This Gazette may contains Multiple Subjects

२०

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

भारतको राजपत्र The Gazette of India

प्राधिकार से प्रकाशित

PUBLISHED BY AUTHORITY

साप्ताहिक

WEEKLY

नई दिल्ली, अगस्त 7 अगस्त 13 , 2011 , शनिवार/ श्रावण 16 श्रावण 22, 1933

सं. 33]

No. 33] NEW DELHI, SATURDAY, AUGUST 7-AUGUST 13 , 2011 /SRAVANA 16-SRAVANA 22, 1933 इस भाग में भिन्न पृष्ठ संख्या दी जाती है जिससे कि यह पृथक संकलन के रूप में रखा जा सके Separate Paging is given to this Part in order that it may be filed as a separate compilation

भाग II-खण्ड उप-खण्ड (ii)

PART II-Section 3 Sub-section (ii)

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

कार्मिक, लोक शिकायत तथा पेंशन मंत्रालय

(कार्मिक और प्रशिक्षण विभाग )

नई दिल्ली, 3 अगस्त, 2011

का. आ. 2079.- केन्द्रीय सरकार एतद्वारा अपराध प्रक्रिया संहिता , 1973 ( 1974 का अधिनियम सं. 2 ) की धारा 24 की उपधारा (8 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए इलाहाबाद में इलाहाबाद उच्च न्यायालय में दिल्ली विशेष पुलिस स्थापना द्वारा अन्वेषण किए जाने वाले मामलों में अभियोजन , अपील , पुनरीक्षण या इन मामलों से उद्भूत अन्य मामलों का संचालन करने के लिए सर्वश्री नजरूल इस्लाम जाफरी तथा अनुराग खन्ना , वकीलों को केन्दीय अन्वेषण ब्यूरो में विशेष लोक अभियोजक के रूप में नियुक्त करती है ।

[फ. सं. 225/28/2006 - ए वी डी- II ) ]

राजीव जैन , अवर सचिव

(5771)

2883 GI/ 11 5772

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 13 , 2011 /SRAVANA 22, 1933

[PART II Sac. 3 ( i )] MINISTRY OF PERSONNEL, PUBLIC GRIEVANCES AND PENSIONS

(DepartmentofPersonnel and Training)

NewDelhi , the 3rdAugust, 2011

S.O. 2079.-In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (8) ofSection 24 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Act No. 2 of 1974) , the Central Government hereby appoints S/Shri Nazrul Islam Jafri and Anurag Khanna, Advocates, as Special PublicProsecutor of the Central Bureau of Investigation in the Allahabad High Court at Allahabad for conducting the prosecution appeals , revisions or other matters arising out of the cases investigated by the Delhi Special Police Establishment.

[F. No. 225/28/2006-AVD- II] RAJIV JAIN, Under Secy.

नई दिल्ली, 4 अगस्त, 2011

का. आ. 2080.-केन्द्रीय सरकार एत‌द्वारा दिल्ली विशेष पुलिस स्थापना अधिनियम , 1946 ( 1946 का अधिनियम सं. 25 ) की धाव 6 के साथ पछित धारा 5 की उप- धारा ( 1 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए छत्तीसगढ़ राज्य सरकार, गृह विभाग , दाऊ कल्याण सिंह भवन, रायपुर की दिनांक 24 मार्च, 2011 की अधिसूचना सं. एफ-4-21/टू/ होम- सी/2011 द्वारा प्राप्त सहमति से दैनिक भास्कर के उप-संपादक श्री सुशील पाठक की हत्या के संबंध में पुलिस स्टेशन सरकन्दा, जिला -बिलासपुर में पंजीकृत भारतीय दंड संहिता, 1860 ( 1860 का अधिनियम सं. 45 ) की धारा 302, 201 तथा शस्त्र अधिनियम , 1959 ( 1959 का अधिनियम सं. 54 ) की धारा 25 , 27 के अंतर्गत अपराध सं. 619/10 का तथा उपर्युक्त अपराधों के संबंध में या उससे संबद्ध प्रयास , दुष्प्रेरण तथा षडयंत्र तथा उसी संव्यवहार के दौरान किए गए या उन्हीं तथ्यों से उद्भूत अन्य कोई अपराध या अपराधों का अन्वेषण करने के लिए दिल्ली विशेष पुलिस स्थापना के सदस्यों की शक्तियों और क्षेत्राधिकार का विस्तार संम्पूर्ण छत्तीसगढ़ राज्य के सम्बन्ध में करती है ।

[फा. सं. 228/11/2011- ए वी डी- II ]

राजीव जैन , अवर सचिव

New Delhi , the 4th August, 2011

S.O. 2080. 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 ofthe State Government of Chhattisgarh, Home Department, Dau Kalyan Singh Bhavan, Raipur vide Notification No. F. 4-21 /Two/Home-C/2011 dated 24th March, 2011 , hereby extends the powers and jurisdiction of the members of the Delhi Special Police Establishment to the whole ofthe State of Chhattisgarh for investigation of Crime No. 619/10 under Sections 302 and 201 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (Act No. 45 of 1860) and Sections 25, 27 of the Arms Act, 1959 (Act No. 54 of 1959) registered at Police Station Sarkanda,District Bilaspur relating to murder of Shri Sushil Pathak, Deputy Editor ofDainik Bhasker and attempt, abetment and conspircy in relation to or in connection with the above mentioned offences and any other offence or offences committed in course of the same transaction or arising out of the same facts.

[F. No. 228/11 /2011 - AVD - II ] RAJIV JAIN, Under Secy.

नई दिल्ली , 4 अगस्त, 2011

का. आ. 2081.-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 राज्य सरकार, गृह ( राजनीतिक ) विभाग , गुप्त अनुभाग की दिनांक 6 जुलाई , 2011 की अधिसूचना सं. 1126- पी एस-कोलकाता द्वारा प्राप्त सहमति से राजस्व आसूचना निदेशालय , सिलीगुड़ी, क्षेत्रीय ईकाई द्वारा दिनांक 20-5-2011 को 12,90,500 रुपए मात्र की नकली भारतीय करेंसी नोट की जब्ती को संबंध में भारतीय दंड संहिता, 1860( 1860 का अधिनियम सं. 45 ) की धारा 120 के साथ पछित धारा 489 - बी, 489- सी के अंतर्गत दिनांक 31-5-2011 की शिकायत डी. आर. आई. एफ. सं. 02/सीएल/आईएमपी/डीआरआई/ एस एल जी/2011-12/87 का तथा उनर्युक्त उल्लिखित अपराध के संबंध में या उससे सम्बद्ध प्रवास, दुष्प्रेरणा तथा षडयंत्र तथा उसी संव्यवहार के क्रम में किए गए या उन्हीं तथ्यों से उद्भूत किसी अन्य अपराध या अपराधों का अन्वेषण करने के लिए दिल्ली विशेष पुलिस स्थापना के सदस्यों की शक्तियों और क्षेत्राधिकार का विस्तार सम्पूर्ण पश्चिम बंगाल राज्य के सम्बन्ध मेंकरती है ।

[फा. सं. 228/49/2011 - ए वी डी- II ) ]

राजीव जैन , अवर सचिव भारत का राजपत्र : अगस्त 13 , 2011 / श्रावण 22, 1933

[भाग II-खंड 3 (ii ) ]

NewDelhi, the 4thAugust, 2011

S.O. 2081.-In exercise of the powers conferredby sub-section (1 ) of Section 5, read with Section 6 of theDelhi SpecialPoliceEstablishment Act, 1946 (Act No. 25 of 1946), the Central Government with the consent of the State Government ofWestBengal, Home (Political ) Department, Secret Section vide Notification No. 1126-P.S . , Kolkata dated 6th July,2011 hereby extends the powers and jurisdiction of the members of the Delhi Special Police Establishment to the whole of the StateofWestBengal for investigation ofcomplaint DRI F. No. 02/CL/IMP/DRI/ SLG/2011-12/87 dated 31-5-2011 under Sections 489-B,489-Cread with 120-B ofthe Indian Penal Code, 1860 (Act No. 45 of 1860) relating to seizure ofFake Indian CurrencyNotes ofRs . 12,90,500 only effected on 20-5-2011 by the Directorate ofRevenue Intelligence Siliguri, Regional Unitand attempt, abetment and conspiracy in relation to or in connection with the above mentioned offences and any other offence or offences committed in course of the same transaction or arising out of the same facts .

[F. No. 228/49/2011-AVD- II] RAJIV JAIN, Under Secy.

वित्त मंत्रालय

(वित्तीय सेवाएं विभाग )

नई दिल्ली, 29 जुलाई, 2011

का. आ. 2082.-राष्ट्रीकृत बैंक ( प्रबन्ध एवं प्रकीर्ण उपबंध ) स्कीम , 1970/1980 के खण्ड 3 के उप- खण्ड ( 1 ) के साथ पठित बैंककारी कम्पनी ( उपक्रमों का अर्जन एवं अंतरण ) अधिनियम , 1970/1980 की धारा 9 की उप- धारा 3 ( ज ) और ( 3 - क ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए , केन्द्रीय सरकारए एतद्वारा श्री जगदीश राज श्रीमाली ( जन्म तिथि : 15-3-1961 ) को उनकी नियुक्ति की अधिसूचना की तिथि से तीन वर्षों की अवधि के लिए अथवा अगले आदेशों तक, जो भी पहले हो , सिंडिकेट बैंक के निदेशक मंडल में अंशकालिक गैर सरकारी निदेशक के रूप में नामित करती है ।

[फा. सं. 6/ 17/2010-बीओ-1 ) ]

समीर कुमार सिन्हा, निदेशक

MINISTRY OF FINANCE

(Department ofFinancial Services)

New Delhi, the 29th July, 2011

[F. No. 6/17/2010-BO- I ] S.O. 2082.- In exercise of the powers conferred by sub- section 3 (h) and ( 3 -A) of Section 9 of The Banking Companies (Acquision and Transfer of Undertakings) Act, 1970/1980 , read with sub-clause (1 ) of clause 3 of the Nationalised Banks (Management and Miscellaneous Provisions) Scheme, 1970/1980 , the Central Government hereby nominates Shri Jagdish Raj Shrimali (DOB : 15-3-1961 ) as part -time non -official Director on the Board ofDirectors of Syndicate Bank, for a period ofthree years from the date of notification of his appointment or until further orders , whichever is earlier.

SAMIR K. SINHA, Director .

नई दिल्ली, 29 जुलाई, 2011

का. आ. 2083.-भारतीय स्टेट बैंक अधिनियम , 1955 ( 1955 का 23 ) की धारा 21 क के साथ पठित धारा 21 की उप- धारा ( 1 ) के खण्ड ( ग ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए , केन्द्रीय सरकार, भारतीय रिजर्व बैंक से परामर्श करके, एतद्वारा श्री रमेश वरलियानी (जन्मतिथि : 15-11-1947) को उनकी नियुक्ति की अधिसूचना की तारीख से तीन वर्षों की अवधि के लिए अथवा अगले आदेशों तक , जो भी पहले हो , भारतीय स्टेट बैंक के भोपाल स्थानीय बोर्ड में सदस्य के रूप में नामित करती है ।

[फा. सं. 3 / 11 /2010- बीओ -1 ) ]

समीर के. सिन्हा, निदेशक

NewDelhi, the 29th July, 2011

S.O. 2083. In exercise of the powers conferred by clause (c) of sub-section ( 1) of Section 21 , read with Section 21Aofthe State Bank of India Act, 1955 (23 of 1955) , the Central Government, in consultation with Reserve Bank of India, herebynominates Shri Ramesh Warlyani (DOB : 15-11-1947) as a member of the Bhopal Local Board of State Bank ofIndia, for a periodofthree years from the date of notification of his appointment or until further orders, whichever is earlier .

[F. No. 3/ 11/2010-BO-I ]

SAMIR K. SINHA, Director.

5774

THEGAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 13 , 2011/SRAVANA 22, 1933

[PART II-SEC. 3(ii )]

नई दिल्ली , 2 अगस्त, 2011

का. आ. 2084.-राष्ट्रीयकृत बैंक ( प्रबन्ध एवं प्रकीर्ण उपबंध ) स्कीम , 1970/1980 के खण्ड 9 ( 2 ) के उप- खण्ड ( ख ) के साथ पठित बैंककारी कम्पनी ( उपक्रमों का अर्जन एवं अंतरण ) अधिनियम , 1970/1980 की धारा 9 की उप - धारा 3 ( छ ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए, केन्द्रीय सरकार एतद्‌द्वारा श्री मनोज कुमार गुप्ता ( जन्म तिथि 6-3-1969 ) को उनकी नियुक्ति की अधिसूचना जारी होने की तिथि से तीन वर्षों की अवधि के लिए अथवा अगले आदेशों तक, जो भी पहले हो, यूको बैंक के निदेशक मंडल में सनदी लेखाकार श्रेणी में अंशकालिक गैर सरकारी निदेशक के रूप में नामित करती है ।

[फा. सं. 6/48/2010-बीओ-I ] समीर कुमार सिन्हा, निदेशक

NewDelhi , the 2nd August, 2011

S.O. 2084. In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section 3 (g) of Section 9 of the Banking Companies Acquisition and Transfer of Undertakings ) Act, 1970/1980, read with sub-clause (b) of clause 9 (2 ) of the Nationalised Banks(Management and Miscelaneous Provisions) Scheme , 1970/1980, the Central Government , after consultationwith ReserveBank ofIndia, hereby nominates Shri Manoj Kumar Gupta (DOB : 6-3-1969) as part -time non -official Director under CharteredAccountant category of the Board of Directors of UCO Bank, for a period of three years from the date of notification ofhis appointment or until further orders, whichever is earlier.

[F. No. 6/48/2010-BO-I ] SAMIR K. SINHA , Director

नई दिल्ली , 2 अगस्त, 2011

का. आ. 2085.-राष्ट्रीयकृत बैंक ( प्रबन्ध एवं प्रकीर्ण उपबंध ) स्कीम , 1970/1980 के खण्ड 3 के उप- खण्ड ( 1 ) के साथ पठित बैंककारी कम्पनी ( उपक्रमों का अर्जन एवं अंतरण ) अधिनियम , 1970/1980 की धारा 9 की उप- धारा 3 ( ज) और ( 3 - क ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए, केन्द्रीय सरकार , एत‌द्वारा श्री विजय कपूर ( जन्म तिथि : 14-8-1963 ) को उनकी नियुक्ति की अभिसूचना की तिथि से तीन वर्षों की अवधि के लिए अथवा अगले आदेशों तक , जो भी पहले हो, देना बैंक के निदेशक मंडल में अंशकालिक गैर- सरकारी निदेशक के रूप में नामित करती है ।

[फा. सं. 6/53/2010- बीओ -1 ]

समीर के. सिन्हा, निदेशक

NewDelhi , the 2nd August, 2011

S.O. 2085.-In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section 3 (h) and (3 - A) of Section 9 of the Banking Companies(Acquisition and Transfer ofUndertakings) Act, 1970/1980, read with sub-clause ( 1 ) of clause 3 ofthe Nationalised Banks(Management and Miscellaneous Provisions) Scheme, 1970/1980, the Central Government hereby nominates Shri VijayKapoor (DOB : 14-8-1963 ) as part -time non -official Director on the Board ofDirectors of Dena Bank, for a period of threeyears from the date ofnotification of his appointment or until further orders, whichever is earlier.

[F. No. 6/53/2010-BO-I ] SAMIR K. SINHA, Director

नई दिल्ली, 2 अगस्त, 2011

का. आ. 2086.-राष्ट्रीयकृत बैंक ( प्रबन्ध एवं प्रकीर्ण उपबंध ) स्कीम , 1970/1980 के खण्ड 3 के उप- खण्ड ( 1 ) , खण्ड 5 , खण्ड 6, खण्ड 7 और खण्ड 8 के उपखण्ड ( 1 ) के साथ पठित , बैंककारी कम्पनी ( उपक्रमों का अर्जन एवं अंतरण ) अधिनियम, 1970/1980 की धान 9 की उप- धारा 3 के खण्ड (क ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए, केन्द्रीय सरकार, भारतीय रिजर्व बैंक से परामर्श करने के पश्चात्, एतद्द‌द्वारा , यूको बैंक के कार्यपालक निदेशक श्री अजय कुमार ( जन्म तिथि: 26-6-1953 ) को 1-10-2011 को अथवा उसके बाद उनके पदभार ग्रहण करने की तारीख से 30-6-2013 तक अर्थात् उनके अधिवर्षिता की आयु प्राप्त करने की तारीख तक अथवा अंगले आदेशों तक, जो भी पहले हो , कार्पोरेशन बैंक के अध्यक्ष एवं प्रबंध निदेशक के रूप में नियुक्त करती है ।

[फा. सं. 4/4/2010-बीओ -1 ] समीर के. सिन्हा, निदेशक 5775

भारत का राजपत्र : अगस्त 13 , 2011 / श्रावण 22 , 1933

[ भाग II-खंड 3 (ii) ]

NewDelhi, the 2ndAugust, 2011

S.O. 2086.-In exercise of the powers conferred by clause (a) of sub-section (3 ) of Section 9 of the Banking Companies (Acquisition and Transfer of Undertakings) Act, 1970/1980 read with sub-clause (1 ) ofclause 3 , clause 5, clause 6, clause 7and sub-clause ( 1 ) ofclause 8 ofthe Nationalised Banks (Management and Miscellaneous Provisions ) Scheme, 1970/1980, the Central Government, after consultation with the Reserve Bank of India hereby appoints Shri Ajai Kumar (DOB: 26-6-1953) , Executive Director, UCO Bank as the Chairman and ManagingDirector , CorporationBank from the date ofhis taking over charge ofthe post on or after 1-10-2011 till 30-6-2013 , i.e. the date of his superannuation or until further orders, whichever is earlier.

[F. No. 4/4/2010-BO- I] SAMIR K. SINHA, Director.

नई दिल्ली, 2 अगस्त, 2011

का. आ. 2087.-बैंककारी विनियमन अधिनियम , 1949 ( 1949 का 10 ) की धारा 53 द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए, भारत सरकार , भारतीय रिजर्व बैंक की सिफारिश पर , एतद्‌द्वारा , घोषणा करती है कि उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 10 की उप - धारा ( 1 ) के खण्ड (ग ) के उप- खण्ड ( झ ) के उपबंध यूनियन बैंक ऑफ इंडिया पर लागू नहीं होंगे , जहां तक उनका संबंध बैंक के अध्यक्ष एवं प्रबंध निदेशक श्री एम. वी. नायर के ( 1 ) ऋण सूचना ब्यूरो ( इंडिया ) लि. के बोर्ड के अध्यक्ष ( गैर - कार्यपालक निदेशक ) और ( 2 ) स्टार यूनियन काई- इची लाइफ इंश्योरेंस कम्पनी लि. के बोर्ड के अध्यक्ष ( गैर- कार्यपालक निदेशक ) के रूप में नामित होने से है ।

[फा. सं. 20/5/2005- बीओ-1 ] विजय मल्होत्रा , अवर सचिव

New Delhi , the 2ndAugust, 2011

S.O. 2087. In exercise ofthe powers conferred by Section 53 ofthe Banking Regulation Act, 1949 ( 10 of 1949) theGovernment of India on the recommendation of Reserve Bank of India, hereby declare that the provisions of sub-clause (i)ofclause(c) ofsub-section ( 1 ) ofSection 10 ofthe said Act shall not apply to Union Bank of India insofar as it relates to thenomination of Shri M. V. Nair, Chairman and Managing Director ofthe bank on the Board of (1 ) Credit InformationBureau (India) Ltd. as Chairman (Non-Executive Director) and (2) Star Union Dai- ichi Life Insurance Company Ltd. as Chairman (Non-ExecutiveDirector).

[F. No. 20/5/2005-BO-I] VIJAY MALHOTRA, Under Secy.

नई दिल्ली , 3 अगस्त, 2011

का. आ. 2088.-राष्ट्रीयकृत बैंक (प्रबन्ध एवं प्रकीर्ण उपबंध ) स्कीम, 1970/1980 के खण्ड 3 के उप- खण्ड ( 1 ) के साथ पठित , बैंककारी कम्पनी ( उपक्रमों का अर्जन एवं अंतरण ) अधिनियम, 1970/1980 की धारा 9 की उप- धारा ( 3 ) के खण्ड (ख) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों काप्रयोग करते हुए, केन्द्रीय सरकार, एत‌द्वारा , वित्तीय सेवाएं विभाग के संयुक्त सचिव श्री अनुराग जैन को तत्काल प्रभाव से और अगले आदेशों तक, श्रीमती रवनीत कौर के स्थान पर पंजाब नेशनल बैंक के निदेशक मण्डल में सरकार नामिती निदेशक के रूप में नामित करती है ।

[फा. सं. 6/1/2010- बीओ-I ) ]

समीर के. सिन्हा, निदेशक

NewDelhi, the 3rd August, 2011

S.O. 2088. In exercise of the powers conferred by clause (b) of sub-section (3) of Section 9 of the Banking Companies (Acquision and Transfer ofUndertakings)Act, 1970/1980, read with sub-clause ( 1) ofclause 3 , ofthe Nationalised Banks (Management and Miscellaneous Provisions ) Scheme, 1970/1980, the Central Government hereby nominates Shri Anurag Jain, Joint Secretary, Department of Financial Services , as Government Nominee Director on the Board of Directors ofPunjab National Bank, with immediate effect and until further orders vice Smt . Ravneet Kaur.

[F. No. 6/ 1/2010-BO-I ] SAMIRK. SINHA, Director.

नई दिल्ली, 3 अगस्त, 2011

का. आ. 2089.-भारतीय स्टेट बैंक अधिनियम, 1955 ( 1955का 23 ) की धारा 19 के खण्ड ( ङ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए, केन्द्रीय सरकार, एतद्वारा श्री डी. के, मित्तल , सचिव , वित्तीय सेवाएं विभाग , वित्त मंत्रालय को श्री शशि कांत शर्मा के स्थान पर तत्काल प्रभाव से और अगले आदेश होने तक , भारतीय स्टेट बैंक के केन्द्रीय निदेशक मण्डल में निदेशक के रूप में नामित करती है ।

[फा. सं. 6/ 1/2010- बीओ- I ] समीर के. सिन्हा, निदेशक 5776

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 13 , 2011 /SRAVANA 22, 1933

[PART I-SBC. 3( ii )]

New Delhi , the 3rdAugust, 2011

S.O. 2089.- In exercise of the powers conferred by clause (e) ofSection 19 of the State Bank of IndiaAct, 1955 (23 of1955), the Central Government hereby nominates Shri D. K. Mittal, Secretary, Department ofFinancial Services, Ministry ofFinance , tobe a Director on the Central Board of Directors of State Bank of India with immediate effect and until further orders vice Shri Shashi Kant Sharma.

[F. No. 6/1/2010-BO-I] SAMIR K. SINHA, Director

नईदिल्ली, 4 अगस्त, 2011

का. आ. 2090.-भारतीय स्टेट बैंक अधिनियम, 1955 ( 1955 का 23 ) की धारा 19 के खण्ड ( च ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए, केन्द्रीय सरकार , एतद्वारा , भारतीय रिजर्व बैंक के उप - गवर्नर डॉ. सुबीर विठ्ठल गोकरन को श्रीमती श्यामला गोपीनाथ के स्थान पर तत्काल प्रभाव से और अगले आदेश होने तक , भारतीय स्टेट बैंक के केन्द्रीय निदेशक मण्डल में निदेशक के रूप में नामित करती है ।

[फा. सं. 2/2/ 2011- बीओ -1 ] समीर के. सिन्हा, निदेशक

New Delhi , the 4th August, 2011

S.O. 2090.-In exercise of the powers conferred by clause (f) of Section 19 of the State Bank of India Act, 1955 (23 of1955), the Central Government hereby nominates Dr. Subir Vithal Gokarn, Deputy Governor, Reserve Bank ofIndia, to be aDirectoronthe Central Board ofDirectors of State Bank of India with immediate effect and until further orders vice Smt. ShyamalaGopinath.

[F.No. 2/2/2011 -BO- I] SAMIR K. SINHA, Director.

नई दिल्ली, 4 अगस्त, 2011

का. आ. 2091.-जीवन बीमा निगम अधिनियम, 1956 ( 1956 का 31 ) की धारा 4 द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए, केन्द्रीय सरकार, एतद्वारा , श्री डी. के. मित्तल, सचिव , वित्तीय सेवाएं विभाग को तत्काल प्रभाव से अगले आदेशों तक , श्री शशि कांत शर्मा, रक्षा सचिव के स्थान पर उक्त निगम के सदस्य के रूप में नियुक्त करती है ।

[फा. सं. 14/3/2003- बीमा- IV ] ललित कुमार , निदेशक ( बीमा)

New Delhi , the 4th August, 2011

S.O. 2091.- In exercise of the powers conferred by Section 4 of the Life Insurance Corporation Act, 1956 (31 of 1956), the Central Government hereby appoints Shri D. K. Mittal , Secretary, Department of Financial Services as Member of the said Corporation vice Shri Shashi Kant Sharma, Defence Secretary with immediate effect till further orders .

[F.No. 14/3/2003-Ins- IV] LALIT KUMAR, Director (Insurance)

नई दिल्ली , 5 अगस्त, 2011

का. आ. 2092.- राष्ट्रीयकृत बैंक ( प्रबन्ध एवं प्रकीर्ण उपबंध) स्कीम , 1970/1980 के खण्ड 3 के उप- खण्ड ( 1 ) के साथ पठित , बैंककारी कम्पनी ( उपक्रमों का अर्जन एवं अंतरण ) अधिनियम , 1970/1980 की धारा 9 की उप- धारा 3 ( ज ) और ( 3 - क ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए, केन्द्रीय सरकार, एतद्वारा , श्री रमेश चन्द्र अग्रवाल ( जन्म तिथि 12-7-1954 ) को उनकी नियुक्ति की अधिसूचना की तारीख से तीन वर्षों की अवधि के लिए अथवा अगले आदेशों तक, जो भी पहले हो , बैंक ऑफ महाराष्ट्र के निदेशक मण्डल में अंशकालिक गैर- सरकारी निदेशक के रूप में नामित करती है ।

[फा. सं. 6/56/2010- बीओ -1 ]

समीर के. सिन्हा, निदेशक

NewDelhi , the 5th August, 2011

S.O. 2092.-In exercise of the powers conferred by sub -section 3 ( h) and (3 -A) of Section 9 of The Banking Companies (Acquisition and Transfer of Undertakings) Act , 1970/1980 , read with sub -clause ( 1 ) of clause 3 , of the Nationalised Banks (Management and Miscellaneous Provisions ) Scheme, 1970/1980, the Central Government hereby nominates Shri Ramesh Chandra Agrawal (DoB: 12-7-1954) as part -time non -official Director on the Board ofDirectors of Bank ofMaharashtra for a period of three years from the date of notification of his appointment or until further orders , whichever is earlier.

[F. No. 6/56/2010-BO-I ] SAMIRK. SINHA, Director 5777 भारत का राजपत्र : अगस्त13 , 2011 / श्रावण 22 , 1933

[ भाग II-खंड 3 (ii) ]

नई दिल्ली , 5 अगस्त, 2011

का. आ. 2093.- भारतीय स्टेट बैंक अधिनियम , 1955 ( 1955 का 23 ) की धारा 21 क के साथ पठित धारा 21 की उप- धारा ( 1 ) के खण्ड ( ग ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए , केन्द्रीय सरकार, भारतीय रिजर्व बैंक से परामर्श करके , एतद्वारा , श्री जी. पी. गुप्ता (जन्म. तिथि 17-9-1967 ) को उनकी नियुक्ति की अधिसूचना की तारीख से तीन वर्षों की अवधि के लिए अथवा आदेशों तक, जो भी पहले हो, भारतीय स्टेट बैंक के भोपाल स्थानीय बोर्ड में सदस्य के रूप में नामित करती है ।

[फा. सं. 3 / 11 /2010-बीओ-1 ] समीर के. सिन्हा, निदेशक

New Delhi , the 5th August, 2011

S.O. 2093.- In exercise of the powers conferred by clause (c) of sub-section ( 1) of Section 21 read with Section 21A of StateBank of India Act, 1955 (23 of 1955 ), the Central Government, in consultation with Reserve Bank of India, herebynominates Shri G P. Gupta (DoB 17-9-1967) as a member ofthe Bhopal Local Board ofState Bank of India, for aperiod ofthreeyears from the date of notification of his appointment or until further orders, whichever is earlier.

[F. No. 3/11/2010-BO-IJ SAMİR K. SINHA, Director

विदेश मंत्रालय

(सीपी वी प्रभाग)

नई दिल्ली, 28 जुलाई , 2011

का. आ. 2094.-राजनयिक और कॉसलीय ऑफिसर ( शपथ और फीस ) के अधिनियम, 1948 ( 1948 का 41 ) की धारा 2 के खण्ड ( क ) के अनुसरण में , केन्द्र सरकार एत‌द्वारा श्री राम प्रसाद मीना, सहायक को 28-7-2011 से भारत के कौंसलावास , दुबई में सहायक कोंसुलर अधिकारी के कर्तव्यों का पालन करने के लिए प्राधिकृत करती है ।

[सं. टी. 4330/1/2006]

आर. के. पेरिनडिया , अवर सचिव (कॉसुलर)

MINISTRY OF EXTERNAL AFFAIRS

(CPVDivision)

NewDelhi , the 28th July, 2011

S.O. 2094. In pursuance of the clause (a) of the Section 2 ofthe Diplomatic and Consular Officers (Oaths and fees) Act , 1948 (41 of 1948), the Central Government hereby authorize Shri Ram Prasad Meena, Assistant, Consulate General ofIndia, Dubai to perform the duties of Assistant Consular Officer with effect from 28th July, 2011 .

[No. T-4330/1/2006]

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

नई दिल्ली, 1 अगस्त, 2011

का. आ. 2095.-राजनयिक और कॉसलीय ऑफिसर ( शपथ और फीस ) के अधिनियम , 1948 ( 1948 का 41 ) की धारा 2 के खण्ड ( क ) के अनुसरण में , केन्द्र सरकार एतद्‌द्वारा श्रीमती रीना चौहान , सहायक को 1-8-2011 से भारत के राजदूतावास , कुवैत में सहायक कोंसुलर अधिकारी के कर्तव्यों का पालन करने के लिए प्राधिकृत करती है ।

[सुं टी. 4330/1/2006]

टी. डी. भूटिया , अवर सचिव

NewDelhi , the 1st August, 2011-

S.O. 2095.-In pursuance of the clause (a) of the Section 2 of the Diplomatic and Consular Officers (Oaths and fees)Act, 1948(41 of 1948), the Central Government hereby authorize Smt. Reena Chauhan, LDC, Embassy of India,Kuwait toperform the duties of Assistant Consular Officer with effect from 1stAugust, 2011 .

[No. T-4330/1/2006] T. D. BHUTIA, Under Secy.

5778

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 13 , 2011 /SRAVANA 22, 1933

[PART II-Sac. 3 ( ii )]

स्वास्थ्यएवं परिवार कल्याण मंत्रालय

(स्वास्थ्यएवं परिवार कल्याण विभाग )

नई दिल्ली, 30 जून , 2011

का.आ. 2096.-भारतीय चिकित्सा परिषद् अधिनियम, 1956 ( 1956 का 102 ) की धारा 11 की उप- धारा ( 2 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए केन्द्र सरकार, भारतीय चिकित्सा परिषद के परामर्श करके एतद्वारा उक्त अधिनियम की प्रथम अनुसूची में निम्नलिखित और संशोधन करती है, नामतः :-

उक्त अनुसूची में

कालम

(क) " डा. एन टी आर स्वास्थ्य विज्ञान विश्वविद्यालय , विजयवाड़ा के सामने " मान्यता प्राप्त चिकित्सा अर्हता " शीर्ष [ इसके बाद ( 2 ) के रूप में संदर्भित ] के अन्तर्गत " अंतिम प्रविष्टि और उससे संबंधित प्रविष्टि के बाद " " पंजीकरण के लिए संक्षेपण " [ इसके बाद कालम ( 3 ) के रूप में संदर्भित ] शीर्षक के सामने निम्नलिखित अंतः स्थापित किया जाएगा , नामत :

(2)

(3)

" डॉक्टर ऑफ मेडिसिन ( बाल चिकित्सा) " एम डी ( बाल चिकित्सा)

(यह एक मान्यता प्राप्त चिकित्सा अर्हता होगी जब यह एस वी एस मेडिकल कालेज , महबूबनगर , आंध्र प्रदेश में प्रशिक्षित किए जा रहे विद्यार्थियों के संबंध में मई, 2011 को अथवा उसके बाद डॉ. एन टी आर स्वास्थ्यविज्ञान विश्वविद्यालय, विजयवाड़ा द्वारा प्रदान की गई हो ) ।

" डॉक्टर ऑफ मेडिसिन (विकिरण निदान ) " एम डी ( विकिरण निदान )

(यह एक मान्यता प्राप्त चिकित्सा अर्हता होगी जब यह एस वी एस मेडिकल कालेज , महबूबनगर, आंध्र प्रदेश में प्रशिक्षित किए जा रहे विद्यार्थियों के संबंध में मई , 2011 को अथवा उसके बाद डॉ. एन टी आर स्वास्थ्य विज्ञान विश्वविद्यालय , विजयवाड़ा द्वारा प्रदान की गई हो) ।

" प्रसूति विज्ञान एवं स्त्री रोग विज्ञान में डिप्लोमा " डीजीओ

(यह एक मान्यता प्राप्त चिकित्सा अर्हता होगी जब यह कतूरी मेडिकल कालेज , गुंटूर , आंध्र प्रदेश में प्रशिक्षित किए जा रहे विद्यार्थियों के संबंध में मई, 2011 को अथवा उसके बाद डॉ. एन टी आर स्वास्थ्यविज्ञान विश्वविद्यालय , विजयवाड़ा द्वारा प्रदान की गई हो ) ।

डीजीओ

" प्रसूति विज्ञान एवं स्त्रीरोग विज्ञान में डिप्लोमा "

( यह एक मान्यता प्राप्त चिकित्सा अर्हता होगी जब यह प्रतिमा आयुर्विज्ञान एवं अनुसंधान संस्थान , करीमनगर, आंध्र प्रदेश में प्रशिक्षित किए जा रहे विद्यार्थियों के संबंध में मई , 2011 को अथवा उसके बाद डॉ. एन टी आर स्वास्थ्य विज्ञान विश्वविद्यालय , विजयवाड़ा द्वारा प्रदान की गई हो ) ।

"प्रसूतिविज्ञान एवं स्त्रीरोग विज्ञान में डिप्लोमा " डीजीओ

(यह एक मान्यता प्राप्त चिकित्सा अर्हता होगी जब यह पी ई एस आयुर्विज्ञान एवं अनुसंधान संस्थान, कुप्पम , आंध्र प्रदेश में प्रशिक्षित किए जा रहे विद्यार्थियों के संबंध में मई, 2011 को अथवा उसके बाद डॉ. एन टी आर स्वास्थ्य विज्ञान विश्वविद्यालय , विजयवाड़ा द्वारा प्रदान की गई हो) ।

"नेत्र विज्ञान में डिप्लोमा "

डी ओ

(यह एक मान्यता प्राप्त चिकित्सा अर्हता होगी जब यह प्रतिमा आयुर्विज्ञान एवं अनुसंधान संस्थान, करीमनगर , आंध्र प्रदेश में प्रशिक्षित किए जा रहे विद्यार्थियों के संबंध में मई , 2011 को अथवा उसके बाद डॉ. एन टी आर स्वास्थ्य विज्ञान विश्वविद्यालय, विजयवाड़ा द्वारा प्रदान की गई हो ) । 5779

13 , 2011 / श्रावण 22 , 1933

भारत का राजपत्र : अगस्त

[भाग II-खंड 3 ( ii ) ]

(3)

(2)

डीडीवीएल

"त्वचा विज्ञान , वेनरियोलॉजी एवं कुष्ठ रोग विज्ञान में डिप्लोमा"

(यह एक मान्यता प्राप्त चिकित्सा अर्हता होगी जब यह पी ई एस आयुर्विज्ञान एवं अनुसंधान संस्थान , कुप्पम , आंध्र प्रदेश में प्रशिक्षित किए जा रहे विद्यार्थियों के संबंध में मई, 2011 को अथवा उसके बाद डॉ. एन टी आर स्वास्थ्य विज्ञान विश्वविद्यालय , विजयवाड़ा द्वारा प्रदान की गई हो ) ।

(ख) " मान्यता प्राप्त चिकित्सा अर्हता " शीर्षक के अंतर्गत " महर्षि मार्केन्डेश्वर विश्वविद्यालय , अम्बाला , हरियाणा " [ इसके बाद कालम ( 2 ) के रूप में संदर्भित ] के सामने " पंजीकरण संक्षेपण " [इसके बाद कालम ( 3 ) के रूप में संदर्भित ] के सामने निम्नलिखित अंतः स्थापित किया जाएगा, अर्थात्:

(3)

(2)

डीसी एच

"बाल स्वास्थ्यमें डिप्लोमा "

(यह एक मान्यता प्राप्त चिकित्सा अर्हता होगी जब यह एम एम आयुर्विज्ञान एवं अनुसंधान संस्थान , मुल्लाना, अम्बाला , हरियाणा में प्रशिक्षित किए जा रहे विद्यार्थियों के संबंध में अप्रैल , 2011 को अथवा उसके बाद महर्षि मार्केन्डेश्वर विश्वविद्यालय , अम्बाला , द्वारा प्रदान की गई हो) ।

(ग) " मान्यता प्राप्त चिकित्सा अर्हता " शीर्षक के अंतर्गत " सौराष्ट्र विश्वविधालय , गुजरात " [ इसके बाद कालम ( 2 ) के रूप में संदर्भित ] के सामने " पंजीकरण के लिए संक्षेपण " शीर्षक के अंतर्गत अंतिम प्रविष्टि एवं उससे संबंधित प्रविष्टि के बाद निम्नलिखित अंतः स्थापित किया जाएगा, नामत:

(3)

(2)

एम डी (रेडियोथेरैपी)

"डॉक्टर ऑफ मेडिसन ( रेडियोथेरैपी ) "

(यह एक मान्यता प्राप्त चिकित्सा अर्हता होगी जब यह एम पी शाह मेडिकल कॉलेज , जामनगर, गुजरात में प्रशिक्षित किए जा रहे विद्यार्थियों के संबंध में मई , 2011 को अथवा उसके बाद सौराष्ट्र विश्वविद्यालय , गुजरात द्वारा प्रदान की गई हो ) ।

एम डी ( सूक्ष्म जीव विज्ञान)

"डॉक्टर ऑफ मेडिसन ( सूक्ष्म जीव विज्ञान ) "

(यह एक मान्यता प्राप्त, चिकित्सा अर्हता होगी जब यह सी यूशाह मेडिकल कॉलेज , सुरेन्द नगर, गुजरात में प्रशिक्षित किए जा रहे विद्यार्थियों के संबंध में मई, 2011 को अथवा उसके बाद सौराष्ट्र विश्वविद्यालय , गुजरात द्वारा प्रदान की गई हो ) ।

डीए

"संवेदनाहरण में डिप्लोमा "

(यह एक मान्यता प्राप्त अर्हता होगी जब यह पंडित दीनदयाल उपाध्याय मेडिकल कॉलेज, राजकोट , गुजरात में प्रशिक्षित किए जा रहे छात्रों के संबंध में सौराष्ट्र विश्वविद्यालय , गुजरात द्वारा मई, 2011 को या उसके बाद प्रदान की गई हो ) । (घ) " मान्यता प्राप्त चिकित्सा अर्हता " शीर्षक के अंतर्गत " पश्चिम बंगाल स्वास्थ्य विज्ञान विश्वविद्यालय कोलकाता " [ इसके बाद कालम ( 2 ) के रूप में संदर्भित ] के सामने " पंजीकरण के लिए संक्षेपण " शीर्षक के अंतर्गत अंतिम प्रविष्टि एवं उससे संबंधित प्रविष्टि के बाद निम्नलिखित अंतः स्थापित किया जाएगा , नामत :

(3)

(2)

एम एस (ईएनटी)

" मास्टर ऑफ सर्जरी ( ईएनटी) "

(यह एक मान्यता प्राप्त चिकित्सा अर्हता होगी जब यह कोलकाता नेशनल मेडिकल कॉलेज, कोलकाता में प्रशिक्षित किए जा रहे विद्यार्थियों के संबंध में अप्रैल, 2011 को अथवा उसके बाद पश्चिम बंगाल स्वास्थ्य विज्ञान विश्वविद्यालय , कोलकाता द्वारा प्रदान की

गईहो) ।

सभी के लिए टिप्पणी: 1. स्नातकोत्तर पाठ्‌यक्रम को प्रदान की गई ऐसी मान्यता की अधिकतम अवधि 5 वर्षों के लिए होगी जिसके उपरान्त इसका नवीकरण कराना होगा ।

2. उप-खंड 4 में यथापेक्षित मान्यक्त का समय पर नवीकरण नहीं कराये जाने के परिणामस्वरूप संबंधित स्नातकोत्तर पाठ्यक्रम में प्रवेश अनिवार्य रूप से बंद हो जाएंगे ।

[सं यू-12012/42/2011- एमई- (पी- II ) ] ,

अनीता त्रिपाठी, अवर सचिव 2883GI /11-2 5780

THE GAZETTE OFINDIA: AUGUST 13 , 2011 /SRAVANA 22, 1933

[PART II-SEC. 3 (ii ) ] MINISTRY OF HEALTH AND FAMILY WELFARE

(Department ofHealth and FamilyWelfare)

NewDelhi , the 30th June, 2011

S.O. 2096. In exercise of the powers conferred by sub- section (2) of the Section 11 of the Indian Medical Council Act, 1956 ( 102 of 1956) , the Central Government, after consulting the Medical Council of India, hereby makes the following further amendments in the First Schedule to the said Act, namely :

In the said Schedule:

(a) against "Dr. NTR University of Health Sciences, Vijayawada" under the heading ' Recognised Medical Qualification ' [hereinafter referred to as column (2) ] , after the last entry and relating thereto under the heading 'Abbreviation for Registration' [hereinafter referred to as column (3 ) ] , the following shall be inserted, namely :

SCHEDULE

(4)

(3)

MD(Paediatrics)

"Doctor ofMedicine (Paediatrics) "

(Thisshall be a recognised medical qualification when granted by Dr. NTR University of Health Sciences, Vijayawada in respect of students being trained at S. V.S. Medical College, Mahabubnagar, Andhra Pradesh on or after May, 2011.)

"Doctor ofMedicine (Radio Diagnosis) " MD (Radio Diagnosis)

(Thisshall be a recognised medical qualification when granted by Dr. NTR University of Health Sciences, Vijayawada in respect of students being trained atS. V.S. Medical College, Mahabubnagar, Andhra Pradesh on or after May, 2011.)

DGO

"Diploma in Obstetrics & Gynaecology"

(Thisshall be a recognised medical qualification when granted by Dr. NTR University of Health Sciences, Vijayawada in respect of students being trained atKaturi Medical College, Guntur, Andhra Pradesh on or after May, 2011. ) "Diploma in Obstetrics & Gynaecology " DGO

(Thisshall be a recognised medical qualification when granted by Dr. NTR University of Health Sciences, Vijayawada in respect of students being trained atPrathima Institute ofMedical Sciences & Research, Karimnagar , Andhra Pradesh on or after May, 2011. )

DGO

"Diploma in Obstetrics & Gynaecology "

(Thisshall be arecognised medical qualification when granted by Dr. NTR UniversityofHealth Sciences , Vijayawada in respect of students being trained at PES Institute of Medical Sciences & Research, Kuppam, Andhra Pradesh on or after May, 2011. )

DO

"Diploma in Ophthalmology "

(Thisshall be a recognised medical qualification when granted by Dr. NTR University of Health Sciences, Vijayawada in respect of students being trained at PES Institute ofMedical Sciences & Research, Kuppam, Andhra Pradesh onor after May, 2011. )

DDVL

"Diploma in Dermatology, Venreology

&Leprosy"

(Thisshau de a recognised medical qualification when granted by Dr. NTR University of Health Sciences, Vijayawada in respect of students being trained at PES Institute of Medical Sciences & Research , Kuppam, Andhra Pradesh on or after May, 2011. ) 5781

भारत का राजपत्र : अगस्त 13, 2011 / श्रावण 22 , 1933

[ भाग II-खंड 3 ( ii ) ]

(b) against " Maharishi Markandeshwar University Ambala , Haryana" under the heading 'Recognised Medical Qualification' [hereinafter referred to as column (2) ] , after the last entry and entry relating thereto under the heading 'Abbreviation for Registration ' ( hereinafter referred to as column ( 3 ) ] , the following shall be inserted, namely :

(3)

(2)

DCH

"Diploma in ChildHealth"

(This shall be a recognised medical qualification when granted by Maharishi Markandeshwar University, Ambala, Haryana in respect of students being trained at M.M. Institute of Medical Sciences & Research, Mullana, Ambala, Haryana on or after April, 2011. )

(c) against " Saurashtra University, Gujarat " under the heading ' Recognised Medical Qualification ' ( hereinafter referred to as column (2 )] , after the last entry and entry relating thereto under the heading 'Abbreviation for Registration' (hereinafter referred to as column (3 ) ] , the following shall be inserted, namely:

(3)

(2)

MD (Radiotherapy)

"Doctor ofMedicine (Radiotherapy) "

(Thisshall be a recognised medical qualification when granted by Saurashtra University, Gujarat in respect of students being trained at M.P. Shah Medical College, Jamnagar, Gujarat on or after May, 2011. )

MD (Microbiology)

"Doctor ofMedicine (Microbiology) "

(Thisshall be a recognised medical qualification when granted by Saurashtra University, Gujarat in respect of students being trained at C.U. ShahMedical College, Surendranagar, Gujarat on or after May, 2011. )

DA

"Diploma in Anaesthesia "

(Thisshall be a recognised medical qualification when granted by Saurashtra University, Gujarat in respect of students being trained at Pandit Deendayal Upadhyay Medical College, Rajkot, Gujarat on or after May, 2011. ) (d) against " West Bengal University of Health Sciences , Kolkata " under the heading ' Recognised Medical Qualification ' [ hereinafter referred to as column (2 ) ] , after the last entry and entry relating thereto under the heading 'Abbreviation for Registration ' ( hereinafter referred to as column (3 ) ] , the following shall be inserted, namely :

(3)

(2)

MS (ENT)

"Master of Surgery (ENT) "

(This shall be a recognised medical qualification when granted by West Bengal University of Health Sciences , Kolkata in respect of students being trained at Calcutta National Medical College , Kolkata on or after April, 2011. ) to all : 1. The recognition so granted to a Postgraduate Course shall be for a Maximum period of 5 years , upon which Note

itshall have to be renewed.

2. Failture to seek timely renewal of recognition as required in sub - clause -4 shall invariably result in stoppage of admissions to the concerned Postgraduate Course.

[No. U. 12012/42/2011 -ΜΕ (Ρ. ΙΙ ) ]

ANITA TRIPATHI , Under secу.

नई दिल्ली, 11 जुलाई , 2011

का.आ. 2097.-केन्द्रीय सरकार, भारतीय चिकित्सा परिषद् अधिनियम , 1956 ( 1956 का 102 ) की धारा 11 की उप- धारा (2 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए भारतीय चिकित्सा परिषद के परामर्श करने के बाद उक्त अधिनियम की प्रथम अनुसूची में निम्नलिखित और संशोधन करती है अर्थात्:

5782

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 13 , 2011 /SRAVANA 22, 1933

[PART II-SBC. 3(ii)] उक्त अनुसूची में :

(क) " लखनऊ विश्वविद्यालय , लखनऊ " के समक्ष " मान्यता प्राप्त चिकित्सा अर्हता " [ इसके बाद कालम ( 2 ) के रूप में संदर्भित ] शीर्षक के अन्तर्गत और " पंजीकरण के लिए संक्षेपण " [ इसके बाद कालम ( 3 ) के रूप में संदर्भित ] , शीर्षक के अंतर्गत अंतिम प्रविष्टि एवं उससे संबंधित प्रविष्टि के बाद निम्नलिखित अंतः स्थापित किया जाएगा , नामत :

(2)

(3)

एमसीएच (सीवीटीएस )

" मजिस्ट्रार आफ चिरूरगिए (कोडियो वास्कुलर एवं थोरासिक सर्जरी )

(यह एक मान्यताप्राप्त चिकित्सा अर्हता होगी जब यह छत्रपति साहूजी महाराजः चिकित्सा विश्वविद्यालय , लखनऊ में प्रशिक्षित किए जा रहे विद्यार्थियों के बारे में छत्रपति साहूजी महाराज चिकित्सा विश्वविद्यालय, लखनऊ द्वारा 1973 में या उसके बाद प्रदान की गई हो ) ।

(ख) " छत्रपति साहूजी महाराज आयुर्विज्ञान विश्वविद्यालय, लखनऊ " के समक्ष " मान्यताप्राप्त चिकित्सा अर्हता " [ इसके बाद कालम (2 ) के रूप में संदर्भित ] शीर्षक के अन्तर्गत और " पंजीकरण के लिए संक्षेपण " [ इसके बाद कालम ( 3 ) के रूप में संदर्भित ] , शीर्षक के अंतर्गत अंतिम प्रविष्टि एवं उससे संबंधित प्रविष्टि के बाद " बाबा फरीद स्वास्थ्य विज्ञान विश्वविद्यालय , फरीदकोट " के सामने निम्नलिखित अंतः स्थापित किया जाएगा, नामतः:-

(2)

(3)

एमसीएच ( सीवीटीएस )

" मजिस्ट्रार आफ चिरूरगिए (कोर्डियो वास्कुलर एवं थोरासिक सर्जरी. ) ( यह एक मान्यताप्राप्त चिकित्सा अर्हता होगी जब यह छत्रपति साहूजी महाराज चिकित्सा विश्वविद्यालय, लखनऊ में प्रशिक्षित किए जा रहे विद्यार्थियों के बारे में छत्रपति साहूजी महाराज चिकित्सा विश्वविद्यालय , लखनऊ द्वारा 1973 में या उसके बाद प्रदान की गई हो ) ।

लिए नोट :

सभी के

1. स्नातकोत्तर पाठ्यक्रम को इस प्रकार प्रदान की गई मान्यता अधिकतम 5 वर्ष की अवधि के लिए होगी जिसके बाद उसे नवीकृत किया जाना होगा ।

2. उप-खंड 4 में यथापेक्षित मान्यता का समय पर नवीकरण नहीं किए जाने पर संबंधित पाठ्यक्रम में नामांकन को अनिवार्यतः बंद कर दिया जाएगा।

[सं. यू-12012/45/2011- एमई ( पी- II ) ] अनीता त्रिपाठी , अवर सचिव

New Delhi , the 11th July, 2011

S.O. 2097.- In exercise ofthe powers conferred by sub-section (2 ) of Section 11 of the Indian Medical Council Act, 1956 ( 102 of 1956 ), the Central Government, after consulting the Medical Council of India, hereby makes the following further amendments in the First Schedule to the said Act , namely :-

In the said Schedule :

(a) Against " Lucknow University, Lucknow " under the heading ' Recognised Medical Qualification ' [ hereinafter referred to as column (2) ] , after the last entry and entry relating thereto under the heading 'Abbreviation for Registration' [hereinafter referred to as column (3 ) ] , the following shall be inserted, namely :-

(2)

(3)

M. Ch(CVTS)

"Magistrar of Chirurgiae ( Cardio Vascular& Thoracic Surgery ) "

(This shall be a recognised medical qualification when grantedby Lucknow University, Lucknow in respect of the students being trained at Chhatrapati Shahuji Maharaj Medical University, Lucknow on or after 1973.) 5783 भारत का राजपत्र : अगस्त 13 , 2011/ श्रावण 22, 1933

[ भाग II-खंड 3 (ii) ]

(b) Against " Chhatrapati Shahuji Maharaj Medical University, Lucknow " under the heading' Recognised Medical Qualification [hereinafter referred to as column (2) ] , after the last entry and entry relating thereto under the heading 'Abbreviation for Registration ' [hereinafter referred to as column (3 ) ] , the following shall be inserted, namely:

(3)

(2)

M. Ch (CVTS)

"Magistrar ofChirurgiae (Cardio Vascular&Thoracic Surgery) "

(Thisshall be a recognised medical qualification when granted by Chhatra- pati Shahuji Maharaj Medical University, Lucknow in respect ofthe students being trained at Chhatrapati Shahuji Maharaj Medical University, Lucknow on or after 1973.)

Note to all : 1. The recognition so granted to a Postgraduate Course shall be for a Maximum period of 5 years, upon which itshall have to be renewed.

2.Failure to seek timely renewal of recognition as required in sub-clause-4 shall invariably result in stoppage ofadmissions to the concerned Postgraduate Course.

[No. U. 12012/45/2011 -ΜΕ(Ρ. Π) ] ANITA TRIPATHI, Under Secy.

नई दिल्ली, 11 जुलाई , 2011

का.आ. 2098.-केन्द्रीय सरकार , भारतीय चिकित्सा परिषद् अधिनियम , 1956 ( 1956 का 102 ) की धारा 11 की उप- धारा ( 2 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए भारतीय आयुर्विज्ञान परिषद से परामर्श करने के बाद एतद्वारा उक्त अधिनियम की प्रथम अनुसूची में निम्नलिखित और संशोधन करती है अर्थात्: :

उक्त प्रथम अनुसूची में " राजीव गांधी स्वास्थ्य विज्ञान विश्वविद्यालय , बंगलौर, कर्नाटक " के समक्ष " मान्यताप्राप्त चिकित्सा अहंता " [ इसके बाद कालम ( 2 ) के रूप में संदर्भित ] शीर्षक के अन्तर्गत और " पंजीकरण के लिए संक्षेपण " [ इसके बाद कालम ( 3 ) के रूप में संदर्भित ] , शीर्षक के अंतर्गत निम्नलिखित अंतः स्थापित किया जाएगा , अर्थात्:-

(3)

(2)

एम.बी.बी.एस.

" बैचलर ऑफ मेडिसिन एंड बैचलर ऑफ सर्जरी "

(यह एक मान्यताप्राप्त चिकित्सा अर्हता होगी जब यह हसन आयुर्विज्ञान संस्थान , हसन, कर्नाटक में प्रशिक्षित किए गए विद्यार्थियों के बारे में राजीव गांधी स्वास्थ्य विज्ञान विश्वविद्यालय , बंगलौर , कर्नाटक द्वारा जनवरी , 2011 में या उसके बाद प्रदान की गई हो) ।

[ सं. यू-12012/ 91/2004- एमई (पी- II ) ]

अनीता त्रिपाठी , अवर सचिव

NewDelhi , the 11th July, 2011

S.O. 2098.-In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (2) of Section 11 of the Indian Medical Council Act, 1956 ( 102 of 1956 ), the Central Government , after consulting the Medical Council of India, hereby makes the following further amendments in the First Schedule to the said Act, namely:

Inthe said First Schedule against "Rajiv Gandhi University ofHealth Sciences , Bangalore , Karnataka" under the heading 'Recognised Medical Qualification ' [ [ in column (2 ) ] , and under the heading ' Abbreviation for Registration ' [ in column (3 )] , the following shall be inserted, namely :

(3)

(2)

M.B.B.S.

"Bachelor ofMedicine and Bachelor of Surgery"

(Thisshall be a recognised medical qualification when granted by Rajiv Gandhi University ofHealth Sciences, Bangalore , Karnataka in respect of students trained at Hassan Institute of Medical Sciences , Hassan , Karnataka on or after January 2011. )

[No. U-12012/91/2004-ME(P. II)]

ANITA TRIPATHI , Under Secy.

5784

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST, 13 , 2011 /SRAVANA 22 , 1933

[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii ) ]

नई दिल्ली , 21 जुलाई , 2011

का.आ. 2099.-केन्द्रीय सरकार, भारतीय चिकित्सा परिषद् अधिनियम, 1956 ( 1956 का 102 ) की धारा 11 की उप - धारा ( 2 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए भारतीय चिकित्सा परिषद् से परामर्श करने के बाद एतद्वारा उक्त अधिनियम की प्रथम अनुसूची में निम्नलिखित और संशोधन करती है अर्थात्:-

उक्तप्रथम अनुसूची में " राजीव गांधी स्वास्थ्य विज्ञान विश्वविद्यालय , बंगलौर , कर्नाटक " के समक्ष " मान्यता प्राप्त चिकित्सा अर्हता " [ इसके बाद कालम ( 2 ) के रूप में संदर्भित ] शीर्षक के अन्तर्गत और " पंजीकरण के लिए संक्षेपण " [ इसके बाद कालम ( 3 ) के रूप में संदर्भित ] , शीर्षक के अंतर्गत निम्नलिखित अंतः स्थापित किया जाएगा , अर्थात्:-

(2)

(3)

एम.बी.बी.एस.

"बैचलर ऑफ मेडिसिन एवं बैचलर ऑफ सर्जरी"

(यह एक मान्यता प्राप्त चिकित्सा अर्हता होगी जब यह मांड्‌या आयुर्विज्ञान संस्थान , मांड्या, कर्नाटक में प्रशिक्षित किए जा रहे विद्यार्थियों के बारे में राजीव गांधी स्वास्थ्य विज्ञान विश्वविद्यालय , बंगलौर , कर्नाटक द्वारा जनवरी , 2011 में या उसके बाद प्रदान की गई हो) ।

[सं. यू. - 12012/92/2004- एमई- ( पी- II ) ] अनीता त्रिपाठी, अवर सचिव

New Delhi , the 21st July, 2011

S.O. 2099. In exercise of the powers conferred by sub - section (2 ) of Section 11 of the Indian Medical Council Act, 1956 ( 102 of 1956), the Central Government, after consulting the Medical Council of India, hereby makes the following further amendments in the First Schedule to the said Act, namely:

In the said First Schedule against " Rajiv Gandhi University ofHealth Sciences , Bangalore, Karnataka " under the heading ' Recognised Medical Qualification ' [ in column (2) ] , and under the heading ' Abbreviation for Registration' [ in column (3 ) ] , the following shall be inserted, namely :

(2)

(3)

M.B.B.S.

"Bachelor ofMedicine and Bachelor of Surgery"

(Thisshall be a recognised medical qualification when granted by Rajiv Gandhi University ofHealth Sciences , Bangalore , Karnataka in respect of students trained at Mandya Institute of Medical Sciences , Mandya , Karnataka on or after January 2011. )

[No. U- 12012/92/2004-ME(P. II) ] ANITA TRIPATHI , Under Secy.

नई दिल्ली, 21 जुलाई, 2011

का.आ. 2100.-केन्द्रीय सरकार , भारतीय चिकित्सा परिषद अधिनियम , 1956 ( 1956 का 102 ) की धारा 11 की उप- धारा ( 2 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए भारतीय आयुर्विज्ञान परिषद से परामर्श करने के बाद एत‌द्वारा उक्त अधिनियम की प्रथम अनुसूची में निम्नलिखित और संशोधन करती है , अर्थात्:-

उक्त प्रथम अनुसूची में " पं. रविशंकर शुक्ला विश्वविद्यालय , रायपुर , छत्तीसगढ़ " के समक्ष " मान्यता प्राप्त चिकित्सा अर्हता " [इसके बाद कालम (2 ) के रूप में संदर्भित ] शीर्षक के अन्तर्गत और " पंजीकरण के लिए संक्षेपण " [ इसके बाद कालम ( 3 ) के रूप में संदर्भित ] , शीर्षक के अंतर्गत निम्नलिखित अंतः स्थापित किया जाएगा , अर्थात्:

(2)

(3)

एम.बी.बी.एस.

" बैचलर ऑफ मेडिसिन एवं बैचलर ऑफ सर्जरी "

(यह एक मान्यता प्राप्त चिकित्सा अर्हता होगी जब यह एन.डी.एम.सी. गवर्नमेंट मेडिकल , कालेज , जगदलपुर , छत्तीसगढ. में प्रशिक्षित किए जा रहे विद्यार्थियों बारे में पं. रविशंकर शुक्ला विश्वविद्यालय , रायपुर , छत्तीसगढ़ द्वारा मार्च, 2011 में या उसके बाद प्रदान की गई हो ) ।

[सं. यू. - 12012/206/2005- एमई ( पी- II ) भाग ]

अनीता त्रिपाठी, अवर सचिव [ भाग II-खंड 3 (ii ) ]

5785 भारत का राजपत्र : अगस्त 13, 2011 / श्रावण 22, 1933

NewDelhi, the 21st July, 2011

S.O. 2100. In exercise of the powers conferred by sub -section (2) of Section 11 of the Indiari Medical Council Act, 1956 (102 of 1956) , the Central Government , after consulting the Medical Council of India, hereby makes the following further amendments in the First Schedule to the said Act , namely:-

In the said First Schedule against " Pt . Ravishankar Shukla University, Raipur, Chhattisgarh " under the heading 'RecognisedMedical Qualification ' ( in column (2) ] , and under the heading ' Abbreviation for Registration ' [ in column (3 ) ] , the following shall be inserted, namely:--

(2)

(3)

M.B.B.S.

"Bachelor of Medicine and Bachelor of Surgery"

(This shall be a recognised medical qualification when granted by Pt . Ravishankar Shukla University, Raipur, Chhattisgarh in respect of students trained at NDMC Govt . Medical College, Jagdalpur , Chhattisgarh on or after March, 2011. )

[No. U- 12012/206/2005 -ME(P. II) Pt . ] ANITA TRIPATHI , Under Secy.

नई दिल्ली, 21 जुलाई , 2011

का.आ. 2101.-केन्द्रीय सरकार, भारतीय चिकित्सा परिषद् अधिनियम , 1956 ( 1956 का 102 ) की धारा 11 की उप - धारा ( 2 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए भारतीय चिकित्सा परिषद से परामर्श करने के बाद एतद्‌द्वारा उक्त अधिनियम की प्रथम अनुसूची में निम्नलिखित और संशोधन करती है , अर्थात्:-

उक्त प्रथम अनुसूची में " दी तमिलनाडु डॉ. एम.जी. आर. मेडिकल यूनिवर्सिटी, तमिलनाडु " के समक्ष " मान्यता प्राप्त चिकित्सा अर्हता " [ इसके बाद कालम ( 2 ) के रूप में संदर्भित ] शीर्षक के अन्तर्गत और " पंजीकरण के लिए संक्षेपण " [ इसके बाद कालम ( 3 ) के रूप में संदर्भित ] , शीर्षक के अंतर्गत निम्नलिखित अंतः स्थापित किया जाएगा, अर्थात्:-

(2)

(3)

एम.बी.बी.एस.

" बैचलर ऑफ मेडिसिन एवं बैचलर ऑफ सर्जरी"

(यह एक मान्यता प्राप्त चिकित्सा अर्हता होगी जब यह गवर्नमेंट थेनी मेडिकल कॉलेज , थेनी , तमिलनाडु में प्रशिक्षित किए जा रहे विद्यार्थियों के बारे में दी तमिलनाडु डॉ. एम.जी.आर. मेडिकल यूनिवर्सिटी , तमिलनाडु द्वारा फरवरी, 2011 में या उसके बाद प्रदान की गई हो। )

[सं. यू-12012/70/2004 - एमई- ( पी- II ) ]

अनीता त्रिपाठी, अवर सचिव

New Delhi, the 21st July, 2011

S.O. 2101. In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (2) of Section 11 of the Indian Medical Council Act, 1956 ( 102 of 1956 ), the Central Government , after consulting the Medical Council of India, hereby makes the following further amendments in the First Schedule to the said Act, namely:-

Inthe said First Schedule against "The Tamil Nadu Dr. MGR Medical University, Tamil Nadu " under the heading 'RecognisedMedical Qualification ' [ in column (2) ] , and under the heading ' Abbreviation for Registration ' [ in column(3 ) ] , the following shall be inserted, namely :-

(2)

(3)

M.B.B.S.

"Bachelor ofMedicine and Bachelor of Surgery"

(Thisshall be a recognised medical qualification when granted by The Tamil Nadu Dr. MGR Medical University, Tamil Nadu in respect of students trained at Govt . Theni Medical College, Theni, Tamil Nadu on or after February, 2011. )

[No. U. 12012/70/2004 -ME(P. II) ] ANITA TRIPATHI , Under Secy.

[PART II SBC. 3(ii)] 5786

THEGAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 13 , 2011 /SRAVANA 22, 1933

उपभोक्ता मामले , खाद्य और सार्वजनिक वितरण मंत्रालय

(उपभोक्ता मामले विभाग )

नई दिल्ली , 5 मई , 2011

का. आ. 2102.-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 उप - धारा (7 ) और उप- धारा ( 8 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों को प्रयोग करते हुर मैसर्स भारत स्केलस , शॉप नं. 03 , श्रद्धा काम्पलेक्स, प्रमुख पार्क, अंडर उडना पंडेसरा , मैन रोड, पंडेसरा , सूरत ( गुजरात ) द्वारा विनिर्मित मध्यम ( यथार्थता वर्ग III ) वाले " भारत 44 - के " श्रृंखला के अंकक सूचन सहित अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण ( टेबलटॉप टाइप ) के मॉडल का, जिसके ब्रांड का नाम " भारत " है ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/09/10/224 समनुदेशित किया गया है , अनुमोदन प्रमाणपत्र जारी करती है ।

उक्त मॉडल एक विकृत गेज प्रकार का भार सेल आधारित अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण ( टेबलटॉप प्रकार ) है । इसकी अधिकतम क्षमता 30 कि.ग्रा. है और न्यूनतम क्षमता 100 ग्रा. है । सत्यापन मापमान अन्तराल (ई ) 5 ग्रा. है । इसमें एक आधेयतुलन युक्ति है जिसका शत प्रतिशत व्यवकलनात्मक धारित आधेयतुलन प्रभाव है । प्रकाश उत्सर्जक डायोड ( एल ई डी ) प्रदर्श तोलन परिणाम ठपदर्शित करता है । उपकरण 230 वोल्ट और 50 हर्ट्ज प्रत्यावर्ती धारा विद्युत प्रदाय पर कार्य करता है ।

आकृति-1 : मॉडल

TOP BODY OF SCALE

SEAL WIRE

0000

LEAD SQUARE SEAL

SEALWIRE

BOTTOM OF SCALE

σ

LEAD SQUARE SEAL

BHARAT

आकृति-2 : उपकरण के मॉडल का सीलिंग प्रावधान

स्केल की बॉडी के होल्स में से सीलिंग वायर निकाल कर सीलिंग की जाती है । मॉडल को सीलबंद करने के उपबंध का एक प्ररूपी योजनाबद्ध डायग्राम ऊपर दिया गया है ।

उपकरण में बाहरी केलिब्रेशन तक पहुंच की सुविधा है । बाहरी केलिब्रेशन तक पहुंच को रोकने के लिए ए/डी कार्ड/ मदर बोर्ड में.डिप स्विच भी दिया गया है ।

और केन्द्रीय सरकार उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 की उपधारा ( 12 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए घोषणा करती है कि उक्त मॉडल के अनुमोदन के इस प्रमाणपत्र के अंतर्गत उसी विनिर्माता द्वारा उसी सिद्धांत , डिजाइन के अनुसार और उसी सामग्री से जिससे उक्त अनुमोदित मॉडल का विनिर्माण किया गया है, विनिर्मित उसी श्रृंखला के वैसे ही मेक , यथार्थता और कार्यपालन के तोलन उपकरण भी होंगे जो 100 मि.ग्रा. या 2 ग्रा. तक के " 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 सत्यापन मापमान अंतराल (एन ) सहित 50 कि.ग्रा. तक की अधिकतम क्षमता वाले हैं और " ई " मान 1 × 10*, 2 × 10,5 × 10 *, के हैं, जो धनात्मक या ऋणात्मक पूर्णांक या शून्य के समतुल्य हैं ।

[फा. सं. डब्ल्यूएम 21 ( 127 )/2010 ] बी. एन. दीक्षित, निदेशक , विधिक माप विज्ञान 5787 भारत का राजपत्र : अगस्त 13 , 2011 / श्रावण 22, 1933

[ भाग II-खंड 3 ( i ) ]

MINISTRY OF CONSUMER AFFAIRS, FOOD AND PUBLIC DISTRIBUTION

(Department of ConsumerAffairs)

NewDelhi , the 5thMay, 2011

8.O. 2102, Whereas the Central Government , after considering the report submitted toit by prescribed authority, is satisfied that the model described in the said report ( see the figure given below ) is in conformity with the provisions of the Standards ofWeights and Measures Act, 1976 (60 of 1976) and the Standards of Weights and Measures (Approval of Models ) Rules , 1987 and the said model is likely to maintain its accuracy over periods of sustained use and to render accurate service under varied conditions;

Now, therefore , in exercise of the powers conferred by sub-sections (7) and (8) of Section 36 of the said act, the Central Government hereby issues and publishes the certificate of approval of the model of non -automatic weighing instrument (Tabletop type) with digital indication ofMedium Accuracy (Accuracy Class- III ) ofseries " BHARAT44-K" and with brand name " BHARAT " (hereinafter referred to as the said model ) manufactured by M/s Bharat Scales, Shop No. 03 , Shraddha Complex, Pramukh Park, Under Udhna Pandesara, Main Road, Pandosara, Surat (Gujarat ) which is assigned the approval mark IND/09/10/224;

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

Figuro-1:Model

TOP BODY OF BOGALE

SEAL WIRE

LEAD BOUARE

SEAL WIRE

ROTTOM OF SGALE

LEAD SQUARE BEAL

BHARAT

alex

Figure-2: Schematic diagram of the sealing of the model

Sealing is done by passing the sealing wire from the body of the scale through holes . A typical schomatio diagram of sealing provision of the model is given above.

The instrument has external control to calibration. A dip switch has also been provided in A/D card/motherboard to disable access to external calibration.

Further, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section ( 12 ) of Section 36 ofthe said Act, the Contral Covernment hereby declares that this certificate of approval of the said Model shall also cover the weighing instruments of similar mako, accuracy and performance and of the same series with maximum capacity upto 50 kg , and with manber of verification scale interval (n) in the range of 100 to 10,000 for ' e' value of 100 mg. to 2g. and with member ofvoribundus scale interval (n ) in the range of 500 to 10,000 for ' e ' value of 5g, or more and with 'e ' value of 1 × 10% , 2 × 10 5x10 , k being the 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 stilintured.

No. WM-21 ( 127)/2010] B. N. DIXIT, Director of Legal Metrology 2883G1/11-3 5788

THE GAZETTEOF INDIA : AUGUST 13 , 2011 / SRAVANA 22, 1933

[PART II-SEC. 3 ( ii ) ]

नई दिल्ली, 5 मई , 2011

का. आ. 2103.-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 उप - धारा ( 7 ) और उप- धारा ( 8 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए मैसर्स भारत स्केलस , शॉप नं. 03 , श्रद्धा काम्पलेक्स, प्रमुख पार्क, अंडर उडना पंडेसरा , मैन रोड , पंडेसरा , सूरत ( गुजरात ) द्वारा विनिर्मित मध्यम यथार्थता ( यथार्थता वर्ग III ) वाले " भारत 44- यू" श्रृंखला के अंकक सूचन सहित अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण ( प्लेटफार्म टॉइप ) के मॉडल का, जिसके ब्रांड का नाम " भारत " है ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/09/10/225 समनुदेशित किया गया है , अनुमोदन प्रमाण पत्र जारी करती है ।

उक्त मॉडल एक विकृत गेज प्रकार का भार सेल आधारित अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण ( प्लेटफार्म प्रकार ) है । इसकी अधिकतम क्षमता 1000 कि.ग्रा. है और न्यूनतम क्षमता 2 कि.ग्रा. है । सत्यापन मापमान अन्तराल ( ई ) 100 ग्रा. है । इसमें एक आधेयतुलन युक्ति है जिसका शत प्रतिशत व्यवकलनात्मक धारित आधेयतुलन प्रभाव है । प्रकाश उत्सर्जक डायोड ( एल ई डी ) प्रदर्श तोलन परिणाम उपदर्शित करता है । उपकरण 230 वोल्ट और 50 हर्ट्ज प्रत्यावर्ती धारा विद्युत प्रदाय पर कार्य करता है ।

आकृति-1 : मॉडल

OTHER SIDE SEALING

SEAL WITH STAMPING PLATE

PLAI FORM

2103

आकृति-2: मॉडल को सीलिंग करने का योजनाबद्ध डायग्राम

स्केल के फ्रंट , दायीं और बायीं और छेद बनाकर और स्केल की बाटम और टाप बॉडी में से में सीलिंग वायर निकाल कर सीलिंग की जाती है । मशीन को कपटपूर्ण व्यवहार के लिए खोले जाने से रोकने के लिए भी सीलिंग की जाती है । मॉडल के सीलिंग प्रावधान का स्कीमवार डायग्राम ऊपर दिया गया है ।

उपकरण में केलिब्रेशन के लिए बाहरी पहुंच है । बाहरी केलिब्रेशन तक पहुंच को रोकने के लिए ए/डी कार्ड/मदर बोर्ड में डिप स्विच भी दिया गया है ।

और केन्द्रीय सरकार उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 की उप - धारा ( 12 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए सह घोषणा करती है कि उक्त मॉडल के अनुमोदन के इस प्रमाण पत्र के अंतर्गत उसी विनिर्माता द्वारा उसी सिद्धांत , डिजाइन के अनुसार और उसी सामग्री से जिससे उक्तअनुमोदित मॉडल विनिर्माण 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 मापमान अंतराल ( एन ) सहित 50 कि.ग्रा. से 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. डब्ल्यू एम 21 ( 127) /2010 ]

बी. एन. दीक्षित , निदेशक , विधिक माप विज्ञान 5789

भारत का राजपत्र : अगस्त 13 , 2011 / श्रावण 22, 1933

[ भाग II-खंड 3 ( ii ) ]

NewDelhi , the 5th May, 2011

S.O. 2103. Whereas the Central Government, after considering the report submitted to it by prescribed authority, is satisfied that the model described in the said report ( see the figure given below) is in conformity with the provisions of the Standards ofWeights and Measures Act, 1976 (60 of 1976 ) and the Standards of Weights and Measures ( Approval of Models ) Rules , 1987 and the said model is likely to maintain its accuracy over periods of sustained use and to render accurate service under varied conditions;

Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub - sections (7) and (8) of Section 36 of the said act, the Central Government hereby issues and publishes the certificate of approval of the model of non- automatic weighing instrument (Platform type) with digital indication ofMedium Accuracy (Accuracy Class - III) of series " BHARAT 440 -U" andwith brand name " BHARAT " (hereinafter referred to as the said model ) manufactured by M/s Bharat Scales, Shop No: 03, Shraddha Complex, Pramukh Park, Under Udhna Pandesara, Main Road, Pandesara, Surat (Gujarat ) and which is assigned the approval mark IND/ 09/ 10/225 ;

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

Figure-1: Model

( THER SIDE SBALING

SHAL WITH STAMPING PLATE

600.

PLATFORM

Figure-2: Sealing Diagram

The sealing is done through the holes made in front, right and left side ofthe indicator, than sealing wire is passed through bottom and top body of scales . Sealing shall be done to prevent opening of the weighing machine for fraudulent practice .A typical schematic diagram of sealing provision of the model is given above.

The instrument has external control to calibration. A dip switch has also been provided in A/D card/mother board todisable access to external calibration.

Further, in exercise of the power conferred by sub -section (12) of Section 36 of the said Act , the Central Government herebydeclares that this certificate of approval of the said Model shall also cover the weighing instruments of similar make , accuracyand performance and of same series with maximum capacity above 50 kg. and upto 5000 kg . with verification scale interval (n) in the range of 500 to 10,000 for ' e ' value of 5g. or more and with ' e ' value of 1 × 10k, 2 × 10k or 5 × 10k , where k isa 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 ( 127 )/2010 ] B. N. DIXIT, Director of Legal Metrology 5790

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: AUGUST 13 , 2011 /SRAVANA 22, 1933

[PART II-SEC. 3 ( 11 )]

नई दिल्ली, 5 जुलाई , 2011

का. आ. 2104. 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 ( भीचे 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 उप - धारा ( 7 ) और उप - धारा ( 8 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों को प्रयोग करते हुए मैसर्स आर के वेइंग इलेक्ट्रोनिक्स, विनोबा भावे नगर , ओम शांति गली, एस टी बस स्टैंड के सामने , तुमसर , जिला भान्दरा , पिन -441912 द्वारा विनिर्मित मध्यम यथार्थता ( यथार्थता वर्ग III ) वाले " एसएसपीएस -11 " श्रृंखला के अंकक सूचन सहित अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण ( टेबलटॉप दइप ) के मॉडल का, जिसके ब्रांड का नाम " सनसुइसाई " है ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/09/ 11 / 101 समनुदेशित किया गया है, अनुमोदन प्रमाणपत्र जारी करती है ।

उक्त मॉडल एक विकृत गेज प्रकार का भार सेल आधारित अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण ( टेबलटॉप प्रकार ) है । इसकी अधिकतम क्षमता 30 कि.ग्रा. है और न्यूनतम क्षमता 100 ग्रा. है । सत्यापन मापमान अन्तराल ( ई ) 5 ग्रा. है । इसमें एक आधेयतुलन युक्ति है जिसका शत प्रतिशत व्यवकलनात्मक भारित आधेयतुलन प्रभाव है । प्रकाश उत्सर्जक डायोड ( एल ई डी ) प्रदर्श तोलन परिणाम उपदर्शित करता है । उपकरण 230 वोल्ट और 50 हर्ट्ज प्रत्यावर्ती धारा विद्युत प्रदाय पर कार्य करता है ।

आकृति-1

300mm

1.20mm

240mm

330mn

OTHERSIDE SEALING

SEAL WITH STAMPING PLATE

आच्कृति-2 : मॉडल को सीलिंग करने का योजनाबद्ध डायग्राम

डिस्पले की बाडी में से सीलिंग वायर निकाल कर डिस्पले पर सीलिंग की जाती है । सील के साथ जुड़े हुए डिस्पले के बेस प्लेट और टॉप कवर में बने दो छेदों में से सीलिंग वायर निकाल कर सील से जोड़ा गया है । मॉडल को सीलबंद करने के उपबंध का एक प्ररूपी योजनाबद्ध डायग्राम ऊपर दिया गया है ।

उपकरण में बाहरी केलिब्रेशन तक पहुंच की सुविधा है । बाहरी केलिब्रेशन तक पहुंच को रोकने के लिए ए/डी कार्ड/मदर बोर्ड में डिप स्विच भी दिया गया है ।

और केन्द्रीय सस्कार उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 की उप- धारा ( 12 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों को प्रयोग करते हुए यह घोषणा करती है किउक्त मॉडल के अनुमोदन के इस प्रमाणपत्र के अंतर्गत उसी विनिर्माता द्वारा उसी सिद्धांत , डिजाइन के अनुसार और उसी सामग्री से जिससे उक्त अनुमोदित मॉडल विनिर्माण किया गया है , विनिर्मित उसी श्रृंखला के वैसे ही मेक, यथार्थता और कार्यपालन के तोलन उपकरण भी होंगे जो 100 मि.ग्रा. से 2 ग्रा. तक के " 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 सत्यापन मापमान अंतराल ( एन ) सहित 50 कि.ग्रा. तक की अधिकतम क्षमता वाले हैं और " ई" मान 1 × 10%, 2 × 10%, 5 × 10%, के हैं , जो धनात्मक या ऋणात्मक पूर्णांक या शून्य के समतुल्य हैं ।

[फा. सं. डब्ल्यू एम 21 ( 46)/2011 ] बी. एन. दीक्षित , निदेशक , विधिक माप विज्ञान 5791

भारत का राजपत्र : अगस्त 13 , 2011 / श्रावण 22, 1933

[ भाग II-खंड 3 (11 ) ]

New Delhi , the 5th July, 2011

S:O. 2104. Whereas the Central Government , after considering the report submitted to it by prescribed authority, is satisfied that the model described in the said report ( see the figure given below) is in conformity with the provisions of the Standards ofWeights 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 ) ofSection 36 ofthe said Act, the Central Government hereby issues and publishes the certificate of approval of the model of non-automatic weighing instrument (Taple top type) with digital indication ofMedium Accuracy (Accuracy Class - III) of series " SSPS - 11 " and with brand name " SANSUISAI " ( hereinafter referred to as the said model ) manufactured by M/s R. K. Weighing Electronics , VinobaBhave Nagar, Om Shanti Gali, Opp . S. T. Bus Stand, Tumsar, Distt. Bhandara, Pin -441912 and which is assigned the approval mark IND/09/ 11/ 101;

The saidmodel is a strain gauge type load cell based non-automatic weighing instrument (Table Top type) with a maximum capacity of 30 kg. and minimum capacity of 100 g. The verification scale interval (e) is 5g. It has a tare devicewith a100 percent subtractive retained tare effect. The Light Emitting Diode (LED) display indicates the weighing result. The instrument operates on 230Volts, 30 Hertz alternative current power supply.

Figure-1

FRONT VIEW

300mm

240mค่า

330mm

OTIRR SIDE SBALINU

SUAL WITH STAMPING PLATT

Figure- 2: Schematic Diagram of sealing provision of the model

Sealing is done on the display by passing sealing wire from the body of the display. The seal is connectedby whole in base plate & top cover ofdisplay, then seal wire is passed through these two holes attached with seal. Atypical schematic diagram of sealing provision of the model is given above.

The instrument has external control to calibration . A dip switch has also been provided in A/D card/mother board to disable access to external calibration .

Further, in exercise ofthe power conferred by sub -section ( 12) of Section 36 of the said Act, the Central Government hereby declares that this certificate of approval of the said Model shall also cover the weighing instruments of similar make, accuracy and performance of same series with maximum capacity upto 50 kg with verification scale interval (n ) in the range of100 to 10,000 for ' e ' value of 100 g . to 2g. and with verification scale internal (n ) in the range to 500 to 10,000 for ' e ' value of5g. or more and with ' e' value of 1 × 10k, 2 × 10kor 5 × 10t , where k is a positivie 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(46)/2011 ] B. N. DIXIT, Director ofLegal Metrology [PART II-SEC . 3 (ii )] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 13, 2011/SRAVANA 22, 1933

5792

नई दिल्ली, 5 जुलाई, 2011

का. आ. 2105.-केन्द्रीय सरकार का, विहित प्राधिकारी द्वारा उसे प्रस्तुत रिपोर्ट पर विचार करने के पश्चात् यह समाधान हो गया है किउक्तरिपोर्ट 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 उपधारा ( 8 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों को प्रयोग करते हुए मैसर्स आर के वेइंग इलेक्ट्रोनिक्स , विनोबा भावे नगर , ओम शांति गली , 'एस टी बस स्टेंड के सामने , तुमसर, जिला भान्दा , पिन-441912 द्वारा विनिर्मित मध्यम यर्थाथता ( यथार्थता वर्ग III ) वाले " एसपीपीएस-7 " श्रृंखला के अंकक सूचन सहित अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण ( प्लेटफॉर्म टाइप ) के मॉडल का, जिसके ब्रांड का नाम " सनसुइसाई " है ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/09 / 11 / 102 समनुदेशित किया गया है, अनुमोदन प्रमाणपत्र जारी करती है ।

उक्त मॉडल एक विकृत गेज प्रकार का भार सेल आधारित अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण ( प्लेटफार्म टाइप ) है । इसकी अधिकतम क्षमता 1000 कि.ग्रा. है और न्यूनतम क्षमता 2 कि.ग्रा. है । सत्यापन मापमान अन्तराल ( ई ) 100 ग्रा. है । इसमें एक आधेयतुलन युक्ति है जिसका घात प्रतिशत व्यवकलनात्मक धारित आधेयतुलन प्रभाव है । प्रकाश उत्सर्जक डायोड ( एल ई डी ) प्रदर्श तोलन परिणाम उपदर्शित करता है । उपकरण 230 वोल्ट और 50 हर्ट्ज प्रत्यावर्ती धारा विद्युत प्रदाय पर कार्य करता है ।

82911

COFTERSUN SHALING

SEAL WH STAMPING PLATF

PLATFORM

आकृति-2 : मॉडल को सीलिंग करने का योजनाबद्ध डायग्राम

डिस्पले की बाडी में से सीलिंग वायर निकाल का डिस्पले पर सीलिंग की जाती है । सील के साथ जुड़े हुए डिस्पले के बेस प्लेट और टॉप कवर में बने दो छेदों में से सीलिंग वायर निकाल कर सील से जोड़ा गया है । मॉडल को सीलबंद करने के उपबंध का एक प्ररूपी योजनाबद्ध डायग्राम ऊपर दिया गया है ।

उपकरण में बाहरी केलिब्रेशन तक पहुंच की सुविधा है । बाहरी केलिब्रेशन तक पहुंच को रोकने के लिए ए/डी कार्ड/मदर बोर्ड में डिप स्विच भी दिया गया है ।

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

[फा. सं. डब्ल्यू एम 21 (46) /2011 ] बी. एन. दीक्षित, निदेशक, विधिक माप विज्ञान 5793 भारत का राजपत्र : अगस्त 13 , 2011 / श्रावण 22, 1933

[ भाग II-खंड 3 (ii) ]

NewDelhi , the 5th July, 2011

S.O. 2105. Whereas the Central Government, after considering the report submitted to it by prescribed authority, is satisfied that the model described in the said report (see the figure given below) is in conformity with the provisions of the Standards of Weights and Measures Act, 1976 (60 of 1976 ) and the Standards ofWeights and Measures (Approval of Models) Rules , 1987 and the said model is likely to maintain its accuracy over periods of sustained use and to render accurate service under varied conditions;

Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub-sections (7) and (8 ) of Section 36 of the said Act, the Central Government hereby issues and publishes the certificate of approval of the model of non-automatic weighing Instrument (Platform type ) with digital indication of Medium Accuracy (Accuracy Class- III) ofseries " SPPS- 7 " and with brand name " SANSUISAI " (hereinafter referred to as the said model ) manufactured by M/ s R. K. Weighing Electronics , VinobaBhave. Nagar, Om Shanti Gali, Opp. S. T. Bus Stand, Tumsar, Distt. Bhandara, Pin -441912 and which is assigned the approval mark IND/09/ 11/102;

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

Figure-1

B2911

OFTHER SID SHALING

SEAL WITH STAMPING PLATE

FRONT VIEW

2105

Figure-2 : Schematic Diagram of sealing provision of the model.

Sealing is done on the display by passing sealing wire from the body of the display. The seal is connected by whole in base plate & top cover of display, then seal wire is passed through these two holes attached with seal . A typical schematic diagram of sealing provision of the model is given above.

The instrument has external control to calibration . Adip switch has also been provided in A/D card/ mother board to disable access to external calibration .

Further, in exercise ofthe power conferred by sub -section ( 12) ofSection 36 of the said Act, the Central Government hereby declares that this certificate of approval ofthe said Model shall also cover the weighing instruments of similar make , accuracy and performance of same series with maximum capacity above 50 kg . and upto 5,000 kg. with verification scale interval (n) in the range of500 to 10,000 for ' e ' value of 5g. or more and with ' e ' value of 1 × 10k , 2 × 10kor 5 × 10k , where k is a positivie 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 (46)/2011 ] B. N. DIXIT, Director of Legal Metrology [PART II-SBC. 3 ( 11 ) ] 5794

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 13 , 2011 / SRAVANA 22, 1933

नई दिल्ली , 5 जुलाई , 2011

का, आ. 2106, फेन्द्रीय सरकार का , विहित प्राधिकारी द्वारा उसे प्रस्तुत रिपोर्ट पर विचार करने के पश्चात् यह समाधान हो गया है कि उक्त रिपोर्ट में अर्णित मॉडल ( नीचे दी गई आकृति देखें ) बाट और माप मानक अधिनियम, 1976 ( 1976 का 60 ) तथा बाट और माप मानक (मॉडली 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 रखोगा और विभिन्न परिस्थितियों में उपयुक्त सेवा प्रदान करता रहेगा:

अतः , अब , केन्द्रीय सरकार , उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 की उप- धारा ( 7 ) और उप - धारा ( 8 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए मैसर्स पाई पी इंटरप्राइजे , गुरुद्वारा रोक , मोती तालाब पाका, जगदलपुर, ( अस्तर ) ( छत्तीसगढ़ ) , पिन -494001 द्वारा विनिर्मित मध्यम यथार्थता (यथार्थता वर्ग III ) बाले " डब्ल्यूईडी -11 " श्रृंखला के अंकक सूजन सहित अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण ( टेबलटॉप डाइप ) के मॉडल का, जिसके ब्रांड का नाम " हम्ल्यूईआईजीएचडी ओएन " है ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/09/ 11 /96 सममुदेशित किया गया है, अनुमोदन प्रमाणपत्र जारी करती है ।

उक्त मॉकल एक निकृत गेज प्रकार का भार सेल आधारित अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण ( टेबलटॉप प्रकार ) है । इसकी अधिकतम क्षमता ३० कि.ग्रा. है और न्यूनतम क्षमता 100 प्रा. है । सत्यापन मापमान अन्तरालं (ई ) 5 ग्रा. है । इसमें एक आधेषतुलन सुक्ति है जिसका रात प्रतिशत व्यभचलनात्मक धारित आधेमतुलन प्रभाव है । प्रकाश उत्सर्जक डायोक ( एल ई डी ) प्रदर्श तोलन परिणाम उपदरिति करता है । उपकरण 230 बॉल्ट और 50 हदुर्ण प्रत्यावर्ती धारा बिद्युत प्रदाय पर कार्य करता है ।

आकृति- 1 :

MAN

STAMPRHI MATH i LOAD STA

ON- OFF

AFE

ZERO .

2106

आकृति -2 : मॉडल को सीलिंग करने का योजनाबद्ध डायग्राम

किस्मले की बाकी में से जीलिंग बाबर निकाल कर डिस्मले पर सीलिंग की जाती है । सील के साथ जुड़े हुए डिस्पले यो बेस प्लेड और टॉप कलर में अने गो छेदों में से सीलिंग माधर निकाल कर सील से जोड़ा गया है । मॉडल को सीलबंद करने के उपबंध का एक प्ररूपी योजनाबद्ध काचग्राम ऊपर दिया गया है ।

उपकरण में साहरी केलिब्रेशन तक पहुंच की सुविधा है । बाहरी केलिब्रेशन तक पहुंच को रोकने के लिए प/ की कार्ड /मगर ओर्ड में किप स्वित्र भी दिया गया है ।

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 उशी सिद्धांत , डिप्णाइन के अनुसार और उसी सामग्री से जिससे उक्त अनुमोदित मॉडल विनिर्माण किया गया है , विनिर्मित उसी श्रृंखला के वैसे ही मेक, चधार्थता और कार्यपालन के तोलन उपकरण भी होंगे जो 100 मि.ग्रा. से 2 ग्रा. तक के " ई" मान के लिए 100 से 10,000 तक की रेंज में सत्यापन माषमान अंतराल ( एन ) और 5 प्रा. या उससे अधिक के " ई " मान के लिए 500 से 10,000 तक की रेंज में सत्यापन मापमान अंतराल ( एम ) सहित 50 कि.ग्रा. तक की अधिकतम क्षमता वाले हैंऔर "ई" मान 1 × 10 , 2 × 10 , 5 × 10%, के हैं , जो धनात्मक या ऋणात्मक पूर्णांक या शून्य के समतुल्य हैं ।

[फा, सं. डब्ल्यू एम-21 (48 )/2011 ]

बी. एन. दीक्षित , निदेशक , विधिक माप विज्ञान 5795 भारत का राजपत्र : अगस्त 13, 2011 / श्रावण 22 , 1933

[भाग II-खंड 3 (ii) ]

NewDelhi, the 5th July, 2011

S.O. 2106. Whereas the Central Government, after considering the report submitted to it by prescribed authority, is satisfied that the model described in the said report (see the figure given below) is in conformity with the provisions of the Standards ofWeights and Measures Act, 1976 (60 of 1976) and the Standards ofWeights 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) ofSection 36 of the said Act, the Central Government hereby issues and publishes the certificate of approval of the model of non-automatic weighing instrument (Table top type) with digital indication ofMedium Accuracy (Accuracy Class- III) ofseries " WET- 11 " and with brand name "WEIGHT-ON" (hereinafter referred to as the said model ), manufactured by M/s Y. P. Enterprises, Gurudwara Road,Moti Talab Para, Jagdalpur, (Bastar) (C.G ), Pin -494001 and which is assigned the approval mark IND /09/11/96;

The said model is a strain gauge type load cell based non-automatic weighing instrument (Table Top type) with a inaximum capacity of30 kg and minimum capacity of 100 g . The verification scale interval (e) is 5 g. It has a tare devicewith a100 percent subtractive retained tare effect. The Light Emitting Diode (LED) display indicates the weighing result . The instrument operates on 230 Volts, 50 Hertz alternative current power supply.

Figure-1:

MANS

STAMPING PRA

LOADSEAL

ON-OFF.

ON OFF

888888

TARE.

ZERO.

2106

OTHER

Figure-2: Schematic Diagram of sealing provision of themodel

Sealing is done on the display by passing sealing wire from the body of the display. The seal is connected by whole in base plate & top cover of display, than seal wire is passed through these two holes attached with seal . Atypical schematic diagram ofsealing provision of the model is given above.

The instrument has external control to calibration. A dip switch has also been provided in A/D card/mother board todisable access to external calibration.

Further, inexercise ofthe power conferred by sub-section ( 12) of Section 36 of the said Act, the Central Government herebydeclares that this certificate of approval ofthe said Model shall also cover the weighing instruments of similar make, accuracyand performance of same series with maximum capacity upto 50 kg with verification scale interval (n) in the range of100 to 10,000 for ' e ' value of 100 mg to 2 g and with verification scale internal (n) in the range of500 to 10,000 for ' e' value of5g or more and with ' e' value of 1 × 10k, 2 × 10%, 5 × 10%, where k is a positive or negative whole number or equal to zero , manufactured by the same manufacturer in accordance with the same principle , design and with the same materials with which, the said approved model has been manufactured.

[F. No. WM-21 (48)/2011 ]

B. N. DIXIT, Director ofLegal Metrology 2883 GI /11-4 5796

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 13 , 2011/SRAVANA 22 , 1933

[PART II-Sec. 3(ii ) ]

नई दिल्ली, 5 जुलाई , 2011

कां. आ. 2107.-केन्द्रीय सरकार का, विहित प्राधिकारी द्वारा उसे प्रस्तुत रिपोर्ट पर विचार करने के पश्चात् यह समाधान हो गया है किउक्त रिपोर्ट में वर्णित मॉडल ( नीचे दी गई आकृति देखें ) बांट 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 रखीगा और विभिन्न परिस्थितियों में उपयुक्त सेवा प्रदान करता रहेगा;

अत्तः , अब , केन्द्रीय सरकार, उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 की उप - धारा (7 ) और उप- धारा ( 8 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए मैसर्स वाई पी इंटरप्राइज , गुरुद्वारा रोड , मोती तालाब पाडा, जगदलपुर , ( बस्तर ) ( छत्तीसगढ़ ) , पिन-494001 द्वारा विनिर्मित मध्यमं यथार्थता (यथार्थता वर्ग III ) काले " डब्ल्यूईपी-7 " श्रृंखला के अंकक सूचन सहित अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण ( प्लेटफार्म टाइप ) के मॉडल का, जिसके ब्रांड का नाम " डब्ल्यूईआईजीएचटी-ओएन " है ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/09/ 11/97 समनुदेशित किया गया है , अनुमोदन प्रमाण पत्र जारी करती है ।

उक्त मॉडल एक विकृत गेज प्रकार का भार सेल आधारित अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण ( प्लेटफार्म टाइप ) है । इसकी अधिकतम क्षमता 1000 कि.ग्रा. है और न्यूनतम क्षमता 2 कि.ग्रा. है । सत्यापन मापमान अन्तराल ( ई ) 100 ग्रा. है । इसमें एक आधेषतुलन युषित है जिसका शत प्रतिशत व्यवकलनात्मक धारित आधेयतुलन प्रभाव है । प्रकाश उत्सर्जक डायोड ( एल ई डी ) प्रदर्श तोलन परिणाम उपदर्शित करता है । उपकरण 230 वोल्ट और 50 हर्ट्ज प्रत्यावर्ती धारा विद्युत प्रदाय पर कार्य करता है ।

आकृति-1

OTHER SIDE SEALING

SEAL WITH TAMPING PLATE

GALL

2107

600

PLATFOR

FRONT VIEW

आकृति-2 : मॉडल को सीलिंग करने का योजनाबद्ध डायग्राम

डिस्पले की बीडी में से सीलिंग वायर निकाल कर डिस्पले पर सीलिंग की जाती है । सील के साथ जुड़े हुए डिस्पले के बेस प्लेट और टॉप कवर में बने दो छेदों में से सीलिंग वायर निकाल कर सील से जोड़ा गया है । मॉडल को सीलबंद करने के उपबंध का एक प्ररूपी योजनाबद्ध डायग्राम ऊपर दिया गया है ।

उपकरण में बाहरी केलिब्रेशन तक पहुंच की सुविधा है । बाहरी केलिब्रेशन तक पहुंच को रोकने के लिए ए/डी कार्ड/मदर बोर्ड में डिप स्विच भीदिया गया है ।

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

[फा. सं. डब्ल्यूएम-21 (48)/2011 ]

बी. एन. दीक्षित , निदेशक, विधिक माप विज्ञान भारत का राजपत्र : अगस्त 13 , 2011/ श्रावण 22, 1933

[भाग II-खंड 3 (ii ) ]

NewDelhi, the 5th July, 2011

S.O. 2107. Whereas the Central Government, after considering the report submitted to it by prescribed authority, is satisfied that the model described in the said report (see the figure given below) is in conformity with the provisions of the Standards of Weights and Measures Act, 1976 (60 of 1976) and the Standards ofWeights 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 ofthe powers conferred by Sub-sections (7) and (8) of Section 36 ofthe saidAct, the Central Government hereby issues and publishes the certificate of approval of the model of non-automatic weighing instrument (Platform type) with digital indication ofMedium Accuracy (Accuracy Class- III) ofseries "WEP- 7 " andwith brandname "WEIGHT-ON " (hereinafter referred to as the said model ) , manufactured byM/s Y. P. Enterprises, Gurudwara Road, Moti Talab Para, Jagdalpur, (Bastar ) (C.G ) , Pin-494001 and which is assigned the approval mark IND/09/11/97;

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

Figure-1

OTHER SIDE SEALING

SEAL WITH TAMPING PLATE

PLATFORM

FRONT VIEW

Figure-2: Schematic Diagram ofsealing provision ofthemodel

Sealing is done on the display by passing sealing wire from the body of the display. The seal is connected byhole inbase plate & top cover of display, than seal wire is passed through these two holes attached with seal . A typical schematic diagram of sealing provision of the model is given above.

The instrument has external control to calibration. Adip switch has also been provided in A/D card/mother board to disable access to external calibration.

Further, inexercise of the power conferred by sub- section (12 ) of Section 36 of the said Act , the Central Government herebydeclares that this certificate of approval of the said Model shall also cover the weighing instruments of similar make, accuracy and performance of same series with maximum capacity above 50 kg. and upto 5,000 kg with verification scale interval (n) in the range of500 to 10,000 for ' e' value of 5g. or more and with ' e' value of 1 × 10 , 2 x 10kor 5 × 10 , where k is a positivie 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 (48)/2011 ]

B. N. DIXIT, Director of Legal Metrology $798

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 13, 2011 /SRAVANA 22, 1933

[PART II Sec. 3(ii )]

नई दिल्ली, 5 जुलाई , 2011

का. आ. 2108.-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 ब्रनाए रखेगा और विभिन्न परिस्थितियों में उपयुक्त सेवा प्रदान करता रहेगा ;

अतः अब केन्द्रीय सरकार , उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 की उप- धारा ( 7 ) और उप - धारा ( 8 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए मैसर्स साइमेम कंस्ट्रक्शन एंड इंवायनमेंटल इंजीनियरिंग प्रा.लि. , 457 , जीआईडीसी , पोर- रमनगामडी , जिला- बडोदरा , गुजरात -391243 भारत द्वारा विनिर्मित यथार्थता वर्ग II वाले " एसआईएमईएम -7" श्रृंखला के डिस्कटिन्युअस टोटलाइजिंग स्वचालित तोलन उपकरण ( डोहलाइजिंग हुपर व्हीयर ) अंकक सूचन सहित , के मॉडल का, जिसके ब्रांड का नाम " एसआईएमईएम " है ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है) औरजिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/09 / 11 / 105 समनुदेशित किया गया है , अनुमोदन प्रमाण - पत्र जारी करती है ।

उक्तमॉडल एक विकृत गेज प्रकार का भार सेल आधारित डिस्कॉटन्युअस टोटलाइजिंग स्वचालित तोलन उपकरण ( टोटलाइजिंग हुपर व्हीयर ) है । इसकी अधिकतम क्षमता 500 कि.ग्रा. है और न्यूनतम क्षमता 10 कि.ग्रा. है । मापमान अंतराल ( डी) 100 ग्रा. है । एलसीडी/पुलईडी वोल परिणाम सूचित करता है । उपकरण 230 वोल्ट और 50 हर्ट्ज प्रत्यावर्ती धारा विद्युत प्रदाय पर कार्य करता है ।

000

Ot

आकृति-2 : उपकरण के मॉडल का सीलिंग प्रावधान

स्केल की बॉडी के होल्स में से सीलिंग वायर निकाल कर सीलिंग की जाती है । मॉडल को सीलबंद करने के उपबंध का एक प्ररूपी योजनाबद्ध डायग्राम ऊपर दिया गया है ।

उपकरण में बाहरी केलिब्रेशन तक पहुंच की सुविधा है । बाहरी केलिब्रेशन तक पहुंच को रोकने के लिए ए/डी कार्ड/मदर बोर्ड में डिप स्विच भी दिया गया है ।

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

[फा. सं. डब्ल्यूएम 21 (53)/2011 ]

बी. एन. दीक्षित , निदेशक, विधिक माप विज्ञान 5799

भारत का राजपत्र : अगस्त 13 , 2011 / श्रावण 22 , 1933

[भाग II-खंड 3 ( ii ) ]

New Delhi , the 5th July, 2011

S.O. 2108. Whereas the Central Government, after considering the report submitted to it by prescribed authority, is satisfied that the model described in the said report (see the figure given below ) is in conformity with the provisions of the Standards ofWeights 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 ofapproval ofthe model ofAutomatic weighing instrument Discontinuous Totalizing Automatic weighing instrument (Totalizing Hopper Weigher) with digital indication ofAccuracy class-2 ofseries " SIMEM- 7 " and with brand name " SIMEM" (hereinafter referred to as the said Model) , manufactured by M/sSimem Construction and Environmental Engineering Pvt. Ltd. , 457, GIDC, Por -Ramangamdi, Dist. Vadodara, Gujarat- 391243, Indiaand which is assigned the approval mark IND/09/11/105;

The saidmodel is a strain gauge type load cell based Automatic weighing instrument Discontinuous Totalizing Automaticweighing instrument (Totalizing Hopper Weigher ) with a maximum capacity of 500 kg, minimum capacity of 10kg. The scale interval (d) is 100 g. The LCD/LED display indicates theweighing results. The instrument operates on 230Volts, 50Hertz alternative current power supply.

いい

lo

000

Figure-3 Sealing diagram of the sealing provision of the model

Sealing is done bypassing the sealing wire from the body of the scale through holes. Atypical schematic diagram ofsealing provision of the model is given above.

The instrument has external control to calibration. Adip switch has also been provided in A/D card/mother board todisable access to external calibration.

Further, in exercise ofthe power conferred by sub-section ( 12) ofSection 36 of the said Act, the Central Government herebydeclares that this certificate of approval of the said model shall also cover the weighing instruments of similar make , accuracy and performance of same series with capacity from 50 kg. and up to 5000 kg. with verification scale interval (n) in therange of500to 10000 for ' e' value of 5 g or more and with 'e ' value of 1 × 10%, 2 × 10% , 5 × 10%, where k is a positive or negative whole number or equal to zero manufactured by the same manufacturer in accordance with the same principle, design and with the same materials with which, the said approved model has been manufactured.

[F.No. WM-21 (53)/2011 ]

B. N. DIXIT, Director of Legal Metrology [PART II-SBC. 3 (ii ) ] 5800

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: AUGUST 13 , 2011 /SRAVANA 22, 1933

नई दिल्ली , 5 जुलाई, 2011

का. आ. 2109.-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 यक्षार्थता बनाए रखेगा और विभिन्न परिस्थितियों में उपयुक्त सेवा प्रदान करता रहेगा ।

अतः , अब , केन्द्रीय सरकार , उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 की उप - धारा ( 7 ) और उप - धारा ( 8 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुर मैसर्स कौशिक स्केल कॉरपोरेशन , ए-84/बी , ईस्ट नत्थू कालोनी, गुरुद्वारा के पास , शाहदरा , दिल्ली-110032 द्वारा विनिर्मित उच्च यथार्थता (सथार्थता वर्ग- II ) वाले " केएसएच " श्रृंखला के अंकक सूचन सहित अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण ( टेबल टॉप टाइप ) के मॉडल का, जिसके ब्रांड का नाम " इमिनेन्ट" है ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/09/ 11 /91 समनुदेशित किया गया है, अनुमोदन प्रमाण- पत्र जारी करती है ।

उक्त मॉडल एक विकृत गेज प्रकार का भार सेल आधारित अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण ( टेबल टॉप प्रकार ) है । इसकी अधिकतम क्षमता 30 कि.ग्रा. और न्यूनतम क्षमता 100 ग्रा. है । सत्यापन मापमान अंतराल ( ई ) 2 ग्रा. है । इसमें एक आधेयतुलन युक्ति है जिसका शत- प्रतिशत व्यवकलनात्मक धारित आधेयतुलन प्रभाव है । प्रकाश उत्सर्जक डायोड ( एलईडी ) प्रदर्श तोलन परिणाम उपदर्शित करता है । उपकरण 230 वोल्ट और 50 हर्ट्ज प्रत्यावर्ती धारा विद्युत प्रदाय पर कार्य करता है ।

आकृति-1

Load seal

Stamping Platu आकृति-2 : मॉडल को सीलिंग करने का योजनाबद्ध डायग्राम

डिस्पले की बाडी में से सीलिंग वायर निकाल कर डिस्पले पर सीलिंग की जाती है । सील के साथ जुड़े हुए डिस्पले के बेस प्लेट और दॉप कवर में बने दो छेदों में से सीलिंग वायर निकाल कर सील से जोड़ा गया है । मॉडल को सीलबंद करने के उपबंध का एक प्ररूपी योजनाबद्ध डायग्राम उपरोक्त दिया गया है ।

उपकरण में बाहरी केलिब्रेशन तक पहुंच की सुविधा है । बाहरी केलिब्रेशन तक पहुंच को रोकने के लिए ए/डी कार्ड/ मदर बोर्ड में डिप स्विच भी दिया गया है ।

और केन्द्रीय सरकार उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 की उप- धारा ( 12 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों को प्रयोग करते हुए यह घोषणा करती है कि उक्त मॉडल के अनुमोदन के इस प्रमाणपत्र के अंतर्गत उसी विनिर्माता द्वारा उसी सिद्धांत , डिजाइन के अनुसार और उसी सामग्री से जिससे उक्तअनुमोदित मॉडल विनिर्माण किया गया है, विनिर्मित उसी श्रृंखला के वैसे ही मेक , यथार्थता और कार्यपालन के तोलन उपकरण भी होंगे जो मि.ग्रा. से 50 मि.ग्रा. तक के " ई " मान के लिए 100 से 1,00,000 तक के रेंज में सत्यापन मापमान अंतराल ( एन ) और 100 मि.ग्रा. या उससे अधिक के" ई" मान के लिए 5,000 से 1,00,000 तक की रेंज में सत्यापन मापमान अंतराल ( एन ) सहित 50 कि.ग्रा. तक की अधिकतम क्षमता वाले हैं और " ई" मान 1 × 10*, 2× 10*, 5× 10* , के हैं, जो धनात्मक या ऋणात्मक पूर्णांक या शून्य के समतुल्य हैं ।

[फा. सं. डब्ल्यूएम 21 (10)/2011 ] बी. एन. दीक्षित , निदेशक , विधिक माप विज्ञान 5801 भारत का राजपत्र : अगस्त 13, 2011 / श्रावण 22, 1933

[ भाग II-खड 3 (ii) )

NewDelhi , the 5th July, 2011

S.O. 2109.Whereas the Central Government, after considering the report submitted to it by prescribed authority, is satisfied that the model described in the said report (see the figure given below) is in conformity with the provisions of the Standards ofWeights 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 ofthe powers conferredby Sub-sections (7) and (8) of Section 36 ofthe said Act, the Central Government hereby issues and publishes the certificate of approval of the model of non-automatic weighing instrument(Table top type) with digital indication of High Accuracy (Accuracy class- II) of series "KSH" and with brand name "EMINENT" (hereinafter referred to as the said model ), manufactured by M/s Kaushik Scale Corporation, A-84/B, East Nathu Colony, Near Gurudwara, Shahdara, Delhi - 110032 and which is assigned the approval mark IND/09/ 11/91 ;

The said model is a strain gauge type load cell based non -automatic weighing instrument (Table Top Type ) with a maximum capacity of 30 kg . and minimum capacity of 100 g. The verification scale interval (e) is 2g. It has a tare device with a100 percent subtractive retained tare effect. The Light Emitting Diode (LED) display indicates the weighing result . The instrument operates on 230 Volts, 50 Hertz alternative current power supply.

Figure-1

Lead seal

Stamping Plate

2109

Figure-2: Schematic Diagram of sealing provision of the model

Sealing is done on the display by passing sealing wire from the body of the display. The seal is connected by whole inbase plate and topcover of display, than seal wire is passed through these two holes attached with sea. Atypical schematic diagram of sealing provision ofthe model is given above .

The instrument has external control to calibration . A dip switch has also been provided in A/D card/mother board to disable access to external calibration.

Further, in exercise of the power conferredby Sub -section ( 12) of Section 36 of the said Act, the Central Government hereby declares that this certificate of approval of the said model shall also cover the weighing instruments of similar make , accuracy and performance of same series with maximum capacity upto 50 kg with verification scale interval (n) in the range of100 to 1,00,000 for ' e' value of 1 mg. to 50 mg. and with verification scale internal (n) in the range of 5,000 to 1,00,000 for 'e' value of 100mg. or more and with ' e ' value of 1 × 10k, 2 × 10 , or 5 × 10k, where k is a positive or negative whole number or equal to zero manufactured by the same manufacturer in accordance with the same principle, design and with the same materials with which, the said approved model has been manufactured.

[F.No. WM- 21 ( 10)/2011 ]

B. N. DIXIT, Director of Legal Metrology [PART II-Sac. 3(ii)] 5802

THEGAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 13 , 2011/SRAVANA 22, 1933

नई दिल्ली, 5 जुलाई , 2011

का. आ. 2110.-केन्द्रीय सरकार का, विहित प्राधिकारी द्वारा उसे प्रस्तुत रिपोर्ट पर विचार करने के पश्चात् यह समाधान हो गया है किउक्त 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 उप - धारा ( 7 ) और उप- धारा (8 ) द्वारा प्रदत शक्तियों को प्रयोग करते हुए मैसर्स कौशिक स्केल कॉरपोरेशन , ए-84/बी, ईस्ट नत्थूकालोनी, गुरुद्वारा के पास , शाहदरा , दिल्ली -110032 द्वारा विनिर्मित मध्यम यमार्थता (यथार्थता वर्ग- III ) वाले " केएसटी " श्रृंखला के अंकक सूचन सहित अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण ( टेबलटॉप टाइप ) के मॉडल का, जिसके ब्रांड का नाम " इमिनेन्ट" है ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/09/ 11/92 समनुदेशिश किक गया है, अनुमोदन प्रमाणपत्र जारी करती है ।

उक्त मॉडल एक विकृत गेज प्रकार का भार सेल आधारित अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण ( टेबलटॉप प्रकार ) है । इसकी अधिकतम क्षमता 30 कि.ग्रा. और न्यूनतम क्षमता 100 ग्रा. है । सत्यापन मापमान अंतराल ( ई ) 5 ग्रा. है । इसमें एक आधेयतुलन युक्ति है जिसका शत प्रतिशत व्यवकलनात्मक धारित आधेयतुलन प्रभाव है । प्रकाश उत्सर्जक डायोड ( एलईडी ) प्रदर्श तोलन परिणाम उपदर्शित करता है । उपकरण 230 वोल्ट और 50 हर्ट्ज प्रत्यावर्ती धारा विद्युत प्रदाय पर कार्य करता है ।

आकृति-1

Lead seal

Stanaping Platu

2110

आकृति-2 : मॉडल को सीलिंग करने का योजनाबद्ध डायग्राम

डिस्पले की बॉडी में से सीलिंग वायर निकाल कर डिस्पले पर सीलिंग की जाती है । सील के साथ जुड़े हुए डिस्पले के बेस प्लेट और टॉप कवर में बने दो छेदों में से सीलिंग वायर निकाल कर सील से जोड़ा गया है । मॉडल को सीलबंद करने के उपबंध का एक प्ररूपी योजनाबद्ध डायग्राम उपरोक्तदिया गया है ।

उपकरण में बाहरी केलिब्रेशन तक पहुंच की सुविधा है । बाहरी केलिब्रेशन तक पहुंच को रोकने के लिए ए/ डी कार्ड/मदर बोर्ड में डिप स्विच भी दिया गया है ।

और केन्द्रीय सरकार उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 की उप- धारा ( 12 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों को प्रयोग करते हुए यह घोषणा करती है कि उक्त मॉडल के अनुमोदन के इस प्रमाणपत्र के अंतर्गत उसी विनिर्माता द्वारा उसी सिद्धांत , डिजाइन के अनुसार और उसी सामग्री से जिससे उक्तअनुमोदित मॉडल विनिर्माण किया गया है , विनिर्मित उसी श्रृंखला के वैसे ही मेक , यथार्थता और कार्यपालन के तोलन उपकरण भी होंगे जो 100 मि.ग्रा. से 2 ग्रा. तक के " ई " मान के लिए 100 से 10,000 तक के 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 सत्यापन मापमान अंतराल ( एन ) सहित 50 कि.ग्रा. तक की अधिकतम क्षमता वाले हैं और "ई" मान 1 × 10 , 2× 10*, 5× 10*, के हैं, जो धनात्मक या ऋणात्मक पूर्णांक या शून्य के समतुल्य हैं ।

[फा. सं. डब्ल्यूएम 21 (10 )/2011 ] बी. एन. दीक्षित, निदेशक, विधिक माप विज्ञान 5803 भारत का राजपत्र : अगस्त 13 , 2011 / श्रावण 22, 1933

[भाग II-खंड 3(ii) ]

NewDelhi , the 5th July,2011

8.0. 2110-Whereas the Central Government, after considering the report submitted to it by prescribed authority, is satisfied that the model described in the said report (see the figure given below) is in conformity with the provisions of the Standards ofWeights and Measures Act , 1976 (60 of 1976) and the Standards ofWeights and Measures (Approval of Models) Rules, 1987 and the said model is likely to maintain its accuracy over periods of sustained use andto render accurate service under varied conditions;

Now, therefore, in exercise ofthe powers conferred by sub-sections (7) and (8) ofSection 36 of the saidAct, the Central Government hereby issues and publishes the certificate of approval of the model of non-automatic weighing instrument (Tabletop type) with digital indication of Medium Accuracy (Accuracy class-III) of series "KST" and with brandname "EMINENT" ( hereinafter referred to as the said model ) , manufactured by M/s Kaushik Scale Corporation, A-84/B, East Nathu Colony, Near Gurudwara, Shahdara, Delhi - 110032 and which is assigned the approval mark IND/09/11/92;

Thesaidmodel is a strain gauge type load cell based non-automatic weighing instrument (TableTop Type)witha maximum capacity of30 kg and minimum capacity of 100 g. The verification scale interval (e) is 5g. It has a tare device with a100percent subtractive retained tare effect. The Light Emitting Diode (LED ) display indicates the weighing result . The instrument operates on 230 Volts , 50 Hertz alternative current power supply.

Figure-1

Lond seal

2110

Figure-2 Schematic Diagram of sealing provision ofthemodel

Sealing is done on the display by passing sealing wire from the body of the display. The seal is connected by whole inbaseplate and top cover ofdisplay, then seal wire is passed through these two holes attached with seal . Atypical schematic diagram ofsealing provision ofthe model is given above.

The instrument has external control to calibration. Adip switch has also been provided in A/D card/Mother board todisable access to external calibration.

Further, in exercise ofthe power conferred by sub -section ( 12) ofSection 36 of the said Act, the Central Government hereby declares that this certificate ofapproval of the said model shall also cover the weighing instruments ofsimilarmake, accuracy andperformance of same series with maximum capacity upto 50 kg with verification scale interval (n) in the range of100 to 10,000 for ' e ' value of 100 mg to 2g and with verification scale internal (n) in the range of500 to 10,000 for ' e ' value of5g or more and with 'e' value of 1 × 10 , 2 × 10%, 5× 10k, where k is a positive or negative whole number or equal to zero manufactured by the same manufacturer in accordance with the same principle , design and with the same materials with which, the said approved model has been manufactured.

[F.No. WM -21 (10)/2011 ]

B. N. DIXIT, Director ofLegal Metrology 2883G1/11-6 5804

THEGAZETTE OF INDIA: AUGUST 13 , 2011 /SRAVANA 22, 1933

[PART II Sec. 3( ii )]

नई दिल्ली, 5 जुलाई , 2011

का. आ. 2111.-केन्द्रीय सरकार का , विहित प्राधिकारी द्वारा उसे प्रस्तुत रिपोर्ट पर विचार करने के पश्चात् यह समाधान हो गया है किउक्त 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 उप - धारा ( 7 ) और उप- धारा ( 8 ) द्वारा प्रदत शक्तियों को प्रयोग करते हुए मैसर्स कौशिक स्केल कॉरपोरेशन , ए-84 /बी , ईस्ट नत्थू कालोभी , गुरुद्वारा के पास , शाहदरा , दिल्ली-110032 द्वारा विनिर्मित मध्यम यथार्थता (वद्यार्थता वर्ग- III ) वाले " केएसपी " श्रृंखला के अंकक सूचन सहित अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण ( प्लेटफार्म टाइप ) के मॉडल का, जिसके ब्रांड का नाम " इमिनेन्ट" है ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/09/ 11 /93 समनुदेशित किया गया है, अनुभोधन प्रमाण पत्र जारी करती है ।

उक्त मॉडल एक विकृत गेज प्रकार का भार सेल आधारित अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण ( प्लेटफार्म टाइप ) है । इसकी अधिकतम क्षमता 200 कि.ग्रा. और न्यूनतम क्षमता 400 ग्रा. है । सत्यापन मापमान अंतराल (ई ) 20 ग्रा. है । इसमें एक आधेयतुलन युक्ति है जिसका शत प्रतिशत व्यवकलगात्मक भारित आधेयतुलन प्रभाव है । प्रकाश उत्सर्जक डायोड ( एलईडी ) प्रदर्श तोलन परिणाम उपवर्शित करता है । उपकरण 230 वोल्ट और 50 हर्ट्ज प्रत्यावर्ती धारा विद्युत प्रदाय पर कार्य करता है ।

आकृति-1

Schematic Diagram of stamping, und sealing ( Platform scale)

Stamping pl 0000 Lond saal

(Ihlicator of the Platform Scale-Front Bide)

Stamping Plata

2111

Lead seal

Sealingwire

Indicator of the platform Scale Lower back Side)

आकृति-2: मॉडल को सीलिंग करने का योजनाबद्ध डायग्राम

डिस्पले की बाडी में से सीलिंग वायर निकाल कर डिस्पले पर सीलिंग की जाती है । सील के साथ जुड़े हुए डिस्पले के बेस प्लेट और टॉप कवर में बने दो छेदों में से सीलिंग वायर निकाल कर सील से जोड़ा गया है । मॉडल को सीलबंद करने के उपबंध का एक प्ररूपी योजनावद्ध अयग्राम उपरोक्त दिया गया है ।

उपकरण में बाहरी केलिब्रेशन तक पहुंच की सुविधा है । बाहरी केलिब्रेशन तक पहुंच को रोकने के लिए ए/ डी कार्ड/ मदर बोर्ड में डिप स्विच भी दिया गया है ।

और केन्द्रीय सरकार उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 की उप- धारा ( 12 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों को प्रयोग करते हुए यह घोषणा करती है कि उक्त मॉडल के अनुमोदन के इस प्रमाणपत्र के अंतर्गत उसी विनिर्माता द्वारा उसी सिद्धांत , डिजाइन के अनुसार और उसी सामग्री से जिससे उक्त अनुमोदित मॉडल विनिर्माण 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 मापमान अंतराल ( एन ) सहित 50 कि.ग्रा. से 5,000 कि.ग्रा. तक की अधिकतम क्षमता वाले हैं और " ई " मान 1 × 10*, 2× 10% , 5× 10* , के हैं , जो धनात्मक या ऋणात्मक पूर्णांक या शून्य के समतुल्य हैं ।

[फा. सं. डब्ल्यूएम-21 ( 10) /2011 ] बी. एन. दीक्षित , निदेशक , विधिक माप विज्ञान 5805 भारत का राजपत्र : अगस्त 13 , 2011 / श्रावण 22, 1933

[ भाग II-खंड 3 ( ii ) ]

NewDelhi , the 5th July, 2011

S.O. 2111. Whereas the Central Government, after considering the report submitted to it by prescribed authority, is satisfied that the model described in the said report (see the figure given below ) is in conformity with the provisions of the Standards ofWeights 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 ofthe powers conferred by Sub-sections (7) and (8 ) of Section 36 ofthe saidAct, the Central Government hereby issues and publishes the certificate of approval of the model of non -automatic weighing instrument (Platform type) with digital indication of medium accuracy (Accuracy class- III) ofseries "KSP" and with brand name "EMINENT" (hereinafter referred to as the said nodel ) , manufacturedby M/s Kaushik Scale Corporation,A-84/B, EastNathu Colony, Near Gurudwara, Shahdara, Delhi - 110032 and which is assigned the approval mark IND/09/11/93;

Thesaidmodel is a strain gauge type load cell based non-automatic weighing instrument (Platform Type)with a maximum capacity of200 kg and minimum capacity of400 g. The verification scale interval (e) is 20g. It has a tare devicewith a100 per cent subtractive retained tare effect. The Light Emitting Diode (LED) display indicates the weighing result. The instrument operates on 230 Volts , 50 Hertz alternative current power supply.

Figure-1

Schenuitic Clearan of let

Stumpling plate

0000

Lend seal

(Indicator of the PlatformScaleFront Side)

StampingPlato

Lead seal

Sealingwire

(Indicator ofthe platforms Scale- Lowerback Side)

Figure-2: Schematic Diagram of sealing provision of themodel

Sealing is done on the display by passing sealing wire from the body of the display. The seal is connectedby whole inbase plate and top cover ofdisplay, thenseal wire is passed through these two holes attached with seal . Atypical schematicdiagram ofsealing provision ofthe model is given above.

The instrument has external control to calibration. Adip switch has also been provided in A/D card/mother board todisable access to external calibration.

Further, inexercise ofthe power conferredby Sub-section ( 12) ofSection 36 of the said Act, the Central Government herebydeclares that this certificate of approval of the said model shall also cover the weighing instruments of similar make, accuracyandperformance of same series with maximum capacity above 50 kg and upto 5000 kg with verification scale interval (n) in therange of500 to 10,000 for ' e' value of 5g or more and with ' e ' value of 1 × 10 , 2 × 10k, or 5 × 10t , where k is a positive ornegative 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 ( 10)/2011 ]

B. N. DIXIT, Director of Legal Metrology [PART I-Sec. 3(ii)] THEGAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 13 , 2011 /SRAVANA 22 , 1933

$806

नई दिल्ली, 5 जुलाई, 2011

का. आर. 2112.-केन्द्रीय सरकार का, विहित प्राधिकारी द्वारा उसे प्रस्तुत रिपोर्ट पर विचार करने के पश्चात् यह सवाल हो गया है किउक्त रिपोर्ट में वर्णित मॉडल ( नीचे दी गई आकृति देखें ) बाट और माप मानक अधिनियम, 1976 ( 1976 का 60 ) तथा बाह और माप मानफ (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 वथार्थता बनाए रखेगा और विभिन्न परिस्थितियों में उपयुक्त सेवा प्रदान करता रहेगा;

अतः अब केन्द्रीय सरकार, उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 की उप- धारा ( 7 ) और उप- धारा (8 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए मैसर्स गणेश स्केल की , पारेख वाढी , अमरेली रोड, सावरकुंडला , जिला अमरेली , पिन-364515 द्वारा विनिर्मित मध्यम माता (पथार्थता वर्ग- III ) वाले " एसईटी-11 " श्रृंखला के अंकक सूचन सहित अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण ( टेबलटॉप टॉइष ) के मॉडल कमांड का नाम " सेनसोटैक " है ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/09 / 11 /30 समनुदेशित किया गया है, अनुमोदन प्रमाण पत्र जारी करती है ।

उक्त मॉडल एक विकृत गेज प्रकार का भार सेल आधारित अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण ( टेबलटॉप प्रकार ) है । इसकी अधिकतम क्षमता 30 कि.ग्रा. और न्यूनतम क्षमता 100 ग्रा. है । सत्यापन मापमान अंतराल (ई ) 5 ग्रा. है । इसमें एक आर्थयतुलन युक्ति है जिसका शत प्रतिशत व्यवकलनात्मक भारित आधेयतुलम प्रभाव है । प्रकाश उत्सर्जक डायोड ( एलईडी ) प्रदर्श तोलन परिणाम उपदर्शित करता है । उपकरण 230 वोल्ट और 50 हर्ट्ज प्रत्यावर्ती धारा विद्युत प्रदाय पर कार्य करता है ।

आकृति-1

MATE

आकृति-2 : मॉडल को सीलिंग करने का बोजनाबद्ध डायग्राम

किल्ली में से सीकिन वावर निकाल कर डिस्पले पर सीलिंग की जाती है । सील के साथ जुड़े हुए डिस्पले के बेस प्लेट और टॉप कबर में बने योकों में से सीलिंग काबर निकाल कर सील से जोड़ा गया है । मॉडल को सीलबंद करने के उपबंध का एक प्ररूपी योजनाबद्ध डायग्राम उपरोस दिया गया है ।

उपकरण में बाहरी केसिलेशन तक पहुंच की सुविधा है । बाहरी केलिब्रेशन तक पहुंच को रोकने के लिए ए/डी कार्ड/ मगर बोर्ड में डिप स्किन भी दिया गया है ।

और केन्द्रीय सरकार उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 की उप- धारा ( 12 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए यह भोषणा करती है कि उक्त मॉडल के अनुमोदन के इस प्रमाण-पत्र के अंतर्गत उसी बिनिर्माता द्वारा उसी सिद्धांत , डिजाइन के अनुसार और उसी सामग्री से जिससे उक्त अनुमोदित मॉडल विनिर्माण किया गया है , विनिर्मित उसी श्रृंखला के वैसे ही नेफ , यथार्थता और कार्यपालन के तोलन उपपारण भी होंगे जो 100 मि.ग्रा. से 2 ग्रा. तक के " ई " मान के लिए 100 से 10,000 तक के रेंज में सत्यापन मापमान अंतराल ( एम ) और उससे अधिक के " ई " मान के लिए 500 से 10,000 तक की रेंज में सत्यापन मापमान अंतराल (एन ) सहित 50 कि.ग्रा. तक की अधिनमपाले हैं और "ई" मान 1 × 10*, 2×10% , 5 × 10* , के हैं, जो धनात्मक या ऋणात्मक पूर्णांक या शून्य के समतुल्य हैं ।

[फा. सं. डब्ल्यू एम 21 ( 18)/2011 ] बी. एन. दीक्षित , निदेशक , विधिक माप विज्ञान 5807

भारत का राजपत्र: अगस्त 13 , 2011 / श्रवण 22, 1933

भाग II- 3(ii) ]

NewDelhi, the 5th July, 2011

S.O. 2112-Whereas the Central Government, after considering the report submitted to it by prescribed authority, issatisfied that the model described in the said report (see the figure given below) is in conformity with the provisions of theStandards ofWeights and Measures Act, 1976 (60 of 1976 ) and the Standards ofWeights and Measures (Approval of Models) Rules, 1987 and the said model is likely to maintain its accuracy over periods of sustained use and to render accurate service under varied conditions;

Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub-sections (7) and (8 ) of Section 36 of the said act, the Central Government hereby issues and publishes the certificate of approval of the model of non-automatic weighing instrument (Table top type) with digital indication ofMedium Accuracy (Accuracy class - III) ofseries " SET- 11 " and with brand name "SENSOTEK" (hereinafter referred to as the said model ) , manufactured by M/s Ganesh ScaleCo, Parekh Vadi , Amreli Road, Savarkundia, Dist. Amreli , Pin-364515 (Guj .) and which is assigned the approval mark IND/09/11/30;

The said model is a strain gauge type load cell based non-automatic weighing instrument (Table Top Type) with a maximum capacity of30 kg and minimum capacity of 100g. The verification scale interval (e) is 5g. It has a tare devicewith a100 percent subtractive retained tare effect. The Light Emitting Diode (LED) display indicates the weighing results . The instrument operates on 230Volts, 50 Hertz alternative current power supply.

Figure-1

Figure-2: Schematic Diagram of sealing provision ofthe model

Sealing is done on the display by passing sealing wire from the body of the display. The seal is connected by whole in base plate and top cover ofdisplay, than seal wire is passed through these two holes attached with seal . Atypical schematic diagram of sealing provision of the model is-given above.

The instrument has external control to calibration. A dip switch has also been provided in A/D card/Motherboard todisable access to external calibration .

Further, in exercise ofthe power conferred by sub-section ( 12) ofSection 36 of the said Act, the Central Government hereby declares that this certificate ofapproval of the said model shall also cover the weighing instruments of similar make, accuracyand performance of same series with capacity up to 50 kg with verification scale interval (n) in the range of 100to 10,000 for ' e' value of 100 mg to 2g and with verification scale interval (n) in the range of500 to 10,000 for ' e ' value of 5 g or more and with ' e' value of 1 × 10%, 2 × 10%, 5× 10%, wherek is a positive or negative whole number or equal to zero manufactured bythe 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 ( 18)/2011 ]

B. N. DIXIT, Director ofLegal Metrology 5808

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 13, 2011 /SRAVANA 22, 1933

[PART II-Sac. 3(ii)]

नई दिल्ली , 5 जुलाई , 2011

का. आ. 2113.- 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 उपधारा ( 8 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए मैसर्स गणेश स्केल क. , पारेख वाडी, अमरेली रोड, सावरकुंडला , जिला अमरेली , पिन-364515 द्वारा विनिर्मित मध्यम यथार्थता ( वधार्थता वर्ग- III ) वाले " एसईपी -7 " श्रृंखला के अंकक सूचन सहित अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण ( प्लेटफॉर्म टाइप ) के मॉडल का, जिसके ब्रांड का नाम " सेतसोटैक" है ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/09 / 11/31 सममुदेशित किया गया है, अनुमोदन प्रमाणपत्र जारी करती है ।

उक्त मॉडल एक विकृत गेज प्रकार का भार सेल आधारित अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण ( प्लेटफॉर्म टाइप ) है । इसकी अधिकतम क्षमता 1,000 कि.ग्रा. और न्यूनतम क्षमता 2 कि.ग्रा. है । सत्यापन मापमान अंतराल ( ई ) 100 ग्रा. है । इसमें एक आधेयतुलन युक्ति है जिसका शत प्रतिशत व्यवकलनात्मक धारित आधेयतुलन प्रभाव है । प्रकाश उत्सर्जक डायोड ( एलईडी ) प्रदर्श तोलन परिणाम उपवर्शित करता है । उपकरण 230 वोल्ट और 50 हर्ट्ज प्रत्यावर्ती धारा विद्युत प्रदाय पर कार्य करता है ।

आकृति-1

OTHER SILK SHALINI)

8HAI. WITH STAMPING PLATE

600

PLAF

आकृति-2: मॉडल को सीलिंग करने का बोजनाबद्ध डायग्राम

डिस्पले की बाडी में से सीलिंग वायर निकाल कर डिस्पले पर सीलिंग की जाती है । सील के साथ जुड़े हुए डिस्पले के बेस प्लेट और टॉप कवर में बने दो छेदों में से सीलिंग वायर निकाल कर सील से जोड़ा गया है । मॉडल को सीलबंद करने के उपबंध का एक प्ररूपी योजनाबद्ध डायग्राम उपरोक्त दिया गया है ।

उपकरण में बाहरी केलिब्रेशन तक पहुंच की सुविधा है । बाहरी केलिब्रेशन तक पहुंच को रोकने के लिए ए/ डी कार्ड/ मदर बोर्ड में डिप स्विच भी दिया गया है ।

और केन्द्रीय सरकार उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 की उपधारा ( 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 सिद्धांत , डिजाइन के अनुसार और उसी सामग्री से जिससे उक्त अनुमोदित मॉडल विनिर्माण 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 मापमान अंतराल (एन ) सहित 50 कि.ग्रा. से 5,000 कि.ग्रा. तक की अधिकतम क्षमता वाले हैं और " ई " मान 1 × 10 , 2× 10*, 5× 10* , के हैं, जो धनात्मक या ऋणात्मक पूर्णांक या शून्य के समतुल्य हैं ।

[फा. सं. डब्ल्यू एम 21 ( 18)/2011 ] बी. एन. दीक्षित, निदेशक , विधिक माप विज्ञान 5809 भारत का राजपत्र : अगस्त 13 , 2011 / श्रावण 22 , 1933

[ भाग II-खंड 3 ( ii ) ]

NewDelhi , the 5th July, 2011

S.O. 2113. Whereas the Central Government, after considering the report submitted to it by prescribed authority, is satisfied that the model described in the said report (see the figure given below) is in conformity with the provisions of the Standards of Weights and Measures Act, 1976 (60 of 1976) and the Standards ofWeights and Measures (Approval of Models) Rules , 1987 and the said model is likely to maintain its accuracy over periods of sustained use and. to render accurate service under varied conditions;

Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub -sections (7) and (8) of section 36 of the said Act , the Central Government hereby issues and publishes the certificate of approval of the model of non -automatic weighing instrument (Platform type) with digital indication of medium accuracy (Accuracy class- III) of series " SEP- 7" and with brand name " SENSOTEK" (hereinafter referred to as the said model ) , manufactured by M/s Ganesh Scale Co, Parekh Vadi , Amreli Road, Savarkundla, Dist . Amreli, Pin-364515 (Guj .) and which is assigned the approval mark IND/09/ 11/31;

Thesaidmodel is a strain gauge type load cell based non-automatic weighing instrument (Platform type) with a maximum capacity of 1,000 kg and minimum capacity of2kg. The verification scale interval (e) is 100g . It has a taredevice with a 100percent subtractive retained tare effect. The Light Emitting Diode (LED) display indicates the weighing result. The instrument operates on 230 Volts, 50 Hertz alternative current power supply.

Figure-1

OTHER SEALINI

BLAL WITH STAMRING PLATE

2113

PLATFっ

Figure-2: Schematic Diagram of the sealing provision of the model

Sealing is done on the display by passing sealing wire from the body of the display. The seal is connected by whole inbase plate and top cover of display, then seal wire is passed through these two holes attached with seal . Atypical schematic diagram of sealing provision of the model is given above.

The instrument has external control to calibration. Adip switch has also been provided in A/D card/ mother board to disable access to external calibration.

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

[F.No. WM-21 (18)/2011 ]

B. N. DIXIT, Director of Legal Metrology [PART II-Sac. 3(ii)] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 13 , 2011/SRAVANA 22, 1933

5810

भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो

नई दिल्ली, 27 जुलाई , 2011

का. आ. 2114.- भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो नियम , 1987 के नियम 7 के उपनियम ( 1 ) के खखंड ( ख ) के अनुसरण में भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो एतद्वारा अधिसूचित करता है कि जिन भारतीय मानकों के संशोधन के विवरण मीचे अनुसूची में दिए गए हैं वे स्थापित हो गए हैं-

अनुसूची

संशोधित भारतीय मानक की संख्या , वर्ष और शीर्षक

संशोधन लागू होने की तिथि

संशोधन संख्या और वर्ष

क्रम संख्या

(4)

(3)

(2)

(1)

30जून 2011

संशोधन संख्या 1 वर्ष 2011

1. आई एस 498 : 2003 वैक्युम पैन चीनी ( रोपित श्वेत चीनी ) का वर्गीकरण ( पांचवा पुनरीक्षण)

30जून 2011

आई एस 873 :1974 द्रवीय ग्लूकोज की विशिष्टि ( पहला पुनरीक्षण )

2.

संशोधन संख्या 3 वर्ष 2011

30जून 2011

संशोधन संख्या 2 वर्ष 2011

3. आई एस 874 : 1992 डैक्सट्रोज मोनोहाइड्रेट-विशिष्टि (तीसरा पुनरीक्षण)

30जून 2011

आई एस 1151 : 2003 परिष्कृत चीनी-विशिष्टि ( दूसरा पुनरीक्षण )

4.

संशोधन संख्या 2 वर्ष 2011

30जून 2011

5. आई एस 1152: 2003 आइसिंग चीनीविशिष्टि ( दूसरा पुनरीक्षण ) संशोधन संख्या 1 वर्ष 2011

30 जून 2011

6. आई एस 1162 1958 गन्ने के शीरा की विशिष्टि

संशोधन संख्या 2 वर्ष 2011

30जून 2011

7. आई एस 1168 :1973 क्यूब चीनी की विशिष्टि ( पहला पुनरीक्षण) संशोधन संख्या 2 वर्ष 2011

30जून 2011

8. आई एस 5975 : 2003 कच्ची चीनी विशिष्टि ( पहला पुनरीक्षण ) संशोधन संख्या 2 वर्ष 2011

31अगस्त 2011

संशोधन संख्या 2 वर्ष 2011

9. आई एस 7224 : 2006 आयोडीनकृत नमक निर्वात वाष्पित आयोडीनकृत नमक और रिफाइंड आयोडीनकृत नमक- विशिष्ट ( दूसरा पुनरीक्षण )

30जून 2011

आई एस 8847 : 1978 शुष्क ग्लूकोज सिरप की विशिष्टि

10.

संशोधन संख्या 1 वर्ष 2011

30जून 2011 11. आई एस 12906 1990 मिसरी विशिष्टि

संशोधन संख्या 3 वर्ष2011

30जून 2011

12. आई एस 12923 : 1990 गन्ना गुड-विशिष्टि

संशोधन संख्या 3 वर्ष 2011

30जून 2011 13. आई एस 12924 : 1990 बूरा विशिष्टि

संशोधन संख्या 3 वर्ष 2011

30जून 2011 14 आई एस 13952 : 1994 ताड़ गुड-विशिष्टि

संशोधन संख्या 2 वर्ष 2011 [ भाग II-खंड 3 (ii ) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : अगस्त 13, 2011 / श्रावण 22, 1933

5811 (1)

(2)

(3)

(4)

15. आई एस 14400: 1996 ताड़ शक्कर-विशिष्टि

30जून 2011

संशोधन संख्या 2 वर्ष 2011

संशोधन संख्या 1

16. आई एस 15279: 2003 चीनी एवं चीनी उत्पाद-परीक्षण विधि

30जून 2011

वर्ष 2011

इन संशोधनों की प्रतियां भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो, मानक भवन, 9 , बहादुर शाह जफर मार्ग , नई दिल्ली-110002 , क्षेत्रीय कार्यालयों : नई दिल्ली, कोलकाता , चैन्नई, मुम्बई , चण्डीगढ़ तथा शाखा कार्यालयों : अहमदाबाद, बंगलौर, भोपाल , भुवनेश्वर, कोयम्बतूर , गुवाहाटी , हैदराबाद, जयपुर, कानपुर, नागपुर, पटना, पूणे तथा तिरूवनन्तापुरम में बिक्री हेतु उपलब्ध हैं ।

[संदर्भ : एफएडी/जी-128 ] तिथि: 27 जुलाई 2011

डॉ. आर. के. बजाज , वैज्ञानिक ' एफ' एवं प्रमुख ( खाद्य एवं कृषि)

BUREAU OF INDIAN STANDARDS

NewDelhi , the 27th July, 2011

S.O. 2114. In pursuance of Clause (b) of sub - rule (1 ) of Rule 7 of the Bureau of Indian Standards Rules, 1987, the Bureau of Indian Standards hereby notifies that the amendment to the Indian Standard, particulars ofwhich are given in the Schedule hereto annexed have been established on the date indicated against each:-

SCHEDULE

Sl . No. & Year ofthe Indian Standards

No.

No. & Year ofthe Amendment

Date ofwhich the Amendment shall have effect (1) (2)

(3)

(4)

30th June 2011

Amendment No. 1 Year2011

1. IS 498 : 2003 Grading for Vacuum Pan (Plantation White) Sugar (Fifth Revision)

30th June 2011

Amendment No. 3 Year2011

2. IS 873 : 1974 Specification for liquid glucose (FirstRevision)

30th June 2011

Amendment No. 2 Year2011

3. IS 874 : 1992 Dextrose Monohydrate-Specification (Third Revision).

30th June 2011

Amendment No. 2 Year2011

4. IS 1151 : 2003 Refined Sugar-Specification (Second Revision)

30th June 2011

5. IS 1152: 2003 Icing Sugar-Specification (Second Revision)

Amendment No. 1 Year2011

30th June 2011

6. IS 1162 : 1958 Specification for caneMolasses. Amendment No. 2 Year2011

30th June 2011

Amendment No. 2 Year2011

7. IS 1168 : 1973 Specification for cube Sugar (First Revision)

30th June 2011

Amendment No. 2 Year2011

8. IS 5975 : 2003 Raw Sugar- Specification (First Revision)

31stAugust 2011

Amendment No. 2 Year2011

9. IS 7224 : 2006 Iodized salt, vacuum evaporated iodized salt and refined iodized salt-Specification (Second Revision)

30th June 2011

10. IS 8847 : 1978 Specification for dried glucose syrup . Amendment No. 1 -Year2011

30th June 2011

11. IS 12906: 1990 Misri-Specification

Amendment No. 3 Year2011 [PART II Sec. 3(ii)] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 13, 2011 /SRAVANA 22, 1933

5812

(4)

(3)

(1)

30thJune2011 12. IS-12923 : 1990 Cane Gur (Jaggery)-Specification Amendment No. 3 Year2011

30thJune 2011 13. IS 12924: 1990 Bura-Specification

Amendment No. 3 Year2011

30thJune 2011 14. IS 13952: 1994 Palm Jaggery (Gur)-Specification Amendment No. 2 Year2011

30th June 2011 15. IS 14400: 1996 Palm Sugar-Specification

Amendment No. 2 Year2011

30th June 2011

Amendment No. 1 Year,2011

16. 1915279: 2003 Sugar and Sugar Products -Methods ofTest.

Copy ofthis standards are available for sale with the Bureau of Indian Standards, Manak Bhavan, 9, Bahadur Shah ZafarMarg,NewDelhi -110002 and Regional Offices : New Delhi, Kolkata, Chandigarh, Chennai, Mumbai and also Branch Offices: Almedabad, Bangalore, Bhopal, Bhubaneshwar, Coimbatore, Guwahati , Hyderabad, Jaipur, Kanpur, Nagpur, Patna , Pune, Thiruvananthapuram.

[Ref: FAD/G-128 ]

Dr. R. K. BAJAJ, Scientist 'F ' and Head (Food &Agri .) Date:27 July, 2011

नई दिल्ली, 27 जुलाई, 2011

का. आ. 2115- भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो नियम , 1987 के नियम 7 के उपनियम ( 1 ) के खंड ( ख ) के अनुसरण में भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो एतद्‌द्वारा अधिसूचित करता है कि जिन भारतीय मानकों के विवरण नीचे अनुसूची में दिए गए हैं, वे स्थापित हो गए हैं :-

अनुसूची

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

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

(4)

(3)

(2)

(1 )

31 दिसम्बर 2010 1. आई एस 15955 : 2010, आई एस ओ/टी एस 21098 : 2005 खाद्य पदार्थ-जेनेटिकली रूपांतरित जीवधारियों एवं व्युत्पन्न उत्पादों की न्यूक्लिक ऐसिड आधारित विश्लेषण पद्धतियां - आई एस/आई एस ओ 21569 , आई एस/आई एस ओ 21570 अथवा आई एस/ आई एस ओ 21571 में पद्धतियों के संयोजन हेतु प्रक्रिया एवं इस हेतु दी जाने वाली सूचनाएं ।

30नवम्बर 2010 2. आई एस/आई एस ओ 24276 2006 खाद्य पदार्थ- जेनेटिकली रूपांतरित जीवधारियों एवं व्युत्पन्न उत्पादों के संसूचन हेतु विश्लेषण पद्धतियां सामान्य अपेक्षाएं एवं परिभाषाएं ।

इन भारतीय मानकों की प्रतियां भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो, मानक भवन , 9 , बहादुर शाह जफर मार्ग , नई दिल्ली-110002 , क्षेत्रीय कार्यालयों : नई दिल्ली , कोलकाता , चण्डीगढ, चैन्नई , मुम्बई, तथा शाखा कार्यालयों : अहमदाबाद , बंगलौर, भोपाल , भुषणेश्वर , कोयम्बतूर, गुवाहाटी, हैदराबाद , जयपुर, कानपुर, नागपुर, पटना, पूणे तथा तिरूवनन्तापुरम में बिक्री हेतु उपलब्ध हैं ।

[संदर्भ: एफएडी/जी-128 ]

डॉ. आर. के. बजाज, वैज्ञानिक ' एफ' एवं प्रमुख ( खाद्य एवं कृषि ) तिथि: 27 जुलाई 2011 5813 भारत का राजपत्र : अगस्त 13, 2011 / श्रावण 22, 1933

[ भाग II-खंड 3 ( ii ) ]

New Delhi, the 27th July, 2011

S.O. 2115.-In pursuance of Clause (b) of sub -rule ( 1 ) ofRule 7 of the Bureau of Indian Standards Rules, 1987, the Bureau of Indian Standards hereby notifies that the Indian Standard, particulars ofwhich 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 Standards Established

No.

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

(4)

(3)

(2)

(1)

31stDecember 2010 1. IS 15955: 2010 ISO/TS 21098: 2005 Food Stuffs- Nucleic acid based methods of analysis ofgenetically modified organisms and derived products-Informa- tion to be supplied and procedure for the addition ofmethods of IS/ISO 21569 , IS/ISO 21570 or IS/ ISO21571 .

30th November 2010 2. IS/ISO 24276: 2006 Food stuffs-Methdos of analysis forthe detection of genetically modified organisms andderived products-General requirements and definitions.

Copyofthis standards are available for sale with the Bureau of Indian Standards, Manak Blavan, 9, Bahadur Shah ZafarMarg, New Delhi - 110002 and Regional Offices: New Delhi , Kolkata, Chandigarh, Chennai, Mumbai end alsoBranch Offices:Ahmedabad, Bangalore, Bhopal , Bhubaneshwar, Coimbatore , Guwahati , Hyderabad, Jaipur, Kanpur, Nagpur, Patna, Pune, Thiruvananthapuram.

[Ref:FAD/G-128]

Dr. R.K. BAJAJ, Scientist 'F' and Head (Food& Agri . ) Date: 27 July, 2011

नई दिल्ली, 27 जुलाई, 2011

का. आ. 2116.- 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 दिए गए मानकों में संशोधन किया गया है :-

अनुसूची

संशोधन लागू होने की तिथि

संशोधनों की संख्या और तिथि

क्रम संशोधित भारतीय मानक की संख्या और वर्ष संख्या

(4)

(3 )

(2)

(1)

31जुलाई 2011

1. जुलाई2011

1. 1849 ( भाग 1/खंड 2) : 1991

31जुलाई 2011

3. जुलाई2011.

2 2541: 1991

31 जुलाई 2011

2. जुलाई2011

3. 5817 : 1992

31 जुलाई2011

3. जुलाई 2011

4. 10049: 1981

31 जुलाई 2011

4. जुलाई 2011

5. 10359 : 1982

31 जुलाई 2011

1. जुलाई 2011

6. 14401 : 1996

इन संशोधनों की प्रतियां भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो, मानक भवन, 9 , बहादुर साह जफर मार्ग , नई दिल्ली-110002, क्षेत्रीय कार्यालयों गई दिल्ली, कोलकाता , चण्डीगढ़ , चैन्नई, मुम्बई, तथा शाखा कार्यालयों : अहमदाबाद , बंगलौर, भोपाल , भुवनेश्वर , कोंयम्यतूर, मुम्बाहाटी, हैदराबाद , जयपुर, कानपुर, नागपुर, पटना, पूणे तथा तिरूवनन्तापुरम में बिक्री हेतु उपलब्ध हैं ।

[संदर्भ: सीईडी/राजपत्र]

ए.के. सैनी, वैज्ञानिक ' एफ' एवं प्रमुख ( सिविल इंजीनियरी ) तिथि: 27 जुलाई, 2011 5814

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 13, 2011 /SRAVANA 22, 1933

[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii)]

New Delhi, the 27th July, 2011

S.O. 2116. In pursuance of Clause (b) of sub- rule ( 1 ) ofRule 7 of the Bureau of Indian Standards Rules, 1987, theBureau of Indian Standards hereby notifies that Amendmentto the Indian Standard, particulars ofwhich are given in the Schedule hereto annexed have been issued :-

SCHEDULE

SL No. & Year ofthe Indian Standards No.

(1) (2)

1. 1849 (Part 1/Sec. 2): 1991

2 2541: 1991

3. 5817: 1992

4. 10049: 1981

5. 10359: 1982

6. 14401:1996

No. and Year of the amendment

Date from which the amendment shall have effect

(3)

(4)

1. July 2011

31stJuly 2011 3. July 2011

31stJuly 2011 2. July 2011

31st July 2011 3. July 2011

31st July 2011 4. July 2011

31st July2011 1. July 2011

31st July2011 Copy of the amendments 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 BranchOffices:Ahmedabad, Bangalore, Bhopal, Bhubaneshwar, Coimbatore, Guwahati , Hyderabad, Jaipur, Kanpur , Nagpur, Patna, Pune andThiruvananthapuram.

Date: 27th July, 2011

[Ref: CED/Gazette] A. K. SAINI, Scientist 'F' and Head (Civil Engg.)

नई दिल्ली, 28 जुलाई, 2011

का. आ. 2117.-भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो नियम, 1987 के नियम 7 के उपनियम ( 1 ) के खखंड (ख ) के अनुसरण में भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो एत‌द्वारा अधिसूचित करता है कि नीचे अनुसूची में दिए गए हैं, वे स्थापित हो गए हैं :-

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

(1)

(2)

1. आईएस 1660: 2009 पिटवाँ एल्यूमिनियम के बर्तन- विशिष्टि ( पहला पुनरीक्षण)

अनुसूची

स्थापित तिथि

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

(3)

(4)

आईएस 1660( भाग 1 ) : 1982 पिटवाँ 1सितम्बर 2011

एल्यूमिनियम के बर्तन-विशिष्टि

(भाग 1 ) : कुकिंग, टेबल सर्विंग, स्टोरिंग

और बेकिंग के बर्तन ( दूसरा पुनरीक्षण ) आईएस 1660 ( भाग 5 ) : 1966 पिटवाँ एल्यूमिनियम के बर्तन-विशिष्टिभाग

5मोटे तले के बर्तन;

आई एस 1660 (भाग 6 ) : 1980 पिटवाँ एल्यूमिनियम के बर्तन-विशिष्टिभाग 6

कम्पार्टमेंटल ट्रे, और

आई एस 1660 ( भाग 7 ) : 1970

पिटवॉ एल्यूमिनियम के बर्तन भाग 7

लंच बाक्स, का समामेलन

[ भाग II-खंड 3 (ii ) ]

5815 भारत का राजपत्र : अगस्त 13, 2011/ श्रावण 22 , 1933

(1)

(2)

(3)

(4)

31 जुलाई 2011 2. आईएस/आईएसओ 50001 : 2011 ऊर्जा प्रबंधन पद्धतियां- उपयोग के लिए मार्ग- दर्शन सहित अपेक्षाएं

इस भारतीय मानक की प्रतियां भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो , मानक भवन , 9 , बहादुर शाह जफर मार्ग , नई दिल्ली-110002, क्षेत्रीय कार्यालयों : नई दिल्ली, कोलकाता, चण्डीगढ़ , चैन्नई , मुम्बई , तथा शाखा कार्यालयों : अहमदाबाद, बंगलौर , भोपाल, भुवनेश्वर, कोयम्बतूर, गुवाहाटी, हैदराबाद, जयपुर, कानपुर , नागपुर , पटना , पूणे तथा तिरूवनन्तापुरम में बिक्री हेतु उपलब्ध हैं ।

[ संदर्भ : एम.ई.डी./जी-2 : 1 ] तिथि: 28 जुलाई 2011

जे. ए, सिद्दीकी, वैज्ञानिक' ई' निदेशक(यांत्रिक इंजीनियरिंग )

New Delhi, the 28th July, 2011

S.O. 2117. In pursuance of Clause (b) of sub- rule ( 1 ) of Rule 7 of the Bureau of Indian Standards Rules , 1987, the Bureau of Indian Standards hereby notifies that the Indian Standards , particulars of which are given in the Schedule hereto annexed have been established on the date indicated against each:-

SCHEDULE

Sl . No. & Year of the Indian Standards

No. and Year of Indian Standards , Date of Establishment No. Established

if any, Superseded by the New Indian Standard

(1)

(3)

(4)

1st September 2011 1. IS 1660: 2009 Wrought aluminium utensils- Specification (First Revision)

Amalgamation of IS 1660 (Part 1 ) : 1982 Specification for wrought aluminium utensils Part 1 Cooking, table, serving, storing and baking utensils (Second Revision) ;

IS1660 (Part 5): 1966 Specification for wrought aluminium utensils Part 5 Thick bottom utensils;

IS 1660 (Part 6 ) : 1980 Specification for wrought aluminium utensils Part 6 Compartmental trays and IS 1660 (Part 7) : 1970 Specification for wrought aluminium utensils. Part 7 Lunch box.

31stJuly 2011 2. IS/ISO 50001: 2011 Energy management systems-Requirements with guidance for use .

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

[Ref: MED/G-2: 1 ] Date: 28th July 2011

J. A. SIDDIQUI , Scientist ' E ' Director (Mechanical Engineering)

नई दिल्ली, 28 जुलाई , 2011

का. आ. 2118.- 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 दिए गए मानक( कों) में संशोधन किया गया/किये गये हैं :-

[PART II-SEC. 3(ii )] 5816

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: AUGUST 13 , 2011 /SRAVANA 22 , 1933

अनुसूची

संशोधन लागू होने की तिथि संशोधित भारतीय मानक की संख्या और वर्ष

संशोधन की संख्या और तिथि

क्रम संख्या

(4)

(3)

(2)

(1)

संशोधन संख्या 1. 31 जुलाई 2011

जुलाई 2011

1. आई एस 7356 ( भाग 1 ) : 2002 मिट्टी तथा पाषाण भरित बांधों में पोर दाब मापन के लिए उपकरणों के संस्थापन , रख- रखाव और प्रेक्षण कीरीति संहिता- भाग 1 छिप्रिल ट्यूब दाब मापी ( दूसरा पुनरीक्षण)

इस संशोधन की प्रति भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो , मानक भवन , 9 , बहादुर शाह जफर मार्ग , नई दिल्ली-110002 , क्षेत्रीय कार्यालयों: नई दिल्ली, कोलकाता, चण्डीगढ़ , चैन्नई, मुम्बई, तथा शाखा कार्यालयों : अहमदाबाद , बंगलौर, भोपाल, भुवनेश्वर , कोयम्बतूर , गुवाहाटी , हैदराबाद , जयपुर, कानपुर, नागपुर, पटना , पूणे तथा तिरूवनन्तापुरम में बिक्री हेतु उपलब्ध हैं ।

[संदर्भ : डब्लूआर डी 16/टी-3 ]

जे. सी. अरोड़ा , वैज्ञानिक ' एफ ' एवं प्रमुख ( जल संसाधन विभाग ) तिथि: 28 जुलाई, 2011

New Delhi, the 28th July, 2011

S.O. 2118.-In pursuance of Clause (b) of sub - rule ( 1 ) of Rule 7 of the Bureau of Indian Standards Rules, 1987, the Bureau of Indian Standards hereby notifies that Amendments to the Indian Standards , particulars ofwhich are given in the Schedule hereto annexed have been issued :-

SCHEDULE

Sl . No. Title and Year of the Indian Standards

No. and Year of the amendment

No.

Date from which the amendment shall have effect

(4)

(β)

(2)

(1)

31-07-2011

Amendment No. 1

July 2011

1. IS 7356 (Part 1) : 2002 Code of practice for installation , maintenance and observation of instruments for pore pressure measurements in earth dams and rockfill dams: Part 1 Porous tube piezometers (SecondRevision)

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

[Ref: WRD 16/T-3 ]

J. C. ARORA, Sc . ' F ' and Head ( Water Resources Deptt .) Date: 28th July, 2011

नई दिल्ली, 29 जुलाई, 2011

का. आ. 2119.- 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 अनुसूची में दिए गए मानक ( कों) में संशोधन किया गया/किये गये हैं :-

अनुसूची

संशोधन की संख्या और संशोधन लागू होने की तिथि तिथि

क्रम संशोधित भारतीय मानक( कों ) की संख्या , वर्ष और शीर्षक संख्या

(4)

(3)

(2)

(1)

संशोधन संख्या 1

30जून 2011

जून 2011.

1. आई एस 12826 ( भाग 1 ) : 1989 औद्योगिक भट्टियों की क्रमबद्धता परीक्षण एवं स्वीकार्यता रीति संहिता भाग 1 औद्योगिक भट्टियों की क्रमबद्धता के लिये खरीददारों की डाटा सूची 5817

भारत का राजपत्र : अगस्त 13, 2011/ श्रावण 22 , 1933

[भाग II-खंड 3 ( ii ) ]

इस संशोधन की प्रति भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो , मानक भवन , 9 , बहादुर शाह जफर मार्ग , नई दिल्ली-110002 , क्षेत्रीय कार्यालयों : नई दिल्ली, कोलकाता , चण्डीगढ़ , चैन्नई , मुम्बई, तथा शाखा कार्यालयों अहमदाबाद , बंगलौर, भोपाल, भुवनेश्वर, कोयम्बतूर , गुवाहाटी, हैदराबाद, जयपुर, कानपुर , नागपुर, पटना , पूणे तथा तिरूवनन्तापुरम में बिक्री हेतु उपलब्ध हैं ।

[संदर्भ: एमटीडी 26/टी-10]

पी. घोष, वैज्ञानिक ' एफ' एवं प्रमुख ( एमटीडी) तिथि: 29 जुलाई 2011

New Delhi , the 29th July, 2011

S.O. 2119.-In pursuance of Clause (b ) of sub- rule ( 1 ) of Rule 7 of the Bureau of Indian Standards Rules, 1987, the Bureau of Indian Standards hereby notifies that the Indian Standards , particulars of which are given in the Schedule hereto annexed have been established on the date indicated against each:--

SCHEDULE

No. and Year of the amendment

Sl. No. and Title of the Standard(s) No.

Date from which the amendment shall have effect

(4)

(3)

(1)

30June 2011

Amendment No. 1 June 2011

1. IS 12826 (Part 1) : 1989 Ordering , testing and acceptance of industrial furnaces-Code of practice-Part 1 Purchaser's data sheet for ordering industrial furnaces

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

[Ref: MTD 26/T- 10]

P. GHOSH, Sc. ' F ' and Head (Met Engg.) Date: 29-7-2011

नईदिल्ली, 29 जुलाई , 2011

का. आ. 2120.-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 संशाधित 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

(4)

(3)

(2)

(1)

31जुलाई 2011 1. आई एस 1528 ( भाग 23 ) : 2011 /आई एसओ 16282 : 2007 उष्मासह सामग्रियों के नमूने लेने की और भौतिक परीक्षण पद्धतियां भाग 23 सघन आकारित उष्मासह उत्पादों की परीक्षण पद्धति- परिवेश तापमान में अपघर्षण से प्रतिरोधिता ज्ञात करना

31जुलाई 2011

आईएस 10570 : 1983

2. आई एस 10570 2011 उष्मासह कास्टबल के परीक्षण की पद्धति ( पहला पुनरीक्षण )

31जुलाई 2011.

3. आई एस 15895 : 2011 उच्च अल्यूमिना उष्भासहं सीमेंट- विशिष्टि 5818

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 13 , 2011 /SRAVANA 22 , 1933

[PART II-SEC. 3 (ii )] इस भारतीय मानक की प्रतियां भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो , मानक भवन , 9 बहादुर शाह जफर मार्ग , नई दिल्ली-110002 , क्षेत्रीय कार्यालयों : नई दिल्ली, कोलकाता , चण्डीगढ़ , चेन्नई , मुम्बई तथा शाखा कार्यालयों : अहमदाबाद , बंगलौर, भोपाल , भुवनेश्वर, कोयम्बतूर , गुवाहाटी, हैदराबाद, जयपुर , कानपुर, नागपुर, पटना, पूणे तथा तिरूवनन्तापुरम में बिक्री हेतु उपलब्ध हैं ।

[संदर्भ: एमटीडी 15/टी-68 एवं 91 ] पी. घोष , वैज्ञानिक ' एफ' एवं प्रमुख ( एमटीडी)

New Delhi, the 29th July, 2011

S.O. 2120.- In pursuance of Clause (b) of sub - rule ( 1 ) of Rule 7 of the Bureau of Indian Standards Rules , 1987 , theBureau of Indian Standards hereby notifies that the Indian Standards , particulars of which are given in the Schedule hereto annexed have been established on the date indicated against each:

SCHEDULE.

No. and year of the Indian Standards Established

Date of Established S No

No. & year of Indian Standards , if any, Super- seded by the New Indian Standard

(1)

A

(3)

(4)

31stJuly 2011 1 IS 1528 (Part 23 ) : 2011 /ISO 16282 : 2007 Methods of sampling and physical tests for refractory materials Part 23 Methods of tests for dense shaped refractory products -Determination of resistance to abrasion at ambient temperature

IS10570: 1983

31st July 2011 2 IS 10570 : 2011 Methods of testing refractory castables(First Revision)

31st July 2011 3 IS 15895 : 2011 High alumina refractory cement- Specification

Copy of this standard is available for sale with the Bureau of Indian Standards, Manak Bhavan, 9 Bahadur Shah ZafarMarg, NewDelhi - 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: MTD 15/T-68 & 91 ]

P. GHOSH, Sc .- 'F ' and Head (MTD)

नईदिल्ली, 29 जुलाई , 2011

का. आ. 2121.- 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 भारतीय मानक( कों ) की संख्या वर्ष और शीर्षक

स्थापित तिथि

नये भारतीय मानक द्वारा

क्रम संख्या

अतिक्रमित भारतीय मानक

अथवा मानकों, यदि कोई

हो, की संख्या और वर्ष

(1)

(2)

(3)

(4)

31 जुलाई 2011

1. आई एस 15892 2011/ आई एसओ 8653 : 1986 आभूषण- अंगूठी का साइज- परिभाषा , मापन एवं अभिनाम 5819 भारत का राजपत्र : अगस्त 13 , 2011 / श्रावण 22, 1933

[ भाग II-खंड 3 (ii ) ]

इस भारतीय मानक की प्रतियां भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो , मानक भवन, 9 बहादुर शाह जफर मार्ग , नई दिल्ली-110002 , क्षेत्रीय कार्यालयों : नई दिल्ली, कोलकाता, चण्डीगढ़ , चेन्नई, मुम्बई तथा शाखा कार्यालयों : अहमदाबाद , बंगलौर, भोपाल , भुवनेश्वर , कोयम्बतूर , गुवाहाटी, हैदराबाद, जयपुर, कानपुर, नागपुर, पटना, पूणे तथा तिरूवनन्तापुरम में बिक्री हेतु उपलब्ध हैं ।

[संदर्भ : एमटीडी 10/टी-75 ]

पी. घोष, वैज्ञानिक ' एफ' एवं प्रमुख ( एमटीडी )

NewDelhi, the 29th July, 2011

S.O. 2121.-In pursuance of Clause (b ) of sub - rule ( 1 ) of Rule 7 of the Bureau of Indian Standards Rules , 1987 , theBureau of Indian Standards hereby notifies that the Indian Standards, particulars ofwhich are given in the Schedule hereto annexed have been established on the date indicated against each:

SCHEDULE

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

No.

No. & year of Indian Standards, ifany, Super- seded by the New Indian Standard

(4)

(β)

A

(1)

31st July, 2011 1. IS 15892 : 2011 /ISO 8653 : 1986 Jewellery- Ring Sizes-Definition , measurement and designation

Copy ofthis standard is available for sale with the Bureau of Indian Standards, Manak Bhavan, 9 Bahadur Shah ZafarMarg, 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: MTD 10/T-75 ]

P. GHOSH, Sc.- 'F' and Head (MTD)

नई दिल्ली, 29 जुलाई , 2011

का. आ. 2122.-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 अधिसूची में दिए गए मानक( कों ) में संशोधन किया गया/किये गये हैं :

अनुसूची

संशोधित भारतीय मानक ( कों ) की संख्या वर्ष और शीर्षक

क्रम

संशोधन लागू होने की तिथि

संशोधन की संख्या और तिथि

संख्या

(4)

(3)

(2)

(1)

27 जुलाई, 2011

संशोधन संख्या 4 ,

जून 2011

1. आई एस 1161 1998 इस्पात नलिकाएं संरचनात्मक उपयोगों के लिये विशिष्ट ( चौथा पुनरीक्षण )

इस संशोधन की प्रति भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो , मानक भवन , 9 बहादुर शाह जफर मार्ग , नई दिल्ली-110002 , क्षेत्रीय कार्यालयों: नई दिल्ली, कोलकाता , चण्डीगढ़ , चैन्नई, मुम्बई तथा शाखा कार्यालयों : अहमदाबाद , बंगलौर, भोपाल, भुवनेश्वर, कोयम्बतूर, गुवाहाटी, हैदराबाद, जयपुर, कानपुर , नागपुर, पटना, पूणे तथा तिरूवनन्तापुरम में बिक्री हेतु उपलब्ध हैं ।

[संदर्भ: एमटीडी 19/टी-2 ]

पी. घोष , वैज्ञानिक ' एफ' एवं प्रमुख ( एमटीडी)

NewDelhi, the 29th July, 2011

S.O. 2122.- In pursuance of Clause (b) of sub - rule ( 1 ) of Rule 7 of the Bureau of Indian Standards Rules , 1987, theBureau of Indian Standards hereby notifies that the Amendment, Indian Standards, particulars ofwhich are given in the Schedule hereto annexed have been established on the date indicaed against each:

2883Gl /11-7 5820

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 13 , 2011/SRAVANA 22, 1933

[PART II-SEC.3 (ii )]

SCHEDULE

Sl. IS No. & Title of the amemdment(s)

No. & year of the amendment

No.

Date from which the amendment shall have effect (1)

(3)

(4)

27thJuly,2011

Amendment No. 4, June 2011

1. IS 1161: 1998 Steel tubes for structural purposes-Specification (Fourth Revision )

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

[Ref: MTD 19/T- 2 ]

P. GHOSH, Scientist 'F' and Head (MTD)

नई दिल्ली, 3 अगस्त, 2011

का. आ. 2123.- भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो नियम , 1987 के नियम 7 के उपनियम ( 1 ) के खंड (ख ) के अनुसरण में भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो एतद्द्वारा अधिसूचित करता है कि नीचे अनुसूची में दिए गये मानक (कों) में संशोधन किया गया/किये गये हैं :

अनुसूची

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

संशोधन की संख्या और तिथि

(1 )

(2)

(3)

(4)

1. आई एस 5410 : 1992 सीमेन्ट रंग रोगन-

13 सितम्बर 2011 विशिष्टि ( पहला पुनरीक्षण)

संशोधन संख्या नं. 4, जुलाई 2010

इन भारतीय मानकों की प्रतियां भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो , मानक भवन , 9 बहादुर शाह जफर मार्ग , नई दिल्ली-110002 , क्षेत्रीय कार्यालयों : नई दिल्ली, कोलकाता , चण्डीगढ़ , चेन्नई , मुम्बई तथा शाखा कार्यालयों अहमदाबाद , बंगलौर , भोपाल , भुवनेश्वर, कोयम्बतूर , गुवाहाटी , हैदराबाद , जयपुर , कानपुर , नागपुर , पटना , पूणे तथा तिरूवनन्तापुरम में बिक्री हेतु उपलब्ध हैं ।

[संदर्भ: सीएचडी 20/आई एस-5410 ]

ई. देवेन्द्र , वैज्ञानिक ' एफ' एवं प्रमुख ( रसायन )

NewDelhi , the 3rd August , 2011

S.O. 2123. In pursuance of Clause (b) of sub- rule ( 1 ) of Rule 7 of the Bureau of Indian Standards Rules, 1987, theBureau of Indian Standards hereby notifies that Amendment to the Indian Standards, particulars ofwhich are given in the Schedule hereto annexed have been issued :

SCHEDULE

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

No. & year of the amendment

Date from which the amendment shall have effect (1)

(3)

(4)

13th September 2010 1. IS 5410 : 1992 Cement Paint-Specification (FirstRevision)

Amendment No. 4, July,2010

Copy of this standard is available for sale with the Bureau of Indian Standards , Manak Bhavan, 9 Bahadur Shah ZafarMarg, 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: CHD 20/IS- 5410 ]

E. DEVENDER, Scientist ' F' and Head(Chemical) 5821 भारत का राजपत्र : अगस्त 13 , 2011 / श्रावण 22 , 1933

[ भाग II-खंड 3 ( ii ) ]

नई दिल्ली, 3 अगस्त; 2011

का. आ. 2124.- भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो ( प्रमाणन ) विनियम , 1988 के विनियम ( 4 ) के उप - विनियम ( 5 ) के अनुसरण में भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो एतद्‌द्वारा अधिसूचित करता है कि निम्न विवरण वाले लाइसेंसों को उनके आगे दर्शायी गई तारीख से रद्द/स्थगित कर दिया गया है :-

अनुसूची

वर्ष

भामा भाग अनुभाग

भारतीय मानक

काशीर्षक

लाइसेंसधारी का नाम व पता

स्वीकृत करने कीतिथि

क्रम सं

लाइसेंस संख्या

(9)

(7 ) (8 )

(6)

(5)

(3)

(4)

(1) (2)

2000

14862

1.

2-6-2011

3731155

फाइबर सीमेंट फ्लेट शीट्स

सहयाद्री इंडस्ट्रीज लिमि. , गट सं. 322/323 , खेड़गांव, तालुका दौंड, जिला पुणे, महाराष्ट्र ।

2004

14543

2.

8-6-2011

3722659

पैकेजबंद पेयजल (पैकेजबंद प्राकृतिक मिनरल जल के अलावा)

महेश एजेंसी , गट संख्या 2482, मिलकत नं. 5310 , प्रोटेक्टो कम्पनी के पीछे पूना-नाशिक हाइवे, चाकण , तालेका खेड , जिला पुणे-410501, महाराष्ट्र ।

2000

4985

9-6-2011

3732359

3.

पेयजल आपूर्ति के लिए अप्लास्टिकृत पीवीसी पाइप्स

वीना पाइप्स एंड फिटिंग्स प्रा. लि. प्लॉट नं. बी-48/3 , वाई इंडस्ट्रीयल एरिया , तालुका वाई , जिला सातारा -412803 , महाराष्ट्र ।

2004.

14543

4.

22-6-2011 पी. एम. इंडस्ट्रीज ,

3717060

पैकेजबंद पेयजल (पैकेजबंद प्राकृतिक मिनरल जल के अलावा)

गट सं. 246, एच पी 1172 , बारगी वस्ती, चिंबाली, तालुका खेड, जिला पुणे -412105 ,

महाराष्ट्र ।

2004

14543

24-6-2011 भामचंद्र फूड्स एंड बेवरेजेज ,

5. 3733765

पैकेज़बंद पेयजल (पैकेजबंद प्राकृतिक मिनरल जल के अलावा)

गट संख्या 313 , प्लॉट नं. 1 , शिंदेगांव , ए/पी वसूली, तालुका खेड, जिला पुणे-410501 , महाराष्ट्र । 5822

THEGAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 13 , 2011 /SRAVANA 22, 1933

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

(4)

(5)

(6) (7) (8) (9) 6. 3738068 13-6-2011

14255

1995

एरियल बंच्ड केबल्स 1100 वोल्ट वोल्टता तक और सहित के लिए

रविन केबल्स लि. , गट सं. 227/230 , आलंदी - मारकल मेन रोड, मारकल गांव , तालुका खेड, जिला पुणे-412105 महाराष्ट्र ।

[सं. सीएमडी/13 : 13 ]

बी. एम . हनीफ, वैज्ञानिक' एफ' एवं प्रमुख

NewDelhi , the 3rd August, 2011

S.O. 2124. In pursuance of sub - regulation (5 ) of Regulation 4 of the Bureau of Indian Standards ( Certification) Regulations , 1988 of the Bureau of Indian Standards , hereby notifies the grant of licences particulars ofwhich are given in the following Schedule:

SCHEDULE

Title of the Standard ISNo. Part Section Year Grant Date

Sl. No. No. Licence

Name and Address oftheParty

(1) (2)

(3)

(4)

(5)

(6) (7) (8)

(9) 1. 3731155 2-6-2011

14862

2000

Fibre Cement Flat Sheets

Sahyadri Industries Ltd. , GatNo. 322/323, Kedgaon, TalukaDaund, District Pune, Maharashtra

2. 3722659 8-6-2011

14543

2004

Packaged drinking water(Otherthan Packaged natural mineralwater)

Mahesh Agency, GatNo. 2482, MilkatNo.5310, Behind Protecto Company, Poona Nashik Highway, Chakan, Taluka Khed, District Pune-410501 , Maharashtra

3. 3732359 9-6-2011

4985

2000 Veena Pipes and Fittings Unplasticized PVC pipes for potable water supplies

Pvt. Ltd. Plot No. B-48/3 , Wai Industrial Area , TalukaWai, Maharashtra District Satara -412803,

4. 3717060 22-6-2011

14543

2004

Packaged drinking water (Other than packaged natural mineral water)

P. M. Industries , GatNo. 246 , HP 1172 , BargiVasti, Chimbali, Taluka Khed, District Pune -412105 , Maharashtra 5823 भारत का राजपत्र : अगस्त 13, 2011/ श्रावण 22 , 1933

[भाग II-खंड 3 ( ⅱ ) ]

(9)

(7) (8)

(6)

(5)

(4)

(3)

(1) (2)

2004

14543

5.

Bhamchandra Foods and

24-6-2011

3733765

Beverages,

GatNo. 313 , Plot No. 1 ,

water (Other than packaged natural mineralwater) Packaged drinking

TalukaKhed,

Shindegaon, A/P Vasuli , District Pune-410501 ,

Maharashtra .

1995

14255

Aerial bunched cables

Ravin Cables Ltd. ,

13-6-2011

6. 3738068

for working voltages

GatNo. 227/230,

upto and including

Alandi-Markal Main Road,

1100Volts

MarkalVillage,

TalukaKhed, District Pune-412105 , Maharashtra.

[No. CMD/13: 13 ]

B. M. HANEEF, Scientist ' F ' andHead

नई दिल्ली, 3 अगस्त, 2011

का. आ. 2125.- भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो ( प्रमाणन ) विनियम 1988 के नियम 4 के उप- नियम ( 5 ) के अनुसरण में भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो एतद्वारा अधिसूचित करता है कि जिन लाइसेंसों के विवरण नीचे अनुसूची में दिए गए हैं, वे स्वीकृत कर दिए गए हैं :

अनुसूची

वर्ष

भामा

अनुभाग

भाग

भारतीय मानक

काशीर्षक

लाइसेंसधारी का नाम व पता

स्वीकृत करने कीतिथि

लाइसेंस संख्या

क्रम सं

(9).

( 8 )

(7)

(6)

(5)

(4)

(3)

(2)

(1)

2004

14543

पैकेजबंद पेयजल

अमोलरिच पैकेज्ड ड्रिंकिंग

26-4-2011

3720554

1.

वाटर,

(पैकेजबंद प्राकृतिक मिनरल जल के

एम. सं. 409,

अलावा)

एट/पोस्टराजाले,

तालुका फलटन,

जिला सातारा -415523 ,

महाराष्ट्र ।

2004

14543

पैकेजबंद पेयजल

ओम साई इंडस्ट्रीज ,

26-4-2011

3707764

2.

(पैकेजबंद प्राकृतिक

गट संख्या 56/58 ,

मिनरल जल के

मौजे पहाड़पुर,

अलावा)

तालुका गंगापुर,

जिला औरंगाबाद-423702 ,

महाराष्ट्र ।

2002

1165

दूध पाउडर

27-4-2011 सनफ्रेश एग्रो इंडस्ट्रीज प्रा. लि. ,

3722053

3.

प्लॉट नं. यू-4,

गट संख्या 121/1/4 ,

एट रांजनखोल,

पोस्ट तिलकनगर ,

तालुका राहाता,

जिला अहमदनगर -413720,

महाराष्ट्र । 5824

THEGAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 13 , 2011 / SRAVANA 22 , 1933

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

(4)

(5)

(6) (7) (8 ) . (9) 4. 3699589 27-4-2011

1

13334

1998

दूध पाउडर विशिष्टि- भाग 1 मानक श्रेणी मलाई निकाला हुआ.

लोकमंगल प्रॉडक्ट्स लिमिटेड, गट संख्या 514/1 , सुभाष नगर बिबिडरफल, तालुका नार्थ सोलापुर , जिलासोलापुर-413222, महाराष्ट्र ।

5. 3699690 27-4-2011

1165

दूध पाउडर

2002 लोकमंगल प्रॉडक्ट्स लिमिटेड , गट संख्या 514/1 , सुभाष नगर बिबिडरफल, तालुका नार्थ सोलापुर , जिला सोलापुर-413222, महाराष्ट्र ।

6. 3726970 12-5-2011

4985

2000

पेयजल आपूर्ति के लिए

यूपीवीसीपाइप्स

जी. वी. पॉलामिर्स, प्लॉट नं. डी-21 , एमआईडीसी, इस्लामपुर, तालुका वालवा, जिला सांगली-415409 , महाराष्ट्र ।

7. 3727669 16-5-2011

10001

1981 कपूर कार्पोरेशन लिमिटेड , एम-60/1, अतिरिक्त एमआईडीसी, जिला सातारा -415004, महाराष्ट्र ।

8. 3727568 16-5-2011

14543

2004

सामान्य उद्देश्यों के लिए (20किलोवाट तक के) इंजन स्थिर गति सम्पीडन इग्निशन (डीजल) के लिए निष्पादन अपेक्षाएं पैकेजबंद पेयजल (पैकेजबंद प्राकृतिक

मिनरल जल के अलावा)

साई बेवरेजेज , प्लॉट नं. डी-74, सूपा, 'तालुका पारनेर, जिला अहमदनगर -414302, महाराष्ट्र ।

9. 3727467 16-5-2011

14543

2004

पैकेजबंद पेयजल

( पैकेजबंद प्राकृतिक

मिनरल जल के अलावा)

गोदावरी एग्रो प्रॉडक्शन, स. नं. 39 , पी सं. 1-3-2955 , बडगूजर तराफ, जीजाऊ नगर , जिला बीड़ -431122, महाराष्ट्र ।

10.

13487

3728267 18-5-2011

1992

सिंचाई उपकरण -

इंमीटर्स

आर्ट्स वाटरमेटिक्स प्रा. लि. , सं. नं. 25 , गट सं. 84 , ब्लॉक डी, प्लॉट नं. 43-47, एमआईडीसी परभणी के पास , एट खानापुर, जिला परभणी-431401, महाराष्ट्र ।

[सं. सीएमडी/13 : 11 ]

बी. एम. हनीफ, वैज्ञानिक ' एफ ' एवं प्रमुख [ भाग II-खंड 3 ( ii ) ]

5825

भारत का राजपत्र : अगस्त 13 , 2011 / श्रावण 22, 1933

New Delhi , the 3rd August, 2011

S.O. 2125.- In pursuance of sub- regulation (5 ) of the regulation 4 of the Bureau of Indian Standards (Certification) Regulations 1988 , of the Bureau of Indian Standards , hereby notifies the grant of licences particulars of which are given in the following Schedule:

Grant Date

Licence No.

Name and Address ofthe Party Sl. No.

(4)

(3)

(2)

(1)

26-4-2011

3720554

1.

Amolrich Packaged DrinkingWater, M. No. 409, A/PRajale, Taluka Phaltan, District Satara -415523 Maharashtra .

26-4-2011

2. 3707764

Om Sai Industries, GutNo. 56/58, Mauje Pahadpur, TalukaGangapur, District Aurangabad -423702 Maharashtra.

Sunfresh Agro Industries

27-4-2011

3722053

3.

Pvt. Ltd. , Plot No. U-4, GutNo. 121/1/4, AtRanjankhol , PostTilaknagar , Taluka Rahata, District Ahmednagar -413720 Maharashtra.

4.

Lokmangal Products Ltd. ,

27-4-2011

3699589

GatNo. 514/1 , Subhash Nagar, Bibidarfal, TalukaNorth Solpur, District Solapur-413222 Maharashtra.

Lokmangal Products Ltd. ,

5.

27-4-2011

3699690

GatNo. 514/1 ,

Subhash Nagar , Bibidarfal, TalukaNorth Solpur,District Solapur-413222 Maharashtra .

SCHEDULE

Year

Section

Part

IS No.

Title ofthe Standard

(9)

(7) (8)

(6)

(5)

2004

14543

Packaged drinking water (Other than Packaged natural mineral water)

2004

14543

Packaged drinking water(Other than Packaged natural mineral water)

2002

1165

Milk Powder

1998

1

13334

SkimmedMilk Powder- Speci- fication - Part I: Standard Grade

2002

1165

Milk Powder 5826

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 13 , 2011 / SRAVANA 22, 1933

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

(1)

(3)

(4)

(5)

(6) (7) (8)

(9)

4985

3726970 12-5-2011

2000

UPVC pipes for

potablewater

supplies

GV. Polymers, PlotNo. D-21, MIDC, Islampur, TalukaWalwa, District Sangli -415409 Maharashtra.

10001

1. 3727669 16-5-2011

1981 Copper Corporation Ltd. , M-60/1 , Addi . MIDC , Satara-415004 Maharashtra.

Performance requirements for constant speed compression ignition(diesel) engines for general purposes (upto 20kW)

3727568 16-5-2011

14543

2004

Packaged drinking

water(Other than

Packaged natural

mineralwater)

Sai Beverages , PlotNo. D-74, Supa, TalukaParner, District Ahmednagar -414302 Maharashtra .

9 3727467 16-5-2011

14543

Godavari Agro

2004

Packaged drinking

water (Other than

packaged

natural mineral

water)

Production, S. No. 39, P. No. 1-3-2955 , BadgujarTaraf, JijauNagar, District Beed-431122 Maharashtra .

10. 3728267 18-5-2011

13487.

Arts Watermatics Pvt . Ltd. ,

1992

Irrigationequip-

ment - emitters

Sr. No. 25 , Gut No. 84, Block ' D' Plot Nos. 43-47, Near MIDC Parbhani , AtKhanapur, District Parbhani -431401 Maharashtra .

[No. CMD/13: 11]

B. M. HANEEF, Scientist ' F ' andHead 5827 भारत का राजपत्र : अगस्त13 , 2011 / श्रावण 22, 1933

[ भाग II-खखंड 3 ( ii ) ]

नई दिल्ली, 3 अगस्त, 2011

का, आ. 2126.- भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो नियम , 1987 के नियम 7 के उप- नियम ( 1 ) के खंड ( ख ) के अनुसरण में भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो. एतद्वारा अधिसूचित करता है कि जिन भारतीय मानकों के विवरण नीचे अनुसूची में दिए गए हैं वे स्थापित हो गए हैं :

अनुसूची

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

क्रम संख्या

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

(4)

(3)

(2)

(1)

दिसम्बर 2009 1. आई एस 6873 ( भाग 2/अनुभाग 2): 2009/ सिस्पर 14-2 : 1997 रेडियों व्यवधान लक्षणों की मापन पद्धतियाँ एवं सीमाएं भाग 2 विद्युत चुम्बकीय संगतता ( ई एम सी ) घरेलू साधित्र , विद्युत संयत्र और समान उपकरणों के लिये अपेक्षाएं अनुभाग 2 प्रतिरक्षा पारिवारिक उत्पादों के उपयोग हेतु मानक (दूसरा पुनरीक्षण)

दिसम्बर 2009 2 आई एस 9333 : 2009/आई ई सी 60732 1982 चुम्बकीय सामग्री की सिलिंडर कोर , ट्यून कोर और पेंच कोर की मापन पद्धतियां ( पहला पुनरीक्षण )

दिसम्बर 2009 3. आई एस/ आई एस ओ/आई ई सी 133351 : 2004 सूचना प्रोद्योगिकी- सुरक्षा का प्रबन्धन भाग 1 सूचना एवं संचार प्रौद्योगिकी सुरक्षा प्रबन्धन की धारणा और प्रतिरूप

फरवरी 2011 4. आई एस/आई ई सी 62255-1 : 2003 ब्रॉडबैन्ड डिजीटल कम्युनिकेशन हेतु मल्टीकोर एवं सिमेट्रिकल युगल/क्वाड केबल ( हाई बिट रेट डिजीटल एक्सेस टेलीकम्युनिकेशन नेटवर्क्स ) - संयत्र के बाहर की केबल भाग 1 जेनेरिक विशिष्टि

फरवरी 2011 5. आई एस/ आई ई सी 62255-2 : 2006 ब्रॉडबैन्ड डिजीटल कम्युनिकेशन हेतु मल्टीकोर एवं सिमेट्रिकल युगल/क्वाड केबल ( हाई बिट रेट डिजीटल एक्सेस टेलीकम्युनिकेशन नेटवर्क्स ) संयत्र के बाहर की केबल भाग 2 अनफिल्ड केबल खंड विशिष्टि

फरवरी 2011 6. आई एस/आई ई सी62255-3 : 2003 ब्रॉडबैन्ड डिजीटल कम्युनिकेशन हेतु मल्टीकोर एवं सिमेट्रिकल युगल/क्वाड केबल ( हाई बिट रेट डिजीटल एक्सेस टेलीकम्युनिकेशन नेटवर्क्स) - संयत्र के बाहर की केबल भाग 3 फिल्ड केबल- खंड विशिष्टि

इस भारतीय मानक की प्रतियाँ भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो , मानक भवन , 9 बहादुर शाह जफर मार्ग , नई दिल्ली-110002 , क्षेत्रेय कार्यालयों : नई दिल्ली, कोलकाता , चण्डीगढ़ , चेन्नई, मुम्बई तथा शाखा कार्यालयों अहमदाबाद, बंगलौर , भोपाल , भुवनेश्वर , कोयम्बतूर , गुवाहाटी , हैदराबाद , जयपुर , कानपुर, नागपुर, पटना , पुणे तथा तिरूवनन्तापुरम में बिक्री हेतु उपलब्ध हैं ।

[संदर्भ : एल आई टी डी/जी 75 ]

न. सिंह , प्रमुख ( इलेक्ट्रॉनिकी एवं आई टी) तिथि: 03-08-2011 .

2883GI/11-8 5828

[PART II-SEC. 3(ii ) ] THEGAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 13 , 2011/ SRAVANA 22 , 1933

New Delhi , the 3rd August, 2011

S.O. 2126. In pursuance of clause (b) of sub -rule ( 1 ) of Rule 7 of the Bureau of Indian Standards Rules, 1987 , the Bureau of Indian Standards hereby notifies that the Indian Standards , particulars of which are given in the Schedule hereto annexed have been established on the date indicated against each:

SCHEDULE

Date of Established No. & Year ofthe Indian Standards Established

Sl. No.

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

(1)

(4)

(β)

(2)

December2009 1. IS6673 (Part 2/Sec . 2): 2009/CISPR 14-2: 1997 Limits and methods of measurements of radio distubance characteristics Part 2 Electromagnetic compatibility (EMC) requirements for household appliances, electric tools and similar apparatus Section 2 Immunity-product family standard (Second revision)

December 2009 2. IS9333: 2009/IEC 60732 : 1982 Measuring methods for cylinder cores, tube cores and screw cores ofmagnetic oxides (first revision)

December 2009 3. IS/ISOMEC 13335-1 : 2004 Information technology-security- management of information and communications technology securityPart 1 Concepts and models for information and communications technology security management

February 2011 4. IS/IEC 62255-1 : 2003 Multicore and symmetrical pair/quad cables for broadband digital communications (high bit rate digital access telecommunication networks) Outside plant cables Part 1 Generic specification

February 2011 5. IS/IEC 62255-2: 2006 Multicore and symmetrical pair/quad cables for broadband digital communications (high bit rate digital access telecommunication networks) Outside plant cablesPart 2 Unfilled cables-sectional specification

February 2011 6. IS/IEC 62255-3 : 2006 Multicore and symmetrical pair/quad cables for broadband digital communications (high bit rate digital access telecommunication networks) Outside plant cablesPart3 Filled cables-sectional specification

Copy of this Standard is available for sale with the Bureau of Indian Standards , Manak Bhavan, 9 Bahadur Shah ZafarMarg, 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: LITD/G-75] Date:3-8-2011

N. SINGH, Head (Electronics & IT) 5829 [भाग II-खंड 3 (ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : अगस्त 13, 2011-/ श्रावण 22, 1933

पेट्रोलियम और प्राकृतिक गैस मंत्रालय

नई दिल्ली , 4 अगस्त, 2011

का.आ. 2127. केन्द्रीय सरकार ने पेट्रोलियम और खनिज पाइपलाइन ( भूमि में उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जुन ) अधिनियम, 1962 (1962 का 50 ) ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त अधिनियम कहा गया है) की धारा 3 की उप- धारा ( 1 ) के अधीन जारी की गई भारत सरकार केपेट्रोलियम और प्राकृतिक गैस मंत्रालय की अधिसूचना संख्या का. आ. 3009 तारीख क्रमशः 9-12-2010 जो भारत के राजपत्र तारीख क्रमशः 11-12-2010 में प्रकाशित की गई थी, द्वारा उस अधिसूचना से संलग्न अनुसूची में विनिर्दिष्ट भूमि में गुजरात राज्य में मुन्द्रा से दिल्ली तक पेट्रोलियम उत्पादों के परिवहन के लिए मुन्द्रा-दिल्ली पेट्रोलियम उत्पाद पाइपलाइन के माध्यम से हिन्दुस्तान पेट्रोलियम कॉर्पोरेशन लिमिटेड द्वास पाइपलाइन बिछाने के प्रयोजन के लिए उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन के अपने आशय की घोषणा की थी ।

और उक्त राजपत्र अधिसूचना की प्रतियां जनता को तारीख 29-3-2011 को उपलब्ध करा दी गई थी ।

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

अतः अब , केन्द्रीय सरकार, उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 6 की उप- धारा ( 1 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए, यह घोषणा करती है कि इस अधिसूचना में संलग्न अनुसूची में विनिर्दिष्ट भूमि में पाइपलाइन बिछाने के लिए उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन किया जाता है । और केन्द्रीय सरकार उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 6 की उप- धारा ( 4 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए , यह निदेश देती है कि उक्त भूमि में उपयोग का अधिकार इस घोषणा के प्रकाशन की तारीख से केन्द्रीय सरकार में निहित होने के बजाए, हिन्दुस्तान पेट्रोलियम कॉर्पोरेशन लिमिटेड में निहित होगा ।

अनुसूची

राज्य : राजस्थान तहसील: विराटनगर

जिला : जयपुर

खसरा नं.

क्र. सं. गाँव का नाम

क्षेत्रफल

वर्गमीटर

एयर

हेक्टेअर

(4)

(5)

(6)

(3)

(2)

( 1)

0

36

06

1457

1. जयसिंहपुरा

19

00

1455

0

36

0

00

1447

28

00

1434

0

[फा. सं. आर-31015/58/2004-ओ आर- II]

ए. मोस्वामी, अवर सचिव MINISTRY OF PETROLEUM AND NATURAL GAS

New Delhi , the 4th August, 2011

S.O. 2127. Whereas by notification ofthe Government of India in the Ministry of Petroleum & Natural Gas , S.O. No.3009 dated 9-12-2010 in the Schedule below issued under Sub-section (1 ) ofSection 3, Petroleum and Minerals Pipelines (Acquisition ofRight ofUser in Land) Act, 1962 (50 of 1962) (hereinafter referred to as the said Act ), pablished in the Gazette ofIndia dated 11-12-2010 respectively the Central Government declared its intention to acquire the right ofuser in the land specified in the Schedule appended to that notification for the purpose of laying pipeline through Mundra- Delhi Petroleum Product Pipeline for transportation of petroleum products from Mundra in the State of Gujarat to Delhi by Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Limited.

Andwhereas copies of the said Gazette notification were made available to the public on the 29-3-2011;

Andwhereas 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 said report and on being satisfied in the Schedule appended to this notification is hereby acquired for laying the pipeline;

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 land specified in the Schedule appended to this notification is hereby acquired for laying the pipeline;

[PART II-SBC, 3 (ii )] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 13 , 2011 /SRAVANA 22, 1933

5830

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 ofvesting inthe Central Government, vest on the date of publication ofthe declaration, in Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Limited.

SCHEDULE

District: Jaipur

State:Rajasthan Tehsil:Viratnagar

KhasraNo.

Sr. No. Name of theVillage

Area Are

Hectare

Sq.Mtr.

(4)

(6)

(3)

(5)

(1)

(2)

0

06

36

1457

1. Jaisinghpura

0

00

19

1455

36

0

00

1447

00

28

1434

0

[F. No. R-31015/58/2004-OR- II ] A. GOSWAMI , Under Secy .

नई दिल्ली, 4 अगस्त, 2011

का.आ. 2128.-केन्द्रीय सरकार ने पेट्रोलियम और खनिज पाइपलाईन ( भूमि में उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन ) अधिनियम , 1962 (1962का 50 ) (जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त अधिनियम कहा गया है ) की धारा 3 की उप- धारा ( 1 ) के अधीन जारी की गई भारत सरकार के पेट्रोलियम और प्राकृतिक गैस मंत्रालय की अधिसूचना संख्या का.आ. 3010 तारीख क्रमशः 9-12-2011 जो भारत के राजपत्र तारीख क्रमशः 11-12-2010 में प्रकाशित की गई थी, द्वारा उस अधिसूचना से संलग्न अनुसूची में विनिर्दिष्ट भूमि में गुजरात राज्य में मुन्द्रा से दिल्ली तक पेट्रोलियम उत्पादों के परिवहन के लिए मुन्द्रा- दिल्ली पेट्रोलियम उत्पाद पाइपलाइन के माध्यम से हिन्दुस्तान पेट्रोलियम कॉर्पोरेशन लिमिटेड द्वारा पाइपलाइन बिछाने के प्रयोजन के लिए उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन के अपने आशय की घोषणा की थी ।

और उक्त राजपत्र अधिसूचना की प्रतियां जनता को तारीख 30-3-2011 को उपलब्ध करा दी गई थी ।

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

अतः अब, केन्द्रीय सरकार , उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 6 की उप- धारा ( 1 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए , यह घोषणा करती है कि इस अधिसूचना में संलग्न अनुसूची में विनिर्दिष्ट भूमि में पाइपलाइन बिछाने के लिए उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन किया जाता है । और केन्द्रीय सरकार उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 6 की उप- धारा ( 4 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए, यह निर्देश देती है कि उक्त भूमि में उपयोग का अधिकार इस घोषणा के प्रकाशन की तारीख से केन्द्रीय सरकार में निहित होने के बजाए, हिन्दुस्तान पेट्रोलियम कॉर्पोरेशन लिमिटेड में निहित होगा ।

अनुसूची

राज्य : राजस्थान तहसील : जयपुर

जिला: जयपुर

खसरा नं.

क्षेत्रफल

क्र. सं.. गाँव का नाम

वर्गमीटर

हेक्टेअर

एयर

(5)

(1) (2)

(3)

(4)

(6)

33

0

01

07 1. नारीकावास

47

42

0

01

(स. चारागाह )

0

10

1

16 2. लालचन्दपुरा

2

01

0

20 भारत का राजपत्र : अगस्त 13, 2011 / श्रावण 22, 1933

[ भाग II-खंड 3 ( ii ) ]

(3) (2)

(1)

76 3. बावड़ी

64 4. सिंवार.

227

382 5. मांचवा

228

225

5831

(6)

(5)

(4)

01

54 0

09

0

03

98

01

0

48 0

03.

93 0

03

78

01

0

[फा. सं. आर-31015/54/2004- ओ आर- II ]

ए. गोस्वामी, अवर सचिव

New Delhi , the 4th August, 2011

S.O. 2128. Whereas by Notification of the Government of India in the Ministry of Petroleum & Natural Gas S.O. Nos . 3010 dated 9-12-2010 in the Schedule below issued under Sub - section (1 ) of Section 3 , 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 theGazette of India, dated 11-12-2010 respectively the Central Government declared its intention to acquire the right ofuser inthe land specified in the Schedule appended to that notification for the purpose of laying pipeline through Mundra -Delhi Petroleum Product Pipeline for transportation of petroleum products from Mundra in the State of Gujarat to Delhi by Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Limited.

And whereas copies of the said Gazette notification were made available to the public on the 30-3-2011 ;

Andwhereas 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 in the Schedule appended to this notification is hereby acquired for laying the pipeline ;

Now, therefore , in exercise of the powers conferredby Sub - section ( 1 ) of 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 Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Limited.

SCHEDULE

State:Rajasthan

District: Jaipur

Tehsil: Jaipur

KhasraNo.

Sr. No. Name of the Village

(3) (2)

(1)

33 1. Narikawas

47

Area

Are

Hectare

Sq.Mtr.

(5)

(6) (4)

07

01

0

42

01

0

(G/L Pasture)

1 2. Lalchandpura

2

76 3. Bavadi

10

16 0

20

01

0

01

54 0 5832

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 13 , 2011 /SRAVANA 22 , 1933

(2)

(3) (1 )

4. Sinwar

64

227

382 5. Manchawa

228

225

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

(6)

(5)

0

03

09 0

01

98 0

03

48

0

93

03

0 .

01

78

[F. No. R-31015/ 54/2004-OR- II ] A. GOSWAMI , Under Secy.

नई दिल्ली, 9 अगस्त, 2011

का. आ. 2129.-केन्द्रीय सरकार ने पेट्रोलियम और खनिज पाइपलाइन ( भूमि में उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन ) अधिनियम, 1962 ( 1962का 50 ) की धारा 6 की उप- धारा ( 1 ) के अधीन जारी की गई भारत सरकार के पेट्रोलियम और प्राकृतिक गैस मंत्रालय की नीचे दी गई अनुसूची में यथा उल्लिखित तारीखों की संख्या का. आ. द्वारा उन अधिसूचनाओं से संलग्न अनुसूची में विनिर्दिष्ट भूमि में उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन किया था;

और केन्द्रीय सरकार ने , उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 6 की उप - धारा ( 4 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए, उक्त भूमियों में, सभी विल्लगमों से मुक्त उपयोग का अधिकार भारत ओमान रिफाईनरीज लिमिटेड में निहित किया था;

और जबकि सक्षम प्राधिकारी ने केन्द्रीय सरकार को रिपोर्ट दी है कि कच्चे पेट्रोलियम उत्पादों के परिवहन के लिए भारत ओमान रिफाइनरीज लिमिटेड के गुजरात राज्य के जिला जामनगर स्थित वाडीनार संस्थापन से मध्य प्रदेश राज्य के जिला सागर स्थित बीना संस्थापन तक उपर्युक्त भूमियों में पाइपलाइन बिछाई जा चुकी है , अतः ऐसी भूमि के बारे में जिसका विवरण इस अधिसूचना से संलग्न अनुसूची से विनिर्दिष्ट है , प्रचालन समाप्त किया जाए;

अतः , अब केन्द्रीय सरकार पेट्रोलियम पाइपलाइन ( भूमि में उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन ) अधिनियम , 1963 के नियम 4 के स्पष्टीकरण-1 के अधीन अपेक्षानुसार उक्त अनुसूची के स्तंभ 7 में उल्लिखित तारीखों को जिला गुना , मध्य प्रदेश राज्य में प्रचालन की समाप्ति की तारीख के रूप में घोषित करती है ।

अनुसूची का.आ.नं. व तारीख

क्र. सं.

ग्राम का नाम .

तहसील (2)

(1)

(3)

(4) 995, दिनांक 19-5-1998

राघौगढ़

अगरपुरा

कजलिया

राघौगढ़

राघौगढ़

बालाखेड़ी

नलखेड़ा

राघौगढ़

मकसूदनगढ़

राघौगढ़

कजालिया 2. 1797, दिनांक 7-9-1998

राघौगढ़

कजालिया 1783, दिनांक 19-6-2009

राघौगढ़

राघौगढ़

नलखेड़ा

जिला

राज्य

प्रचालन समाप्ति कीतारीख

(6)

(5)

(7)

मध्य प्रदेश 2-7-2009 गुना

मध्य प्रदेश 2-7-2009 गुना

मध्य प्रदेश 2-7-2009 गुना

मध्यप्रदेश 2-7-2009 गुना

मध्य प्रदेश 2-7-2009 गुना

मध्य प्रदेश 2-7-2009 गुना

मध्य प्रदेश 2-7-2009 गुना

मध्य प्रदेश 2-7-2009 गुना

[फा. सं. आर-31015/13/2011- ओ आर- II ]

ए, गोस्वामी, अवर सचिव 5833 [ भाग II-खंड 3 ( ii ) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : अगस्त 13 , 2011/ श्रावण 22 , 1933

New Delhi, the 9thAugust, 2011

S.O. 2129.-Whereas by Notification ofthe Government of India in the Ministry of Petroleum & Natural Gas , S.O. Nos. and dates as mentioned in the Schedule below issued under Sub- section ( 1 ) of Section (6) , Petroleum and Minerals Pipelines (Acquisition of Right ofUser in Land) Act, 1962 (50 of 1962), the Central Government acquired the Right ofUser inthe said lands specified in the Schedule appended to those Notifications ;

Andwhereas, in exercise ofpowers conferred by Sub-section (4) ofSection 6 of the said Act, the Central Government vested the right ofuser in the lands, free from all encumbrances in the name of Bharat Oman Refineries Limited;

Andwhereas, the Competent Authority has made a report to the Central Government that the pipeline for the purpose oftransportation of crude oil from Vadinar , District Jamnagar in the State ofGujarat to Bina, District Sagar, in the State ofMadhya Pradesh has been laid in the said lands and hence the operation may be terminated in the said lands which inbriefare specified in the Schedule annexed to this Notification;

Now, therefore, as required under explanation 1 ofRule 4 of the Petroleum and Minerals Pipelines (Acquisition of Right ofUser in Land) Rules , 1963, the Central Government hereby declares the dates mentioned in Column 7 of the said Schedule as the dates of termination in District Guna in the State ofMadhya Pradesh.

SCHEDULE

District

State

S.O. No. and date

Tehsil

NameofVillage

Dateof Termination SL No.

(1)

(4)

(6)

(3)

(5)

Guna

2-7-2009 1. 995, Date 19-5-1998

Agarpura

Madhya Pradesh

Raghogarh

Guna

2-7-2009

- Madhya Pradesh

Kajaliva

Raghogarh

Balakhedi

Guna

2-7-2009

Madhya Pradesh

Raghogarh

Guna

Nalkheda

2-7-2009

Madhya Pradesh

Raghogarh

Guna

Maksudan Garh

2-7-2009

Madhya Pradesh

Raghogarh

2-7-2009

Guna Madhya Pradesh

1797, Date7-9-1998

2.

Kajaliya

Raghogarh

2-7-2009 1783, Date 19-6-2009

Kajaliva

Madhya Pradesh

3.

Raghogarh Guna

Guna

Nalkheda

2-7-2009

Raghogarh

Madhya Pradesh

[F. No. R- 31015/ 13/2011 -OR- II ] A. GOSWAMI , Under Secy.

नई दिल्ली, 9 अगस्त, 2011

का. आ. 2130.- केन्द्रीय सरकार ने पेट्रोलियम और खनिज पाइपलाइन ( भूमि में उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन ) अधिनियम , 1962 (1962 का 50 ) की धारा 6 की उपधारा ( 1 ) के अधीन जारी की गई भारत सरकार के पेट्रोलियम और प्राकृतिक गैस मंत्रालय की नीचे दी गई अधिसूची में यथा उल्लिखित तारीखों की संख्या का. आ. द्वारा उन अधिसूचनाओं से संलग्न अनुसूची में विनिर्दिष्ट भूमि में उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन किया था;

और केन्द्रीय सरकार ने , उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 6 की उपधारा ( 4 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए, उक्त भूमियों में, सभी विल्लंगमों से मुक्त उपयोग का अधिकार भारत ओमान रिफाईनरीज लिमिटेड में निहित किया था;

और जबकि सक्षम प्राधिकारी ने केन्द्रीय सरकार को रिपोर्ट दी है कि कच्चे पेट्रोलियम उत्पादों के परिवहन के लिए भारत ओमान रिफाईनरीज लिमिटेड के गुजरात राज्य के जिला जामनगर स्थित वाडीनार संस्थापन से मध्य प्रदेश राज्य के जिला सागर स्थित बीना संस्थापन तक उपर्युक्त भूमियों में पाइपलाइन बिछाई जा चुकी है, अतः ऐसी भूमि के बारे में जिसका विवरण इस अधिसूचना से संलग्न अनुसूची से विनिर्दिष्ट है, प्रचालन समाप्त किया जाए;

अतः , अब केन्द्रीय सरकार पेट्रोलियम पाइपलाइन ( भूमि में उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन ) अधिनियम, 1963 के नियम 4 के स्पष्टीकरण -1 के अधीन अपेक्षानुसार उक्त अनुसूची के स्तंभ 7 में उल्लिखित तारीखों को जिला सागर, मध्य प्रदेश राज्य में प्रचालन की समाप्ति कीतारीख के रूप में घोषित करती है । THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 13 , 2011 /SRAVANA 22 , 1933

5834

अनुसूची

तहसील

ग्राम का नाम क.अ.नं. व तारीख

क्र.सं.

(4)

(3) (2)

(1)

बीना 3040, दिनांक2-12-1997 हांसलखेड़ी 1.

बीना

पटकुई

बीना

पिपरियापुरन

बीना

सरगोली

मनमति

बीना

बीना

नेहरोन

बीना

सरगोली 2. 2329, दिनांक 10-9-2010

[PART II-SEC. 3 (ii ) ] राज्य

जिला

प्रचालन समाप्ति कीतारीख

(7)

(5)

(6)

28-9-2010 मध्य प्रदेश

सागर

28-9-2010 मध्य प्रदेश

सागर

28-9-2010 मध्य प्रदेश

सागर

28-9-2010 सागर

मध्य प्रदेश

28-9-2010 मध्य प्रदेश

सागर

मध्य प्रदेश 28-9-2010 सागर

28-9-2010 सागर

मध्य प्रदेश

[फा. सं. आर-31015/13/2011- ओ आर- II]

ए, गोस्वामी, अवर सचिव

New Delhi , the 9th August, 2011

S.O. 2130. Whereas by Notification of the Government of India in the Ministry of Petroleum & Natural Gas, S.O. Nos. and dates as mentioned in the Schedule below issued under Sub-section ( 1 ) of Section (6 ) , Petroleum and Minerals Pipelines (Acquisition of Right of User in Land) Act, 1962 (50 of 1962 ), the Central Government acquired the Right ofUser inthe said lands specified in the Schedule appended to those Notifications ;

Andwhereas, inexercise ofpowers conferred by sub- section (4) of Section 6 of the said Act, the Central Government vestedthe right ofuser in the lands , free from all encumbrances in the name of Bharat Oman Refineries Limited;

Andwhereas, the Competent Authority has made a report to the Central Government that the pipeline for the purposeoftransportation of crude oil from Vadinar, District Jamnagar in the State of Gujarat to Bitna, District Sagar , in the StateofMadhyaPradesh has been laid in the said lands and hence the operation may be terminated in the said lands which in briefare specified in the Schedule annexed to this Notification;

Now,therefore, as required under explanation 1 of Rule 4 of the Petroleum and Minerals Pipelines ( Acquisition of Right ofUser in Land) Rules, 1963, the Central Government hereby declares the dates mentioned in Column 7 of the said Schedule as the dates of termination in District Sagar in the State ofMadhya Pradesh.

SCHEDULE

Tehsil

S.O. No. and date

NameofVillage Sr. No.

(3)

(4) (1)

(2)

Hansalkhedi

Bina 1. 3040, Date 2-12-1997

Bina

Patkuie

Bina

Pipariyapuran

Bina

Sargoli

Mnamati

Bina

Bina

Nahron

Bina 2. 2329, Date 10-9-2010

Sargoli State

District

Dateof Termination

の

(6)

(5)

28-9-2010 Madhya Pradesh

Sagar

28-9-2010 Madhya Pradesh

Sagar

28-9-2010 Madhya Pradesh

Sagar

28-9-2010 Madhya Pradesh

Sagar

28-9-2010 Madhya Pradesh

Sagar

28-9-2010 Sagar Madhya Pradesh

28-9-2010 Madhya Pradesh

Sagar

[F. No. R-31015/13/2011 -OR- II ] A. GOSWAMI , Under Secy.

[भाग II-खंड 3 ( ii ) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : अगस्त 13 , 2011 / श्रावण 22 , 1933

5835

नई दिल्ली , 9 अगस्त, 2011

का. आ. 2131.-केन्द्रीय सरकार ने पेट्रोलियम और खनिज पाइपलाइन ( भूमि में उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन ) अधिनियम , 1962 (1962का 50 ) की धारा 6 की उप - धारा ( 1 ) के अधीन जारी की गई भारत सरकार के पेट्रोलियम और प्राकृतिक गैस मंत्रालय की नीचे दी गई अनुसूची में यथा उल्लिखित तारीखों की संख्या का. आ. द्वारा उन अधिसूचनाओं से संलग्न अनुसूची में विनिर्दिष्ट भूमि में उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन किया था;

और केन्द्रीय सरकार ने , उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 6 की उप - धारा ( 4 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए , उक्त भूमियों में, सभी विल्लंगमों से मुक्त उपयोग का अधिकार भारत ओमान रिफाईनरीज लिमिटेड में निहित किया था;

और जबकि सक्षम प्राधिकारी ने केन्द्रीय सरकार को रिपोर्ट दी है कि कच्चें पेट्रोलियम उत्पादों के परिवहन के लिए भारत ओमान रिफाईनरीज लिमिटेड के गुजरात राज्य के जिला जामनगर स्थित वाडीनार संस्थापन से मध्यप्रदेश राज्य के जिला सागर स्थित बीना संस्थापन तक उपर्युक्त भूमियों में पाइपलाइन बिछाई जा चुकी है , अतः ऐसी भूमि के बारे में जिसका विवरण इस अधिसूचना से संलग्न अनुसूची से विनिर्दिष्ट है , प्रचालन समाप्त किया जाए;

अतः , अब केन्द्रीय सरकार पेट्रोलियम पाइपलाइन ( भूमि में उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन ) अधिनियम , 1963 के नियम 4 के स्पष्टीकरण -1 के अधीन अपेक्षानुसार उक्त अनुसूची के स्तंभ 7 में उल्लिखित तारीखों को जिला झाबुआ, मध्य प्रदेश राज्य में प्रचालन की समाप्ति की तारीख के रूप में घोषित करती है ।

अनुसूची क्र. सं. का.आ.नं. व तारीख

ग्राम का नाम

तहसील (1)

(2)

(3)

(4)

भीमफालिया

1. 3139, दिनांक 12-12-1997

झाबुआ

कालाखूट

झाबुआ

पिटोल कलॉ

झाबुआ

पिटोलखुर्द

झाबुआ

बावडीबडी

झाबुआ

खेड़ी

झाबुआ

मोद

झाबुआ

मसूरिया

झाबुआ

गेलरकला

झाबुआ

झाबुआ

उदद्यमाल,

नरवालिया

झाबुआ

ढेबर

झाबुआ

झाबुआ

जुनवानिया

बरोड़

झाबुआ

कल्याणपुर

झाबुआ

भमरदा.

झाबुआ

बरखेड़ा

झाबुआ

मुण्डत

झाबुआ

नारदा

झाबुआ

पाडलघाटी

झाबुआ 2883 GI /11-9

जिला

राज्य

प्रचालन समाप्ति की तारीख (6)

( 5 )

(7)

मध्य प्रदेश 30-4-2009 झाबुआ

30-4-2009 मध्य प्रदेश

झाबुआ

मध्य प्रदेश 30-4-2009 झाबुआ

मध्य प्रदेश 30-4-2009 झाबुआ

मध्य प्रदेश 30-4-2009 झाबुआ

30-4-2009 मध्य प्रदेश

झाबुआ

मध्य प्रदेश 30-4-2009 झाबुआ

मध्य प्रदेश 30-4-2009 झाबुआ

30-4-2009 मध्य प्रदेश

झाबुआ

मध्य प्रदेश 30-4-2009 झाबुआ

मध्य प्रदेश 30-4-2009 झाबुआ

मध्य प्रदेश 30-4-2009 झाबुआ

मध्य प्रदेश 30-4-2009 झाबुआ

मध्य प्रदेश 30-4-2009 झाबुआ

मध्य प्रदेश 30-4-2009 झाबुआ

मध्य प्रदेश 30-4-2009 झाबुआ

मध्य प्रदेश 30-4-2009 झाबुआ

मध्य प्रदेश 30-4-2009 झाबुआ

मध्य प्रदेश 30-4-2009 झाबुआ

मध्य प्रदेश 30-4-2009 झाबुआ 5836

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: AUGUST 13 , 2011 /SRAVANA 22 , 1933

(2)

(3)

(4)

(1)

2. 1088 , दिनांक 22-4-2009 कालाखूंट

झाबुआ

पिटोल कलॉ

झाबुआ

झाबुआ

पिटोल खुर्द

खेड़ी

झाबुआ

मोद

झाबुआ

गैलरकला

झाबुआ

नरवालिया

झाबुआ

ढेबर

झाबुआ

झाबुआ

कल्याणपुरा

बरखेड़ा

झाबुआ

झाबलिया 3. 3041 , दिनांक 5-12-1997

पेटलावद

रलियावन

पेटलावद

सोयला

पेटलावद

पेटलावद

अलीस्याखेड़ी

पेटलावद

रायपुरिया

पेटलावद

मातापाड़ा

पेटलावद

सागड़िया

अजब बोराली

पेटलावद

पेटलावद

बावड़ी

पेटलावद

बाछीखेड़ा

सेजलिया

पेटलावद

बरबेट

पेटलावद

कचनारिया

पेटलावद

पेटलावद

रुपारेल

भमती

पेटलावद

पेटलावद

गब्बापाड़ा

पेटलावद

डाबड़ी

बेगनबर्डी

पेटलावद

पेटलावद

लालपुरा

छायनपाडा

पेटलावद

कसारबर्डी

पेटलावद

पेटलावद

झाबलिया 4. 714, दिनांक18-3-2009

सोयला

पेटलावद

पेटलावद

आलस्याखेड़ी

सेजलिया

पेटलावद

बेगनबर्डी

पेटलावद

लालपुरा

[PART II-SBC. 3 ( ii)] (5)

(6)

(7)

30-4-2009 मध्यप्रदेश

झाबुआ

मध्य प्रदेश 30-4-2009 झाबुआ

मध्य प्रदेश 30-4-2009 झाबुआ

मध्य प्रदेश 30-4-2009 झाबुआ

मध्य प्रदेश 30-4-2009 झाबुआ

मध्य प्रदेश 30-4-2009 झाबुआ

मध्यप्रदेश 30-4-2009 झाबुआ

मध्य प्रदेश 30-4-2009 झाबुआ

30-4-2009 मध्य प्रदेश

झाबुआ

30-4-2009.

मध्य प्रदेश

झाबुआ

मध्य प्रदेश 30-4-2009 झाबुआ

मध्य प्रदेश 30-4-2009 झाबुआ

मध्य प्रदेश 30-4-2009 झाबुआ

30-4-2009 मध्य प्रदेश

झाबुआ

मध्य प्रदेश 30-4-2009 झाबुआ

मध्य प्रदेश 30-4-2009 झाबुआ

मध्य प्रदेश 30-4-2009 झाबुआ

मध्य प्रदेश 30-4-2009 झाबुआ

मध्य प्रदेश 30-4-2009 झाबुआ

मध्य प्रदेश 30-4-2009 झाबुआ

मध्य प्रदेश 30-4-2009 झाबुआ

30-4-2009 मध्य प्रदेश

झाबुआ

मध्य प्रदेश 30-4-2009 झाबुआ

मध्य प्रदेश 30-4-2009 झाबुआ

मध्य प्रदेश 30-4-2009 झाबुआ

मध्य प्रदेश 30-4-2009 झाबुआ

मध्य प्रदेश 30-4-2009 झाबुआ

मध्यप्रदेश 30-4-2009 झाबुआ

मध्य प्रदेश 30-4-2009 झाबुआ

30-4-2009 मध्य प्रदेश

झाबुआ

30-4-2009 मध्य प्रदेश

झाबुआ

मध्य प्रदेश 30-4-2009 झाबुआ

मध्यप्रदेश 30-4-2009 झाबुआ

मध्यप्रदेश 30-4-2009 झाबुआ

मध्यप्रदेश 30-4-2009 झाबुआ

मध्यप्रदेश 30-4-2009

पेटलावद

झाबुआ

मध्य प्रदेश 30-4-2009 झाबुआ

[फा. सं. आर-31015/13/2011- ओं आर- II ]

ए. गोस्वामी, अवर सचिव भारत का राजपत्र : अगस्त 13 , 2011 / श्रावण 22, 1933

[ भाग II-खंड 3 ( ii ) ]

5837

NewDelhi , the 9th August, 2011

S.O. 2131. Whereas by Notification ofthe Government of India in the Ministry of Petroleum & Natural Gas, S.O. Nos . and dates as mentioned in the Schedule below issued under Sub -section ( i) of Section (6) , Petroleum and Minerals Pipelines (Acquisition of Right of User in Land) Act, 1962 (50 of 1962), the Central Government acquired the Right ofUser in the said lands specified in the schedule appended to those Notification;

Andwhereas, in exercise ofpowers conferred by Sub-section (4 ) of Section 6 ofthe said Act, the Central Government vested the right ofuser in the lands , free from all encumbrances in the name of Bharat Oman Refineries Limited;

Andwhereas, the Competent Authority has made a report to the Central Government that the pipeline for the purpose oftransportation of crude oil fromVadinar, District Jamnagar in the State ofGujarat to Bina, District Sagar, in the State ofMadhya Pradesh has been laid in the said lands and hence the operation may be terminated in the said lands which inbriefare specified in the schedule annexed to this Notification;

Now, therefore, as required under explanation 1 of rule 4 of the Petroleum and Minerals Pipelines (Acquisition of Right of User in Land ) Rules , 1963 , the Central Government hereby declares the dates mentioned in Column 7 of the said Schedule as the dates of termination in District Jhabuva in the State of Madhya Pradesh .

SCHEDULE

Tehsil

S.O. No. and date

NameofVillage Sr. No.

(4)

(3) (1)

(2)

Jhabuva

Bhimfaliya 1. 3139 , Date 12-12-1997

Kalakhut

Jhabuva

Pitolkala

Jhabuva

Pitolkhurd

Jhabuva

Bawadibadi

Jhabuva

Khedi

Jhabuva

Mod

Jhabuva

Jhabuva

Masuriya

Gelarkala

Jhabuva

Jhabuva

Udeymal

Narwalia

Jhabuva

Jhabuva

Dhebar

Jhabuva

Junwaniya

Barod

Jhabuva

Jhabuva

Kalyanpur

Bhamarda

Jhabuva

Barkheda

Jhabuva

Mundot

Jhabuva

Jhabuva

Naranda

Jhabuva

Padalghati

Kalakhut

Jhabuva

2. 1088, Date 22-4-2009

Jhabuva

Pitolkala

Jhabuva

Pitolkhurd

Jhabuva

Khedi

Mod

Jhabuva

District

State

Date of Termination

(6)

(5)

30-4-2009 Jhabuva Madhya Pradesh

30-4-2009 Madhya Pradesh

Jhabuva .

30-4-2009 Jhabuva Madhya Pradesh

Jhabuva

30-4-2009 Madhya Pradesh

Jhabuva

30-4-2009 Madhya Pradesh

30-4-2009 Jhabuva Madhya Pradesh

Jhabuva

30-4-2009 Madhya Pradesh

Jhabuva

30-4-2009 Madhya Pradesh

30-4-2009 Jhabuva Madhya Pradesh

30-4-2009 Jhabuva Madhya Pradesh

30-4-2009 Madhya Pradesh

Jhabuva

30-4-2009 Jhabuva Madhya Pradesh

30-4-2009 Jhabuva Madhya Pradesh

30-4-2009 Jhabuva Madhya Pradesh

30-4-2009 Jhabuva Madhya Pradesh

30-4-2009 Madhya Pradesh

Jhabuva

30-4-2009 Jhabuva Madhya Pradesh

30-4-2009 Jhabuva Madhya Pradesh

30-4-2009 Jhabuva Madhya Pradesh

30-4-2009 Jhabuva Madhya Pradesh

30-4-2009 Jhabuva Madhya Pradesh

30-4-2009 Jhabuva Madhya Pradesh

30-4-2009 Jhabuva Madhya Pradesh

30-4-2009 Jhabuva Madhya Pradesh

30-4-2009 Jhabuva Madhya Pradesh 5838

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 13 , 2011/ SRAVANA 22, 1933

(1)

(2)

(3)

(4) 2. 1088, Date 22-4-2009-Contd. Gelarkala

Jhabuva

Narwalia

Jhabuva

Dhebar

Jhabuva

Jhabuva

Kalyanpura

Barkheda

Jhabuva 3. 3041 , Date 5-12-1997

Petlawad

Zhabliya

Petlawad

Raliyavan

Soyala

Petlawad

Petlawad

AlisiyaKhedi

Petlawad

Raipuriya

Petlawad

Matapada

Petlawad

Sagadiya

Petlawad

AjabBorali

Bawdi

Petlawad

Bachhikheda Petlawad

Sejaliya

Petlawad

Barbet

Petlawad

Petlawad

Kachnariya

Petlawad

Ruparel

Bhamti

Petlawad

Petlawad.

Gabbapada

Dabdi

Petlawad

Petlawad

Beganbardi

Petlawad

Lalpura

Petlawad

Chhayanpara

Kasarbardi

Petlawad 4. 714 , Date 18-3-2009

Petlawad

Zhabliya

Soyala

Petlawad

Petlawad

AlisiyaKhedi

Petlawad

Sejaliya

Beganbardi

Petlawad

Lalpura

Petlawad

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

(6)

Jhabuva Madhya Pradesh 30-4-2009 Jhabuva

30-4- 30-4-2009 Madhya Pradesh

Jhabuva

30-4-2009 Madhya Pradesh

Jhabuva

30-4-2009 Madhya Pradesh

Jhabuva

30-4-2009 Madhya Pradesh

Jhabuva

30-4-2009 Madhya Pradesh

Jhabuva Madhya Pradesh 30-4-2009 Jhabuva Madhya Pradesh 30-4-2009 Jhabuva Madhya Pradesh , 30-4-2009 Jhabuva Madhya Pradesh 30-4-2009 Jhabuva

30-4-2009 Madhya Pradesh

Jhabuva

30-4-2009 Madhya Pradesh

Jhabuva Madhya Pradesh 30-4-2009 Jhabuva Madhya Pradesh 30-4-2009 Jhabuva Madhya Pradesh 30-4-2009 Jhabuva Madhya Pradesh 30-4-2009 Jhabuva

30-4-2009 Madhya Pradesh

Jhabuva

30-4-2009 Madhya Pradesh

Jhabuva

30-4-2009 Madhya Pradesh

Jhabuva Madhya Pradesh 30-4-2009 Jhabuva

30-4-2009 Madhya Pradesh

Jhabuva

30-4-2009 Madhya Pradesh

Jhabuva Madhya Pradesh 30-4-2009 Jhabuva

30-4-2009 Madhya Pradesh

Jhabuva

30-4-2009 Madhya Pradesh

Jhabuva Madhya Pradesh 30-4-2009 Jhabuva

30-4-2009 Madhya Pradesh

Jhabuva

30-4-2009- Madhya Pradesh

Jhabuva Madhya Pradesh 30-4-2009 Jhabuva

30-4-2009 Madhya Pradesh

Jhabuva

30-4-2009 Madhya Pradesh

Jhabuva

30-4-2009 Madhya Pradesh

[F. No. R-31015/ 13 /2011 -OR- II ] A. GOSWAMI , Under Secy.

नई दिल्ली, 9 अगस्त, 2011

का. आ. 2132.-केन्द्रीय सरकार ने पेट्रोलियम और खनिज पाइपलाइन ( भूमि में उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन ) अधिनियम, 1962 (1962का 30 ) की धारा 6 की उप - धारा ( 1 ) के अधीन जारी की गई भारत सरकार के पेट्रोलियम और प्राकृतिक गैस मंत्रालय की नीचे दी गई अनुसूची में वथा उल्लिखित तारीखों की संख्या का. आ. द्वारा उन अधिसूचनाओं से संलग्न अनुसूची में विनिर्दिष्ट भूमि में उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जनकिया था;

[भाग II-खंड 3 ( ii ) ]

5839 भारत का राजपत्र : अगस्त 13, 2011/ श्रावण 22 , 1933

और केन्द्रीय सरकार ने, उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 6 की उप- धारा ( 4 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए, उक्त भूमियों में , सभी विल्लंगमों से मुक्त उपयोग का अधिकार भारत ओमान रिफाईनरीज लिमिटेड में निहित किया था;

और जबकि सक्षम प्राधिकारी ने केन्द्रीय सरकार को रिपोर्ट दी है कि कच्चे पेट्रोलियम उत्पादों के परिवहन के लिए भारत ओमान रिफाईनरीज लिमिटेड के गुजरात राज्य के जिला जामनगर स्थित वाडीनार संस्थापन से मध्य प्रदेश राज्य के जिला सागर स्थित बीना संस्थापन तक उपर्युक्त भूमियों में पाइपलाइन बिछाई जा चुकी है, अतः ऐसी भूमि के बारे में जिसका विवरण इस अधिसूचना से संलग्न अनुसूची से विनिर्दिष्ट है, प्रचालन समाप्त किया जाए;

अतः , अब केन्द्रीय सरकार पेट्रोलियम पाइपलाइन ( भूमि में उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन ) अधिनियम , 1963 क नियम 4 के स्पष्टीकरण -1 के अधीन अपेक्षानुसार उक्त अनूसची के स्तंभ 7 में उल्लिखित तारीखों को जिला राजगढ़, मध्य प्रदेश राज्य में प्रचालन की समाप्ति की तारीख के रूप में घोषित करती है ।

अनुसूची

क्र. सं. का.आ. व तारीख

ग्राम का नाम

तहसील

जिला

:

राज्य

प्रचालन समाप्ति कीतारीख (1)

(2)

(3)

(4)

(5)

(6)

1. 991 , दिनांक18-5-1998

मध्यप्रदेश 21-1-2010 खजूरिया घाटा सारंगपुर

राजगढ़

सामगी घाटा

मध्य प्रदेश 21-1-2010

राजगढ़

सारंगपुर

तिसई

मध्य प्रदेश 21-1-2010

राजगढ़

सारंगपुर

बारोल

मध्य प्रदेश 21-1-2010

सारंगपुर

राजगढ़

खेरचा खेड़ी

मध्य प्रदेश 21-1-2010

राजगढ़

सारंगपुर

पठारी

राजगढ़

मध्य प्रदेश 21-1-2010

सारंगपुर

मध्य प्रदेश

निपानियातुला

राजगढ़

21-1-2010

सारंगपुर

देन्दला

राजगढ़

21-1-2010

मध्य प्रदेश

सारंगपुर

ध्याना

मध्य प्रदेश 21-1-2010

राजगढ़

सारंगपुर

मध्य प्रदेश 21-1-2010

राजगढ़

सेमलीलोड़ा सारंगपुर

संडावता

राजगढ़

मध्य प्रदेश 21-1-2010

सारंगपुर

मध्य प्रदेश

बरखेड़ा खुर्रम

राजगढ़

21-1-2010

सारंगपुर

2. 1797, दिनांक 7-9-1998

मध्य प्रदेश

सेमलीलोढ़ा

राजगढ़

21-1-2010

सारंगपुर

भ्याना

मध्य प्रदेश 21-1-2010

राजगढ़

सारंगपुर

3. 166 , दिनांक11-1-2010

मध्य प्रदेश

सेमलीलोड़ा

राजगढ़

21-1-2010

सारंगपुर

मध्य प्रदेश 21-1-2010

राजगढ़

निपान्यातुला सारंगपुर

भ्याना

मध्य प्रदेश 21-1-2010 .

राजगढ़

सारंगपुर

देंदला

मध्य प्रदेश

राजगढ़

21-1-2010

सारंगपुर

शामगी घाटा

मध्य प्रदेश

राजगढ़

सारंगपुर

21-1-2010 पठारी

राजगढ़

मध्य प्रदेश 21-1-2010

सारंगपुर

21-1-2010 बरखेड़ी खुर्रम

मध्य प्रदेश

सारंगपुर

राजगढ़

मध्य प्रदेश 21-1-2010 खंजरपुर

राजगढ़

सारंगपुर

मध्य प्रदेश 21-1-2010

राजगढ़

खुजुरिया घाटा सारंगपुर

4. 993, दिनांक 18-5-1998

मध्यप्रदेश 21-1-2010

राजगढ़

राजगढ़

रसूलपुरा

कल्पोनी

मध्य प्रदेश

राजगढ़

21-1-2010.

राजगढ़.

मध्य प्रदेश 21-1-2010

राजगढ़

पाडलियाखेड़ी

राजगढ़ 5840

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 13 , 2011 /SRAVANA 22, 1933

(3)

(4) (2)

(1)

4. 993, दिनांक18-5-1998-जारी

चौंसला

राजगढ़

राजगढ़

तुमडिया खेड़ी

राजगढ़

खजूरी

राजगढ़

गोरखपुरा

राजगढ़

किशनपुरिया

राजगढ़

कुण्डिबे

राजगढ़

लालपुरा

राजगढ़

मोहकमपुरा

राजगढ़

रानीपुरा

राजगढ़

चैनपुरिया

राजगढ़

सालपुरा

सांगी

राजगढ़

राजगढ़

सावलखेड़ा

राजगढ़

जैतुपरा

राजगढ़

पिपल्याखुर्द

राजगढ़

किानपुरिया खुर्द

राजगढ़

रामपुरिया

राजगढ़

पिपल्बे पुरोहित

राजगढ़

हिरणखेड़ी

राजगढ़

घोघड़िया कलां

गोल्याबे

राजगढ़

बाजतलाई

राजगढ़

राजगढ़

भोजपुरिया

देवली कलां

राजगढ़

खेरी

राजगढ़

अम्बा

राजगढ़

नारयण घाटा

राजगढ़

राजगढ़

सिन्दूरिया

नाईपुरिया

राजगढ़

कचारी

राजगढ़

राजगढ़

5. 164, दिनांक 11-1-2010 खजूरी

राजगढ़

तुमडिया खेड़ी

राजगढ़

गोरखपुरा

राजगढ़

किशन पुरिया

राजगढ़

पीपल्बे पुरोहित

घोघड़िया कलां राजगढ़

अम्बा

राजगढ़

[PART II-SEC. 3(ii)]

(6)

(5)

(7)

21-1-2010 मध्य प्रदेश

राजगढ़

21-1-2010 मध्य प्रदेश

राजगढ़

21-1-2010 मध्य प्रदेश

राजगढ़

मध्य प्रदेश 21-1-2010 राजगढ़

21-1-2010 मध्य प्रदेश

राजगढ़

21-1-2010 मध्य प्रदेश

राजगढ़

मध्य प्रदेश 21-1-2010 राजगढ़

मध्य प्रदेश 21-1-2010 राजगढ़

मध्य प्रदेश 21-1-2010 राजगढ़

मध्य प्रदेश 21-1-2010 राजगढ़

मध्य प्रदेश

राजगढ़

21-1-2010 मध्य प्रदेश 21-1-2010 राजगढ़

मध्य प्रदेश 21-1-2010 राजगढ़

मध्य प्रदेश 21-1-2010 राजगढ़

मंध्य प्रदेश 21-1-2010 राजगढ़

21-1-2010 मध्य प्रदेश

राजगढ़

मध्य प्रदेश 21-1-2010 राजगढ़

मध्य प्रदेश 21-1-2010 संजगढ़

21-1-2010 मध्य प्रदेश

राजगढ़

मध्य प्रदेश 21-1-2010 .

राजगढ़

मध्य प्रदेश 21-1-2010 राजगढ़

21-1-2010 मध्य प्रदेश

राजगढ़

मध्य प्रदेश 21-1-2010 राजगढ़

मध्य प्रदेश

राजगढ़

21-1-2010 मध्य प्रदेश 21-1-2010 राजगढ़

मध्य प्रदेश 21-1-2010 राजगढ़

21-1-2010

मध्य प्रदेश

राजगढ़

मध्य प्रदेश 21-1-2010 .

राजगढ़

मध्य प्रदेश 21-1-2010 राजगढ़.

21-1-2010 मध्य प्रदेश

राजगढ़

मध्य प्रदेश 21-1-2010 राजगढ़

मध्य प्रदेश 21-1-2010 राजगढ़

मध्य प्रदेश 21-1-2010 राजगढ़

21-1-2010

मध्य प्रदेश

राजगढ़

मध्य प्रदेश 21-1-2010 राजगढ़

मध्य प्रदेश 21-1-2010 राजगढ़

21-1-2010

मध्य प्रदेश

राजगढ़ भारत का राजपत्र : अगस्त 13 , 2011 / श्रावण 22, 1933

[भाग II-खंड 3 (ii) ]

(3)

(4) (2)

(1)

राजगढ़ 5. 164, दिनांक 11-1-2010-जारी देवली कलां

राजगढ़

सावनखेड़ी

राजगढ़

रानीपुरा

गोल्याबे

राजगढ़

राजगढ़

भोजपुरिया

राजगढ़

पाडल्याखेड़ी

राजगढ़

सिन्दुरिया

ब्यावरा

बांकपुरा

6. 969 दिनांक 12-5-1998

ब्यावरा

गुलजारपुरा

ब्यावरा

कनाड़ियाखेड़ी

ब्यावरा

रतनपुरा

ब्यावरा

भूकनी

ब्यावरा

बरखेड़ी

नापानेरा

ब्यावरा

ब्यावरा

देवरी खेड़ा

ब्यावरा

गोलाखेड़ा

ब्यावरा

रायपुरा

पिपलया पेडत

ब्यावरा

ब्यावरा

भगवानपुरा

ब्यावरा

लालपुरा ( रामपुरा)

ब्यावरा

कनाड़िया खेड़ी 7. 165 , दिनांक11-1-2010

ब्यावर

नापानेरा

ब्यावरा

पीपल्या पेड़त

ब्यावरा

देहरी खेड़ा

ब्यावरा

भूकनी

ब्यावरा

गुलजारपुरा

ब्यावरा

बांकपुरा

ब्यावरा

लालपुरा

ब्यावरा

बरखेड़ी

ब्यावरा

भगवानपुरा

5841

(7)

(5)

(6)

21-1-2010 मध्यप्रदेश

राजगढ़

21-1-2010 मध्य प्रदेश

राजगढ़

21-1-2010 मध्यप्रदेश

राजगढ़

21-1-2010 मध्य प्रदेश

राजगढ़

21-1-2010 मध्यप्रदेश

राजगढ़

21-1-2010 मध्य प्रदेश

राजगढ़

21-1-2010 मध्य प्रदेश

राजगढ़

21-1-2010 मध्य प्रदेश

राजगढ़

21-1-2010 मध्य प्रदेश

राजगढ़

21-1-2010 मध्य प्रदेश

राजगढ़

21-1-2010 मध्य प्रदेश

राजगढ़

21-1-2010 मध्य प्रदेश.

राजगढ़

मध्य प्रदेश 21-1-2010 राजगढ़

21-1-2010 मध्य प्रदेश

राजगढ़

मध्य प्रदेश 21-1-2010 राजगढ़

मध्य प्रदेश 21-1-2010 राजगढ़

मध्य प्रदेश 21-1-2010 राजगढ़

21-1-2010 मध्य प्रदेश

राजगढ़

21-1-2010 मध्य प्रदेश

राजगढ़

21-1-2010 मध्य प्रदेश

राजगढ़

मध्य प्रदेश 21-1-2010 राजगढ़

21-1-2010 मध्य प्रदेश

सजगढ़

मध्य प्रदेश 21-1-2010 राजगढ़

21-1-2010 मध्य प्रदेश

राजगढ़

मध्य प्रदेश 21-1-2010 राजगढ़

21-1-2010 मध्य प्रदेश

राजगढ़

21-1-2010 मध्य प्रदेश

राजगढ़

मध्य प्रदेश 21-1-2010 राजगढ़

21-1-2010 मध्य प्रदेश

राजगढ़

21-1-2010 मध्य प्रदेश

राजगढ़

[फा. सं. आर-31015/13/2011- ओ आर- II ]

ए, गोस्वामी , अवर सचिव

New Delhi , the 9th August, 2011

S.O. 2132. Whereas by Notification of the Government of India in the Ministry of Petroleum & Natural Gas , S.O. Nos . and dates as mentioned in the Schedule below issued under Sub - section ( i) of Section (6) , Petroleum and Minerals Pipelines ( Acquisition of Right of User in Land) Act , 1962 (50 of 1962), the Central Government acquired the Right of User in the said lands specified in the Schedule appended to those Notifications;

Andwhereas , in exercise of powers conferred by Sub- section (4) of Section 6 of the said Act, the Central Government vested the right ofuser in the lands, free from all encumbrances in the name of Bharat Oman Refineries Limited;

5842

THEGAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 13 , 2011 / SRAVANA 22, 1933

[PART II-SEC. 3(ii)] And whereas, the Competent Authority has made a report to the Central Government that the pipeline forthe purpose of transportation of crude oil from Vadinar, District Jamnagar in the State ofGujarat to Bina, District Sagar, inthe State ofMadhya Pradesh has been laid in the said lands and hence the operation may be terminated in the said lands which inbriefare specified in the Schedule annexed to this Notification;

Now, therefore, as required under explanation 1 of rule 4 of the Petroleum and Minerals Pipelines (Acquisition of Right of User in Land) Rules, 1963 , the Central Government hereby declares the dates mentioned in Column 7 of the said Schedule as the dates of termination in District Rajgarh in the State of Madhya Pradesh .

SCHEDULE

S.O. No. and date

Tehsil

District

State

NameofVillage

Sl. No.

Dateof Termination (1)

(2)

(3)

(4)

(5)

(6)

(7) 1. 991 , Date 18-5-1998

Khajuriya Ghata Sarangpur Rajgarh Madhya Pradesh 21-1-2010

21-1-2010

Samgi Ghata Sarangpur Rajgarh Madhya Pradesh

Tesai

21-1-2010

Madhya Pradesh

Sarangpur Rajgarh

Barol

21-1-2010

Madhya Pradesh

Sarangpur Rajgarh

Khercha Khedi

21-1-2010

Madhya Pradesh

Sarangpur Rajgarh

Pathari

21-1-2010

Madhya Pradesh

Rajgarh

Sarangpur

21-1-2010

Nipaniyatula Sarangpur Rajgarh Madhya Pradesh

Daidala

Rajgarh

Sarangpur

Madhya Pradesh 21-1-2010

21-1-2010

Bhyana

Madhya Pradesh

Sarangpur Rajgarh

Semliloda

Madhya Pradesh 21-1-2010

Rajgarh

Sarangpur

Sandavata

21-1-2010

Madhya Pradesh

Sarangpur Rajgarh

21-1-2010

Rajgarh

Barkheda Khurram Sarangpur

Madhya Pradesh 2. 1797 , Date 7-9-1998

Semli Loda

21-1-2010

Sarangpur Rajgarh Madhya Pradesh

Bhyana

21-1-2010

Madhya Pradesh

Rajgarh

Sarangpur

Semliloda

3. 166 , Date 11-1-2010-

Rajgarh

21-1-2010

Madhya Pradesh

Sarangpur

Nipaniyatula

21-1-2010

Rajgarh

Sarangpur

Madhya Pradesh

21-1-2010

Bhyana

Madhya Pradesh

Sarangpur Rajgarh

Daidala

21-1-2010

Sarangpur Rajgarh Madhya Pradesh

21-1-2010

Samgi Ghata Sarangpur Rajgarh Madhya Pradesh

Pathari

21-1-2010

Madhya Pradesh

Rajgarh

Sarangpur

21-1-2010

Madhya Pradesh

Rajgarh

Barkheda Khurram Sarangpur

21-1-2010

Khanjarpur

Madhya Pradesh

Sarangpur Rajgarh

Khajuriya Ghata Sarangpur Rajgarh Madhya Pradesh 21-1-2010 4. 993 , Date 18-5-1998

Rajgarh Rajgarh

21-1-2010

Rasulpura

Madhya Pradesh

21-1-2010

Madhya Pradesh

Rajgarh

Kalponi

Rajgarh

21-1-2010

PadliyaKhedi Rajgarh Rajgarh Madhya Pradesh

Chaunsala

21-1-2010

Rajgarh Rajgarh Madhya Pradesh

21-1-2010

Tumadiya Khedi Rajgarh Rajgarh Madhya Pradesh

Khajuri

Rajgarh Rajgarh Madhya Pradesh 21-1-2010

Gorakh Pura

21-1-2010

Rajgarh Madhya Pradesh

Rajgarh

KisanPuriva

21-1-2010

Madhya Pradesh

Rajgarh

Rajgarh

Kundibe

21-1-2010

Rajgarh Rajgarh MadhyaPradesh

Lalpura

Rajgarh Rajgarh MadhyaPradesh 21-1-2010

Mohakam Pur

Rajgarh

21-1-2010

Rajgarh

Madhya Pradesh 5843

भारत का राजपत्र : अगस्त 13, 2011 / श्रावण 22 , 1933

[ भाग II-खंड 3 ( ii) ]

(7)

(6)

(2)

(3)

(5)

(4)

(1)

Madhya Pradesh 21-1-2010

Rajgarh

Rani Pura

Rajgarh

4. 993, Date 18-5-1998-Contd.

21-1-2010

Rajgarh Madhya Pradesh

Rajgarh

ChainPuriya

SalPura

21-1-2010

Madhya Pradesh

Rajgarh

Rajgarh

Madhya Pradesh 21-1-2010

Rajgarh

Sangi

Rajgarh

21-1-2010

SavanKheda

Madhya Pradesh

Rajgarh

Rajgarh

21-1-2010

JaitPura

Madhya Pradesh

Rajgarh

Rajgarh

Madhya Pradesh 21-1-2010

Rajgarh

Rajgarh

PiplyaKhurd

21-1-2010

Madhya Pradesh

Rajgarh

Rajgarh

KisanPuriya Khurd

21-1-2010

Madhya Pradesh

Rajgarh

Rajgarh

RamPuriya

21-1-2010

Rajgarh Madhya Pradesh

Rajgarh

Piplabe

HiranKhedi

Madhya Pradesh 21-1-2010

Rajgarh

Rajgarh

21-1-2010

Madhya Pradesh

Rajgarh

Rajgarh

Ghoghadiya Kalan

21-1-2010

Madhya Pradesh

Goliabe

Rajgarh Rajgarh

21-1-2010

Madhya Pradesh

Rajgarh

Rajgarh

Bajtalai

21-1-2010

Madhya Pradesh

Rajgarh

Rajgarh

Bhojpuriya

21-1-2010

Dewali Kalan

Madhya Pradesh

Rajgarh

Rajgarh

21-1-2010

Kheri

Madhya Pradesh

Rajgarh

Rajgarh

Amba

21-1-2010

Madhya Pradesh

Rajgarh

Rajgarh

21-1-2010

Madhya Pradesh

Rajgarh

Rajgarh

NarayanGhata

21-1-2010

Madhya Pradesh

Rajgarh Rajgarh

Sinduriya

21-1-2010

Madhya Pradesh

Rajgarh

Rajgarh

Naipuriya

21-1-2010

Kachari

Madhya Pradesh

Rajgarh

Rajgarh

21-1-2010

Madhya Pradesh

Rajgarh Rajgarh

5. 164, Date 11-1-2010

Khajuri

21-1-2010

Madhya Pradesh

Rajgarh Rajgarh

Tumadiya Khedi

21-1-2010

Madhya Pradesh

Rajgarh Rajgarh

Gorakhpura

21-1-2010

Madhya Pradesh

Rajgarh Rajgarh

KisanPuriya

21-1-2010

Madhya Pradesh

Rajgarh

Rajgarh

PiplabePurohit

21-1-2010

Madhya Pradesh

Rajgarh

Rajgarh

Ghoghadiya Kalan

21-1-2010

Madhya Pradesh

Amba

Rajgarh

Rajgarh

21-1-2010

Dewali Kalan

Madhya Pradesh

Rajgarh

Rajgarh

21-1-2010

SavanKhedi

Madhya Pradesh

Rajgarh

Rajgarh

21-1-2010

Madhya Pradesh

Rajgarh

Rajgarh

Ranipura

21-1-2010

Goliabe

Madhya Pradesh

Rajgarh

Rajgarh

21-1-2010

Madhya Pradesh

Rajgarh

Rajgarh

Bhojpuriya

21-1-2010

Madhya Pradesh -

Rajgarh

Rajgarh

Padliyakhedi

21-1-2010

Madhya Pradesh

Rajgarh

Rajgarh

Sinduriya

Biaora

21-1-2010

Madhya Pradesh

Rajgarh

Bankpura

6. 969, Date 12-5-1998

21-1-2010

Biaora

Madhya Pradesh

Rajgarh

Guljarpura

21-1-2010

Madhya Pradesh

Biaora Rajgarh

Kanadiya Khedi

Biaora

21-1-2010

Madhya Pradesh

Rajgarh

Ratanpura

21-1-2010

Bhunkni

Biaora

Madhya Pradesh

Rajgarh

21-1-2010

Barkhedi

Biaora

Madhya Pradesh

Rajgarh

Biaora

21-1-2010

Madhya Pradesh

Rajgarh

Napanera

21-1-2010

Devari Kheda Biaora

Madhya Pradesh

Rajgarh 5844

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: AUGUST 13 , 2011/ SRAVANA 22, 1933

(3)

(4) (1)

(2)

Biaora 6. 969, Date 12-5-1998-Contd. Gola Kheda

Biaora

Raipura

Biaora

PipaliyaPedat

Biaora

BhagwanPura

Biaora

Lalpura (Rampura) 7. 165, Date 11-1-2010

Biaora

Kanadiya Khedi

Biaora

Napanera

Biaora

PipliyaPedat

Dehari Kheda Biaora

Bhukani

Biaora

Biaora

Guljarpura

Biaora

Bankpura

Biaora

Lalpura

Barkhedi

Biaora

Biaora

Bhagwanpura

[PART II-SEC. 3(ii ) ]

(7) (5)

(6)

21-1-2010 Rajgarh Madhya Pradesh

Madhya Pradesh 21-1-2010 Rajgarh

21-1-2010 Madhya Pradesh

Rajgarh

21-1-2010 Madhya Pradesh

Rajgarh

Madhya Pradesh 21-1-2010 Rajgarh

Madhya Pradesh 21-1-2010 Rajgarh

Madhya Pradesh 21-1-2010 Rajgarh

21-1-2010 Madhya Pradesh

Rajgarh

Madhya Pradesh 21-1-2010 Rajgarh

21-1-2010 Rajgarh Madhya Pradesh

Madhya Pradesh 21-1-2010 Rajgarh

Madhya Pradesh 21-1-2010 Rajgarh

21-1-2010 Madhya Pradesh.

Rajgarh

21-1-2010 Madhya Pradesh

Rajgarh

Madhya Pradesh 21-1-2010 Rajgarh

[F. No. R-31015/ 13 /2011 -OR- II )

A. GOSWAMI , Under Secy.

नई दिल्ली, 9 अगस्त, 2011

का. आ. 2133.-केन्द्रीय सरकार ने पेट्रोलियम और खनिज पाइपलाइन ( भूमि में उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन ) अधिनियम , 1962 (1962 का 50 ) की धारा 6 की उप- धारा ( 1 ) के अधीन जारी की गईं भारत सरकार के पेट्रोलियम और प्राकृतिक गैस मंत्रालय की नीचे दी गई अनुसूची में यथा उल्लिखित तारीखों की संख्या का. आ. द्वारा उन अधिसूचनाओं से संलग्न अनुसूची में विनिर्दिष्ट भूमि में उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन किया था;

और केन्द्रीय सरकार ने, उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 6 की उप- धारा ( 4 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए, उक्त भूमियों में, संभी विल्लंगमों से मुक्त उपयोग का अधिकार भारत ओमान रिफाईनरीज लिमिटेड में निहित किया था;

और जबकि सक्षम प्राधिकारी ने केन्द्रीय सरकार को रिपोर्ट दी है कि कच्चे पेट्रोलियम तेल के परिवहन के लिए भारत ओमान रिफाईनरीज लिमिटेड के गुजरात राज्य स्थित वाडीनार संस्थापन से मध्य प्रदेश राज्य स्थित बीना संस्थापन तक उपर्युक्त भूमियों में पाइपलाइन बिछाई जा चुकी है , चूंकि गुजरात राज्य के जिला दाहोद में पाइपलाइन बिछाई जा चुकी है , अतः ऐसी भूमि के बारे में जिसका विवरण इस अधि सूचनासे संलग्न अनुसूची से विनिर्दिष्ट है , प्रचालन समाप्त किया जाए;

अतः अब केन्द्रीय सरकार पेट्रोलियम पाइपलाइन ( भूमि में उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन ) अधिनियम , 1963 के नियम 4 के स्पष्टीकरण-1 के अधीन अपेक्षानुसार उक्त अनुसूची के स्तंभ 7 में उल्लिखित तारीखों को जिला दाहोद , गुजरात राज्य में प्रचालन की समाप्ति की तारीख के रूप में घोषित करती है ।

अनुसूची

तहसील क्र. सं. का.आ. नं. व तारीख

गांव का नाम

(1)

(3)

(4) (2)

बारीया

भाथ वाडा

1. 1803, दिनांक 16-7-1997

बारीया

असायडी

बारीया

सानीया

बारीया

रेवाडी

बारीया

पिपलोद

पंचेला

बारीया जिला

राज्य

प्रचालन समाप्ति कीतारीख

(7)

(6)

(5)

4-9-2010 पंजमहाल गुजरात

7-9-2010 पंजमहाल गुजरात

पंजमहाल

7-9-2010

गुजरात

7-9-2010 पंजमहाल

गुजरात

14-9-2010 पंजमहाल गुजरात

14-9-2010 पंजमहाल

गुजरात ر

5845 भारत का राजपत्र : अगस्त 13, 2011 / श्रावण 22 , 1933

[ भाग II-खंड 3 ( ii) ]

(7)

(6)

(5)

(4)

(3)

(2)

(1)

14-9-2010

देवगढ बारिया

गुजरात

दाहोद

पीपलोद

2. 1442, दिनांक 21-5-2010

14-9-2010

दाहोद

गुजरात

देवगढ बारिया

पंचेला

18-9-2010

पंचमहाल

लिमखेडा

गुजरात

प्रतापपुरा

3. 2779 , दिनांक1-10-1997

18-9-2010

पंचमहाल गुजरात

परपटा

लिमखेडा

30-9-2010

पंचमहाल

लिमखेडा

गुजरात

मन्ली

30-9-2010 .

पंचमहाल

लिमखेडा

गुजरात

कुन्ली

5-10-2010

पंचमहाल

लिमखेडा

गुजरात

अगारा

6-10-2010

पंचमहाल

लिमखेडा

गुजरात

अम्बवा

6-10-2010

पंचमहाल

लिमखेडा

गुजरात

पटवान

7-10-2010

पंचमहाल गुजरात

टींबा

लिमखेडा

7-10-2010

पंचमहाल

लिमखेडा

गुजरात

विसलंगा

7-10-2010

पंचमहाल

लिमखेडा

गुजरात

जादाखेरीया

7-10-2010

पंचमहाल '

लिमखेडा

गुजरात

कथोलीया

5-10-2010

दाहोद

गुजरात

लिमखेडा

अगारा

1. 1798 , दिनांक7-9-1998

18-9-2010

लिमखेडा

गुजरात

दाहोद

परपटा

30-9-2010

गुजरात

दाहोद

लिमखंडा

मानली

18-9-2010

दाहोद

लिमखेडा

गुजरात

प्रतापपुरा

5. 1907 , दिनांक 14-9-1998

5-10-2010

दाहोद

गुजरात

लिमखेडा

अगारा

6-10-2010

दाहोद

अम्बत्रा

गुजरात

लिमखेडा

6-10-2010

लिमखेडा दाहोद

गुजरात

पटवान

18-9-2010

दाहोद

लिमखेडा

गुजरात

6. 1820 , दिनांक 14-7-2010 प्रतापपुरा

:

18-9-2010

लिमखेडा

दाहोद

गुजरात

परपाटा

30-9-2010

लिमखेडा दाहोद

गुजरात

मानली

5-10-2010

लिमखेडा

दाहोद

गुजरात

अगारा

6-10-2010

दाहोद

लिमखेडा

पटवान

गुजरात

7-10-2010

लिमखेडा

दाहोद

गुजरात

टींबा

7-10-2010

लिमखेडा दाहोद

गुजरात

वीसलंगा

7-10-2010

लिमखेडा दाहोद

गुजरात

जाडाखेरीयां

14-9-2010

पंचमहाल गुजरात

दाहोद

7 2254 दिनांक 9-9-1997

25-9-2010

पंचमहाल गुजरात

दाहोद

26-9-2010

पंचमहाल गुजरात

दाहोद

29-9-2010

पंचमहाल गुजरात

दाहोद

29-9-2010

पंचमहाल गुजरात

दाहोद

30-9-2010

पंचमहाल गुजरात

दाहोद

2-10-2010

पंचमहाल गुजरात

दाहोद

3-10-2010

पंचमहाल गुजरात

दाहोद

4-10-2010

पंचमहाल गुजरात

दाहोद

4-10-2010 .

पंचमहाल गुजरात

दाहोद 5846

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 13 , 2011 /SRAVANA 22, 1933

(2)

(1)

(3)

(4)

दाहोद

भुतोडी

7. 2254, दिनांक 9-9-1997-जारी

कठला

दाहोद

वरवाडा

दाहोद

खंगेला

दाहोद

जालत

8. 1907, दिनांक 14-9-1998

दाहोद

मोटी खरज

दाहोद

बावका

दाहोद 9 1595, दिनांक 25-6-2010 बावका

दाहोद

दाहोद

भुताडी

गडोइ

दाहोद

नगराला

दाहोद

मोटीखरज

दाहोद

जालत

दाहोद

चंदवाना

दाहोद

कठला

दाहोद

वरबाडा

दाहोद

खंगेला

दाहोद

[PART II Sac. 3(ii) ] (5)

(6)

(7) पंचमहाल

5-10-2010

गुजरात

पंचमहाल.

7-10-2010

गुजरात

पंचमहाल

9-10-2010

गुजरात

पंचमहाल

10-10-2010

गुजरात

दाहोद

4-10-2010

गुजरात

दाहोद

5-10-2010

गुजरात

दाहोद

7-10-2010

गुजरात

दाहोद

25-9-2010

गुजरात

दाहोद

गुजरात

5-10-2010 दाहोद

26-9-2010

गुजरात

दाहोद

26-9-2010

गुजरात

दाहोद

30-9-2010

गुजरात

दाहोद

गुजरात

2-10-2010 दाहोद

4-10-2010

गुजरात

दाहोद

29-9-2010

गुजरात

दाहोद

30-9-2010

गुजरात

दाहोद

2-10-2010

गुजरात

[फा. सं. आर-31015/13/2011- ओ आर- II ]

ए, गोस्वामी , अवर सचिव

New Delhi , the 9th August, 2011

S.O. 2133. Whereas by Notification of the Government of India in the Ministry of Petroleum & Natural Gas, S.O. Nos. and dates as mentioned in the Schedule below issued under sub-section ( i ) of Section (6 ) , Petroleum and Minerals Pipelines (Acquisition of Right ofUser in Land) Act , 1962 (50 of 1962 ), the Central Governement acquired the Right ofUser in the said lands specified in the Schedule appended to those notifications;

And whereas, in exercise ofpowers conferred by sub- section (4) ofSection 6 of the said Act, the Central Government vested the right of user in the lands , free from all encumbrances in the Bharat Oman Refineries Limited;

Andwhereas , the Competent Authority has made a report to the Central Government that the pipeline for the purpose oftransportation of crude oil from Vadinar , in the State of Gujarat to Bina , in the State of Madhya Pradesh has been laid in the said lands and hence the operation may be terminated in District Dahod in the State ofGujarat in respect of the said lands which in briefare specified in the Schedule annexed to this Notification;

Now, therefore, as required under explanation 1 of rule 4 ofthe Petroleum and Minerals Pipelines ( Acquisition of Right of User in Land) Rules, 1963 , the Central Government hereby declares the dates mentioned in Column 7 of the said Schedule as the dates of termination in District Dahod in the State ofGujarat .

SCHEDULE S.O. No. and date

Taluka

Name ofVillage Sl . No.

(1)

2)

(3)

(4) 1. 1803 , Date 16-7-1997

Bhathwada Bariya

Asayadi

Bariya

Saniya

Bariya

Rebari

Bariya

Piplod

Bariya

Panchela

Bariya District

State

Dateof Termination ofoperation (5)

Panchmahal

4-9-2010

Gujarat

Panchmahal

7-9-2010

Gujarat

Panchmahal

7-9-2010

Gujarat

Panchmahal

7-9-2010

Gujarat

Panchmahal

14-9-2010

Gujarat

Panchmahal

14-9-2010

Gujarat भारत का राजपत्र: अगस्त 13 , 2011 / श्रावण 22, 1933

[भाग II-खंड 3( ii ) ]

(1)

(3)

(4)

2. 1442, Date 21-5-2010

Piplod

Panchela :

5847 (5)

の

14-9-2010

Gujarat

Dahod

DevgarhBariya

14-9-2010

Gujarat

Dahod

DevgarhBariya

18-9-2010 Panchmahal

Limkheda

3. 2779, Date 1-10-1997 Pratappura

Limkheda

Parpata

Gujarat

18-9-2010 Panchmahal Gujarat

30-9-2010 Panchmahal

Limkheda

Manli

Gujarat

30-9-2010 Panchmahal

Limkheda

Kumli

Gujarat

5-10-2010 Panchmahal

Limkheda

Agara

Gujarat

6-10-2010.

Panchmahal

Ambwa

Limkheda

Gujarat

6-10-2010 Panchmahal

Patwan

Limkheda

Gujarat

7-10-2010 Panchmahal

Timba

Limkheda

Gujarat

7-10-2010 Panchmahal

Limkheda

Vislanga

Limkheda

Jadakheriya

Gujarat

7-10-2010 Panchmahal Gujarat

7-10-2010 Panchmahal

Limkheda

Katholiya

Limkheda

4. 1798, Date 7-9-1998

Agara

Limkheda

Parpata

Manli

Limkheda

Limkheda

5. 1907, Date 14-9-1998

Pratappura

Limkheda

Agara

Ambwa

Limkheda

Patwan

Limkheda

Limkheda

6. 1820, Date 14-7-2010

Pratappura

Limkheda

Parpata

Manli

Limkheda

Limkheda

Agara

Patwan

Limkheda

Timba

Limkheda

Limkheda

Vislanga

Limkheda

Jadakheriya

Dahod

Gujarat

5-10-2010 Dahod

Gujarat

18-9-2010 Dahod

Gujarat

30-9-2010 Dahod

Gujarat

18-9-2010 Dahod

Gujarat

5-10-2010 Dahod

Gujarat

6-10-2010 Dahod

Gujarat

6-10-2010 Dahod

Gujarat

18-9-2010 Dahod

Gujarat

18-9-2010 Dahod

Gujarat

30-9-2010 Dahod

Gujarat

5-10-2010 Dahod

Gujarat

6-10-2010 Dahod

Gujarat

7-10-2010 Dahod

Gujarat

7-10-2010 Dahod

Gujarat

7-10-2010 Dahod

Gujarat

14-9-2010 Panchmahal

Matwa 7. 2254, Date 9-9-1997

Gujarat

25-9-2010 Panchmahal

Bawka

Dahod

Gujarat

Panchmahal

Dahod

Gadoi

Gujarat

26-9-2010 J

29-9-2010 Panchmahal

Dahod

Nagrala

Dahod

Gujarat

29-9-2010- Panchmahal

NaniKharaj

Dahod

Moti Kharaj

Gujarat

30-9-2010 Panchmahal . Gujarat

2-10-2010 Panchmahal

Dahod

Jalat

Gujarat

3-10-2010 Panchmahal

Gamla

Dahod

Chandwana

Gujarat

4-10-2010 Panchmahal

Dahod

Gujarat

4-10-2010 Panchmahal

Katwara

Dahod

Gujarat

5-10-2010 Panchmahal

Dahod

Bhutodi

Gujarat

7-10-2010 Panchmahal

Kathala

Dahod

Gujarat

9-10-2010 Panchmahal

Varvada

Dahod

Gujarat

10-10-2010 Panchmahal

Dahod

Khangela

Dahod

Bawka 8. 1907, Date 14-9-1998

Dahod

Moti Kharaj

Dahod

Jalat

Gujarat

7-10-2010 Dahod

Gujarat

5-10-2010 Dahod

Gujarat

4-10-2010 Dahod

Gujarat 5848

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: AUGUST 13 , 2011 /SRAVANA 22 , 1933

(1)

(2)

(3)

(4)

Bavka

Dahod 9. 1595 , Datę 25-6-2010

Gadoi

Dahod

Dahod

Nagrala

Dahod

Motikharaj

Jalat

Daliod

Chandwana Dahod

Bhutodi

Dahod

Kathala

Dahod

Dahod

Varbada

Dahod

Khangela

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

(6)

(7) Dahod

25-9-2010

Gujarat

Dahod

26-9-20100

Gujarat

Dahod

29-9-2010

Gujarat

Dahod

30-9-2010

Gujarat

Dahod

2-10-2010

Gujarat

Dahod

4-10-2010

Gujarat

Dahod

5-10-2010

Gujarat

Dahod

29-9-2010

Gujarat

Dahod..

30-9-2010

Gujarat

Dahod

2-10-2010

Gujarat

[F. No. R-31015 /13/2011 -OR- II

A. GOSWAMI , Under Secy.

नई दिल्ली, 9 अगस्त, 2011

का. आ. 2134.-केन्द्रीय सरकार ने पेट्रोलियम और खनिज पाइपलाइन ( भूमि में उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन ) अधिनियम , 1962 (1962का 50 ) की धारा 6 की उप - धारा ( 1 ) के अधीन जारी की गई भारत सरकार के पेट्रोलियम और प्राकृतिक गैस मंत्रालय की नीचे दी गई अनुसूची में यथा उल्लिखित तारीखों की संख्या का.आ. द्वारा उन अधिसूचनाओं से संलग्न अनुसूची में विनिर्दिष्ट भूमि में उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन किया था;

और केन्द्रीय सरकार ने , उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 6 की उप - धारा ( 4 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए, उक्त भूमियों में , सभी विल्लंगमों से मुक्त उपयोग का अधिकार भारत ओमान रिफाईनरीज़ लिमिटेड में निहित किया था;

और जबकि सक्षम प्राधिकारी ने केन्द्रीय सरकार को रिपोर्ट दी है कि कच्चे पेट्रोलियम तेल के परिवहन के लिए भारत ओमान रिफाईनरीज लिमिटेड के गुजरात राज्य स्थित वाडीनार संस्थापन से मध्य प्रदेश राज्य स्थित बीना संस्थापन तक उपर्युक्त भूमियों में पाइपलाइन बिछाई जा चुकी है , चूंकि गुजरात राज्य के जिला राजकोट में पाइपलाइन बिछाई जा चुकी है , अतः ऐसी भूमि के बारे में जिसका विवरण इस अधिसूचना से संलग्न अनुसूची से विनिर्दिष्ट हैं , प्रचालन समाप्त किया जाए;

अतः , अब केन्द्रीय सरकार पेट्रोलियम पाइपलाइन ( भूमि में उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन ) अधिनियम , 1963 के नियम 4 के स्पष्टीकरण -1 के अधीन अपेक्षानुसार उक्त अनुसूची के स्तंभ 7 में उल्लिखित तारीखों को जिला राजकोट , गुजरात राज्य में प्रचालन की समाप्ति की तारीख के रूप में घोषित करती है ।

अनुसूची क्र. सं. का.आ.नं. व तारीख

गांव का नाम

तहसील (1)

(2)

(3)

(4)

पडधरी

खजुरडी

1. 3138,दिनांक 11-12-1997

खाखराबेला

पडधरी 2. 1796, दिनांक7-9-1998

पडधरी

खजुरडी

3. 3000 , दिनांक 19-11-1997

मोरबी

जोधपर (जाला)

रोहीशाला

मोरबी

नेकनाम

मोरबी

हमीरपर

मोरबी

छत्तर

मोरबी 4.

नेकनाम

टंकारा 596, दिनांक 25-6-2010

टंकारा

हमीरपर

छत्तर

टंकारा जिला

राज्य

प्रचालन समाप्ति कीतारीख (5)

(6)

(7) राजकोट

20-9-2010 गुजरात

राजकोट

20-9-2010 गुजरात

राजकोट

20-9-2010 गुजरात

राजकोट

20-9-2010 गुजरात

राजकोट

20-9-2010 गुजरात

राजकोट

16-9-2010 गुजरात

राजकोट

6-9-2010 गुजरात

राजकोट

6-9-2010 गुजरात

राजकोट

16-9-2010 गुजरात

राजकोट

6-9-2010 गुजरात

राजकोट

6-9-2010 गुजरात भारत का राजपत्र : अगस्त 13 , 2011/ श्रावण 22 , 1933

भाग II-खंड 3 ( ii ) ]

(3)

(4) (1)

(2)

वांकानेर

कोटडा नायानी

5. 2838 , दिनांक 28-10-1997

वांकानेर

वालासण

वांकानेर

पीपलीया राज

वांकानेर

प्रतापगढ़

वांकानेर

सींधावदर

वांकानेर

भोजपरा

वांकानेर

राजावडला

वांकानेर

लालपर

वांकानेर

केराला

वांकानेर

रसीकगढ़

वांकानेर

पाज

वांकानेर

दीघलीया

सेखरडी

वांकानेर

वांकानेर

दलडी

कासीपर

वांकानेर

वांकानेर

वालासण

6. 1796, दिनांक 7-9-1998

वांकानेर

पीपलीयाराज

वांकानेर

राजावडला

कोटडानायाणी वांकानेर 7. 1818 , दिनांक 13-7-2010

वांकानेर

पीपलीया राज

वांकानेर

प्रतापगढ़

वांकानेर

सींधावदर

वांकानेर

भोजपरा

वांकानेर

राजावडला

वांकानेर

लालपर

वांकानेर

केराला

वांकानेर

रसीकगढ़

वांकानेर

पाज

वांकानेर

दलडी

5849

(7) (5)

(6 )

6-10-2010 राजकोट

गुजरात

6-10-2010 राजकोट गुजरात

राजकोट

28-9-2010 गुजरात

28-9-2010 राजकोट

गुजरात

राजकोट

28-9-2010 गुजरात

27-9-2010 राजकोट गुजरात

राजकोट

27-9-2010 गुजरात

25-9-2010 राजकोट

गुजरात

25-9-2010 राजकोट - गुजरात

25-9-2010 राजकोट

गुजरात

25-9-2010 राजकोट गुजरात

25-9-2010 राजकोट

गुजरात

25-9-2010 राजकोट

गुजरात

25-9-2010 राजकोट

गुजरात

राजकोट

23-9-2010 गुजरात

6-10-2010 राजकोट गुजरात

28-9-2010 राजकोट गुजरात

27-9-2010 राजकोट

गुजरात

6-10-2010 राजकोट गुजरात

28-9-2010 राजकोट गुजरात

28-9-2010 राजकोट गुजरात

28-9-2010 राजकोट

गुजरात

27-9-2010 राजकोट गुजरात

राजकोट

27-9-2010 गुजरात

25-9-2010 राजकोट

गुजरात

25-9-2010 राजकोट गुजरात

राजकोट

25-9-2010 गुजरात

25-9-2010 राजकोट गुजरात

राजकोट

25-9-2010 गुजरात

[फा. सं. आर-31015/13/2011- ओ आर- II ]

ए. गोस्वामी, अवर सचिव

New Delhi , the 9th August, 2011

S.O. 2134. Whereas by Notification of the Government of India in the Ministry of Petroleum & Natural Gas , S.O. Nos . and dates as mentioned in the Schedule below issued under Sub -section ( i ) of Section (6) , Petroleum and Minerals Pipelines (Acquisition of Right of User in Land) Act, 1962 (50 of 1962) , the Central Government acquired the Right ofUser inthe said lands specified in the Schedule appended to those Notifications;

Andwhereas, in exercise of powers conferredby Sub-section (4) of Section 6 of the said Act, the Central Government vested the right ofuser in the lands free from all encumbrances in the name ofBharat Oman Refineries Limited;

And whereas, the Competent Authority has made a report to the Central Government that the pipeline for the purpose oftransportation ofcrude oil from Vadinar, in the State of Gujarat to Bina in the State of Madhya Pradesh has been laid in the said lands and hence the operation may be terminated in District Rajkot in the State of Gujarat in respect of the said lands which in brief are specified in the Schedule annexed to this Notification;

5850

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 13 , 2011 / SRAVANA 22 , 1933

[PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii)) Now, therefore, as required under explanation 1 of Rule 4 of the Petroleum and Minerals Pipelines (Acquisition of Right of User in Land ) Rules , 1963 , the Central Government hereby declares the dates mentioned in Column 7 of the said Schedule as the dates of termination in District Rajkot in the State ofGujarat.

SCHEDULE

Taluka S.O. No. and Date

Name ofVillage Sl . No.

(1)

(2)

(3)

(4)

Padadhari 1. 3138, Date 11-12-1997

Khajurdi

Khakhrabela Padadhari 2. 1796, Date 7-9-1998

Padadhari

Khajurdi

3. 3000 , Date 19-11-1997

Jodhpur (Jhala) Morbi

Rohishala

Morbi

Neknam

Morbi

Morbi

Hamirpar

Morbi

Chhatar

Neknam

Tankara 4. 1596, Date 25-6-2010

Tankara

Hamirpar

Chhattar

Tankara 5. 2838 , Date 28-10-1997

Kotda Nayani Wankaner

Valasan

Wankaner

Wankaner

PipaliyaRaj

Wankaner

Pratapgadh

State

District

Dateof Termination (5)

(6)

の

20-9-2010 Rajkot

Gujarat

20-9-2010 Rajkot

Gujarat

20-9-2010 Rajkot

Gujarat

20-9-2010 .

Rajkot

Gujarat

20-9-2010 Rajkot

Gujarat

16-9-2010 Rajkot

Gujarat

6-9-2010 Rajkot

Gujarat

6-9-2010 Rajkot

Gujarat

16-9-2010 Rajkot

Gujarat

6-9-2010

Gujarat

Rajkot

6-9-2010 Rajkot

Gujarat

6-10-2010 Rajkot

Gujarat

6-10-2010 Rajkot

Gujarat

28-9-2010.

Rajkot

Gujarat

28-9-2010 Rajkot

Gujarat

Sindhavadar Wankaner

Wankaner

Bhojpara

Wankaner

Rajavadla

Wankaner

Lalpar

Kerala

Wankaner

Wankaner

Rasikgadh

Wankaner

Paj

Wankaner

Dighaliya

Sekhardi

Wankaner

Daldi

Wankaner

Wankaner

Kasipar

6. 1796, Date 7-9-1998

Valasan

Wankaner

Wankarner

PipaliyaRaj

Wankaner

Rajavadla

7. 1818 , Date 13-7-2010

Kotda Nayani Wankaner

Wankaner

Pipaliyaraj

Wankaner

Pratapgadh

Wankaner

Sindhavadar

Wankaner

Bhojpara

Wankaner

Rajavada

Wankaner

Lalpar

Kerala

Wankaner

Wankaner

Rasikgadh

Wankaner

Paj

Daldi

Wankaner

28-9-2010

Gujarat

Rajkot

27-9-2010 Rajkot

Gujarat

27-9-2010 Rajkot

Gujarat

25-9-2010.

Rajkot

Gujarat

25-9-2010 Rajkot

Gujarat

25-9-2010 Rajkot

Gujarat

25-9-2010

Gujarat

Rajkot

25-9-2010 Rajkot

Gujarat

25-9-2010 Rajkot

Gujarat

25-9-2010 Rajkot

Gujarat

23-9-2010 Rajkot

Gujarat

6-10-2010 Rajkot

Gujarat

28-9-2010 Rajkot

Gujarat

27-9-2010 Rajkot

Gujarat

6-10-2010 Rajkot

Gujarat

28-9-2010 Rajkot

Gujarat

28-9-2010 Rajkot

Gujarat

28-9-2010 Rajkot

Gujarat

27-9-2010 Rajkot

Gujarat

27-9-2010 Rajkot

Gujarat

25-9-2010 Rajkot

Gujarat

25-9-2010

Gujarat

Rajkot

25-9-2010

Gujarat

Rajkot

25-9-2010 Rajkot

Gujarat

25-9-2010 Rajkot

Gujarat

[F. No. R-31015/ 13/2011 -OR- II] A. GOSWAMI , Under Secy.

[ भाग II-অত 3 ( 1) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : अगस्त 13 , 2011 / श्रवण 22 , 1933

5851

नई दिल्ली, 9 अगस्त, 2011

का, आ, 2135.-केन्द्रीय सरकार ने पेट्रोलियम और खनिज पाइपलाइन ( भूमि में उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन ) अधिनियम , 1962 ( 1962 का 50 ) की धारा 6 को उपधारा ( 1 ) के अधीन जारी की गई भारत सरकार के पेट्रोलियम और प्राकृतिक गैस मंत्रालय की नीचे दी गई अनुसूची में यथा उल्लिखित तारीखों की संख्या का.आ. द्वारा उन अधिसूचनाओं से संलग्न अनुसूची में विनिर्दिष्ट भूमि में उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन किया था।

और केन्द्रीय सरकार ने , उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 6 की उप - धारा ( 4 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए, उक्त भूमियों में , सभी विल्लंगमों से मुक्त उपयोग का अधिकार भारत ओमान रिफाईनरीज लिमिटेड में निहित किया था:

और जबकि सक्षम प्राधिकारी ने केन्द्रीय सरकार को रिपोर्ट दी है कि कच्चे पेट्रोलियम तेल के परिवहन के लिए भारत ओमान रिफाईभरीज लिमिटेड के तुजरात राज्य स्थित बाडीमार संस्थापन से मध्य प्रदेश राज्य स्थित बीमा संस्थापन तक उपर्युक्त भूमियों में पाइपलाइन बिछाई जा चुकी है , चूंकि गुजरात राज्य के जिला सुरेन्द्र नगर में पाईपलाइन बिछाई जा चुकी है, अतः ऐसी भूमि के बारे में जिसका बिबरण इस अधिसूचना से संलग्न अनुसूची से विनिर्दिष्ट हैं , प्रचालन समाप्त किया जाएः अतः , अब केन्द्रीय सरकार पेट्रोलियम पाइपलाइन ( भूमि में उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन ) अधिनियम , 1963 के नियम 4 से स्पष्टीकरण -1 के अधीन अपेक्षानुसार उक्त अनुसूची के स्तंभ 7 में उल्लिखित तारीखों को जिला सुरेन्द्र नगर, गुजरात राज्य में प्रचालन की समाप्ति की तारीख के रूप में घोषित करती है ।

अनुसूची

गांव का नाम

का.आ.नं. व तारीख

क्र.सं.

तहसाल (2)

(3)

(4) ( 1)

1, 25 , दिनांक 29-12-1997 आणंदपूर ( धान )

रामपरा ( धाम)

लाखामाची

रुपावडी

श्रामगढ़

जाजराबाली

ओडीला

बोडीला

रावराणी

चोडीला 2 1951 , दिनांक 30-9-1998

लाखामांत्री

3. 1815 , दिनांक 12-7-2010

चोडीला

देवलीघा

चोडीला

धनगढ़

4. 24, दिनांक 26-12-1997

मुली

झोमासर

मुली

चुली

चुली

मुली 5. 1951 , दिनांक 30-9-1998

राज्य

प्रचालन समाप्ति की तारीख (5)

(7) (6)

23-9-2010 गुजरात

सुरेन्द्र नगर

23-9-2010 सुरेन्द्र नगर

23-9-2010 गुजरात

सुरेन्द्र नगर

23-9-2010 / सुरेन्द्र नगर गुजरात

23-9-2010 गुजरात

सुरेन्द्र नगर

22-9-2010 गुजरात

सुरेन्द्र नगर

22-9-2010 गुजरात

सुरेन्द्रनगर

12-10-2010 गुजरात

सुरेन्द्र नगर

22-9-2010 सुरेन्द्र नगर

23-9-2010 गुजरात

सुरेन्द्र नगर

23-9-2010

22-9-2010 गुजरात

नगर

12-10-2010 गुजरात

गुजरात

13-9-2010

21-9-2010 सुरेन्द्र नगर

21-9-2010 नगर गुजरात

नगर

22-9-2010 गुजरात

22-9-2010 गुजरात

सुरेन्द्र नगर

22-9-2010 गुजरात

सुरेन्द्र नगर

22-9-2010 गुजरात

सुरेन्द्र नगर

13-9-2010 गुजरात

सुरेन्द्र नगर 5852

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 13 , 2011 / SRAVANA 22, 1933

(4)

(2)

(3) (1)

मुली

उमरडा 6. 1591 , दिनांक 25-6-2010

मुली

धर्मेन्द्रगढ़

सोमासर

मुली

वढवाण

रामपुरा 7. 27 , दिनांक29-12-1997

वढवाण

दुवा

वढवाण

वडोद

वढवाण

बलदाणा

गोमटा

वढचाण

बलदाना

वढ़वाण

8. 1951 , दिनांक 30-9-1998

वढवाण

9. 1590 , दिनांक 25-6-2010 रामपुरा

वढवाण

दुवा

वढवाण

वडोद

वढवाण

बलदाना

गोमटा

वढवाण

लींबडी

रासका 10. 26, दिनांक 29-12-1997

लींबडी

लींबडी

लींबडी

अंकेवालिया

लींबडी

भलगामडा

लींबडी

चोरणीया

लींबडी

जाखण

लींबडी

कटारीया

टोकराला

लींबडी

पाणसीणा

लींबडी

रलोल

लींबडी

घनश्यामपर

जनशाली

लींबडी

जनशाली

लींबडी

11. 900 , दिनांक 17-3-1997

लींबडी

अंकेवालीया 12. 1951 , दिनांक 30-9-1998

भलगामडा

लींबडी

लींबडी

टोकराला

लींबडी

जालमपुर

रासका

लींबडी

13. 1598 , दिनांक 25-6-2010

लींबडी

लींबडी

लींबडी

अंकेवालिया

भलगामडा

लींबडी

चोरणीया

लींबडी

जाखन

[PART II-SEC. 3 (ii )]

(7) (6)

(5)

13-9-2010 गुजरात

सुरेन्द्रनगर

21-9-2010 गुजरात

सुरेन्द्र नगर

22-9-2010 गुजरात

सुरेन्द्रनगर

23-9-2010 सुरेन्द्र नगर गुजरात

23-9-2010 गुजरात

सुरेन्द्र नगर

23-9-2010 गुजरात

सुरेन्द्रनगर

23-9-2010 गुजरात

सुरेन्द्रनगर

23-9-2010 गुजरात

सुरेन्द्र नगर

23-9-2010 गुजरात

सुरेन्द्रनगर

23-9-2010 गुजरात

सुरेन्द्रनगर

23-9-2010.

गुजरात

सुरेन्द्रनगर

23-9-2010 सुरेन्द्र नगर गुजरात

23-9-2010 गुजरात

सुरेन्द्रनगर

23-9-2010 गुजरात

सुरेन्द्रनगर

30-9-2010 सुरेन्द्र नगर गुजरात

30-9-2010 गुजरात

सुरेन्द्र नगर

30-9-2010 गुजरात

सुरेन्द्रनगर

1-9-2010 गुजरात

सुरेन्द्र नगर

1-10-2010 सुरेन्द्रनगर गुजरात

1-10-2010 सुरेन्द्रनगर गुजरात

10-2010 सुरेन्द्रनगर गुजरात

7-10-2010 गुजरात

सुरेन्द्र नगर

7-10-2010 सुरेन्द्र नगर गुजरात

22-9-2010 सुरेन्द्रनगर गुजरात

22-9-2010

गुजरात

सुरेन्द्र नगर

22-9-2010

गुजरात

सुरेन्द्र नगर

22-9-2010 सुरेन्द्र नगर गुजरात

30-9-2010

गुजरात

सुरेन्द्रनगर

1-9-2010 गुजरात

सुरेन्द्रनगर

7-10-2010

गुजरात

सुरेन्द्रनगर

22-9-2010 सुरेन्द्रनगर गुजरात

30-9-2010 सुरेन्द्रनगर गुज़रात

30-9-2010

गुजरात

सुरेन्द्र नगर

30-9-2010

गुजरात

सुरेन्द्र नगर

1-9-2010

लींबडी

गुजरात

सुरेन्द्र नगर

1-10-2010

गुजरात

सुरेन्द्रनगर

1-10-2010

गुजरात

सुरेन्द्रनगर भारत का राजपत्र : अगस्त 13 , 2011 / श्रावण 22 , 1933

[ भाग II-खंड 3 ( ii ) ]

(3)

(4) (2)

(1)

लींबडी.

कटारिया 13. 1598 , दिनांक 25-6-2010-जारी

टोकराला

लींबडी

रलोल

लींबडी

लींबडी

जालमपुर

जनशाली

लींबडी

चित्रालांक

सायला 14. 2780, दिनांक 27-10-1997

ईश्वरीया

सायला

चोरवीरा ( थानगढ ) सायला

सायला

सायला

चित्रालांक

सायला

15. 1594 , दिनांक 25-6-2010

सायला

ईश्वरीया

सायला

चोरविरा ( थान)

5853

(7)

(6)

(5)

7-10-2010

गुजरात

सुरेन्द्रनगर

7-10-2010

गुजरात

सुरेन्द्रनगर

22-9-2010

गुजरात

सुरेन्द्रनगर

22-9-2010 गुजरात

सुरेन्द्रनगर

22-9-2010

गुजरात

सुरेन्द्रनगर

25-9-2010 सुरेन्द्रनगर गुजरात

25-9-2010

गुजरात

सुरेन्द्रनगर

13-9-2010

गुजरात

सुरेन्द्रनगर

13-9-2010.

गुजरात

सुरेन्द्रनगर

25-9-2010

गुजरात

सुरेन्द्रनगर

25-9-2010

गुजरात

सुरेन्द्रनगर

13-9-2010

गुजरात

सुरेन्द्रनगर

[फा. सं. आर-31015 /13/2011- ओ आर- II ]

ए, गोस्वामी , अवर सचिव

New Delhi , the 9th August, 2011

S.O. 2135. Whereas by Notification of the Government of India in the Ministry of Petroleum & Natural Gas, S.O. Nos . and dates as mentioned in the Schedule below issued under Sub - section (1 ) of Section (6) , Petroleum and Minerals Pipelines ( Acquisition of Right of User in Land) Act , 1962 (50 of 1962) , the Central Government acquired the Right of User in the said lands specified in the schedule appended to those Notification;

Andwhereas , in exercise of powers conferred by Sub-section (4) of Section 6 of the said Act , the Central Government vested the right of user in the lands , free from all encumbrances in the name of Bharat Oman Refineries Limited;

Andwhereas , the Competent Authority has made a report to the Central Government that the pipeline for the purpose oftransportation ofcrude oil from Vadinar, in the State ofGujarat to Bina in the State ofMadhya Pradesh has been laid in the said lands and hence the operation may be terminated in District Surendra Nagar in the State ofGujarat in respect ofthe said lands which in brief are specified in the schedule annexed to this Notification;

Now, therefore, as required under explanation 1 ofRule 4 of the Petroleum and Minerals Pipelines (Acquisition of Right ofUser in Land) Rules , 1963, the Central Government hereby declares the dates mentioned in Column 7 of the said Schedule as the dates oftermination in District Surendra Nagar in the State ofGujarat .

SCHEDULE

Taluka

NameofVillage Sr. S.O. No. and Date

No.

(4)

(3) (2)

(1)

1. 25, Date 29-12-1997

Chotila

Anandpur (Than)

Chotila

Rampara (Than)

Lakhamachi

Chotila

Chotila

Devaliya

Chotila

Rupavati

Chotila

Thangadh

Chotila

Khakhrawali

Chotila

Ravrani

Chotila

Thangadh 2. 1951 , Date 30-9-1998

Chotila

Lakhamachi 3. 1815, Date 12-7-2010

Chotila

Devaliya

Chotila

Thangadh

Chotila

Raorani

State

District

Date of Termination ofoperation

(6)

の (5)

23-9-2010 SurendraNagar Gujarat

23-9-2010

Gujarat

Surendra Nagar

23-9-2010

Gujarat

Surendra Nagar

23-9-2010

Gujarat

Surendra Nagar

23-9-2010

Gujarat

Surendra Nagar

22-9-2010

Gujarat

Surendra Nagar

22-9-2010 Surendra Nagar Gujarat

12-10-2010 Surendra Nagar Gujarat

22-9-2010

Gujarat

Surendra Nagar

23-9-2010

Gujarat

Surendra Nagar

23-9-2010

Gujarat

Surendra Nagar

22-9-2010

Gujarat

Surendra Nagar

12-10-2010

Gujarat

Surendra Nagar 5854

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: AUGUST 13 , 2011 / SRAVANA 22 , 1933

(1) (2)

(3)

(4)

Umarda

4. 24, Date26-12-1997

Muli

Muli

Dharmendragadh

Tidana

Muli

Muli

Somasar

Siddhasar

Muli

Nalia

Muli

Muli

Navaniya

Muli

Umarda

5. 1951 , Date30-9-1998

6. 1591 , Date25-6-2010 Umarda

Muli

Muli

Dharmendragadh

Somasar

Muli 7. 27, Date29-12-1997

Wadhwan

Rampura

Tuwa

Wadhwan

Vadod

Wadhwan

Baldana

Wadhwan

Gomta

Wadhwan

Baldana

8. 1951 , Date30-9-1998

Wadhwan 9.1590, Date 25-6-2010

Wadhwan

Rampara

Tuwa

Wadhwan

Vadod

Wadhwan

Baldana

Wadhwan

Gomta

Wadhwan

Raska

10. 26, Date29-12-1997

Limbdi

Limbdi

Limbdi

Ankewalia

Limbdi

Limbdi

Bhalgamda

Chorania

Limbdi

Jakhan

Limbdi

Limbdi

Katariya

Tokrala

Limbdi

Pansina

Limbdi

Ralol

Limbdi

Limbdi

Ghanshyampur

Janshali

Limbdi

Janshali

Limbdi 11 900 , Date 17-3-1997

Ankewalia

12 1951 , Date 30-9-1998

Limbdi

Limbdi

Bhalgamda

Tokrala

Limbdi

Limbdi

Jalampur

Raska

13 1598, Date 25-6-2010

Limbdi

Limbdi

Limbdi

Limbdi

Ankewaliya

Limbdi

Bhalgamda

Limbdi

Choraniya

Jakhan

Limbdi

Limbdi

Katariya

[PART II-SBC. 3 ( 11 )) (5)

(6)

13-9-2010 Surendra Nagar Gujarat

21-9-2010 Surendra Nagar Gujarat

21-9-2010 Surendra Nagar Gujarat

22-9-2010 Surendra Nagar Gujarat

22-9-2010 Surendra Nagar Gujarat

22-9-2010 Surendra Nagar Gujarat

22-9-2010 Surendra Nagar Gujarat

13-9-2010 Surendra Nagar Gujarat

13-9-2010 Surendra Nagar Gujarat

21-9-2010 Surendra Nagar Gujarat

22-9-2010 Surendra Nagar Gujarat

23-9-2010 Surendra Nagar Gujarat

23-9-2010 SurendraNagar Gujarat

23-9-2010 Surendra Nagar Gujarat

23-9-2010 Surendra Nagar Gujarat

23-9-2010 Surendra Nagar Gujarat

23-9-2010 Surendra Nagar Gujarat

23-9-2010 Surendra Nagar Gujarat

23-9-2010 Surendra Nagar Gujarat

23-9-2010 Surendra Nagar Gujarat

23-9-2010 Surendra Nagar Gujarat

23-9-2010 Surendra Nagar Gujarat

30-9-2010 Surendra Nagar Gujarat

30-9-2010 Surendra Nagar Gujarat

30-9-2010 Surendra Nagar Gujarat

1-9-2010 Surendra Nagar Gujarat

1-10-2010 Surendra Nagar Gujarat

1-10-2010 Surendra Nagar Gujarat

7-10-2010 Surendra Nagar Gujarat

7-10-2010 Surendra Nagar Gujarat

7-10-2010 Surendra Nagar Gujarat

22-9-2010 Surendra Nagar Gujarat

22-9-2010 Surendra Nagar Gujarat

22-9-2010 Surendra Nagar Gujarat

22-9-2010 Surendra Nagar Gujarat

30-9-2010 Surendra Nagar Gujarat

1-9-2010 Surendra Nagar Gujarat

7-10-2010 Surendra Nagar Gujarat

22-9-2010 Surendra Nagar Gujarat

30-9-2010 Surendra Nagar Gujarat

30-9-2010 Surendra Nagar Gujarat

30-9-2010 Surendra Nagar Gujarat

1-9-2010 :

Surendra Nagar Gujarat

1-10-2010 Surendra Nagar Gujarat

1-10-2010 Surendra Nagar Gujarat

7-10-2010 Surendra Nagar Gujarat [ भाग 11-खखंड 3 (ii ) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : अगस्त 13 , 2011 / श्रावण 22 , 1933

(1)

(2)

(3)

(4)

Limbdi

13. 1598 Date 25-6-2010-Contd. Tokrala

Ralol

Limbdi

Limbdi

Jalampur

Limbdi

Janshali

Chitralank 14. 2780 , Date 27-10-1997

Sayala

Ishvariya

Sayala

Chorvira (Than) Sayala

Sayala

Suyala

Chitralank 15. 1594 Date 25-6-2010

Sayala

Ishwariya

Sayala

Sayala

Chorvira (Than)

5855

の (5)

7-10-2010 Surendra Nagar Gujarat

22-9-2010 Surendra Nagar Gujarat

22-9-2010 Surendra Nagar Gujarat

22-9-2010 Surendra Nagar Gujarat

25-9-2010 Surendra Nagar Gujarat

25-9-2010 SurendraNagar Gujarat

13-9-2010 Surendra Nagar Gujarat

13-9-2010 Surendra Nagar Gujarat

25-9-2010 SurendraNagar Gujarat

25-9-2010 Surendra Nagar Gujarat

13-9-2010 Surendra Nagar Gujarat

[F. No. R-31015/ 13 /2011 -OR- II )

A. GOSWAMI , Under Secy.

नई दिल्ली , 9 अगस्त, 2011

का. आ. 2136.-केन्द्रीय सरकार ने पेट्रोलियम और खनिज पाइपलाइन ( भूमि में उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन ) अधिनियम , 1962 (1962का 50 ) की धारा 6 की उप - धारा ( 1 ) के अधीन जारी की गई भारत सरकार के पेट्रोलियम और प्राकृतिक गैस मंत्रालय की नीचे दी गई अनुसूची में यथा उल्लिखित तारीखों की संख्या का. आ. द्वारा उन अधिसूचनाओं से संलग्न अनुसूची में विनिर्दिष्ट भूमि में उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन किया था;

और केन्द्रीय सरकार ने , उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 6 की उप- धारा (4 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए , उक्त भूमियों में, सभी विल्लंगमों से मुक्त उपयोग का अधिकार भारत ओमान रिफाईनरीज लिमिटेड में निहित किया था;

और जबकि सक्षम प्राधिकारी ने केन्द्रीय सरकार को रिपोर्ट दी है कि कच्चे पेट्रोलियम तेल के परिवहन के लिए भारत ओमान रिफाईनरीज लिमिटेड के गुजरात राज्य स्थित वाडीनार संस्थापन से मध्य प्रदेश राज्य स्थित बीना संस्थापन तक उपर्युक्त भूमियों में पाइपलाइन बिछाई जा चुकी है, चूंकि गुजरात राज्य के जिला जामनगर में पाइपलाइन बिछाई जा चुकी है, अतः ऐसी भूमि के बारे में जिसका विवरण इस अधि सूचना से संलग्न अनुसूची से विनिर्दिष्ट हैं, प्रचालन समाप्त किया जाए;

अतः , अब केन्द्रीय सरकार पेट्रोलियम पाइपलाइन ( भूमि में उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन ) अधिनियम , 1963 के नियम 4 के स्पष्टीकरण -1 के अधीन अपेक्षानुसार उक्त अनुसूची के स्तंभ 7 में उल्लिखित तारीखों को जिला जामनगर, गुजरात राज्य में प्रचालन की समाप्ति की तारीख के रूप में घोषित करती है ।

अनुसूची

का.आ.नं. व तारीख

ग्राम का नाम क्र. सं.

तहसील

(3) (1)

(2)

(4)

सींगच

लालपुर

1. 2840 , दिनांक 4-11-1997

जांखर

लालपुर

जोगवड

लालपुर

सींगच

लालपुर

2. 1817, दिनांक 12-7-2010

जांखर

लालपुर

जांखर 3. 1364, दिनांक 30-6-1998

लालपुर

गागवा

जाम नगर

4. 81, दिनांक 31-12-1997

जाम नगर

मोटीखावडी

जाम नगर

मुंगणी

जाम नगर

नानी खावडी

सापर

जाम नगर

आमरा

जाम नगर

जिला

राज्य

प्रचालन समाप्ति कीतारीख

(6)

(7) (5)

23-9-2010 जाम नगर गुजरात

24-9-2010 जाम नगर गुजरात

24-9-2010 जाम नगर गुजरात

23-9-2010 जाम नगर गुजरात

24-9-2010 जाम नगर गुजरात

24-9-2010 जाम नगर गुजरात

24-8-2010 जाम नगर गुजरात

25-8-2010 जाम नगर गुजरात

24-8-2010 .

जाम नगर गुजरात

23-8-2010 जाम नगर गुजरात

26-8-2010 जाम नगर गुजरात

26-8-2010 गुजरात

जाम नगर 5856

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 13 , 2011 /SRAVANA 22 , 1933

(2)

(1)

(3)

(4)

वसइ 4. 81 , दिनांक 31-12-1997-जारी

जाम नगर

रावलसर

जाम नगर

नाघेडी

जाम नगर

जाम नगर

कनसुमरा

जाम नगर

जाम नगर

मोरकंडा

जाम नगर

ठेबा

जाम नगर

मोटा थावरिया

जाम नगर

अलीया वाडा

जाम नगर

मोडा

जाम नगर

लाखाणी मोटावास जाम नगर

लाखाणी नानावास जाम नगर

खंभालीडा

जाम नगर

5. 992 , दिनांक18-5-1998 लाखाबावल

जाम नगर

लाखाबावल 6. 1692 , दिनांक 24-8-1998

जाम नगर

7.

सापर

जाम नगर

1796, दिनांक 7-9-1998

आमरा

जाम नगर

जाम नगर

वसड़

जाम नगर

कनसुमरा

जाम नगर

जाम नगर

अलीया वाडा

जाम नगर

गागवा 8. 1443, दिनांक 21-5-2010

जाम नगर

वसइ

जाम नगर

नाधेडी

जाम नगर

जाम नगर

कनसुमरा

मोरकंडा

जाम नगर

ठेबा

जाम नगर

मोटा थावरीया

जाम नगर

अलीयाबाडा

जाम नगर

मोडा

जाम नगर

लाखाणी मोटावास जाम नगर

लाखाणी नानावास जाम नगर

रोझीया 9. 2500, दिनांक 30-9-1997

ध्रोल

हमापर

ध्रोल

ध्रोल

मोटा इटाला

गढडा

ध्रोल

लैयाला

ध्रोल

ध्रोल

सुधाधुना

[PART II-SEC. 3 (ii)]

(7) (5)

( 6)

जाम नगर

26-8-2010

गुजरात

जाम नगर

10-8-2010

गुजरात

जाम नगर

12-8-2010

गुजरात

जाम नगर

12-8-2010

गुजरात

जाम नगर

12-8-2010 गुजरात

जाम नगर

30-8-2010

गुजरात

जाम नगर

30-8-2010

गुजरात

जाम नगर

30-8-2010 गुजरात

जाम नगर

21-8-2010

गुजरात

जाम नगर

21-8-2010 गुजरात

जाम नगर

20-8-2010 गुजरात :

जाम नगर

29-8-2010 गुजरात

जाम नगर

27-8-2010 गुजरात

जाम नगर

10-8-2010 गुजरात

जाम नगर

10-8-2010 गुजरात

जाम नगर

26-8-2010 गुजरात

जाम नगर

26-8-2010 गुजरात

जाम नगर

26-8-2010 गुजरात

जाम नगर

12-8-2010 गुजरात

जाम नगर

12-8-2010 गुजरात

जाम नगर

21-8-2010 गुजरात

जाम नगर

24-8-2010 गुजरात

जाम नगर

26-8-2010 गुजरात

जाम नगर

12-8-2010 गुजरात

जाम नगर

12-8-2010 गुजरात

जाम नगर

30-8-2010 गुजरात

जाम नगर

30-8-2010 गुजरात

जाम नगर

30-8-2010 गुजरात

जाम नगर

21-8-2010 गुजरात

जाम नगर

21-8-2010 गुजरात

जाम नगर

20-8-2010 गुजरात

जाम नगर

29-8-2010 गुजरात

जाम नगर

29-8-2010 गुजरात

जाम नगर

27-8-2010 गुजरात

जाम नग्र

27-8-2010 गुजरात

जाम नगर

27-8-2010 गुजरात

जाम नगर

27-8-2010 गुजरात

जाम नगर

27-8-2010 गुजरात भारत का राजपत्र : अगस्त 13 , 2011/ श्रावण 22, 1933

[भाग II-खंड 3 ( ii ) ]

(4)

(3)

(2)

(1)

थ्रोल

रोझीया

1796, दिनांक 7-9-1998

10.

झोल

हमापर

झोल

रोझीया

1597 , दिनांक 25-6-2010

11.

ब्रोल

लैयाला

भ्रोल

लैयाला

12. 1364 , दिनांक 30-6-1998

5857

(7)

(5)

(6)

29-8-2010 जाम नगर गुजरात

27-8-2010 जाम नगर गुजरात

29-8-2010 जाम नगर गुजरात

27-8-2010 जाम नगर गुजरात

29-8-2010 जाम नगर गुजरात

[फा. सं. आर-31015/13/2011- ओ आर- II ]

ए, गोस्वामी , अवर सचिव

NewDelhi , the 9th August, 2011

S.O. 2136. Whereas by Notification of the Government of India in the Ministry of Petroleum & Natural Gas , S.O. Nos. and dates as mentioned in the Schedule below issued under Sub-section (i ) of Section (6) , Petroleum and Minerals Pipelines (Acquisition of Right of User in Land) Act, 1962 (50 of 1962) , the Central Government acquired the Right ofUser in the said lands specified in the Schedule appended to those Notifications ;

Andwhereas , in exercise ofpowers conferredby sub - section (4) of Section 6 of the said Act, the Central Government vested the right ofuser in the lands , free from all encumbrances in the name of Bharat Oman Refineries Limited;

Andwhereas, the Competent Authority has made a report to the Central Government that the pipeline for the purpose oftransportation of crude oil from Vadinar, in the State of Gujarat to Bina in the State ofMadhya Pradesh has been Jaid in the said lands and hence the operation may be terminated in District Jam Nagar in the State ofGujarat in respect of the said lands which in brief are specified in the Schedule annexed to this Notification;

Now, therefore , as required under explanation 1 of Rule 4 of the Petroleum and Minerals Pipelines (Acquisition of Right ofUser in Land) Rules , 1963 , the Central Government hereby declares the dates mentioned in Column 7 of the said Schedule as the dates of termination in District Jam Nagar in the State ofGujarat.

SCHEDULE

Taluka S.O. No. and date

NameofVillage Sl. No.

(4)

(3)

(2)

(1)

Lalpur 1. 2840, Date 4-11-1997 Singach

Jankha

Lalpur

Lalpur

Jogwad

Lalpur 2. 1817, Date 12-7-2010 Singach

Jankhar

Lalpur

Jankha

Lalpur 3. 1364, Date 30-6-1998

JamNagar

Gagwa

4. 81 , Date 31-12-1997

Moti

JamNagar

JamNagar

Mungni

NaniKhaydi JamNagar

JamNagar

Sapar

Amra

JamNagar

Vasai

JamNagar

Rawalsar

JamNagar

JamNagar

Naghedi

Kansumara

JamNagar

State

District

Date of Termination ofoperation

(6)

(5)

23-9-2010

Gujarat

JamNagar

24-9-2010

Gujarat

JamNagar

24-9-2010

Gujarat

JamNagar

23-9-2010

Gujarat

JamNagar

24-9-2010

Gujarat

JamNagar

24-9-2010

Gujarat

JamNagar

24-8-2010

Gujarat

JamNagar

25-8-2010

Gujarat

JamNagar

24-8-2010

Gujarat

JamNagar

23-8-2010 JamNagar Gujarat

26-8-2010

Gujarat

JamNagar

26-8-2010

Gujarat

JamNagar

26-8-2010

Gujarat

JamNagar

10-8-2010

Gujarat

JamNagar

12-8-2010 JamNagar Gujarat

12-8-2010

Gujarat

JamNagar $858

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 13 , 2011 / SRAVANA 22, 1933

(1)

(2)

(4)

Jam Nagar 4. 81 , Dato 31-12-1997-Contd.

JamNagar

Morkanda

JamNagar

Theba

JamNagar

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

12-8-2010

Gujarat

JamNagar

30-8-2010

Gujarat

JamNagar

30-8-2010

Gujarat

JamNagar

MotaThavaria

JamNagar

AliaBada

JamNagar

2

Moda

JamNagar

30-8-2010 JamNagar Gujarat

21-8-2010 JamNagar Gujarat

21-8-2010 JamNagar Gujarat

20-8-2010

Lakhani Motawas

Jam Nagar

Gujarat

JamNagar

29-8-2010 JamNagar

Lakhani Nanawas

JamNagar

Khambhalida JamNagar

5. 992, Dato 18-5-1998 Lakhabaval

JamNagar

6. 1692, Date 24-8-1998 Lakhabaval

JamNagar

7. 1796, Date7-9-1998 Sapar

JamNagar

Amra

JamNagar

Vasai

JamNagar

Kansumara

JamNagar

JamNagar

JamNagar

Aliabada

JamNagar

& 1443 , Date21-5-2010 Gagwa

JamNagar

Vasai

JamNagar

Naghedi

JamNagar

Kansumara

JamNagar

Morkanda

JamNagar

Theba

JamNagar

MotaThavaria JamNagar

Aliyabada

JamNagar

Moda

JamNagar

JamNagar

Gujarat

27-8-2010 JamNagar Gujarat

10-8-2010 JamNagar Cujarat

10-8-2010 JamNagar Cujamt

26-8-2010

Gujarat

JamNagar

26-8-2010

Oujarat

JamNagar

26-8-2010

Gujarat

JamNagar

12-8-2010

Gujarat

JamNagar

12-8-2010

Gujarat

JamNagar

21-8-2010

Gujarat

JamNagar

24-8-2010

Gujarat

JamNagar

26-6-2010

Cujarat

JamNagar

12-8-2010 JamNagar Gujarat

12-8-2010

Gujarat

JamNagar

30-8-2010

Gujarat

JamNagar

Gujarat

30-8-2010 JamNagar

Gujarat

30-8-2010 JamNagar

21-8-2010

Gujarat

JamNagar

21---2010

Gujarat

JamNagar

20-8-2010

Lakhani Motawas

Jam Nagar

Oujarat

JamNagar

29-8-2010

Lakhani Nanawas

9. 2500, Dato30-9-1997

Dhrol

Rojhiya

Dhrel

Hamapar

MotaItala

Dhrol

Gadhada

Dhrol

Dhrol

Lalyala

Dhrel

Sudhaghuna 10. 1796, Date 7-9-1998

Dhrol

Rojhiya

Dhrol

Hamapar

Dhrol 11. 1597, Date25-6-2010 Rojhiya

Dhrol

Laiyala

12. 1364, Date30-6-1998

Dhrol

Laiyala

Oujarat

JamNagar

29-8-2010 JamNagar Gujarat

27-8-2010

Gujarat

JamNagar

27-6-2010 JamNagar Gujarat

27-8-2010

Gujarat

JamNagar

27-6-2010

Gujarat

JamNagar

27-4-2010

Gujarat

JamNagar

29-6-2010 JamNagar Gujarat

27-6-2010 JamNagar Oujarat

29-8-2010

Oujarat

JamNagar

27-4-2010

Chularat

JamNagar

29-4-2010

Gujarat

JamNagar

[F. No. R- 31015/13 /2011 -OR-

A. GOSWAMI , Under Secy 5859 भारत का राजपत्र : अगस्त 13 , 2011 / श्रावण 22, 1933

[भाग II-खंड 3 (ii ) ]

AMENDED AWARD

श्रम और रोजगार मंत्रालय

नई दिल्ली, 14 जुलाई , 2011

:

In exercise ofthe powers conferred by clause (d) of sub-section ( 1 ) and sub-section (2 -A) of Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 the Central Government has referred the following dispute for adjudication to this Tribunal:

का.आ. 2137.-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 (1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में केन्द्रीय सरकार मैसर्स बी.एन. पी. पारिबास के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीचअनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औधोगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण , मुम्बई के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 46/2007 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 11-7-2011 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

"Whether the demand of the Union for granting an increase in stagnation increment at the rate of Rs . 886/- for clerical staff and Rs. 311/- for sub-staff w.e.f. 1-11-2002 is proper and justified ? If so, towhat relief the workmen are entitled ?

[सं. एल-12011 / 12/2007- आई आर ( बी-1 ) ] रमेश सिंह , डेस्क अधिकारी

MINISTRY OF LABOUR AND EMPLOYMENT

NewDelhi , the 14th July, 2011

2. The first party bank has filed an application on 28-3-2011 stating therein that without prejudice to its legal stand it has increased the stagnation increment @ Rs. 886/- forclerical staff and Rs . 311/- for sub -staffw.e.f. 1-11-2002 to 31-10-2007 andRs . 1,266/- for clerical staff and Rs. 461 for sub-staff w.e.f. 1-11-2007 and, therefore , appropriate award be passed in terms of above settlement.

3. Learned counsel for the union has filed a reply to this application and has contended that since the bank has done it without prejudice to its legal stand, therefore, the settlement is not final and an award cannot be passed in terms ofthe application ofthe bank. He has placed reliance onAIR 1980 SC 2181 and BLR Vol . 61 page 678.

S.O. 2137. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No.46/2007) ofthe Central Government Industrial Tribunal -cum -Labour Court- 1 , Mumbai , as shown in the Annexure in the Industrialdispute between the employers in relation to the management of M/s . BNP Paribas and their workmen, receivedby the Central Government on 11-7-2011.

[No. L- 12011/ 12/2007 - IR (B- 1) ] RAMESH SINGH, Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL NO. 1, MUMBAI

Justice G.S. SARRAF, Presiding Officer

Reference No. CGIT- 1/46 of 2007

PARTIES:

4. According to the schedule the dispute is whether the demand of the union for granting an increase in the stagnation increment @ Rs . 886/- for clerical staff and Rs. 311/-for sub-staffw.e.f. 1-11-2002 is proper andjustified. The first party bank has not only met the demand ofthe unionby granting an increase in stagnation increment @ Rs . 886/- for clerical staff and Rs . 311/- for sub-staff w.e.f. 1-11-2002 but it has also granted an increase in the stagnation increment @ Rs . 1,266/- for clerical staff and Rs .461/-for sub-staffwith effect from 1-11-2007. When the firstparty has granted increase in stagnation increment as demanded by the union and even further increase then certainlythere remains no dispute for adjudication.

Employers in relation to the mangement of M/s. BNP Paribas

AND

5. It is thus clear that the first party bank has fully accepted the demand of the union and has granted increase inthe stagnation increment as per the demand, therefore, there exists no dispute between the parties.

Theirworkmen

6.AnAward is made accordingly.

APPEARANCES:

JUSTICEGAS. SARRAF, Presiding Officer

नई दिल्ली, 15 जुलाई, 2011

FortheManagement : Shri Umesh Nabar, Adv. holdingbrief for Shri R.N. Shah, Adv.

:Shri Mahadeshwar, Adv.

FortheUnion

:Maharashtra

STATE

का.आ. 2138.-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में केन्द्रीय सरकार कोटक महिन्द्रा बैंक लि. के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनक्के कर्मकारों के. बीच अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक Mumbai , the 28th June , 2011 5860

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 13 , 2011 / SRAVANA 22 , 1933

अधिकरण, दिल्ली के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या17/2011 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 6-7-2011 को प्राप्त हुआ था । [सं. एल-12025/ 1/2011- आई आर ( बी- I ) ] रमेश सिंह , डेस्क अधिकारी New Delhi , the 15th July, 2011

S.O. 2138. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 17/2011 ) of the CentralGovernment Industrial Tribunal -cum-Labour Court- 1 , Delhi , as shown in the Annexure in the industrial dispute between the employers in relation to the management of Kotak Mahindra Bank Ltd. and their workman, received by the Central Government on 6-7-2011.

[No. L- 12025/ 1 /2011 - IR (B- 1)] RAMESH SINGH, Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

BEFORE DR. R.K. YADAV, PRESIDING OFFICER CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL CUM-LABOUR COURT NO. 1 , KARKARDOOMA COURT COMPLEX, DELHI

L.D. No. 17/2011

Workman Shri Shashi Bhushan Choudhary, So Late Sh . Ramanand Choudhary, Through M/s . Checkmate Services Karamchari Sangh (Regd. ), 5239 , Ajmeri Gate, Delhi - 110006-

Versus

1. The Manager, M/s. Checkmate Services Pvt . Ltd. , 58/61 , Vashishth Park, Sagarpur, NewDelhi .

2 TheManager, KotakMahindra Bank Ltd. , GroundFloor, Ambadeep Building , 14, Kasturba Gandhi Marg, NewDelhi - 110001

Management

AWARD

Shashi Bhushan Chaudhary, an employee of M/s . Checkmate Services (Pvt . ) Ltd. , (hereinafter referred to as the contractor) ,was deputed as gunman at the premises of Kotak Mahindra Bank ( hereinafter referred to as the Principal Employer) .He was engaged on 28-8-2008 and worked till 23-2-2010 , the date when his services were dispensed with . Neither any notice was served nor any wages, in lieu thereof, was paid to him . Retrenchment compensationwas also not paid. He raised a dispute before the Conciliation Officer in that regard, but no settlement

[PART II SEC . 3 ( ii )] could arrive at. After expiry of a period of 45 days , he raised a dispute before this Tribunal on 7-3-2011 , in view ofthe provisions of sub -section (2) of Section 2A ofthis Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( in short the Act ).

2. Proviso to sub-clause ( ii) of clause ( a) of Section 2 of the Act makes it clear that in case of a dispute between a contractor and the contract labour employed through the contractor, in an industrial establishment where such dispute first arose, the appropriate Government shallbe the Central Government or the State Government , as the case may be , where the contract labour was employed . ThePrincipal Employer is the aforesaid bank, which is a banking company within the meaning of clause (bb) of Section 2 ofthe Act , over which control is exercised by the Central Government. In view of these facts , the present dispute filed by the claimant , without being referred for adjudication by the appropriate Government , was entertained under sub -section ( 2) of Section 2A oftheAct . for articulation of the dispute.

3. Claim was demurred by the Contractor, pleading that it was a case of dismissal and not of retrenchment. Claimant left his place of duty on 23-2-2010 and never bothered to contact his employer. His services came to an end and a new guard was employed in his place . Losses were suffered on account of irresponsible conduct of the claimant. His wages till Feb. 2010 has already been paid . He wasbeing paid minimum wages, as declared under law. All his emoluments stood paid . He has no claim against his employer and his claim is liable to be dismissed.

4. Principal Employer asserts in its written statement that the claimant was an employee of the Contractor and records of employment are in his possession. Service agreement was entered in to with the Contractor, who engaged the claimant to discharge those obligations. It was incumbent on the Contractor to comply all labour laws . Being an employee of the Contractor, the claimant may raise his dispute against the Contractor only. It has further been pleaded that this Tribunal has no jurisdiction to entertain the dispute.

5. Following issues were settled , out ofpleadings of theparties:

1. Whether the claimant was dismissed by the management for his misconduct ?

2. Whether the claimant is entitled for relief of reinstatement. If yes, to what back wages ?

3. Relief.

6. During the course of adjudication, parties reached a settlement . The Contractor offered to reinstate services of the claimant with effect from 24th June , 2011 , with continuity of services and twenty per cent back wages for the period of interregnum, which offer was accepted by [ भाग II-खंड 3 (ii ) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : अगस्त 13, 2011/ श्रावण 22 , 1933

Shri Shashi Bhushan Choudhary, Accordingly, there remained no occasion for this Tribunal to proceed with the adjudication process . Statement made by the parties are reproduced in extenso:

"Statement Col. P.S. Sharma, General Manager,M/s . Checkmate, Services (Pvt. ) Ltd. , 58/61 , Vashisth Park, Sagarpur, New Delhi on S.A.:

I amGeneral Manager, M/s Checkmate Services (Pvt.) Ltd. , and competent to settle the matter. M/ s . Checkmate Services (Pvt . ) Ltd. is ready to reinstate services of Shri Shashi Bhushan Choudhary with continuity and twenty percent back wages . The claimant shall abide by all service conditions as per appointment letter. He mayjoin his duties with effect from 24th June, 2011. "

5861 management of Kotak Mahindra Bank Ltd. and their workman, which was receivedby the Central Government on 6-7-2011 .

[No. L- 12025/ 1 /2011 -IR (B-I) ] RAMESH SINGH, Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

BEFORE DR. R.K. YADAV, PRESIDING OFFICER CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT NO. 1 , KARKARDOOMA COURT COMPLEX, DELHI

L.D. No. 19/2011

Shri Varinda Prasad Shukla

S/o Sh. Ram Adhar Shukla,

ThroughM/s. Checkmate Services Karamchari Sangh (Regd. ) 5239 ,Ajmeri Gate,

Delhi -110006

"Statement of Shri Shashi Bhushan Choudhary S/o late Shri Ramanand Choudhary age 43 years R/ o H.No. 503 , Khairpur, Kotla Mubarakpur , New Delhi On S.A.

I have heard statement made by Col.P.S. Sharma and am in agreement to the fact stated therein . My claim may be decided in accordance with the facts stated by Col. Sharma . "

7. In view of these facts, it is ordered that the Contractor shall reinstate services of Shri Shashi Bhushan Choudhary son of late Shri Ramanand Choudhary, Gunman, with effect from 24th June 2011 , with continuity of service and twenty percent back wages for interregnum period, which wages would be counted keeping in view the minimum wages declared, at the relevant time . An award is , accordingly, passed. It is sent to the appropriate Government for publication.

Dated 23-6-2011

Dr. R.K. YADAV, Presiding Officer नई दिल्ली, 15 जुलाई , 2011

का.आ. 2139.-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 (1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में केन्द्रीय सरकार कोटक महिन्द्रा बैंक लि. के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण , दिल्ली के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 19/2011 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार की 06-07-2011 को प्राप्त हुआ था । [सं. एल-12025/1/2011- आई आर ( बी- I ) ] रमेश सिंह, डेस्क अधिकारी New Delhi , the 15th July, 2011

S.O. 2139. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 19/2011 ) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal -cum -Labour Court - 1 , Delhi , now as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the

Workman

Versus

1. TheManager,

M/s. Checkmate Services Pvt. Ltd. ,

58/61, Vashisth Park, Sagarpur,

NewDelhi

2. TheManager,

KotakMahindra Bank Ltd. , Ground Floor, AmbadeepBuilding, 14, Kasturba GandhiMarg,

New Delhi - 110001

Management

AWARD

Shri Varinda Prasad Shukla, an employee of M/s. Checkmate Services (Pvt. ) Ltd. , (hereinafter referred to as the contractor) , was deputed as gunman at the premises of Kotak Mahindra Bank (hereinafter referred to as the Principal Employer) . He was engaged on 08-06-2007 and worked till 11-6-09 , the date when his services were dispensed with. Neither any notice was served nor any wages, in lieu thereof, was paid to him . Retrenchment compensationwas also not paid . He raised a dispute before the Conciliation Officer in that regard, but no settlement couldarrive at.After expiry of a period of45days , he raised adispute before this Tribunal on 10-3-2011, in view ofthe provisionsofsub-section (2) of Section 2A ofthis Industrial DisputesAct, 1947 ( in short theAct).

2.Proviso to sub -clause (ii) ofClause (a) of Section 2 oftheAct makes it clear that in case of a dispute between acontractor and the contract labour employed through the contractor, in an industrial established were such dispute first arose, the appropriate Government shall be the Central Government or the State Government, as the case may be, where the contract labour was employed . The Principal Employer is the aforesaid bank, which is a banking companywithin the meaning ofClause (bb) of Section 2 of 5862

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 13, 2011 /SRAVANA 22, 1933

[PART I-SBC. 3 (ii )] the Act, over which control is exercised by the Central Government. In view of these facts, the present dispute filedby the claimant, without being referred for adjudication bythe appropriateGovernment, was entertained under sub- section(2) of Section 2A of theAct, for articulation of the dispute.

I amGeneralManager, M/s Checkmate Services (Pvt.) Ltd. , and competent to settle the matter.M/s. Checkmate Services (Pvt. ) Ltd. is ready to reinstate services of Shri Varinda Prasad Shukla with continuity and twenty percent back wages. The claimant shall abide by all service conditions as per appointment letter. He may join his duties with effect from 24th June, 2011. "

"Statement of Shri Varinda Prasad Shukla S/o late Shri Ram Adhar Shukla age 47 years R/oH.No. C-57, Gali No. 4, Ali Vihar, Badarpur, NewDelhi on S.A.

Ihave heard statement made by Cel . P.S. Sharma and am in agreement to the fact stared therein . My claim may be decided in accordance with the facts statedbyCol. Sharma."

3. Claim was demurred by the Contractor, pleading that it was a case of dismissal and not of retrenchment . Claimant left his place ofduty on 11-6-2009 and never bothered to contact his employer . His services came to an end and a new guard was employed in his place. Losses were suffered on account of irresponsible conduct ofthe claimant. His wages will August, 2009, has alreadybeen paid. He was being paid minium wages , as declared under law. All his emoluments stood paid. He has no claim against his employer and his claim is liable to be dismissed.

7. In view of these facts, it is ordered that the Contractor shall reinstate services of Shri VarindaPrasad Shukla son of late Shri Ram Adhar Shukla, Gunman, with effectfrom 24th June 2013 , with continuity of service and twentypercentback wages for interregnum period, which wages would be counted keeping in view the minimum wages declared, at the relevant time . An award is, accordingly, passed . It be sent to the appropriate Government for publication.

Dated 23-6-2011

4.Principal Employer asserts in its written statement that the claimant was an employee of the Contractor and records of employment are in his possession. Service agreement was entered in to with the Contractor, who engaged the claimant to discharge those obligations. It was incumbent on the Conractor to comply all labour laws . Being an employee of the Contractor, the claimant may raise his dispute against the Contractor only. It has further been pleaded that this Tribunal has no jurisdiction to entertain the dispute.

Dr. R.K. YADAV, PresidingOfficer

नई दिल्ली, 15 जुलाई , 2011

5. Following issues were settled, out ofpleadings of theparties:

1. Whether this Tribunal has no jurisdiction to entertain the reference since the appropriate Government for the present dispute happens to beGovernment ofN.C.T. Delhi ?

का.आ. 2140.-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947(1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में केन्द्रीय सरकार कोटक महिन्द्रा बैंक लि. के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच , अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औधोगिक अधिकरण-1 दिल्ली के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 20/2011 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 06-07-2011 को प्राप्त हुआ था । 2. Whether the claimant has been dismissed by M/s. Checkmate Services Pvt . Ltd. Owing to his misconduct ?

[सं. एल-12025/ 1 /2011- आई आर ( बी -1 ) ] रमेश सिंह, डेस्क अधिकारी 3. Whether the claimant is entitled for relief of reinstatement . If yes, to what back wages ?

4. Relief.

New Delhi , the 15th July , 2011

6. During the course of adjudication , parties reached a settlement . The Contractor offered to reinstate services of the claimant with effect from 24th June, 2011 , with continuity of services and twenty percent back wages for the period of interregnum, which offer was accepted by Shri Varinda Prasad Shukla. Accordingly, there remained no occasion for this Tribunal to proceed with the adjudication process. Statement made by the parties are reproduced in extenso :

S.O. 2140.- In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 20/2011 ) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal -cum -Labour Court- 1 , Delhi , as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of Kotak Mahindra Bank Ltd. and their workman, which was receivedby the Central Government on 06-07-2011 .

[No. L- 12025/ 1 /2011 -IR(B- 1) ] RAMESH SINGH, Desk Officer "Statement Col. P.S. Sharma, General Manager, M/s. Checkmate Services (Pvt .) Ltd. , 58/61 , Vashisth Park, Sagarpur, New Delhi on S.A.:

5863 भारत का राजपत्र : अगस्त 13 , 2011 / श्रावण 22 , 1933

[ भाग II-खंड 3 ( ii ) ]

ANNEXURE

BEFORE DR. R.K. YADAV/PRESIDING OFFICER, CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL- CUM-LABOUR COURTNO. 1, KARKARDOOMA COURT COMPLEX, DELHI

I.D. No. 20/2011

Shri Karan Singh ,

S/o Sh . Raghuraj Singh ,

3. Claim was demurred by the Contractor, pleading that it was a case of dismissal and rot of retrenchment . Claimant left his place of duty on 1-5-2010 and never bothered to contact his employer . His services came to an end and a new guard was employed in his place . Losses were suffered on account of irresponsible conduct of the claimant. His wages till Feb. 2010, has already been paid. Hewas being paid minimum wages, as declared under law. All his emoluments stood paid. He has no claim against his employer and his claim is liable to be dismissed.

Through M/s . Checkmate Services Karamchari

Workman

Sangh (Regd. ) 5239, Ajmeri Gate, Delhi-110006

Versus

The Manager,

1. M/s . Checkmate Services Pvt . Ltd. , 58/61 , Vashishth Park , Sagarpur , NewDelhi .

2. The Manager,

4. Principal Employer asserts in its written statement that the claimant was an employee of the Contractor and records of employment are in his possession. Service agreement was entered in to with the Contractor, who engaged the claimant to discharge those obligations . It was incumbent on the Conractor to comply all labour laws . Being an employee of the Contractor, the claimant may raise his dispute against the Contractor only. It has further been pleaded that this Tribunal has no jurisdiction to entertain the dispute.

5. Following issues were settled , out ofpleadings of theparties:

Management

Kotak Mahindra Bank Ltd. , Ground Floor, Ambadeep Building, 14. Kasturba Gandhi Marg , New Delhi - 110001 .

AWARD

1. Whether this Tribunal has no jurisdiction to entertain the reference since the appropriate Government for the present dispute happens to be Government of N.C.T. , Delhi ?

2. Whether the claimant has been dismissed by M/s. Checkmate Services Pvt. Ltd. owing to his misconduct ?

3. Whether the claimant is entitled for relief of reinstatement . If yes , to what back wages ?

4. Relief.

Shri Karan Singh , an employee of M/ s . Checkmate Services ( Pvt . ) Ltd. , ( hereinafter referred to as the contractor) , was deputed as Gunman at the premises of Kotak Mahindra Bank ( hereinafter referred to as the Principal Employer ) . He was engaged on 25-01-2007 and worked till 01-05-2010, the date when his services were dispensed with . Neither any notice was served nor any wages , in lieu thereof, was paid to him. Retrenchment compensation was also not paid. He raised a dispute before the Conciliation Officer in that regard, but no settlement could arrive at . After expiry of a period of 45 days , he raised a dispute before this Tribunal on 10-3-2011 , in view of the provisions of sub - section ( 2 ) of Section, 2A of this Industrial Disputes Act . 1947 ( in sholrt ' the Act ' ) .

6. During the course of adjudication , parties reached a settlement . The Contractor offered to reinstate services of the claimant with effect from 24th June , 2011 , with continuity of services and twenty percent back wages for the period of interregnum, which offer was accepted by Shri Karan Singh .Accordingly, there remained no occasion for this Tribunal to proceed with the adjudication process. Statement made by the parties are reproduced in extenso:

"Statement of Col. P.S. Sharma, General Manager , M/s. Checkmate Services (Pvt. ) Ltd. , 58/61 , Vashisth Park, Sagarpur, New Delhi on S.A.:

I am General Manager, M/s Checkmate Services (Pvt.) Ltd. , and competent to settle the matter. M/s . Checkmate Services (Pvt . ) Ltd. is ready to reinstate services of Shri Karan Singh with continuity and twenty percent back wages . The claimant shall abide by all service conditions as per appointment letter. He may join his duties with effect from 24th June, 2011."

2. Proviso to sub -clause ( ii ) of clause (a) of Section 2 ofthe Act makes it clear that in case of a dispute between a contractor and the contract labour employed through the contractor, in an industrial establishment were such dispute first arose, the appropriate Government shall be the Central Government or the State Government , as the case may be , where the contract labour was employed. The Principal Employer is the aforesaid bank, which is a banking company within the meaning of clause ( bb ) of Section 2 of the Act , over which control is exercised by the Central Government . In view of these facts, the present dispute filedby the claimant, without being referred for adjudication bythe appropriate Government , was entertained under sub- section ( 2 ) of Section 2A of the Act , for articulation ofthe dispute.

5864

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 13 , 2011 /SRAVANA 22, 1933

"Statement of Shri Karan Singh S/ o Shri Raghuraj Singh age 38 years R/ o H.No. C-37, Gali No. 3 , Ali Vihar,Badarpur, New Delhi on S.A.

I have heard statement made by Col.P.S. Sharma and am in agreement to the facts stated therein .My claim may be decided in accordance with the facts statedby Col. Sharma."

7. In view of these facts , it is ordered that the Contractor shall reinstate services of Shri Karan Singh S/ o Shri Raghuraj Singh, Gunman, with effect from 24th June 2011 , with continuity of service and twenty per cent back wages for interregnum period , which wages would be countedkeeping in view the minimum wages declared , at the relevant time. An award is, accordingly, passed. It be sent to the appropriate Government for publication.

Dated 23-6-2011

Dr. R.K. YADAV, Presiding Officer

:

नई दिल्ली, 15 जुलाई , 2011

का.आ. 2141. औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 (1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में केन्द्रीय सरकार कोटक महिन्द्रा बैंक लि. के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण, दिल्ली के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 18/2011 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 6-7-2011 को प्राप्त हुआ था । [सं. एल-12025/1/2011- आई आर ( बी-1 ) ]

रमेश सिंह , डेस्क अधिकारी New Delhi , the 15th July, 2011

S.O. 2141. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 18/2011 ) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal -cum-Labour Court - 1 , Delhi , as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of Kotak Mahindra Bank Ltd. and their workman, received by the Central Government on 6-7-2011.

[No. L- 12025/ 1 /2011 - IR (B- I) ] RAMESH SINGH, Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

BEFORE DR. R.K. YADAV, PRESIDING OFFICER, CENTRALGOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL- CUM -LABOURCOURT NO . 1 , KARKARDOOMA COURT COMPLEX, DELHI

L.D. No. 18/2011

Shri Ashok Kumar Chaurasia,

S/o $ h . Ramprit Chaurasia, Through M/s . Checkmate Services Karamchari Sangh (Regd.) 5239, Ajmeri Gate,

Delhi-110006

[PART II-SEC. 3 ( ii ) ]

Versus

1. TheManager,

M/s. Checkmate Services Pvt . Ltd. , 58/61 , Vashishth Park, Sagarpur, NewDelhi ,

2. TheManager, Kotak Mahindra Bank Ltd. , Ground Floor, Ambadeep Building , 14, Kasturba Gandhi Marg, NewDelhi - 110001 .

Management

AWARD

Shri Ashok Kumar Chaurasia , an employee ofM/ s . Checkmate Services (Pvt . ) Ltd. , (hereinafter referred to as the contractor) , was deputed as Gunman at the premises of Kotak Mahindra Bank ( herein after referred to as the Principal Employer) . He was engaged on 20-03-2008 and worked till 3-9-2009 , the date when his services were dispensed with . Neither any notice was served nor any wages , in lieu thereof, was paid to him. Retrenchment compensation was also not paid. He raised adispute before the Conciliation Officer in that regard, but no settlement could arrive at . After expiry of a period of45 days, he raised adispute before this Tribunal on 10-3-2011 , in view of the provisions of sub -section ( 2) of Section 2A ofthis Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( in short ' the Act ' ) .

2.Proviso to sub -clause ( ii ) of clause (a ) of section 2 of the Act makes it clear that in case of a dispute between a contractor and the contract labour employed through the contractor, in an industrial establishment where such dispute first arose , the appropriate Government shall be the Central Government or the State Government , as the case may be, where the contract labour was employed . The Principal Employer is the aforesaid bank, which is a banking company within the meaning of clause (bb) of Section 2 of the Act , over which control is exercised by the Central Government . In view of these facts , the present dispute filed by the claimant , without being referred for adjudication by the appropriate Government , was entertained under sub - section (2 ) of Section 2A of theAct , for articulation of the dispute .

3.Claim was demurred by the Contractor, pleading that it was a case of dismissal and not of retrenchment . Claimant left his place of duty on 3-9-2009 and never bothered to contact his employer. His services came to an end and a new guard was employed in his place . Losses were suffered on account of irresponsible conduct of the claimant. His wages will August , 2009 , has already been paid. He was being paid minium wages , as declared under law. All his emoluments stood paid. He has no claim against his employer and his claim is liable to be dismissed.

Workman

4. Principal Employer asserts in its written statement that the claimant was an employee of the Contractor and [ भाग II-खंड 3 (ii ) ]

5865 भारत का राजपत्र : अगस्त 13 , 2011 / श्रावण 22 , 1933

facts stated therein. Claim made by Sh. Ashok Kumar Chaurasia be decided in accordance with the facts stated by Col. Sharma."

records of employment are in his possession. Service agreement was entered in to with the Contractor, who engaged the claimant to discharge those obligations . It was incumbent on the Contractor to comply all labour laws. Being an employee of the Contractor, the claimant may raise his dispute against the Contractor only. It has further been pleaded that this Tribunal has no jurisdiction to entertain the dispute.

5. Following issues were settled, out ofpleadings of theparties:

7. In view of these facts, it is ordered that the Contractor shall reinstate services of Shri Ashok Kumar Chaurasia son of Shri Ramprit Chaurasia, Gunman, with effect from 24th June 2011, with continuity ofserviceand twenty percent back wages for interregnum period, which wages would be counted keeping in view the minimum wages declared, at the relevant time . An award is, accordingly, passed . It be sent to the appropriate Government for publication.

Dated 23-6-2011

Dr. R.K. YADAV, PresidingOfficer 1. Whether this Tribunal has no jurisdiction to entertain the reference since the appropriate Government for the present dispute happens to beGovernment of N.C.T. Delhi ?

नई दिल्ली, 18 जुलाई , 2011

2. Whether the claimant has been dismissed by M/ s . Checkmate Services Pvt. Ltd. owing to his misconduct ?

3. Whether the claimant is entitled for relief of reinstatement . Ifyes , to what back wages ?

4. Relief.

का.आ. 2142-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 (1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में केन्द्रीय सरकार कोटक महिन्द्रा बैंक लि. के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालय , दिल्ली के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 21/2011 ) . को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 06-07-2011 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल-12025 /1/2011- आई आर ( बी-1 ) ] रमेश सिंह, डेस्क अधिकारी

New Delhi, the 18th July, 2011 ' 6. During the course of adjudication, parties reached a settlement . The Contractor offered to reinstate services of the claimant with effect from 24th June, 2011 , with continuity of services and twenty percent back wages for the period of interregnum, which offer was accepted by Shri Ishwar Singh Mudgil , authorised representative of Shri Ashok Kumar Chaurasia. He claimed himself to be authorised to settle the dispute on behalf of the claimant. Accordingly, there remained no occasion for this Tribunal to proceed with the adjudication process . Statement made by the parties are reproduced in extenso:

"Statement Col. P.S. Sharma, General Manager ,M/s. Checkmate Services (Pvt .) Ltd. , 58/61 , Vashisth Park, Sagarpur, New Delhi on S.A. :

S.O. 2142.-In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 21/2011 ) ofthe Central Government Industrial Tribunal -cum-Labour Court- 1 , Delhi , as shown in the Annexure in the industrial dispute between the employers in relation to the management of Kotak Mahindra Bank Ltd. and their workman, received by the Central Government on 06-07-2011.

[No. L- 12025/ 1/2011 -IR (B- 1)] RAMESH SINGH, Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

I amGeneral Manager, M/s Checkmate Services (Pvt.) Ltd. , and competent to settle the matter . M/ s . Checkmate Services (Pvt . ) Ltd. is ready to reinstate services of Shri Ashok Kumar Chaurasia with continuity and twenty percent back wages . The claimant shall abide by all service conditions as per appointment letter . He mayjoin his duues with effect from 24th June, 2011. "

BEFORE DR. R.K. YADAV, PRESIDING OFFICER CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL- CUM -LABOUR COURTNO . 1, KARKARDOOMA COURTS COMPLEX, DELHI

L.D. No. 21/2011

"Statement of Shri Ishwar Singh Mudgil , General Secretary, Rastriya Rajdhani Shramik Sangh, T- 78 , MilanMarket, Shivaji Marg, Karampura, Delhi on S.A.

Shri RamNaresh, S/o Sh. Ram Khilari , Through M/s . Checkmate Services Karamchari Sangh (Regd. ) 5239, Ajmeri Gate, Delhi-110006

Workman

Versūs

I am the General Secretary, Rastriya Rajdhani Shramik Sangh and authorised to make a statement on behalf of the claimant . I have heard statement made by Col. P.S. Sharma and am in agreement to the [PART II-SEC . 3 (ii ) ] 5866

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 13 , 2011 /SRAVANA 22 , 1933

1. TheManager, M/ s . Checkmate Services Pvt . Ltd. , 58/61 , Vashishth Park, Sagarpur, New Delhi .

2. TheManager,

engaged the claimant to discharge those obligations . It was incumbent on the Contractor to comply all labour laws . Being an employee of the Contractor, the claimant may raise his dispute against the Contractor only. It has further been pleaded that this Tribunal has no jurisdiction to entertain the dispute.

5. Following issues were settled, out of pleadings of theparties:

Kotak Mahindra Bank Ltd., Ground Floor, AmbadeepBuilding, 14, Kasturba Gandhi Marg, New Delhi -110001

...Management

AWARD

1. Whether this Tribunal has no jurisdiction to entertain the reference since the appropriate Government for the present dispute happens to beGovernment of N.C.T. Delhi ?

2. Whether the claimant has been dismissed by M/s. Checkmate Services Pvt . Ltd. owing to his misconduct ?

3. Whether the claimant is entitled for relief of reinstatement. If yes, to what back wages ?

4. Relief.

Shri Ram Naresh, an employee ofM/s . Checkmate Services ( Pvt . ) Ltd. , ( hereinafter referred to as the contractor) , was deputed as gunman at the premises of Kotak Mahindra Bank (herein after referred to as the Principal Employer) . He was engaged on 29-07-2008 and worked till 28-02-2010, the date when his services were dispensed with . Neither any notice was served nor any wages, in lieu thereof, was paid to him. Retrenchment compensation was also not paid. He raised a dispute before the Conciliation Officer in that regard, but no settlement couldarriveat.After expiry of a period of45 days , he raised adispute before this Tribunal on 10-3-2011 , in view ofthe provisions ofsub-section (2) of Section 2A ofthe Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( in short the Act).

6. During the course of adjudication , parties reached a settlement . The Contractor offered to reinstate services of the claimant with effect from 24th June, 2011 , with continuity of services and twenty percent back wages for the period of interregnum , which offer was accepted by Shri Ram Naresh .Accordingly, there remained no occasion for this Tribunal to proceed with the adjudication process. Statement made by the parties are reproduced in extenso:

"Statement Col. P.S. Sharma, General Manager , M/s . Checkmate Services (Pvt. ) Ltd. , 58/61 , Vashisth Park. Sagarpur, New Delhi on S.A.:

2.Proviso to sub -clause ( ii ) of clause ( a) of Section 2 oftheAct makes it clear that in case of a dispute between acontractor and the contract labour employed through the contractyor, in an industrial establishment where such dispute first arose, the appropriate Government shall be the Central Government or the State Government, as the casemay be, where the contract labour was employed. The Principal Employer is the aforesaid bank, which is a banking company within the meaning of clause (bb) of Section 2 oftheAct , over which control is exercised by the Central Government . In view of these facts , the present dispute filed by the claimant, without being referred for adjudication by the appropriate Government , was entertained under sub -section (2 ) of Section 2A of the Act, for articulation of the dispute.

I amGeneral Manager, M/s Checkmate Services (Pvt. ) Ltd. , and competent to settle the matter. M/s . Checkmate Services (Pvt . ) Ltd. is ready to reinstate services of Shri Ram Naresh with continuity and twenty percent back wages . The claimant shall abide by all service conditions as per appointment letter . He may join his duties with effect from 24th June , 2011." :

"Statement of Shri Ram Naresh S/o Shri Ram khilari age 34 years R/o H.No. A- 116, J.J. Camp, Tigri Vistar, New Delhi on S.A.

I have heard statement made by Col.P.S. Sharma and am in agreement to the facts stated therein . My claim may be decided in accordance with the facts statedby Col. Sharma. "

3. Claim was demurred by the Contractor, pleading that it was a case of dismissal and not of retrenchment . Claimant left his place of duty on 28-02-2010 and never botheredtocontact his employer. His services came to an end and a new guard was employed in his place . Losses weresuffered on account of irresponsible conduct of the claimant . His wages will Feb. 2010, has already beenpaid. Hewas being paid minimum wages, as declared under law. All his emoluments stood paid . He has no claim against hisemployer and his claim is liable to be dismissed.

7. In view of these facts, it is ordered that the Contractor shall reinstate services of Shri Ram Naresh S/o Shri Ram Khilari , Gunman, with effect from 24th June 2011, with continuity of service and twenty percent back wages for interregnum period, which wages would be counted keeping in view the minimum wages declared, at the relevant 4. Principal Employer asserts in its written statement that the claimant was an employee of the Contractor and records of employment are in his possession . Service agreement was entered in to with the Contractor, who [ भाग II-खंड 3 ( ii) ]

time. An award is, accordingly, passed. It is sent to the appropriateGovernment for publication.

Dated: 23-6-201

Dr. R.K. Yadav, PresidingOfficer नई दिल्ली, 18 जुलाई , 2011

का.आ. 2143.-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में केन्द्रीय सरकार कोटक महिन्द्रा बैंक लि. के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण श्रम न्यायालय नं. 1 दिल्ली के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 22/2011 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 6-7-2011 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल-12025/ 1 /2011- आई आर ( बी-1 ) ] रमेश सिंह , डेस्क अधिकारी New Delhi , the 18th July, 2011

S.O. 2143. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 22/2011 ) ofthe Central Government Industrial Tribunal -cum -Labour Court- 1 , Delhi as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of Kotak Mahindra Bank Ltd. and their workman, which was received by the Central Government on6-7-2011 .

[No. L- 12025/ 1 /2011 - IR (B- 1) ] RAMESH SINGH, Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

BEFORE DR. R.K. YADAV/PRESIDING OFFICER CENTRALGOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL- CUM-LABOURCOURT NO . 1, KARKARDOOMA COURTCOMPLEX, DELHI

L.D. No. 22/2011

Shri Ranjeet Kumar Shukla,

5867

भारत का राजपत्र : अगस्त 13 , 2011/ श्रावण 22 , 1933

AWARD

Shri Ranjeet Kumar Shukla, an employee of M/ s . Checkmate Services (Pvt. ) Ltd. , (hereinafter referred to as the contractor) , was deputed as gunman at the premises of Kotak Mahindra Bank (hereinafter referredto as the Principal Employer) , He was engaged on 10-06-2008 and worked till 1-3-2010, the date when his services were dispensed with . Neither any notice was served nor any wages , in lieu thereof, was paidto him . Retrenchment compensation was also not paid. He raised a dispute before the Conciliation Officer in that regard, but no settlement could arrive at . After expiry ofa period of45 days , he raised adispute before this Tribunal on 10-3-2011 , in view ofthe provisions of sub -section (2) ofsection 2A ofthis Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (in short the Act).

2.Proviso tosub -clause ( ii ) ofclause (a) of section 2 of the Act makes it clear that in case of a dispute between a contractor and the contract labour employed through the contractor, in an industrial establishment where such dispute first arose , the appropriate Government shall be the Central Government or the State Government, as the case may be, where the contract labour was employed. The Principal Employer is the aforesaid bank, which is a banking company within the meaning of clause (bb) of fection 2 of the Act, over which control is exercised by the Central Government . In view of these facts , the present dispute filed by the claimant, without being referred for adjudication by the appropriate Government , was entertained under sub - section (2) ofsection 2A of theAct . for articulation ofthe dispute.

3. Claim wasdemurred by the Contractor, pleading that it was a case of dismissal and not of retrenchment . Claimant left his place of duty on 1-3-2010 and never bothered to contact his employer. His services came to an end and a new guard was employed in his place . Losses were suffered on account of irresponsible conduct of the claimant. His wages till Feb. , 2010, has already been paid. He was being paid minium wages , as declared under law. All his emoluments stood paid. He has no claim against his employer and his claim is liable to be dismissed,

Workman

S/o Sh . Triyogi Narain Shukla, Through M/s . Checkmate Services Karamchari Sangh (Regd. ), 5239, Ajmeri Gate, Delhi-110006

Versus

1. TheManager,

M/s. Checkmate Services Pvt . Ltd. , 58/61, Vashishth Park, Sagarpur, NewDelhi

2. TheManager,

Kotak Mahindra Bank Ltd. , Ground Floor, AmbadeepBuilding, 14, Kasturba Gandhi Marg, NewDelhi -110001

4. Principal Employer asserts in its written statement that the claimant was an employee of the Contractor and records of employment are in his possession . Service agreement was entered into with the Contractor, who engaged the claimant to discharge those obligations . It was incumbent on the Contractor to comply all labour laws . Being an employee of the Contractor , the claimant may raise his dispute against the Contractor only. It has further been pleaded that this Tribunal has no jurisdiction to entertain the dispute.

5. Following issues were settled , out ofpleadings of the parties:

Management

2883GI/11-13 5868

[PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii )] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 13 , 2011 /SRAVANA 22 , 1933

accordingly, passed. It be sent to the appropriate Government for publication.

Dated: 23-6-2011 Dr. R.K. YADAV, Presiding Officer (1) Whether this Tribunal has no jujrisdiction to entertain the reference since the appropriate Government for the present dispute happens to beGovernment ofN.C.T. , Delhi ?

नई दिल्ली , 18 जुलाई , 2011 (2) Whether the claimant has been dismissed by M/s. Checkmate Services Pvt . Ltd. Owing to his misconduct ?

(3) Whether the claimant is entitled for relief of reinstatement . Ifyes, to what back wages ?

(4) Relief.

का.आ. 2144.-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में केन्द्रीय सरकार कोटक महिन्द्रा बैंक लि. के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालय , दिल्ली के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 23/2011 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 6-7-2011 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल -12025/ 1/2011- आई आर ( बी -1 ) ] रमेश सिंह , डेस्क अधिकारी

NewDelhi , the 18th July, 2011 6.Duringthe course of adjudication , parties reached a settlement . The Contractor offered to reinstate services of the claimant with effect from 24th June , 2011 , with continuity of services and twenty per cent back wages for the period of interregnum, which offer was accepted by Shri Ishwar Singh Mudgil , authorised representative of Shri Ranjeet Kumar Shukla. He claimed himself to be authorised to settle the dispute on behalf of the claimant . Accordingly, there remained no occasion for this Tribunal to proceed with the adjudication process .Statement made by the parties are reproduced in extenso :

"Statement of Col. P.S. Sharma, General Manager, M/s. Checkmate Services (Pvt. ) Ltd. , 58/61 , Vashisth Park, Sagarpur, New Delhi on S.A.:-

S.O. 2144.-In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 23/2011 ) ofthe Central Government Industrial Tribunal -cum-Labour Court- 1, Delhi as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of Kotak Mahindra Bank Ltd. and their workman, which was received by the Central Government on6-7-2011 .

[No. L- 12025/1 /2011 -IR (B- I) ] RAMESH SINGH, Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

I amGeneralManager, M/ s Checkmate Services (Pvt. ) Ltd., and competent to settle the matter.M/s. Checkmate Services (Pvt .) Ltd. is ready to reinstate services ofShri Ranjeet Kumar Shukla with continuity and twenty per cent back wages . The claimant shall abide by all service conditions as per appointment letter. He mayjoin his duties with effect from 24th June, 2011."

BEFORE DR. R.K. YADAV, PRESIDING OFFICER, CENTRALGOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL- CUM-LABOUR COURTNO. 1 , KARKARDOOMA COURT COMPLEX, DELHI

L.D. No. 23/2011

"Statement of Shri Ishwar Singh Mudgil , General Secretary, Rastriya Rajdhani Shramik Sangh, T- 78 , MilanMarket, Shivaji Marg, Karampura , Delhi on S.A.:-

Workman

Shri Chander Shekhar Sharma, S/o Sh. Ram Sharan Sharma, ThroughM/s . Checkmate Services Karamchari Sangh (Regd. ) , 5239 , Ajmeri Gate, Delhi-110006

Versus

1. The Manager ,

I am the General Secretary, Rastriya Rajdhani Shramik Sangh and authorised to make a statement onbehalf of the claimant . I have heard statement madeby Col. P.S. Sharma and am in agreement to the facts stated therein. Claim made by Sh. Ranjeet Kumar Shuklabe decided in accordance with the facts stated by Col , Sharma ."

M/s. Checkmate Services Pvt . Ltd . , . 58/61, Vashishth Park , Sagarpur, NewDelhi

2. TheManager , Kotak Mahindra Bank Ltd. , Ground Floor, Ambadeep Building, 14, Kasturba GandhiMarg, NewDelhi - 110001

Management 7. In view of these facts , it is ordered that the Contractor shall reinstate services of Shri Ranjeet Kumar Shukla son ofShri Triyogi Narain Shukla, Gunman, with effectfrom 24th June, 2011, with continuity ofservice and twenty per cent back wages for interregnum period, which wages would be counted keeping in view the minimum wages declared , at the relevant time . An award is, भारत का राजपत्र : अगस्त 13 , 2011 / श्रावण 22, 1933

[ भाग II-खंड 3 ( ii ) ]

AWARD

Shri Chander Shekhar Sharma, an employee of M/s . Checkmate Services (Pvt. ) Ltd. , ( hereinafter referred to as the contractor ) , was deputed as gunman at the premises of Kotak Mahindra Bank (hereinafter referredto asthe Principal Employer) . He was engaged on 16-9-2008 and worked till 1-3-2010, the date when his services were dispensed with . Neither any notice was served nor any wages , in lieu thereof, was paid to him . Retrenchment compensation was also not paid . He raised a dispute before the Conciliation Officer in that regard, but no settlement could arrive at. After expiry of a period of45 days, he raised a dispute before this Tribunal on 10-3-2011 , in view ofthe provisions of sub-section (2 ) ofsection 2A of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 (in short ' the Act ' ) .

2. Proviso to sub-clause (ii ) ofclause (a) of section 2 oftheAct makes it clear that in case of a dispute between acontractor and the contract labour employed through the contractor, in an industrial establishment where such dispute first arose, the appropriate Government shallbe the Central Government or the State Government, as the case may be, where the contract labour was employed. ThePrincipal Employer is the aforesaid bank, which is a banking company within the meaning of clause (bb ) of section 2 of theAct, over which control is exercisedby the Central Government. In view of these facts , the present dispute filed by the claimant, without being referred for adjudication by the appropriate Government, was entertained under sub - section (2 ) of section 2A of theAct, for articulation ofthe dispute.

3. Claim was demurred by the Contractor, pleading that it was a case of dismissal and not of retrenchment . Claimant left his place of duty on 1-3-2010 and never bothered to contact his employer. His services cameto an end and a new guard was employed in his place. Losses were suffered on account of irresponsible conduct of the claimant. His wages till Feb. , 2010, has already been paid. Hewas being paid minimum wages, as declared under law. All his emoluments stood paid. He has no claim against his employer and his claim is liable to be dismissed.

4. Principal Employer asserts in its written statement that the claimant was an employee of the Contractor and records of employment are in his possession . Service agreement was entered into with the Contractor, who engaged the claimant to discharge those obligations . It was incumbent on the Conractor to comply all labour laws . Being an employee of the Contractor, the claimant may raise his dispute against the Contractor only. It has further been pleaded that this Tribunal has no jurisdiction to entertain the dispute .

5869 1. Whether this Tribunal has no jujrisdiction to entertain the reference since the appropriate Government for the present dispute happens to beGovernment of N.C.T. Delhi ?

2. Whether the claimant has been dismissed by M/s, Checkmate Services Pvt . Ltd. owing to his misconduct ?

3. Whether the claimant is entitled for relief of reinstatement . If yes, to what back wages ?

4.Relief.

6.During the course of adjudication , parties reached a'settlement . The Contractor offered to reinstate services of the claimant with effect from 24th June , 2011 , with continuity of services and twenty per cent back wages for the period of interregnum, which offer was accepted by Shri Chander Shekhar Sharma. Accordingly, there remained no occasion for this Tribunal to proceed with the adjudication process . Statement made by the parties are reproduced in extenso:.

"Statement of Col. P.S. Sharma, General Manager, M/s. Checkmate Services (Pvt. ) Ltd. , 58/61 , Vashisth Park, Sagarpur , New Delhi on S. A. :-

I amGeneralManager, M/s. Checkmate Services (Pvt.) Ltd. , and competent to settle the matter. M/s . Checkmate Services (Pvt . ) Ltd. is ready to reinstate services of Shri Chander Shekhar Sharma with continuity and twenty per cent back wages . The claimant shall abide by all service conditions as per appointment letter. He may join his duties with effect from 24th June , 2011. "

"Statement of Shri Chander Shekhar Sharma S/o . Shri Ram Sharan Sharma, Age 32 years, R/o H.No. 1345, Gali No. 7, L-Block, Sangam Vihar, New Delhi on S.A.:-

I have heard statement made by Col.P.S. Sharma and am in agreement to the facts stated therein. My claim may be decided in accordance with the facts statedby Col. Sharma . "

7. In view of these facts , it is ordered that the Contractor shall reinstate services of Shri Chander Shekhar Sharma son of Shri Ram Sharan Sharma, Gunman , with effect from 24th June , 2011 , with continuity of service and twenty per cent back wages for interregnum period, which wages would be counted keeping in view the minimum wages declared, at the relevant time . An award is , accordingly, passed. It be sent to the appropriate Government for publication.

Dated 23-6-2011

5. Following issues were settled, out ofpleadings of theparties:

Dr. R.K. YADAV, Presiding Officer $870

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 13 , 2011 / SRAVANA 22 , 1933

नई दिल्ली , 18 जुलाई, 2011

का.आ. 2145.-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में केन्द्रीय सरकार सी.पी.डब्ल्यू. डी. के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालय , जयपुर के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 69/2006 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 18-7-2011 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल-42011/24/2006- आंई आर ( डो यू) ] जोहन तोपनो , अवर सचिव NewDelhi , the 18th July, 2011

S.O. 2145. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act . 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award ( Ref. No. 69/ 2006) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal -cum- Labour Court , Jaipur as shown in the Annexure , in the industrial dispute between the employers in relation to the management of C.P.W.D. and their workmen , which wasreceivedby the Central Governinent on 18-7-2011.

[No. L -42011 / 24/2006 - İR(DU) ] JOHAN TOPNO , Under Secy.

ANNEXURE

CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM -LABOUR COURT, JAIPUR

PRESENT : N. K. PUROHIT, Presiding Officer I.D. 69/2006

Reference No. L-42011 /24/2006 / IR (DU)

[PART II-Sac. 3 ( ii ) ] "Whether the demand of All India CPWD ( MRM ) Karamchari Sangathan for regularization of the 14 workers ( as per Annexure ) by the management of CPWD from the date of their initial appointment on muster roll is just and legal ? Ifyes, to what relief the concerned workmen are entitled to and from which date ?"

2. The union has pleaded in its claim statement that theworkinen were appointed as daily rated workmen w.e.f. their respective date of employment as per Annexure - l under the management of CPWD . In view of the judgement ofHon'ble Supreme Court the Director General of Works CPWD issued order dated 25-8-88 for regularization of the services of daily rated workmen by 7-12-88 . The Horticulture Wing of the management of CPWD regularized the services of daily rated workmen by 7-12-88 whereas the Electrical and Civil Wing did not take action in this behalf and continued to keep the workmen on muster roll for years together whichis unfair labour practice. It is further pleaded that servies of workmen at S. No. 1 and 14 of Annexure - I were egularized in the pay scale of Rs . 950-1500 ( Skilled Category ) instead of highly skilled category. The union has prayed that the services of the workmen be regularized from the date of their initial employment and services of the two workinen placed at S.Nos. 1 and 14 of Annexure - I be regularized in the highly skilled category pay scale .

Dated: 10-10-2006

The Zonal Secretary All India CPWD ( MRM) Karamchari Sangathan House No. 4823 , Gali No. 13 , Balbir Nagar Extension , Shahdara . New Delhi - 110032

V/s

The Executive Engineer (Electrical ) CPWD, Jaipur Kendriya Vidhyut Mandal . B-7 , Moti Marg , Bapunagar, Jaipur-305015

AWARD (28-6-2011)

1. The Central Government in exercise of the powers conferred under clause ( d ) of Sub-section i and 2 ( A) of Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act . 1947 has referred the following industrial dispute to this tribunal for adjudication which is as under :

3. Upon perusal of the proceedings it appears that atthe time of filing claim statement the post of the Presiding Officer was lying vacant therefore , after posting of the PresidingOfficer directions were given on 15-10-2009 to issue fresh notices to both the parties . Proceedings of the case reveal that despite service of registered notice none appeared on behalf of the applicant union. The proceedings also reveals that representatives on behalf of the Executive Engineer ( Electrical ) and Executive Engineer ( Civil ) put their appearance on 2-5-2011 and submitted their authority letter but on next date i.e. 26-5-2011 none appeared on behalf of the non - applicant . Thus, due to absence of both the parties on the said date. the case was reserved for passing award.

4. It is well settled that if a party challenges the legality of an action of the management the initial burden lies upon him to prove his case . Since the industrial dispute was raised by the union on behalf of the workmen it was incumbent for the union to have appeared to substantiate its case for alleged unjustified action of the non -applicant. The union has filed certain photo copies of documents marked as Annexure 1 to 8 in support of its averments in claim statement. But after filing the said documents none has appeared on behalf of the union to prove its case . It appears that the union is not willing to coritest the case further.

भारत का राजपत्र : अगस्त 13 , 2011 / श्रावण 22 , 1933

[ भाग II-खंड 3 ( ii ) ]

5. Thus , under these circumstances "No Claim Award" is passed in this matter. The reference under adjudication is answered accordingly.

6. Award as above .

N. K. PUROHIT, Presiding Officer नई दिल्ली , 18 जुलाई , 2011

का.आ. 2146.-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 औद्योगिकः अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालय , लखनऊ के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 110/2001 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 18-7-2011 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल-40012/83/2001- आई आर ( डी यू) ] जोहन तोपनो , अवर सचिव New Delhi , the 18th July, 2011

S.O. 2146.- In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 110/ 2001) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal -cum- Labour Court , Lucknow as shown in the Annexure , in the industrial dispute between the employers in relation to the management of Department of Telecom and their workınan, which was received by the Central Government on 18-7-2011 .

[No. L-40012/83/2001 - IR (DU) ] JOHAN TOPNO , Under Secy.

ANNEXURE

CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM - LABOUR COURT, LUCKNOW

PRESENT : Dr. MANJU NIGAM , Presiding Officer

I.D. 110/2001

Reference No: L-40012 / 83 /2001 /IR (DU)

Dated: 27-6-2001

BETWEEN

Shri Mewa Lal S /o Sh . Bindadeen R/o Village-PureFakir Cola Haivatpur PO-Major Ganj/Bhadokhar Distt. - Raebareli

AND

1. The General Manager Telecom Deptt . O/o General Manager Gandhi Bhawan Lucknow ( U.P. ) - 226001

5871 2. The Telecom District Engineer O/o the Telecom DistrictManager

Raebareli (Distt .) - 229001

AWARD

1. By order No. L-40012 / 83 / 2001 - IR(DU) dated : 27-6-2001 the Central Government in the Ministry of Labour, New Delhi in exercise of powers conferred by clause (d) of Sub- section ( 1 ) and sub- section ( 2A) of Section 10 ofthe Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947) referred this industrial dispute between Shri Mewa Lal S/o Sh. Bindadeen, R/o Village-Pure Fakir Cola Haivatpur, POMajor Ganj /Bhadokhar, Distt . - Raebareli and the General Manager, Telecom Deptt . , O/o General Manager, Gandhi Bhawan, Lucknow (U.P. ) and the Telecom District Engineer, O/o the Telecom District Manager, Raebareli (Distt .) for adjudication.

2: The reference under adjudication is:

"WHETHER THE ACTION OF THE MANAGEMENT OF TELECOM, LUCKNOW IN TERMINATING THE SERVICES OF SH..MEWA RAM VIDE ORDER DATED 5-2-99 WAS LEGAL AND JUSTIFIED ? IF NOT, WHAT RELIEF THE WORKMAN IS ENTITLED TO ? "

3. The case ofthe workman , Mewa Ram, in brief, is thathewas employed under Divisional Engineer, Telecom, Raibareli on the post of security guard on 16-10-1996 without any appointment letter and worked as duch till 5-2-1999 when his services has been terminated without any notice or retrenchment compensation in violation to the provisions contained in Section 25 F of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 in spite of the fact he worked for more than 750 days in total and for more than 240 days in the year preceding his termination. It is submitted by the workman that during his service period he put his attendance on the attendance register and was paid on Muster Roll Sheet and also that he was never given any proof regarding salary. It has been alleged by the workman that the management retained workmen junior to him and also employed some other new persons in violation to the provisions contained in Section 25 G and H of the Act . Accordingly, the workman has prayed that his termination order be set aside and he be reinstated with consequential benefits including back wages .

4. The opposite party has filed its written statement , denying the claim ofthe workman; wherein it has submitted that the workman was never engaged by it, as such , there arise no question of termination or violation ofany ofthe provisions of I.D. Act. Moreover, it has submitted that the workman was the employee of M / s . Security and Protection Services , Varanasi . It has been submitted by the management that the workman never received any payment towards salary from the department directly; rather the management , as per terms of the contract, had 5872

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: AUGUST 13 , 2011 /SRAVANA 22, 1933

always paid for the watch and ward services rendered by M/sSecurityand Protection Services, Varanasi and in no point oftime any payment was made to the workman by the management in lieu of his any services . The management has specifically submitted that the workman was admittedly deployed by the M/ s Security and Protection Services , Varanasi as one of its several watchman, which did not create any lien in favour ofthe workman against the management, furthermore, the contract in between the management and M/s Security and protection Services , Varanasi came to an end on 5-3-99.Accordingly, the management has prayed that the claim oftheworkman be rejected without any relieftohim.

Theworkmanhas filed its rejoinder; wherein he has not brought any new fact apart from reiterating the averments already made by him in his statement ofclaim.

5. The parties filed photocopies of certain documents in support of their respective claim . The workmanhas examined itself in support of his averments made in the statement of claim; whereas the management examined Shri K. P. Bajpai , SDE (Planning) in support of their case. The parties cross-examined the witnesses of each other. After conclusion of parties ' evidence, opportunityfor argument was provided to the parties; but the parties representatives refrained to avail the same, accordingly, the case was reserved for award keeping in viewthe case being very old, as it pertains to the year 2001and longabsence ofparties ' representatives.

6. The workman Mewa Ram has examined himself aswitness in support of this claim that he was appointed onthe post of Security Guard on 16-10-1996 and no appointment letter was given at the time of recruitment. Hefurther stated that he was not given any letter regarding termed appointment nor in project work nor ad-hoc appointment nor he was kept through any contractor. He also stated that he put his attendance on the Muster Roll and was paid salary @Rs . 1000 per month . In cross- examination, he stated that the payments were made by thedepartment and he was not given any pay slip. Further, he stated that he was not sponsored by the Employment Exchange nor saw any advertisement. The workman has fild photo copy of following documents in support ofhis claim.

Certificate dated 26-2-98, which does not rind reference ofworkman in it.

Attendance Register w.e.f. 1-11-98 to 2-12-98 .

(ii) Attendance Register w.e.f. 1-9-98 to 31-10-98.

(iv) Attendance Register w.e.f. 1-5-98 to 30-6-98.

(v) Attendance Register w.e.f. 1-3-98 to 30-4-98.

(vi) AttendanceRegister w.e.f. 1-1-98 to 28-2-98 .

[PART II-SBC. 3 (ii)] (vii) Attendance Register w, e.f. 1-11-97 to31-12-97.

(viii) Attendance Register w.e.f. 1-9-97 to 31-10-97.

(ix) Attendance Register w.e.f. 1-7-97 to 1-8-97 .

(x) Attendance Register w.e.f. 1-5-97 to 30-6-97.

(xi) Letter dated 8-10-99 given by the department inrespect ofelectionduty.

(xii) Representation dated 5-2-99 ofthe workman .

(xiii) Representation dated 4-2-99 of the workman .

7. In rebuttal the management has examined Shri K.P. Bajpai , SDE (Planning) , who stated that M/s Security andProtection, S -II, 42 -A, Gyatri Nagar Colony, Tanakpur, Varanasiwas given contract to supply security guard.He further stated that the workman was never appointedby the Telecom department nor their attendance was taken by the department . He also stated that he worked under the supervision of the Secrurity Agency and the contractor was paid as per contract, thus , there was no relationship of employer and employee between the department and theworkman, MewaLal.

After opposite party's evidence , the management filed photocopy of following documents vide list of documents dated23-11-2005:

(1) Tender along with rule and regulation.

(ii) Application submitted by M/ s Security and Protection Services through Director and agreement.

(iii) Photocopy of the payment receipt to the contractor regarding their services.

8. When management filed above referred documents at the belated stage the parties were given opportunity to lead evidence , in light of documents filed, the workman was given time to file documents in rebuttal vide order dated 13-1-2006 . When workman did not lead any evidence on many dates the case was ordered to proceed ex-parte vide order dated 2-2-2007 against the workman and the management was given opportunityto adduce its evidence. The management also failed to availed the opportunity to lead evidence on many dates and accordingly, the case was ordered to proceed ex-parte against the management vide order dated 1-10-2007 and next date was fixed on 3-12-2007 for arguments .

9. The case is fixed for arguments since 3-12-2007; but the parties did not turn up for argument and were getting the case adjourned on one or the other pretext. Since the reference is very old, pending for arguments since 2007, as no party is turning, I think it proper to dispose of the present reference in the interest of justice; and accordingly the case was reserved for award.

5873

भारत का राजपत्र : अगस्त 13 , 2011 / श्रावण 22 , 1933

[भाग II-खखंड 3 (ii ) ]

then for the claimant to lead evidence to show that he had in fact worked for 240 days in the year precedinghis termination . Filing of an affidavit is only his own statement in his favour and that can notbe regarded as sufficient evidence for any court ortribunal to come to the conclusion that a workman had, in fact, worked for 240 days or order or record ofappointment or engagement for that period was produced by the workman. On this ground alone , the award is liable to be set aside. " 10. In the light ofthe aforesaid rival statements of both the sides I have scanned the documents produced by the workman . The workman has filed photocopy of certificatedated 26-2-98 , paper No. C-24, which does not find reference of the workman at all ; and has filed photocopy of attendance register for the month ofMay, 1997 to December , 1998 many ofwhich are not on any proper format. Abare perusal ofit shows that apart from few, they were hand made and most them are illegible and many of them are not countersigned by any authority. He has not filed originals to the above documents nor has moved any formal application to get them summoned from the management .

15. Analyzing its earlier decisions on the aforesaid pointHon'ble Apex Court has observed in 2006 (108) FLR R.M. Yellatti andAsstt. Executive Engineer as follow:

11. Per contra, the management has filed photo copy oftender along with rule and regulation and application submitted by M/ s Security and Protection Services in response thereof. It has also filed photocopy of payment receipt to the contractor regarding their services.

Abare perusal of contract dated 29-4-1999 signed by AGM ( Admn. ) , Telecom , Varanasi and Director, M/sSecurity and Protection Services , Varanasi, Paper No. C-74 to 74/4 shows that the security guards were required to be paid through the contractor.

12. Moreover, from the perusal of aforesaid documents, filed by the workman, it is not evident that the workman had worked from 16-10-1996 to 5-2-1999 . There is no document to prove this fact that the workman had actuallyworked as casual labour for more than 240 days in the preceding 12 months from the date of his disengagement.

13. Admittedly no appointment letter was issued and no post was ever advertised for the appointment. There is no evidence of the workman that the Divisional Engineer was competent to engage daily wager. He has not produced any voucher or any other documentary evidence to prove this fact that he was paid salary @Rs. 1000 per month for the period mentioned in his statement.

"It is clear that the provisions of the evidence Act in termsdo not apply to the proceedings under section 10ofthe Industrial Disputes Act . However, applying general principles and on reading the aforestated judgments we find that this Court has repeatedly taken the view that the burden of proof is on the claimant to show that he had worked 240 days in a given year. This burden is discharged only upon the workman stepping in the witness box. This burden is discharged upon the workman adducing cogent evidence, both oral and documentary. In cases of termination of services of daily wages earner, there will be no letter of appointment or termination. There will also be no receipt or proofof payment. Thus , in most cases , the workman (claimant) can only call upon the employer to produce beforethe Court the nominal muster roll for the given period, the letter of appointment or termination, if any, the wage register , the attendance register etc. Drawing of adverse inference ultimately would dependthereafter on facts ofeach case. The above decisions however make it clear that mere affidavits or self serving statements made by the claimant/ workmanwill no suffice in the matter ofdischarge of theburdenplaced by law on the workman to prove that he had worked for 240 days in a given year. The above judgments further lay down that mere non production ofmuster rolls per se without any plea ofsuppression by the claimant workman will not be the ground for the tribunal to draw an adverse inference against the management. " 14. It is well settled that if a party challenges the legality oforder the burden lies upon him to prove illegality of the order and if no evidence is produced, the party invoking jurisdiction of the court must fail . In the present case burden was on the workman to set out the grounds to challenge the validity of the termination order and to prove the termination order was illegal . It was the case of theworkman that he had worked for more than 240 days in the year concerned. This claim has been denied by the management ; therefore , it was for the workman to lead evidence to show that she had in fact worked up to 240 days inthe year preceding his alleged termination. In(2002) 3 SCC 25 Range Forest Officer vs S.T. Hadimani Hon'ble Apex Court has observed as under :

16. In the present case the workman has stated that he has worked continuously for 240 days , but has not produced any original documents in support of his oral evidence nor summoned the documents from the management . The photocopies of the attendance register filedby him do not serve the purpose as many of them are not on proper/printed format and also they are not signed by any authority. Even for the argument's sake ifthey are taken to be genuine one , then this Tribunal has to go through them to find out as to whether the workman worked "Itwas the case ofthe claimant that he had so worked but this claim was denied by the appellant . It was 5874

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 13 , 2011/SRAVANA 22, 1933

for240days in12calendar months preceding thedateof his termination. And on scrutinizing the attendance register forthe period 4-2-1998 to 5-2-1999, it comes out that the workman has worked for 211 days only during saidperiod.

On the other hand the management has well proved its case by filing copy of contract with the M/s Security and protection Services which reveals that the security guards were required to be paid through the contractor and they were not deemed to be employee of any of the either State or Central Government . Also, the payment requisition placed by the contractor before the management for payment finds reference ofworkman.

17. Merely pleadings are no substitute for proof. Initial burden ofestablishing the fact of continuous work for 240 days in a year was on the workman but he has failed todischarge the above burden. There is no reliable material for recording findings that the workman had workedmore than 240 days in the preceding year from the date of his alleged termination and the alleged unjust or illegal order of termination was passed by the management.

18. Accordingly, the reference is adjudicated against the workman Mewa Ram and he is not entitled to any relief.

19. Award as above.

Dr. MANJU NIGAM, Presiding Officer Lucknow 30-6-2011

नई दिल्ली , 18 जुलाई , 2011

का. आ. 2147.-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 , चण्डीगढ़ के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 5/2011 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 18-7-2011 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल-40012/91/2010- आई आर (डी यू) ] ओहन तोपनो , अवर सचिव NewDelhi, the 18th July, 2011

S.O. 2147.-In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 5/2011 ) ofthe Central Government Industrial Tribunal -cum -Labour Court No. I, Chandigarh as shown in the Annexure, in the industrial dispute between the employers in relation to the management of Department of Posts and their workman , which was receivedby the Central Government on18-7-2011.

[No. L-40012/91/2010- IR (DU)] JOHAN TOPNO, Under Secy.

[РАКТ ПВис. 3(1) ]

ANNEXURE

BEFORE SHRI A. K. RASTOGI, LINK OFFICER OF THE PRESIDING OFFICER, CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL CUM- LABOUR COURT- L, CHANDIGARH

Case L. D. No. 5/2011

Shri Mandeep Kumar

S/o Late Kailash Chand,

C/o Shri R. K. Singh Parmar,

Working President,

Punjab INTUC, Brari,

POPartapNagar,

Nangal Dam, Ropar

Applicant

Versus

The Sr. Superintendent of Post Offices,

Department of Post,

Jalandhar Division,

Jalandhar (Punjab)

Respondent APPEARANCES

For the Workman :Shri R. K. Singh ParmarA.R. FortheManagement : None .

AWARD

Passed on 5-7-2011

Government of India vide Notification No. L-40012/ 91/2010- IR (DU), dated 20-4-2011 by exercising its powers under Section 10, sub-section ( 1 ) (d) and Section (2A) of the Industrial Disputes Act, (the Act in short) has referred the following industrial dispute for adjudication to this Tribunal:

"Whether the action of the management ofSupdt. Post Offices, Jalandhar Division, Jalandhar in terminating the services of Shri Mandeep Kumar sonofLate Kailash Chand w.e.f. 1-12-2009 is legal andjustified ? What relief the workman is entitled to and what directions are necessary in the matter ?" 2. Inexercise ofthe powers conferred by the Central Govt. vide orderNo. A. 11016/3/2009 -CLS- II dated 9th of May2011 , case was taken up today for hearing Shri R. K. Singh Parmar authorized representative of workman appeared for the workman and made a statement thathe is the authorized representative of the workman and the workmanMandeep Kumar does not want to pursue the present reference as he has filed a casebefore the Central Administrative Tribunal and he withdraws the present reference and the present reference may be allowed to be withdrawn.

5875 भारत का राजपत्र : अगस्त13 , 2011 / श्रावण 22, 1933

[ भाग II-सखंड 3 (ii ) ]

AWARD (Dated:7th July, 2011)

3. In view of the statement of the authorized representative ofthe workman, the industrial dispute under reference stands withdrawn and accordingly a nodispute award is passedbythis Tribunal . Two copies ofthe award besent toCentral Govt. for further necessary action.

A. K. RASTOGI, PresidingOfficer

Chandigarh.

नई दिल्ली, 18 जुलाई , 2011

Inexercise ofthe powers conferred by clause (d) of sub-section (1 ) and sub-section 2 (A) of Section 10 of Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947) ("theAct " in short) ,the Central Government has referred the industrial dispute between the employers , in relation to the management of the Jawahar Navodaya Vidhyalaya and their workman, Shri Gunwant Ramchandra Dhore for adjudication, as per letter No. L-42012/69/2000- IR(DU) dated9-8-2000, with the following schedule:

का. आ. 2148,-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 (1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार जवाहर नवोदय विद्यालय के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच , अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औधोगिक अधिकरण , नागपुर के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या सी जी आई टी/ एन जी पी/237/2000 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 18-7-2011 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

"Whether the action ofthe management ofPrincipal, JawaharNavodaya Vidhyalaya, Talodhi (Balapur), Distt. , Chandrapur in terminating Sh. Gunwant Ramchandra Dhore , Ex Electrician , Jawahar NavodayaVidhyalaya is legal, proper and justified ? Ifnot, towhat relief the workman is entitled and fromwhich date ?"

[सं. एल-42012/69/2000- आई आर ( डी यू) ] जोहन तोपनो , अवर सचिव

New Delhi, the 18th July, 2011

2. Being noticed, the workman, Shri Gunwant Ramchandra Dhore ("the workman" in short) filed his statement of claim and the management of Jawahar Navodaya Vidhyalaya ("the Party No. 1 " in short )filedthe written statement.

S.O. 2148. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. CGIT/ NGP/ 237 / 2000 ) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum -Labour Court, Nagpur as shown in the Annexure, in the industrial dispute between the employers in relation to the management of Jawahar Navodaya Vidhyalaya and their workman, whichwas received bythe Central Government on 18-7-2011.

[No. L-42012/69/2000-IR (DU)] JOHAN TOPNO, Under Secy.

ANNEXURE

BEFORE SHRI J. P. CHAND , PRESIDING

OFFICER, CGIT-CUM-LABOUR COURT, NAGPUR

Date: 7-7-2011

CaseNo. CGIT/NGP/237/2000

PartyNo. 1:

ThePrincipal,

Jawahar Navodaya Vidhyalaya, Talodhi (Balapur),

Tah . Nagbhid,

Chandrapur (M.S. )

Versus

PartyNo. 2:

Shri Gunwant Ramchandra Dhore , Talodhi (Balapur),

Tah.Nagbhid,

Chandrapur

The case of the workman as per the statement of claim is that he passed his S.S.C. Examination in the year 1987 and also completed wireman's licence course from Bombay Board and he was appointed by the party No. 1 w.e.f. 14-8-91 in the capacity of electrician, but without issuance of any appointment order and he was in continuous service from the date of his appointment till 20-10-97, on which date, his services were terminatedby the party No. 1 and the nature ofwork, which was being performed by him is ofpermanent nature and he rendered his service very honestly and sincerely and experience certificates were issued to him by the party No. 1 on 19-8-93 and 28-10-96 and the party No. 1 is an industry and the provisions of the standing orders are also applicable to party No. 1, which have got overriding effect andby notifications dated 29-10-88 and 16-11-88, the Government had issued instructions in respect ofpayment ofwages to daily wage employees and vide letter dated 18-6-91 , comntunication was made by party No. 1 regarding creation and sanction ofpost of cook and helper and their pay scales , which clearly goes to show that the post against which he was appointed was clear, vacant and sanctioned post . The further case ofthe workman is that he was enrolled with the Employment Exchange and is qualified for consideration for appointment to the post of Electrician on regular basis after completion ofDiploma in Electrician from I.T.I. and the said work is available round the year with the party No. 1 and party No. 1 should have taken steps to get the post of Electrician sanctioned by sending proposal and his termination is not bonafide and the same was done by party No. I to deny him the benefits $876

[PART II- SEC. 3 ( ii ) ] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 13 , 2011 /SRAVANA 22 , 1933

ofpermanency and after termination of his services , the PartyNo. 1 gave appointment to one Mr. C. B. Sao on year toyear contract basis as an Electrician and the work is still available but he is not being provided with the work and as hehad completed more than 240 days of continuous service without any break, he had acquired the status of permanent employee and initially he was being paid Rs. 1000 per month as salary and his appointment on daily wages basis but payment of consolidated pay appears be contrary to the notification issued by the Government from time to time and instead of regularizing his services, the PartyNo. 1 issued a termination notice dated 20-9-97 , whereby his services were terminated w.e.f. 20-10-97 and before termination of his services , the mandatory provisions of sections 25 - F and 25 -G of the Act were not complied with and retrenchment compensation was not paidand oneMr. Diwakar Namdeo Shinde , who was junior to him was allowed to continue in service by Party No. 1 andwas promoted to the post ofHead Cook from the post ofHelper and several juniors were regularized by Party No. 1 to his exclusion and therefore , the termination ofhis service is illegal , arbitrary and void ab initio.

It is also pleaded by the workman that he had filed the complaint ULPA Complaint No. 134/97 before the Labour Court, Chandrapur and vide order dated 3-11-97 , he was permitted to withdraw the said complaint with libertytofile the complaint before the appropriate authority and therefore, he filed Writ Petition No. 811/98 before the Hon'ble High Court of Judicature at Mumbai , Bench at Nagpur and the Hon'ble Court vide order dated 8-9-99 disposed ofthe writ with liberty to raise the dispute before the appropriate authority and as such, he raised the dispute and accordingly, the reference was made by the Central Government. The workman has prayed for his reinstatement in service by setting aside the order of . termination dated 20-9-97 and to grant all consequential reliefs including backwages .

wasappointed was clear, vacant and sanctioned post . It is further pleaded by the party No. 1 that the workman was engaged as a casual worker as per the requirement of the mess and he had not completed more than 240 days of continuous service without any break and he had not acquired the status of permanent employee and vide communication letter dated 18-6-91 , posts of Cook and Helper were created and sanctioned in Navodaya Vidyalaya Mess but as the number of persons required for working in mess was more , additional persons were required to be engaged and as such few persons as per requirement were engaged as casual workers and their wages were paid out of the funds allocated under the head of" student's expenditures - Boarding and Lodging" and the workman was never engaged even as a casual daily rated worker in the mess either as a Cook or a Helper but he was engaged only for doing odd jobs, i.e. for repairing offurniture, electrical, water work etc. as and when required and the nature of work he was performing was not a continuous one and the workman failed to aver as to what type of work he was performing and at one hand, he has averred that he was in continuous service as an electrician and on the other hand, he has pleaded that vide communication dated 18-6-91 , posts of Cook and Helper were created and that the posts against which he was appointed was clear, vacant and sanctioned post and the workman was never appointed against any sanctioned post and he was engaged as a casual daily rated worker andMr. Diwakar Shende was appointed as a fresh recruitee to the post of Cook by scrupulously following the prescribed procedure and the workman was engaged for doing petty works on daily wages , for which he was paid out of the fund, which was collected from the students towards boarding and lodging expenses and at no point oftime, the workman was paid from the Consolidated Fund of India or as a matter of fact from the fund of the Vidyalaya and the engagement of the workman on dailywages basis cannot bestow him any right to claim reinstatement in a civil post debars the Recruitment Rules and procedure thereof and the Vidyalaya is governed by a set of Recruitment Rules and the workman was neither appointed nor engaged as per Recruitment Rules and there is no sanction post of Electrician, which is a Group ' C' post and the school is under the control of Ministry of Human Resources and the said Ministry has put a ban to the recruitment of daily wages employee and in view of the submissions , the workman is not entitled to any relief.

4. It is pertinent to mention here that on 10-2-2003 , an award was passed by the Tribunal for reinstatement of the workman in service from the date of termination i.e. 20-10-97 as a Class - IV employee , holding the order of termination of the services of the workman not to be legal andjustified. The Party No. 1 filed Writ Petition No. 3088 of2003 before the Hon'ble High Court of Judicature at Bombay, Nagpur Bench challenging the said award and 3. The Party No. 1 in its written statement pleaded Inter -alia that the workman was not in continuous service In the capacity ofElectrician w.e.f. 14-8-91 till 20-10-97 and the nature ofwork performed by him was not of permanent in nature . Party no . 1 has admitted about issuance of the experience certificates on 19-8-93 and 28-10-96 but pleaded that the same are not relevant for deciding the reference . It is further pleaded by Party No. 1 that Navodaya Vidyalaya is a school and the same being an educational institution is not an industry and the provisions of the standing orders having overriding effect is not applicable to it . It is admitted by the Party No. 1 that Government had issued notifications dated 20-10-88 and 16-11-88 having Instructions regarding payment of wages to daily wages employeesand issuance ofletter dated 18-6-91 by it stating that one post ofCook and one Helper have been created and sanctioned and their pay scales have been prescribed but has denied that the post against which , the workman 5877 भारत का राजपत्र : अगस्त 13, 2011 / श्रावण 22 , 1933

[ भाग II-खंड 3 ( ii ) ]

the Hon'ble Court vide order dated 6-2-2006 was pleased to quash and set aside the award dated 10-2-2003 and to direct to dispose of the reference afresh in accordance with law, after giving opportunity to all the sides.

It isnecessary to mention here that after remand of the reference , the Party No. 1 made certain amendments to the written statement and the workman also made amendment of the statement ofclaim to meet the changes made by the Party No. 1 in the written statement, by way ofamendment.

engaged as an Electrician on 14-8-1991 and he was in continuous service till the date of his termination on 20-10-1997 and he had completed 240 days of work in every calendar year from the date of his appointment and that the workman was in continuous service from 1-9-1993 to 28-10-1998 has also been proved by production of the experience certificate, which has been admitted by the witness for the Party No. 1 and as the workman had completed 240 days ofwork in the three years preceding his termination, his termination without compliance ofthe provisions as laid down in Sections 25 -F and 25-G of the Act is illegal and as such, the workman is entitled for reinstatement in service with continuity and back wages . In support of such contentions , reliance was placed on the decision reported in 1980 II LLJ - 72 ( Santosh Gupta versus State Bank of India) .

It is also necessary to mention here that even though, the parties had already led evidence , both oral and documentary, the workman examined himself as a witness in support ofhis claims and proved the documents, Exts . W- 7 to W- 18 . However, management did not adduce any fresh oral evidence and sticked to the oral evidence of their witness , K. Ramesh, who had already been examined prior to the remand of the reference.

8. In reply, it was submitted by the learned advocate forthe Party No. 1 that the workman was engaged on daily wages basis to do odd jobs and the wages was paid from school fund and as such, the workman cannot claim to be inpermanent employment ofParty No. 1 and the workman has admitted that he was not called for any interview and no selection process was undertaken, prior to his engagement, from which an inference can be drawn that the workman was engaged as a daily rated worker and question ofdrawing adverse inference for non production ofdocuments cannot be drawn against it as the workman was engaged to do odd works and as such, no muster roll was maintained and as the workman has produced the vouchers , under which , he was paid the wages . It was submitted that as the worker was a daily wager, he did not have the right for permanency or reinstatement or regularization . In- support of the contention, reliance has beenplaced on the decision reported in State of Karnataka versus Umadevi (2006, Vol . I, SCC- 1 ) . It was also submitted that as it is the admitted case that there is no post of Electrician, the Tribunal has no jurisdiction to direct the creation ofthe post and for reinstatement of the workman and the workman was paid from the student fund for the odd works , he was doing and as such he , was not a workman. In support of such contentions reliance was placed on the decisions reported in Union of India versus Chotelal , AIR 1999 SC - 376 and State of Haryana versus Navneet, 2008 V- II, SCC 65 .

5. The workman in his examination - in -chief, which is on affidavit, has reiterated the facts mentioned in the statement of claim. However, in the cross -examination , he has stated that Jawahar Vidyalaya is a residential school having a mess and he does not know from which fund the amount is paid for running the mess and he also does not know if the post of Cook was sanctioned in the year 1991. He has admitted that sometime the work ofElectrician was get done from him on daily wages and he as working as electrician-cum- waterman -cum -plumber and the post of Electrician or Plumber was not published in 1991 and he was alone when he was engaged and no interview was taken.He has further stated that the post of electrician is aGroup ' C' post and for appointment, there are rules. He has admitted that no order was given to him by the management and there was no written order for appointing him and he has no letter from Employment Exchange recommending his name and document , Ext . W- 18 is in respect ofDadar and Nagar Haveli . He has further stated that Mr. C. B. Sao was appointed on contract basis in the year 1997 and D. N. Shende was working as a Helper and Shende was promoted to the post of Head Cook from Helper and the post ofHead Cook is a Group ' D ' post and no personhad been regularized in the post of Electrician after his removal and the check, Ext . W- 17 was given to him in compliance to the order ofHon'ble High Court and he has not filed any voucher for the period from 1991 to 1997 showing payment to him.

6. The witness for the Party No. 1 in his examination- in-chief, which is also on affidavit, has reiterated the facts mentioned in the written statement. In his cross- examination, the witness for the Ist party has admitted the contents of experience certificate given in favour of the workman.

9. On perusal of the documents filed by the workman and the oral evidence adduced by the parties , it is found that the workman was engaged as a daily wage Electrician from 14-8-1991 to 14-12-1991 , 15-1-1992 to 30-4- 1992, 1-7-1992 to 14-12-1992 and 1-1-1993 to 30-4-1993 . It is also found that the workman was engaged on consolidated payment as Electrician from 1-3-1993 to 28-10-1996 with break from 15th December to 15th January and 1st May to June 30, every year.

7. At the time of argument , it was submitted by the learned advocate for the workman that the workman was

10. It is pertinent to mention here that the workman has claimed that he worked with Party No. 1 till 20-10-1997 5878

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 13, 2011 /SRAVANA 22 , 1933

[PART II Sec. 3 ( ii )]

New Delhi , the 20th July, 2011

S.O. 2149.-In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 239/ 2000) ofthe Central Government Industrial Tribunal -cum- Labour Court, Nagpur , as shown in the Annexure inthe industrial dispute between the employers in relation to the management of WCL and their workanan, which was received by the Central Government on 20-07-2011.

[No. L-22012/12/2000- IR(CM-II)] D. S. S. SRINIVASA RAO, DeskOfficer

ANNEXURE

and his service was terminated orally on 20-10-1997, without compliance of the provisions of Sections 25 -F and25-G of theAct . It is well settled that for applicationof theprovisions ofSection 25 -F of the Act the initial burden ofproof is on the workman to show that he had completed 240days ofservice, preceding the 12 calendar months of thedate ofthe alleged termination of service and the onus ofproofdoes not shift to employer nor is the burden of proof on the workman discharged , merely because employer fails to prove a defence or an alternative plea of abandonment of service and filing of affidavit of workman tothe effect that he had worked for 240 days continuously orthat the workman had made repeated representations or raised demands for reinstatement is not sufficient evidence that can discharge the said burden. Other substantive evidence needs to be adduced to prove 240 days continuous service.

BEFORE SHRI J.P. CHAND , PRESIDING OFFICER, CGIT-CUM-LABOURCOURT, NAGPUR

CaseNo. CGIT/NGP/239/2000 Date: 12-07-2011

PartyNo. 1:

Inthis case, though from the evidence adduced by the workman, it is found that he worked till 28-10-1996, there is no other evidence except the oral evidence of the workman on affidavit that he worked for 240 days in the preceding 12 months of 20-10-1997, the alleged date of termination ofhis service. So the question of application oftheprovisions ofSections 25 -F and25 -G does not arise.

The SubAreaManager, WCL, M/s.Western Coalfields Ltd. , Rayatwari Sub Area, PO:Rayatwari, Dist. Chandrapur, Chandrapur(M.S. )

Versus

PartyNo.2:

It isalso found from record that the appointment of the workmanwas not in accordance with the rules and he was engaged on daily wages basis . It is also clear that there was and is no post of Electrician in the school in question.Hence , there is no question of the reinstatement of the workman in service . From the facts and circumstances ofthe case, it is also found that the workman isnot entitled to any other relief. Hence , it is ordered:

ORDER

Shri Lomesh Maroti Khartad, President, National Colliery Workers Congress,AmbedkarWard, Ballarpur, Tehsil & Distt. , Chandrapur (M.S. )

AWARD (Dated: 12th July, 2011) The action of the management of Principal , Jawahar Navodaya. Vidhyalaya, Talodhi ( Balapur ) , Distt , Chandrapur in terminating Sh. Gunwant Ramchandra Dhore, Ex-Electrician, Jawahar Navodaya Vidhyalaya is legal, proper andjustified. The workman is not entitled to anyrelief.

J. P. CHAND, Presiding Officer

नई दिल्ली, 20 जुलाई , 2011

Inexercise of the powers conferredby clause (d) of sub-section ( 1 ) and sub-section 2 (A) of Section 10 of Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ("the Act " in short), the Central Government has referred the industrial dispute between the employers , in relation to the management of the Western Coalfields Ltd. and their workman, Shri Gulab Raghobaji Bhoyar for adjudication, as per letter No. L- 22012/ 12/2000 - IR(CM - II ) dated 04-08-2000, with the following schedule:

का. आ. 2149. औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में केन्द्रीय सरकार डब्ल्यू.सी.एल. के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच : अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण , नागपुर के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 239/2000 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 20-07-2011 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल-22012/ 12/2000- आई आर ( सी एम- II ) ] डी.एस.एस. श्रीनिवास राव , डेस्क अधिकारी

"Whether the action of the management namely Sub- AreaManager, Durgapur Rayatwari Colliery ofWCL, PO : & Distt . Chandrapur in dismissing Shri Gulab Raghobaji Bhoyar, Dresser, Durgapur Rayatwari Colliery is legal andjustified? Ifnot, to what relief the workman is entitled and from which date? What other directions are necessary in the matter ?" 5879

भारत का राजपत्र : अगस्त 13, 2011 /- श्रावण 22 , 1933

[ भाग II-खंड 3 ( ii ) ]

2. After the reference was received, notices were sentto the parties to file the statement of claim and written statement and in response to the notices , the union , National Colliery Workers Congress, ("the union" in short) filed the statement of claim on behalf of the workman, Shri Gulab Raghobaji Bhoyar (" the workman " in short ) and the management of W.C.L. ( " party No. 1 " in short ) filed the written statement .

only from 03-03-97 and the workman thereafter worked regularly and the absence of the workman from 17-08-96 to 19-02-97 was beyond his control and there was sufficient cause for the same , as he was hospitalized at Armorí and duringthe enquiry, the workman was forced by the enquiry officerto sign some papers and in the enquiry, the principles ofnatural justice were violated and proper procedure was not followed and documents filed by the workman were not taken into consideration and the report of the enquiry officer isbaised and not based on materials on record and theAuthorities did not apply their mind judiciously and passedthe order of dismissal in a mechanical manner and the workman was dismissed from services w.e.f. 05-05-97, asper the office order dated 05-05-97 ofManager , Durgapur Rayatwari Colliery and the appeal preferred bythe workman to the Chief General Manger but the same was rejected and the workman was not supplied with the copy ofthe enquiry report and the enquiry proceedings in utter disregard to the principles of natural justice and the provisions of S.O. 28.10 of the certified standing orders and he was also not served with the second show.cause notice before imposition of the capital punishment of dismissal and though the workman had sufficient documents in support of his contentions, the documents were stolen away in the theft committed in his house on 24-03-98 and theworkman reported the matter at Chandrapur CityPolice Station on 24-03-98. The union has prayedto set aside and quash the order of punishment imposed against the workman and to reinstate him in service with continuity and full back wages and other consequential benefits.

3. The party No. 1 in its written statement has pleaded inter-alia that the workman was working in Durgapur Rayatwari Colliery before being dismissed from service and he developed the habit of remaining unauthorised absent frequently and for his such conduct, he was warned several times and inspite of giving written assurance to improve his conduct, the workman did not do so and continued with his habit and from 17-08-96, he again remained unauthorized absent without sanctioned of leave and information to the management and for that he was charge sheeted vide charge sheet dated 1 /5-2-97 and he was asked to submit his explanation within 3 days of the receipt of the charge sheet and the workman submitted his explanation vide his letter No. 20-02-97 stating therein that due to undergoing stomach operation, he could not able to attend his duty from 17-08-96 and he did not send any intimation about the same to the management which was his mistake and as his explanation was found not to be satisfactory, an enquiry was constituted and one Shri R.G Gedam was appointed as the enquiry officer and the enquiry officer fixed the enquiry to 06-03-97 , after due intimation to the workman and the workman appeared in the enquiry with his co- worker and at the outset, the procedure of the enquiry was explained to the workman and he was asked as to whether he admits the charge or not and the workman The case of the workman as projected in the statement of claim is that the workman was initially appointed in July, 1984 as a " Badli Worker" and in view of his sincere, regular and loyal service throughout, he was made a permanent worker as General Mazdoor Category- I in 1986-87 and then he was promoted as Timber Mazdoor in category - III in 1988 and as driller and dresser category - IV in the year 1990-91 and in 1992, he started suffering from Appendicitis pain and other diseases, off and on and he underwent treatment in Chanda Rayatwari CollieryDispensary from 18-05-92 to 25-05-92 and even thereafter, as he was not well, his relatives took him to his native village and got him treated in the local government hospital, "Gramin Rugnalaya ", Armori and after number of pathological tests , it was found by the doctor that the workman was suffering from Acid peptic disease with duodenal ulcer and he was admitted in the hospital from 27-05-1992 to 06-04-93 for treatment and he was declared fit for duty from 07-04-93 and after his fitness , he suffered frompainand other complications, for which, he got himself treated at Chandrapur Area Hospital of WCL and the documents in regard to the treatment are available with the management and he was admitted in the said hospital on 12-06-95 and underwent Appendomy operation on 14-06-95 and he remained in the hospital from 12-06-95 to 19-06-95 and was advised to get "Review in O.P.D. " and rest and he was declared fit for duties from 28-07-95 , by the doctor ofthe said hospital on 24-07-95 and he joined duty thereafter andworked regularly, but as he was still suffering frompainoffand on, he was getting treatment from private doctors besides from the dispensary/hospital of WCL .. The further case of the union is that the workman again developed certain complications and his condition became critical , soworkman's father rushed him to the Government hospital "Gramin Rugnalaya" , Armori, where he was admitted for "Appendicular Deysegia with colitis " from 17-08-96 to 13-02-97 and he was declared fit for duty on 20-02-97 and when he came to join duty on 20-02-97, he was served with a vague charge sheet dated 1/5-2-97 under the signature of the Deputy Chief Mining Engineer/ Manager, Durgapur Rayatwari Colliery, under the provisions ofS.O. 26.04 and 26.30 ofthe certified standing orders for remaining absent from 17-08-96 without information and sanction of leave and without satisfactory reason and for habitual absenteeism and the workman was pressed to sign a reply prepared by one office clerk on 20-02-97 and even after submission of the reply, the workman was kept under illegal forced idleness and was allowed to join duty 5880

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: AUGUST 13 , 2011 /SRAVANA 22, 1933

[PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii ) ]

proved that prejudice was caused to the workman for the said reason and the workman is not entitled for any relief.

4.Asthis is a case ofdismissal ofthe workman from service, after holding a departmental enquiry, the validity of the departmental enquiry was taken as a preliminary issue for consideration and as per order dated 03-01-2007 , it was held by this Tribunal that the departmental enquiry held against the workman is legal and proper and in accordance with the principles of natural justice.

5. At the time of argument , it was submitted by the learned advocate for the workman that the workman was keptunder forced idleness which amounted to suspension from 20-02-97 to 2-3-97and as no subsistence allowance was paid to the workman the enquiry was vitiated . In support of such contentions, reliance was placed on the decisions, in the case of Depot Manager APSRTC vs. Labour Court III Hyderabad ( 2001 LAVI.C. 133 ) and Captain M. Paul Anthony Vs. Bharat Gold Mines , ( 1999 3 Supreme Court Cases679) . However, such contentions cannot be taken into consideration , as because there is no such pleading in the statement of claim and the points have beenraised for the first time at the stage of the argument. It isalso well settled that mere non -payment of subsistence allowance cannot be taken as a ground to hold that the enquiry is vitiated and it is to be pleaded and tobe proved that due to non -payment of subsistence allowance , prejudice was caused to the workman and for that he was not able to defend the case properly.

Itwas also contented by the learned advocate for the workman regarding the vagueness of the charges and non taking into consideration of the materials on recordby the enquiry officer and non supply ofthe enquiry reportto the workman. In this regard, it is to be mentioned here that most of the points raised by the learned advocate for the workman included the points mentioned above were considered by the Tribunal at the time of passing orders on the validity of the enquiry and were answered against theworkman.

admitted the charges and in view of the admission of the charges by the workman, the enquiry could have been closed but to give an opportunity to the workman to put up his defence, if any, the enquiry officer proceeded with the enquiry and the workman filed four medical certificates on record and the said certificates were marked as exhibits AW 1 to 4 and thereafter, the workman asked for adjournment of the enquiry till 10-03-97 to file some more documentskept in his home , but on 10-03-97 , neither the workman nor his co- worker attended the enquiry and in the interest ofjustice, the enquiry officer adjourned the enquiry to 12-03-97 and on 12-03-97, when then enquiry officer asked the workman to file further documents ifany, the workman stated that he could not able to locate the documents inspite of search and whatever documents hadbeen filed by him earlier were his documents and then theworkman examined himself in his defence and he was cross-examined by the management representative and thedocuments filed by the management representative were marked as exhibit No. 1 to 31 and in the cross - examination, the workman admitted to have remained absent from 17-08-96 without leave and without intimation to the management but he gave reasons for his absence and the say ofthe co -worker of the workman was also recorded on 20-03-97 and thereafter, the enquiry was closed by the enquiry officer with the consent of the parties and the enquiry officer submitted his report on 06-04-97 , holding theworkman guilty of the charges and the enquiry officer analyzed the materials on record to arrive at the findings and his report was based on the materials on record and considering the seriousness of the misconduct , it was decidedto dismiss the workman from service and after obtaining approval from the competent authority, the workman was dismissed from service w.e.f. 05-05-97 and the dismissal of the workman from service is perfectly justified and lawful in view of the proved misconduct , - which was of repetitive and serious in nature . It is also pleadedby the party No. 1 that the workman never informed the management about the alleged sickness or applied for any leave or sent any document and the alleged documents appear to be manipulated and it is (Party No. 1) not aware that the show cause filed by the workman was written by any clerk and he was pressed to sign the same and the worknian never complained to the management in this regard and during enquiry, he admitted to have submitted his reply to the charge sheet and as regard the double punishment , the same is misconceived and wrong and the enquiry was held in a fair and proper manner by observing theprinciples of natural justice and the workman was never forced to sign any document during the enquiry by the enquriy officer and the workman attended the enquiry with his co-worker and fully participated in the enquiry and both of them had also signed the proceedings. It is also pleaded by the party No. 1 that even when the copy ofthe enquiry report was not supplied, the action of the employer would not be nullified unless it is pleaded and

6. On the other hand , it was submitted by the learned advocate for the management that the workman in his statement of claim has not challenged regarding the perversity of the findings of the enquiry officer and the proportionality of the punishment and as such, both the issues are to be answered in favour of party No. 1 and the findings of the enquiry officer are based on the evidence onrecord and not on any extraneous matter and the enquiry officer has analyzed the evidence on record and the quantum of punishment cannot be said to be shockingly disproportionate to the proved misconduct against the workman in a legal departmental proceeding and it is well settledby the Hon'ble Apex Court in number of decisions thatunless and until it is found by the Tribunal that the punishment imposed is shockingly disproportionate to the charge, there should not be any interference with the 5881

भारत का राजपत्र : अगस्त 13 , 2011/ श्रावण 22, 1933

[ भाग II-खंड 3 ( ii ) ]

ofclaim and no chance was given to the management to meet such contention . Hence the same cannot be taken in consideration . Therefore , it is ordered:

ORDER

punishment by the Tribunal or any other judicial bodies . In support of such contentions , reliance was placed on the decisions reported in 2001 LABI.C. 2367 ( S. Rahimuddin vs.Director General CSIR) , AIR 1972 Supreme Court 2181 (M/s. TheBenarus Electric Light Power Co. Ltd. appellant Vs. Labour Court No. 2. Lucknow) , 2008 LABI.C. 415 (M/s. L&T Komatsu Ltd. Vs. N. Uday Kumar ) & some other decisions .

The action of the management namely Sub Area Manager, Durgapur Rayatwari Colliery of WCL, PO : & Distt. Chandrapur in dismissing Shri Gulab Raghobaji Bhoyar, Dresser, Durgapur Rayatwari Colliery is legal and justified. The workman is not entitled to any relief.

J.P. CHAND, Presiding Officer

नई दिल्ली, 20 जुलाई, 2011 7. Perused the record. Taking into consideration the materials on record and the submissions made by the learned advocates for the parties and so also the principles enunciated by the Hon'ble Courts in the decisions on which reliance has been placed by the parties, it is found that the findings of the enquiry officer are not perversed as the findings of the enquiry officer are based on the evidence on record and he has assigned reasons in support ofsuch findings .

का.आ. 2150.-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 (1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में केन्द्रीय सरकार सी. जवाहर नवोदय विद्यालय के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण , नागपुर के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 185/2002 ) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 20-07-2011 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल -42012 /117/2001- आई आर (सी एम- II ) ] डी.एस.एस. श्रीनिवास राव , डेस्क अधिकारी

NewDelhi, the 20th July, 2011 At this juncture, I think it pertinent to mention that the workman in his show cause and so also in his statement given in the departmental enquiry has admitted about his remaining absent from duty from 17-08-96 to 19-02-97 without any intimation to the management or sanction of leave.According to the workman , he was admitted in the hospital at Armori . In support of such claim , he has filed document W-9 . On perusal the document, W-9 , it is found that the claim of the workman is not true . W- 9 is not a dischargecertificate as claimed by the workman. It is found that the same is a medical certificate issued by the medical superintendent, Rural Hospital Armori and according to the said certificate, the workman was an outdoor patient in the said hospital from 17-08-96 to 19-02-97. No other document has been filed by the workman in support of the claim of his illness and admission in the hospital as an indoor patient from 17-08-96 to 19-02-97. Hence it is found that the findings of the enquiry officer are not perversed.

S.O. 2150.- In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 185/ 2002) ofthe Central Government Industrial Tribunal -cum- Labour Court, Nagpur, as shown in the Annexure in the industrial dispute between the management of Jawahar Navodaya Vidyalaya, Navodaya Vidyalaya Samittee and their workman, which was received by the Central Government on 20-07-2011 .

[No. L-42012/ 117/2001 -IR (CM -II)] D. S. S. SRINIVASA RAO, Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

BEFORE SHRI J.P. CHAND , PRESIDING OFFICER, CGIT-CUM-LABOUR COURT, NAGPUR Inthis case, the charge of unauthorized absence of theworkman has been proved in an enquiry, which was fair and proper and in accordance with the principles ofnatural justice.Applying the principles enunciated by the Hon'ble ApexCourt in the decision reported in 2008 LAB I.C. 415 (Supra) to the present case in hand, it is found that the punishment is not shockingly disproportionate andas such, there is ground to interfere with the punishr ent .

CaseNo. CGIT/NGP/185/2002 Date: 07-07-2011

PartyNo. 1(a):

ThePrincipal, Jawahar Navodaya Vidyalaya, Washim (M.S. ) .

1(b) : The Dy. Director, NavodayaVidyalaya Samittee, Regional Office , Kothrude, Pune (M.S. )

The learned advocate for the workman has mentioned in the written notes of argument that approval of the Appellate Authority was taken by the Disciplinary Authority for imposing the punishment of dismissal from service against the workman and therefore the order of punishment can be said to be passed by the Appellate Authorityand thereby the workman was deprived offrom filing a valid appeal to the Appellate Authority and his right to file an appeal became in fructuous . However, such contention was raised for the first time in the written notes ofargument. Such a pleading was not taken in the statement 5882

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 13 , 2011 /SRAVANA 22, 1933

[PART II-Sac. 3(ii ) ] 1(c) : The Secretary, NavodayaVidyalaya Samittee, Manav SansadhanVikas Mantralaya, (EducationDeptt. ), Govt. of India, NewDelhi

Versus

PartyNo. 2:

crook andultimately without issuing any notice or following theprocedure laid down by law, illegally and arbitrarily terminatedhis service w.e.f. 01-07-1999 and there are still vacancyofdifferent posts including mess -helper and many juniorshave also been engaged in the posts . Theworkman has prayed to quash and set aside the oral termination of his service and to reinstate him in service with continuity and full backwages.

Shri Vasant PundalikaGore, RisodNaka, PO/Taluka/Distt. Washim, Washim (M.S.)

AWARD

(Dated:7th July, 2011)

3. The Party No. 1 in its written statement refuting the allegations made in the statement of claim has pleaded that it is a registered society and as per gazette notification dated 17-02-1998, the society has been brought within purviewandjurisdiction of Central Administrative Tribunal andas such the Industrial Tribunal has no jurisdiction and the workman was engaged on daily wages basis as and whenwork was available and as no work was available, the engagement ofthe workman was discontinued and as such, hehas no right to claim regularization .

4.It is necessary to mention here that after filing of thewritten statement by the Party No. 1, the workmanwas directed to file rejoinder if any but neither he filed any rejoinder nor appeared in the case after 18-07-2006.

In exercise of the powers conferred by clause (d) of sub -section ( 1) and sub -section 2( A) of Section 10 of Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ("the Act" in short), the Central Government has referred the industrial dispute between the employers , in relation to the management ofthe Jawahar NavodayaVidyalaya and their workman, Shri Vasant Pundalik Gore for adjudication, as per letter No. L -42012/ 117/2001 - IR (CM - II ) dated 22-05-2002, with the following schedule:

Whether the action of the management ofJawahar NavodayaVidhyalaya through its principal , Washim Inorally terminating the services of Shri Vasant PundalikGore w.e.f. 01-07-1999 is legal andjustified? Ifnot, to what relief the said workman is entitled to ?"

5. As the workman claimed to have worked continuously from 01-03-1996 to 01-07-1999 and the Party No. 1 denied the same , the initial burden was on the workman toprove that he was engaged for more than 240 daysbyParty No. 1 in the preceding 12 months of the date ofalleged termination i.e. 01-07-1999. However , in this case, except the claim petition , the workman has not produced any evidence in support ofhis claim . As the workmanhas failedtodischarge the initial burden , he is not entitled for any relief. Hence it is ordered:

ORDER

2. Being noticed by the Tribunal to file their respective statement of claim and written statement, the worknaan, Vasant ("the workman in short" ) filed his statement of claim and the management of Navodaya Vidyalaya ("the Party No. 1 in short") filed its written statement respectively.

The action ofthe management of Jawahar Navodaya Vidyalaya through its Principal , Washim in orally terminating the services of Shri Vasant Pundalik Gore w.e.f. 01-07-1999 is legal and justified . The workman is not entitied foranyrelief.

J.P. CHAND, PresidingOfficer

नई दिल्ली , 20 जुलाई , 2011

का.आ. 2151.-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 (1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में केन्द्रीय सरकार सी. एम.पी. एण्ड डी.आई.एल. के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच , अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण , नागपुर के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 124/2003 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 20-07-2011 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

Theworkman in his statement of claim has pleaded inter-aliathat he was engagedby the PartyNo. 1 initiallyas amess-helper w.e.f. 01-03-1996 and worked continuously till01-07-1999, when he was illegally terminated from service byPartyNo. 1 orally and his elder brother, Gajanan Pundalik Gorewas alsoworking with Party No. 1 and while working with party No. 1 , in 1997, his brother met with an accident and subsequently died and as wife of Gajanan, and he himselfweredependent on Gajanan, Party No. 1 again gave him appointment on compassionate ground on 07-04-1997 asmess-helper and he was illegally terminated by Party No. 1 on 01-07-1999 and he worked with Party No. 1 continuously forthree years without any break and as one Shri BS. Tambe, a mess-helper made a complaint against thethen Principal for harassment and cited him as a witness in the enquiry against the Principal, the Principal bare grudge against him and decided to oust him by hook and

[सं. एल -22012/ 163/2002- आई आर (सी एम- II ) ] डी.एस.एस. श्रीनिवास राव , डेस्क अधिकारी 5883 भारत का राजपत्र : अगस्त 13 , 2011 / श्रावण 22, 1933

[ भाग II-खंड 3 ( ii ) ]

NewDelhi , the 20th July,2011.

not providing proper representation to the Koyla Udhyog Kamgar Sanghatan, a registered tradeunion inthe bi -partite committees such as JCM, Housing Committees and Welfare Committees operating in CMPDI along with other two registered unions is justified, proper and legal ? If not, to what reliefthe said Koyla Udhyog Kamgar Sangathan entitled?" S.O. 2151. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 124/ 2003) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal -cum- Labour Court , Nagpur , as shown in the Annexure in the industrial dispute between the management of Central Mines Planning & Design Institute Limited, and their workman, which was received by the Central Government on 20-07-2011.

[No. L - 22012/ 163/2002 - IR ( CM-II) ]

D. S. S. SRINIVASA RAO, Desk Officer

2.Being noticed, the union, Koyla Udhyog Kamgar Sangathan (KUKS ) , (" the union " in short ) through its secretary filed its statement of claim and the management of the Central Mine Planning and Design Institute Ltd. [" the party No. 1 (b) in short " ] filed its written statement.

ANNEXURE

BEFORE SHRI J. P. CHAND , PRESIDING OFFICER, CGIT-CUM -LABOUR COURT, NAGPUR

Case No. CGIT/NGP/ 124/2003

Date: 01-07-2011

PartyNo. 1(a) :

3. The case ofthe union as presented in the statement ofclaim is that it is registered under the Trade Union Act, 1926 and is representing several employees working under the control ofParty No. 1 (a) and the Party No. 1 (b) is also registered under the Companies Act, 1956 and under the rules framed and circular issued by the Govt . of India, there is no recognized union operating at the Party No. 1(a) and (b) industry and all the unions operating at Party Union of India, Ministry of Coal ,

Shastri Bhawan,

AWing, 3rd Floor , New Delhi - 110001 Through its Secretary.

(b) : Central Mine Planning and Design

Institute Limited, Jaripatka,

KasturbaNagar ,

Nagpur-440014-

Through its Regional Director

Versus

PartyNo. 2:

KoylaUdhyog Kamgar ,

Sanghathan (KUKS ) , S/87, Bharat Nagar, Nagpur, Through its Secretary.

AWARD

(Dated: 1st July, 2011 )

No. 1's industry have got equal status and in absence of recognized unions, Party No. 1 has got no right to invite any particular union for negotiation and the same is an unfair Labour practice covered under. Vth Schedule ofthe Act, and amounts to showing favouritism to one set or workers, who joined a particular union and in view of such matter, it raised the dispute before the Regional Labour Commissioner (Central ) , Nagpur. The further case ofthe union is that it had written to the management of Party No. 1(b) for discussion with it for giving representation in all the Committees like JCM, Welfare Committee, Housing Committee etc. but the Party No. 1(b) did not reply and besides it, there are two other unions , namely, National Coal Organization Employees Association (NCOEA ) affiliated to CITU and Rashtriya Colliery Mazdoor Sangh (RCMS) affiliated to INTUC and majority of the employees are its members but in spite of the same, the management did not consider its membership for giving proper representation in different committees , which is against the Trade Union Act and violation of the principles of natural justice and giving representation to two unions and not to one union is discriminatory, unjust , illegal and violation ofthe principles of maintaining the relationship ofemployer and employee and the party No. 1 (b) did not invite it to attend the meeting of the joint consultative In exercise of the powers conferred by clause (d) of sub-section ( 1 ) and sub -section 2 (A) of Section 10 of Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947) (" the Act" in short ) , the Central Government has referred the industrial dispute between the employers , in relation to the management of the Central Mines Planning and Design Institute Limited and their workman for adjudication, vide letter No. L -22012/ 163/2002 - IR(CM- II) dated 8-5-2003, with the following schedule:

SCHEDULE

committee and welfare committee held on 20-12-2001 at 3 p.m. , but invited the other two unions and thus meted out gross injustice to it and it is entitled for representing the employees in JCC and other committees and the Party No. 1 has no right to have any discriminatory treatment against it . The union has prayed for a direction to provide facilityto it to represent in all bodies, wherever other unions are invited and other interim reliefs during the pendency of the reference.

"Whether the action of the management of CMPDI , through its Regional Director, Jaripatka, Nagpur in 5884

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 13 , 2011/ SRAVANA 22 , 1933

[PART II-SEC.3 (ii) ]

Unions are not allowed to participate in Coal India and CMPDI and Coal India are adopting the said practice though they are not recognized Unions and NCOEA and RCMS are also participating though they are recognized Unions and her union is not affiliate to any Central Trade Unions and the five Central Trade Unions along with their affiliated Unions are only allowed to participate in Coal India and CMPDI .

6. Thewitness for the Party No. 1(b) in her evidence, which is on affidavit has also reiterated the facts mentioned in the written statement. However, the evidence of this witness has not been seriously challenged in the cross- examination.

7. It was submitted by the learned advocate for the petitioner that the union is a registered Union and there is no recognized union operating in the industry of Party No. 1 and the Party No. 1 cannot show partiality or favour to any Union in view of item No. 2 ofSchedule V of the Act and the Union by its letter dated 24-04- 2002 requested to give its representation in all the committees but Party No. 1 did not give any reply to the same and Union also sent a notice on 24-07-2002 in that regard and the union was not invited to attend the meeting held on 22-12-2001 , whereas , the other two unions were invited to attend the said meeting , which was an unfair labour practice under Schedule V of the Act and about non inviting the union for negotiation , where there is no legally recognized Union was consideredby the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the judgment reported in 1986 LIC , 253 - MSRTC versus Maharashtra Motor Kamgar Federation and therefore thereference is to be answered in the affirmative.

4. In its written statement , the Party No. 1(b) has pleaded inter alia that there is no industrial dispute what so ever and the union has failed to point out the nature of dispute which exists , by which any of its workman has been affected in any manner and by not allowing the union to participate, it has not committed any wrong resulting into an industrial dispute and it does not have any knowledge as to whether the union is a registered union and the Govt . of India under the Ministry of Coal has framed a joint bipartite committee for the coal Industry i.e. JBCCI for negotiating the service conditions of the employees and the representative of the management of Coal Industry and five Central Trade Unions , INTUC , AITUC , CITU , HMS and BMS and representative of Ministry of Coal participate for the purposes of discussion of all matters relating to the industry and the employees of Coal Industry and in view of formation of JBCCI and the general adopted practice of its holding company, the aforesaid five unions are generally treated as recognized unions and all the unions affiliated to the aforesaid five unions are allowed to participate in the meetings and accordingly it also (Party No. 1 (b) invites the above five unions and unions which are affiliated to the said five unions and as the union is not affiliated to any of the aforesaid five unions, the union is not invited to participate in the meetings and the act of its not calling the union for participation is not an unfair labour practice as covered under Vth Schedule of the Act . It is further pleadedby the Party No. 1 (b) that the Secretary of the union was expelled by the Central Committee ofCITU from primary membership of NCOEA and CITU for her antiparty activities and as such, she has formed the union and it has not showing any kind of favouritism to one set of workers by not inviting the union and as such , the union has no right of representation in any of its activities .

5. Parties have led oral evidence in support of their respective claims , besides relying on documentary . evidence . Ms. V. Chandra, the secretary of the Union has been examined as a witness on behalf of the Union . The Personnel Manager of Party No. 1(b) , Mrs. Santama John has been examined as a witness on behalf of the irarty Nool (b)

8. In reply, it was submitted by the learned advocate for the Party No. 1(b) that there is no industrial dispute, as the union has failed to point out the nature ofthe dispute that exists , by which any of the workman hasbeen affected in any manner and the Hon'bleApex Court in the decision reported in (2000) 1 SCC-371 (National Engineering Industries Ltd. versus State of Rajasthan) have held that, " Existence of apprehension of industrial dispute is a condition precedent for a reference" and as there is no dispute, the reference is liable to be rejected summarily and JBCCI has been formedby the Govt of India which is ajoint Bi -partite Committee for the Coal Industry for negotiating the service conditions ofemployees and the representatives offive Central Unions , INTUC, AITUC, CITU, HMS and EMS participate in the discussion of all the matters relating to the industry and its employees and in view offormation of JBCC and the general adopted practice ofthe holding company of Party No. 1(b), the aforesaid five unions are generally treated as the recognized Unions and all the Unions which are affiliated to the Thewitness for the union in her examination - in -chief has reiterated the facts mentioned in the statement ofclaim and has further stated that the reply filed by Party No. 1 (b) is contrary to the instructions of Central Management of Party No. 1(b) . However, in her cross -examion, she admitted that in the Ministry of Coal, there are five Central Trade Unions, namely, INTUC, CITU , AITUC , HMS an BMS and the said five Central Trade Unions and Unions has affiliated to said five Unions are alone to participate in Coal India and in CMPDI and the aforesaid five Central Trade Unions and the affiliated trade unions are participating and Union not affiliated to the said Central 5885 भारत का राजपत्र... अगस्त 13 , 2011/ श्रावण 22 , 1933

[ भाग II-खंड 3 ( ii ) ]

aforesaid five unions are allowed to participate in the meetings and as such in not inviting the union for participation cannot be termed as unfair labour practice and the Secretary of the Union is very much aware about the generally adopted practice and as such, the reference is to be answered in negative.

9. The first question to be considered in this case is as to whether the dispute in question can be said to be an industrial dispute.

unions . The witness has also admitted that her union is not affiliated to any Central Union. " When the witness has admitted that only unions affiliated to the five Central Trade Unions are being invited to participate in the meetings and the committees and her union is not affiliated to any of the said five Central Trade Unions , it cannot be said that the Party No. 1 adopted any unfair labour practice. As the facts and circumstances of the presentcase at hand are quite different from the facts and circumstances ofthe case mentioned in the decision 1986 LIC-253 (supra) where the allegations were also that the management was allowing other unions to affix notices on the notice board of the establishment and collecting union fund including monthly subscription from their members within the premises of the establishment , with respect, I am ofthe opinion that the said decision has no application to the present case . Hence it is ordered:

ORDER

Section 2 (k) of the Act provides the definition of " Industrial dispute " . According to the said definition, " industrial dispute means any dispute or difference between employers and employers , or between employers and workmen, or between workmen and workmen, which is connected with the employment ofthe non -employment or the terms of the employment or with the conditions of labour, if any person. " The definition of " industrial dispute " does not include any dispute between union and the management . In this case, the only allegation of the union is that the Party No. 1 did not invite it to attend the meeting held on 22-12-2001 . The dispute raised by the union cannot be said tobe an industrial dispute and the same is not coming within the defintion of" industrial dispute ".

The action ofthe managment of CMPDI, through its Regional Director, Jaripatka, Nagpur in not providing proper representation to the Koyla Udhyog Kamgar Sangathan, a registered trade union in the Bipartite Committees such as JCM, Housing Committees and Welfare Committees operating in CMPDI along with other two registered Unions is justified, proper and legal . The Union , Koyla Udhyog Kamgar Sangathan is not entitled foranyrelief.

J. P. CHAND, Presiding Officer 10. The next point for consideration is whether the Party No. 1 (b ) adopted unfair labour practice in view of Item No. 2 of the Fifth Schedule ofthe Act . Item No. 2 of the Fifth Schedule reads as follows:

नई दिल्ली, 20 जुलाई , 2011

"To dominate, interfere with or contribute support, financial or otherwise, to any trade union, that is to say,-

(a) an employer taking any active interest in organizing a trade union of his workmen, and

का. आ. 2152.-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 (1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में केन्द्रीय सरकार बी.बी.एम.बी. के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालय , नं. 2, चण्डीगढ़ के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 123/2005, 209/2005, 233/2005 एवं 245/2005 , ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 20-07-2011 को प्राप्त हुआ था । (b) an employer showing partiality or granting favour to one ofseveral trade unions attempting to organize his workmen or to its members, where such a trade union is not a recognized trade union. "

[सं. एल -23012/24/2004- आई आर ( सी- II ) ,

सं. एल-23012/32/2004- आई आर (सी- II ) ,

सं. एल-23012/70/2004- आई आर ( सी- II ) ,

सं. एल-23012/61 /2004- आई आर ( सी- II ) ]

डी. एस. एस. श्रीनिवास राव, डेस्क अधिकारी

NewDelhi , the 20th July, 2011

S.O. 2152.-In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 123/2005, 209/2005, 233/2005, & 245/2005 ) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum- Labour Court No. 2, Chandigarh, as shown in the Annexure in the industrial dispute between the employers in relation to the management of BBMB and As it is already mentioned earlier that in this case, the only dispute is about the management not inviting the union to attend the meetings , where as other two unions , which are also not recognized unions are being invited. It is necessary to mention here that the witness for the union, who is the secretary herself, has stated that " It is true to say that all the five Central Trade Unions and their affiliated unions are alone to participate in Coal India. It is true to say that similarly in CMPDI the aforesaid 5 Central Unions and its affiliated trade unions are participating. It is true that unions not affiliated to the Central Unions are not allowed to participate in Coal India and CMPDI . " It is true that Coal India and CMPDI are adopting this practice though they are not recognized 5886

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: AUGUST 13 , 2011 /SRAVANA 22, 1933

their workman, which was received by the Central Government on 20-07-2011 .

[No. L-23012/24/2004- IR (C- II),

No. L-23012/32/2004- IR (C- II),

No. L-23012/70/2004 -IR (C- II),

No. L-23012/61/2004-IR (C- II)] D. S. S. SRINIVASA RAO, Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

IN THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM- LABOUR COURT-IL, CHANDIGARH CampCourt at Sunder Nagar, Distt . Mandi (H.P. ) PRESENT:

Sri A. K. RASTOGI, Presiding Officer CaseNo. IDNo. 123 of2005 Registered on 19-7-2005

Sh. Kali Das S/o Sh. Safi Ram, C/o Sh. HemPrabh S/o Sh. Bali Ram, R/oVillage Bhayarta, P.O. Chanahan, Teh. & Distt. , Mandi (HP)

CaseNo. ID No. 209 of2005 Registered on 3-8-2005

Sh . Ram Singh S/o Sh. Hilnu, C/o Sh. Hem Prabh S/o Sh. Bali Ram, R/oVillage Bhayarta, P.O. Chanahan, Teh . & Distt. Mandi (HP)

ID No. 233 of 2005

Registered on 5-8-2005

Sh. Tara Chand S/o Sh. Hukam Chand, C/o Sh. Hem Prabha S/o Sh. Bali Ram, R/oVillage Bhayarta, P.O. Chanahan, Teh.&Distt. Mandi (H.P. )

CaseNo. ID No. 245 of 2005 Registered on 5-8-2005

Sh. Bhagat Ram S/o Sh. Madhu Ram, C/o Sh. HemPrabh S/o Sh. Bali Ram, R/oVillage Bhayarta, P.O. Chanahan, Teh. &Distt. Mandi (H.P. )

[PART II-SEC. 3 (ii)] 2. The Chief Engineer,

BSL Project, Sunder Nagar Township , Distt. Mandi (H.P. )

...Respondents

APPEARANCES

Forthe Workmen

: None

For the Management :Sh. Ravinder Singh, LawOfficer

AWARD

Passed on 24th June, 2011

The Central Government vide Notification No. L-23012/24/sx2004- IR(CM- II), L- 23012/32/2004- IR(CM- II), L-23012/70/200- IR(CM-II) and L-23012/61/2004- IR (CM - II) all dated 7-7-2005 under Section 10 sub-section 1 Clause (d) and sub - section (2A) of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947has referred to this Tribunal the question ofthe legality and justification of the demand of the above detailed workmen for their reinstatement in the service ofBBMB Sunder Nagar, for adjudication.

Applicants

Versus

1. The Chairman,

BhakraBeas ManagementBoard, Madhya Marg, Sector-19B, Chandigarh.

Notices were issued to the parties after receiving the reference and they put in their appearances . But subsequently the proceedings remained stayed erroneously on account of the Order dated 24th September, 2007 of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in SLP No. 16939 to 17007 of2007 for quite some time. The present Presiding Officer after taking charge found that the Apex Court had stayed69 cases only but the proceedings are stayed in 78 cases pending in this Court . Management was asked to submit the list of69 stayed cases .Management submitted the list whereupon it was found that the proceedings in the above noted four cases are not stayed. Hence notices were issued to workmen by registered post on 18-5-2011 fixing 24-6-2011 for their appearance at Camp Court, Sunder Nagar, Distt. Mandi as the address given in the reference was that ofDistt . Mandi . But the workmen did not turn up and the notice sent to them by registered post returned with the postal remark that the address of the concerned workmen is not known to Sh. Hem Prabh, through whom the notices were to be served on the workmen as per address given in the reference. Under these circumstances it could not be possible to contact the workmen. In the beginning they had appeared in the case . Sh . Tara Chand and Sh . Kalidas had not filed their claim statements even, As the workmen are not available at the given address and their further whereabouts are also not known the above references are answered against them . One copy ofAward be placed on the record of the related IDs each and two copies of the Award be sent to Central Government for further necessary action .

ASHOK KUMAR RASTOGI, Presiding Officer 5887

भारत का राजपत्र : अगस्त13 , 2011/ श्रावण 22 , 1933

[भाग II-खंड 3 ( ii ) ]

नई दिल्ली, 20 जुलाई , 2011

Onbehalfofthe : Mr. D.K. Verma, Advocate employers

Industry: Coal

State: Jharkhand

Dhanbad, the 11th July, 2011

ORDER

का.आ. 2153.-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 (1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में केन्द्रीय सरकार बी.सी.सी.एल. के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालय , धनबाद नं. 2 , के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 65/2001 ) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 20-07-2011 कोप्राप्त हुआ था !

TheGovernment of India, Ministry ofLabour, in exercise ofthe 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- 20012/979/ 2000- IR (C-I) , dated, the 19th February, 2001.

[सं. एल-20012/979/2000- आई आर ( सी-1 ) ] डी.एस.एस. श्रीनिवास राव, डेस्क अधिकारी

SCHEDULE

NewDelhi, the 20thJuly, 2011

"Whether the action of Project Officer, Sudamdih CoalWashery, Dist. Dhanbad, in not regularising Sri Baldeo Rajak and Shri Devanand Tiwari in Clerical Cadre is justified? If not, to what relief are the said workmen entitled and from what date ?" S.O. 2153. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 65/ 2001) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal- cum-Labour Court No. 2, Dhanbad, as shown in the Annexure in the industrial dispute between the employers in relation to the management of M/s . BCCL, and their workman, which was received by the Central Government on 20-07-2011 .

[No. L- 20012/979/2000-IR(C-I)]

D. S. S. SRINIVASA RAO , Desk Officer

2. Today both the workmen Baldeo Rajak and Devanand Tiwari are present and pressed their petition filed on 25-2-09 under the signature of Shri Nitai Mahato , theCentral Secretary of the Union concerned for passing 'Nodispute' Award as the matter has been settled with the management for their regularisation as Grade- III Clerk subject to the withdrawal of this case . Mr. D.K. Verma, Ld. Advocate for the management is present who expressed no objection to it.

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNALNO.2 AT DHANBAD

PRESENT

Shri Kishori Ram, PresidingOfficer

Inthematter ofan Industrial Dispute under Section10 (1)(d) ofthe I.D. Act, 1947.

Reference No. 65 of 2001

PARTIES :

Employers in relation to the management of M/s. BCCL and their workman

APPEARANCES:

3. Perused the case record I find that the case as per schedule relates to their non - regularisation in the Clerical Grade, has been pending for the evidence of theworkman since 9-4-2004, though WW- 1 Baldeo Rajak was examined in behalf of the Union on 29-9-2005. Meanwhile the management as per letter dt. 19/20-02- 2009 has offered both these workmen for their regularisation as Grade - III Clerk provided that they withdraw the case . The Management by the letter has sought from the workmen their Matriculation Certificate and all educational certificates with their No Objection on their behalf to the acceptance of the Clerical Grade- III and the wages thereof. Since the present industrial dispute has been materialised and settled by the management with both the workmen, no longer the industrial dispute exists . Under these circumstances , the present industrial dispute being referred by the Labour Ministry cannot be withdrawn rather it may be closed in order to respond it in the terms of the aforesaid settlement between both the parties . Hence the case is closed and accordingly order is passed.

Onbehalfofthe

workmen

KISHORI RAM, Presiding Officer : Sri Baldeo Rajak and Sri Devanand Tiwari, concerned workmen themselves.

5888

THEGAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 13 , 2011 /SRAVANA 22, 1933

[PART II-SBC. 3( ii)] नईदिल्ली, 20 जुलाई , 2011

10(1 )( d) of the I.D. Act, 1947 has referred the following dispute to this Tribunal for adjudication vide their Order No. L-20012/85/96- IR (C-I), dated 1-5-97.

SCHEDULE

का.आ. 2154.-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार बी.सी.सी.एल. के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालय , धनबाद नं. 2 के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 55/1997 को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 20-7-2011 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

"Whether the demand of the Union for the regularisation of the services ofSh. Biswajit Dubey Goswamy as Store Keeper and Shri Rajesh Chauhan asStoreClerk in Clerical Gr. II with retrospective ellect with all fringe benefits is justified ? If so, to what releifare the concerned workmen entitled?" [सं. एल-20012/85/1996- आई आर ( सी-1 ) ] डी.एस.एस. श्रीनिवास राव , डेस्क अधिकारी

New Delhi , the 20th July, 2011

S.O. 2154. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 55/1997) ofthe Central Government Industrial Tribunal -cum -Labour Court-2, Dhanbad, as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of M/ s . BCCL, and their workman, whichwas received by the Central Government on 20-7-2011 .

[No. L-20012/85/1996-IR (C -I) ] D. S. S. SRINIVASA RAO, Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL NO. 2, AT DHANBAD

PRESENT :

Shri Kishori Ram, Presiding Officer

2. The case of the sponsoring Union as stated on the Written Statement is that the workmen concerned were permanent employees of Barora Coal Washery of M/s . BCCL, since their appointment as Category I Mazdoor on May, 1994. As per the Office Order dt . 12-5-94 of the Project Officer Workmen Biswajit Dubey Goswami and Rajesh Chauhan as Store Clerk and Clerk respectively have beenworking in Time Office as well as on the Weigh Bridge since then. Firstly, after interviewing and finding them competent they were deputed by the Project Officer for three months by that order. On their request for regularisation or reversion to their original jobs, the Project Officer directed them to continue in the job ofClericalGrade till further order. The management also assured them to take up it with the Personnel Manager of Central Coal WasheryOrganisation. On completion of requisite numbers of days they represented to the Management for their regularisation with proper pay scale and grade in Clerical Grade II as per their job performance with. But the Management did not regularise them so. On the failure of the conciliationproceeding in the Industrial dispute raised by the Union before the ALC (C), hence the reference for adjudication.

Inthe matter ofan Industrial Dispute under Section 10(1) (d) ofthe I.D. Act, 1947

Reference No. 55 of 1997

PARTIES:

As per Standing Order of the Company, workman after expiry of six months become permanent for the jobs theyare performing. Not regularising the workmen for their respective posts is illegal , and depriving them of their legitimate claims for their pay scale and proper wages . So the demand oftheir Union for the regularisation is justified.

Employers in relation to the management ofBarora Coal Washery ofM/ s . BCCL and their workman .

APPEARANCES :

: Mr. R. R. Prasad, Advocate

The Union in its rejoinder has pleaded that the Management is not entitled to take the plea, when it is taking suchjobs from the workmen working since long.

Onbehalf ofthe workman

: None

Onbehalfofthe employers

STATE: Jharkhand

INDUSTRY : Coal

Dhanbad, the 7th July, 2011

AWARD

The Government of India, Ministry of Labour, in exercise of the powers conferred on them under Section

3. Whereas with specific denials to the aforesaid allegations the case of the Management is that the aforesaid demand of the Union is baseless , false frivolous with ulterior motive to enter into the Clerical Grade. Workmen Biswajit Dubey Goswami and Rajesh Chauhan were appointed as Fitter (Apprentice ) and General Mazdoor Cat. I respectively. As per the cadre scheme , none of the workmen are entitled to the Clerical Grades . Moreover there is a complete ban on diverting workmen from the daily rated categories to monthly paid Clerical Grade. They never worked as Clerks at Barora Washery continuously, rather 5889

भारत का राजपत्र : अगस्त 13 , 2011/ श्रावण 22 , 1933

[भाग II-खंड 3( ii ) ]

respectively had directed their duties as Weigh Bridge as pershift. But thewitness namely co-worker Rajesh Chauhan has admitted that both the aforesaid Office Orders Ext. W-7 series do not ascertain any direction to work as a Clerk, though he knows the Mazdoor in Cat. I and the Clerk areindifferent cadres .Admittedly both the workmen were not selected to the post of Clerk while the Office Orders were issued for the performance ofthejob as a Clerk.

theyare factually working in time rated category, andmost juniors in service . They were temporarialy engaged to performclerical jobs in exigency in store and Weigh Bridge fora period ofthree months purely on temporary basis as perthe office order dt. 5/ 12-5-94 . They did not acquire the permanent status in the Clerical posts under the provisions ofCertified Standing Orders of the company as applicable totheworkmen concerned because they were not engaged inclericaljobs ofpermanent nature for 6 months. Therefore, they are not in any way entitled to regularisation in Clerical Grade II so also the demand of the Union for is illegal and unjustified.

Finding with Reasons

4. In this case WW- 1 Biswajit Goswami and WW-2 Rajesh Chauhan both the workmen on behalf of the union, MW- 1 Basudev Singh ; the Sr. P.O. from the side of the management have been examined .

7.Whereas , affirming the appointment of both the workersMW- 1 Basudev Singh as the then Sr. P.O. ofBarora CoalWashery has stated that as per the Orders (dt. 17-2-93 and22-1-93) (Exts . M- 1 and M -2) workmen Biswajit Dubey Goswami and Rajesh were posted as App. (Fitter Trade) andGeneral Mazdoor in Cat. I respectively at the aforesaid Coal Washery. They regularly performed their duties for their posts they were appointed for. As per the Officer Order (dt. 5-3-97- Ext. M- 3 ) ofthe Project Officer concerned theywere accordingly directed to report Mr. A. K. Verma, AC(CP) in their aforesaid designated posts . The Service Excerpt (Ext . W-4) of aforesaid Biswajit Dubey Goswami under his signature bear his designation Fitter/App. But the concerned workman never performed their duties as Clerk onany substantive post, as there is a ban in view of the circular issued by the Head Quarter to regularise any time ratedworker ofany stream to Cadre, though the witness (MW- 1) has admitted that the management as per Order dt . 5-5-84 (Ext . M-5 as Ext. W- 1 the same ) allowed the concerned workman to work as a Clerk absolutely on tempórary basis only a period ofthree months, after which theywere returned to their original posts . According to the witness, the aforesaid order (Ext . M-5) speaks that there were vacancies of the Clerical Grade in the Store . This statement of the witness is merely an inference which cannot betreatedas an admission at the point of alleged vacancies as argued by the Learned Counsel for the Workman/Union, as the aforesaid official orders bears "the acute shortage ofClerical personnel ....... as well as due to non-availability of the suitable Cler', 'mployee " which evidently establish the deputation of both the work for the Clerical job for three months only on temporary basis. This Management witness has deni theworking ofthe workmen for 240 days as a Clerk in eac year on the ground that no reversion order was issued thereafter.

5.On the perusal ofthe case record, I find that asper averment of WW- 1 Biswajit Goswami one of the two workmen, though he was appointed as a Fitter Apprentice Gr. I in 1993 atBarora Coal Washery yet the management as perthe order (Official onedt. 5/ 12-5-94, Ext . W- 1 ) directed him to discharge his duty as a Store Clerk for three months but till date, the management exploiting his service according.His appointment letter dt. 24-9-92 is Ext. W-2 which shows he was appointed to the post of App . (Fitter Trade) in Cat . I. According to the workmen (WW- 1 ) on his representation to the management ( the original hand written representation dt. 13-5-94 under the signature of both workmenBiswajit Dubey Goswami and Rajesh Chauhan addressed to the Project Officer concerned - Ext . W-3 ) the Project Officer by his endorsement (dt. 17-5 -...... as Ext . W-3/1 ) allowed them to work the job as a Clerk. Besides that the Project Officer J. Singh as per five Office Orders (Ext. W-4 series - on Slip of papers) allowed them to work as a Clerk. Likewise Mr. B. P. Srivastava [Project Officer (W) ) as per letter dt . 17-12-99 (Ext . W- 5) directed the workman (WW- 1 ) to report Sri R. Kumar, for day to day work of Heavy Vehicle and Maintenance Deptt . w.e.f. 21-12-99, and still he claims that he has been discharging his duties as Clerk but he has been paid the wages of Category- I Mazdoor. The witness has admitted to have worked as a Clerk for three months . But despite the Management's Order dt . 22-3-96 directing him to join his original job, the Management as per Office Order dt. 5/6-3-97 (hand written - Ext . W-6) instructed the workman toperformthe work. Denying all the aforesaid Officer Orders as fabrications , he claimed for regularisation of his service as Clerk from 1994. But he could not sumbit any paper to show that he is discharging his duties as a Clerk.

8. Mr. R. R. Prasad, the Ld . Advocate for the Union/ Workmen submits that in view of the official order (Ext . W- 1 equal to Ext . M-5) as well as the Joint Petition ofthe workmen (Ext . W-3) bearing the endorsement ofthe Project Officer concerned (Ex .. W-3 /1 ) to continue their work till the posting of the permanent clerks, these workmen are entitledto regularisation for their respective posts in Clerical Grade- II. But thejoint petition ofthe workmen dt. 15-5-94 apparently addressed to the Project Officer in lack of the justification for its retention after the alleged endorsement oftheProjectOfficer just after five days ofthe issuance of 6.Corroborating the evidence ofco-workerBiswajit Dubey Goswami , WW- 2 Rajesh Chouhan, the general Mazdoor has stated that the management as per Office Orders (dt. 8-8-03 and 16-2-04 Ext. W- 7 and W-7/1) 5890

THEGAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 13 , 2011 /SRAVANA 22, 1933

the official order (Ext. W-3) appears to be inadmissible as questionable document, as the original has been retained bythe workmen themselves for this purpose and thereafter no any other official order as to their continuation their deputation till further order was not produced before the Tribunal in continuation of the aforesaid official order of their purely temporary deputation. Aglance at the office orders (Ext . W-4 series ) as well as all the Office Orders (Exts. W-5 to W-7) discloses as the proof oftheir deputation intermittently not regularly or continuously as the Clerks only in exigencies . Thus none of the workmen has proved to have worked as a Clerk for six months by rendering continuous service in the aforesaid permanent post as per Certified StandingOrder clause 7.2.

Considering the entire aforesaid discussed facts and law, I find that the demand of the concerned Union for regularisation of the services of workmen Biswajit Dubey Goswami and Rajesh Chouhan as Store Keeper and Store Clerk inClerical Grade- II with retrospective effect with all the fringe benefits is totally illegal and unjustified. They are not entitled to any relief except the differences of the wages for their relevant deputed works at the relevant time intermittently.

The management is directed to implement the Award within three months from the date of its publication in the Gazette of India in the light of the observation made above.

KISHORI RAM, Presiding Officer नईदिल्ली, 20 जुलाई , 2011

[PART II-SEC. 3(ii) ] industrial dispute between the employers in relation to the management of Syndicate Bank and their workman, which was received by the Central Government on 14-6-2011 .

The notification in I.D. No. 15/2009 issued vide letter No. L - 12012/72/2009 - IR (B- II) dated 14-6-2011 may be treated as cancelled.

[No. L- 12011 /72/2009- IR (B- II) ] RAMESH SINGH, Desk Officer ANNEXURE

IN THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL -CUM- LABOUR COURT- IL, CHANDIGARH

PRESENT:

Shri A. K. RASTOGI , Presiding Officer

Case No. ID 15/2K9

Registered on 2-12-2009

Sh. Sudhir Kumar Sharma, S/o Sh. Bhim Singh Sharma, Syndicate Bank, CAO 25, Jeewan Prakash Building, K. GMarg, New Delhi .

.Applicant

Versus

The Deputy General Manager, Syndicate Bank, Regional Office, 48, Bhadana Bhawan, Neelam Bata Road, Faridabad.

Respondent

APPEARANCES :

Forthe workman

का.आ. 2155.-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में सिंडीकेट बैंक के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालय-11 , चंडीगढ़ के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 15/2009 ) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 14-6-2011 को प्राप्त हुआ था । दिनांक 14-6-2011 के पत्र सं. एल-12012/72/2009-आई आर ( बी-1 ) द्वारा औ. वि. नं 15/2009 में जारी की गई अधिसूचना को रद्द समझा जाएगा ।

[सं. एल -12011 /72/2009- आई आर ( बी- II ) ] रमेश सिंह , डेस्क अधिकारी NewDelhi, the 20th July, 2011

S.O 2155. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 15/2009) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal/Labour Court-II , Chandigarh, now as shown in the Annexure in the

Sh . B. S. SharmaARof workman

Forthe Management : Sh . Aman Khera, Manager, (HR/ IR) for management bank.

AWARD

Passed on June 2, 2011

CentralGovernment vide Notification No. L- 12011 / 72/2009 - IR(B- II) , dated 5-11-2009, by exercising its powers under Section 10 Sub- section ( 1 ) Clause (d) and Sub- section2(A) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (hereinafter referred to as Act) has referred the following Industrial dispute for adjudication to this Tribunal:

"Whether the action of the Deputy General Manager, Syndicate Bank, Faridabad in not paying the allowance and protection of emoluments on being transferred on redeployment from Ballabhgarh District Faridabad to Nangaljat Branch Distt. Mewat as per 8th bipartite settlement w.e.f. 27-6-2005 till date isjust, fair and legal ? To what relief the workman is entitled to and from which date ?" [ भाग II-खंड 3( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : अगस्त 13, 2011/श्रावण 22, 1933

Workmanraised an industrial dispute stating thathe belongs toNon-subordinate Cadre ofthe respondent bank. On25-6-2005 he was transferred from Ballabhgarh to Nangal JatBranch .Hejoined the transferees branch on 27-6-2005. Hewas deployed outside the District under the deployment scheme ofthe bank and as per provisions of VIII Bi -partite Settlement he was entitled to a lump sum amount of Rs. 400 P.M. besides protection of emoluments drawn at the original centre , so long he is not repatriated to the original centre. He was being paid as per aforesaid provisions ofthe settlement . But on 28-11-2006 the branch ofthe bank was ordered to recover the same and the status of transfer was changed from deployment to general transfer. With effect from 1-1-200 the management again started to paythe lump sum amount ofRs . 400 P.M. but the amount recovered was not repaid and on 31-5-2008 the management again advised the branch office to recover the amount. On 31-12-2008 the management again started paying the lump sum amount w.e.f. 1-6-2007 but on 3-3-2009 the management again advised the branch office to stop payment of the lump sum amount . The claim has beenfiled by Syndicate Bank Staff Association and it has beenprayed that the direction be issued to the management to repatriate the workman to the original centre i.e. Ballabhgarhbranch and to pay Rs . 1,78,665 as per Annexure XII of the Claim statement and action be taken against theerring officials for resorting to unfair labour practice in respect of subject matter under the provisions of the Act.

The claim was contested by the respondent/ management. It was stated that as per transfer policy norms of the bank the general transfers are effected within the District and if there is only one branch in a district, the transfer may be effected to the close or contiguous district in which there is a branch office . The rotational transfer shall be within the state for the deployment of staff from surplus district to deficit district exempting certain categories ofclerical staff as enumerated in the guidelines issued by the bank from time to time . It was further stated that the workman had been transferred within the former undivided Faridabad District and hence it was a general transfer and no lump sum amount was admissible to him. He had not been transferred under rotational transfer as claimedbyhim.

Theclaimant filed rejoinder to the written statement ofthe respondent. It was disclosed in the rejoinder that the MewatDistrict was formed on 4-4-2005, the VIII Bi-partite Settlement was signed on 2-6-2005 and the workman was transferred on 25-6-2005 i.e. much after the formation ofthe MewatDistrict and signing of VIII Bi -partite settlement. It also appears from the rejoinder that Ballabhgarh, where the workman was working before his transfer was in Faridabad District while Nangal Jat, the place to which he was transferred is in Mewat District . It was reiterated that transfer ofthe workman from Ballabhgarh to Nangaljat is

5891 deployment in terms of VIII Bi -partite Settlement and therefore, he is entitled to the lump -sum amount of Rs . 400 permonth with protection of all his emoluments .

From the pleadings of the parties following issues arise for consideration:

1. Whether the workman was deployed outside district under the deployment scheme of the bank and is he entitled to lump-sum amount of Rs . 400 P.M. plus protection of emoluments drawnatthe original centre ?

2. Whether the management is justified in refusing the allowances and emoluments in question to the workman ?

3. What relief the workman is entitled to ?

Theconcerned workman filed his affidavit while the management did not choose to cross examine him . It did not file any affidaviť in evidence also. On 28-7-2010 management evidence was closed.

Ihave heard the A. R. of the parties and perused the record. My findings on various issues are as follows:

Issue No. 1& 2 :

Boththe issues being inter -connected are being taken up together. It is not dispute that the workman belongs to a non-subordinate cadre and he was transferred from Ballabhgarh Branch of Faridabad district to Nangaljat branch ofMewat District . The transfer order is contained in the Memo dated 21-6-2005 filed by the workman as Annexure-I ofthe claim statement . Annexure- VI of the claim statement is a communication from the bank to the workman in reply ofhis letter. Through Annexure -VI the workman was informed that by the time management received the official communication of formation of Mewat District the general transfer exercise was over and his representation willbe considered during the general transfer 2006. As it has been mentioned in the rejoinder of the workman, his A. R. argued that the management in asserting so is not telling the truth. The notification about the creation of MewatDistrict is Annexure - II ofthe claim statement and is dated4-4-2006. It is a public notice and management cannot be allowed to say that it was not within its knowledge. I agreewithin the A. R. of the workman that the transfer of theworkman from Ballabgarh to Nangaljat was a transfer to another district .

Annexure- IV of the claim statement contains the VIII Bi-partite Settlement which provides deployment ofstaff. According to it a workman in the non- subordinate cadre may be deployed within a district irrespective of the distance involved . In cases necessitating deployment outside district the workman concerned may be deployed to any branch office ofthe bank situated outside the district up to a distance not exceeding 100 K.M. from his place of $892

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: AUGUST 13, 2011 /SRAVANA 22, 1933

[PART II-Sec. 3 ( ii) ]

NewDelhi, the 20th July, 2011 posting. Obviously the case of the workman is that of deployment outside the district.

S.O. 2156.- In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 2/4/ 2011) of theCentral Government Industrial Tribunal-cum- LabourCourt, Mumbai- 2 , now as shown in the Annexure inthe industrial dispute between the employers in relation to the management of M/s . Gulf Air Company and their workman, which was received by the Central Government on20-7-2011 .

[No. L-11012/08/2010-IR(C -I)] D.S S. SRINIVASA RAO, DeskOfficer ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL NO.2, MUMBAI

PRESENT:

K. B. KATAKE, Presiding Officer

Reference No. CGIT-2/4 of2011 The bi-partite settlement also provides that a workman in the non- subordinate cadre , so long as he serves inthedeployed centre shall draw a lump-sum amount of Rs.400 P.M. (not ranking for any other benefit) besides protection of emoluments drawn at the original centre. Therefore, is also clear that as the workmanwas deployed outside the district he is entitled to lump-sum amount of Rs.400 P.M. besides protection of emoluments drawn at the original centre as per provisions of the bi -partite settlement. The bank is not justified in refusing the said allowances and emoluments to the workman. The letters of thebankdated28-11-2006, 31-5-2008, 30-12-2008 and3-3- 2009Annexures-VIII to XI of the claim statements shows that management in allowing, disallowing and re-allowing the allowances in question was in a fix and was not ableto take any firm decision in the matter. I hold that the workman is entitled toRs.400 P.M. emoluments amount + protection oftotal emoluments during the period he is posted at the deployment centre on Nangal Jat District Mewat thebank is notjustified in refusing the same. Issue No. 1 and 2 are decided in favour ofthe workman accordingly.

IssueNo.3:

Employers in relation to the management ofGulfAir Company.

TheManager (India), GulfAirCompany, Ground Floor, Maker Chamber-V, NarimanPoint, Mumbai -400021

AND Their Workmen

TheGeneral Secretary, All India Federation ofGulf AirEmployees Association LokBharati, Flat No. 206/2A, Andheri (E), Mumbai-400059.

The reliefclaimed by the claimant for a direction to management to repatriate him to the original centre and to payRs. 1,78,665 and also to take action against the officials in resorting to unfair labour practice are all beyond the scope of reference. For the adjudication of the dispute ender reference only this much can be and is held that the actionofthe bank management in not paying the allowance andprotection ofemoluments on being transferred on re- deployment from Ballabhgarh District Faridabad toNangal Jat DistrictMewat as per VIIIbi-partite Settlement w.e.f. 27-6-2005till date is notjust, fair and legal . The workman is entitled to the said allowances and protection of emoluments from the date ofhis joining at Nangal Jat branch and during the period of his posting at the said branch. Reference is answered accordingly in favour of the workman. Let two copies of award be sent to the Central Government for further necessary action.

APPEARANCES :

ASHIK KUMAR RASTOGI, PresidingOfficer नई दिल्ली , 20 जुलाई , 2011

FortheEmployer : Mr. G S. Desai , Advocate

For the Workman : Noappearance

Mumbai, the 14th June, 2011 AWARD

मा.आ. 2166.-गौधोगिक विचार अधिनियम, 1947 (1947 का 14) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में केन्द्रीय सरकार गोलक एकर कम्पनी के प्रबंधन के संबद्ध नियोजकों और ॐ कर्मकारों के बीच अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औधोगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/ श्रम म्यानालय , मुम्बई नं. 2 के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 2/4/2011) को अकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 20-7-2011 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[ं एल-11012/08/2010- आई आर (सी-1 ) ] डी. एस. एस. श्रीनिवास राव, डेस्क अधिकारी

TheGovernment of India, Ministry of Labour & Employmentby its Order No. L- 11012/08/2010- (C-I), dated 12-1-2011 in exercise of the powers conferred byclause(d) of sub -section ( 1 ) and sub -section 2 (A) of Section 10 ofthe Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 have referred [भाग II-खंड 3 (ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : अगस्त 13 , 2011/ श्रावण 22, 1933

the following industrial dispute to this Tribunal for adjudication:

"Whether the action ofthe management ofM/s.Gulf AirCompany in refusing to negotiate and settle the charter of 40 demands served by the All India Federation of GulfAssociation dated 7-8-2006 is legal andjustified ? To what relief the workmen are entitled?"

2.After receipt of the reference , notices were served onboth the parties . The second party union though duly served, neither appeared nor filed its statement of claim, Onthe other hand, the first party management appeared through their advocate and also sent a representation Ex-4 . They submitted that the second party union has settled the charter of demands dated 7-8-2007 . They have signed the settlement under Section 12(3) of Industrial Disputes Act on 2-8-2010 . Therefore no industrial dispute pertaining to 40 charter of demands survive . The union should withdraw the reference. There is no industrial dispute as matter is settled. Therefore they pray that the reference be disposed of. They have also filed with list Ex-8 copy of the memorandum of settlement signed by boththeparties.

3.As the second party remained absent and did not file statement of claim. On the other hand first party management has filed on record the copy of MOU signed byboth the parties with list Ex-8 . In the circumstances it is clear that no industrial dispute remains to be adjudicated. Thus I dispose ofthe reference as dispute is already settled. Thus the order:

5893 NewDelhi , the 20th July,2011

S.O. 2157.- In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 21/2004) oftheCentralGovernment Industrial Tribunal -cum -Labour Court-2,Dhanbad, now as shown in the Annexure in the industrial dispute between the employers in relation to the management ofM/s. BCCL, and their workman, whichwas receivedby the Central Government on 20-7-2011 .

[No. L-20012/208/2003-IR(C-I)] D. S. S. SRINIVASA RAO, DeskOfficer

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL (NO. 2) AT DHANBAD

PRESENT:

Shri Kishori Ram, Presiding Officer

Inthe matter ofan Industrial Dispute under Section 10(1)(d) ofthe I.D. Act, 1947

Reference No. 21 of2004

PARTIES:

Employers in relation to the management ofBagdigi Colliery ofM/s. BCCL and their workman.

APPEARANCES :

: None

Onbehalfofthe

ORDER

workmen/Union

:

Onbehalfofthe

(1) The reference is disposed of as dispute is already settled between the parties.

Mr.D. K.Verna,

Advocate

employers

INDUSTRY: Coal STATE: Jharkhand

(ii) No order as to cost.

Date: 14-6-2011

K. B. KATAKE, PresidingOfficer नई दिल्ली, 20 जुलाई , 2011

का.आ. 2157. औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में केन्द्रीय सरकार बी.सी.सी.एल. के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/श्रम न्यायालय , धनबाद नं. 2 के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 21/2004 ) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 20-7-2011 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल -20012/208/2003- आई आर ( सी-1 ) ] डी.एस.एस. श्रीनिवास राव , डेस्क अधिकारी Dated, Dhanbad, the 5th July, 2011

ORDER

TheGovernment 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 disputeto this Tribunal for adjudication vide their Order No. L -20012/208/2003- IR (C-I) , dated, the 24th December, 2003.

SCHEDULE

"Whether the action of the management ofBCCL, Bagdigi Colliery is justified in not allowing Shri Raghubar Ram, Miner Loader, Sick Leavewages forperiod from 20-11-01 to 20-5-02 ? If not, to what relief is the concerned workman entitled ?" 5894

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 13 , 2011 /SRAVANA 22, 1933

[PART II-SEC. 3 (ii) ]

In the matter of an Industrial Dispute under Section 10(1)(d) of the I.D. Act , 1947

Reference No. 112 of 1998

:

2. Mr. Raghunandan Roy, the representative ofthe workman is not present to represent the Workman/Union, for any witness for the evidence on the part of the Union ispresent whereas Mr. D. K. Verma, the Ld . Advocate for themanagement is present.

PARTIES:

Employers in relation to the management of M/s. BCCL and their workman.

APPEARANCES :

Onbehalfofthe : Mr. R. R. Prasad,

workmen

Advocate

Onbehalf ofthe : Mr.B. M. Prasad,

employers Advocate

State : Jharkhand

Industry: Coal

Dhanbad, the 5th July, 2011

AWARD

3.On perusal ofthe case record I findthat the present referred schedule relates to not allowing by the Management ofBCCL, Bagdigi Colliery workman Raghubar Ram, the Miner Loader, Sick Leave Wages for the period 10-11-2001 to 20-5-2002 . It is also evident that the case has been pending for the evidence of the workman since 28-2-2006; for which notices dt . 15-11-2010 and showcause notice through Registered postdt. 26-4-2011 were given to the Union/Workman yet neither the Union Representative nor the workmanturned up for his evidence . The very conduct of the Workman/Union discloses disinterestedness in pursuing or producing the evidence on his behalf since long. Under these circumstances , proceeding with the case for uncertainty on account of the long absence or non- production ofthe witnesses on behalf of the Union appears to be unnecessary. Hence the case is closed and order is passed.

KISHORI RAM, Presiding Officer

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- 20012/56/97 - IR, Coal - I dated, the 13th April , 1998.

नई दिल्ली, 20 जुलाई, 2011

SCHEDULE

"Whether the action ofthe General ManagerBarora Area I M/ s . BCCL , P.O. Nawagarh (Dhanbad) in denying to regularise the services ofShri Om Prakash Sinha Dresser (T) as a Clerk is justified ? If not , to whatrelief is the concerned workman entitled ? " का.आ. 2158.-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 ( 1947 का 14) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में केन्द्रीय सरकार बी.सी.सी.एल. के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालय , नं. 2, धनबाद के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 112/1998 ) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 20-7-2011 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल-20012/56/1997- आई आर ( सी-1 ) ] डी.एस.एस. श्रीनिवास राव, डेस्क अधिकारी

New Delhi , the 20th July, 2011

S.O. 2158.- In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 112/ 1998) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal -cum- Labour Court -2, Dhanbad, as shown in the Annexure in the industrial dispute between the employers in relation to the management of M/ s . BCCL , and their workmen, which was receivedby the Central Government on 20-7-2011 .

[No. L-20012/56/ 1997- IR (C-I ) ] D. S. S. SRINIVASA RAO , Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL (No. 2) AT DHANBAD

PRESENT:

2. The case of the sponsoring Union is that workman Om Prakash Sinha was initially appointed as Dresser (T) at the Central Hospital , Baghmara. As per the Personnel Officer (Admn.) Barora Area Office's letter No.GM I/PD/ 91/0.0557/2494 dt . 11/ 13-9-91 , he was transferred to work as Clerk since then he has been satisfactorily working as a Clerk at different places as per directions of the Managementdt . 21-3-91 , 31/1 , 2/9 , 11/2 , 12/13-7-94, 13/14-7-94, 11-11-96, 11-6-96. He is still performing thejob as a Clerk at Barora Area Office of the Management. After one year he gave representation dated 17-9-92 for his regularisation on post of Clerk as recommended by the Admn, of Barora Area No. 1 of the Dy. Chief Personnel Manager concerned again its - reminder dt. 11-4-94 to the General Manager for regularisation as Clerk Gr. II , but the Management adpoted an unfair Labour practice denying his regularisation and wages of Clerk Gr. II . He deserves the aforesaid regularisation since 17-9-91 as wall as the back wages thereof. After the representationdt . 18/ 14-10- 94 of the Union on his behalf to the Management, the Union raised the Industrial Dispute before the ALC ( C ) , Dhanbad, but on the failure of the conciliation proceeding the case was referred for adjudication .

SHRI KISHORI RAM, Presiding Officer 5895

भारत का राजपत्र : अगस्त 13 , 2011/ श्रावण 22, 1933

[ भाग II-खंड 3 (ii) ]

In rejoinder, the Union categorically denying the alleged facts of the Management, has pleaded the working ofthe workman, not due to favouratism of the management under the influence of the Trade Union Leader.

all transfer as per letter dt. 13-9-91 (Ext . W-2) and the Office Orderdt . 21-3-92 (Ext . W- 3 ). According to him after the completion of working as a Clerk for one year he had represented to the management for regulraisation on the post of Clerk. He has also proved the Official Order (31/28-9-1992, 11/ 12-3-93, 21-9-93, 25/26-11-92, 12/13-7-94, 13/14-7-94 and 11-6-96) marked as Exts . W-4 series and his reminder ( 11-4-94) as Ext. W- 5 (after objection ), the certificate issued by the management (GM) , date less and number less related to Raj Bhasha Pakhwar 1994 as Ext . W-6 in addition to the two officials letter dated 7-3-1996 and 15/ 17-4-2004 as Ext . W- 7 series related to the names of his nominees to be entered in his Service Book showing his desigination as a Clerk. He has claimed that he isstill working as a Clerk, yet he is getting his wages as GeneralMazdoor. But the management refused to regularise him. He has admitted in his cross -examination that he was timerated worker and he performed/worked from April , 1990 to 17th December, 1991 in the X- ray Unit at the Central Hospital that there is a control room at the area office to meet emergency work if so arises, for which Officer, Clerks, and Peon are engaged absolutely on temporary basis . He hasalso admitted that his letter (Ext . W-5) and the Certificate Ext. W-6 have no Seal , Serial No. and date on them respectively.

3. Whereas with speficic denial to the allegations of the Union, the Management has pleaded in its Written Statement -cum -rejoinder that the workman was appointed as Dresser (T) on 27-4-90 as a trainee for the job of the Hospital and was posted at Regional Hospital , Baghmara ofM/s . BCCL . Subsequently at his approach to the local management he was transferred to the Area Office towork with the Personnel Officer ( Admn. ) as per the office order dt. 11-9-91 under the influence of powerful Union leader, but he could not serve as Dresser (T) , rather he managed to perform miscelleneous office job ofa Peon and sometime ofa Clerk with a view to claim for it . He was a time rated worker, and did not belong to the cadre scheme . As per Cadre Scheme, all eligible candidates of the area having minimum 3 years services and possessing requisite qualifications are selected for the post of Clerical Grade by the Selection Committee to be confirmed by the Competent Authority, and all persons of the area are given opportunity to appear before it . Putting any person ex -cadre on the clerical post is contrary to the provision of Cadre Scheme Such cases of local Management are considered on by the Head Quarter unless objection made from any quarter.

The Management in its rejoinder pleaded that it was a case of manipulation to show favour for the workman circumventing the cadre scheme provisions . He was never promoted nor given the status of a Clerk non -engaged continuously toperform the job of a Clerk . So the workman is not entitled to any relief.

Finding with Reasoning

7.Whereas the statement of MW- 1 Narendra Singh, the Dy. Personnel Manager of Barora Area reveals that though Selection is processed for the post of Clerk falling under the Clerical Grade as per NCWA, yet occasionally the workman on his transfer to Area Office as General Mazdoor who was asked to work as Peon , was deputed to work as a Clerk witout any limitation since 1991 in the Administrative Section . Likewise MW-2 , as the Manager (Estate), has testified to the fact that he (the witness ) had seen the workman Om Prakash Sinha as an Attendance Clerk inBaroraArea Office during the period 2001-02 and since then he has been still serving accordingly.

4. In the case , WW- 1 Om Prakash Sinha, the workman himselfon behalf of the Union and MW- 1 Narendra Singh , Dy. P.M. (A) and MW-2 B. C. Halder , the Manager (Estate) both ofBaroraArea, BCCL from the side of the management have been examined .

5. On going through the materials /evidences ofboth the parties , I find the facts admitted, hence indisputable are as under :

(i) The workman was initially appointed as Dresser (Trainee) in April , 1990 at Central Hospital, Baghmara. He was a time rated worker.

8. Mr. R. R. Prasad, the Ld . Advocate for the Union submits that the workman by virtue of his aforesaid documents has proved continuously working as a Clerk since 1991 though he is being paid the wages for Category-I, so he is entitled for regularisation on the said post.But contrary to it Mr. B. M. Prasad, the Ld . Advocate for the management has conterided that in view of the admitted fact of the workman's appointment as a Dresser but his claim for the regularisation on the post of Clerk which is a cadre post is not tenable , because he was temporarily deputed as a Clerk during the period of specified "Bandh and Nakabandi/blockage call/strike/strike call " .

(ii) There is a clerical Scheme for the post of Clerical Cadre.

9. On evaluation of the materials available on the case record, I find the aforesaid official letters prove his continuous service for six months as a deputed Clerk for six months as Exts. W-4 and 4/1 , though other official letters if taken together for consideration prove intermittently/ 6.As per averment ofWW- 1 Om Prakash Sinha, the workman himself he was though appointed as Dresser (Trainee) in April, 1990 at Central Hospital , Baghmara by the letter marked as Ext . W- 1 , yet worked as a Clerk w.e.f. 17-9-91 at Barora Area in Administrative Section since his

:

5896

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 13 , 2011 /SRAVANA 22, 1933

[PART II SEC . 3 ( ii)] APPEARANCES :

:Mr. N. GArun,

Onbehalf of the

workman

Organising Secretary, RCMS Union.

: None

Onbehalf of the

employers

continually engagement of the workman as a Clerk between the period 21-3-92, 1993, 1994 and 1996 at the relevant time for the exigency concerned. Under these circumstances I findandhold that the action ofthe General Manager, Barora Area I M/s . BCCL, P.O. Nawagarh, Dhanbad in denying regularisation of the service of Shri Om Prakash Sinha is unjustified . So he is entitled for regularisation as a Clerks w.e.f. 1-3-1993 with backwages .

State: Jharkhand

The management is directed to implement the Award within three months from the date of its publication in the Gazette ofIndia.

KISHORI RAM, Presiding Officer नई दिल्ली, 20 जुलाई , 2011

का.आ. 2159.-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार बी.सी.सी.एल. के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच , अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालय , धनबाद नं. - 2 के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 164/2001 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 20-7-2011 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल-20012/99/2001- आई आर ( सी- I ) ] डी. एस. एस. श्रीनिवास राव , डेस्क अधिकारी New Delhi, the 20thJuly, 2011

SO . 2159. 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 -2, Dhanbad, now as shown in the Annexure inthe Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation tothe management ofM/s . BCCL and their workman, which was receivedby the Central Government on 20-7-2011 .

[No: L-20012/99 /2001 -IR( C-I) ] D. S. S. SRINIVASA RAO, Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL (NO. 2) AT DHANBAD PRESENT : Shri Kishori Ram, Presiding Officer

Inthe matter ofan Industrial Dispute under Section 10(1) (d) of the I.D. Act, 1947

Reference No. 164 of2001

PARTIES:

Employers in relation to the management ofKustore Area of M/ s . Bharat Coking Coal Ltd. and their . workman,

Industry:Coal.

Dhanbad, the 5th July, 2011

ORDER

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-20012/99/2001 - IR (C-I) dt . 18-5-2001/24May, 2001.

SCHEDULE

" KYYA MESSRS BHARAT COKING COAL LIMITED, ENA COLLIERY KEY PRAVANDH- TANTRA DWARA SHRI DHARM RAJ SINGH, AUTO ELECTRICIAN KO CANTEEN MANAGER KEY PAD PAR NIYAMIT NA KIYA JANA TATHA UKT PAD KA VETANMAN NA DIYA JANA UCHHIT NİYYAMANUSAR EVAM NYAYA SANGAT HAIN ? YADI NAHI TO KARMKAR KIS RAHAT KEY PATRA HAIN TATHA KIS TARIKH SEY ?"

2. Mr. N. G Arun, the representative of theworkman inpresent, and prays for the closure of the case, as the workmanDharmraj Singh, Auto Electrician did not turn up despite his several time request for his presence a witness . Mr. R. N. Ganguly, the Ld. Advocate for the management is not present.

3. Perused the case record . I find the present Schedule ofReference relates to non -regularisation ofShri Dharam Singh, Auto Electrician on the post of Canteen Manager and non -payment of the pay scale for the post. It also reveals that the case is pending for the evidence of the workman since 18-10-2005 for which several times notices dt. 3-11-2010, 17-2-2011 and show cause dt.26-4- 2011 were issued to the workman, yet he failed to appear for the reason best known to him . For this reason the aforesaid Representative of the workman has also solicited for the closure of the case..

Under these circumstances , I find proceeding with the case in uncertainty is worthless. Hence the case is closed and according the order is passed.

KISHORI RAM, PresidingOfficer [भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

नई दिल्ली, 20 जुलाई, 2011

का.आ. 2160.-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार बी.सी.सी. एल. के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच , अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालय न. 2 धनबाद के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 116/2003 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 20-7-2011 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल -20012/ 138/2003- आई आर ( सी-1 ) ] डी. एस. एस. श्रीनिवास राव , डेस्क अधिकारी New Delhi, the 20th July, 2011

S.O. 2160. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 116/2003) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal -cum -Labour Court-2, Dhandad as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of M/ s . BCCL, and their workman , which was received by the Central Government on 20-7-2011.

[No. L-20012/138/2003 - IR (C-I )] D.S.S. SRINIVASA RAO, Desk Officer

ANNEXURE BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL (No. 2) AT DHANBAD PRESENT

SHRI KISHORI RAM, Presiding Officer . In the matter of an Industrial dispute under Section 10 ( 1 ) (D) ofthe I. D. Act, 1947 REFERENCE No. 116 of 2003

PARTIES : Employers in relation to the management of Kustore Kshetra of M/ s . B.C.C.L. and their workman.

APPEARANCES :

Onbehalf ofthe Workman : Mr. S. Paul, Advocate .

OnbehalfoftheEmployers : Mr. U. N. Lal , Advocate .

State : Jharkhand Industry: Coal . Dhanbad, Dated, the 27the June , 2011 AWARD

The Government of India, Ministry of Labour in exercise ofthe 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-20012/ 138/2003- IR (C-I ) dated 10-11-2003.

"KyaBharat Coking Coal Ltd. Kustore kshetra key pravandhtanttra dwara karmkar Shri H. K. Bakshi ki janm tarikh 1-1-46 ko Sahi mante huye unhey Dinank 30-11-2002 sey seva nivritkiya Jana Uchit evemNaya Sangat Hain ? Yadi Nahi to karmkar kis Rahat Key Patra Hain ?"

5897

भारत का राजपत्र : अगस्त 13 , 2011/ श्रावण 22; 1933

2.The case ofthe workman H.K. Bakshi corrected as H.K. Bakshi is that at the time of his appointment his date ofbirth as 1-1-46 was recorded in his Form ' B'register, and on that basis , the management of Ena Colliery had sent the C. M.P. F. Office on Official declaration for opening his . C.M.P. F. A/C . No. C/421537 wherein his aforesaid birth date was recorded. His date of birth was always in disputable.

The Management neither ever raised any dispute nor issued any notice for a change in this birth date . The workman under the circumstances believed his birth date in tact in his Form ' B ' Register. A Joint Bipartite Committee for Coal Industry was also constituted as per one time proposal of theGovt . of India for removal ofthe anomalies existing in the various subsidiaries of Coal India Ltd. in respect ofthe procedure ofdetermination and rectification ofthe date ofbirth in their respective records . Further as per decision to provide the workman an opportunity to know what his Biodata including his date of birth available intheir service records , and to represent for rectification of any error, if any, in his Bio data, a notice with the service excerpt under the signature of the competent officials of the Management was served upon the workman which also mentioned his aforesaid birth- date . It is also an authentic document in addition to the Form ' B ' Register which was prepared in 1974by the Management of Ena Colliery by recording his age as 29 corresponding to his aforesaid date of birth for reason known to them . Despite the above facts , the workman was served with a notice dtd. 27-5-2002 by the Project Officer , alleging his superannuation on 30-11-2002.

3. Since the Title Suit No. 71/2002 based on the notice dtd. 27-5-2002 as cause of action , with a prayer for in junction, but on account of his superannuation on 30-11-2002 pendent lite, became infructuous , so he was advised to withdraw it, either to file an afresh . Title Suit against afresh cause of action or to raise an Industiral Dispute for his aforesaid illegal superannuation . Then he filed a complaint on 2-12-2002. Before the ALC ( C) , Dhanbad , raising an Industrial Dispute U /s . 2(a) of the I.D. Act wherein the Management concerned could neither appear nor produce any document in support of its illegal and unfair stand which was anti- labour policy and exposed a motivated victimisation case . Despite the acceptance of the Management his birth date 01-01-46 as recorded in its own records and documents , the Indentity Card , Original Form B Register, Declaration Form A under the C.M.P.F. Act, the service excerpt etc. , the managementdenied and disputes it at raising the dispute . The documents was prepared on 11-10-84, accordingly the date offilling up column on the said date, if even assumed, shows the age of the workman at 29 years on aforesaid date i.e. on 11-10-84, but not on 22-11-71 as falsely alleged by the Management, and in thataspect 30th Nov. 2002 could not be established as his superannuation date at his 60 years legally. As such, in view of his birth date 1-1-46 accepted , the workman is entitled to continuance on his service up to 1-1-2006 till he 5898

[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii) ] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST : 13 , 2011 / SRAVANA 22, 1933

attains 60 years of his age . His superannuation on 30-11-2002 is illegal , arbitrary, mala fide and victimisedly as anti-labour policy.

No. 71/2002 before the Munsif Ist Dhanbad and the C.W. J.C. No. 3723 /2K( R) before the Hon'ble High Court but no reliefwas granted to him . Thus the dispute raised by the workman at the fag end of his service or after his superannuation is not legally tenable . So the demand of the workman for the DOB as 1-1-1946 is not justified.

5. Further the Management pieaded in its rejoinder that the initial record Form B shows 29 years age , 22-11-71 the date of appointment and 22-11-44 the DOB of the workman under its relevant columns . It is the basic document for determining the age of superannuation . The Original entry in Old Form B cannot be superseded by any in advertant communication to any workman . This evidently stipulates as per decision cantained on the Implementation Instruction No.76 circulated by CIL. As per his DOB recorded in the Old Form B in accordance with provisions ofemployment read with Company's policy and guide line circulated by JBCCI through NCWA - VI , the superannuation notice and retirement was rightly effected towards the workman on completing his 60 years of age on the last date of said month .

FINDING WITH REASONING

6. Inthe case , WW- 1 Hem Kanti Bakshi ( H.K. Bakshi ) , the ex-workman on behalf of his behalf, MW- 1 Arun Kumar Jha, Sr. P.O. and MW- 2 Suraj Kumar Pandey, the Manager Personnel , Ena Colliery in Kustore Area of BCCL , from the side of the Management examined , but out of both MWs , MW- 1 Arun Kr. Jha being not cross- examined by the workman his examination - in- chief has been expunged as perorder dtd . 4-3-2011 of the Tribunal .

7. The perusal of the materials available on the case record manifests the admission of workman as under Further it is pleaded in the rejoinder on behalf of the workman that without waiting for the order of the Ld . Subordinate Judge Ist Court over injunction matter on his aforesaid Title Suit the Management illegally stopped him to work treating his superannuation w.e.f. 30-11-2002 . No provision provides for changing or frequent entries in the Form B Register with regard to date of birth which amounts to a manipulation by the management concerned as its custodianauthority of it, not the workman . The denial stand of the management to the service excerpt , a reliable document prepared in 1987 , by the management itself to remove the anomalies is as per their convenience and suitability. Neither any notice of enquiry nor explanation called for nor finding against the workman was communicated as to the correct entry in his service record, evenafter alleged correction with the alleged approval of the competent authority. The Management is taking the pleas after coming to the Court of law. For the first time the workman could learn from his superannuation notice dtd . 27-5-2002 about a change in his date of birth on the basis ofwhich he was going to retire on 30-11-2002 . Sri Sanjay Kr. Dutta, the project Officer is liable to be prosecuted for false statement in W.S. under his signature . Moreover, in 1987 while circulating a service excerpt as one time chance for removal ofthe anomalies , Management did not whisper against his birth date ( 1-1-46) as available on the records . So no such plea of the Management issuing a notice of superannuation of the workman in 2006 is acceptable , treating the dispute raised at the fag end. Since the workman has been made to superannuate before 31-12-2005 , he is entitled to get the relief as he did not complete 60 years on 30-11-2002.

(i) Workman was appointed as Stowing Fitter at Ena Colliery on 22-11-1971 and his age 29 years was recorded in Form B. He was matriculate at the time of his appointment and he has signed the Form B Register accepting his particulars recorded therein.

(ii) On receipt of his superannuation dated 4/27-5-2002 (Ext .W-4) he had filed a Suit (Title Suit No.71/ 2002) before the Court of the Ld . Munsiff, Civil Court , Dhanbad for injunction . But prior to its hearing, on account of his superannuation from his service ,

he withdrew the case .

4. Whereas categorically denying the allegations of the workman the Management has pleaded that workman H.K. Bakshi was a permanent employee of Ena Colliery/ Project working as Asstt . Foreman while retiring . At the time of his appointment on 22-11-1971 his age was in advertantly recorded as 29 years in 1972 the Form B of the Unit. His service excerpt prepared in 1987 was not recorded as per correct/ initial entry in it mother record , Form B. The case of the incumbent including 129 others was enquired into it by the Vigilance Deptt. on the basis of its finding, the age 29 years as recorded initially in the old Form B was taken as final and correct with Competent Authority. As per above decision of the Management, the Superannuation Notice No. Ena/PD/2002/F - 3 /529 dtd. 4/27-5-2002 was issued to the workman , who on completion ofhis 60 years as per his DOB recorded in Old Form B, the mother record as per Mines Act/ Rules rightly superannuated on 30-11-2002 , the last date of the said month as per company policy in according with the clause 12.8.0 of the NCWA. The workman had filed the Title Suit

8. Now on going through the statement of witnesses both the parties , I find that WW- 1 Hem Kanti Bakshi (H.K. Bakshi ) , the ex- workman himself has admitted his appointment as Stowing Fitter at Ena Colliery on 22-11-1971 , hisagewas recorded as 29 in the Form B Register as on 1974 (Ext. W-3) .According to him, his date of birth as 1-1-1946 was recorded in his declaration Form-A for C. M. P.F. /P.F as also noted in his I. D. Card and his Service Excerpt (Ext. W- 1 and W- 2) respectively tallies with his aforesaid age recorded in the Form B Register ( Ext . W-3 ) .

5899 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र अगस्त 13 , 2011 / श्रावण 22, 1933

So the witness claims for his superannuation due on 1-1-2006 But as per the aforesaid superannuation notice the management superannuated him from his service w.e.f. 30-11-2002 . He has further stated that during his service period, the management never informed him of the wrong entry ofthis date of birth in his aforesaid documents such as declaration Form-A , the 1. D. Card and the Service Excerpt . But suddenly the aforesaid superannuation notice was issuedby the management for it w.e.f. from the aforesaid date at the age of 60 years .

as on its each page, so inview of the proved documents , namely, the identity card, the service Excerpt, the copy of the Form B (Ext. W- 1 , W-2 and W- 3) respectively ofthe workman the workmen who was appointed on 22-11-1971 while he was but his age 29 years was recorded in the Form B Register of the year 1974 , so the claim of the workman concerning his superannuation falling due on 1-1-2006 is justified. In response to it, Mr. U. N. Lall, the Ld. Advocate for the management contended that at the time of appointment on 22-11-1971 the workman's age 29 years wasrecorded in the Form B Register of the Colliery and duly authenticated by him by putting his signature in its relevant column as apparant from Ext. M - 1 under its serial No.988 ofthe aforesaid Form B Register, so the claim ofthe workman based on his DOB as 1-1-1946 cannot be the basis even ifhis age 29 years as claimed in the year 1974 is. taken in to account, as no document could be producedby the workman in this regard . Further he has argued that as per the Implementation Instruction No. 76 of NCWA- III read with Annexure - I para (b ) ( ii) it clearly stipulates "Wherever there is no variation of records , such cases will not be reopened unless there is a glaring and apparent wrong entry brought to the notice of the management ..... " and that accordingly on the superannuation notice in view ofthe aforesaid mother record, the Old Form B the workman superannuated on the last day of the month i.e. w.e. f. 20-11-2002 in accordance with the provision of the NCWA .

9.Whereas the deposition of MW-2 Saroj Kumar Pandey, the Manager Personnel of Ena Colliery in Kustore Area of BCCL is that as per the original old Form B Register (Ext. M - 1 ) (with objection) , original Form B Register produced beasrs under its Sl . No. 988 the age of the workman as 29 years as recorded under its column 4 , his date of appointment as 22-11-71 under its column No. 7 under the signature of the workman but without a date though the register bears the page No. torn yet the name of the workman vertically third ( from the top) . The witness has also proved the carban copy of the letter dated 15-2- 2003 issued by the Dy. C.P.M. Kustore Area to the ALC (C), Dhanban as to the details of the age of the workman as Ext. M-2, the photo copy ofthe aforesaid superannuation notice as Ext . M -3 , has also marked as Ext . W-4, the photo copy of the letter issued by the General Manager (P & IR ) BCCL cancerning the age date of birth of employees of the Ena Colliery concerned including the workman as Ext. M-4 . According to the witness , in accordance with the age of the as recorded in Form B Register initially at the time of his appointment as well as the Circuler of the management the workman on due time i . e . on 30th November, 2002, though itwas due on 22-11-2002 , so the claim of the workman for retiring in the year 2006 as per his alleged date of birth as 1-1-1946 is not justified nor made out . The photo copy of Form B being the replica of Ext . W-3 ( Form B of the workman) has been proved as Ext . W- 3 / 1 . Thus copy ofthe Form B appears to be under the signature of Dy. P. M. of the Ena Colliery Project related to the workman which shows his retirement with effect from the aforesaid date. Though the witness could not as certain the preparation of the aforesaid Form B Register under whose signature yet established it as a statutory register maintained by the Management . He has also admitted the Form B Register bears the year 1974 written theTop but without any signature of any Authority at any page yet the witness expressed his ignorance whether it was prapared in the year mentioned above .

11. On going through the entire materials , oral and documentary as adduced on behalf of both the parties and after evaluation of the materials in view of the submissions of the respective parties, I find the contention of Mr. S , K. Paul , the Ld . Counsel for the workman appears to be not plausible for the reasons firstly that it is an acknowledged facte that Form B Register of persons employed in the mines is a statutory Register maintained . under Section 48 of the Mines Act , 1952. It is prepared in theprescribed Form serially and all the particulars of the workman concerned are filled upon the date of appointment of the concerned , workman under his signature and the after the Identity Card Register is prepared accordingly on the basis of which I. D. Card is issued to the workman. But in the present case the issuance of. I. D. Card No. 73976 (Ext . W- 1 ) was issued to this workman on 10-5-73 as contrasted with his Form B (Ext . W-3 ) alleging his age 29 years in 1974 appears to be quite in congruous . Secondly that workman even being Matriculate neither produced nor proved his Matriculation Certificate in support of his present claim even before this Tribunal in terms of Implementation Instruction No. 76 (a) ( i) and thirdly the Form B Register (Ext. M- 1 ) ( with objection), being a statutory register maintained by the management as per the provision under Section 48 of the Mines Act in common and natural course ofits functioning is admissible unde Section 114 of theEvidence Act. So there is no confusion about the year 1974 or the date 11-10-84 the latter with initial of the 10. Challenging the authenticity of the Form B Register ( its relevant page substituted by its photo copy - Ext . M - 1 ) Mr. Paul , the Ld . Advocate for the workman submits that in lack of its original register, by no stretch of imagination it can be treated as original register, as its page bears the year 1974 written in the top without any signature [PART II-SEC. 3 (ii) ] 5900

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST : 13,2011 / SRAVANA 22, 1933

ANNEXURE

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

NO. CGIT/LC/R/ 57/2001

Presiding Officer : SHRI MOHD.SHAKIR HASAN authority concerned as entered for the relevant purpose but not for the preparation of the Form B Register, and that the alleged service excerpt Form (Ext . W-2 ) which is purposed to be for supplying particulars by the management as well as by the workman for the correction of any wrong entry into records of the management is entirely fulfilledby the workman himself under his signature did.7-6-88.

Workman

Ku . Shahnaz Khan , D/o Late Karimulla Khan, Kaji Mohalla, Nr. Masjid, Mungawali , Guna

Versus

12. On the consideration of the aforesaid findings it stands clear that the correction of date of birth by an employee long after his joining service will not be permissible as held in the case of G. M. Bharat Coking Coal Ltd. v- Shib Kumar Dusadh (2000) 8 SCC 696 AIR 2001 SC 722001 LLR 74 (SC).

ChiefGeneral Manager, Deptt. ofTelecommunication, Hoshangabad Road, M.P. Circle , Bhopal(MP)

The Distt . Engineer (Phones ) , Guna

Management

AWARD

Passed on this 13th day of July , 2011 In the result, I held that the workman has failed to prove his claimed date of birth 1-1-1946 by any authentic document i.e. his matriculation certificate so I respond thisAward accordingly that the question of treating the workman's alleged date of birth by the management as correct does not arise for his superannuation on 30-11- 2002 was duly and justly affected by the managment was in accordance with his age 29 years as on his date of appointment i. e. 22-11-71 . Hence , the workman is not at all entitled to any relief.

KISHORI RAM , Presding Officer

नई दिल्ली, 21 जुलाई , 2011

1. The Government of India, Ministry of Labour vide its Notification No.L - 40012/536 /2000 - IR ( DU ) dated 9-2-2001 has referred the following dispute for adjudication bythistribunal: -

" Whether the action ofthe management ofDistrict Engineer (Phones , Guna in terminating the services of Ku.Shahabaz Khan D/ o Late Sh . Kareem Ulla Khanw.e.f. 8-2-99 is justified? If not, to what relief the workman is entitled ?"

का.आ.2161.- 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 , जबलपुर के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या सी जी आई टी/एल सी./आर/57/2001 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 21-7-2011 को प्राप्त हुआ था।

[सं. एल-40012/536/2000- आई आर ( डी. यू ] जोहन तोपनो,अवर सचिव

New Delhi , the 21st July, 2011

2. The case of the applicant/ workman in short is that she was appointed in December 1992 as clerk with the management at Guna and worked continuously till 7-2-99 when she was terminated without assigning any reason. She had continuously worked for about seven years and completed 240 days in a year under the provision of the Industrial Dispute Act ( in short the Act , 1947) . She was terminated without giving retrenchment compensation under the provision of Section 25 - F of the Act and the termination is illegal ab - initio. It is stated that the workman be reinstated with back wages .

S.O.2161 -In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Centrai Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. CGIT/ LC/R/ 57/2001 ) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum- Labour Court Jabalpur as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of Department ofTelecom and their workman , which was received by tne CentralGovernment on 21-7-2011 .

[No. L-40012/536/2000- IR ( DU)]

3. The management appeared and filed Written Statement to contest the reference . The case of the renagement , interalia, is that it is denied that the applicant / workman was appointed in the month of December 1992 on the post of clerk . It is stated that she might have been executed the work time to time in the period of 1991 to 1997 but after completion of the work, no labour was engaged. She was never engaged against any post and nor rendered JOHAN TOPNO, Under Secy.

:

5901 [भाग II- खण्ड 3( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र अगस्त 13 , 2011 / श्रावण 22 , 1933

240 days uninterrupted service in a year . It is stated that the provision of the Act 1947 is not attracted to the casual labour whose engagement was only on the basis of a contract lasting for a day according to the exigency of work . It is stated that the provision of payment of retrenchment compensation and mandatory provision of the Act 1947 are not applicable . Under the circumstances , the applicant/workman is not entitled to any relief.

4. On the basis of the pleadings of the parties , the following issues are for adjudication-

L. Whether the action of the management in terminating the services of the workman w.e.f. 8-2-99 isjustified?

II . To what relief the workman is entitled?

5. Issue No. I

7.On the other hand, the management has examined only one witness in support of the case . The management witness Shri Rajiv Naiyak is Divisional Engineer at Guna. He has come to support the case of the management. He has stated that the applicant had worked intermittently as casual labour . He has further stated that she had never worked more than 240 days in a calendar year. In cross- examination he has stated that he has no personal knowledge and has stated on the basis of the record of the department . But the management has not produced any document in court to establish the claim of this witnesse . He has stated that he had seen muster rolls at the time of preparing his evidence . Those muster rolls are not produced in Court for perusal for the reason best known to the management . It was intentionally with-held by the management. It is clear that adverse inference is to be drawn against the management and the documents filed by the workman in the case are to be relied which proves that she worked continuously till removal from services . In absence of the documents of the management, the oral evidence of the management is not reliable . Thus it is clear that the termination of the applicant/ workman without compliance of the mandatory provision of Section 25 - F of the Act , 1947 is unjustified. This issue is decided in favour of the workman and against the management.

8. Issue No. II

Both the parties have adduced evidence in the case. The applicant Ku . Shahnaz Khan is examined herself. She was engaged as casual labour in the month of December 1992 and worked continuously till 7-2-1999 in the office of District Engineer (Phones) Guna. She was terminated by verbal order without assigning any reason . She has further statedthat she had worked more than 240 days in a calendar year and no compensation was paid in accordance with the provision of Section 25 -F of the Act, 1947. She has filed photo copies of the documents which are Annexure W- 1 to W-21 . She has supported her evidence in cross- examination and has stated that she worked under SDO( Phones) . There is nothing in her evidence to disbelieve this witness . His evidence shows that she worked continuously from December 1992 till termination from services .

The learned counsel for the management submits that even if it is found that the termination of the applicant/ workman is not in accordance with provision of the Act, 1947, she is not entitled to reinstatement with back wages . The learned counsel for the management has relied the decision ofthe Hon'ble Apex Court passed in Civil Appeal No. 3815 of2010 , Senior Superintendent Telegraph ( Traffic) BhopalVrs . Santosh Ku . Seal andOrs . wherein the Hon'ble Apex Court has held that-

" Inview ofthe aforesaid legal position and the fact that the workmen were engaged as daily wagers about 25 years back and they worked hardly for 2 or 3 years , relief of reinstatement and back wages to them cannot be said to be justified and instead monetary compensation would subserve the ends ofjustice . In our considered view, the compensation ofRs. 40,000 to each of the workmen (Respondent No.1 to 14) shall meet the ends ofjustice . We order accordingly. Such payment shall be made within 6weeks from today failing which the same shall carry. interest at the rate of 9 % per annum . "

The learned counsel for the management has also relied decision reported in (2006) 2.SCC.716 wherein the Hon'ble Apex Court has held that-

6.Annexure W/ 1 to W/ 18 are the photocopies ofthe attendance particulars . She has stated in her evidence that the original of these documents are in possession ofthe management. The management has not filed to rebut the documentary evidence of the workman . These documents show that she worked continuously and not intermittently. She has also filed photocopy of the certificate granted by the Incharge of the Department which is Annexure W/20 . She has been drawn attention in her evidence by the management that the said certificate was taken for getting another job . However the said certificate shows that she was in employment of the management continuously w.e.f. 14-11-95 to 30-11- 98. There is nothing in the evidence to show that the said document is forged or fabricated nor the said document is denied by the management . Thus it is clear that she was more than 240 days in employment twelve months preceding the date with reference. It is an admitted fact that no notice nor any compensation was paid under the provision of Section 25 -F of theAct, 1947 .

5902

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST : 13,2011 / SRAVANA 22, 1933

[PART II-SEC. 3( t)]

Tribunal-cum - Labour Court, Jabalpur as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers inrelationto the management of Telecom District Manager and their workman , which was received by the Central Government on 21-7-2011 .

[No. L-40012/344/ 1999- IR (DU)] JOHAN TOPNO, Under Secy.

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT "However it has not been contended that the services of the respondent were not gorerned by the provisions of the Industrial Disputes Act . He worked from 16-9-85 to 19-5-87. He must have , thus , completed 240 days of service . The termination ofhis services without complying with the provisions of Section 25 -F of the industrial disputes Act was, thus , illegal . He , however, had unjustly been directed to continue in service by reason of an interim order. He has been continuing in service pursuant thereto.

INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL CUM- LABOUR COURT, JABALPUR

NO . CGIT/LC/R/132/2000

The appellant, in our opinion, cannot be made to suffer owingto a mistake on the part of the court . The respondent also cannot take advantage of a wrong order.

PresidingOfficer : SHRI MOHD.SHAKIR HASAN

Shri Jakir Hussain ,

S/ o Basarat Hussain Ramward Garha Kota, Sagar(MP)

Workman

Versus

In the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, we are, therefore, ofthe opinion that interest ofjustice would be subserved if, in place of directing reinstatement of the services of the respondent, the appellant is directed to pay a sum ofRs . 10,000 by way of compensation to him. It isdirected accordingly. The orders under challenge are set aside. The appeal is allowed with the aforementioned directions and observations ."

Telecom District Manager, Sagar(MP)

Management

AWARD

Thus it appears that it is proper instead of directing the management to reinstate the workman in service , the management is directed to pay a sum ofRs.50,000/-(Rupees Fifty Thousand only) by way of compensation to her within three months from the date of award. Accordingly the reference is answered.

Passed on this 14th day of July, 2011 9. In the result, the award is passed without any order to costs .

1. The Government of India, Ministry of Labour vide its Notification No.L - 40012/344/ 1999 /IR (DU) dated 7-7-2000 has referred the following dispute for adjudication by this tribunal :-

10. Let the copies of the award be sent to the Government of India, Ministry of Labour & Employment asper rules.

MOHD. SHAKIR HASAN, Presiding Officer नई दिल्ली, 21 जुलाई , 2011

" Whether the action of the management ofDistrict Manager, Telecom , Sagar (MP) in terminating the services of Shri Jakir Hussain , casual labour w.e.f. 22-10-90 is legal and justified ? If not, to what relief the workman is entitled?"

का.आ. 2162.- औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 (1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार टेलीकॉम डिस्ट्रिक्ट मेनेजर के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच , अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालय , जबलपुर के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या सी जी आई टी/एल सी/आर/ 132/2000 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 21-7-2011 को प्राप्त हुआ था।

[सं. एल-40012/344/1999- आई आर ( डी यू) ] जोहन तोपनो, अवर सचिव

2. The case of the workman , in short, is that he was engaged as casual labour in the year 1984 and workedin the year 1984 for 6 days , in the year 1985 for 196 days , in 1986 for 142 days in 1987 for 241 days , in 1988 for 342 days and in 1990 for 192 days, It is stated that the was not given temporary status as per policy framed by the department nor was regulaized in the service . He was terminated orally without notice and without giving any compensation in violation of the Industrial Dispute Act . 1947 ( inshort the Act 1947) . It is submited that the workman be reinstated withbackwages .

New Delhi, the 21st July, 2011

S.O. 2162. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. CGIT/ LC/R/ 132/2000) of the Central Government Industrial

3. The management appeared and filed Written Statement in the case. The case of the management , interalia, is that the applicant workman was engaged for project work on temporary basis and after completion of the work, he was not further engaged . He left the work on [भाग II- खण्ड 3(ii) ]

hisown accord. It is stated that he was never engaged for more than240 days in a calendar year. On these ground, it is stated that he is not entitled to any relief and the reference be answered accodingly.

4. On the pleadings of the parties , the following issues are framed-

I. Whether the action of the management in termi- nating the services of the workman is legal and justified?

II . To what relief, the workman is entitled ?

5. Issue No. I

The workman has adduced only documentary evidence in the case . Exhibit W/1 is the copy of the order passed in O.A. No. 411 of 1990 and 12 other applications by the Central Administrative Tribunal , Jabalpur whereby it was ordered that the casual labours who were engaged before 22-6-88 shall be regularized . This is filed to show that similar casual labours who were engaged before 22-6-88 were regularized . This workman was not party to that case . The question is as to whether the case of this workman was similar to those casual labours or not . The workman did not turn up for cross examination in the case. As such his evidence is of no use . There is no other evidence adduced by the workman to prove that his case was similar to those casual labour who were directed to beregularized in O.A. No. 411/1990 .

6. On the other hand, the management has examined Shri R. G. Gohewho is Divisional Engineer (Admn. ) Sagar. He has supported the case of the management . He has stated that the workman was engaged for specific work with a condition that as the work is completed his service will come to an end . This clearly shows that Section 2 (oo)(bb) ofthe Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 is applicable and he does not come under the definition of retrenchment . He has further stated that the workman had never worked for 240 days or more in a calendar year. Hisevidence is unrebutted . There is no reason to disbelieve his evidence . His evidence clearly shows that there is no violation of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. Thus this issue is decided in favour of the management and against the workman.

7. Issued No. I

Onthe basis of the discussion made above , the workman is not entitled to any relief. Accordingly the reference is answered .

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

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

MOHD . SHAKIR HASAN , Presiding Officer

5903

भारत का राजपत्र : अगस्त 13 , 2011/ श्रावण 22 , 1933

नई दिल्ली, 21 जुलाई , 2011.

का.आ. 2163.- औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में , केन्द्रीय सरकार चीफ पोस्ट मास्टर जनरल के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच , अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण , नागपुर के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या सी जी आई टी/एन जी पी/ 109/2003 ) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को21-7-2011 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल -40012/ 195 /2002- आई आर ( डीयू) ] जोहन तोपनो , अवर सचिव New Delhi , the 21st July, 2011

S.O. 2163.-In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. CGIT/ NGP/ 109/2003 ) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal -cum - Labour Court, Nagpur as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of Chief Post Master General and their workmen , which was received bythe Central Government on 21-7-2011 .

[No. L-40012/195 /2002- IR (DU) ] JOHAN TOPNO, Under Secy.

ANNEXURE

BEFORE SHRI J.P. CHAND, PRESIDING OFFICER, CGIT-CUM- LABOUR COURT, NAGPUR

Dated 11-7-2011 Case No. CGIT /NGP/109/2003

PartyNo.1 : The Chief Post Master General, Raipur Circle , Deptt. of Posts ," Raipur(C.G.)

Versus

PartyNo.2 : Shri Rakesh Kumar Umre , Qr. No. 296, Road No.8, Shanti Nagar, Supala, Bhilai , P.O. Supela, Durg (M.P. ) .

AWARD

(Dated the 11th July, 2011 )

Inexercise of the powers conferred by clause. (d ) of sub -section ( 1 ) and sub - section 2 (A) of section 10 of Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) ( " the Act " in short) , the Central Government has referred the industrial dispute between the employers in relation to the management of Raipur Circle , Deptt . of Posts and their workman , Shri Rakesh Umre , to this Tribunal for adjudication as per letter No. L - 40012/ 195/ 2002 - IR (DU) dated 11-3-2003 with the following schedule :

"Whether the termination of service of Shri Rakesh Umre , Ex -daily wages Pharmacist in the P & T 5904

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST : 13 , 2011 /SRAVANA- 22, 1933

[PART IISec. 3(ii)] Dispensary, Raipur w.e.f. 2-8-1998 by the Chief Post MasterGeneral , Raipur Circle is legal and justified ?

Ifnot, to what relief the workman is entitled to ? "

completed more than 240 days of work prior to his termination of service and his services were terminated on 31-7-1998 without compliance of the provisions of Section 25-F of the Act . On the other hand, the Party No. 1 has pleaded that the workman was engaged in different spells . in leave vacancy and he had not completed 240 days of work prior to his disengagement .

2.Being noticed, the workman , Shri Rakesh Umre ("the workman" in short ) filed his statement of claim , whereas, the management of Post Office ("the Party No. 1 " in short) filed their written statement . The case of the workman as projected in the statement of claim is that he was appointed by the Party No.1 as a daily wage Pharmacist from 5-10-1994 to 8-1-1995 , 24-4-1995 to 7-5-1995 , 12-6-1995 to 29-8-1995 , 8-9-1995 to 15-11-1995 , 1-2-1996 to 16-2-1996 , 14-8-1997 to 31-7-1998 and certificates were issued in his favour in that regard and he worked as a Pharmacist from 5-10-1994 to 31-7-1998 continuously, which was more than 240 days and as such , he was entitled to be appointed permanently in the said job , but , he was not taken on duty from31-7-1998by the Party No. 1 and the Party No.1 without any reason , terminated his services without following the provisions of Section 25 -F of the Act . The workman has, prayed for reinstatement in service with back wages and consequential benefits .

It is well settled that in such a case, the initial burden of proof is on the workman to show that he had completed 240 days of service preceding the 12 calendar months of the date of the alleged date of termination of service and even the failure of the employer to prove a defence, the onus of proof does not shift to the employer nor is the burden of proof on the workman discharged, merely beacuse employer fails to prove a defence and filing of affidavit of workman to the effect that he had worked for 240 days continuously or that the workman had made repeated representations or raised demands for reinstatement , is not sufficient evidence that can discharge the said burden and other substantive evidence needs to be adduced to prove 240 days continuous service .

In this case no oral evidence has been adduced by the parties . Some certificates grantedby the Party No.1 have been filed on behalf of the workman . On perusal of the said certificates , it is found that the workman, was engaged by the Party No.1 at different spells on the leave vacancy of the permanent Pharmacist . The certificate granted on 1-8-1998 shows that the workman was engaged as a Pharmacist on daily wages basis in the leave vacancy from 14-8-1997 to 31-7-1998 in different spells of not more than 89 days . From the said certificate , it cannot be calculated as to for how many days the workman was engaged in the preceding 12 months of 31-7-1998 i.e. the dateof alleged date of termination of service . There is no other evidence on record to show that the workman worked for 240 days in the preceding 12 months of the date of the alleged termination . The workman has failed to discharge the initial burden that he worked for 240 days in the preceding 12 months of 31-7-1998 . Therefore , compliance of the provisions of Section 25 - F is not applicable to this case .

3. The Party No.1 in their written statement has pleaded inter alia that the workman was engaged on casual basis during the leave vacancy of regular Pharmacist and no appointment order was issued to the applicant and as such, question of his removal from service from 31-7-1998 does not arise and the workman did not work continuously on daily wages basis from 14-8-1997 to 31-7-1998 and he worked on different spells during the period from 14-8-1997 to 31-8-1998 and he had not completed 240 days of work during the aforesaid period and as he was engaged in differrent spell during the leave vacancy of the regular Pharmacist , he is not entitled for regular appointment, in view of the principles enunciated by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Union of India and Others versus Debikar Guha and Others , 2000(3 ) S.C. SLJ - 132 that , "substitute/ adhoc casual worker have no right for regular appointment , merely because an employee continued beyond the term of his appointment, he would not be entitled to any right to be absorbed or made permanent in services merely on such continuance , if the original appointment was not made by following a due process of selection as envisaged by the relevant rules " and the applicant is claiming regularization and appointment in a civil post and he does not fall within the definition of " workman " and as such , the Act is not applicable and the Tribunal has nojurisdiction to adjudicate the reference and the workman is not entitled to any relief.

4. In this case , the workman has claimed that he worked continuously from 5-10-1994 to 31-7-1998 and

It is also clear from the documents filed by the workman himself that he was engaged on daily wages basis as a Pharmacist in different spells on leave vacancy and not on regular basis and he was never engaged continuously and his engagement was never in a regular basis or in accordance with the relevant rules . Hence he has no right for reinstatement in service and to claim permanent appointment. Hence , it is ordered .

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii ) ]

5905

भारत का राजपत्र अगस्त 13 , 2011/ श्रावण 22 , 1933

ORDER

I D No. 35/2010

Registered on 25-5-2010

The reference is answered in the negative. The workman is not entitled to any relief.

J. P. CHAND, Presiding Officer

Shri Sher Singh S/o Sh . Sukh Ram , C/ o Sh . Rajesh Kumar Sharma, President District CITU, District CommitteeMandi, 221/10, Thanera Mohalla, Mandi (HP)

Applicants नई दिल्ली, 21 जुलाई , 2011

Versus

1. The General Manager, Kol Dam Hydro Electric Power Project, NTPC , VPO Barmana, Bilaspur (HP) .

2. The Managing Director, M/s AKS Engineers and Contractors, Kol Dam Hydro Electric Power Project, Sanjay Sadan, Chhota Shimla- 171002 .

3. Project Manager , Italian.Thai Development Co. Ltd. , Kol Dam Hydro Electric Power Project, Village Kayan, PO Slapper , Teh . Sundernagar , Mandi (HP) .

का.आ. 2164.-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 (1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में , केन्द्रीय सरकार कोल डैम हाइड्रो इलेक्ट्रिक पॉवर प्रोजेक्ट , एनटीपीसी के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच , अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालय नं. 2 , चण्डीगढ़ के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 25 , 32, 35/2010 ) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 21-7-2011 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

...Respondents

APPEARANCES

[सं. एल-42012/22 ,44, 31/2010- आई आर ( डी यू) ] जोहन तोपनो , अवर सचिव

For the Workman :

None

ForRespondent No. 1 :

New Delhi , the 21st July, 2011

Sh . Vikas P. Singh , Advocate

ForRespondent No. 3 : Sh . H.R. Sharma, Sr. Manager (HR & IR)

AWARD

Passed on 7th July, 2011 S.O. 2164. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 25, 32, 35/2010) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal- cum-Labour Court No. 2. Chandigarh as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between employers in relation to the management of Kol Dam Hydro Electric Power Project , NTPC and their workmen , which was received by the Central Government on 21-7-2011 .

[No. L -42012/22, 44, 31 /2010- IR ( DU) ]

JOHAN TOPNO , Under Secy.

ANNEXURE

IN THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL- UM - LABOUR COURT- II , CHANDIGARH

The Central Government vide Notification No. L-42012/22/ 2010 - IR ( DU) L- 42012/44-2010 ( IR (DU ) , and L-42012/3-2010 - IR ( DU) all dated 12-5-2010 in exercise of the powers conferred under Section 10 sub- section 1 Clause (d) and sub- section (2A) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 has referred the question of the legality and justification of the action of the management of M/ s AKS Engineers and Contractors , a. Sub- Contractor or M/ s Indian Thai Development Public Company Ltd. of NTPC Kol Dam in terminating the services of the workman and of the relief to which the workmen are entitled, for adjudication to this Tribunal .

PRESENT : Presiding Officer SRI A. K. RASTOGI ,

CASE ID No. 25 of 2010

Registered on 25-5-2010

Sh . Pyar Singh S/ o Sh . Kala Ram , C/ o Sh. Rajesh Kumar Sharma, President District CITU, District Committee Mandi, 221/10 , Thanera Mohalla, Mandi (HP) .

ID No. 32/2010

Registered on 25-5-2010

After receiving the references the notices were issued to the parties . The respondent No.1 and 3 put in their appearances . But the workmen did not appear and file claim statement despite notices sent to them by registered post on 20-1-2011 , Respondent No. 2 Managing Director M/ s AKS Engineers and Contractors Kol Dam Hydro Electric Power Project , Sanjay Sadan , Chhota Shimla also did not appear. Since the workmen did not appear and submit their claim statement , the references are decided against them : Two copies of the Award be sent to the Central Government for further necessary action and one copy each be placed on the record of ID No. 25 / 2010, 32/2010 and 35/2010 respectively.

ASHOK KUMAR RASTOGI, Presiding Officer Sh . Kazana Ram S/o Sh . Theber Ram , C/ o Sh. Rajesh Kumar Sharma, President District CITU , District CommitteeMandi, 221/10 , Thanera Mohalla, Mandi (HP) .

5906

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 13 , 2011 /SRAVANA 22, 1933

नई दिल्ली, 21 जुलाई , 2011

का.आ. 2165 औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 (1947) का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार नवल डॉक याई प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण नं. 2 , मुम्बई के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या सीजीआईटी-2/93 ऑफ 2000 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 21-7-2011 को प्राप्त हुआ था।

[सं. एल-14012/ 10/2000- आईआर ( डी यू) ] जोहन तोपनो , अवर सचिव NewDelhi, the21st July, 2011

S.O. 2165.- 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/ 93 of2000) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal No. 2, Mumbai as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of Naval Dockyard and their workman , which was received by the Central Government on 21-7-2011 .

[No. L- 14012/ 10/2000- IR (DU)] JOHAN TOPNO , Under Secy.

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNALNO. 2, MUMBAI

PRESENT

K. B. KATAKE, Presiding Officer

Reference No. CGIT- 2/93 of 2000 EMPLOYERS IN RELATION TO THE MANAGEMENT OF NAVAL DOCKYARD

TheAdmiral Superintendent,

NavalDockyard, Western Naval Command, Shahid Bhagat Singh Marg, Fort, Mumbai -400 023.

AND

Their Workmen

Simt. Rajvati B. Karotia LAR ofBishan Swarup Karotia, RoomNo. D- 1, AmbikaHousing Society, Khadi No. 3 , Sakinaka, Mumbai-400072.

[PART IISEC. 3 (ii)) APPEARANCES :

Mr. V. Narayanan, Advocate For the Employer :

For the Workman : No appearance.

Mumbai, dated the 14th June, 2011 AWARD PART- II

The Government of India, Ministry of Labour & Employment by its Order No. L- 14012/10/2000- (DU) dated 9-8-2000 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 refered the following industrial dispute to this Tribunal for adjudication:

"Whether the action of the management of Naval Dockyard , Mumbai in terminating the services of Bishan Swarup Sirichand Karotia (Token No. 2449) and Ex-Class IV worker w.e.f. 20-1-1996 is legal and justified? Ifnot, to what relief the workman concerned isentitled? "

2.After receipt of the reference both the parties were served with notices in response to the notice, the second party workman has filed his statement of claim at Ex- 8 . According to him , he was in service of the first party management as a class -IV worker w.e.f. 16-10-1986 . On 6-7-87 he was confirmed as a permanent worker. Since 16-10-86 he was working continuously sincerely and honestly. Since 6-6-1994 the workman was taken ill . He was suffering from chronic backache/ bodyache with anxiety anddepression . He was under medical treatment from CG HealthScheme.He was referred to Sion Hospital. He took treatment of Dr. Anil , Dr. D. Khot , Dr. Dilip Joshi . He was under treatment from 5-7-94 . From 14-8-99 fitness certificate was issued by Dr. Joshi . He certified that the workman was fitto work from 16-8-99 . The workman and his wife had given various letters to the first party since 10-9-94 upto 27-5-99 and kept on informing about the illness and the treatment of the workman . After he obtained fitness certificate, he wanted to join his duties . Accordingly he informed to first party. However they did not give any reply to his letter. When he approached the workplace, the time keeper told him that his services were already terminated w.e.f. 28-1-1996 .

3.According to the workman , he remained absent as hewas taken ill . No chargesheet was served on him . Neither any inquirywas conducted. He was terminated from service without inquiry or any notice thereof. Therefore the workman has prayed that the order oftermination is illegal unjustified . The same should be quashed and he be reinstated in service with full backwages and continuity in service with consequential benefits .

4. The first party management resisted the statement ofclaim vide their written statement at Ex . 10. According to them, the first party is not an ' industry' within the meaning [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

5907

भारत का राजपत्र अगस्त 13 , 2011 /श्रावण 22, 1933

the point ofpunishment to determine the adequacy thereof. In part- I award , the inquiry is held fair and proper so also the findings of Inquiry Officer were held not perverse . In the circumstances for deciding the point of adequacy of sentence, oral evidence has a very little role to play. Infact. it is a point of law. Therefore , even in the absence of oral evidence, finding on this point can be recorded. Therefore , evenin the absence of oral evidence , I would like to examine the adequacy of sentence in the light of principles of law and the well settled precedents ofApex Court.

8. The workman was absent for more than five and half years continuously. Such a long absence without intimation or without obtaining permission is no doubt treated as gross misconduct . On the point Apex Court ruling can be resorted to in Chairman & MD V.S.P. & Ors . V/ s . Goparaju Sir Prabhakara Hari Babu 2008 - II LLJ - 645 wherein the Hon'ble Court held that:

"Punishment of removal from service for habitual unauthorized and continuous absenteeism is justified. High Court cannot reverse the punishment on the ground of sympathy or sentiment ." of Section (j ) of I.D. Act, 1947. According to them the second party is a Government servant governed by article 309 of Constitution of India. The applicant was absent from duty continuously from 6-1-1994 . He was served with chargesheet vide Memorandumdt 24-5-1995 under rule 14 ofCentral Civil Services ( Classification Control andAppeal) Rules , 1965. The inquiry was conducted . Inspite of service of chargesheet, the workman did not give any reply to the chargesheet . Neither he took part in the inquiry. Therefore inquiry was proceeded against him as per the procedure and services ofworkman was terminated w.e.f. 20-01-1996 . Before termination of his service , copy of inquiry report with showcause notice was served on the workman . He did not give any reply. Therefore, order of termination was passed and the same was served on the workman on his residence address . The inquiry was fair and proper. The workman was continuously absent since January, 1994. Не neither applied for leave nor obtained permission from the concerned officer. Therefore his service was rightly terminated for the misconduct . The punishment is proportionate tothe misconduct. Therefore they pray that reference be dismissed with cost .

5. In the Part - I Award my Ld Predecessor held that the inquiry was fair and proper and the findings of Inquiry Officer were not perverse. Therefore this second part of inquirywas proceeded with to decide the following issues :

Issues

Findings

9. In short continuous absenteeism for a period of more than five years amount to serious misconduct to impose punishment of termination . Thus I hold that the punishment of termination of services ofthe second party workman is quite adequate and needs no interference. Accordingly, I decide this issue no . 1 in the affirmative .

Issue no.(ii) :

(i) Whether the punishment is proportionate to the miscon- duct of the workman?

Yes.

Does not arise .

(ii) If not, what punishment should be awarded to him?

(iii) What order ?

Asper final order.

REASONS

10. As issue no . I is decided in the affirmative question of awarding any lesser sentence does not arise. Thus I decide this issue no . 2 as does not arise . In the light of the above discussion, I come to the conclusion that punishment imposed by the management as per the recommendation of Inquiry Officer is quite adequate and it needs no interference . As a result, the reference deserves tobe rejected. Thus the order :

Issue no. (i) :

ORDER

The reference stands rejected with no order as to cost.

Dated: 14-6-2011

Κ.Β. ΚΑΤΑΚΕ, Presiding Officer/Judge नई दिल्ली, 21 जुलाई , 2011:

का.आ. 2166 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 , चैन्नई के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 30/2008 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 21-7-2011 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

6. During pendency of the reference the workman expired . His wife was taken on record as L/R of second party workman. She filed her affidavit on 20-4-2010 at Ex-43 .However, thereafter, she did not turn up to face the cross -examination . Therefore her affidavit cannot be read in the evidence . Furthermore , the wife of the second party workman had already filed an application Ex- 35. She made a request to settle the retirement dues such as P.F. Gratuity and other retirement benefits at an earliest and she do not want to pursue the pending reference . The wife of second partyworkman is consistently absent since April , 2010. On the other hand the concerned officer of first party management has filed purshis Ex-45 stating that they have paid all the dues of the workman and now there is nothing to settle or payto the second party. Therefore it is submitted that the reference be dismissed .

[सं. एल -40011 /7/2008-आईआर (डीयू) ] जोहन तोपनो, अवर सचिव 7. Though the parties had not led any evidence on THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 13 , 2011/SRAVANA 22, 1933

5908

NewDelhi, the 21st July, 2011

S.O. 2166 -In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 30/2008) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal -cum - Labour Court, Chennai as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management ofDepartment of Posts and their workman , which was received by the Central Government on 24-7-2011.

[No. L-40011 /7/2008- IR(DU)] JOHAN TOPNO , Under Secy.

ANNEXURE

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

Thursday, the 14th July, 2011

PRESENT : A. N. JANARDANAN, Presiding Officer Industrial Dispute No. 30/2008 [In the matter of the dispute for adjudication under clause (d) of sub-section ( 1 ) and sub - section 2 (A) of Section 10 ofthe Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947) betweentheManagement of Senior Superintendent ofPost Offices, Chennai and their Workman ]

BETWEEN

Sri R. Meignanamurthy ( Deceased) 1st Party/Petitioner M. Chandrika

2.M. Kousalya

(1stParty/PartyNos . 1 & 2 Legal Heirs ofthe Deceased Workman)

Vs

The Director of Postal Services : 2nd Party/

1stRespondent TamilNaduCircle, D/o Post Chennai City Region Chennai -2

The Senior Supdt. ofPost Offices 2nd Party/ Deptt. ofPosts , Sub-Division - II 2nd Respondent Chennai City South Division , T.Nagar, Chennai -600017

2nd Party/ The Principal Chief Post Master :

3rd Respondent General (TN Circle), D/o Posts & Telegraphs , Anna Road, Chennai-600002

The Post Master

: 2nd Party/

4tt. Respondent D/o Post, Saidapet Post Office , Saidapet, Chennai -600015

APPEARANCE :

Forthe 1st Party/Petitioner : M/ s Ajoy Khose & V. Porkodi , Advocates For the 2nd Party/ 1st to 4th : Sri B. Sekar, Advocate Management

[PART IISBC. 3(ii)]

AWARD

The Central Government, Ministry of Labour vide its Order No. L-40011 / 7 /2008 - IR (DU) dated 06-06-2008 referred the following Industrial Dispute to this Tribunal for adjudication.

The schedule mentioned in that order is.:

"Whether the action of the management of Senior Superintendent of Post Offices, Chennai in imposing the penalty of compulsory retirement from services on their. workman Sri R. Meignanamurthy vide memo dated 10-09-2001 is legal and justified ? If not, to what reliefthe workman is entitled to ?"

2. After the receipt of the Industrial Dispute, the referred ID was taken on file as ID 30/2008 and issued notices to both sides . Both sides entered appearance through their Advocates and filed their Claim, Counter, Amended Claim and Amended Counter Statement as the casemaybe.

3. The averments in the Amended Claim Statement also comprising those in the original Claim Statement, briefly read as follows :

The first and second petitioners of Ist Party are respectivelywife and daughter of Sri R. Meignanamurthy, now deceased original petitioner/ workman who had been appointed as Class - IV Staff on 10-02-1972, later promoted as Postman under Group-C in 1991. He was entitled to time bound promotion of 16 years service in 1997 in the post of Postman but which was not granted to him in spite of request. During 1998 he developed occupational disease ofhypertension and became heart patient and he was forced to take Medical Leave from 21-06-1998 sending leave application . After rejoining duty on 28-06-1998 he further. proceeded on Medical Leave during 4 spells in 1998 and 1999where after he rejoined duty. The above leave was not rejectedbut weretreated as periods ofdies non unilaterally without notice to the workman . He was called upon to submit fresh applications and medical certificates , the earlier onesbeingmisplaced , and he complied with the requisition . On 26-11-1999 he was issued with a Charge Memo alleging belatedness of the leave applications and alleging unauthorized absence and stamping him as a habitual absentee . He was alleged of violating Rules 31 ( ii) and 31 ( iii ) ofthe CCS ( Conduct) Rules , 1964 such as failure in devotion to duty and behaving in a manner unbecoming of government servant . An enquiry was held and in the report dated 23-10-2000 he was found guilty of the charges by a laconic expression. On 10-9-2001 he was compulsorily retired, while certain new facts and adverse allegations against him weighed consideration with the Superintendent of Post Offices behind his back and in violation of principles ofnatural justice . On wrong conclusion contrary 5909 भारत का राजपत्र : अगस्त 13, 2011 /श्रावण 22, 1933

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

to the Charge Memo he was put to extreme penalty. The appeal dated 10-10-2001 was rejected on 18-06-2002 which was as per a direction of the Central Administrative Tribunal dated 18-04-2000 to dispose of it . Again on a move before the Central Administrative Tribunal it was directed to dispose the appeal afresh after seeing whether theAppellate Authority had gone beyond the charges and also had taken into account extraneous facts , where again the same thing happened further attributing act subversive of discipline in rejecting the appeal on 9-4-2003 . Revision dated 7-9-2003 was rejected on 29-04-2004 . Against the illegal and unjust orders the reference is occasioned. It ought to have been held that charges were not proved. Notice of personal hearing should have been given by the revisional authority or at least the matter should have been remanded. No order had been passed rejecting or refusing leave and there cannot be any absence or unauthorized absence of the petitioner to be so reckoned . One cannot predict and foresee supervention of illness to submit leave application in advance and the conduct of the Management is arbitrary, unreasonable and unconstitutional . At the most there would only be a belated submission of leave application , a procedural violation not to be met with extreme penalty. In the absence of denial of ill - health and genuineness of MedicalCertificate to hold his absence as deliberate is not correct, which was not a charge also . Petitioner was proceeded against as if he had admitted his guilt but what he admitted is only belated application for leave . In case of doubt petitioner ought to have been referred for the opinion of the Medical Board which was not done treating the period as Dies Non without notice and hearing . It is a pre- determined hostile attitude towards the petitioner. The punishment amounts to actual and legal victimization as well as unfair labour practice and is also prohibited under Section- 25 (T) read with Section - 25 (U) ofthe ID Act . There isdouble jeopardy of giving more than one punishment by treating period of absence as Dies Non and denying time- bound promotion apart from imposing Compulsory Retirement which is unjust , arbitrary and illegal . No other workmen has been similarly. punished. Hence it is discriminatory. After 28 years of service petitioner was due to retire on superannuation by 31-01-2009 . It affected him several ways including his terminal benefits . During the pendency ofthe ID petitioner died on 10-04-2010 leaving his family members to starve and struggle for livelihood . Setting aside his Compulsory Retirement the petitioner has to be ordered to be given time bound promotion from the due date with consequential benefits , back wages from date of Compulsory Retirement to the date of superannuation with revised terminal benefits receivable at the hands of his heirs .

4. The averments in the Amended Counter Statement also comprising those in the original Counter Statement, briefly read as follows:

Petitioner had been habitually absenting from duty un-authorizedly on 23 occasions from 5-4-1972 to 16-9-2001 for a total of 1217 days, which period were treated as Dies Non under due process . He was awarded departmental punishments for various irregularities such as postponement of one increment for six months as per order dated 29-7-1972 for misbehaviour towards superior, one increment for 1 year on 5-12-1974 for refusal to obey superior,was suspended from 6-10-1972 to 29-7-1974 for misbehaviour, for delay in making delivery of letters with false remarks, for unauthorized absence on 4-7-1972, 5-7-1972 and 7-7-1972 . He was awarded punishment of reduction of payby4stages for 1 year from 1-1-1981 , on 30-12-1980 for retaining letters for delivery, on 24-2-1983 causing inconvenience to the public for making false remarks as "Not Known" on 25 letters , subsequently got deliveredby another postman, staying away from duty from 5-4-1983 to 9-4-1983 for which 1 increment due on 1-1-1984 for 3 years was withheld on 13-6-1983 . He deserted duties at R.A. Puram Post Office and committed dereliction ofduty on 28-5-1983 and 18-7-1983 , un- authorizedly absented from 24-10-1983 to 27-10-1983 for which he was punished withholding 1 increment for 3 years on 24-11-1983 . While at Saidapet PostOffice he un -authorizedly absented during 6occasions ranging from 21-6-1998 to 27-6-1998 and 11-08-1998 to 14-9-1999 with belated leave applications . He did not respond to Show Cause Notice whereby Dies Non was imposed as per rules . On 26-11-1999 charge was issued. Enquiry was held. He did not reply to the report ofenquiry and hence he was compulsorily retired on 17-9-2001 and terminal benefits settled. Petitioner did not mend himself and continuedhis lapses in spite ofadequate opportunities given. He is governed by CCS (Conduct) Rules , 1964 and CCS(CCA) Rules , 1965 and he cannot come under IDAct. Post Office has been held to be not an industry by the Apex Court . Termination by way of punishment in disciplinary action not being retrenchment ID Act is not applicable. ID is to be dismissed. He was promoted as Postman on 22-01-1983 and not in 1991. He was due for financial up -gradation on completion of 16 years of qualifying service w.e.f. 21-1-1999. Working out 1217 days i.e. 2 Years , 8 Months and 9 Days asunauthorized absence period he completing 16 years of qualifying service: excluding Dies Non only on 30-09-2001 he was eligible for financial up-gradation on 1-10-2001 , ifhe was eligible during the pendency of a Rule- 14 case against him on the date due to which financial up gradation could not be given . For the unauthorized absence from 21-6-1998 to 3-8-1998: he did not intimate his illness till 31-7-1998 . Medical Certificate showing illness as Enteric Fever but mentioned as hypertension/heart patient elsewhere is an afterthought. While at Saidapet Post Office he submitted leave application withMedical Certificates belatedly which showed no heart problem . Leave was not granted by the competent authority. Dies Non was imposed after notice only. Leave applications were submitted only on rejoining duty on several occasions.

5910

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 13, 2011 /SRAVANA 22, 1933

Case as to misplacing of leave applications is an afterthought . During the final hearing of the enquiry dated 20-10-2000 petitioner had accepted the charges .His legal heirs cannot claim any benefits under the ID Act . After the death ofthe petitioner his wife becomes eligible for Family Pension. Petitioner was never asked to apply for Medical Leave in advance. Charge Sheet clearly showed the period ofhis unauthorized absence . The report of the Medical Board is not a general necessity. Punishment is in order. The claim is only to be dismissed.

5.Points for consideration are :

(i) Whether the Compulsory Retirement of the deceased petitioner by the Management is legal and justified ?

(i) To what relief the concerned workman is entitled

6. Evidence consists of the oral evidence of WW1 and Ex .W1 to Ex . W14 on the petitioner's side and on the side of the Respondent testimony by Proof Affidavit in lieu of Chief Examination with no cross -examination later endorsed as not pressed by Respondent's Counsel due to consent being given for marking Ex.Ml to Ex.M14 and Ex.MI to Ex.M14 marked on the consent of the petitioner.

Points ( i) & ( ii)

7. Heard both sides . Perused the documents , records and written arguments filed on behalf ofthe Respondents. According to the learned counsel for the petitioner Postal Department is an industry and under Section - 10 (8 ) of the IDAct the legal representatives of the deceased petitioner/ workman can continue the proceedings in terms of benefits receivable at their hands as Legal Heirs of the deceased . Unless there is challenge and the reference is set aside the same requires to be adjudicated upon by the Tribunal . Petitioner availed léave due to illness on medical certificate . No employee absents himself without any reason or sufficient grounds . He was absent due to illness which is not described as willful, habitual or deliberate in the charge- sheet. Petitioner was not heard on the question of punishment in violation of the principles of natural justice that his act amounted to subversive of discipline is not so mentioned in the charge . His Compulsory Retirement is to be set aside and he is to be given reinstatement, back wages and with other benefits so as to procure for him terminal benefits at the enhanced rates and the family pension at the enhanced rates receivable by his wife since the petitioner has since been dead . The consideration of past alleged bad conduct without opportunity of being heard for imposed punishment is bad in law.

8. Contra arguments on behalf of the Respondent are that the petitioner was absent on 23 occasions totaling 1217 days during his entire service of 29 years . He has admitted his misconduct . He was willfully and want only

[PART II SEC. 3(ii)] absenting without information against the rules and procedure for proceeding on leave . His leave application and medical certificates were only belatedly filed on the expiry of the leave periods . Unauthorized absence was clearly shown in the charge- sheet which preceded the holding of the valid enquiry. The petitioner had not completed 16 years of qualifying service for TBOP promotion and hence the same was not granted. Now his wife has become eligible for family pension. Post Office is not an industry and the petitioner being governed by CCS and CCA Rules , 1965 and not by the ID Act and therefore IDAct is not maintainable . The claim is to be dismissed.

9. Reliance was placed on behalf of the petitioner on a number of decisions such as :

UNION OF INDIA AND REGISTRAR , INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL , CHENNAI AND ANOTHER (2010 - III - LLJ - 349 ) wherein the High Court of Madras upheld the decision of the Tribunal reinstating the workman who has put in 20 years of service depriving the entire backwages and treating the period of unauthorized absence as leave on loss of pay.

The judgment dated 12-08-2008 in Writ Appeal No. 801/2008 and MP No. 1/2008 the High Court ofMadras held that " no person can ask for prior leave if he falls ill as the illness does not come giving notice to a person".

10. On behalf ofthe Respondent reliance was placed on the ruling ofthe Apex Court in STATE OF PUNJAB VS. DR . P.L. SINGLA (2008-8 - SCC-469) wherein it is held " if unauthorized absence remains unaccounted it will result in break in service, thereby affecting the seniority, pension , pay, etc. ofthe employee. Any consequential order directing how the period of absence shouldbe accounted, is an accounting and administrative procedure , which does not affect or supersede the order imposing punishmenf ".

11. The crux of the question is whether the Compulsory Retirement of the petitioner is legal and justified. The workman faced charge in an enquiry for unauthorized absence during various spells in 1998 and 1999 though later sought to be set right by applying for leave with medical certificates belatedly, which leave applications do not stand sanctioned by the competent authority and the periods of absence of the petitioner thus standing treated as Dies - Non do not qualify him for time- bound promotion to which he would have otherwise been entitled. The contention on behalf of the petitioner that PostOffice is an industry and that ID Act is applicable to the petitioner in the given facts of the case is acceptable as a settled position . Whether the petitioner is entitled to a punishment less than the one imposed as being disproportionate to the gravity of the offence is the question that looms large for consideration .Agood mumber [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

5911

भारत का राजपत्र : अगस्त 13, 2011/ श्रावण 22, 1933

his previous misconduct without hearing him violating principles of natural justice which is illegal . Apart from that view of the matter the punishment imposed appears harsh and disproportionate to the gravity of the misconduct. He should have been imposed some lesser punishment by which his continuance in service is not disturbed . The contention on his behalf that there has been double jeopardy in the matter of punishment is not without substance. Не has been treated as on Dies - Non . His time- bound promotion is denied . He has been made to retire compulsorily too. The cumulative impact ofall these renders the action harsh. It is disproportionate to the gravity of the present misconduct shocking the conscience of the Court . Therefore the same requires to be modified and reduced. Since the workman is now dead he is to be given a paper reinstatement into service with continuity of service till his date of superannuation and all attendant benefits but not back wages , which , i.e. forfeiture ofback wage shall be the modified punishment to be given to him . He is also not entitled to the time- bound promotion . He is entitled to his terminal benefits as well as family pension payable to his wife fixed at enhanced rates . The Management is directed to comply with the above forthwith-and the petitioners are entitled to the relief as above .

12. The reference is answered accordingly.

(Dictated to the P.A. , transcribed and typed by him , corrected and pronounced by me in the open court on this day the 14th July, 2011 )

A. N. JANARDANAN, Presiding Officer

Witnesses Examined :

For the 1st Party/

Petitioner

WW1 , Sri R. Meignanamurthy (Deceased)

For the 2nd Party/ MW1 , Sri A. Thomas Lourduraj Management

Documents Marked:-

From the Petitioner's side

Ex.No. Date

Description

Ex.W1

Leave letters and medical certificates submitted by the Ist Party to the 2nd Party.

Ex.W2 26-11-1999

Charge Memo issued to the 1st Party/Workman

Ex.W3

Enquiry Proceedings .

Ex.W4 23-10-2000 Enquiry findings .

Ex.W5 10-09-2001 Order of punishment passed by the 2nd Party/Party No.2 , Compulsory retiring the petitioner from services .

Ex.W6 10-10-2001

ofdecisions of the Apex Court and High Courts relied on by petitioner, a few of which have been mentioned supra whether are, apt to advance the case ofthe petitioner. Here is a dispute in which an enquiry was held after a proper charge sheet disclosing the allegations in which a finding was arrived rendering the workman guilty of having been unauthorizedly absent on belated leave applications with medical certificates, however disclosing ailments as to convince the competent authority to sanction the leave though at later points of time. That it has not been put to his notice as to his previous misconduct is a lacunae on the part of the Disciplinary Authority. It is brought home that the petitioner had been with the same misconduct from the inception of his service of habitually absenting without leave supported by medical certificates in time including misconduct of any other nature like misbehaviour towards superiors , disobeying them, non - adherence to dutydue to which he is shown to have had been subjected to various punishments , major or minor. When all these added together it could be seen that petitioner has been a workman whose conduct could not be mended and has been uncontrollable in the matter of enforcement of departmental discipline . But without putting the petitioner onnotice as to his previous misconduct, the same should not have weighed consideration with the Disciplinary Authority to impose upon him the impugned punishment . What appears is that it is taking into account the past misconduct also that the petitioner has been imposed the punishment. Illness does not come after issuing notice to its victim and that is to be allowed to be a defence in all or any of the instances of unauthorized absence without application for leave with medical certificate in the absence of compelling circumstances to proceed otherwise . When his period of absence is treated as Dies- Non the stand of the Management that he does not qualify for the time- bound promotion appears correct and is onlyjustifiable. Still one cannot jump into a hasty conclusion that petitioner ceased to have lack of interest in his work and that for some reason or other projecting the same to be under medical grounds on medical certificates produced belatedly with delayed leave applications he has been seeking to set right his lapses to continue in service of the Respondent . It is worthy to note that no workman absents : himself without any reason or sufficient grounds . When petitioner's absence during 1998 and 1999 without application for leave in advance on medical grounds which gave rise to the specific allegations of charge in the present enquiry in the culmination of which the petitioner was compulsorily retired is taken in isolation without consideration of the previous misconduct for which punishments were imposed then and there the present termination from service of petitioner with compulsorily retirement appears harsh. It is not necessary to be reiterated that the Disciplinary Authority appears to have been dissuaded to impose the same taking into consideration

Appeal filed by the Ist Party against the order ofpunishment.

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 13, 2011 / SRAVANA 22, 1933

5912

Ex.W7

OA No. 387/2002 filed by the 1st Party before the Central Administrative Tribunal .

Order in OA No. 387/2002 .

18-04-2002

Ex.W8

18-06-2002

Ex.W9

Order of the 2nd Party/Party No. 1 rejecting the appeal filed by the 1stParty.

Ex. W10

OA No. 887/2002 filed by the 1st Party before the Central Administrative Tribunal .

05-03-2003

Ex. W1

Order in OA No. 887/2002 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal.

09-04-2003

Ex.W12

Order in the Appellate Authority passed afresh after the order in OA No. 887/2002.

29-04-2003

Ex.W13.

Order ofthe 2nd Party/Party No. 3 rejecting the revision petition .

13-05-2003

Ex. W14

17-08-2004 Orders of the 2nd Party setting the terminal benefits to the 1st party. 25-08-2004

14-03-2005

23-08-2006

On the Management's side

Date

Ex. No

Description

29-07-1972

Ex.M1

Proceedings ofthe Postmaster, St. Thomas Mount HO issued to the petitioner.

Ex.M2 05-12-1974 Letter sent by SPM, Tiruvanmiyur to the petitioners .

Ex.M3 30-12-1980 Proceedings of the 2nd Respondent .

Ex.M4 13-06-1983 Proceedings issued of the SPM, R.A. Puram issued to the petitioner.

-do-

24-11-1983

Ex.MS

Ex.M6 26-11-1999 Proceedings of the 2nd Respondent.

-do-

13-09-2001

ExM7

Ex.M8 18-06-2002 Proceedings of the PMG, Chennai-2 .

13-03-2003

Ex.M

Order in OA No. 887/02 on the file ofHon'ble Central Administrative Tribunal , Madras Bench .

09-04-2003

Ex.M10

Proceedings of the PMG, Chennai-2.

Proceedings of the 3rd 29-04-2004

ExM11

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

2/2007

Ex.M12

Petition filed by the petitioner before Regional Labour Commissioner, Chennai-600006. 26-02-2009

Ex.M13

Report of the Regional Labour Commissioner, Chennai -600006.

Ex.M14 06-06-2008 Order of Ministry of Labour.

नई दिल्ली, 2 अगस्त, 2011

का.आ. 2167 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 । सितम्बर, 2011 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 आन्ध्र प्रदेश राज्य के निम्नलिखित क्षेत्रों में प्रवृत्त होंगे, अर्थात्:

"वरंगल जिले के हनुमकोण्डा मण्डल में स्थित मडिकोण्डा, कनपर्ती तथा कडिपिकोण्डा राजस्व गाँव तथा धर्मसागर मण्डल में स्थित धर्मसागर , रामपुर तथा करूणापुरम् का राजस्व गाँव ।"

[सं. एस -38013/57/2011 - एस.एस. 1 ]

एस. डी. जेवियर , अवर सचिव New Delhi , the 2nd August , 2011

S.O. 2167 -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 September, 2011 , as the date on which the provisions of Chapter IV (except Sections 44 and 45 which have already been brought into force) and Chapter-V and VI [ except sub- section ( 1 ) ofSection 76 and Sections 77, 78 , 79 and 81 which have already been brought into force ] of the said Act shall come into force in the following areas in the State of Andhra Pradesh namely:-

"All the Areas falling in the Revenue Villages of Madikonda , Kanaparthy and Kadipikonda in Hanamkonda Mandal, Dharmasagar, Rampur and Karunapuram in Dharamasagar Mandal , in Warangal District."

[No. S- 38013/57/2011 -SS. I ]

S. D. XAVIER, Under Secy.

नई दिल्ली , 2 अगस्त, 2011

का.आ. 2168 कर्मचारी राज्य बीमा अधिनियम , 1948 (1948 का 34 ) की धारा 1 की उप- धारा ( 3 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए , केन्द्रीय सरकार एतद्‌द्वारा । सितम्बर, 2011 को उस तारीख के रूप में नियत करती है, जिसको उक्त अधिनियम के 5913

भारत का राजपत्र अगस्त 13 , 2011 / श्रावण 22 , 1933.

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

कर्नाटक राज्य के निम्नलिखित क्षेत्रों में प्रवृत्त होंगे , अर्थात्:-

तालुक जिला

होबली

क्र. राजस्व ग्राम का नाम

सं. व नगरपालिका सीमाएं

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 आन्ध्र प्रदेश राज्य के निम्नलिखित क्षेत्रों में प्रवृत्त होंगे , अर्थात्:-

चित्रदुर्गा

चित्रदुर्गा

कसबा

1 केलगोटे इन्डस्ट्रियल एरिया

कसबा

चित्रदुर्गा

चित्रदुर्गा

2 के. आई.ए.डी.बी. एरिया

चित्रदुर्गा चित्रदुर्गा

कसबा

मेडेहल्ली विलेज 3

[सं. एस-38013/59/2011 - एस एस. 1 ]

एस. डी. जेवियर , अवर सचिव

New Delhi , the 2nd August , 2011 " करीमनगर जिले के जंगतियाल मण्डल में जगतियाल नगर निगम की सीमा में आने वाले सभी क्षेत्र तथा मल्लियाल मण्डल के राजारम और रामन्नापेट राजस्व गाँव- चलगल, धारूर , अंतरगाँव, नरसिंगपुर , तारकानगर ( नरसिंगपुर से संबद्ध खेड़ा गाँव ) , तिप्पन्नापेट , हैदरपल्लि ( तिप्पन्नापेट से संबद्ध खेड़ा गाँव ) , पोरंड्ला , कन्डलापल्लि, जबितापुर, लक्ष्मीपुर, वेंगलापुर , गोल्लापल्लि ( वेंगलापुर, से संबद्ध खेड़ा गाँव ) , मोथे, वेल्दुर्थी, रघुरामकोटा तिम्मापुर रघुरामकोटा ( तिम्मापुर, से संबद्ध खेड़ा गाँव ) । "

[सं. एस-38013/58/2011 - एस.एस. 1 ]

एस. डी. जेवियर, अवर सचिव

j New Delhi , the 2nd August , 2011

S.O. 2169.-In exercise of the powers confered by sub - section ( 3 ) of Section 1 of the Employees ' State Insurance Act, 1948 (34 of 1948 ) the Central Government hereby appoints the 1st September, 2011 , as the date on which the provisions of Chapter IV ( except Sectioris 44 and 45 which have already been brought into force ) and Chapter V and VI [ except sub- section ( 1 ) of Section 76 and Sections 77, 78 , 79 and 81 which have already been brought into force] of the said Act shall come into force in the following areas in the State of Karnataka namely

District

Taluk

Hobli

Sl . Name of the Rev.

No. Village of

Municipal Limits

Kasaba Chitradurga Chitradurga

Kelegote Indi . Area 1

Kasaba Chitradurga Chitradurga

KIADB Area 2

Kasaba Chitradurga Chitradurga

3 Medehalli Village

S.O. 2168.-In exercise ofthe 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 September , 2011 , as the date on which the provisions of Chapter IV (except Sections 44 and 45 which have already been brought into force ) and Chapter V and VI [ except Sub - section (1 ) of Section 76 and Sections 77, 78, 79 and 81 which have already been brought into force ] of the said Act shall come into force in the following areas in the State ofAndhra Pradesh namely:-

[No. S-38013/59 /2011 -SS. I ]

S. D. XAVIER, Under Secy .

नई दिल्ली, 2 अगस्त, 2011 "All the Areas falling within the Limits of Jagitial Municipality and the Revenue Villages of Rajaram and Ramannapet ofMallial Mandal , Chalgal Dharur, Anthargaon , Narsingapur , Tharakanagar [H/ o Narsingapur ] Thippannapet , Hyderpalli [ ( H) of Thippannapet ] Porandla, Kandlapalli , Jabithapur, Laxmipur, Venglapur , Gollapalli [ ( H ) ofVenglapur] Mothe, Veldurthi , Raghuramkota Thimmapur , Raghuramkota [ ( H ) ofThimmapur] of Jagitial Mandal ofKarimnagar District of Andhra Pradesh ."

[No. S-38013 /58 /2011 -SS . I ]

S. D. XAVIER , Under Secy.

का.आ. 2170 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 । सितम्बर , 2011 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 बिहार राज्य के निम्नलिखित क्षेत्रों में प्रवृत्त होंगे , अर्थात्:-

नई दिल्ली, 2 अगस्त, 2011

जिला

क्र. राजस्व ग्राम का नाम

राजस्व थाना संख्या

सं

4

3

1 2

गया

343

1. नवन

गया

346

2. बगदाहा

गया

352

3. टेकुना

का.आ. 2169 कर्मचारी राज्य बीमा अधिनियम , 1948 (1948 का 34 ) की धारा की उप -धारा ( 3 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए , केन्द्रीय सरकार एतद्वारा । सितम्बर , 2011 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 5914

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 13 , 2011 / SRAVANA 22, 1933

352

3. टेकुना

गया 1 2

3

4 4. जहान बिगहा

349

गया 5. धनधावा

366

गया 6. दुलरा

372.

गया 7. नवडीहा

369

गया 8. धनवान

351

गया 9. गुरी

375

गया

345

गया 10. सिजुआ

: 11 . बोध गया

359

गया

347

गया 12. कचनपुर

13. भैयां बिगहा

344

गया

353

गया 14. मस्तपुरा

15. अमर बिगहा

348

गया 16. उलरा

370

गया 17. परहान्दा

368

गया 18. खरान्ती

350

गया 19. रतनारी

371

गया 20. बजराहा

373

गया 21. शोभाबिगहा

374

गया

360

22. मस्तीपुर

गया

[सं. एस-38013 /60/2011- एस एस. 1 ]

एस. डी. जेवियर , अवर सचिव New Delhi , the 2nd August , 2011

SO. 2170 -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

[PART 11-Sec.3 (ii) ] hereby appoints the 1st September, 2011 , as the date on which the provisions of Chapter IV ( except Sections 44 and 45 which have already been brought into force ) and Chapter-V and VI ( except sub - Section ( 1 ) of Section 76 and Sections 77, 78 , 79 and 81 which have already been brought into force) of the said Act shall come into force in the following areas in the State of Bihar namely:-

Sl .

District No.

Revenue Thana

Name of the areas Revenue Villages

1. Nawan

343.

Gaya 2. Bagdaha

346

Gaya 3. Tekuna

352

Gaya

349

4.. Jahan Bigha

Gaya 5 Dhandhwa

366

Gaya 6. Dulra

372

Gaya 7. Nawdiha

369

Gaya 8. Dhanawan

351

Gaya 9. Guri

375

Gaya 10. Sijua

345

Gaya

359

11 . Bodh - Gaya

Gaya 12 .

347

Kachan Pur

Gaya

344

13. Bhaiya Bigha

Gaya

353

14. Mastpura

Gaya

348

15. Amar Bigha

Gaya 16. Ulra

370

Gaya 17. Parhanda

368

Gaya 18. Kharanti

350

Gaya 19. Ratnari

371

Gaya

373.

20. Bajraha

Gaya

374

21 . Shobha Bigha

Gaya

360

22. Mastipur

Gaya

[No. S-38013/60/2011 -SS . 1 ]

S. D. XAVIER, Under Secy.

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