuously worked up to 7-8-87 and has completed 240 days of actual work with the non - applicant establishment . As against it , the non - applicant's stand is that the workman was employed by the Installation Officer under the project for installation of the radio center at Gangwana and on completion of the project , the work came to an end and the workman left the job on his own. Thus , the non - applicants have sought to invoke the provision contained under sub- clause (bb) to 2 ( 00) of the Act which lays down that if the service of the workman is terminated as a rdsult of the non - renewal ofthe contract of employment on its cxpiry or such contract being terminated under a stipulation, the termination would not tantamount to retrenchment . Obviously , the non - applicant establishment in support of itsplea that the workman was employed under the project has not led any documentary evidence on the record.

11. The workman's averment is that be had worked during three spells with the non - applicant establishment , viz. , ( i ) from 1-1-85 10 7-8-87 as a beldar , (ii ) from 1-4-89 to 31-10-89 as a 4th Class , and , ( iii ) from 1-2-92 to 31-3-92 again as a 4th class .

13. Now, I dwell on the remaining periods of employment of the workman by the non - applicant establishment . Evidently , neither the workman has completed 240 days of actual work during the spell from 1-4-89 to 31-10-89 nor in the last period from 1-2-92 to 31-3-92 . He has only completed 204 days in the second spell of engagement . Secondly, the workman has failed to produce on record any documentary evidence to prove this fact that he was employed as a 4th class during both these periods . He has produced the gate passes Ex . W-8 to W - 16 which pertain to the period of his first employment . Thus , neither the workman has been able to brought on the record any documentary evidence in support of his plea, nor he had completed 240 days of actual work in a calendar year during these two periods . Hence, he is not entitled to get the protection under section 25-F of the Act .

14. The Ld. representative for the workman has referred to the following decisions in support of his submission, but they do not bear the resemblance with thepresent controversy: ( 1981) 3 SCC 225 ; 1998 ( 1 ) RLR 209; RLR ( 1998 ) 266; 2003 (1 ) SC service Law Judgments 349 ; RLR 2002( 1 ) 518 ; RLR 2001 (3) 812.

15.Contrary to it, the Ld . representative for the non- applicant hasplaced his reliance upon (2004 ) 8 SCC 246 , the facts thereof are that the workmen were employed for the purpose ofdigging pits for erecting electric poles in the course of drawing electric wire and their employment was discontinued and intermittent during the period in question. On these facts , the Hon'ble Apex Court has observed that the nature on work could not be construed as a permanent job and the employment of the people in that local area for the limited job cannot be construed as an employment for a continuous and regular work of the Board. The Hon'ble Court further goes on to say that the employment of the workman was on a job requirement basis and was not for any continuous service required by 12. So far as the first period of employment is concerned , the workman to substantiate his plea of appointment by the non - applicant establishment has mainly relied upon the certificate Ex . W -7 issued by the Installation Officer which says that Sh . Rajendra (workman) has been working at this installation since 1-1- 85 as daily wages/beldar . It was issued on 15th April , 1985 . The non -applicant has not disputed this period , but his stand is that the workman was employed by the Installation Officer for the project work . The only document in this context adduced on behalf of the workman as alrcady pointed out is certificate Ex . W-7. In his cross - examination, the workman has admitted that neither any appointment letter nor any termination order was given to him. His further adınission is that the Installation Officer had employed him for setting up the transmitter and on installation ofthe transmitter, the project work was put to anend. He has further admitted that on completion of the installation work, all the concerned employees were disengaged. Thus, it is the clear admission of the workman thathe was engaged by the Installation Officer as a casual worker under a project whose employed was disengaged [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

the establishment . The present controversy is squarely covered by this decision and the submission made on behalf of the non - applicant that the employment of the workman was for the project work and after its completion the work came to an end , is fortified by the judicial pronouncement supra .

16. Accordingly , the workman's termination does not tantamount to retrenchment an he is not entitled to get the protection under Section 25- F of the Act. This pointis, therefore , decided against the workman, Point No. II

17. Now, I switch to the next point as to whether the non - applicant establishment has acted contrary to the provision under Section 25 - G of the Act by retaining the junior persons at the time of terminating the service of the workman?

18. It is difficult to be persuaded by the submission advanced on behalf of the workman that the non - applicant establishment has not brought on record the documents disclosing the names of those workmen who were employed along with the claimant. It is fairly settled law that the onus lies upon the workman to prove this factum and to indicate the names of those junior persons working in the establishment whose services were retained by the management at the time of terminating his service, But no such plea has been noted in his claim statement nor the names of such junior persons have been disclosed therein . This submission raised on behalf of the workman that on account of the non - production of such documents before the Court , the adverse interference should be drawn against the non -applicant establishment is not sustainable in view ofthe Hon'ble Supreme Court's observation made in (2004) 8 SCC 246. wherein the Hon'ble Apex Court has propounded that in the absence of the specific plea made on behalf of the workman , no adverse inference can be drawn against the establishment. Thus , the workman has failed to discharge the burden of this issue which is decided against him accordingly .

Point No. III

19. Lastly , the Ld . representative for the workman has also submitted that on 31-10-94, one employee named Sh . Prabhu Dayal retired on attaining the age of superannuation and the workman had submitted his applications Ex. W - 3 and W - 4 before the establishment for appointing him to this vacant post of 4th class . The ld. representative, therefore , contends that since the workman was a retrenched worker , an opportunity of employment ought to have been afforded to him by the non - applicant establishment , whereas this post was filled by recruiting another person . The submission has been sought to be countered on behalf of the non - applicant by stating that the regular appointment by the establishment is made by following the prescribed procedure .

1636 G1/05-35

5927

भारत का राजपत्र : जून 11 , 2005/ज्येष्ठ 21 , 1927

20.Under point no . I, it has been concluded that the workman was engaged on contractual basis in the project am completion of the project work , his service matically came to an end. On these facts , the workman cannot be considered to be a retrenched employee since the provision under exception ( oo) to Section 2 (bb) is attracted in thepresent controversy . Apart it , the workman has failed to disclose the name of any such person who was appointed by the establishment . His plea is therefore, vague and indefinite . Hence , the workman cannot avail the protection under Section 25 -H of the Act . The submission made on behalf of the workman , therefore , is repelled.

21. For the foregoing reasons , the workman has failed to establish that be is entitled for the protection under Sections 25 - F, 25 -G and 25 -H ofthe Act. Accordingly , be is entitled to no relief.

22. In the result , the reference is answered in the negative against the workman and in favour of the management and it is held that the action of the management ofAll IndiaRadio in terminating the service of the workman w.e.f. 7-8-1987 is legal and justified and the claim of the workman is rejected . An award is passed in these terms accordingly.

23. Let a copy of the award be sent to the Central Government forpublication under Section 17 (1 ) of the Act . R. C. SHARMA , Presiding Officer नई दिल्ली, 19 मई, 2005

का.आ. 2094.-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार ऑल इंडिया रेडियो के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालय, जयपुर के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या सी जी आई टी-7/2001 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 19-05-2005 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल-42012/186/94-आई . आर. ( डी. यू. ) ] कुलदीप राय वर्मा, डैस्क अधिकारी New Delhi , the 19th May, 2005

S.O. 2094. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. CGIT- 7/2004) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal- Labour Court , Jaipur now as shown in the Annexure , in the industrial dispute between the employers in relation to the management of All India Radio and their workman, which was received by the Central Government on 19-05-2005 .

[No. L -42012/ 186/94 - IR (DU) ] KULDIP RAI VERMA, Desk Officer 5928

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 11 , 2005 / JYAISTHA 21 , 1927

ANNEXURE

CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL -CUM -LABOUR COURT, JAIPUR Case No. CGIT/ 7/2004 .

ReferenceNo. L-42012/ 186/ 1994- IR(DU)

Sh . Kailash Chand ,

S/o Sh . Motilal Dhanka,

Madrampura , Post Mahrana,

Diggi Road,

[PART II-SEC. 3 ( ii) ] 2-11-91 , but the workman stopped working on his own without any prior intimation to the authorities . Retention ofjunior persons to the workman has also been denied on behalf ofthe non- applicants and it has been categorically stated that the workman has never completed 240 days of continuous service with the establishment .

4. In the rejoinder , the workman has reterated the facts as stated in the statement of claim.

.....Applicant

Tehsil Sanganer, Jaipur

Versus

1. Station Director ,

All India Radio , M. I. Road , Jaipur.

2. Installation Officer, All India Radio ,

Lines Road ,

5.Onthe pleadings of both the parties, the following points for determination were framed:-

L Whether the workman was appointed on 01-09-1990 to the post of Helper on daily wages by an oral order by the non -applicant, who continuously worked up to 01-11-1991 and whose service was terminated in contra- vention of theprovision under Section 25 -F of the Act?

....Non- applicants

Khatipura , Jaipur .

PRESENT :

Sh . R.C. Sharma, Presiding Officer

Forthe applicant

: Sh. Raj Kumar.

: Sh . T. P. Sharma For the non - applicants

Date of award

: 11-04-2005

AWARD

1. The Central Government in exercise of the powers conferred under Clause ' D ' of sub - Sections 1 to Section 10 ofthe Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (herein after referred to as the Act ' ) has referred the following industrial dispute for adjudication to this Tribunal which runs as under:-

"Whether the action of the management of Station Director, All India Radio , Jaipur in terminating the services of Sh . Kailash Chand isjust and fair? If not, to what relief the workman is entitled to ? " 2.The workman in his statement of claim has pleaded that he was initially appointed as a helper on 1-9-90 by the non -applicant establishment who continuously worked up to 1-11-91 , but his service was terminated on 2-11-91 without giving him one month's notice or pay in lieu ofthe notice and retrenchment compensation in violation of Section 25 - F of the Act . He has further stated that he had completed 240 days of continuous service under the employment of the non - applicant establishment and at the time of terminating his service the junior persons to him , viz. , Sh . Kalyan Sahay and Sh . Raju were retained in violation of Section 25 -G of the Act . He has also pleaded that after his termination one Sh . Radheyshyam was engaged by the establishment in contravention of Section 25-H of the Act . The workman has urged that he be taken back in the service with its continuity and other consequential benefits .

3.Disputing the claim filed by the workman , the non- applicants in their written - counter have averred that the workman was engaged as a casual labour to meet out the casual works in the establishment, who was not appointed as a helper by following the prescribed procedure may against the sanctioned post under the rules. It has been further denied that his service was ever terminated on II. Whether at the time of terminating the service ofthe workman the junior persons to him viz. Shri Kalyan Sahay and Raju were retained by the management in violation of Section 25 -G ofthe Act?

III . Whether after the termination of the workman the fresh hands viz . Shri Radheyshyam was engaged by the management?

M. relief, if any .

6. In the evidence , the workman has submitted his affidavit and on behalf of the non - applcants , the affidavit ofMW- 1 , Sh. Om Kumar Sharma, the Station Engineer , has been brought on the record. both these witnesses were cross - examined by the rival representative respectively.

7. I have heard both the parties and have scanned the record. Thepoint - wise discussion follows as under:-

Point No. I

8. The ld . representative for the workman contends that the workman had continuously worked w.e.f. 1-9-90 to 1-11-91 , but his service was terminated w.e.f. 2-11-91 in contravention of the provision under Section 25 - F of the Act . Theld. representative for the workman has also explained the delay caused in raising the industrial dispute by stating that the workman had moved an application before the Central Administrative Tribunal , which vide its order Annexure 2 dated 18-11-95 wasdisposed of with a direction to raise the dispute before the Conciliation Officer . Accordingly , he approached the Conciliation Officer who refused to refer the dispute and aggrieved with it, he preferred the writ petition before the Hon'ble High Court , which by its order dated 19-11-2003 Annexure 3 directed the competent Government to refer the industrial dispute to the competent forum . Theld. representative further contends that the workman had completed 240 days of continuous work with the non - applicant establishment and theld . representative has relied upon the affidavit of the workman and the notice Ex . 1 issued by the workman to the non - applicants.

5929 [भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र: जून 11 , 2005/ज्येष्ठ 21 , 1927

9. Responding to these submissions , the Ld . representative for the non - applicants submits that the workman had never completed 240 days of continuous work with the non - applicant establishment , who stopped working on his own and he was simply employed on casual basis to meet out the casual work in the department . It has also been urged on behalf of the non -applicants that the workman was working on a project.

Court to come to the conclusion that the workman, in fact, hadworked for 240 days in a year . In the referred case, the workman also failed to produce any proof of receipt of salary or wages for 240 days or order of engagement . The present controversy is squarely covered by the decision supra and after examining the facts and circumstances on the record , it is held that the workman has failed to discharge the burden of this issue. Accordingly , it is decided against the workman and in favour of the non- applicants.

10. I have bestowed my thoughtful consideration to the rival contentions .

Points No. II

11. Now , the question which calls for the determination is whether the workman has completed 240 days of actual service in a calendar year preceding to this date of termination ?

16. The ld. representative contends that at the time of terminating the service of the workman the junior persons named in the affidavit were retained by the establishment .Again, the ld. representative has relied upon the affidavit of the workman on this point also . On behalf ofthe non-applicants , this submission has been opposed by arguing that no junior person was retained by the non- applicant establishment .

12. To substantiate the plea of completion of 240 days of actual service , the workman has submitted his affidavit and the notice Ex . Annexure 1 dated 12-11-91 which has been addressed to the Station Director, All India Radio , Jaipur . It says that the workman was engaged to the post of helper on daily wages basis on 1-9-90 , who worked upto 1-11-91 and had completed 240 days of continuous service in the calendar year and who was terminated without complying with the legal requirements . Besides it , no documentary evidence has been led by the workman to prove his submission that he had completed 240 days of continuous service .

13. The workman in his cross - examination has admitted that he was orally engaged as a casual labour and his service was terminated orally.

17. The workman in his affidavit has stated that while terminating his service the junior persons to him , viz. , Raju and Kalyan Sahay were retained by the non- applicant establishment . But no documentary evidence could be led on this point which could suggest that such persons were also employed by the non - applicant establishment along with the engagement of the workman. This fact has been denied by MW- 1 , Om Kumar Sharma in his cross- examination who has deposed that at the relevant time i.e. at the time of disengagement of the workman no suchperson were working with the establishment . Hence , theworkman could not be able to produce any trustworthy evidence on this point . This point, therefore , is decided against the workman and in favour of the non -applicants .

Point No. III

14. As against it, MW- 1 , Om Kumar Sharma has denied the factum of completion of 240 days of continuous service of the workman with the non- applicant establishment and has categorically stated that the notice Annexure 1 was not received by the establishment and has emphatically denied that the workman had not worked from 1-9-90 to 1-11-91 under the employment of the department.

18. The workman in his claim statement has named Sh. Radheyshyam who was engaged as casual labour by the establishment subsequent to the termination of the workman. But in his affidavit , he has not reiterated his name and no documentary evidence could be led on this point too. As such no evidence is available on the record which may substantiate the plea of the workman that subsequent to his termination , fresh hands were recruited by the establishment without giving him an opportunity ofemployment. As such , this point is decided against the workmanand in favour of the non - applicants .

RELIEF

19. For the foregoing reasons , the workman is entitled to no relief.

20. In the result, the reference is answered in the negative against the workman and in favour of the management and it is held that the action of the non- applicant establishment in terminating the service of the workman is just and fair. The claim of the workman is rejected : An award is passed in these terms accordingly.

21. Let a copy of the award be sent to the Central Government forpublication under Section 17 ( 1 ) of the Act.

R.C. SHARMA , Presiding Officer 15. Thus, the workman has failed to bring out any cogent evidence on the record to substantiate his plea thathe had completed 240 days of actual work in a calendar yearprecedingto his date of termination. On this point he has led his oral evidence only which could not be supported by any documentary evidence and his oral evidence is of feeble nature which cannot be relied upon inthe lack of some definite and positive evidence. The ld . representative for the non -applicants in support of his submission that merely on the basis of the oral testimony of the workman, it cannot be presumed that he had completed 240 days of actual work with the establishment , has referred to the decision reported in (2002) 3 SCC 55 . The Hon'ble Supreme Court in this decision has propounded that when the claimant pleads that he had completed 240 days in the year preceding to his termination, which was denied by the appellant, then it was for the claimant to lead the evidence to show that he had in fact worked for 240 days in a year preceding to his termination . The Hon'ble Court further goes on to say that filing his affidavit only is his own evidence in his favour and it cannot be regarded as sufficient evidence for any 5930

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 11 , 2005 /JYAISTHA 21 , 1927

[PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii) ] नई दिल्ली, 19 मई , 2005

का.आ. 2095- 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 सं . 1 , चण्डीगढ के पंचाट (संदर्भ संख्या 398/2000 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 19-05-2005 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल-40012/314/2000- आई.आर. ( डी.यू. ) ]

कुलदीप राय वर्मा, डैस्क अधिकारी New Delhi , the 19th May , 2005

His authorised representative Shri O.P. Singh is present . Learned representative for the management Shri Shiv Kumar requested for closing the case as the workman is already employed and not interested in persuing this reference anddespite notice at his residence and two visits of process server he has not appeared . Workman A.R. submits that workman is not contacting nor giving response to their calls and it appears that he is not interested in persuing the reference as he has already employed. Hence court may take necessary action on the requested of he management . In view of the submission of the A.R. of the workman and submission of management's authorised representative , it is clear that workman is not interested to persue the present reference and the same is returned for want of prosecution vide separate award of even date . Central Govt . be informed. File be consigned to record.

RAJESH KUMAR, Presiding Officer नई दिल्ली, 19 मई , 2005

S.O. 2095. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central * Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No.398/ 2000) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal - cum- Labour Court No. 1 , Chandigarh now as shown in the Annexure, in the industrial dispute between the employers in relation to the management of Deptt . of Telecom and their workmen, which was received by the Central Government on 19-05-2005.

[No. L-40012/314/2000 - IR (DU) ]

KULDIP RAI VERMA, Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

का.आ. 2096.- 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 सं. 1 , चण्डीगढ के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 376/2000 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 19-05-2005 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल-40012/307/2000 - आई.आर. (डी.यू.) ] कुलदीप राय वर्मा, डेस्क अधिकारी BEFORE SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, PRESIDING OFFICER, CENTRAL GOVT . INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAI - CUM - LABOUR COUR- 1 , CHANDIGARH

Case No. I.D. 398/2000

New Delhi , the 19th May , 2005

Shri Chander Pal son of Shri Velay Ram , House No. 121 -A , Sector 30 -B , Chandigarh .

..Applicant

Versus

The General Manager, Telecom, Sector - 18, Chandigarh .

.Respondent

Appearances :

S.O. 2096. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 376/ 2000) ofthe Central Government Industrial Tribunal -cum- Labour Court , No. 1 , Chandigarh now as shown in the Annexure , in the industrial dispute between the employers in relation to the management of Deptt. of Telecom and their workmen, which was received by the Central Government on 19-05-2005.

For the Workman : Shri O.P. Singh

For the Mana ment : Shri Shiv Kumar

[No. L-40012/307/2000 -IR (DU) ] KULDIP RAI VERMA, Desk Officer AWARD

Passed on 8-4-2005

ANNEXURE

Central Govt . vide notificationNo. L -40012/314/2000/ IR (D.U. ) dated 28-9-2000 has referred the following dispute to this Tribunal for adjudication :-

BEFORE SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, PRESIDING OFFICER, CENTRAL GOVT. INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL- CUM-LABOUR COURT, 1 , CHANDIGARH

Case No. I.D. 376/2000

"Whether the action of the management of General Manager. Telecom . , Chandigarh in terminating the services of Shri Chander Pal son of Shri Velay Ram isjust and legal? If not, to what relief the workman is entitled and from which date ? "

Shri Laxman Majhi Son of Shri Jag Lal Majhi , House No. 1353 , Mauli Jagran Complex, Chandigarh .

...Applicant 2. Case repeatedly called . Workman is not present .

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3( ii ) ]

भारत का राजपत्र: जून 11 , 2005/ज्येष्ठ 21 , 1927

Versus

(1) The ChiefGeneral Manager , Telecom, Punjab Circle, Sector-34, Chandigarh .

(2) The Principal General Manager, Telecom, Sector- 18 , Chandigarh,

Respondent APPEARANCES :

For the Workman : Shri O.P. Singh

For the Management : Shri Shiv Kumar

AWARD

Passed on 8-4-2005

Central Govt . vide notification No. L-40012/307/2000/ IR (D.U.) dated 25-9-2000 has referred the following dispute to this Tribunal for adjudication:

"Whether the action of the management of Department ofTelecom . Chandigarh in terminating the services of Shri Laxaman Majhi son of Shri Jag Lal w.e.f. 27-2-99 is just and legal ? If not , to what reliefthe workman is entitled ? "

2. Case repeatedly called . Workman is not present. Hisauthorised representative Shri O.P. Singh is present. Learned representative for the management Shri Shiv Kumar requested for closing the case as the workman is not interested in persuing this reference and despite notice at his residence and two visits of process server he has not appeared and it is reported that he left for his village and address is not known . Workman A.R. submits that workman is not contacting nor giving response to their calls and it appears that he is not interested in persuing the reference .Hence court may take necessary action on the request ofthe management . In view of the submission of the A.R. of the workman and submission of management's authorised representative , it is clear that workman is not interested to persue the present reference and the same is returned for want of prosecution vide separate award of even date . Central Govt . be informed. Filebe consigned to record .

RAJESH KUMAR, Presiding Officer नई दिल्ली, 19 मई , 2005

का.आ. 2097.- 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 . 1 चण्डीगढ के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 164/2001 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 19-05-2005 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल-40012/ 5/ 2001- आई.आर. ( डी.यू. ) ]

कुलदीप राय वर्मा, डेस्क अधिकारी

5931 New Delhi , the 19th May, 2005

S.O. 2097. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the Award ( Ref. No. 164/ 2001) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal -cum- Labour Court, No. 1 , Chandigarh now as shown in the Annexure, in the industrial dispute between the employers in relation to the management of Deptt. of Telecom and their workman, which was received by the Central Government on 19-05-2005 .

[No. L -40012/5/2001 - IR (DU) ] KULDIP RAI VERMA, Desk Officer ANNEXURE

BEFORE SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, PRESIDING OFFICER, CENTRAL GOVT. INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM- LABOUR COURT,-1 , CHANDIGARH

Case No. L.D. 164/2001

Shri Bharat Kumar C/o Shri R. Sharma, H.N. 372 , Sector- 20A,, Chandigarh .

Applicant

Versus

(1) The ChiefGeneral Manager , Telecom, Punjab Circle, Sector-34, Chandigarh.

(2)The Principal General Manager, Telecom, Sector- 18 , Chandigarh,

Respondent APPEARANCES :

FortheWorkman : Shri O.P. Singh

FortheManagement : Shri Shiv Kumar AWARD

Passed on 8-4-2005

Central Govt . Vide notification No. L -40012/5/2001/ IR (D.U. ) dated 12-4-2001 has referred the following dispute to this Tribunal for adjudication:

"Whether the action of Chief General Manager , Telecom , Punjab Circle , and the Principal General Manager, Telecom, Chandigarh district in ordering disengagement/termination of services of Shri Bharat Kumar a workman engaged through contractor Shri R.K. Mittal w.e.f. 27-2-1999 is just and legal ? If not, to what relief the workman is entitled and from which date ? "

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 11 , 2005/JYAISTHA 21 , 1927

[PART II- SEC. 3 ( ii) ]

Versus

(1) The Principal General Manager , Telecom, Sector- 18 , Chandigarh,

Respondent

APPEARANCES :

For the Workman

None

: Shri G.C. Babbar

FortheManagement

AWARD

Passed on 4-5-2005

not appeared and it is reported that he left for his village and address is not known. Workman A.R. submits that workman is not contacting nor giving response to their calls and it appears that he is not interested in persuing the reference. Hence court may take necessary action on the request of the management . In view of the submission of the A.R. of the workman and submission of management's authorised representative , it is clear that workman is not interested to persue the present reference and the same is returned for want of prosecution vide seperate award of even date . Central Govt . be informed. Filebe consigned to record.

RAJESH KUMAR, Presiding Officer

Central Govt . vide notification No. L -40012/240/2001/ IR (D.U. ) dated 06-11-2001 has referred the following dispute to this Tribunal for adjudication:

नई दिल्ली, 19 मई, 2005

"Whether the action of the management of Department of Telecom . Chandigarh in terminating the services of Shri Banarsi Majhi son of Shri Bhagwan Majhi w.e.f. 27-2-99 is just and legal ? Ifnot, to what relief the workman is entitled ? " का.आ. 2098.- 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 सं .. 1 चण्डीगढ के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 325/2001 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 19-05-2005 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल -40012 /240/2001- आई.आर. ( डी.यू. ) ]

कुलदीप राय वर्मा, डैस्क अधिकारी

New Delhi , the 19th May, 2005

2. Learned counsel for the management submitted that in this case the workman is not taking any interest despite several notices were issued even one through Regd. A.D. On 14-4-05 Shri D.R. Kainth , Advocate appeared but he also did not appear thereafter , for the workman, court notice was issued on 15-3-05 for today . Today neither the advocate nor the workman appeared despite registered notice. The management advocate Shri Babbar submitted that workman appears not to be interested, hence reference may be returned for want of prosecution.

S.O. 2098.- In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the Award ( Ref. No. 325/ 2001) ofthe Cesntral Government Industrial Tribunal -cum- Labour Court , No. 1 , Chandigarh now as shown in the Annexure, in the industrial dispute between the employers in relation to the management of Deptt . of Telecom and their workman , which was received by the Central Government on 19-05-2005 .

[No. L-40012/240/2001 -IR (DU)]

KULDIP RAI VERMA, Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

3. In view of the above submission and may perusal ofthe court file, I found that workman put his appearance firstly on 22-4-02 through one Vijay Kumar , Thereafter none appeared for workman on 17-1-03 . 5-5-03. As none appeared on behalf of the workman on 21-7-04 , again on 28-1-05 and workman also not appeared on 14-2-05 . Though Shri D.R. Kainth noted the date once . Thereafter no one appeared on 15-3-05 for workman and again on 4-5-05 for the workman despite registered A.D. notice . It appears that workman is not interested in persuing his case . Therefore, as workman is not interested in prosecuting his case as he has not filed any rejoinder and not filed any affidavit in evidence , present reference is returned to the Ministry for want ofprosecution . Central Govt. be informed. File be consigned to record.

RAJESH KUMAR, Presiding Officer BEFORE SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, PRESIDING OFFICER, CENTRAL GOVT. INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM - LABOUR COURT, 1, CHANDIGARH.

Case No. I.D. 325/2001

नई दिल्ली, 19 मई , 2005

Shri Banarsi Majhi son of Shri Bhagwan Majhi , House No. 1163 , Mauli Jagran Complex , Chandigarh .

का.आ. 2099.- औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार दूर संचार विभाग के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबंद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच,

.Applicant [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

5933

भारत का राजपत्र: जून 11 , 2005/ज्येष्ठ 21 , 1927

अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालय नं. 1 चण्डीगढ के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 407/2000 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 19-05- 2005 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल-40012/ 5/2001- आई.आर. ( डी.यू. ) ]

कुलदीप राय वर्मा, डेस्क अधिकारी New Delhi , the 19th May, 2005

S.O. 2099.-In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No.407 / 2000) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal/ Labour Court , No. 1 , Chandigarh now as shown in the Annexure , in the industrial dispute between the employers in relation to the management of Deptt. of Telecom and their workmen , which was received by the Central Government on 19-05-2005 .

[No. L -40012/5/2001 -IR (DU)]

KULDIP RAI VERMA , Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

BEFORE SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, PRESIDING OFFICER, CENTRAL GOVT. INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM - LABOUR COURT 1 , CHANDIGARH

Case No. I.D. 407/2000

Shri Jasbir Singh C/o Shri R. Sharma , H.No. 372 , Sector-

...Applicant 20A, Chandigarh

Versus

( 1 ) The Chief General Manager , Telecom, Punjab Circle, Sector -34 , Chandigarh

Respondents (2) The Principal General Manager , Telecom, Sector- 18 , Chandigarh .

APPEARANCES :

For the Workman : Shri O.P. Singh

Shri Shiv Kumar

For the Management :

AWARD

Passed on 8-4-2005

Central Govt . Vide notification No. L -40012/5/2001/ IR (D.U. ) dated 12-4-2001 has referred the following dispute to this Tribunal for adjudication:

"Whether the action of General Manager , Telecom . Punjab Circle , and the Principal General Manager, Telecom , Chandigarh district in ordering disengagement/ termination of services of Shri Jasbir Singh a workman engaged through contractor Shri R.K. Mittal w.e.f. 27-2-1999 is just and legal ? If not, to what relief the workman is entitled and from which date ?"

2. Case repeatedly called . Workman is not present . Hisauthorised representative Shri O.P. Singh is present . Learned representative for the management Shri Shiv Kumar requested for closing the case as the workman is not interested in persuing this reference and despite notice athis residence and two visits of process server he has not appeared and it is reported that he left for his new address and new address is not known. Workman A.R. submits that workman is not contacting nor giving response to their calls and it appears that he is not interested in persuing the reference. Hence court may take necessary action on the request of the management. In view of the submission of the A.R. of the workman and submission of management's authorised representative , it is clear that workman is not interested to persue the present reference and the same is returned for want of prosecution vide seperate award of even date. Central Govt. be informed. Filebe consigned to record.

RAJESH KUMAR, Presiding Officer नई दिल्ली, 19 मई, 2005

का.आ. 2100.- औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार मिलिट्री फार्म के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालय नं. 1 चण्डीगढ़ के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 415/2000 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 19-05-2005 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल -14012/54/2000- आई.आर. ( डी.यू. ) ]

कुलदीप राय वर्मा, डेस्क अधिकारी New Delhi , the 19th May , 2005

S.O. 2100. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) , the Central Government hereby publishes the Award ( Ref. No. 415/ 2000) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal / Labour Court, No. 1 , Chandigarh now as shown in the Annexure , in the industrial dispute between the employers in relation to the management of Military Farm and their workmen, which was received by the Central Government on 19-05-2005 .

[No. L - 14012/54/2000- IR (DU) ]

KULDIP RAI VERMA , Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

CENTRAL GOVT. INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM- LABOUR COURT -L, CHANDIGARH Presiding Officer: Shri Rajesh Kumar Case No. I.D. 415/2000

Shri Sham Lal

Son of Mam Chand ,

Village Dhulkot, P.O. Baldev Nagar ,

Ambala ( Haryana)

Applicant 5934

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 11 , 2005/ JYAISTHA 21 , 1927

Versus

The Officer Incharge , Military Farm, Ambala Cantt.

Haryana

[PART II SEC . 3 ( ii)]

Respondent

Appearances:

Forthe Workman : Shri M.M. Putney

For the Management Shri K.K. Thakur

AWARD

Passed on 5-5-2005

Central Govt . vide Notification No. L - 14012/54/2000/ IR (D.U. ) dated 30th of October , 2000 has referred the following dispute to this Tribunal for adjudication:

"Whether the action of the management of Military Farm , Ambala Cantt. in terminating the services of Shri Sham Lal son of Mam Chand , w.e.f. 17-11-1998 is just , and legal ? If not, to what relief the workman is entitled?"

2. Brief facts of the case are that workman filed claim statement stating that he was appointed as regular employee of the respondent management through employment exchange and was selected by a duly constituted selection committee and joined on 10-4-95 and worked continuously and regularly as shed cleaner when his services were abruptly terminated on 17-11-1998 after about three and half year. Dispute was raised by the workman inMarch, 1999 and on failure of conciliation, the matter was referred through the present reference . That the workman was recruited alongwith Balbir Singh and Nasib Singh and their cases were also pending in this court and were decided in settlement on the assurance by the management. The workman has completed more than 240 days of service in accordance with the provisions of the I.D. Act 1947. That the management has issued repeated intructions to dispense with the services of those workman who had not been recruited through/ sponsored by the employment exchange , but instead of terminating the services of those employees the management terminated the services of the workman despite the fact that C.A.T. Chandigarh vide their decision dated 21-4-95 in OA No. 1224 /HR of 1993 had quashed the order of regularization of service who were recruited other wise than through employment exchange . The management had not regularize the services who were through employment exchange . The Management has framed and circulated standing orders governing the conditions of service of the workmen and according to these standing orders , recruitment of casual workmen has to be made through employment exchange and such recruited employees are to be brought on regular establishment after six months . The workman was also granted temporary status but those employees who were not recruited through employment exchange and had not granted temporary status and yet retained in service . The name of some of them are Sham Dev , son of Bandhu , Doodh Nath son of Suder , Ramesh son of Swarna , Smt. Poonam , Surinder Kumar son of Sadhu Ram , Kans Raj son of Kampta Parshad, Man Bahadur son of Sher Bahadur , Chajju Singh son ofBaishakhi Singh, Baldev Singh Son of Karam Singh, Gurdev Singh son of Moti Singh, Dharam Raj son of Sadhu Singh , Smt. Bimla wife of Nath , Krishan Kumar son of Jai Singh.

3. Thereafter , after filling the claim statement by the workman , the management did not file the written statement on several dates and the management was proceeded exparte on 15-10-2001 and the case was fixed for exparte evidence . Thereafter the management inoved an application for setting aside exparte order passed by my learned predecessor and the application of the management vide order dated 25-9-02 was dismissed holding that on perusal of the file it is very clear that the rep. of the management has for the first time filed his letter of authority on 5-3-02 and on the date i.e. 15-10-2001 Shri K.K. Thakur was not the authorized representative of management. The application filed by the management has also not been supported by any affidavit on behalf of the management . Thus 1 find no ground to set - aside the exparte order dated 15-10-01 and the application to this effect is rejected . The case is at the stage of evidence of theworkman.

Putup on6-3-2003 and the management was through outexparte without written statement. The management also did not file any affidavit in this case.

4. The workman in his exparte evidence produced himself as WW1 and proved his affidavit as Ex . W1 .

5. I have heard the arguments advanced by both the parties. Learned counsel for the workman Mr. Madan Mohan submits that there is no evidence of the management in this case to rebut the claim and evidence oftheworkman . The managcinent did not file their affidavit and the application of the management for setting aside exparte order was also dismissed by the learned predecessor of this Court . Hence there is the rebuttal of the evidence of the workman . The workman by his own affidavit and other documents filed which were given to the management which are Ex . W2 list of selected candidates which include the name of the workman , Ex . W3 information to the employment exchange regarding selection and engagement of the workmen as casual labour (shed cleaner) , Ex. W4 policy of casual industrial and non industrial employees issued by the Army Headquarter, New Delhi . Ex. W5 is letter dated 6-6-92 , Ex . W6 are the standing order for casual labour in Central Government . Ex. W7 is thejudgment of CAT which quashed the order ofthe management in similar cases . Ex. W8 is the copy of letter dated 31-3-93 , Ex . W9 and Ex. W10 are the orders of CAT dated 19-7-2000 and Ex. W11 is retrenchment order of Nasib Singh . Learned counsel for the workman 5935 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र: जून 11 , 2005/ज्येष्ठ 21 , 1927 .

management is exparte, but the workman has failed to prove his case. The workman has not completed 240 days of service in a calendar year . The workman was engaged as a casual labourer on as and when required basis through employment exchange and temporary status was granted to the workman erroneously. As per instructions status canbegrantedto only those who are in service on 1-9-93 and have rendered continuous service of at least one year (theyhave been engaged for 240 days) as on 1-9-93 i.e. those who have not completed 240 days are not entitled to such benefits . He submitted that workman is not entitled to any relief. He submitted that workman was gainfully employed and temporary status was withdrawn . The workman has not legal and vested right to continue in service if no regular post is available . The workman was engaged on daily wage as and when required basis and there was no work available with the management and as such the workman is not entitled to any relief and reference may be answered in favour of the management .

also referred tojudgement 1979 SLR page 223 , ajudgment ofour own High Court wherein it is held that workman is ⚫entitled to backwages with reinstatement with continuity ofservice and it if for the employer to raise and establish the circumstances necessitating departure, (ii) 1995 SSC (L& S) between Swadeshi Cotton Mills Vs. Labour Court- I, Kanpur and others wherein it is held that workman demand for creation of post and fixation of his salary in thatpost and there was a denial of such pay to the workman and it is held that labour court has thejurisdiction to create the post of designer sprayman, ( iii ) 1995 Supreme Court Cases L& S 193 Manorma Verma Vs. State of Bihar wherein the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that once termination iffound to be illegal consequential order for grant ofwages must follow unless there are reasons justifying a departure from normal order i.e. appellant not gainfully employed elsewhere during the period of termination and entitled to back -wages from the date of termination till reinstatement (iv) 2003 (3 ) SCT Maninder Kaur Vs. Statement ofPunjab wherein it is held that engaging daily wager on casual basis is one of the recognized source of employment and non availability of sanctioned regular posts/vacancies is no ground to deny such right to workers.

6. Learned counsel for the workman while summing up his arguments submitted that in view of the law referred by him above and that management is exparte and even written statement is not on record and that management by compromising in two cases Nasib Singh and Balbir Singh, and giving her benefits the workman is entitled for reinstatment and backwages with all consequential benefits as the workman has completed more than 240 days and he obtained status of permanent workman and his abrupt retrenchment is a violation of Section 25F of the I.D. Act 1947. He submitted that there is no evidence ofthemanagement on record . The workman was appointed after following the due procedure and his name was sent and sponsored by the employment exchange and a duly constituted committee interviewed the workman and other candidates and found him fit and selected him and also informed the employment exchange for removing the name of the workman from the employment seekers from the employment exchange . He also submitted that workman in his affidavit on oath had stated that he has not been gainfully employed since his services were terminated. Despite his best efforts he has not been able to procure any regular job and his name has been struck off from the employment exchange and he has now become over age and he has been maintaining himself by doing odd jobs as and when available without any regular source of income and that he has support of his father . Learned counsel for the workman submits that workman has proved his case and reference may be answered in his favour.

8. In view of the above submissions and my perusal of the evidence and documents on record filed by the workman and which were not disputed I am of the considered view that there is no pleadings of the management , no written statement was filed and the management was proceeded exparte and thereafter exparte . evidence ofthe workman was recorded . The management has taken a stand in the arguments that workman is not entitled as he has not completed 240 days whereas the workman stated that he has completed 240 day and that he got the status of permanent workman and that he was duly appointed through a regular process and his name was called from employment exchange and employment exchange sponsored his name and thereafter a duly constituted committee of the management interviewed the workman and other candidates and ultimately selected the workman . After his selection he joined services on 10-4-95 and since then continued to work and as the management abruptly terminated his services from 17-11-1998 and upto that time workman worked continuously for the period of three years and seven months and has completed 240 days. Learned counsel for theworkman has submitted that neither management gave any notice retrenchment compensation as required U / S 25 of the I.D. Act 1947. In view of the above, I am of the considered view that when a person joined through the process of employment exchange and after through interview by a duly constituted committee was found fit and he joined duty on 10-4-1995 and after working for three years and seven months as completed 240 days processing one year from 17-11-98 was terminated from service without notice and retrenchment compensation , ofviolation of Section 25 of the I.D. Act, 1947. In view of the violation of mandatory provisions mentioned above andwithout following the process terminating his services and other who were not appointed through employment 7. On the other hand learned counsel for the management Shri K.K. Thakur submits that although the

1636GI/2005-36 5936

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 11 , 2005 / JYAISTHA 21 , 1927

exchange were kept in service is quite illegal and in my view such order of termination is illegal and liable to be set- aside . 1 found that in view of the law referred by workman if the termination if found illegal , against the provisions of I.D. Act 1947 , he is entitled for full back wages from the date of termination till his reinstatement when workman has also proved that he is not gainfully einployed and was getting odd jobs without any source of regular income . In the circumstances Management is through out exparte, there is no plea of the management and no rebuttal of the evidence of the workman , I find that workman has proved that the action of the management of Military Farm Ambala Cantt, in terminating the services of Sham Lal w.e.f. 17-11-1998 is not just and not legal andhe was not gainfully employed till date.

9. Therefore , as the termination of workman is illegal and not just as held by me above , I further hold that workman entitled to be reinstated from the date of his terminationto the post he was holding on 17-11-1998 . Hence the workman is hereby ordered to be reinstated from 17-11-1998.

10. As regards other financial benefits i.e. back wages . I find that workman has proved that he was not gainfully engaged throughout and doing odd work and living on with the help of his father , he is therefore , entitled to full service benefits with back wages from the date of termination till the date of passing of the award. Accordingly the reference is answered in favour of the workman. Central Govt. be informed . File be consigned to record.

RAJESH KUMAR, Presiding Officer Chandigarh.

नई दिल्ली, 20 मई, 2005

का.आ. 2101.-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 ( 1947 का14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार दी बैंक ऑफ राजस्थान लि० के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालय जयपुर के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या केस सं. सी० जी० आई ०टी०-53/2004 ) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 19-05-20 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

:सं. एल-12012/102/2004- आई.आर. ( बी-1 ) ] अजय कुमार, डेस्क अधिकारी New Delhi . the 20th May , 2005

S.O. 2101.-In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Dispate Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the Award ( Case No. CGIT- 53/2004 ) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal- cum-Labour Court , Jaipur, now as shown in the Annexure, in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of The Bank of Rajasthan Ltd. and

[PART II- SEC. 3 (ii) ]

their workmen, which was received by the Central Government on 19-5-2005.

[No. L - 12012/ 102/2004 - IR (B - 1 ) ] AJAY KUMAR, Desk Officer ANNEXURE

CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL- CUM- LABOUR COURT, JAIPUR

Case No. CGIT - 53/ 2004

Reference No. L - 12012 / 102/ 2004 - IR (B - 1)

......Applicant

Smt.Bimla Kumari Gupta, W/o Sh. R. K. Khandelwal , R/oE -45 , Ambabari , Jaipur

Versus

TheManaging Director,

The Bank of Rajasthan Ltd. , Head Office , Sardar Patel Marg ,

.Non- applicant

Jaipur(Rajasthan)

Present:

Presiding Officer : SH . R.C. SHARMA : None

Forthe applicant

Forthe non - applicant Sh. Alok Fatehpuria

Date ofaward : 20-4-2005

AWARD

1. The Central Government in exercise of the powers conferred under Clause ' D' of Sub- sections 1 & 2 ( A) to Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 (hereinafter referred to as the ' Act' ) has referred the following industrial Dispute for adjudication to this Tribunal which runs as under:

"Whether the action of the management of the Bank ofRajasthan Ltd. , Jaipur for not accepting the pension option of Smt . Bimla Kumari Gupta, Retired employee is fair and justified ? If not, what relief the applicant is entitled to ? "

2. The workman in her statement of claim has pleaded that she was appointed as a Clerk on 11-3-64 in the non- applicant bank, who was promoted to the post of the Head Clerk in the year 1982 and on attaining the age of superannuation , she was retired on 31-10-2003 . She has further stated that both the parties are governed by the Bank of Rajasthan Ltd. (Employees ) Pension Rules , 1996 , which are applicable to those employees also who were in service as on 31-10-93 and that while she was posted as a Head Clerk in the Bani Park Branch of the bank , she had opted for the pension prior to the stipulated date i.c. 26-1-96. According to her averments , her signatures were verified on the pension form by the then Branch Manager wherein she had clearly mentioned that the countributory Provident Fund plus its interest be transferred in her pension fund . She has also stated that on 10-5-2000 , she addressed a letter to the Assistant General Manager , Salary [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

Cell Pensions that in her application opting for pension she had mistakenly mentioned the date of its presentation as 20-2-96 in place of 20-1-96 which may be treated as 20-1-96 for further action. But the bank vide its letter dated 27-5-2000 , declined his request . Thereafter several representations were made by her , but ultimately the bank vide its letter dated 17-9-2003 intimated her that she had not submitted the option form within the stipulated period. The claimant has urged that the refusal made on behalf of thebank for grant of her pension be declared as unjustified and illegal and the non - applicant bank may be directed to provide him the pensionary benefits .

3. Resisting the claim of the workman, the non- applicant in his written- counter has averred that the present dispute is not covered by Section 2(A) of the Act, which has been raised individually by the workman and has not been espoused by the Union and, therefore , it is not an industrial dispute under Section 2( k) of the Act . It has been further stated that the claimant had not given the option for the pension, that the last extended date of submission for the option was 14-12-98 and till that date , no option for pension on behalf of the workman was received in the bank. It is alleged by the non - applicant that the workman for the first time had presented her option form with her letter dated 5-5-2000 before the bank, wherein she had narrated that on 20-2-96 , she had submitted the option form to the bank . It is also pleaded in the written- counter , that despite the fact that the bank was contributing in her provident fund, she had not brought into the notice of the bank that she had opted for the pension till her date of retirement and on her retirement after availing the retiral benefits including the provident fund, she has malafidely raised this dispute .

4. On the pleadings of both the parties , the following points for determination were framed:-

I Whether the claimant Smt. Vimla Kumari Gupta is entitled to get the pension as a retired employee of the non - applicant bank ? BOA

BONA IL Whether the instant dispute is not covered under Section 2- A the of LD . Act ?

III Relief, if any.

5. The workman was afforded ample opportunity for adducing her affidavit in the evidence but she failedto submit it before the Court and on 11-4-2005, on account of her non - appearance , her evidence was closed. The non- applicant has chosen not to produce any evidence.

6. I have heard the ld . representative for the non- applicant have scanned the record . The point -wise discussion follows as under :-

PointNo. I

7. Needless to state that no evidence has been led on this point on behalf of the workman . The ld . representative for the non -applicant has contended that when the evidence has not been brought on the record on behalf of the workman, the Court cannot dispose of the lis

5937

भारत का राजपत्र: जून 11 , 2005/ज्येष्ठ 21 , 1927

between the parties upon the pleadings and has relied upon 2004 FJR- Reports AP 844.

8. In the present case , as is evident , the workman has not even filed her affidavit to substantiate her plea that she is entitled for the pension, therefore , she has failed to establish her right . The submission made on behalf of the non - applicant is fortified by the judicial decision supra . Accordingly , this point is decided against the workman and in favour of the non -applicant .

PointNo. II

9. The ld. representative contends that undisputedly the dispute has been raised by the workman herself which comes under Section 2(A) of the Act and the present dispute could only be raised by a number of workman or by the Union, therefore, according to his contention, the dispute is not tenable in view of Section 2(k) of the Act .

10. Section 2 (k ) of the Act defines the Industrial Dispute as any dispute between employers and employers , between employers and workmen and between the workmen and workmen , which is connected with the employment of any person. Section 2 (A) says that where any employer discharges , dismisses or terminates the service of an individual workman, any dispute between thatworkman and his employer shall be deemed to be an Industrial Dispute. It, therefore, follows that the individual workman can raise his dispute only regarding his discharge, dismissal or termination from service .

11. Thus , the requirement of Section 2(A) is that when a workman is discharged, dismissed or terminated from the service , then in such an event a dispute can be raised against the employer by the workman himself, whereas the requirement of Section 2 (K) is that if a dispute has arisen between the employer and a number of the workmen, it can be raised by such workmen or by the Union for individual workman. Evidently, the present dispute relating to the grant of pensionary benefit to the workman is not espoused by the Union. Therefore , in the individual capacity the claimant cannot raise such industrial dispute and it is not tenable in view of the aforestated legal position . As such, this point is decided in favour of the non - applicant bank and against the workman.

RELIEF

12. For the aforestated reasons , the workman is entitled to no relief.

13. Consequently , the reference is answered in the negative against the workman and in favour of the management and it is held that the action of the management of non -applicant bank for not accepting the pension optionof the claimant is fair and justified. The claim ofthe workman is rejected . An award is passed in these terms accordingly.

14. Let a copy of the award be sent to the Central Government for publication under Section 17 ( 1 ) of the Act .

R.C. SHARMA , Presiding Officer 5938

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 11. 2005 / JYAISTHA 21. 1927

श्रम एवं रोजगार मंत्रालय नई दिल्ली, 13 मई, 2005

का.आ. 2102.- कर्मचारी राज्य बीमा अधिनियम, 1948 (1948 का 34 ) की धारा 1 की उप - धारा ( 3 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए, केन्द्रीय सरकार एतद्वारा 1 जून, 2005 को उस तारीख के रूप में नियत करती है, जिसको उक्त अधिनियम के अध्याय 4 (44 व 45 धारा के सिवाय जो पहले से प्रवृत्त हो चुकी है ) अध्याय 5 और 6 [ धारा 76 की उप- धारा ( 1 ) और धारा 77 , 78 , 79 और 81 के सिवाय जो पहले ही प्रवृत्त की जा चुकी है । के उपबंध पंजाब के निम्नलिखित क्षेत्रों में प्रवृत्त होंगे , अर्थात्, -

क्र.सं.

तहसील जिला राजस्व ग्राम कानाम

हदबस्त संख्या

244

पायल

दौराहा

लुधियाना 2. कानेच

220

लुधियाना

3. जसपाल बांगर 259

लुधियाना

4. खाकट

234

लुधियाना

पायल

243

राजगढ़

लुधियाना

150

खन्ना

6. जसपालों

लुधियाना 7.

247

पायल लुधियाना मल्लीपुर

8. कादों

पायल

246

लुधियाना

[संख्या एस -38013/ 24/ 2005 - एस.एस. - 1 ]

के. सी. जैन, निदेशक

[PART II- SEC . 3 (ii) ] NINISTRY OF LABOUR AND EMPLOYMENT New Delhi , the 13th May , 2005

S.O. 2102. In exercise of the powers conferred by Sub - section ( 3 ) of Section 1 of the Employees ' State Insurance Act, 1948 (34 of 1948 ) the Central Government hereby appoints the 1st June , 2005 as the date on which the provisions of Chapter- IV ( except Sections 44 and 45 which have already been brought into force) and Chapter- Vand VI [ except Sub - section ( 1) of Section 76 and Sections 77, 78 , 79 and 81 which have already been brought into force] of the said Act shall come into the force in the following areas in the State of Punjab namely:-

Hadbast Tehsil Tehsil and District Sl.No. Name of the Revenue No. Village

244

Ludhiana Doraha

Payal

Ludhiana 2.

220

Kanech

Ludhiana

Jaspal Bangar 259

234

Khakat

Ludhiana

243

Ludhiana Rajgarh

Payal

Khanna

150

Ludhiana Jaspalon

247

Ludhiana

Payal

Mallipur

246

8. Kaddon

Ludhiana

Payal

[No. S- 38013/24/2005 - S.S- ] K.C. JAIN, Director

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