This Gazette may contains Multiple Subjects

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

सत्यमेव जयते

भारत का राजपत्र The Gazette of India

प्राधिकार से प्रकाशित

PUBLISHED BY AUTHORITY

साप्ताहिक

WEEKLY

नई दिल्ली, अगस्त 28 सितम्बर 3 , 2011 , शनिवार/ भाद्र 6 भाद्र 12 , 1933

सं. 36]

NEW DELHI, AUGUST 28 SEPTEMBER 3 , 2011 , SATURDAY/BHADRA 6- BHADRA 12, 1933

No. 36]

भाग में भिन्न पृष्ठ संख्या दी जाती है जिससे कि यह पृथक संकलन के रूप में रखा जा सके

Separate Paging is given to this Part in order that it may be filed as a separate compilation

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

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

कार्मिक , लोक शिकायत तथा पेंशन मंत्रालय

MINISTRY OF PERSONNEL, PUBLIC GRIEVANCES AND PENSIONS

( कार्मिक एवं प्रशिक्षण विभाग )

शुद्धिपत्र

(Department of Personnel and Training) CORRIGENDUM

नई दिल्ली , 19 अगस्त, 2011

New Delhi , the 19th August, 2011

S. O. 2318. In this Department, Notification No 228/79 /2010- AVD- II dated 13-7-2011 , in English version, the words " 6th June , 2011 " appearing in the 5th line , may be read as " 7th June , 2011 " and the word " an" appearing in the 9th line may be read as " and" .

का. आ . 2318. इस विभाग की अधिसूचना सं. 228/79/2010 - AVD II दिनांक 13-07-2011 के अंग्रेजी रूपांतर की पांचवी पंक्ति में दृष्टि गोचर शब्द " छह जून , 2011 " को " सात जून, 2011 " एवं नौवी पंक्ति में दृष्टिगोचर शब्द " एन " को " एन्ड" पढ़ा जाए ।

2. In Hindi version of this notification, the words " 6-6-2011 " appearing in the 3rd line , may be read as "7-6-2011 " and the words appearing in the 9th and 10th lines " Bharitiya Dand Sanhita Ki Dhara 49, 49- B Ke Sath Pathit Dhara 120- B Tatha Vanyajeev ( Sanrakshan) Adhiniyam , 1972 Ki Dhara 51 " may be read as " Bharitiya Dand Sanhita 1860 Ki Dhara 120- B Ke Sath Dhara 51 Sahpathiit Dhara 49 , 49 -B Vanyajcev (Sanrakshan) Adhiniyam , 1972 " .

हिंदी रूपांतर की तीसरी पंक्ति में दृष्टिगोचर शब्द" 6-6-2011 " को " 7-6-2011 " एवं नौवीं एवं दसवीं पंक्तियों में दृष्टिगोचर शब्द " भारतीय दंड संहिता की धारा 49 , 49- बी के साथ पठित धारा 120 - बी तथा वन्यजीव ( संरक्षण ) अधिनियम , 1972 की धारा 51 " को " भारतीय दंड संहिता , 1860 की धारा 120 - बी के साथ धारा 51 सपठित धारा 49 , 49- बी वन्यजीव ( संरक्षण ) अधिनियम , 1972 " पढ़ा जाए ।

[F. No. 228/79/2010-AVD - II] . RAJIV JAIN , Under Secy. (V- II) [फा. सं. 228/79/2010-एवीडी- II ] राजीव जैन , अवर सचिव (V- II)

(6199)

3202G1/2011

26 3 156 6200

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 3 , 2011 /BHADRA 12, 1933

[PART II-SBC. 3 (ii) ] नई दिल्ली , 19 अगस्त, 2011

द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए , केन्द्रीय सरकार, एतद्वारा , भारतीय रिजर्व बैंक के परामर्श से श्री प्रकाश बक्शी , अध्यक्ष, नाबार्ड को निक्षेप बीमा और प्रत्यय गारंटी निगम ( डीआईसीजीसी ) के निदेशक मंडल में , अधिसूचना की तारीख से दिनांक 30-09-2013 अर्थात् उनके द्वारा अधिवर्षिता की आयु प्राप्त करने की तारीख तक अथवा अगले आदेशों तक, जो भी पहले हो , श्री उमेश चन्द्र सारंगी के स्थान पर निदेशक के रूप में नामित करती है ।

[फा. सं. 7/4/2007- बीओ -1 ]

समीर कुमार सिन्हा, निदेशक

MINISTRY OF FINANCE

(Department of Financial Services)

New Delhi , the 19th August , 2011 का. आ. 2319.केंद्रीय सरकार एतद्वारा इस विभाग की अधिसूचना सं. 228/67/2007- एवीडी- II दिनांक 30 अक्तूबर , 2008 में आशिक संशोधन करते हुए और दिल्ली विशेष पुलिस स्थापना अधिनियम , 1946 ( 1946 का अधिनियम सं. 25 ) की धारा 6 के साथ पठित धारा 5 की उपधारा ( 1 ) के अनुसरण में उत्तर प्रदेश राज्य सरकार , गृह ( पुलिस ) सेक्शन- III की अधिसूचना सं. 586पी/6-3-2011-9 एसआईटी/07 , लखनऊ दिनांक 8 अप्रैल , 2011 द्वारा प्राप्त सहमति से वर्ष 2002 से वर्ष 2005 तक की अवधि के दौरान विभिन्न जिलों में सार्वजनिक वितरण प्रणाली ( पीडीएस ) के अधीन विभिन्न स्कीमों में बड़े पैमाने पर हुए घोटाले के संबंध में दंडनीय अपराधों तथा उपर्युक्त उल्लिखित अपराध के संबंध में या उससे संबद्ध प्रयास , दुष्प्रेरण तथा षडयंत्र तथा उसी संव्यवहार के क्रम में या उन्ही तथ्यों से उ‌द्भूत किसी अन्य अपराध/अपराधों का अन्वेषण करने के लिए दिल्ली विशेष पुलिस स्थापना के सदस्यों की शक्तियों और क्षेत्राधिकार का विस्तार सम्पूर्ण उत्तर प्रदेश राज्य के संम्बन्ध में करती है ।

[फा. सं. 228/32/2011 - एवीडी- II ]

राजीव जैन , अवर सचिव

New Delhi , the 19th August , 2011

S. O. 2320. In exercise ofthe powers conferredby clause (d) of sub - section ( 1 ) of Section 6 read with clause (ii) of sub - Section 2 of Section 6 of the Deposit Insurance and Credit Guarantee CorporationAct, 1961 (47 of 1961 ) , the Central Government, in consultation with Reserve Bank ofIndia, hereby nominates Shri Prakash Bakshi , Chairman, NABARD as a director on the Board of Directors of Deposit Insurance and Credit Guarantee Corporation (DICGC) from the date ofnotification and upto 30-09-2013 i.e. the date of his attaining the age of superannuation or until further orders whichever is earlier vice Shri Umesh Chandra Sarangi .

[F. No. 7/4/2007-BO- I

SAMIR K. SINHA, Director

नईदिल्ली, 19 अगस्त, 2011

का. आ. 2321. राष्ट्रीय कृषि तथा ग्रामीण विकास बैंक अधिनियम , 1981 ( 1981 का 61 ) की धारा 6 की उप - धारा ( 1 ) के खण्ड ( ग ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए , केन्द्रीय सरकार , एतद्वारा , भारतीय रिजर्व बैंक के परामर्श से , श्री एच. आर. खान, उप गवर्नर , भारतीय रिजर्व बैंक को अधिसूचना की तारीख से और अगले आदेशों तक , जो भी पहले हो , डॉ. के. सी. चक्रबर्ती के स्थान पर राष्ट्रीय कृषि तथा ग्रामीण विकास बैंक ( नाबार्ड ) के निदेशक मंडल में अंशकालिक निदेशक के रूप में नामित करती है । S. O. 2319.- In partial modification of this Department's Notification No. 228/ 67/2007- AVD - II dated 30th October, 2008 and in pursuance of the sub- section (1) of Section 5 read with Section 6 of the Delhi Special Police Establishment Act, 1946 (Act No. 25 of 1946) , the Central Government with the consent of the State Government of Uttar Pradesh, Home (Police ) Section - III vide Notification No. 586P/ 6-3-2011-9 SIT/07 , Lucknow dated 8th April, 2011 , hereby extends the powers and jurisdiction of the members of the Delhi Special Police Establishement to the whole of the State of Uttar Pradesh for investigation of offences punishable relating to the large scale scame in different schemes under Public Distribution System (PDS) in different districts during the period from 2002 to 2005 and attempts , abetments and conspiracies 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 .

[फा. सं. 7/2/2009- बीओ -1 ] समीर कुमार सिन्हा, निदेशक [F. No. 228 /32/2011 - AVD - II ] RAJIV JAIN, Under Secy.

वित्त मंत्रालय

New Delhi , the 19th August, 2011 (वित्तीय सेवाएं विभाग )

नई दिल्ली, 19 अगस्त, 2011

का. आ. 2320. निक्षेप बीमा और प्रत्यय गारंटी निगम अधिनियम , 1961 ( 1961 का 47 ) की धारा 6 की उप - धारा 2 के खण्ड ( ii ) के साथ पठित धारा 6 की उप - धारा 1 के खण्ड ( घ )

S. O. 2321.-In exercise of the powers conferred by clause (c) of sub- section ( 1 ) of Section 6 of the National Bank for Agriculture and Rural Development Act , 1981 (61 of 1981) , the Central Government, in consultation with the Reserve Bank of India, hereby nominates Shri H. R. Khan, Deputy Governor, Reserve Bank of India as part- time director on the Board of Directors of National Bank भारत का राजपत्र : सितम्बर 3 , 2011 /भाद्र 12 , 1933

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

forAgriculture and Rural Development (NABARD), from thedateofnotification and until further orders whichever is earlier, vice Dr. K. C. Chakraborty.

[F. No. 7/2/2009-BO-I] SAMIR K. SINHA , Director नई दिल्ली, 24 अगस्त, 2011

का. आ. 2322.- राष्ट्रीयकृत बैंक ( प्रबंध एवं प्रकीर्ण उपबंध) स्कीम , 1970/1980 के खंड 3 के उप - खंड ( 1 ) और खण्ड 8 के उप-खण्ड ( 1 ) के साथ पठित , बैंककारी कंपनी ( उपक्रमों का अर्जन एवं अंतरण ) अधिनियम , 1970/1980 की धारा 9 की उप- धारा 3 ( क ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए , केन्द्रीय सरकार , भारतीय रिजर्व बैंक से परामर्श करके , एतद्वारा , आन्ध्रा बैंक के महाप्रबंधक श्री एम. अंजनेया प्रसाद ( जन्म तिथि 1-12-1954 ) , को उनके पदभार ग्रहण करने की तारीख से 30-11-2014 तक अर्थात् उनकी अधिवर्षिता की तारीख तक अथवा अगले आदेशों तक , जो भी पहले हो , सिंडिकेट बैंक के कार्यपालक निदेशक के रूप मेंनियुक्त करती है।

[फा. सं. 4/5/2010- बीओ- I ] समीर के. सिन्हा , निदेशक New Delhi , the 24th August, 2011

S. O. 2322.-In exercise of the powers conferredby clause (a) of sub- section (3 ) of Section 9 of The Banking Companies (Acquisition & Transfer ofUndertakings) Act, 1970/1980 read with sub- clause (1 ) of clause 3 and sub- clause ( 1 ) of clause 8 of The Nationalised Banks (Management & Miscellaneous Provisions) Scheme, 1970/ 1980, the Central Government, after consultation with the Reserve Bank of India, hereby appoints Shri M. Anjaneya Prasad (DoB:1-12-1954) , General Manager, Andhra Bank as Executive Director, Syndicate Bank, with effect from thedate ofhis taking over charge ofthe post till 30-11-2014, i.e. the date ofhis superannuation or until further orders , whichever isearlier.

[F. No. 4 /5/2010- BO- I]

SAMIR K. SINHA, Director नई दिल्ली , 24 अगस्त, 2011

का. आ. 2323.- राष्ट्रीयकृत बैंक ( प्रबंध एवं प्रकीर्ण उपबंध ) स्कीम , 1970/1980 के खंड 3 के उप - खंड ( 1 ) और खंड 8 के उपखंड ( 1 ) के साथ पठित , बैंककारी कंपनी ( उपक्रमों का अर्जन एवं अंतरण ) अधिनियम , 1970/1980 की धारा 9 की उप- धारा 3 के खण्ड ( क ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए , केन्द्रीय सरकार , भारतीय रिजर्व बैंक से परामर्श करके, एतद्वारा , बैंक ऑफ इंडिया के महाप्रबंधक श्री सुरेश कुमार जैन ( जन्म तिथि 5-5-1954 ) , को 1-9-2011 को अथवा उसके पश्चात उनके पदभार ग्रहण करने की तारीख से 31-5-2014 तक अर्थात् उनकी अधिवर्षिता की तारीख तक अथवा अगले आदेशों तक , जो भी पहले हो , यूनियन बैंक ऑफ इंडिया के कार्यपालक निदेशक के रूप में नियुक्त करती है ।

[फा. सं. 4/5/2010 - बीओ- I ]

समीर के. सिन्हा, निदेशक

6201 New Delhi , the 24th August , 2011

S. O. 2323. In exercise of the powers conferred by clause (a) of sub- section (3 ) of Section 9 ofThe Banking Companies (Acquisition & Transfer ofUndertakings) Act, 1970/1980 read with sub - clause ( 1 ) of clause 3 and sub- clause (1) of clause 8 of The Nationalised Banks (Management& Miscellaneous Provisions ) Scheme , 1970/ 1980, the Central Government , after consultation with the ReserveBank ofIndia, hereby appoints Shri Suresh Kumar Jain (DoB: 5-5-1954), General Manager, Bank of India as Executive Director, Union Bank of India, with effect from the date ofhis taking over charge of the post on or after 1-9-2011 till 31-5-2014, i.e. the date of his superannuation oruntil further orders , whichever is earlier .

[F. No. 4/5/2010-BO- I]

SAMIR K. SINHA , Director मुख्य आयकर आयुक्त का कार्यालय जोधपुर , 24 अगस्त, 2011

(सं. 6/2011-12 )

का. आ. 2324. आयकर अधिनियम , 1961 ( 1961 का 43वां) की धारा 10 ( 23 ग ) के खण्ड ( vi ) के साथ पठित आयकर नियमावली-1962 के नियम 2 गए द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए मुख्य आयकर आयुक्त , जोधपुर एतद्द्वारा " सेन्ट जॉन्स एजूकेशन सोसायटी पोस्ट आमर्थला , आबूरोड " को उक्त धारा के प्रयोजनार्थ निर्धारण वर्ष 2010-11 से आगे तक निम्नलिखित शर्तों के अधीन अनुमोदित करते हैं :-

1. कर निर्धारिती उसकी आय का प्रयोग अथवा उसकी आय का प्रयोग करने के लिए उसका संचयन पूर्णतः तथा अनन्यतः उन उद्देश्यों के लिए करेगा जिनके लिए इसकी स्थापना की गई । केर निर्धारिती न्यास द्वारा एक प्रतिबद्धता (अंडरटेकिंग ) की गयी है कि संस्था का कार्य केवल शिक्षा प्रसार ही होगा व इसके अलावा संस्था कोई कार्य नहीं करेगी । संस्था को यह सुनिश्चित करना है कि दी गई अन्डरटेकिंग का उल्लंघन न हो ।

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

3. यह आदेश किसी ऐसी आय के संबंध में लागू नहीं होगा , जो कि कारोबार से प्राप्त लाभ तथा अभिलाभ हो जब तक ऐसा कारोबार उक्त कर निर्धारिती के उद्देशयों की प्राप्ति के लिए प्रासंगिक नहीं हो तथा ऐसे कारोबार के संबंध में अलग से लेखा पुस्तिकाएं नहीं रखी जाती हो । 6202

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: SEPTEMBER 3 , 2011 /BHADRA 12 , 1933

[ PART II-SEC. 3 ( ii ) ] 4. कर निर्धारिती आयकर अधिनियम , 1961 के प्रावधानों के अनुसार अपनी आय विवरणी नियमित रूप से आयकर प्राधिकारी के समक्ष फाइल करेगा ।

have to adhere to its undertaking that the activities ofthe Institute shall be confined only to educational purpose. The Institute shalldo no other activity except education.

5. विघटन की स्थिति में इसकी अतिरिक्त राशियां और परिसंपत्तियां समान उद्देश्यों वाले धर्मार्थ संगठन को दे दी जाएंगी और उसका कोई भी भाग संस्थान के किसी सदस्य को नहीं दिया जाएगा ।

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

6. आयकर अधिनियम की धारा 10 ( 23 ग ) के साथ पठित 115खखग में परन्तुक 15 की शर्तों में अनाम दानों के सम्बन्ध में यह अनुमोदन लागू नहीं होगा ।

7. यह अधिसूचना तब तक जारी रहेगी जब तक इसे वापस न लिया जाय ।

3. this order will not apply in relation to any income being profits and gain of business , unless the business is incidental to the attainment of the objectives of the assessee and separate books of accounts are maintained in respect of such business;

[संदर्भ सं.-मु.आ.आ./आ.अ. ( तक)/जोध/2011-12/1931 ] दिलीप शिवपुरी, मुख्य आयकर आयुक्त

OFFICE OF THE CHIEF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME- TAX

4. the assessee will cularly file its return of income before the incomex authority in accordance with theprovisions me-taxAct , 1961 ;

Jodhpur, the 24th August , 2011 (No. 6/2011-12)

5. that in the event of dissolution , its surplus and the assets will be given to a charitable organization with similar objectives and no part of the same will go to any of the members of the Institution .

6. The approval will not apply in relation to anonymous donations in terms of the fifteenth proviso to Section10(23C) r.w.s. 115BBC of the Act. S. O. 2324. In exercise of the powers conferred by clause (vi) of, Section 10(23C) of the Income- tax Act , 1961 (43 of 1961 ) read with rule 2CA of the Income Tax Rules , 1962, I , the Chief Commissioner of Income Tax , Jodhpur hereby approve " St. John's Educational Society, Amthala P.O. , Abu Road, " for the purpose of the said-section for the assessment year 2010-11 onwards , subject to the following conditions: -

7. This notification will remain in force until it is withdrawn.

[Ref. No. CCIT/ITO (Tech . )/ Ju/ 2011-12/ 1931 ] 1. the assessee will apply its income, or accumulate for application wholly and exclusively to educational purpose only. The assessee trust shall

DILEEP SHIVPURI , Chief Commissioner of IncomeTax

स्वास्थ्यएवं परिवार कल्याण मंत्रालय

( स्वास्थ्यएवं परिवार कल्याण विभाग )

नई दिल्ली , 9 अगस्त, 2011

का. आ. 2325. भारतीय आयुर्विज्ञान परिषद अधिनियम , 1956 ( 1956 का 102 ) की धारा 11 की उप- धारा ( 2 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए केन्द्र सरकार , भारतीय आयुर्विज्ञान परिषद् से परामर्श करने के बाद , एतद्‌द्वारा उक्त अधिनियम की प्रथम अनुसूची में निम्नलिखित और संशोधन करती है , अर्थात्

उक्तअनुसूची में.-

( क ) " डा. एनटीआर स्वास्थ्य विज्ञान विश्वविद्यालय , विजयवाड़ा " के समक्ष शीर्षक ' मान्यता प्राप्त चिकित्सा अर्हता ' [ इसके बाद कालम ( 2) के रूप में संदर्भित ] के अन्तर्गत और शीर्षक ' पंजीकरण के लिए संक्षेपण ' [ इसके बाद कालम ( 3 ) के रूप में संदर्भित ] के अन्तर्गत अंतिम प्रविष्टि एवं उससे संबंधित प्रविष्टि के बाद निम्नलिखित अंतःस्थापित किया जाएगा , अर्थात्: -

(2)

(3)

" डॉक्टर ऑफ मेडिसीन ( पैथोलोजी ) "

एमडी( मैथोलोजी )

( यह एक मान्यता प्राप्त चिकित्सा अर्हता होगी जब यह एलूरी सीता रामा राजू आयुर्विज्ञान अकादमी , एलूरू , आन्ध्र प्रदेश में प्रशिक्षित किए जा रहे विद्यार्थियों के संबंध में डा. एनटीआर स्वास्थ्य विज्ञान विश्वविद्यालय , विजयवाड़ा द्वारा मई , 2011 में अथवा उसके पश्चात् प्रदान की गई हो ) 6203

भारत का राजपत्र : सितम्बर 3 , 2011 / भाद्र 12 , 1933

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

(3)

(2)

डीओ

" नेत्र विज्ञान में डिप्लोमा "

(यह एक मान्यता प्राप्त चिकित्सा अहंता होगी जब यह एलूरी सीता रामा राजू आयुर्विज्ञान अकादमी , एलूरू , आन्ध्र प्रदेश में प्रशिक्षित किए जा रहे विद्यार्थियों के संबंध में डा. एनटीआर स्वास्थ्य विज्ञानं विश्वविद्यालय , विजयवाड़ा द्वारा मई, 2011 में अथवा उसके पश्चात् प्रदान की गई हो)

डीसीएच

" बाल स्वास्थ्य में डिप्लोमा"

(यह एक मान्यता प्राप्त चिकित्सा अर्हता होगी जब यह पीईएस आयुर्विज्ञान एवं अनुसंधान संस्थान , कुप्पम , आन्ध्र प्रदेश में प्रशिक्षित किए जा रहे विद्यार्थियों के संबंध में डा. एनटीआर स्वास्थ्य विज्ञान विश्वविद्यालय , विजयवाड़ा द्वारा मई, 2011 में अथवा उसके पश्चात् प्रदान की गई हो)

डी. ऑथों.

" अस्थिरोग विज्ञान में डिप्लोमा"

(यह एक मान्यता प्राप्त चिकित्सा अर्हता होगी जब यह डा. पिन्नामानेनी सिद्धार्थ आयुर्विज्ञान एवं अनुसंधान संस्थान , कृष्णा जिला , आन्ध्र प्रदेश में प्रशिक्षित किए जा रहे विद्यार्थियों के संबंध में डा. एनटीआर स्वास्थ्यविज्ञान विश्वविद्यालय , विजयवाड़ा द्वारा मई , 2011 में अथवा उसके पश्चात् प्रदान की गई हो )

डीसीएच

" बाल स्वास्थ्य में डिप्लोमा "

डीजीओ

" प्रसूति एवं स्त्रीरोग विज्ञान में डिप्लोमा "

(यह एक मान्यता प्राप्त चिकित्सा अर्हता होगी जब यह चलमेडा आनन्द राव आयुर्विज्ञान संस्थान , करीम नगर, आन्ध्र प्रदेश में प्रशिक्षित किए जा रहे विद्यार्थियों के संबंध में डा. एनटीआर स्वास्थ्य विज्ञान विश्वविद्यालय , विजयवाड़ा द्वारा मई , 2011 में अथवा उसके प्रश्चात् प्रदान की गई हो )

डीएमआरडी

" चिकित्सा विकिरण निदान में डिप्लोमा "

(यह एक मान्यता प्राप्त चिकित्सा अर्हता होगी जब यह चलमेडा आनन्द राव आयुर्विज्ञान संस्थान , करीम नगर , आन्ध्र प्रदेश में प्रशिक्षित किए जा रहे विद्यार्थियों के संबंध में डा. एनटीआर स्वास्थ्य विज्ञान विश्वविद्यालय , विजयवाड़ा द्वारा मई, 2011 में अथवा उसके पश्चात् प्रदान की गई हो)

डीए

" संज्ञाहरण विज्ञान में डिप्लोमा "

(यह एक मान्यता प्राप्त चिकित्सा अर्हता होगी जब यह चलमेडा आनन्द राव आयुर्विज्ञान संस्थान , करीम नगर , आन्ध्र प्रदेश में प्रशिक्षित किए जा रहे विद्यार्थियों के संबंध में डा. एनटीआर स्वास्थ्य विज्ञान विश्वविद्यालय , विजयवाड़ा द्वारा मई , 2011 में अथवा उसके पश्चात् प्रदान की गई हो) "

(ख) " विनायक मिशन विश्वविद्यालय , सेलम , तमिलनाडु" के समक्ष शीर्षक ' मान्यता प्राप्त चिकित्सा अर्हता ' [ इसके बाद कालम ( 2 ) के रूप में संदर्भित ] के अन्तर्गत और शीर्षक ' पंजीकरण के लिए संक्षेपण ' [ इसके बाद कालम ( 3 ) के रूप में संदर्भित ] के अन्तर्गत अंतिम प्रविष्टि एवं उससे संबंधित प्रविष्टि के बाद निम्नलिखित अंतःस्थापित किया जाएगा , अर्थात्: - 6204

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 3 , 2011 /BHADRA 12, 1933

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

(3)

" डॉक्टर ऑफ मेडिसीन ( माइक्रोबायोलोजी ) "

एमडी(माइक्रोबायोलोजी)

(यह एक मान्यता प्राप्त चिकित्सा अर्हता होगी जब यह आरूपडई वीडू मेडिकल कॉलेज , पुडुचेरी में प्रशिक्षित किए जा रहे विद्यार्थियों के संबंध में विनायक मिशन विश्वविद्यालय , सेलम , तमिलनाडु द्वारा मई , 2011 में अथवा उसके पश्चात् प्रदान की गई हो ) " सभी नोट करें कि : 1. स्नातकोत्तर पाठ्यक्रम को प्रदान की गई मान्यता अधिकतम 5 वर्ष तक की अवधि के लिए होगी जिसके पश्चात् इसे नवीकृत करवाना होगा ।

2. उप-खण्ड 4 में यथापेक्षित मान्यता को समय से नवीकृत न करवाने के परिणामस्वरूप संबंधित स्नातकोत्तर पाठ्यक्रम में दाखिले निरपवाद रूप से बन्द हो जाएंगे ।

[सं. यू-12012 /51 / 2011 - एमई ( पी. II ) ]

अनिता त्रिपाठी, अवर सचिव MINISTRY OF HEALTH AND FAMILY WELFARE

(Department of Health and Family Welfare)

New Delhi , the 9th August , 2011

S. O. 2325. 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 consultating the Medical Council of India , hereby, makes the following further amendments in the First Schedule to the said Act , namely :-

Inthe said Schedule-

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

" Doctor ofMedicine (Patholody) "

MD ( Pathology)

(This shall be a recognised medical qualification when granted by Dr. NTR University of Health Sciences , Vijayawada in respect of students being trained at Alluri Sita Rama Raju Academy of Medical Sciences , Eluru , Andhra Pradesh on or after May, 2011 )

" Diploma in Ophthalmology "

DCH

" Diploma in Child Health "

(This shall be 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 and Research , Kuppam , Andhra Pradesh on or after May, 2011 ) 6205 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : सितम्बर 3 , 2011 / भाद्र 12, 1933

D. Ortho.

" Diploma in Orthopaedics "

(This shall be a recognised medical qualification when granted by Dr. NTR University of Health Sciences , Vijayawada in respect of students being trained at Dr. Pinnamaneni Siddhartha Institute of Medical Sci- ences & Research , Krishna Dt. , Andhra Pradesh on or afterMay, 2011 ).

DCH

" Diploma in ChildHealth"

(This shall be a recognised medical qualification when granted by Dr. NTR University of Health Sciences , Vijayawada in respect of students being trained at Dr. Pinnamaneni Siddhartha Institute of Medical Sciences & Research , Krishna Dt . , 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 at Chalmeda Anand Rao Institute of Medical Sciences , Karimnagar, Andhra Pradesh on or after May, 2011 .

DMRD

"Diploma in Medical Radio Diagnosis"

(This shall be a recognised medical qualification when granted by Dr. NTR University of Health Sciences , Vijayawada in respect of students being trained at Chalmeda Anand Rao Institute of Medical Sciences , Karimnagar , Andhra Pradesh on or after May, 2011) .

" Diploma in Anaesthesiology "

(This shall be a recognised medical qualification when granted by Dr. NTR University of Health Sciences , Vijayawada in respect of students being trained at Chalmeda Anand Rao Institute of Medical Sciences , Karimnagar, Andhra Pradesh on or after May, 2011 ).

(b) against " Vinayaka Missions University, Salem , Tamil Nadu" under the heading Recognised Medical Qualifica- tion' ( hereinafter referred to as column (2) ] , after the last entry and entry relating thereto under the heading ' Abbreviation forRegistration ' [ hereinafter referred to as column (3) ] , the following shall be inserted , namely :-

MD (Microbiology)

" Doctor ofMedicine (Microbiology) "

(This shall be a recognised medical qualification when granted by Vinayaka Missions University, Salem , Tamil Nadu in respect of students being trained at Aarupadai . VeeduMedical College, Puducherry on or after May, 2011 ).

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

2. Failure 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. 12012/51 /2011 -ME (P.II ) ]

ANITA TRIPATHI , Under Secy.

6206

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 3 , 2011 /BHADRA 12, 1933

[PART II-SEC. 3 ( ii) )

कृषि मंत्रालय

( कृषि अनुसंधान एवं शिक्षा विभाग )

नई दिल्ली, 19 अगस्त 2011

का.आ. 2326.-लोक परिसर ( अप्राधिकृत दखलकारों की बेदखली ) अधिनियम , 1971 ( 1971 का 40 ) की धारा 3 द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए केन्द्रीय सरकार एतद्वारा तालिका के कॉलम ( 2 ) में उल्लिखित अधिकारियों को सरकार के राजपत्रित अधिकारी के पद के समकक्ष अधिकारी होने के नाते , उक्त अधिनियम के उ‌द्देश्यों के लिए सम्पदा अधिकारी नियुक्त करती है , जो नीचे दी गई तालिका के कालम ( 3 ) की सदृश प्रविष्टि में विनिर्दिष्ट लोक परिसरों के संबंध में, अपने संबंधित क्षेत्राधिकार की स्थानीय सीमाओं के भीतर उक्त अधि नियम के द्वारा या इसके अंतर्गत संपदा अधिकारियों को प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग और निहित कर्तव्यों का निष्पादन करेंगे ।

तालिका

क्रम सं. अधिकारी का नाम और पदनाम

दर्शाये गये राज्यों के अनुसार स्थानीय सीमाएं

1. श्री डी. मोइत्रा , मुख्य प्रशासनिक अधिकारी , केन्द्रीय चावल अनुसंधान संस्थान, कटक

उड़ीसा, बिहार , झारखड़ , पश्चिम बंगाल , सिक्किम, मेघालय , असम, अरूणाचल प्रदेश , नागालैण्ड , मणिपुर, मिजोरम, त्रिपुरा , अण्डमान एवं निकोबार द्वीप समूह ।

महाराष्ट्र, गोवा, गुजरात , मध्य प्रदेश , राजस्थान , छत्तीसगढ़ 2. श्री सुरेश कुमार , मुख्य प्रशासनिक अधिकारी , केन्द्रीय मात्स्यिकी शिक्षा संस्थान, मुम्बई

[फा. सं. 15 ( 15 )/2010 - ई एण्ड एम ]

विजय सिंह , अवर सचिव

MINISTRY OF AGRICULTURE

(Department ofAgricultural Research and Education)

New Delhi , the 19th August, 2011

S.O. 2326. In exercise of the powers conferred by Section 3 of the Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Act, 1971 (40 of 1971 ) , the Central Government hereby appoints the following officers mentioned in column (2) of the Table , being the officers equivalent to the rank of Gazetted Officer of the Government, to be Estate Officers for the purposes of the said Act, who shall exercise the powers conferred and perform the duties imposed, on the Estate Officers by or under the said Act, within the local limits of their Respective jurisdiction in respect of the public premises specified in the corresponding entry in column (3 ) of the Table below.

TABLE

Sl . No.

Locallimits as per States indicated

Name and Designation of the Officer

Orrissa, Bihar, Jharkhand , West Bengal , Sikkim , Meghalaya , Assam, Arunachal Pradesh , Nagaland , Manipur , Mizoram , Tripura, A&N Island

1. Shri D. Moitra , ChiefAdmn. Officer, Centre Rice Research Institute, Cuttack

2. Shri Suresh Kumar,

Maharashtra, Goa, Gujarat , Madhya Pradesh , Rajasthan, Chhattisgarh

Chief Admn. Officer , Central Institute of Fisheries Education, Mumbai

[F. No. 15 ( 15 )/2010- E&M]

VIJAY SINGH , Under Secy.

6207. भारत का राजपत्र सितम्बर 3 , 2011/ भाद्र 12 , 1933

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

उपभोक्ता मामले , खाद्य और सार्वजनिक वितरण मंत्रालय

(उपभोक्ता मामले विभाग )

नई दिल्ली , 18 अप्रैल , 2011

का.आ. 2327.-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 शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए मैसर्स यूनिवर्सल कंस्ट्रक्शन मशीनरी एंड इक्यूपमेंट लि. ' यूनिवर्सल हाउस ' वार्जे जकत नाका, कोथरूड , पुने 52 , महाराष्ट्र द्वारा विनिर्मित साधारण यथार्थता ( यथार्थता वर्ग- III ) वाले " 750 " श्रृंखला के एनालॉग सूचन सहित , अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण ( मेकेनिकल प्लेटफार्म हुपर टाइप स्टील यार्ड ) के मॉडल का , जिसके ब्राण्ड का नाम " बेचिंग प्लांट- सेंडमेटल बैच कंट्रोलर " है , ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/09/ 2010/319 समनुदेशित किया गया है, अनुमोदन प्रमाण-पत्र जारी करती है ।

उक्त मॉडल एनालॉग सूचन सहित मैकेनिकल लीवर आधारित अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण ( मेकेनिकल प्लेटफार्म हुपर टाइप स्टील यार्ड ) है । इसकी अधिकतम क्षमता 750 कि.ग्रा. , न्यूनतम क्षमता 10 कि. ग्रा. है । सत्यापन मापमान अन्तराल ( ई ) । कि ग्रा. है और मापमान अंतराल (डी) 200 ग्रा. है ।

01020 kg

आकृति -2 मॉडल को सीलिंग करने का योजनाबद्ध डायग्राम

स्केल की बाडी में बनाए गए होल्ज 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 ।

और केन्द्रीय सरकार उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 की उप - धारा ( 12 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए यह घोषणा करती है कि उक्त मॉडल के अनुमोदन के इस प्रमाणपत्र के अंतर्गत उसी विनिर्माता द्वारा उसी सिद्धांत, डिजाइन के अनुसार और उसी सामग्री से जिससे उक्तअनुमोदित मॉडल का विनिर्माण किया गया है , विनिर्मित उसी श्रृंखला के वैसे ही मंक , यथार्थता और कार्यपालन के तोलन उपकरण भी होंगे जो 5. कि.ग्रा. या उससे अधिक के " ई " मान के लिए 100 से 1000 तक की रेंज में सत्यापन मापमान अंतराल ( एन ) सहित 750 कि.ग्रा. तक की अधिकतम क्षमता वाले हैं और " ई " मान 1x10 , 2x10 % , 5x10 , के हैं, जां धनात्मक या ऋणात्मक पूर्णांक या शून्य के समतुल्य हैं ।

[फा. सं. डब्ल्यू एम 21 ( 175 )/2010 |

बी.एन. दीक्षित , निदेशक , विधिक माप विज्ञान 3202 GI /11-2 PART II- SEC . 3 ( ii ) ] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 3 , 2011 /BHADRA 12, 1933

6208

MINISTRY OF CONSUMER AFFAIRS, FOOD AND PUBLIC DISTRIBUTION

(Department of ConsumerAffairs )

New Delhi , the 18th April , 2011.

SQ: 2887 Whereas the Central Government , after considering the report submitted to it by the prescribed authority, is satisfied that the Model described in the said report (see the figure given below ) is in conformity with the provisions of the Standards of Weights and Measures Act , 1976 (60 of 1976 ) and the Standards of Weights and Measures ( proval 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 Mechanical Platform ( Hopper Type ) Steelyard ] with analogue indication ( hereinafter referred to as the said Model )belonging to Ordinary accuracy class (Accuracy class -III ) and " 750 " Series with brand name " Batching Plant - Sand Metal batch @ontroller " maunfactured by M/ s . Universal Construction Machinery & Equipment Ltd. " Universal House " , Warje Jak Nakie, Kothrud , Pune- 52 , Maharashtra and which is assigned the approval mark IND/09 /2010/319;

The said model is a machanical lever based non - automatic weighing instrument [ Mechanical Platform (Hopper Type) Steelyard) with analogue indication of maximum capacity 750 kg. minimum capacity 10 kg . The value ofverification scale intervalte is 1kg, and scale interval ' d ' is 200g .

Figure

זור

0120 kg

Figure- 2Sealing arrangement

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

Further, in exercise of the 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 instrument of similarmake, accuracy and performance of same series with maximum capacity up to 750 kg . and with number of verification scale interval (n ) in the range of 100 to 1000 for ' e' value of 5kg . or more and with ' e ' value of lx10k, 2x10 or 5x10 * , k being a positive or negative whole number or equal to zero manufactured by the same manufacturer in accordance with the same principle, design and materials with which , the said approved Model have been manufactured.

[ .No.WM - 21 ( 175 )/2010 ]

B. N. DIXIT, Director of Legal Metrology [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

नई दिल्ली , 18 अप्रैल , 2011

का.आ. 2328.-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 ) गाथा बाट और बाप मानक (मॉडलों का अनुमोदन ) नियम , 1987 के उपबंधों के अनुरूप हैं 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 प्रदेस शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए मैसर्स एडप्रो आटोमेशन प्रा. लि. , नं. 7 , 9वां क्रास , गणपति नगर , राजगोपाल नगर, मैन रोड, बंगलौर 58 द्वारा विनिर्मित पार्थता वर्ग, X( 1) वाले " एडीपी- बीएफएम " श्रृंखला के स्वचालित ग्रेविमेट्रिक फिलिंग उपकरण ( विसकॉस/नॉन- विसकॉस लिक्विड ) के मॉडल का, जिसके ब्राण्ड का नाम " एडप्रो " है , ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन बिह आई एन डी/09/10/22 समनुदेशित किया गया है , अनुमोदन प्रमाण पत्र जारी करती है ।

उक्त मॉडल एक विकृत गेज प्रकार का भार सेल आधारित स्वचालित ग्रेविमेट्रिक फिलिंग उपकरण (बिसकोसामान पिसकॉस लिक्विड ) है उत्पाद की मात्रा और प्रकृति पर निर्भर करते हुए इसकी उत्पादकता 500 कि.ग्रा. , 30 पैकेट प्रति घंटा की परम्परा के साथ है । इसका वायु दाब 6 कि.ग्रा. सेमी है । मशीन को सभी प्रकार विसकॉस/नॉन - विसकॉस आयल जैसे मस्टर्ड आयल, जिंगिली आयल, भूषणमुखी का तेल आदि के भरने के लिए डिजाइन किया गया है । प्रकाश उत्सर्जक डायोडल ( एल ई डी ) प्रदर्श तोलन परिणाम उपदर्शित करता है । उपकरण 230 वोल्ट और 50 हर्ट्ज प्रत्यावर्ती धारा विद्युत प्रदाय पर कार्य करता है ।

CADPRO

आकृति-2 मॉडल को सीलिंग करने का योजनाबद्ध डायग्राम

स्टाम्प और मील के सत्यापन के लिए इंडीकंटर के पिछली तरफ , कवर और बरास्कंट के ऊपर से चार बांरेड स्क्रू में से लीडिड सीलिंग वायर कसा गया है । सील से छेड़छाड़ किए बिना इंडिकेटर कां खांला नहीं जा सकता । मॉडल कां सीलबंद करने के उपबंध का एक प्ररूपी योजनावद्ध डायग्राम उपरोक्त दिया गया है ।

उपकरण में बाहरी कंलिब्रेशन तक पहुंच की सुविधा है । वाहरी केलिब्रेशन तक पहुंच को रोकने के लिए एडी 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 यह घोषणा करती है कि उक्त मॉडल के अनुमोदन के इस प्रमाणपत्र के अंतर्गत उसी विनिर्माता द्वारा उसी सिद्धांत , डिजाइन के अनुसार और उसी साम्रगी से जिससे उक्त अनुमोदित मॉडल का विनिर्माण किया गया है. विनिर्मित उसी श्रृंखला के वैसे ही मंक , यथार्थता और कार्यपालन के तांलन उपकरण भी होंगे जो 50 कि.ग्रा. से 500 कि.ग्रा. तक क्षमता वाले हैं ।

[ फा. सं. डब्ल्यू एम 21 (07 )/2010]

वी.एन. दीक्षित, निदेशक , विधिक माप विज्ञान 6210

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 3 , 2011 /BHADRA 12 , 1933

[ PART II -SEC . 3 ( ii )]

New Delhi , the 18th April , 2011

S.O. 2328. Whereas the Central Government , after considering the report submitted to it by the prescribed authority, is satisfied that the model described in the said report (see the figure given below) is in conformity with the provisions of the Standards of Weights and Measures Act, 1976 (60 of 1976) and the Standards of Weights and Measures (Approval of Models) Rules , 1987 and the said model is likely to maintain its accuracy over periods of sustained use and to render accurate service under varied conditions ;

Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub - sections (7 ) and (8 ) of Section 36 of the saidAct , the Central Government hereby issues and publishes the certificate of approval of the model of Automatic Gravimetric Filling Instrument (Viscous /Non Viscous Liquid) belonging to Accuracy Class , X ( 1 ) of ' ADP -BFM ' series with brand name "ADPRO" ( hereinafter referred to as the said model ) , maunfactured by M/s Adpro Automation Pvt . Ltd. , No. 7 , 9th Cross , Ganapathy Nagar, Rajgopal Nagaı , Main Road, Bangalore - 58 and which is assigned the approval mark IND/09/ 10/ 22 ;

The said model is a strain gauge type load cell based Automatic Gravimetric Filling Instrument ( Viscous /Non Viscous Liquid) It has the output upto 500kg. with a frquency of weighing 30 packs per hour depending upon the quantity and nature of the product. Its air pressure is 6kg./cm2 . The machine is designed for filling all types of viscous and non viscous oils like mustard oil, Gingili oil , Sunflower oil , etc. The Light Emitting Diode ( LED)display indicates the weighing results . The instrument operates on 230 Volts , 50 Hertz alternative current power supply

Figure-1

CADPRO

MODEL ADR BFM MAX

SPACE FOR SEALIN

Figure- 2 Sealing diagram of the sealing provision of the model

On the rear side of the indicator , a leaded sealing wire is fastened through four bored screws , passing over the cover and bracket, for receiving the verification stamp and seal . The indicator can not be opened without tampering the seal . 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 to disable access to external calibration .

Further, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub -section ( 12) of section 36 of the said, Act , the Central Government hereby declares that this certificate of approval of the said model shall also cover the weighing instruments of similar make accuracy and performance of same series capacity from 50 kg. to 500 kg.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/(07)/2010 ]

B. N. DIXIT, Director of Legal Metrology 6211

भारत का राजपत्र : सितम्बर 3 , 2011 / भाद्र 12 , 1933

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

नई दिल्ली, 18 अप्रैल , 2011

का.आ. 2329.-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 हैं 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 एडप्रो आटोमेशन प्रा. लि. , नं. 7 , 9वां क्रास , गणपति नगर, राजगोपाल नगर , मैन रोड , बंगलौर 58 द्वारा विनिर्मित यथार्थता वर्ग , X (0.5 ) वाले " एडीपी- बएफएम " श्रृंखला के स्वचालित ग्रेविमेट्रिक फिलिंग उपकरण ( विसकॉस/नॉन- विसकॉस लिक्विड ) के मॉडल का, जिसके ब्राण्ड का नाम " एडप्रो " है, ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/09 / 10/ 23 समनुदेशित किया गया है , अनुमोदन प्रमाण पत्र जारी करती है ।

उक्त मॉडल एक विकृत गेज प्रकार का भार सेल आधारित स्वचालित ग्रेविमेट्रिक फिलिंग उपकरण ( विसकॉस/नॉन-विसकॉस लिक्विड ) है उत्पाद की मात्रा और प्रकृति पर निर्भर करते हुए इसकी उत्पादकता 50 कि.ग्रा. , 150 पैकेट प्रति घंटा की बारम्बारता के साथ है । मशीन को सभी प्रकार विसकॉस /नॉन - विसकॉस आयल जैसे मस्टर्ड आयल , जिंगिली आयल , सूरजमुखी का तेल आदि के भरने के लिए डिजाइन किया गया है । प्रकाश उत्सर्जक डायाडल ( एल ई डी ) प्रदर्श तोलन परिणाम उपदर्शित करता है । उपकरण 230 वोल्ट और 50 हर्ट्ज प्रत्यावर्ती धारा विद्युत प्रदाय पर कार्य करता है ।

ADPRO

SPACE T'UK SI ALLING

आकृति-2 मॉडल को सीलिंग करने का योजनाबद्ध डायग्राम

स्टाम्प और सील के सत्यापन के लिए इंडीकेटर के पीछे , कवर और ब्रैकेट से निकालते हुए लीडिड सीलिंग वायर फोर बोरेडे स्क्रूज से कसा जाता है । सील तोड़े बिना इंडिकेटर को खोला नहीं जा सकता । 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/मंदर बार्ड में डिप स्विच भी दिया गया है ।

[फा. सं. डब्ल्यू एम 21 (07)/2010 ]

बी.एन. दीक्षित , निदेशक , विधिक माप विज्ञान 6212

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 3 , 2011 /BHADRA 12, 1933

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

New Delhi , the 18th April , 2011

S.O..2329. Whereas the Central Government, after considering the report submitted to it by the prescribed authority, is satisfied that the model described in the said report (see the figure given below) is in conformity with the provisions of the Standards of Weights and Measures Act , 1976 (60 of 1976) and the Standards of Weights and Measures (Approval of Models) Rules , 1987 and the said model is likely to maintain its accuracy over periods of sustained use and to render accurate service under varied. conditions ;

Now, therefore , in exercise of the powers conferredby sub - sections (7 ) and ( 8) of Section 36 of the said Act , the Central Government hereby issues and publishes the certificate ofapproval of the model of Automatic Gravimetric Filling Instrument ( Viscous/Non Viscous Liquid) belonging to Accuracy Class , X (0.5) of ' ADP - FM ' series with brand name " ADPRO" ( hereinafter referred to as the said model) , maunfactured by M/ s Adpro Automation Pvt. Ltd. , No. 7, 9th Cross , Ganapathy Nagr , Rajgopal Nagar , Main Road, Bangalore 58 and which is assigned the approval mark IND/ 09/ 10/23 ;

The said model is a strain gauge type load cell based Automatic Gravimetric Filling Instrument ( Viscous /Non Viscous Liquid) It has the output upto 50kg . with a frquency of weighing 150 packs per hour depending upon the quantity and nature of the product . The machine is designed for filling all types of viscous and non viscous oils like mustard oil , Gingili oil , Sunflower oil , etc. The Light Emitting Diode (LED) indicates the weighing results . The instrument operates on 230 Volts and 50 Hertz alternate current power supply.

Figure- 1

ADPRO

SALIN

Figure- 2 Sealing diagram of the sealing provision of the model

On the rear side of the indicator, a leaded sealing wire is fastened through four bored screws , passing over the cover and bracket , for receiving the verification stamp and seal . The indicator can not be opened without tampering the seal . Atypical schematic diagram of sealing provision of the model is givenabove .

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 powers conferred by sub - section ( 12 ) of section 36 of the said , Act , the Central Government hereby declares that this certificate of approval ofthe said model shall also cover the weighing instrument of similar make accuracy and performance of same series capacity from 50 kg . 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 .

1.No.WM- 21 / ( 07 )/2010 ]

B. N. DIXIT, Director of Legal Metrology 6213 भारत का राजपत्रः सितम्बर-3 2011/ भा度 12 , 1933

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

नई दिल्ली, 18 अप्रैल , 2011

का.आ. 2330.-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 मापःमानक 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 परिस्थित्तियों में उपयुक्त सेवा प्रदान करता रहेगा;

अतः , अब, केन्द्रीय सरकार , उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 कीउप- धारा ( 7 ) और उप - धारा ( 8 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए मैसर्स प्रकाश ट्रेडर्स , 89 , कबाडी बाजार , मेरठ सिटी-250002 , उत्तर प्रदेश द्वारा विनिर्मित उच्च यथार्थता वर्ग ( यथार्थता- II ) वाले " पीटीटी " श्रृंखला के अंकक सूचन सहित अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण ( टेबलटाप टाइप ) के मॉडल का , जिसके ब्रांड का नाम " एंकर " है ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/09/ 10/389 समनुदेशित किया गया है , अनुमोदन प्रमाण-पत्र जारी और प्रकाशित करती है ।

उक्त मॉडल एक विकृत गेज प्रकार का भार सेल आधारित अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण ( टेबलटाप टाइप ) है । इसकी अधिकतम क्षमता 30 कि.ग्रा. और न्यूनतम क्षमता 100 ग्रा. है । सत्यापन मापमान अन्तराल 2 ग्रा. है । इसमें एक आधेयतुलन युक्तिहै जिसका शत प्रतिशत व्यकलनात्मक धारित आधेयतुलन प्रभाव है । लाईट इमिटिंग डायोड ( एल ई डी ) प्रदर्श तोलन परिणाम उपदर्शित करता है । उपकरण 230 वोल्ट और 50 हर्ट्ज प्रत्यावर्ती धारा विद्युत प्रदाय पर कार्य करता है ।

Lead seal

Stamping Plate

आकृति-2 मॉडल को सीलिंग करने का योजनाबद्ध डायग्राम

डिस्पले की बाडी से सीलिंग वायर निकाल कर डिस्प्ले पर सील किया जाता है । सील को डिस्पले को बेस प्लेट और टॉप कवर के छेद से जोड़ा गया है उसके बाद इन दो छेदों से सील 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 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 का विनिर्माण किया गया है , विनिर्मित उसी श्रृंखला के वैसे ही मेक, यथार्थता और कार्यपालन के तोलन उपकरण भी होंगे जो 1 मि. ग्रा. से 50 मि.ग्रा. तक के " ई " मान के लिए 100 से 100,000 तक की रेंज में सत्यापन मापमान अंतराल ( एन ) और 100 मि.ग्रा. या उससे अधिक के " ई " मान के लिए 5000 से 100,000 तक की रेंज में सत्यापन मापमान अंतराल ( एन ) सहित 50 कि.ग्रा . तक की अधिकतम क्षमता वाले हैं और " ई " मान 1x10 % , 2x10% और 5x10 , के हैं, जो धनात्मक या ऋणात्मक पूर्णांक या शून्य के समतुल्य हैं ।

[फा. सं. डब्ल्यूएम 21 ( 242)/2010 ]

बी.एन. दीक्षित , निदेशक , विधिक माप विज्ञान 6214

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 3 , 2011 /BHADRA 12 , 1933

[PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii)]

New Delhi , the 18th April , 2011

S.O. 2330.-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 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 (Table top type) with digital indication of high Accuracy (Accuracy class -II) of Series " PTT" and with brand name " ANCHOR" (hereinafter referred to as the said Model ) , maunfactured by M/ s . Prakash Traders , 89 , Kabari Bazar , Merrut City- 250002, Uttar Pradesh and which is assigned the approval mark IND/09 / 10/ 389 ;

The said model is a strain gauge type load cell based non- automatic weighing instrument (Table Top Type) with a maximum capacity of 30kg. and minimum capacity of 100 g . The verfication scale interval (e) is 2g. 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 or 50 Hertz alternative current power supply.

Figure- 1

Lead seal

Stamping Plate

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, 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 . 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 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 up to 50kg. with verification scale interval ( n) in the range of 100 to 100,000 for ' e ' value of 1mg . to 50 mg . and with verification scale interval (n ) in the range of 5000 to 100,000 for ' e ' value of 100mg. or more and with ' e ' value of 1x10k , 2x10k , or 5x10k , wherek 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 ( 242)/2010]

B. N. DIXIT, Director of Legal Metrology 6215 भारत का राजपत्र : सितम्बर 3 , 2011 / भाद्र 12 , 1933

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

नई दिल्ली , 18 अप्रैल , 2011

का.आ. 2331.-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 प्रकाश ट्रेडर्स , 89 , कबाड़ी बाजार , मेरठ सिटी-250002 , उत्तर प्रदेश द्वारा विनिर्मित उच्च यथार्थता ( यथार्थता III ) वाले " पीटीपी " श्रृंखला के अंकक सूचन सहित अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण ( प्लेटफार्म टाइप ) के मॉडल का, जिसके ब्रांड का नाम " एंकर " है ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/09/ 10/390 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 200 कि.ग्रा. और न्यूनतम क्षमता 400 ग्रा. है । सत्यापन मापमान अन्तराल 20 ग्रा. है । इसमें एक आधेयतुलन युक्ति है जिसका शत प्रतिशत व्यकलनात्मक 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 ।

Stamping plate

7 κα 0000 IT Lead seal

(Indicator of the Platform Scale-Front Side)

Stamping Plate Lead seal

Sealing wire

findicator 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 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 ।

और केन्द्रीय सरकार उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 की उप- धारा ( 12 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए यह घोषणा करती है कि उक्त मॉडल के अनुमोदन के इस प्रमाणपत्र के अंतर्गत उसी विनिर्माता द्वारा उसी 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 5000 कि. ग्रा. तक की अधिकतम क्षमता वाले हैं और " ई " मान 1x10 , 2x10 और 5x10 * , के हैं, जो धनात्मक या ऋणात्मक पूर्णांक या शून्य के समतुल्य हैं ।

[फा. सं. डब्ल्यूएम-21 ( 242)/2010 ] बी.एन. दीक्षित , निदेशक, विधिक माप विज्ञान 3202GI/11-3

شیر 6216

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 3 , 2011 /BHADRA 12 , 1933

[ PART II SEC. 3 (ii ) )

New Delhi , the 18th April , 2011

S.O. 2331. 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 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 of Medium Accuracy (Accuracy class -III ) of Series " PTP " and with brand name " ANCHOR" ( hereinafter referred to as the said Model ) , maunfacturedby M/ s . Prakash Traders , 89 , Kabari Bazar, Merrut City- 250002 , Uttar Pradesh and which is assigned the approval mark IND/09/ 10/390 :

The said model is a strain gauge type load cell based non -automatic weighing instrument ( Platform Type ) with amaximum capacity of 200kg. and minimum capacity of400 g . The verfication scale interval ( e ) is 20g . It has a taredevice 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

Stamping plate

Lead seal

0000

(Indicator of the Platform Scale Front Side)

Stamping Plate

Lead seal

Sealingwire

(Indicator of the platform Scale Lowor back Side) Figure- 2 Schematic Diagram of sealing provision of the Model

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 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 5000 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 1x10 , 2x10k, or 5x10k , 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 ( 242)/ 2010 ]

B. N. DIXIT , Director of Legal Metrology 6217 भारत का राजपत्र सितम्बर 3 , 2011/ भाद्र 12, 1933

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

नई दिल्ली, 18 अप्रैल , 2011

का.आ. 2332.- 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 शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए मैसर्स एडलर वेइंग सिस्टमस , एम सी एफ-5862 , संजय कालोनी , सेक्टर-23 , फरीदाबाद 121005 द्वारा विनिर्मित उच्च यथार्थता ( यथार्थता वर्ग- II ) वाले " एडब्ल्यूएसटी " श्रृंखला के अंकक सूचन सहित अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण ( टेबलटाप टाइप ) के मॉडल का, जिसके ब्रांड का नाम " एडलर " है ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/09 / 10/258 समनुदेशित किया गया है , अनुमोदन प्रमाण- पत्र जारी करती है ।

उक्त मॉडल एक विकृत गेज प्रकार का भार सेल आधारित अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण ( टेबलटाप टाइप ) है । इसकी अधिकतम क्षमता 30 कि.ग्रा. और न्यूनतम क्षमता 100 ग्रा. है । सत्यापन मापमान अन्तराल ( ई ) 2 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 ।

Stamping-Plate

Lead Scal

LOAD RECEPTOR

888888

0000

ADDLER

आकृति-2 मॉडल को सीलिंग करने का योजनाबद्ध डायग्राम

डिस्पले की बाडी में से सीलिंग वायर निकाल कर डिस्प्ले के राइट साइड /बैक साइड में सीलिंग की गई है । डिस्पले की बेस प्लेट और टॉप कवर के छेद से सील को जोड़ा गया है तब सील वायर इन दोनों छेदों में से निकाल कर सील से जोड़ा गया है । मॉडल को सीलबंद करने के उपबंध का एक प्ररूपी योजनाबद्ध डायग्राम उपरोक्त 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 भीदिया 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 प्रमाण- पत्र 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 1 मि. ग्रा. से 50 मि.ग्रा. तक के " ई " मान के लिए 100 से 1,00,000 तक की रेंज में सत्यापन मापमान अंतराल ( एन ) और 100 मि.ग्रा. या उससे अधिक के " ई " मान के लिए 5000 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 1x10% , 2x10 या 5x10 कं , के हैं , जो धनात्मक या ऋणात्मक पूर्णांक या शून्य के समतुल्य हैं ।

[फा. सं. डब्ल्यूएम -21 ( 158 ) /2010 ] बी. एन. दीक्षित , निदेशक , विधिक माप विज्ञान 6218

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 3 , 2011 /BHADRA 12, 1933

[PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii) ]

New Delhi , the 18th April, 2011

S.O. 2332. 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 the Standards of Weights and Measures Act , 1976 (60 of 1976) and the Standards of Weights and Measures (Approval of Models ) Rules , 1987 and the said model is likely to maintain its accuracy over periods of sustained use and to render accurate service under varied conditions;

Now, therefore , in exercise of the powers conferred by sub- sections ( 7 ) and (8 ) of Section 36 of the said Act, the Central Government hereby issues and publishes the certificate of approval of the model of non - automatic weighing instrument (Table top type) with digital indication of High Accuracy (Accuracy class -II ) of Series " AWST " and with brand name " ADDLER" (hereinafter referred to as the said Model ) , maunfactured by M /s . Addler Weighing Systems , MCF - 5862 , Sanjay Colony, Sector- 23 , Faridabad 121005 and which is assigned the approval mark IND/09/ 10/258 ;

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

Figure- 1

StampingPlate

Lead Scal

LOAD RECEPTOR

0000

ADDLER

Figure - 2- Schematic Diagram of sealing provision of the Model

Sealing is done on the right side /back side of 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 . 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 to disable 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 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 up to 50kg . with verification scale interval (n ) in the range of 100 to 1,00,000 for ' e ' value of Img . to 50 mg. and with verification scale interval ( n ) in the range of 5000 to 1,00,000 for ' e ' value of 100mg . or more and with ' e' value of 1x10 , 2x10 or 5x 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 ( 158 )/2010 /

B. N. DIXIT, Director of 1.egal Metrology 6219 भारत का राजपत्र : सितम्बर 3 , 2011 / भाद्र 12 , 1933

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

नई दिल्ली , 18 अप्रैल 2011

का.आ. 2333.-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 एडलर वेइंग सिस्टमस , एम सी एफ -5862 , संजय कालोनी , सेक्टर-23 , फरीदाबाद-121005 द्वारा विनिर्मित मध्यम यथार्थता ( यथार्थता वर्ग- III ) वाले " एडब्ल्यूएसपी " श्रृंखला के अंकक सूचन सहित अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण ( प्लेटफार्म टाइप ) के मॉडल का , जिसके ब्राण्ड का नाम " एडलर " है ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/09/ 10/259 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 200 कि. ग्रा. और न्यूनतम क्षमता 1 कि. ग्रा. है । सत्यापन मापमान अन्तराल ( ई ) 50 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 ।

Stamping Plate

Leadsent

000

(Indicator of the platform Scale Front Side)

StampingPlate

Leadseaf

Lol soal

आकृति- 2-मॉडल को सीलिंग करने का योजनाबद्ध डायग्राम

डिस्पले की बाडी में से सीलिंग वायर निकाल कर डिस्पले के राइट साइड/ बैक साइड में सीलिंग की गई है । डिस्पले की बेस प्लेट और टाप कवर के छेद से सील को जोड़ा गया है , तब सील वायर इन दोनों छेदों में से निकाल कर सील से जोड़ा गया है । मॉडल को सीलबंद करने के उपबंध का एक प्ररूपी योजनाबद्ध डायग्राम उपरोक्त 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 प्रमाण - पत्र 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 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 1x10 , 2x10 या 5x10 * , के हैं , जो धनात्मक या ऋणात्मक पूर्णांक या शून्य के समतुल्य हैं ।

[फा. सं. डब्ल्यू एम -21 ( 158 )/2010 ]

बी. एन. दीक्षित , निदेशक , विधिक माप विज्ञान 6220

[PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii )] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 3 , 2011 /BHADRA 12 , 1933

New Delhi , the 18thApril , 2011

S.O. 2333. Whereas the Central Government , after considering the report submitted to it by the prescribed authority, is satisfied that the model described in the said report (see the figure given below) is in conformity with the provisions of the Standards of Weights and Measures Act, 1976 (60 of 1976 ) and the Standards of Weights and Measures (Approval of Models) Rules , 1987 and the said model is likely to maintain its accuracy over periods of sustained use and to render accurate service under varied conditions;

Now, therefore , in exercise of the powers conferred by sub - sections (7) and ( 8 ) of Section 36 of the said Act, the Central Government hereby issues and publishes the certificate of approval of the model of non - automatic weighing instrument (Plateform type ) with digital indication of medium accuracy ( Accuracy class -III ) of series " AWSP " and with brand name "ADDLER" (hereinafter referred to as the said model) , maunfactured by M/s . Addler Weighing Systems , MCF- 5862, Sanjay Colony, Sector- 23 , Faridabad- 121005 and which is assigned the approval mark IND/09/ 10/ 259 ;

The said model is a strain gauge type load cell based non - automatic weighing instrument ( Plateform type) with amaximum capacity of 200 kg . and minimum capacity of 1 kg . The verification scale interval (e ) is 50 g. It has a tare device with a 100 per cent subtractive retained tare effect . The Light Emitting Diode ( LED ) display indicates the weighing result. The instrument operates on 230 Volts and 50 Hertz alternative current power supply.

Stamping Plate

Lead seal

(trikator of the platioon Scale Froni Side)

StampingMate

Load seel

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

Sealing is done on the right side /back side of 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 . 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 to disable access to external calibration .

Further, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub - section ( 12 ) of Section 36 of the said Act , the Central Government hereby declares that this certificate of approval of the said model shall also cover the weighing instrument of similarmake , accuracy and performance of same series with maximum capacity up to 50kg . and 5000kg . 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 1x10k , 2x10h , or 5x10k , 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 /( 158 )/2010 ]

B. N. DIXIT, Director of legal Metrology 6221 भारत का राजपत्र : सितम्बर 3 , 2011 / भाद्र 12 , 1933

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

नई दिल्ली, 18 अप्रैल 2011

का.आ. 2334.- 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 पारस टेक्नोलोजी , नं. 14 , 14वां ' बी ' क्रास , साराक्की विलेज , जे पी नगर , प्रथम फेज , बेंगलूर 560078 द्वारा विनिर्मित " एमएस -1132 " श्रृंखला के अंकक सूचन सहित " टैक्सी/आटो मीटर " ( फ्लेग टाइप ) के मॉडल का, जिसके ब्राण्ड का नाम " पारस " है ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/09/ 10/449 समनुदेशित किया गया है, अनुमोदन प्रमाणपत्र जारी करती है ।

उक्त मॉडल " टैक्सी/आटो मीटर " ( फ्लेग टाइप ) मापन उपकरण है । जो लगातार योग करता जाता है और यात्री द्वारा देय भाड़े को यात्रा के दौरान किसी भी समय दर्शाता है । सार्वजनिक वाहन के यात्रियों द्वारा देय भाड़ा , तय की गई दूरी और निर्धारित स्पीड से कम पर व्यतीत किए गए समय का फलन है जो प्राधिकृत शुल्क के अनुसार अनुपूरक भाड़े से स्वतन्त्र है । मीटर की रीडिंग प्रकाश उत्सर्जक डायोड ( एल ई डी ) द्वारा दर्शायी जाती है । टैक्सी मीटर का ' के' फेक्टर 1350 प्लसेस प्रति किलोमीटर पर चलता है । इंडीकेटर में 5 अंकों ( 3 तीन अंक रुपए के लिए और 2 अंक पैसे के लिए ) तक अधिकतम किराया सूचन, 4 अंकों ( 4 अंकों में एक दशमलव प्वाइंट शामिल ) में अधिकतम दूरी सूचन और 4 अंकों में ( 2)अंक मिनट के लिए और 2 अंक सेकैण्ड के लिए ) अधिकतम समय सूचन दर्शाता है ।

10450 0145

आकृति-2 मॉडल के सीलिंग प्रावधान का सीलिंग डायग्राम

सील और स्टाम्प के सत्यापन के लिए दिए गए दो स्क्रू होल्ज वाले में से लीडिड वायर निकाल मीटर की रियर बाटम साइड में सीलिंग की जाती है सील से छेड़छाड़ किए बिना मीटर को खोला नहीं जा सकता । मॉडल को सीलबंद करने के उपबंध का एक प्ररूपी योजनाबद्ध डायग्राम उपरोक्त दिया गया है ।

[फा. सं. डब्ल्यूएम-21 ( 269 )/2010 ]

बी.एन. दीक्षित , निदेशक , विधिक माप विज्ञान 6222

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 3 , 2011 /BHADRA 12 , 1933

[PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii) ]

New Delhi , the 18thApril , 2011

S.O. 2334. Whereas the Central Government , after considering the report submitted to it by the prescribed authority, is satisfied that the model described in the said report (see the figure given below) is in conformity with the provisions of the Standards of Weights and Measures Act , 1976 ( 60 of 1976 ) and the Standards of Weights and Measures (Approval of Models) Rules , 1987 and the said model is likely to maintain its accuracy over periods of sustained use and to render accurate service under varied conditions ;

Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub - sections (7) and ( 8 ) of Section 36 of the said Act, the Central Government hereby issues and publishes the certificate of approval of the model of " Taxi/Auto Meter" (Flag Type) with digital indication (hereinafter referred to as the said model) of " MS - 1132 " series and with brand name " PARAS " maunfactured by M/ s Paras Technology, No. 14, 14th ' B ' Cross , Sarakki Village , J. P. Nagar , 1st Phase , Bangalore- 560078 and which is assigned the approval mark IND/09/ 10/449;

The said model of " Taxi/Auto Meter " ( Flag Type ) is a measuring instrument which totalizes continuously and indicates the fare at any moment of journey the charges payable by the passenger of a public vehicle as function of the distance traveled and below a certain speed , the fare is calculated as function of the time taken . This being independent of supplementary charges according to the authorized tariffs . The reading of the meter is indicated by the Light Emitting Diode (LED) . The ' k ' factor of the Taxi Meter is 1350 pulses per kilometer . The indicator have 5 digits ( 3 digits for rupees and two digits for paise) for maximum fare indication , 4 digits ( 4 digits including one decimal point) for maximum distance indication and4digits (two for minuts and two for seconds) for maximum time indication.

10450

0 145

Figure - 2 Schematic Diagram of sealing provision of the model

Sealing is done on the rear bottom side of the meter, two screws with holes are provided through which the leaded wire will be passed to receive the verification seal and stamp. The meter cannot be opened without tampering the seal ,A schematic diagram of sealing provision of the model is given above.

[ F.No.WM -21/ (269)/ 2010 ]

B. N. DIXIT, Director of Legal Metrology 6223 भारत का राजपत्र : सितम्बर 3 , 2011 / भाद्र 12 , 1933

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii ) ]

नई दिल्ली, 18 अप्रैल 2011

का.आ. 2335.-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 शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए मैसर्स ए एंड ए इंटरप्राइज , मार्फत अनिल महेश्वरी , गांव नंदला , वाया नसीराबाद, जिला अजमेर-305401 ( राजस्थान ) द्वारा विनिर्मित मध्यम यथार्थता ( यथार्थता वर्ग- III ) वाले " एएम-टी III " श्रृंखला के अंकक सूचन सहित अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण ( टेबलटाप टाइप ) के मॉडल का, जिसके ब्राण्ड का नाम " एटलस " है ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/09/10/96 समनुदेशित किया गया है , अनुमोदन प्रमाण-पत्र जारी करती है ।

उक्तमॉडल एक विकृत गेज प्रकार का भार सेल आधारित अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण ( टेबलटाप प्रकार ) है । इसकी अधिकतम क्षमता 30 कि.ग्रा. और न्यूनतम क्षमता 100 ग्रा. है । सत्यापन मापमान अन्तराल ( ई ) 5 ग्रा. है । इसमें एक आधेयतुलन युक्ति है जिसका शत प्रतिशत व्यकलनात्मक 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 ।

ATLAS

TARE

obabo

आकृति-2 मॉडल को सीलिंग करने का योजनाबद्ध डायग्राम

स्केल की बाडी में होल से सीलिंग वायर निकाल कर सीलिंग की जाती है । मॉडल को सीलबंद करने के उपबंध का एक प्ररूपी योजनाबद्ध डायग्राम उपर 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 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 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 1x10 , 2x10 5x10 के , के हैं , जो धनात्मक या ऋणात्मक पूर्णांक या शून्य के समतुल्य हैं ।

[फा. सं. डब्ल्यूएम -21 (17 )/2010 ]

बी.एन. दीक्षित , निदेशक, विधिक माप विज्ञान 3202GI/11--4 6224

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 3 , 2011/BHADRA 12, 1933

[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii )]

New Delhi , the 18thApril , 2011

S.O. 2335. Whereas the Central Government, after considering the report submitted to it by the prescribed authority, is satisfied that the model described in the said report ( see the figure given below) is in conformity with the provisions of the Standards of Weights and Measures Act , 1976 (60 of 1976) and the Standards of Weights and Measures (Approval of Models) Rules , 1987 and the said model is likely to maintain its accuracy over periods of sustained use and to render accurate service under varied conditions ;

Now, therefore , in exercise of the powers conferred by sub- sections (7) and ( 8) of Section 36 of the said Act , the Central Government hereby approves and issues the certificate of approval of the model of non- automatic weighing instrument (Tabletop type) with digital indication , belonging to Medium Accuracy (Accuracy class -III) of series " AM- TIII" and with brand name " ATLAS" ( hereinafter referred to as the said model ) , maunfactured by M/ s A& A Enterprise, C/ o Anil Maheswari , Village - Nandla , Via Nasirabad, Dist. Ajmer- 305401 ( Rajasthan) which is assigned the approval mark IND/09/ 10/96;

The said model is a strain gauge type load cell based non - automatic weighing instrument (Tabletop type) with a maximum capacity of 30 kg . and minimum capacity of 100g . The verification scale interval ( e) is 5g . It has a tare device with a100 perc ent subtractive retained tare effect. The Light Emitting Diode ( LED) display indicates the weighing result . The instrument operates on 230 Volts and 50 Hertz alternative current power supply.

afolddw

Namaia ATLAS

LANE

Secmisite Sesking

Figure- 2 Schematic Diagram of sealing of the model

Sealing is done by passing the sealing wire from the body of the scale through holes . 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 to disable access to external calibration .

Further , in exercise of the powers conferred by sub- section ( 12 ) of Section 36 of the said , Act , the Central Government hereby declares that this certificate of approval of the said model shall also cover the weighing instrument of similar make , accuracy, performance and of the same series with maximum capacity up to 50kg. and with number of verification scale interval (n) in the range of 100 to 10,000 for ' e ' value of 100mg . to 2g. and with number of verification scale interval (n) inthe range of 500 to 10,000 for ' e ' value of 5g. or more and with ' e ' value of 1x10k , 2x10 % , or 5x10k, k being the positive or negative whole number or equal to zero , manufactured by the said manufacturer in accordance with the same principle, design and materials with which , the approved model has been manufactured.

[ F.No.WM-21 / ( 17)/ 2010 ]

B. N. DIXIT, Director of Legal Metrology 6225 भारत का राजपत्र : सितम्बर 3 , 2011 / भाद्र 12 , 1933

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

नई दिल्ली , 18 अप्रैल 2011

का.आ. 2336.- 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 शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए मैसर्स ए एंड ए इंटरप्राइज , मार्फत अनिल महेश्वरी , गांव नंदला, वाया नसीराबाद , जिलाअजमेर -305401 ( राजस्थान ) द्वारा विनिर्मित मध्यम यथार्थता ( यथार्थता वर्ग- III ) वाले " एएम - पी III " श्रृंखला के अंकक सूचन सहित अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण ( प्लेटफार्म टाइप ) के मॉडल का, जिसके ब्राण्ड का नाम " एटलस " है ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/09/ 10/97 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 . और न्यूनतम क्षमता 4 कि.ग्रा. है । सत्यापन मापमान अन्तराल ( ई ) 200 ग्रा. है । इसमें एक आधेयतुलन युक्ति है जिसका शत प्रतिशत व्यकलनात्त्मक 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 ।

Uther side sealing

PLATFORM SCALE

HEAD

INDICATOR

Pupate seaduse Schematic Dragra Bilaller Model

↑

Starting Plat siile seating

STAND WEIGHING PLATFORM

ATLAS

आकृति-2 मॉडल को सीलिंग करने का योजनाबद्ध डायग्राम

डिस्प्ले की बाडी में से सीलिंग वायर निकाल कर डिस्प्ले के राइट साइड /बैक साइड में सीलिंग की गई है । डिस्प्ले की बेस प्लेट और टाप कवर के छेद से सील को जोड़ा गया है , तब सील वायर इन दोनों छेदों में से निकाल कर सील से जोड़ा गया है । मॉडल को सीलबंद करने के उपबंध का एक प्ररूपी योजनाबद्ध डायग्राम उपरोक्त दिया गया है ।

उपकरण में केलिब्रेशनके 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 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 का 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 " 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 1x10 , 2x10 5x10 के , के हैं , जो धनात्मक या ऋणात्मक पूर्णांक या शून्य के समतुल्य हैं ।

[फा. सं. डब्ल्यूएम-21 ( 17 ) /2010 ] बी.एन. दीक्षित, निदेशक , विधिक माप विज्ञान [PART II-SEC. 3 ( ii) ] 6226

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 3 , 2011 /BHADRA 12, 1933

New Delhi , the 18th April , 2011

S.O. 2336. Whereas the Central Government, after considering the report submitted to it by the prescribed authority, is satisfied that the model described in the said report (see the figure given below) is in conformity with the provisions of the Standards of Weights and Measures Act , 1976 ( 60 of 1976 ) and the Standards of Weights and Measures (Approval of Models ) Rules , 1987 and the said model is likely to maintain its accuracy over periods of sustained use and to render accurate service under varied conditions;

Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub - sections (7 ) and (8 ) of Section 36 of the said Act , the Central Government hereby issues and publishes the certificate of approval of the model of non- automatic weighing instrument (Plateform type) with digital indication , Medium Accuracy (Accuracy class -III ) of series " AM - PIII " and with brand name " ATLAS" (hereinafter referred to as the said model ) , maunfactured by M/ s A &A Enterprise, C/o Anil Maheswari , Village-Nandla , Via Nasirabad, Dist . Ajmer- 305401 (Rajasthan) which is assigned the approval mark IND/ 09 / 10/97;

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 4kg. The verification scale interval (e ) is 200g . It has a tare device with a 100 percent subtractive retained tare effect . The Light Emitting Diode ( LED) display indicates the weighing results . The instrument operates on 230 Volts and 50 Hertz alternative current power supply .

Dither side sealing

PLATFORM SCALE

INDICATOR HEAD

Schemauc Diaarn Os Piaz lomo Manel

↑

Stamulut Flar side sealing

STAND WLIGHING PLATFORM

ATLAS

Figure- 2 Schematic diagram of sealing provision of the model

Sealing is done on the right side /back side of 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 . 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 to disable access to external calibration .

Further, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub - section ( 12 ) of Section 36 of the said , Act , the Central Government hereby declares that this certificate of approval of the said model shall also cover the weighing instruments of similar make, accuracy and performance and the same series with maximum capacity above 50kg . up to 5000kg . 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 1x10k , 2x10k , or 5x10k , 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 / ( 17)/2010]

B. N. DIXIT, Director of Legal Metrology 6227

भारत का राजपत्र : सितम्बर 3 , 2011 / भाद्र 12, 1933

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

नई दिल्ली , 18 अप्रैल 2011

का.आ. 2337.-केन्द्रीय सरकार का, विहित प्राधिकारी द्वारा उसे प्रस्तुत रिपोर्ट पर विचार करने के पश्चात् वह समाधान हो गया है कि उक्त रिपोर्ट में वर्णित मॉडल ( नीचे दी गई आकृति देखें ) बाट और माय 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 उक्तमॉडल 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 ग्रीव्स कॉटन लिमिटेड, हैवी इंजीनियरिंग यूनिट, डी-18 , सिपकॉट इंडस्ट्रियल काम्पलैक्स मुम्मिडीयोन्नडी-601201 द्वारा विनिर्मित यथार्थता वर्ग -1 वाले " जीपीएम -1000 " श्रृंखला के डिस्कंटिन्युअस टोटलाइजिंग स्वचालित तोलन उपकरण ( टोटलाइजिंग हुपर व्हीयर ) अंकक सूचन सहित , के मॉडल का, जिसके ब्राण्ड का नाम " ग्रीव्स " है ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/09/ 10/ 356 समनुदेशित किया गया है , अनुमोदन प्रमाण - पत्र जारी करती है ।

उक्त मॉडल एक विकृत गेज प्रकार का भार सेल आधारित डिस्कंटिन्युअस टोटलाइजिंग स्वचालित तोलन उपकरण ( टोटलाइंजिंग हुपर व्हीयर ) है । इसकी अधिकतम क्षमता 2500 कि.ग्रा . और न्यूनतम क्षमता 200 कि.ग्रा. है । मापमान अन्तराल ( डी) । कि.ग्रा. है । इसमें एक आधेयतुलन युक्ति है जिसका शत प्रतिशत व्यकलनात्मक धारित आधेयतुलन प्रभाव है । एल ई डी तोल परिणाम सूचित करता है । उपकरण 3 फेज एसी 415 वी और 50 हर्ट्ज -50 केडब्ल्यूपर कार्य करता है ।

आकृति-2 मॉडल को सीलिंग करने का योजनाबद्ध डायग्राम

सीलिंग के लिए वेइंग स्केल के बायीं तरफ में , आउटर कवर और तल प्लेट में काट कर दो छेद किए गए हैं और इन दोनों छेदों को स्टाम्प और सीलिंग के सत्यापन लीड वायर से कसा गया है । उपकरण को सील से छेड़छाड़ किए बिना नहीं खोला जा सकता । मॉडल को सीलबंद करने के उपबंध का एक प्ररूपी योजनाबद्ध डायग्राम ऊपर दिया गया है ।

[फा. सं. डब्ल्यूएम-21 ( 227 )/2010 ]

बी.एन. दीक्षित , निदेशक , विधिक माप विज्ञान 6228

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 3 , 2011 /BHADRA 12, 1933

[PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii) ]

New Delhi , the 18thApril , 2011

S.O. 2337.-Whereas the Central Government, after considering the report submitted to it by the prescribed authority, is satisfied that the model described in the said report (see the figure given below) is in conformity with the provisions of the Standards of Weights and Measures Act , 1976 (60 of 1976) and the Standards of Weights and Measures (Approval of Models) Rules , 1987 and the said model is likely to maintain its accuracy over periods of sustained use and to render accurate service under varied conditions;

Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub - sections (7) and (8 ) of Section 36 of the said Act , the Central Government hereby approves and issues the certificate of approval of the model of Discontinuous Totalizing Automatic weighing instrument (Totalizing Hopper Weigher) with digital indication of Accuracy class - 1 of series " GPM- 1000" and with brand name " GREAVES " (hereinafter referred to as the said Model) , maunfactured by M/ s . Greaves Cotton Limited, Heavy Engineering Unit, D- 18 , Sipcot Industrial Complex, Gummidipoondi -601201 and which is assigned the approvalmark IND/09/10/356;

The said model is a strain gauge type load cell based Discontinuous Totalizing Automatic weighing instrument (TotalizingHopper Weigher) with a maximum capacity of2500 kg . and minimum capacity of 200kg. The scale interval (d) is 1kg. Ithas a tare device with a 100 per cent subtractive retained tare effect. The LED display indicates the weighing results . The instrument operates on 3 phase AC 415V & 50 HZ - 50KW.

Figure-2 sealing diagram

Sealing is done from left side of the indicator, two holes are made by cutting the outer cover and base plate and fastened by a leaded wire through these two holes for receiving the verification stamp and seal. The indicator cannot be opened without tempering the seal . 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 to disable access to external calibration .

[ F.No.WM - 21 ( 227 )/ 2010 ] B. N. DIXIT, Director of I.egal Metrology 6229 भारत का राजपत्र : सितम्बर 3 , 2011 / भाद्र 12 , 1933

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

नई दिल्ली , 18 अप्रैल , 2011

का.आ. 2338.-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 शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए मैसर्स पेडसन्स इंस्ट्रूमेंटस प्रा. लि. , मंगलदास मार्किट, अकोला-444001 (महा. ) द्वारा विनिर्मित यथार्थता वर्ग X ( 1 ) वाले " अविष्कार " श्रृंखला के स्वचालित ग्रेविमेट्रिक फिलिंग उपकरण डिजिटल टाइप के मॉडल का , जिसके ब्राण्ड का नाम " पेडसन्स " है ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/09 /09/39 समनुदेशित किया गया है, अनुमोदन प्रमाण - पत्र जारी करती है । उक्त मॉडल एक विकृत गेज प्रकार का भार सेल आधारित स्वचालित ग्रेविमेट्रिक फिलिंग उपकरण डिजिटल टाइप है । इसकी अधिकतम क्षमता 30 कि.ग्रा. और न्यूनतम क्षमता 1 कि.ग्रा. सहित उत्पाद की मात्रा और प्रकार पर आधारित फिल्सरेट 10 पैकेट प्रति मिनट है । मशीन को फ्री फ्लोइंग , नॉन स्टिकी , नॉन डस्टी उत्पाद आदि भरने के लिए डिजाइन किया गया है । लिक्विड क्रिस्टल डिस्पले ( एल सी डी) तोलन परिणाम उपदर्शित करता है । उपकरण 230 वोल्ट और 50 हर्ट्ज प्रत्यावर्ती धारा विद्युत प्रदाय पर कार्य करता है ।

आकृति- 2-सीलिंग प्रावधान का योजनाबद्ध डायग्राम

डिस्प्ले पर सीलिंग की गई है , स्क्रू के साथ स्टाम्पिंग प्लेट को लगाया गया है और सीलिंग वायर बाड़ी में से निकाल कर स्टाम्पिंग के लिए सील से जोड़ा गया है । सील तोड़े बिना इंडीकेटर को खोला नहीं जा सकता । मॉडल को सीलबंद करने के उपबंध का एक प्ररूपी योजनाबद्ध डायग्राम उपर 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 भांदिया 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 प्रमाण- पंत्र 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 ग्रा. से 300 कि.ग्रा. तक की रेंज में होंगे ।

[फा. सं. डब्ल्यू एम-21 (40 )/2010 ]

बी. एन. दीक्षित , निदेशक , विधिक माप विज्ञान 6230

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 3 , 2011 /BHADRA 12, 1933

[PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii) ]

New Delhi , the 18thApril , 2011

S.O. 2338.-Whereas the Central Government , after considering the report submitted to it by the prescribed authority, is satisfied that the model described in the said report ( see the figure given below) is in conformity with the provisions of the Standards of Weights and Measures Act, 1976 (60 of 1976) and the Standards of Weights and Measures(Approval of Models) Rules, 1987 and the said model is likely to maintain its accuracy over periods of sustained use and to render accurate service under varied conditions;

Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub - sections (7) and ( 8 ) of Section 36 of the said Act , the CentralGovernment hereby issues and publishes the certificate of approval of the Model of Automatic Gravimetric Filling Instrument belonging to Accuracy Class X ( 1 ) of series " AVISHKAR " and with brand name " PADSONS " ( hereinafter referred to as the said model ), maunfactured by M/ s . Padsons Instruments Pvt . Ltd. , Mangaldas Market , Akola - 444001 (Mah.)andwhich is assigned the approval mark IND/09 /09 /39 ;

The said model is a strain gauge type load cell based Automatic Gravimetric Filling Instrument. It has with a maximum capacity of30 kg . and minimum capacity of 1kg . a frequency ofweighing 10 packs per minuts depending upon the quantityand nature of the product . The machine is designed for filling the free flowing non - sticky, non- dusty products . The Liquid Crystal Display (LCD) indicates the weighing results . The instrument operates on 230 Volts and 50 Hertz alternative current power supply.

Figure- 2-Sealing diagram of the sealing provision of the model

Sealing is done on the display stamping plate is fitted with screw and sealing wires passed through body and connected to the seal for stamping . The indicator cannot be opened without breaking the seal . A typical 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 .

[ F. No.WM -21/(40)/2010]

B. N. DIXIT, Director of Legal Metrology 6231 भारत का राजपत्र : सितम्बर 3 , 2011 / भाद्र 12 , 1933

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

नई दिल्ली, 18 अप्रैल , 2011

का.आ. 2339.-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 प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए मैसर्स एमसन इलेक्ट्रोनिक्स , ए-42 /26 , गुरुद्वारा रोड , दिलशाद गार्डन इंडस्ट्रियल एरिया , शाहदरा , दिल्ली-110094 द्वारा विनिर्मित उच्च यथार्थता ( यथार्थता वर्ग- II ) वाले " एईटी " श्रृंखला के अंकक सूचन सहित अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण ( टेबलटाप टाइप ) के मॉडल का , जिसके ब्राण्ड का नाम " एमसन " है ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/09/10/80 समनुदेशित किया गया है , अनुमोदन प्रमाण- पत्र जारी करती है ।

उक्त मॉडल एक विकृत गेज प्रकार का भार सेल आधारित अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण ( टेबलटाप प्रकार ) है । इसकी अधिकतम क्षमता 30 कि.ग्रा. और न्यूनतम क्षमता 100 ग्रा. है । सत्यापन मापमान अन्तराल ( ई ) 2 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 ।

SUALWIRE

LEADSQUARE SEAL

BOTTOMOFSCALE

Auson

TOPBODYOFSCALE

0000

LEADSQUARE

SEAL.

SEALWIRE

आकृति-2-मॉडल को सीलिंग करने का योजनाबद्ध डायग्राम

बाटम प्लेट , टॉप कवर और स्टाम्पिंग प्लेट के हैड होल्स में से सील वायर निकाला गया है । दूसरे उदाहरण में साइड कवर और बाटम प्लेट के छेदों में से वायर निकाला गया और बायीं तरफ सील किया गया । मॉडल को सीलबंद करने के उपबंध का एक प्ररूपी योजनाबद्ध डायग्राम उपर 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 प्रमाण- पत्र 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 1 मि.ग्रा. से 50 मि.ग्रा. तक के " ई " मान के लिए 100 से 50,000 तक की रेंज में सत्यापन मापमान अंतराल ( एन ) और 100 मि.ग्रा. या उससे अधिक के " ई " मान के लिए 5000 से 50,000 तक की रेंज में सत्यापन मापमान अंतराल ( एन ) सहित 50 कि. ग्रा . तक की अधिकतम क्षमता वाले हैं और " ई " मान 1x10 , 2x10 के या 5X10 , के हैं, जो धनात्मक या ऋणात्मक पूर्णांक या शून्य के समतुल्य हैं ।

[फा. सं. डब्ल्यू एम-21 ( 75 )/2010] बी. एन. दीक्षित, निदेशक , विधिक माप विज्ञान 3202GI /11-5 6232

[PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii) ] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 3 , 2011 /BHADRA 12, 1933

New Delhi , the 18th April , 2011

S.O. 2339. 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 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 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 of High Accuracy (Accuracy class -II ) of series " AET" and with brand name " AMSON " ( hereinafter referred to as the said model ) , maunfactured by M/ s . Amson Electronics , A-42/ 26 , Gurudawara Road, Dilshad Garden Industrial Area , Shahdara , Delhi - 110094 and which is assigned the approval mark IND/09/ 10/80;

The said model is a strain gauge type load cell based non - automatic weighing instrument (Table top type) with amaximum capacity of 30 kg . and minimum capacity of 100g . The verification scale inte val (e ) is 2g. It has a tare device with a 100 per cent subtractive retained tare effect . The Light Emitting Diode (LED) dis, iay indicates the weighing result . The instrument operates on 230 Volts and 50 Hertz alternative current power supply.

SIALWIRE

LEADSQUARE SEAL

BOTTOM

TOPBODYOFSCALE

0000

-LEADSQUARE SEAL

GHALWIRE

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

Seal wire passes through head holes of bottom plate , top cover and stamping plate . In the second instance , wire is passed through the holes in the side cover and bottom plate and then sealed at left side . 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 to disable access to external calibration .

Further, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub- section ( 12 ) of Section 36 of the said Act , the Central Government hereby declares that this certificate of approval of the said model shall also cover the weighing instrument of similar make , accuracy and performance and the same series with maximum capacity above 50kg. and with verification scale interval (n) in the range of 100 to 50,000 for ' e ' value of 1mg. to 50mg. and with number or varification scale interval (n) in the range of 5000 to 50,000 for ' e ' value of 100mg . or more and with ' e ' value of 1x10k , 2x10k , or 5x 10k , 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 manufactured.

[ F. No. WM - 21 / ( 75 )/2010 ]

B. N. DIXIT, Director of Legal Metrology 6233 भारत का राजपत्र: सितम्बर 3 , 2011 / भाद्र 12 , 1933

[ भाग II-खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

नई दिल्ली , 18 अप्रैल , 2011

का.आ. 2340,-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 प्रदश शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए मैसर्स एमसन इलेक्ट्रॉनिक्स , ए-42/ 26 , गुरुद्वारा रोड , दिलशाद गार्डनः इंडस्ट्रियल एरिया, शाहदरा , दिल्ली-110094 द्वारा विनिर्मित मध्यम यथार्थता ( यथार्थता वर्ग- III ) वाले " एईपी " श्रृंखला के अंकक सूचन सहित अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण ( प्लेटफार्म टाइप ) के मॉडल का, जिसके ब्राण्ड का नाम " एमसन " है ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/09/10/81 समनुदेशित किया गया है, अनुमोदन प्रमाण-पत्र जारी करती है ।

उक्त मॉडल एक विकृत गेज प्रकार का भार सेल आधारित अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण ( टेबलटाप टाइप ) है । इसकी अधिकतम क्षमता 1000 कि.ग्रा. 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 ।

TOP OF NOICE OR

SEAL WIRE

LEAD SQUARE SEAL

LEAD SQUARE

SRAL आकृति-2-मॉडल को सीलिंग करने का योजनाबद्ध डायग्राम

और केन्द्रीय सरकार उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 कीउप- धारा ( 12 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए यह 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 उक्त अनुमोदित मॉडल का 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 1x10 , 2x10 * या 5x10 , के हैं, जो धनात्मक या ऋणात्मक पूर्णांक या शून्य के समतुल्य हैं ।

[फा. सं. डब्ल्यूएम-21 (75 )/2010 ] बी. एन. दीक्षित , निदेशक , विधिक माप विज्ञान 6234

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 3 , 2011 /BHADRA 12 , 1933

[PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii) ]

New Delhi , the 18th April, 2011

S.O. 2340.- 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 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 ( Plateform type) with digital indication , Medium Accuracy (Accuracy class - III ) of series " AEP" and with brand name " AMSON " ( hereinafter referred to as the said model ) , maunfactured by M/ s . Amson Electronics , A-42/26, Gurudawara Road , Dilshad Garden Industrial Area, Shahdara , Delhi - 110094 and which is assigned the approval mark IND/09/ 10/81 ;

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 of2kg . The verification scale interval ( e) is 100g. It has a tare device with a 100 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.

TOP OF INDICE OR

..SEAL WIRE

LEAD SQUARE SEAL Figure- 2-Schematic diagram of sealing provision of the model

Seal wire passes through head holes of bottom plate , top cover and stamping plate . In the second instance, wire is passed through the holes in the side cover and bottom plate and then sealed at left side . 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 to disable access to external calibration .

Further , in exercise of the powers conferred by sub- section ( 12 ) of Section 36 of the said Act, the Central Government hereby declares that this certificate of approval of the said model shall also cover the weighing instrument of similar make , accuracy and performance of same series with maximum capacity above 50kg . up to 5000kg . 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 1x10k, 2x10k , or 5x10k , 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 / (75)/2010]

B. N. DIXIT, Director of Legal Metrology 6235 भारत का राजपत्र : सितम्बर 3 , 2011 / भाद्र 12 , 1933

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

(भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो )

नई दिल्ली, 18 अगस्त , 2011

का.आ. 2341.- 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

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

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

(4)

(3)

(2)

(1)

31दिसम्बर , 2010 1. आई एस/ आईएसओ 835 : 2007 प्रयोगशाला हेतु कांच का सामान अंशाकित पिपेट

इस भारतीय मानक की प्रतियां भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो , मानक भवन , 9 , बहादुरशाह 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 10/आईएस/ आईएसओ 835 ] ई देवेन्द्र, वैज्ञानिक ' एफ' एवं प्रमुख ( रसायन ) (BUREAU OF INDIAN STANDARDS ) New Delhi , the 18th August, 2011

S. O. 2341. 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

Sl . No. No. and year ofthe

Indian Standards Established

No. and Year ofthe Indian Standards , if any, Superseded by theNew Indian Standards

(4)

(3)

(2)

31December, 2010

1. IS/ISO 835 : 2007 Laboratory Glassware- Graduated Pipettes

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

[Ref: CHD 10/IS/ISO 835 ]

E. DEVENDAR, Scientist ' F ' & Head (Chemical)

नई दिल्ली, 24 अगस्त, 2011

का.आ. 2342.- 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 :-

3202GI /11-6 6236

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

(1)

(2)

1 . आई एस/आई एस ओ 10001 : 2007 गुणता प्रबन्धन - उपभोक्ता संतुष्टि- संगठनों के लिए आचरण संहिता की मार्गदर्शिका

2. आई एस/ आई एस ओ 10003 2007 गुणता प्रबन्धन - उपभोक्ता संतुष्टि संगठनों के बाहर विवादों को हल करने के दिशा-निर्देश

3. आई एस/आई एस ओ 9004 2009 संगठन की सतत सफलता का अनुरक्षण गुणता प्रबंध दृष्टिकोण ( छठा पुनरीक्षण)

4. आई एस/ आई एस ओ/टी एस 16949 : 2009 गुणता प्रबंध पद्धति-स्वचल उत्पादन तथा तत्संबधी सर्विस क्षेत्र संगठनों के लिए आई एस ओ 9001: 2008 के अनुप्रयोग की विशेष अपेक्षाएं (दूसरा पुनरीक्षण)

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 3 , 2011/BHADRA 12, 1933

[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii )] अनुसूची

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

(3)

(4)

28फरवरी , 2011

28 फरवरी , 2011

30 मई, 2010 आई एस/ आई एस ओ 9004 : 2000

30 मई , 2010 आई एस/आई एस ओ/ टी एस 16949 : 2000

इन 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, बंगलुरु , भोपाल , भुवनेश्वर, कोयम्बतूर , गुवाहाटी , हैदराबाद , जयपुर , कानपुर , नागपुर , पटना , पूणे तथा तिरूवनन्तापुरम में बिक्री हेतु उपलब्ध हैं ।

[संदर्भ : एम एस डी/जी-8 अधिसूचना ] निर्मल कुमार पाल, वैज्ञानिक ' एफ' एवं प्रमुख ( प्रबन्ध एवं तंत्र विभाग )

New Delhi , the 24th August, 2011

S. O. 2342. 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: --

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

(1)

(2)

1. IS/ ISO 10001: 2007 Quality management - Customer satisfaction Guidelines for codes of conduct for organizations

2. IS/ ISO 10003 : 2007 Quality management - Customer satisfaction Guidelines for dispute resolution external to organizations

SCHEDULE

Date of Established No. and Year of Indian Standards , if any, Superseded by the New Indian Standards

(3)

(4)

28 February, 2011

IS/ISO 9004: 2000

3. IS/ ISO 9004: 2009 Managing for the sustained success of an organization- A quality management approach (SixthRevision)

30May, 2010 भारत का राजपत्र : सितम्बर 3 , 2011 /भाद्र 12 , 1933

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

(2)

(3) (1)

4. IS/ISO/TS 16949 : 2009 Quality manage- mentsystems - Particular requirements for the application of ISO 9001 : 2008 for automotive production and relevant service part organizations (Second Revision)

6237

(4)

IS/ISO/TS 16949 :2000

30May, 2010

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

Date : 24 August 2011

[Ref: MSD/G-8 Notification]

NIRMAL KUMAR PAL, Scientist ' F ' & Head (Management & Systems Department )

नई दिल्ली, 24 अगस्त, 2011

का.आ. 2343.- भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो ( प्रमाणन ) विनियम, 1988 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

लाइसेंसधारी का नाम व पता

क्रम सं.

लाइसेंस संख्या

स्वीकृत करने कीतिथि वर्ष/माह

(4)

(3)

(1) (2)

3721859 5-7-2011

मैसर्स यशराज इंडस्ट्रीज , प्लॉट नं. 32 ए , बी यू भंडारी इंड. इस्टेट, ए/पी सनसवाडी, तालुका शिरुर , जिला पुणे महाराष्ट्र ।

11-7-2011

2. 3741562

मैसर्स पूना सीमेंट प्रा. लि. , स. नं. 16/4/1/1 , शेड नं. 2 , मंगडेवाडी, गूजरवाडी, तालुका हवेली , जिला पुणे-411046 महाराष्ट्र ।

3742160 14-7-2011

मैसर्स साई केबल इंडस्ट्रीज , प्लॉट नं. बी-17 /1 बी , ओल्ड एमआईडीसी जिला सातारा , महाराष्ट्र ।

12-7-2011

4. 3742665

मैसर्स द कोहिनूर तारपोलिन इंडस्ट्रीज ,

10/11, वाई पी पोवारनगर, जिला कोल्हापुर-416012 महाराष्ट्र ।

14-7-2011

3743061

मैसर्स सपना एग्रो इंडस्ट्रीज , एच एन 68-1 - ए , वा. नं. 6 , गांधी मार्केट, ए/पी एवं तालुका परली वैजनाथ , जिला बीड -431515 महाराष्ट्र ।

अनुभाग वर्ष भा मा भाग संख्या

भारतीय मानक काशीर्षक

(7)

(9 )

(8)

(5)

(6)

2004 14543

पैकेजबंद पेयजल (पैकेजबंद प्राकृतिक मिनरल जल के अलावा)

1989 8112

43ग्रेड सामान्य पोर्टलैंड सीमेंट

1990 694

1100 वोल्ट तक और सहित कार्यकारिता बोल्टेज के लिए पीवीसी रोधित केबल्स

1977 2089

कॉमन प्रूफ्ड केनवास/ डक और पोलिन्स (तारपोलिस)

2004

14543

पैकेजबंद पेयजल (पैकेजबंद प्राकृतिक मिनरल जल के अलावा)

[सं. सी. एम. डी. 13:11 ] बी. एम . हनीफ , वैज्ञानिक ' एफ' एवं प्रमुख 6238

[PART II SEC. 3( ii) ]

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 3, 2011/BHADRA 12, 1933

New Delhi , the 24thAugust, 2011

S.O. 2343.-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 ofwhich are given inthe following schedule :-

GrantDate

Licence No.

SL No.

Name & Address of theParty (1) (2)

(3)

(4) 3721859 5-7-2011

M/ s . Yashraj Industries Plot No. 32A, B.U. Bhandari Indl . Estate , A/P Sanaswadi , Taluka Shirur, District Pune , Maharashtra 2. 3741562 11-7-2011 M/s. Poona Cement Pvt . Ltd. S. No. 16/4/1/1 , Shade No. 2, Mangdewadi , Gujarwadi , Taluka Haveli , District Pune-411046 , Maharashtra

3. 3742160 14-7-2011 M/ s . Sai Cable Industries , Plot No. B- 17/1B, Old MIDC , District Satara, Maharashtra 4. 3742665 12-7-2011 M/s . The Kohinoor Tarpaulin Industries 10/11 , Y.P. Powarnagar, District Kolhapur-416012 Maharashtra 5.

14-7-2011

3743061

M/ s . Sapna Agro Industries H. No. 68-1 -A, W. No. 6 , Gandhi Market , A/P & Taluka Parli Vaijnath , District Beed-431515 Maharashtra SCHEDULE

Sec . Year

ISNo. Part

Title ofthe Standard

(5)

(6)

(9)

(7) (8)

2004

14543

Packaged drinking water (Other than packaged natural mineralwater)

3112

1989 43 Grade ordinary portland cement

1990 PVC insulated cables for working voltage upto and including 1100V

1977

2089

Copmmon proofed canvas /duck and paulins (tarpaulins)

2004

14543

Packaged drinking water (Other than packaged natural mineralwater)

[Ref: CMD/ 13 : 11 ]

B. M. HANEEF, Scientist ' F ' & Head

नई दिल्ली, 24 अगस्त, 2011

का. आ. 2.344.-भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो ( प्रमाणन ) विनियम 1988 के विनियम 5 के उप- विनियम ( 6 ) के अनुसरण में भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो एतद्वारा अधिसूचित करता है कि निम्न विवरण वाले लाइसेंसों को उनके आगे दर्शायी गई तारीख से रद्द/स्थगित कर दिया गया है :---

लाइसेंसधारी का नाम व पता क्र. सं.

लाइसेंस संख्या सीएम/एल-

(1) (2)

(3)

79040-79 मैसर्स सॉफ्टग्रिप पावर सलूशंस प्रा. लि. प्लाट नं. 57/8 , सेक्टर 10 , पीसीएनटीडीए , प्राधिकरण , भोसरी , जिला पुणे -411026, महाराष्ट्र

अनुसूची

रद्द करने की तिथि लाइसेंस के अन्तर्गत वस्तु/प्रक्रम सम्बद्ध भारतीय मानक का शीर्षक

(4)

(5)

27-5-2011 एसी स्टेटिक वॉटहॉर मीटर्स , श्रेणी 1 और 2

[सं. सी एम डी 13:13 ]

बी. एम. हनीफ , वैज्ञानिक ' एफ ' एवं प्रमुख 6239 भारत का राजपत्र : सितम्बर 3 , 2011 / भाद्र 12 , 1933

[भाग II-खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

New Delhi , the 24th August , 2011

S.O. 2344. In pursuance ofsub- regulation (6) ofthe regulation 5 of the Bureau of Indian Standards (Certification) Regulations, 1988 , ofthe Bureau of Indian Standards, hereby notifies that the licences particulars ofwhich are given below have been cancelled/suspended with effect from the date indicated against each:

SCHEDULE

Sl . No.

Dateof Cancellation Name and Address of the Licensee

Licence No. CM/L-

Article/Process with relevant Indian Standards covered by the licence cancelled/ suspension

(5)

(4)

(3)

(1)

(2)

27-5-2011 1. 7904079

Ac static watthour meters , class 1 and 2

M/s softgrip Power Solutions Pvt . Ltd PlotNo. 57/8 , Sector 10, PCNTDA, Pradhikaran, Bhosari , Pune-411026 Maharashtra

[No. CMD/ 13 : 13 ]

B. M. HANEEF, Scientist ' F ' & Head

नईदिल्ली , 24 अगस्तं, 2011

का.आ. 2345.- 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 संशोधनों के विवरण नीचे अनुसूची में दिए गए हैं वे स्थापित हो गए हैं :

अनुसूची

स्थापित तिथि क्रम सं. स्थापित भारतीय मानक के संशोधनों की संख्या, वर्ष और शीर्षक

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

(4)

(3)

(2)

(1)

अगस्त 2011

कुछ नहीं

1. संशोधन संख्या2- आई एस 9873 ( भाग 3 ) : 1999/आई एस ओ 8124-3:1997 खिलौनोंकी सुरक्षा हेतु अपेक्षाएं भाग 3 कुछ तत्वों का स्थानान्तरण - ( पहला पुनरीक्षण )

अगस्त 2011

कुछ नहीं

2. संशोधन संख्या 3 - आई एस 9873 ( भाग 3 ) : 1999/आई एस ओ 8124-3: 1997 खिलौनों की सुरक्षा हेतु अपेक्षाएं भाग 3 कुछ तत्वों का स्थानान्तरण ( पहला पुनरीक्षण )

इस भारतीय संशोधनों की प्रतियां भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो , मानक भवम्, 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 : पीसीडी/जी-7 ( गजट) ] पी. के. गम्भीर, वैज्ञानिक ' जी' ( तकनीकी )

New Delhi , the 24th August , 2011

S. O. 2345. 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 Amendments to Indian Standards , particulars ofwhich are given inthe Schedule hereto annexed have been established on the date indicated against each:-

6240

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 3 , 2011 /BHADRA 12, 1933

[ PART II- SEC . 3 ( ii ) ]

SCHEDULE

Sl . No. No. and year and Title of the .

Date ofEstablishment Amendment Established

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

(1)

(2)

(3)

(4)

None

August 2011 1. Amendment No. 2 to IS 9873 (Part 3 ) : 1999/ISO 8124-3 : 1997 Safety requirement for toys Part 2 Migration of certain elements (First Revision)

None

August 2011 2. Amendment No. 3 to IS 9873 (Part 3 ) : 1999 /ISO 8124-3 : 1997 Safety requirements for toys Part 2 Migration of certain elements (First Revision)

Copies of these Amendments 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: PCD/G - 7 (Gazette) ]

P. K. GAMBHIR , Scientist ' G' ( Technical ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION No. 79 of 2007

Consumer Welfare Association and Anr.

Petitioners .

Vs.

Union of India and Ors .

Respondents .

Mr. Rajiv Chavan with Rutuja Ambekar for Petitioners .

Mr. Mandar Goswami for Union of India .

Mr. Sumit Moholkar i/by Roy's Law Firm for Respondent No. 4.

Mr.Milan Bhise for Intervener .

Coram : Mohit S. Shah , C. J. and D. G. Karnik, J.

Thursday, 24th March , 2011 PC:

TheBureau of Indian Standard shall issue necessary notification regarding the phathalates in the materials specified under IS 9873 (Part - 3 ) as expeditiously as possible and preferably by 30th June , 2011 and thereafter , the Union of India, Ministry of Commerce and Industry, Department of Industrial Policy and Promotion shall issue the necessary notification making the standard mandatory within two months thereafter.

2. Public Interest Litigation is accordingly, disposed of in terms of the above directions .

CHIEF JUSTICE

D. G KARNIK. J.

6241 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : सितम्बर 3 , 2011 / भाद्र 12 , 1933

नई दिल्ली , 26 अगस्त, 2011

का.आ. 2346.- भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो ( प्रमाणन) विनियम , 1988 के विनियम 5 के उप - विनियम ( 6 ) 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

भारतीय मानक का शीर्षक

भामा सं. भाग खंड वर्ष लाइसेंस संख्या

क्रम सं.

लाइसेंसधारी का नाम एवं पता

स्वीकृत करने कीतिथि वर्ष/माह

(7) ( 8 ) ( 9 ) (3)

(5)

(6)

(2)

(4)

(1)

1417

1999 1. 7927697 06/4/2009

स्वर्ण और स्वर्ण मिश्र धातुओं के आभूषण/शिल्पकारी शुद्धता व मुहरांकन

गहना क्रिएशन इंडिया प्रा. लि. 413/414 , पारेख मार्केटए केनेडी पूल के सामने , ऑपेरा हाउस, मुंबई , महाराष्ट्र-425 003

1417

1999 09/4/2009

2. 7930686

स्वर्ण और स्वर्ण मिश्र धातुओं के आभूषण/शिल्पकारी शुद्धता व मुहरांकन

अंता ज्वेलर्स फ्रान्सिस्कोलोयोला रोड , शूप संख्या 74 , उत्तर गोवा, मारगोवा , गोवा-403 601

1987

7834

27/4/2009

3. 7940689

जल आपूर्ति के लिए विलायक सिमेंट सहित इंजेक्शन मोल्डित पीवीसीफिटिंग

तुलसी एक्सट्रशन लि. एन-99 , 100 और 108 , एमआयडीसी एरिया , जलगांव , महाराष्ट्र -425 003

1417

1999 4. 7940790 05/5/2009

स्वर्ण और स्वर्ण मिश्र धातुओं के आभूषण/शिल्पकारी शुद्धता व मुहरांकन

श्रीबालाजी ज्वेलर्स बी/1212 , ओम बालाजी दर्शन बिल्डिंग, नया गोल्डन नेस्ट रोड , स्निकिंग के नजदीक , थाने , भाईदर - पूर्व, महाराष्ट्र-401 105

1417

1999 05/5/2009

5. 7947808

स्वर्ण और स्वर्ण मिश्र धातुओं के आभूषण/शिल्पकारी शुद्धता व मुहरांकन

वी जी एन ज्वेलर्स सृष्टी हाउस , पहली मंजिल , शॉप संख्या 1 , एन एस रोड, मुलुण्ड-पूर्व, महाराष्ट्र-400 080

1999

1417

05/4/2009

6. 7940891

स्वर्ण और स्वर्ण मिश्र धातुओं के आभूषण /शिल्पकारी शुद्धता व मुहरांकन

साईऐषाज्वेलर्स ख मार्केट , 39 , केनेडी पूल , ऑपेरा हाउस , महाराष्ट्र-400 004

1417

1999 05/5/2009

7. 7940891

स्वर्ण और स्वर्ण मिश्र धातुओं के आभूषण/शिल्पकारी शुद्धता व मुहरांकन

साईज्वेलर्स शॉप संख्या 2 , ओम दिप्ती को.ऑ. सोसायटी लि. , श्रद्धानंद रोड, विलेपार्ले-पूर्व, महाराष्ट्र-400 057 6242

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 3 , 2011 /BHADRA 12, 1933

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

(4)

(5)

(6) ( 7) ( 8 ) ( 9 ) 8. 7941085 05/5/2009

1417

1999

स्वर्ण और स्वर्ण मिश्र धातुओं के आभूषण/शिल्पकारी शुद्धता व मुहरांकन

मंथनज्वेलर्स शॉप संख्या 5 , रोनक आर्केड, गोखले रोड , नौपाडा, थाणे- पश्चिम , महाराष्ट्र-400 602

9. 7940487 08/5/2009

1660 1

1982

पिटंवा एल्युमिनियम के बर्तन भाग 1 - कूकिंग टेबल , सर्विग , भंडारण व बेकिंग के बर्तन

त्रिवेणी बैलिती इण्डस्ट्रीज प्रा. लि. , 231 , खर्डी, पोस्ट गोलबन , तालुका- शहापुर , थाणे , खर्डी , महाराष्ट्र-421 301

10. 7942491 11/5/2009

1417

1999

के आभूषण/शिल्पकारी शुद्धता स्वर्ण और स्वर्ण मिश्र धातुओं व मुहरांकन

दी ललित जेम्स को. , 117 , पंचरत्ना , पहली मंजिल , ऑपेरा हाउस , मुंबई, महाराष्ट्र-400 004

11. 7942794 11/5/2000

1999

1417

स्वर्ण और स्वर्ण मिश्र धातुओं के आभूषण/शिल्पकारी शुद्धता व मुहरांकन

एस. के. सेठ कं. , ज्वेलर्स 226/230 , गिरीराज बिल्डिंग , शॉप संख्या 204 , दूसरी मंजिल , शेख मेमन रस्ता , झवेरी बाजार , मुंबई -400 002

12. 7942390 12/5/2009

2365

1977

लिफटों, एलिवेटरसें और उत्तोंलकों के लिए इस्पात तार झूला रस्सियां

देश वायर प्रोडक्टस् प्रा. लि. , 34 , केब्रोस इण्डस्ट्रीयल इस्टेट , भाण्डूप सोनपुर रोड , एलबीएस मार्ग , भाण्डूप पश्चिम, महाराष्ट्र-400 078

13. 7942895 14/5/2009

1660 1

1982

पिटवां एल्युमिनियम के बर्तन भाग 1 - कूकिंग टेबल , सर्विग , भंडारण व बेकिंग के बर्तन

हर्ष एन्टरप्राइजेज गाला , संख्या 10/411 , मदनी इस्टेट , एम जी लिंक रोड, सोनपुर , भाण्डूप- पश्चिम , महाराष्ट्र-400 078

1417

14. 7942996 15/5/2009

1999

स्वर्ण और स्वर्ण मिश्र धातुओं के आभूषण/शिल्पकारी शुद्धता व मुहरांकन

रय्याज्वेलर्स यूनिट संख्या 11 / 11 - ए, 80/88 , डी एल मार्ग , हकोबा मिल्स के सामने , काला चौकी, मुंबई , महाराष्ट्र-400 033

1417

15. 7943901 18/5/2009

1999

स्वर्ण और स्वर्ण मिश्र धातुओं के आभूषण/शिल्पकारी शुद्धता व मुहरांकन

शिवेकज्वेल्स शिव सेन्टर को.ऑ. सोसायटी , सेक्टर 17 , शॉप संख्या 32/47 , वाशी, नवी मुंबई , महाराष्ट्र-400 705

18/5/2009

16. 7943089

2581

2002

पोत परिवहन प्रयोजनों के लिए गोल लड जस्तीकृत इस्पात तार रस्सियां

देश वायर प्रोडक्टस् प्रा.लि. , 34, केब्रोस इण्डस्ट्रीयल इस्टेट , भाण्डूप सोनपुर रोड, एलबीएस मार्ग , भाण्डूप पश्चिम, महाराष्ट्र-400 078 भारत का राजपत्र : सितम्बर 3 , 2011 / भाद्र 12 , 1933

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii ) ]

(4)

(2) (3)

(1)

25/5/2009

17. 7945194

असोसिएट ट्रान्सरिल लि. , 103/104 , कृष्णा टावर, होटल विराज बिल्डिंग , पीडब्ल्यूडी ऑफिस के सामने , सॅली रो , सिलवासा, दादरा और नगर हवेली-396 230 05/6/2009

18. 7948305

6243

(7) ( 8 ) ( 9 )

(6)

(5)

व मुहरांकन

टकले बंधू 911 , सराफ बाजार , नासिक , महाराष्ट्र-422 001 05/6/2009

21. 7948103

लालजीभाई ज्वेलर्स 32 , माताजी बिल्डिंग , एनएस रोड, मुलुण्ड- पश्चिम, महाराष्ट्र-400 080 05/6/2009

22. 7948204

1999

1417

के आभूषण/ शिल्पकारी शुद्धता स्वर्ण और स्वर्ण मिश्र धातुओं व मुहरांकन

1999

1417

स्वर्ण और स्वर्ण मिश्र धातुओं

के आभूषण/शिल्पकारी शुद्धता

व मुहरांकन

एम सुरेश कंपनी प्रा. लि. 419 , पारेख मार्केट , ऑपेरा हाउस ,

महाराष्ट्र-400 004 05/6/2009

23. 7947404

सुविकास अॅलॉय एवं स्टिल प्रा. लि. गतेश विलेज ( बुदूर्ग ) शिरीष पाडा, खानीवली रोड, थाने , वाडा , महाराष्ट्र-421 303 12/6/2009

24. 7949408

2008

1786

कंकिट प्रबलन के लिए उच्च सांद्रण विरूपित इस्पात छड़ और तार ( टीएमटी प्रक्रिया)

1996

398

ऐल्यमिनियिम मिश्रधातु लडदार

चालक ( ऐल्यूमिनियम मैग्नीज

सिलीकॉन टाईप)

जेएसके इण्डस्ट्रीज प्रा.लि. सर्वे संख्या 369/1/1/2 , विपेज सयाली , सियाराम मिल्क के पिछे , सिलवासा, दादरा और नगर हवेली-396 230 12/6/2009

25. 7949509

जेएसके इण्डस्ट्रीज प्रा.लि. सर्वे संख्या 369/1/1/2 , विपेज सयाली , सियाराम मिल्क के पिछे , सिलवासा, दादरा और नगर हवेली-396 230 3202GI /11-7

1996

398

शिरोपरि प्रेषण उद्देश्यों के लिए ऐल्यूमिनियम चालक-विशिष्टि भाग 2 - ऐल्यूमिनियम के चालक जस्तीकृत इस्पात प्रबलित (तीसरा पुनरीक्षण ) 6244

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 3 , 2011 /BHADRA 12, 1933

(1) (2) (3)

(4)

26. 7949610 12/6/2009 जेएसके इण्डस्ट्रीज प्रा.लि. सर्वे संख्या 369/1/1/2 , विपेज सयाली, सियाराम मिल्क के पिछे , सिलवासा , दादरा और नगर हवेली-396 230 27. 7950389 17/6/2009 ओम गोल्ड ट्रेडन्झ लिमिटेड 704, सातवी मंजिल , पांचाली शॉपिंग सेंटर, नागरिक स्टोर के सामने , स्टेशन रोड, थाने- प्रश्चिम, महाराष्ट्र-400 601 28. 7950490 17/6/2009 दामसे रिटेल ज्वेलरी प्रा. लि. , 518 , पाल्म स्प्रिंग सेन्टर, लिंक रोड, मलाड- पश्चिम , महाराष्ट्र-400 064 29. 7950591 18/6/2009 एच एम शाह दूसरी , मंजिल , शॉप संख्या 26, गुरू आशिष बिल्डिंग , 262, शेख मेमन रस्ता, गणेण वाडी, महाराष्ट्र-400 002 30. 7951189 22/6/2009 पी जी शंकलेशा ज्वेलर्स शॉप संख्या 19 , कृष्णा शारदा आवर , धनवंतरी हॉस्पिटल के सामने , लाल चक्की चौक , स्टेशन रोड , थाने उल्हासनगर , महाराष्ट्र-421 004 31. 7953092 22/6/2009 प्रशांत ज्वेलर्स शॉप संख्या 5 , म्युनिसिपल बिल्डिंग- बी, रफीअहमद किडवई रोड , वडाला , महाराष्ट्र-400 031 32. 7956102 06/7/2009 यश गोल्ड 105, धनजी स्ट्रीट , तल मंजिल , मुंबई -400 003 33. 7956001 15/7/2009 कांचन ज्वेलर्स शॉप संख्या । , तांबोली टावर , कालवनी नाका, सिलवासा, दादरा और नगर हवेली-396 230

34. 7956506 15/7/2009 फाईन ज्वेलरी ( इंडिया ) लि. , प्लाट संख्या 14 , फाईन हाउस , डब्ल्यूआयसीईएल , सिप्झ के सामने, अंधेरी- पूर्व, महाराष्ट्र-400 093

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

(7 ) ( 8 ) ( 9 )

(6)

398

1996 शिरोपरि प्रेषण उद्देश्यों के लिए ऐल्युमिनियम चालक-विशिष्टि भाग ऐल्युमिनियम लडदार चालक

1417

1999 स्वर्ण और स्वर्ण मिश्र धातुओं के आभूषण/शिल्पकारी शुद्धता व मुहरांकन

1417

1999 स्वर्ण और स्वर्ण मिश्र धातुओं के आभूषण/शिल्पकारी शुद्धता व मुहरांकन

1417

1999 स्वर्ण और स्वर्ण मिश्र धातुओं के आभूषण/शिल्पकारी शुद्धता व मुहरांकन

1417

1999 स्वर्ण और स्वर्ण मिश्र धातुओं के आभूषण/शिल्पकारी शुद्धता व मुहरांकन

1417

1999 स्वर्ण और स्वर्ण मिश्र धातुओं के आभूषण/शिल्पकारी शुद्धता व मुहरांकन

1417

1999 स्वर्ण और स्वर्ण मिश्र धातुओं के आभूषण/शिल्पकारी शुद्धता व मुहरांकन

1417

1999 स्वर्ण और स्वर्ण मिश्र धातुओं के आभूषण/शिल्पकारी शुद्धता व मुहरांकन

2112

2003 चाँदी और चाँदी मिश्र धातुओं के आभूषण/शिल्पकारी शुद्धता व मुहरांकन-विशिष्टि 6245 भारत का राजपत्र : सितम्बर 3 , 2011 / भाद्र 12 , 1933

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

( 7 ) ( 8 ) ( 9 )

(6)

(5)

(4)

(3)

(2)

(1)

के आभूषण/शिल्पकारी शुद्धता

व मुहरांकन

श्रनिवास ज्वेलर्स, एसएमसी बंला , शन पेट्रोल पम्प के नजदीक , एस टी डेपो के सामने , पिम्पलगांव , बसवंत , तालुका- निफड, नासिक , महाराष्ट्र-422 209

1991

11188

तिजोरी ( स्टॉग रूम ) दरवाजे

17/7/2009

41. 7956708

गार्डवेल इण्डस्ट्रीज प्रा. लि. , राजहंस इण्डस्ट्रीयल कॉम्पलेक्स, चिंचपाडा, गोखिवारे , थाणे , वसई- पूर्व , महाराष्ट्र-401 208

1999

1417.

22/7/2009

42. 7957710

स्वर्ण और स्वर्ण मिश्र धातुओं

के आभूषण/शिल्पकारी शुद्धता

व मुहरांकन

हिरा कागझी ज्वेल्स 403 , पारेख मार्केट बिल्डिंग , 39 , केनेडी पूल , ऑपेरा हाउस , महाराष्ट्र-400 004

1999

1417

24/7/2009

43. 7959613

स्वर्ण और स्वर्ण मिश्र धातुओं के आभूषण/ शिल्पकारी शुद्धता व मुहरांकन

रिलायन्स रिटेल लिमिटेड, शॉप संख्या जी-9 , तल मंजिल , फेज 1 , आर सिटी, एलबीएस मार्ग , घाटकोपर- पश्चिम , महाराष्ट्र-400 077 6246

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 3 , 2011 / BHADRA 12, 1933

(1) (2) (3)

(4) 44. 7959815 24/7/2009 एल डी घोडके सराफ , शिवाजी चौक, विठठल मंदिर के नजदीक, कल्याण फरसाण मार्ट के सामने , थाने , कल्याण-421 301 45. 7959714 28/7/2009 रिलायन्स रिटेल लिमिटेड, शॉप संख्या जी -9 , तल मंजिल , फेज 1 , आर सिटी , एलबीएस मार्ग , घाटकोपर- पश्चिम, महाराष्ट्र-400 077 46. 7961596 05/8/2009 एम आर एस गोल्ड, 596 , झवेरी बाजार , थाने , उल्हासनगर , महाराष्ट्र-421 002 47. 7961697 05/8/2009 शृगांर हाउस ऑफ मंलसूत्र प्रा. लि. , 205 , मोती धर्मकांता बिल्डिंग , तिसरी मंजिल , शॉप संख्या 18 , मुंबादेवी रोड , मुंबा मंदिर के सामने, मुंबई , महाराष्ट्र-400 002 48. 7961701 05/8/2009 जे जे ज्वेलर्स 128- बी , लारम सेन्टर , एस वी रोड , अंधेरी स्टेशन के नजदीक , अंधेरी-पश्चिम, महाराष्ट्र-400 058 49. 7962396 07/8/2009 जे एम सीज्वेलर्स 175 , ज्वेल वर्ल्ड, कॉटन एक्सचेंज , पहली मंजिल , शॉप संख्या 112 , कालबादेवी, महाराष्ट्र-400 002 50. 7962497 07/8/2009 विशाल मेटाली वर्क्स, 208, 209, वसन उद्योग भवन , एस बी मार्ग , लोअर परेल , महाराष्ट्र-400 013 51. 7962194 07/8/2009 टाईम टेक्नोप्लास्ट लिमिटेड, यूनिट 1 , मोल्डिंग डिविजन , एन-99 , 100-108 , एमआयडीसी एरिया , जलगांव , महाराष्ट्र-425 003

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

(6) ( 7) ( 8 ) ( 9 )

1417

1999 स्वर्ण और स्वर्ण मिश्र धातुओं के आभूषण/शिल्पकारी शुद्धता व मुहरांकन

2112

2003 चांदी और चांदी मिश्र धातुओं के आभूषण/शिल्पकारी शुद्धता व मुहरांकन-विशिष्टि

1999

1417

स्वर्ण और स्वर्ण मिश्र धातुओं के आभूषण/शिल्पकारी शुद्धता व मुहरांकन

1417

1999 स्वर्ण और स्वर्ण मिश्र धातुओं के आभूषण/शिल्पकारी शुद्धता व मुहरांकन

1417

1999 स्वर्ण और स्वर्ण मिश्र धातुओं के आभूषण/शिल्पकारी शुद्धता व मुहरांकन

1417

1999 स्वर्ण और स्वर्ण मिश्र धातुओं के आभूषण/शिल्पकारी शुद्धता व मुहरांकन

1417

1999 स्वर्ण और स्वर्ण मिश्र धातुओं के आभूषण /शिल्पकारी शुद्धता व मुहरांकन

1433 3

1996 मलक जल व्यवस्था के लिए घनत्व वाले पॉलथिएलीन पाइप 6247 भारत का राजपत्र : सितम्बर 3 , 2011 / भाद्र 12, 1933

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

(6) ( 7) ( 8 ) ( 9 )

(5)

(4)

(2) (3 )

(1)

1999

1417

20/8/2009

52. 7966004

स्वर्ण और स्वर्ण मिश्र धातुओं के आभूषण/शिल्पकारी शुद्धता व मुहरांकन

परेख गोल्ड हाउस प्रा. लि. , 229ए, सिद्धपुरा इण्डस्ट्रीयल इस्टेट, प्लाट संख्या 3 , गायवाडी रोड , गोरेगांव- पश्चिम, महाराष्ट्र-400 062

1992

398

53. 7967915 20/8/2009 पॉलिकॅब वायर्स प्रा. लि. , हाउस , पहली मंजिल , 771 , पंडित सातवलकर मार्ग , माहिम , महाराष्ट्र-400 016

शिरोपरि प्रेषण उद्देश्यों के लिए एल्युमिनियम चालक- विशिष्टि भाग 5 अतिरिक्त उच्च वोल्टता 400 कि वो और अधिक के लिए जस्तीकृत इस्पात प्रबलित एल्युमिनियम के चालक

1999

1417

7967612 24/8/2009

54.

स्वर्ण और स्वर्ण मिश्र धातुओं के आभूषण/शिल्पकारी शुद्धता व मुहरांकन

कवित गोल्ड, शॉप संख्या 9 , बाबा कचरू गायकवाड चाल , गौतम नगर, रहिवासी सेवा संघ , बेहराम बाग , जोगेश्वरी- पश्चिम , महाराष्ट्र-400 102

1999

1417

25/8/200

55. 7967511

स्वर्ण और स्वर्ण मिश्र धातुओं के आभूषण/शिल्पकारी शुद्धता व मुहरांकन

हिराचंद ज्वेलर्स प्रा. लिमिटेड , 236 , पंचरत्न बिल्डिग , ऑपेरा हाउस , मुंबई, महाराष्ट्र-400 004

1985

1786

25/8/2009

56. 7966913

कंकिट पबलन के लिए उच्च सांद्रण विरूपित इस्पात छड और तार ( टी एम टी प्रक्रिया)

श्री सप्तशृंगी इस्पात प्रा. लि. , गट संख्या 228 , पोस्ट लखमापूर , तालुका-दिदोंरी , जिला-नासिक-423 213

1999

1417

26/8/2009

57. 7967814

स्वर्ण और स्वर्ण मिश्र धातुओं के आभूषण/ शिल्पकारी शुद्धता व मुहरांकन

मंगलोरेज्वेलरी वर्क्स 11 और 12- ए, भिवंडीवाला बिल्डिंग, एल एन रोड , माटुंगा ( मध्य रेल) महाराष्ट्र-400 019

1999

2202

01/9/2009

58. 7969111

लकडी के सपाट दरवाजे के शटर ( ठोस कोर प्रकार ) (छठा पुनरीक्षण)

मापले मोल्डिंग प्रा. लिमिटेड , एमएसएसआयडीसीएस, प्लाट संख्या 24 , वूड बेस इण्डस्ट्रीयल कॉम्पलेक्स, विलेज हान्द्रे, तालुका-वाडा , जिला- थाने, महाराष्ट्र-421 303

2004

1659.

02/9/2009

59. 7969212

ब्लॉक बोर्ड-विशिष्ट

( तीसरा पुनरीक्षण)

मापले मोल्डिंग प्रा. लिमिटेड , एमएसएसआयडीसीएस , प्लाट संख्या 24 , वूड बेस इण्डस्ट्रीयल कॉम्पलेक्स, विलेज हान्द्रे , तालुका-वाडा, जिला-थाने , महाराष्ट्र-421 303 6248

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 3, 2011 /BHADRA 12, 1933

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

(4)

(5)

( 7) (8 ) ( 9 )

(6)

60. 7969414 03/9/2009

1786

1985

ककिट प्रबलन के लिए उच्च सांद्रण विरूपित इस्पात छड और तार ( टी एम टी प्रक्रिया )

मोहित इस्पात लिमिटेड, प्लाट संख्या 1 , नवीलम विपेज , बिचोलीभ इण्डस्ट्रीयल इस्टेट, बिचोलीम , पणजह, गोवा-403 001

61. 7971094 04/9/2009

1417

1999.

स्वर्ण और स्वर्ण मिश्र धातुओं के आभूषण/ शिल्पकारी शुद्धता व मुहरांकन

दीपसन्स ऑरनामेन्टस् शॉप संख्या 34 , आर एन आर्केड , क्रिस्टल अॅवेन्यूको. सो. लि. , लोखंडवाला कॉम्पलेक्स, अंधेरी- पश्चिम, महाराष्ट्र-400 053

62. 7970395 07/9/2009

1786

1985

अम्बे मेटस्टिल प्रा. लि. , गट संख्या 195 , विपेन वडावली , उचट कोन्डला रोड , थाने , वाडा, महाराष्ट्र-421 303

63. 7970601 07/9/2009

9537 3

1983

विद्युत संस्थापनों के लिए विद्युतरोधी सामग्री के दृढ सादी नलिकाएँ

मधुर प्लास्ट शेड संख्या 9 , शिला अपार्टमेंट , राधाबाई चाल , थाने , उल्हासनगर , महाराष्ट्र-421 003

64. 7975611 25/9/2009

9537 3

1983

विद्युत संस्थापनों के लिए विद्युतरोधी सामग्री के दृढ सादी नलिकाएँ

अल्टा पॉलिमर्स , सर्वे संख्या 338/2 , पटेल ग्राउंड के पीछे, कांचीगम , दमण और दीव-396 210

65. 7971704 10/9/2009

4984

1985

पानी की आपूर्ति के लिए उच्च घनत्व वाले पॉलिएथिलीन पाईप

रॉयल प्लास्टिक, गट संख्या 574 , 1 ए/ 1 बी , आग्रा रोड, रमेश पेट्रोल पम्प, चंदनपुरी , शिवर, नासिक , मालेगांव , महाराष्ट्र-423 203

66. 7971397 09/9/2009

2112

2003

चांदी और चांदी मिश्र धातुओं के आभूषण/शिल्पकारी शुद्धता व मुहरांकन-विशिष्टि

सद्गुण ज्वेलर्स प्रा. लिमिटेड, प्लाट संख्या 97 , फेज II , तीसरी मंजिल , स्ट्रीट संख्या 16 , एमआईडीसी , अंधेरी- पूर्व, महाराष्ट्र-400 093

67. 7971195 09/9/2009

1417

1999

स्वर्ण और स्वर्ण मिश्र धातुओं के आभूषण /शिल्पकारी शुद्धता व मुहरांकन

ज्वेल्स बाय क्वीन , सी 001 , I एवं II 23 , न्यू पोर्णिमा अर्पा , सी विंग , तल मंजिल , पेडर रोड, मुंबई , महाराष्ट्र-400 026 6249 भारत का राजपत्र : सितम्बर 3 , 2011 / भाद्र 12 , 1933

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3( ii) ]

( 7) ( 8 ) ( 9 )

(6)

(5)

(4)

(2) (3)

(1)

1999

1417

09/9/2009

68. 7971296

स्वर्ण और स्वर्ण मिश्र धातुओं

के आभूषण/शिल्पकारी शुद्धता

व मुहरांकन

सद्‌गुण ज्वेलर्स प्रा. लिमिटेड , प्लाट संख्या 97 , फेज II , तीसरी मंजिल , रस्ता संख्या 16 , एमआईडीसी, अंधेरी पूर्व

महाराष्ट्र-400 093

1999

1417

11/9/2009

7972605

69.

स्वर्ण और स्वर्ण मिश्र धातुओं के आभूषण/ शिल्पकारी शुद्धता व मुहरांकन

पॉप्यूलर गोल्ड, 64, गॅलरीया , हिरानंदानी गार्डन , पवई, अंधेरी- पश्चिम , महाराष्ट्र-400 076

1999

1473 5

11/9/2009

70. 7972096

तुलसी एक्सटेंशन लि. एन-99 , 100 और 108 , एमआईडीसी एरिया , जलगांव महाराष्ट्र-425 003

भवनों के अंदर और बाहय संवातन और वर्षा जल पद्धति सहित मृदु और अपशिष्ट विकास पद्धति के लिए अप्लैस्टिकित पॉलिविनायल क्लोराईड ( यूपीवीसी) इंजेक्शन मोल्डित फिटिंग

1999

1417

16/9/2009

71. 7973809

स्वर्ण और स्वर्ण मिश्र धातुओं के आभूषण/ शिल्पकारी शुद्धता व मुहरांकन

श्रीरामज्वेलर्स , विराज विहार, शॉप संख्या 7 , सेक्टर 17 , वेलकम सुपर मार्केट के सामने , रायगढ़ , ऐरोली , महाराष्ट्र-400 708

1999

1417

18/9/2009

72. 7974104

तेल दाब चूल्हों के लिए बर्नर , आबाज करने वाले , पदनाम नंबर 1

शंकर महादेव एण्टरप्राइजेज , स्विमिंग पूल रोड , बुध विहार के नजदीक , म्युनिसिपल कॉर्पोरेशन के पिछे , महाराष्ट्र-421 003

1999

1417

23/9/2009

73. 7974508

स्वर्ण और स्वर्ण मिश्र धातुओं के आभूषण /शिल्पकारी शुद्धता व मुहरांकन

सबिनेज्वेलर्स , 7, सुरतवाला बिल्डिंग, राजाराममोहन मार्ग , 211 /ए, प्रार्थना समाज , चर्नी रोड , महाराष्ट्र-400 004

1999

1417

29/9/2009

74. 7975813

स्वर्ण और स्वर्ण मिश्र धातुओं के आभूषण/शिल्पकारी शुद्धता व मुहरांकन

शागरज्वेलर्स , शॉप संख्या 7 -सी, सायरा आवर , लोखंडवाला टाउनशीप , आकूर्ली रोड , कांदिवली-पूर्व, महाराष्ट्र-400 101

1999

1417

29/9/2009

75. 7975914

स्वर्ण और स्वर्ण मिश्र धातुओं के आभूषण/शिल्पकारी शुद्धता व मुहरांकन

इन्टरनेशनल जेमोलॉजिकल इन्स्टिट्यूट ( इं) प्रा. लि. , 402/404, मनी महाल , 11/21 , मॅथ्यूरोड , आपेरा हाउस , मुंबई महाराष्ट्र-400 004 6250

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 3 , 2011 /BHADRA 12, 1933

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

(4)

(5)

(6) ( 7 ) ( 8 ) ( 9 ) 76. 7976007 29/9/2009

1417

1999

स्वर्ण और स्वर्ण मिश्र धातुओं के आभूषण/शिल्पकारी शुद्धता व मुहरांकन

खयान्स'ज्वेलर्स, 1002, सूर्या आवर, नाथलाल पारेख मार्ग , डॉन बॉस्को स्कूल के सामने , माटुंगा , महाराष्ट्र-400 019

77. 7976916 01/10/2009

1417

1999

स्वर्ण और स्वर्ण मिश्र धातुओं के आभूषण/शिल्पकारी शुद्धता व मुहरांकन

शान्तिलाल ज्वेलर्स , 65/67 , झवेरी बाजार , दूसरी मंजिल , शॉप सं. 7 , मुंबई -400 002

78. 7976815 01/10/2009

1417

1999

स्वर्ण और स्वर्ण मिश्र धातुओं के आभूषण/शिल्पकारी शुद्धता व मुहरांकन

झवेरी बाजार , शिरू चौक , के जी ज्वेलर्स , शॉप संख्या 801/802 , थाने , उल्हासनगर , महाराष्ट्र-421 002

1417

79. 7979215 12/10/2009

1999

स्वर्ण और स्वर्ण मिश्र धातुओं के आभूषण/शिल्पकारी शुद्धता व मुहरांकन

आभूषण ज्वेलर्स , शॉप संख्या 5 , फेअर लेन , बिल्डिंग , प्लाट संख्या 182 , अप्पा मंदिर के सामने , सेक्टर 17 ,नेरूल , नवी मुंबई , महाराष्ट्र-400 706

80. 7979720 15/10/2009

1417

1999

स्वर्ण और स्वर्ण मिश्र धातुओं के आभूषण/शिल्पकारी शुद्धता व मुहरांकन

कामाक्षी ज्वेलर्स , बैंक ऑफ बरोडा के सामने , लोहिया मैदान के नजदीक , मारगांव , उत्तर गोवा, गोवा-403 601

81. 7982810 30/10/2009

1417

1999

स्वर्ण और स्वर्ण मिश्र धातुओं के आभूषण /शिल्पकारी शुद्धता व मुहरांकन

दिनेश ज्वेलर्स , पाठके शॉपिंग सेन्टर, पुराने टीएम सी स्टेशन रोड , थाने पश्चिम, महाराष्ट्र-400 001

82. 7982911 30/10/2009

1417

1999

स्वर्ण और स्वर्ण मिश्र धातुओं के आभूषण/शिल्पकारी शुद्धता व मुहरांकन

जय पारसनाथ ज्वेलर्स , काकड मार्केट, तीसरी मंजिल , 301/306 , कालबादेवी रोड, मुंबई , महाराष्ट्र-400 002

1417

83. 7983004

1999 30/10/2009

स्वर्ण और स्वर्ण मिश्र धातुओं के आभूषण/शिल्पकारी शुद्धता व मुहरांकन

केबीजे ज्वेलरी प्राइवेट लिमिटेड , 66/66ए, तीसरी मंजिल , केबीजे प्लाझा , झवेरी बाजार , मुंबई , महाराष्ट्र-400 002

1417

84. 7983105 30/10/2009

1999

स्वर्ण और स्वर्ण मिश्र धातुओं के आभूषण/शिल्पकारी शुद्धता व मुहरांकन

ए यू फिनजा ज्वेल्स, तल मंजिल , जे के बिल्डिग- II मेहरा इस्टेट , एलबीएस मार्ग , विक्रोली, मुंबई, महाराष्ट्र-400079 6251 भारत का राजपत्र : सितम्बर 3 , 2011 / भाद्र 12 , 1933

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

( 7) ( 8 ) ( 9 )

(5)

(6)

(4)

(2) (3)

(1)

1999

1417

7985109 11/11/2009

85.

स्वर्ण और स्वर्ण मिश्र धातुओं के आभूषण/ शिल्पकारी शुद्धता व मुहरांकन

4/बी, श्यामकमल अग्रवाल मार्केट , विले पार्ले पूर्व , महाराष्ट्र-400 057 पी. के. ज्वेलर्स,

1999

1417

7985210 12/11/2009

86.

स्वर्ण और स्वर्ण मिश्र धातुओं

के आभूषण/शिल्पकारी शुद्धता

व मुहरांकन

पेडणेकर ज्वेलर्स, शॉप संख्या ए-1 , तल मंजिल , बीचोलिम , जिला- दक्षिण गोवा , गोवा

1999

व मुहरांकन

श्री सूरज ज्वेलर्स , 309/45 , स्टेशन रोड, अंबरनाथ पूर्व , जिला- थाने , महाराष्ट्र-421 501

1999

1417

20/11/2009

7987214

91.

स्वर्ण और स्वर्ण मिश्र धातुओं के आभूषण /शिल्पकारी शुद्धता व मुहरांकन

अहिरंत ज्वेलर्स , 7, विनस अपार्टमेंट , नवरघर रोड , भाईदर पूर्व , जिला- थाने , महाराष्ट्र-401 105

1999

1417

20/11/2009

7987315

92.

स्वर्ण और स्वर्ण मिश्र धातुओं

के आभूषण/शिल्पकारी शुद्धता

व मुहरांकन

मास इंटरनेशनल , 624, पारेख मार्कट , 39 , केनेडी पूल, मुंबई-400 004

1999

1417

01/12/2009

93. 7989723

स्वर्ण और स्वर्ण मिश्र धातुओं

के आभूषण/शिल्पकारी शुद्धता

व मुहरांकन

रिलायन्स रिटेल लिमिटेड , शॉप संख्या जी-9 , तल मंजिल फेज 1 , आर सिटी, एलबीएस मार्ग , घाटकोपर- पश्चिम , महाराष्ट्र-400 077

3202GI /11-8 6252

[PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii) ] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 3 , 2011 /BHADRA 12, 1933

(7) (8) (9 )

(5)

(6)

(2)

(4)

(1)

(3)

15801

2008 02/12/2009

7989319

94.

गरम और शीत जल आपूर्ति के लिए पॉलीप्रोपाइलीन संयोगिक कोपोलीमर पाइपें

दी सुप्रिम इण्डस्टीज लिमिटेड यूनिट संख्या 3 , गट संख्या 47, 47/2 ,48 से 50 , 55 से66, 69 से 70 , 72 और 73, जलगांव- औरंगाबाद स्टेट हायवे, पोस्ट- गडेगांव, जिला-जलगांव, महाराष्ट्र-425 114

1417

1999 7989925 03/12/2009

95.

स्वर्ण और स्वर्ण मिश्र धातुओं के आभूषण/शिल्पकारी शुद्धता व मुहरांकन

हेमा गोल्ड एण्ड सिल्वर 8 , श्यामलदास गांधी मार्ग , प्रिन्सेस रस्ता, मंगलदास मार्केट के सामने , मुंबई-400002

2003

2112

96. 7989824 3/12/2009 रिलायन्स रिटेल लिमिटेड सांघी मोटर्स पॉपर्टी , 39 , ए, मुंबई-400 007

चांदी और चांदी मिश्र धातुओं के आभूषण/शिल्पकारी शुद्धता व मुहरांकन-विशिष्ट

1999

1417

09/12/2009

97. 7990809

स्वर्ण और स्वर्ण मिश्र धातुओं के आभूषण/शिल्पकारी शुद्धता व मुहरांकन

सौरभ ज्वेलर्स , 99 , भवानी पेठ, सराफ बाझार , जिला-जलगांव , महाराष्ट्र-425 001

1999

1417

98. 7990910 09/12/2009

स्वर्ण और स्वर्ण मिश्र धातुओं के आभूषण /शिल्पकारी शुद्धता व मुहरांकन

पाटील एण्ड पवार ज्वेलर्स राजदीप अपार्टमेंट , स्टेशन , वसई पश्चिम , जिला- थाने , महाराष्ट्र-401 202

1417

1999 99. 7991003 10/12/2009

स्वर्ण और स्वर्ण मिश्र धातुओं के आभूषण/शिल्पकारी शुद्धता व मुहरांकन

शिव आर्ट चैन प्रा. लि. , 110/111 , ज्वेल वर्ल्ड , कॉटन एक्सचेंज बिल्डिंग , कालबादेवी जंक्शन , मुम्बई -400 002

1984

2925

10/12/2009

100. 7991407

औद्योगिकी सुरक्षा हेलमेट दूसरा पुनरीक्षणद्ध

प्राईम प्लास्टिक 34 , सेठी इण्ड. इस्टेट , दूसरी मंजल , 10 - ई , सुरेन रोड , अंधेरी पूर्व , महाराष्ट्र-400 093

1999

1417

101. 7992106 15/12/2009

स्वर्ण और स्वर्ण मिश्र धातुओं के आभूषण/शिल्पकारी शुद्धता व मुहरांकन

हार्दीक सराफ शिव रोड, बिर्ला गेट , उल्हासनगर , जिला- थाने , महाराष्ट्र

1999

1417

22/12/2009 ॲसटोन

102. 7993411

स्वर्ण और स्वर्ण मिश्र धातुओं के आभूषण/शिल्पकारी शुद्धता व मुहरांकन

507 , आरपी भूषण सेन्टर , एमआयडीसी रोड संख्या 11 , जी एफ आई सी कंम्पाउड, तुंगा पॅराडाईस के पीछे , अंधेरी , महाराष्ट्र-400 093 भारत का राजपत्र: सितम्बर 3 , 2011 / भाद्र 12, 1933

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

(4)

(3)

(2)

(1)

24/12/2009

103. 7994514

6253

(8 ) ( 9 )

(7)

(6)

(5)

1999

1417

स्वर्ण और स्वर्ण मिश्र धातुओं

'के आभूषण/शिल्पकारी शुद्धता

व मुहरांकन

मिनाक्षी ज्वेलर्स , तारापूर रोड , चित्रालय, बी ए आर सी गेट के सामने , बाईसर पश्चिम , जिला-थाने, महाराष्ट्र-401 504 31/12/2009

7995516

104.

बालाजी इण्डस्ट्रीज सेक्टर 17 , संगम टॉवल्स के सामने , बीके संख्या 825 के नजदीक, उल्हासनगर -421 003 6/1/2010

7996417

105.

महेषज्वेलर्स , दीपमणी आपर्टमेंट , रेलवे गेट केसामने , बदलापूर पूर्व, जिला-थाने , महाराष्ट्र-421 503 6/10/2010

7996518

106.

राज ज्वेलर्स , शॉप संख्या 90 , एल के मार्केट, तीसरा लेन , झवेरी बाजार , महाराष्ट्र-400 002 8/1/2010

7997116

107.

मनहर ज्वलर्स 3 , कुरेशी महाल, एम एम सी रोड, माहिम, महाराष्ट्र-400 016 8/1/2010

7997217

108.

झवेरचंद भुराभाई झवेरी 56/ए , तल मंजिल , झरीवाला मेशन , हगेस रोद्व गामदेवी , झवेरी बाजार , महाराष्ट्र-400 002

8/1/2010

7997318

109.

मार्ग , ऑपेरा हाउस , महाराष्ट्र-400 004 अडोरा ज्वेल्स 147-सी, पंचरतना , एम पी

8/1/2010

7997419

110.

सुरेशज्वेलर्स 101 , पहला कॉटन एक्सचेंज बिल्डिंग , 175 , कालबादेवी रोड, महाराष्ट्र-400 002

11/1/2010

7997722

111.

स्काय गोल्ड प्रा. लि. , रूम संख्या 9 , दूसरी मंजिल , 60/62, गोविंद निवास , धानजी रस्ता, मुंबई-400 003

1999

8808

तेल दाव चूल्हों के लिए बर्नर, आवाज करने वाले , पदनाम नंबर 1

1999

1417

के आभूषण/शिल्पकारी शुद्धता स्वर्ण और स्वर्ण मिश्र धातुओं व मुहरांकन

1999

1417

स्वर्ण और स्वर्ण मिश्र धातुओं के आभूषण /शिल्पकारी शुद्धता व मुहरांकन

1999

1417

के आभूषण/शिल्पकारी शुद्धता स्वर्ण और स्वर्ण मिश्र धातुओं व मुहरांकन

1999

1417

स्वर्ण और स्वर्ण मिश्र धातुओं के आभूषण/शिल्पकारी शुद्धता व मुहरांकन

1999

1417

स्वर्ण और स्वर्ण मिश्र धातुओं के आभूषण /शिल्पकारी शुद्धता व मुहरांकन

1999

1417

स्वर्ण और स्वर्ण मिश्र धातुओं के आभूषण/शिल्पकारी शुद्धता व मुहरांकन

1999

1417

स्वर्ण और स्वर्ण मिश्र धातुओं के आभूषण/शिल्पकारी शुद्धता व मुहरांकन 6254

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 3 , 2011 /BHADRA 12, 1933

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

(4)

(5)

(6) (7 ) (8 ) ( 9 ) 112. 7997823 11/1/2010

1417

1999

स्वर्ण और स्वर्ण मिश्र धातुओं के आभूषण /शिल्पकारी शुद्धता व मुहरांकन

टेम्पल डिजाईन एल एल पी प्लॉट संख्या आर-1 , दूसरी मंजिल , कामा इण्डं. इस्टेट, वालभत रोड , बजंग नगर , के सामने , गोरेगांव पश्चिम , महाराष्ट्र-400 063

113. 7997924 11/1/2010

1660 1

1982

पिटंवा एल्युमिनियम के बर्तन भाग-1--कूकिंग टेबल , सर्विंग , भंडारण व बेकिंग के बर्तन

के.पी. इण्डस्टीज शुभ इण्डस्ट्रीयल इस्टेट, सेक्टर संख्या 2 , गाला संख्या 11 , गुरई पाडा, वसई पूर्व, जिला-थाने , महाराष्ट्र-401208

114. 7998926 11/1/2010

13592

1992 काईटेक इण्डस्टीज इंडिया लि. सी-8/11 , जीवन भीमानगर , बोरिवली,

संवातन और वर्षा के पानी के तंत्र सहित भवनों के अंदर की मिट्टी तथा अपशिष्ट निरावेशन तंत्र के लिए अनम्यकृत पीवीसी पाइपें

115. 7999019 19/1/2010

1417

1999

स्वर्ण और स्वर्ण मिश्र धातुओं के आभूषण/शिल्पकारी शुद्धता व मुहरांकन

महाराष्ट्र-400103 मिनल ज्वेलर्स बिल्डिंगसंख्या 213 , 4 बेहराम मेन्शन , वरली पोस्ट ऑफिस के नजदीक , वरली , महाराष्ट्र-400018

116. 7999120 19/1/2010

1417

1999

स्वर्ण और स्वर्ण मिश्र धातुओं के आभूषण/शिल्पकारी शुद्धता व मुहरांकन

रानी इंटरनेशनल 35-डी, स्नेह सदन , 101/102 , मेन अॅवॅन्यूरोड, सांताक्रुझ पश्चिम , महाराष्ट्र-400 054

117. 7999221 19/1/2010

1417

1999

स्वर्ण और स्वर्ण मिश्र धातुओं के आभूषण/शिल्पकारी शुद्धता व मुहरांकन

केशरीमल कपूरचंद एण्ड को . विष्णू मनीधर चाल , बाजार, पेठ , गिलादेवी चौक , कल्याण पश्चिम , जिला-थाने , महाराष्ट्र-421 301

118. 3603449 21/1/2010

398

1996

षिरोपरि प्रेशण उद्देश्यों के लिए ऐल्यूमिनियिम चालक भाग 1 ऐल्यूमिनियिम लडदार चालक

गालडा पावर एण्ड टेलिकम्युनिकेशन लि. , पोस्ट बॉक्स संख्या 64 , प्लॉट संख्या 20 , वृंदावन पार्क , सिलवासा-396 230 , दादरा और नगर हवेली

119. 3600342 21/1/2010

1417

1999

स्वर्ण और स्वर्ण मिश्र धातुओं के आभूषण/ शिल्पकारी शुद्धता व मुहरांकन

उझूरी ज्वेल्स प्रा. लि. , 211/212 , केटूओ इण्ड. इस्टेट, एमआयडीसी पुलिस स्टेशन के नजदीक , अंधेरी पश्चिम , महाराष्ट्र-400 059

120. 3600544 22/1/2010

1417

1999 गोल्ड स्टार ज्वेलरी इंडिया प्रा. लि. ,

स्वर्ण और स्वर्ण मिश्र धातुओं के आभूषण/शिल्पकारी शुद्धता व मुहरांकन

प्लॉट संख्या 8 , रॉयल स्टार आर्केड , वेस्टर्न इण्ड. इस्टेट , सिप्झ- सिझ के सामने , एमआयडीसी, अंधेरी पश्चिम, महाराष्ट्र-400 007 6255 भारत का राजपत्र : सितम्बर 3 , 2011/ भाद्र 12 , 1933

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

( 7 ) ( 8 ) ( 9 )

( 6)

(5)

(4)

(3)

(2)

(1)

1999

1417

22/1/2010

3600645

121.

स्वर्ण और स्वर्ण मिश्र धातुओं

के आभूषण/शिल्पकारी शुद्धता

व मुहरांकन

काजल गोल्ड पॅलेस शॉप संख्या 4 , प्रनित अपार्टमेंट , गोदरेज हिल रोड , खडकपाडा, कल्याण पश्चिम , जिला-थाने महाराष्ट्र-421 301

1999

1417

26/1/2010

122. 3601243

स्वर्ण और स्वर्ण मिश्र धातुओं

के आभूषण/शिल्पकारी शुद्धता

व मुहरांकन

पेंडणेकर ज्वेलर्स प्रा.लि. , साई स्नेहा आयडीबीआय बैंक के सामने , एमटीएनएल के पीछे , एमएल को- हाउसिंग सोसायटी रोड, पुराना पनवेल , पनवेल , जिला-रायगढ़ महाराष्ट्र-410 206

1999

1417

26/1/2010

3601344

123.

स्वर्ण और स्वर्ण मिश्र धातुओं के आभूषण/ शिल्पकारी शुद्धता व मुहरांकन

टकले जेम्स् एण्ड ज्वेलरी , शॉप संख्या 25 , वूडलॅण्ड टॉवर्स, पुराना गांगूपर नाका, नासिक , जिला-नासिक , महाराष्ट्र-422 002

1999

1417

26/1/2010

124. 3601445

स्वर्ण और स्वर्ण मिश्र धातुओं के आभूषण/शिल्पकारी शुद्धता व मुहरांकन

रविज्वेलर्स शॉप संख्या 5 , भमा सावित्री बिल्डिंग , कल्याण, जिला-थाने , महाराष्ट्र-421 306

1999

1417

30/1/2010

3602649

125.

स्वर्ण और स्वर्ण मिश्र धातुओं के आभूषण/शिल्पकारी शुद्धता व मुहरांकन

मयुराज्वेलर्स 8 , हन्सा विला, अपना बाजार के नजदीक , जवाहरलाल नेहरू रोड , मुलुण्ड पश्चिम , महाराष्ट्र-400 080

2008

15801

01/2/2010

3602447

126.

गरम और शीत जल आपूर्ति के लिए पॉलीप्रोपाइलीन संयोगिक कोपोलीमर पाइपें

प्रिन्स पाइप्स एण्ड फिटिंग प्रा. लि. , 95 , प्रिन्स भवन , रोड संख्या 16, मरोल , एमआयडीसी , अंधेरी पूर्व, मुंबई-400 093

1999

1417

10/2/2010

3606354

127.

स्वर्ण और स्वर्ण मिश्र धातुओं के आभूषण/शिल्पकारी शुद्धता व मुहरांकन

अशपुराज्वेलर्स शॉप संख्या 6 , जनार्दन आर्केड, बैंक ऑफ बरोडा केसामने, मेन रोड, डहाणू रोड , जिला-थाने महाराष्ट्र-401 602

1995

4984

09/2/2009

3607255

128.

पानी की आपूर्ति के लिए

घनत्व वाले पॉलिएथिलीन

पाईप

काईटेक इण्डस्टीज इंडिया लि. , सी-118 / 11 , जीवन भीमनगर , बोरिवली,

महाराष्ट्र-400 103 6256

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 3 , 2011 / BHADRA 12, 1933

(2)

(1)

(3)

(4) 129. 3606758 12/2/2010 सुवर्णराज इंडिया प्रा. लि. , 1 और 2/7 , बॅकबे व्यूव , चौथी माला , 3 - ए , मामा परमानंद मार्ग , मुंबई-400 004 130. 3606657 13/2/2010 सुवर्णराज इंडिया प्रा. लि. , 1 और 2/7 , बॅकबे व्यूव, चौथी माला , 3 - ए, माला परमानंद मार्ग , मुंबई-400 004 131. 3606960 13/2/2010 मोहनलाल पूरनचंद एण्ड सन्स 32/34 , राजवाडकर रस्ता, कुलाबा, मुंबई -400 005 132. 3607457 16/2/2010 इन्डिगो ज्वेलरी प्रा.लि. , 5 , एल के आर्केड , मरोल जंक्शन , सर एम वी रोड , गंधेरी पूर्व, महाराष्ट्र-400 059 133. 3607558 17/2/2010 फयूचर वॅल्यूरिटेल लिमिटेड नॉलेज हाउस , श्याम नगर , जोगेश्वरी विक्रोली लिंक रोड के बाद , जोगेश्वरी पूर्व , महाराष्ट्र-400 060 134. 3607861 18/2/2010 सुपर प्लास्ट कंपनी एच -118 , 121 , अन्सा इण्डस्ट्रीयल इस्टेट , साकी विकार रोड, अंधेरी पूर्व, महाराष्ट्र-400 072 135. 3611852 27/2/2010 वतूमल सन्सज्वेलर्स शॉप संख्या 158/159 , सिरू चौक, उल्हासनगर, जिला-थाने , 'महाराष्ट्र-420 003 136. 3611650 26/2/2010 मेघाप्लास्ट चालता संख्या 71 , शेड संख्या 30 , अमित इण्डस्ट्रीयल एरिया , भाउजी नगर , विठलवाडी , रेलवे स्टेशन रोड, उल्हासनगर-421 003

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

(6) (7) (8 ) ( 9 )

2112

2003 चांदी और चांदी मिश्र धातुओं के आभूषण/शिल्पकारी-शुद्धता व मुहरांकन-विशिष्ट

1417

1999 स्वर्ण और स्वर्ण मिश्र धातुओं के आभूषण/शिल्पकारी शुद्धता व मुहरांकन

1417

1999 स्वर्ण और स्वर्ण मिश्र धातुओं के आभूषण/शिल्पकारी शुद्धता व मुहरांकन

1417

1999 स्वर्ण और स्वर्ण मिश्र धातुओं के आभूषण /शिल्पकारी शुद्धता व मुहरांकन

1417

1999 स्वर्ण और स्वर्ण मिश्र धातुओं के आभूषण/शिल्पकारी शुद्धता व मुहरांकन

14927

2001 विद्युत संस्थापन के लिए केबल तनाव और वाहिनी पद्धति भाग 2 केबल तनाव एवं वाहिनी पद्धति दीवारों पर या सीलिंग पर लगाने के लिए वांछित

1417

1999 स्वर्ण और स्वर्ण मिश्र धातुओं के आभूषण/ शिल्पकारी शुद्धता व मुहरांकन

9537 3

1983 विद्युत संस्थापन के लिए विद्युतरोधी सामग्री के दृढ सादी नलिकाएं 6257 भारत का राजपत्र : सितम्बर 3 , 2011 / भाद्र 12, 1933

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii ) ]

( 9 )

(7) ( 8 )

(6)

(5)

(4)

(3)

(2)

(1)

2006

3196 1

2/3/2010

3612046

137.

कॉनफिडन्स पेट्रोलियम इंडिया लिमिटेड, यूनिट 2 , सर्वे संख्या 34/1 , 34/2, विपेज पौड , खलापुर, 'जिला- रागढ़ , महाराष्ट्र-410207

अल्प दाव द्रवणीय गैसों के लिए 5 लीटर से अधिक जल क्षमता वाले वेल्डित अल्प कार्बन इस्पात के सिलिंडर भाग । द्रवित पेट्रोलिय गैस ( एल. पी. जी. ) के लिए सिलिंडर (पांचवा पुनरीक्षण )

1984

2925

8/3/2010

3613048

138.

औद्योगिक सुरक्षा हेलमेंट

(दूसरा पुनरीक्षण)

विजय साब्रे सेफटी प्रा. लि. , प्लाट संख्या 35 , चांदिवली विंपेज , साकी विकार रोड, अंधेरी पूर्व, महाराष्ट्र-400 072

1999

1417

10/3/2010

139. 3613553

स्वर्ण और स्वर्ण मिश्र धातुओं

के आभूषण/शिल्पकारी शुद्धता

व मुहरांकन

कृष्णाज्वेलर्स शॉप संख्या 25 , प्रभाकर नाईक शॉपिंग कॉम्पलेक्स , भाजी मार्केट के सामने , वाडा, जिला-थाने, महाराष्ट्र-421 303

1989

303

11/3/2010

3614454

140.

सामान्य प्रयोजनों के लिए

प्लाईवुड

(तीसरा पुनरीक्षण)

मापेल मोल्डिंग प्रा . लि. , एमएसएसआईडीसीएस , प्लाट संख्या 24, वुड बेस इण्डस्ट्रीयल कॉम्पलेक्स, विलेज हान्द्रे, तालुका-वाडा, जिला-थाने , महाराष्ट्र-421 303

1999

1417

18/3/2010

3616054

141.

स्वर्ण और स्वर्ण मिश्र धातुओं

के आभूषण/शिल्पकारी शुद्धता

व मुहरांकन

संनगुणे इण्डस्ट्रीज ऑफिस संख्या 20 , पहली मंजिल , पारेख मार्केट 39, जीएसएस रोड , ऑपेरा हाउस , महाराष्ट्र-400 004

1989 26/3/2010

3617561

142.

सामान्य प्रयोजनों के लिए प्लाईवुड 303 (तीसरा पुनरीक्षण)

एशियन प्लाईवुड गट संख्या 214 , विपेज शिवाले, तालुका-मुरबाड , जिला-थाने-421 301

1999

1417

31/3/2010

3619262

143.

स्वर्ण और स्वर्ण मिश्र धातुओं

के आभूषण/शिल्पकारी शुद्धता

वं मुहरांकन

न्यूराधेश्याम मिश्रीलाल सराफ एच संख्या 2/315/1 , सराफ बाजार , गांधी चौक , भुसावल , जिला-जलगांव

महाराष्ट्र-425 201 6258

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: SEPTEMBER 3, 2011/BHADRA 12, 1933

[PART II SBC. 3 (ii)] (1) (2) (3)

(4)

(5)

(6) (7) (8 ) (9 ) 144. 3619363 31/3/2010

1417

1999 राधेश्याम मिश्रीलाल सराफ एण्डसन्स्

स्वर्ण और स्वर्ण मिश्र धातुओं के आभूषण/शिल्पकारी शुद्धता

व मुहरांकन

एच संख्या 2/315/1 , सी एस संख्या 1343 , भुसावल , जिला-जलगांव महाराष्ट्र-425 201

145. 3619666 31/3/2010

1417

1999

स्वर्ण और स्वर्ण मिश्र धातुओं के आभूषण/शिल्पकारी शुद्धता व मुहरांकन

आर आर रायकर ज्वेलर्स क्लोविस्ट डिकसेस्टारोड , एम जी मार्केट के नजदीक , मारगोवा, उत्तर गोवा, गोवा-403 601

[ सं. के. प्र. वि. / 13 11 ]

डॉ. एस. एल. पालकर , निदेशक एवं प्रमुख ( एम डी एम- II )

New Delhi , the 26th August , 2011

S.O. 2346- In pursuance of sub -regulation (6) of regulation 5 of the Bureau of Indian Standards (certification) regulations , 1988 , the Bureau of Indian Standards , hereby notifies that the licences particulars of which are given in the following schedule have grant with effect from the date indicate against each :

SCHEDULE

GOLDate Licensee Name and Address IS Product

ISNo. Part Sec . Year Sr. No.

CML No.

7 8 9 1. 7927697 6/04/2009 Gehna Creations (India)

1417

1999

Gold and GoldAlloys , Jewellery/Artefacts- Fineness and Marking

Pvt. Ltd. , 413/414 , Parekh Market, Opp. KenndeyBridge , Opera House , Mumbai , Maharashtra -400004

2. 7930686 09/04/2009 Anta Jewellers

1417

1999

GoldandGoldAlloys , Jewellery/Artefacts- Fineness and Marking

Francisco Loyola Road, Shop No. 74, North Goa , Margoa Goa-403 601

3. 7940689 27/04/2009

7834 1

1987 Tulsi Extrusions Ltd. N-99, 100 and 108 MIDC. Area, Jalgaon, Maharashtra

Injection Moulded PVC Fitting with Solvent Cement Joints for WaterSupplies: Part 1 Genera; Requirements

4. 7947808 05/05/2009

1417

1999

GoldandGoldAlloys , Jewellery/Artefacts- Fineness and Marking

VGN Jewellers , Shrishti House , 1stFloor, Shop No. 1 , N.S. Road, Mulund (East) , Maharashtra- 400 080

5. 7940790 05/05/2009

1417

1999

GoldandGoldAlloys , Jewellery/Artefacts- Fineness and Marking

Shree Balaji Jewellers , B/11/ 12 , Om Shree Balaji Darshan Bldg . , New Golden Nest Road, Near Sineking, Bhayander (East ) , Thane , Maharashtra 6259 भारत का राजपत्र : सितम्बर 3 , 2011/ भाद्र 12, 1933

[भाग II-खण्ड 3( ii) ]

(7) (8 ) ( 9 )

(5)

(6)

(1)

(3)

Fineness and Marking

S.K. Seth Co. Jewellers , 226/230, Giriraj Building, Shop No. 204 , 2nd Floor, Sheikh Memon Street, Zaveri Bazar, Mumbai , Maharashtra -400002

1977

2365

12/05/2009

12. 7942390

Steel Wire Suspension Ropes for Lifts , Elevators and Hoists

Desh Wire Products Pvt. Ltd. , 34, Kembros , Industrial Estate, Bhandup Sonapur Road, Off. LBS Marg, Bhandup (W) Maharashtra-400078

1417

1999 13. 7942895 14/05/2009

Gold andGoldAlloys ,

Jewellery/Artefacts-

LinkFinertess and Marking

Harsh Enterprises GalaNo. 10/411 , Madani Estate, M.G. Road, Sonapur, Bhandup (W), Maharashtra -400078

1999

1417

15/05/2009

14. 7942996

Gold andGoldAlloys ,

Jewellery/ Artefacts-

Fineness and Marking

Raia Jewels Pvt . Ltd. , Unit No. 11 / 11 - A, 80/88 D.L. Marg , Opp . Hakoba Mills , Kala Chowky, Mumbai , Maharashtra- 400 033

3202GI/11-9 6260

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 3 , 2011 /BHADRA 12, 1933

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

(4)

(5)

( 7 ) ( 8 )

(6)

( 9 ) 15. 7943901 18/05/2009

1417

1999

Gold andGoldAlloys , Jewellery/ Artefacts- Fineness and Marking

Shiivek Jewels , Shiv Centre , Co. Op . , Society, Sector 17 , Shop No. 32/47 , Vashi , Thane , Navi Mumbai , Maharashtra - 400705

16. 7943089 18/05/2009

2581

2002

Round Strand Galvanized SteelWire Ropes for Shipping Purposes

Desh Wire Products P. Ltd. , 34, Kembros , Industrial Estate , Bhandup Sonapur Road , Off. LBS Marg, Bhandup (W) Maharashtra -400 078

17. 7945194 25/05/2009

398

1992

Aluminium conductors for Overhead Transmission Purposes : Part 5 Aluminium Conductors-GalCondu Steel Reinforced for Extra High Voltage (400 Kv andAbove)

Associated Transrail StructuresLtd., 103/104 , Krishna Tower, C/o .Hotel Viraj Building , Opp . PWD Office , Saily Road, Dadra and Nagar Haveli Silvassa - 396 230

18. 7948305 05/06/2009

1417

1999

GoldandGoldAlloys , Jewellery/ Artefacts-- Fineness and Marking

Hemi Exquisite Jewellery Prithvi House , 5th Floor, Janki Kutir, Juhu , Maharashtra -400 049

19. 7947909 05/06/2009

1417

1999

Gold andGoldAlloys , Jewellery/Artefacts- Fineness and Marking

Vieu Jewels , 501, Sopan , Cross Podar Road, Above Bank of Maharashtra , Santacruze(W) Maharashtra - 400 054

20. 7948002 05/06/2009

1417

1999 Takle Bandhu , 911 , Saraf Bazar , Nashik , Maharashtra -422 001

Gold and Gold Alloys , Jewellery/Artefacts- Fineness and Marking

21. 7948103 05/06/2009

1417

1999

Gold andGold Alloys , Jewellery/ Artefacts- Fineness and Marking

Lalajibhai Jewellers , 32, Mataji Bldg . , N.S. Road, Greater Bombay, Mulund(W) Maharashtra -400 080

22. 7948204 05/06/2009

1417

1999

Gold and GoldAlloys , Jewellery/Artefacts- Fineness and Marking

M Suresh Company P. Ltd. , 419 , Parekh Market, Opera House, Maharashtra -400 004

23. 7947404 05/06/2009

1786

2008

High Strength Deformed Steel Bars and Wires for Concrete Reinforcement

Suvikas Alloys & Steel Pvt. Ltd. , Gatesh Village ( Budruk) , Shirish Pada , Khanivalu Road , Thane , Wada , Maharashtra - 421 303

24. 7949408 12/06/2009

398 4

1994 JSK Industries Pvt . Ltd. , Survey No. 369/1/1/2 , Village : Sayli , Behind Siyarm Silk Mills , Dadra andNagar Haveli , Silvassa- 396 230

Aluminium Conductors for Overhead Transimission Purposes: Part 4 Aluminium Alloy Stranded Conductors (Aluminium Magnesium SiliconType) 6261 भारत का राजपत्र : सितम्बर 3 , 2011/भाद्र 12 , 1933

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

( 8 ) ( 9 )

(5)

(6) ( 7 )

(4)

(1) (2) (3)

1996

398 2

12/06/2009

25. 7949509

Aluminium Conductors for Overhead Transimission Purposes: Part 4 Aluminium Conductors , Galvanized Steel Reinforced

JSK Industries Pvt . Ltd. , Survey No. 369/1/1/2 , Village: Sayli , Behind Siyarm SilkMills Dadra and Nagar Haveli , Silvassa - 396 230

1996

398 1

7949610 12/06/2009

26.

Aluminium Conductors for Overhead Transmission Purposes : Part 1 Aluminium Stranded Conductors

JSK Industries Pvt . Ltd. , Survey No. 369/1/1/2 , Village : Sayli , Behind Siyarm SilkMills Dadra and Nagar Haveli, Silvassa - 396 230

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 3 , 2011 /BHADRA 12 , 1933

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

(4)

(5)

(6) (7) ( 8 ) ( 9 ) 34. 7956506 15/07/2009

2112

2003

Silver and Silver Alloys , Jewellery/Artefacts- Fineness and Marking

Fine Jewellery (India) Ltd. , Plot No. 14 , Fine House , W.I.C.E.L. Opp . Seepz, Andheri (E) , Maharashtra -400093

35. 7954704 15/07/2009

1417

1999

Gold andGoldAlloys , Jewellery/ Artefacts- Fineness and Marking

Kasa Jewellery Pvt . Ltd. , B-4, Vimal Apt. , Juhu LaneCorner, Greater BombayAndheri (W), Maharashtra -400058

36. 7955504 15/07/2009

1417

1999

Gold andGoldAlloys , Jewellery/Artefacts- Fineness and Marking

R.S. Jewellers , Shop No. 1 , Calcary Apts . , Dr. Ambedkar Road , Khar(W), Maharashtra-400 052

37. 7955605 16/07/2009

1417

1999

Gold andGoldAlloys , Jewellery/Artefacts- Fineness and Marking

Star Jewels , Shop No. 14, Sukh Sagar Bldg. , Gr. Floor, Next to Kobe Restaurant , N.S. Patkara Marg, Mumbai , Maharashtra-400 007

38. 7955706 16/07/2009

2062

2006

Steel for General Structural Purposes

Karamtara Steel Pvt . Ltd. , Survey No. 48-58 , Plot No. 05-55 , MIDC, Village Saravali , Tarapur, Tal-Palghar, Raigarh, Boisar, Maharashtra- 401 506

39. 7956203 16/07/2009

1417

1999

Gold andGoldAlloys , Jewellery/Artefacts- Fineness and Marking

Kalash Jewels 2/B Laxmi Industrial Estate , New Link Road , Andheri (W) , Mumbai , Maharashtra -400 053

40. 7956405 16/07/2009

1417

1999

Gold andGoldAlloys , Jewellery/ Artefacts- Fineness and Marking

Shriniwas Jewellers , SMC Bunglow, Near ShahPetrol Pump , Opp. S.T. Depot . , PimpalGaon Baswant, Tal .Niphad, Nashik , Maharashtra -422 209

41. 7956708 17/07/2009

11188

1991

Vault(Strong Room) Doors: Part 1

Guardwel Industries Pvt . Ltd., Rajhans Industrial Complex , Chinchpada , Gokhivere , Thane , Vasai , (E) Maharashtra - 4001 208

42. 7957710 22/07/2009

1417

1999

Gold andGoldAlloys , Jewellery/Artefacts- Fineness and Marking

Hira Kagzi Jewels , 403, Parekh Market Bldg. , 39 , Kennedy Bridge , Greater Bombay, Opera House, Maharashtra -400004 6263 भारत का राजपत्र : सितम्बर 3 , 2011 / भाद्र 12 , 1933

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

(7) (8 ) ( 9) (1)

(4)

(5)

(6)

(2) (3)

1999

1417

43. 7959613 24/07/2009

GoldandGoldAlloys,

Jewellery/Artefacts-

Fineness and Marking

Reliance Retail Limited, Shop No.G-9 ,Ground Floor, Phase I , R City, L.B.S. Marg, Ghatkoper (W) Maharashtra-400 077

1417

1999 44. 7959815 24/07/2009

Gold andGoldAlloys ,

Jewellery/ Artefacts-

Fineness and Marking

L.D. Ghodke Saraf Shivaji Chowk, Near Vithal Temple Opp . Kalyan FarsanMart , Thane, Kalyan(W) , Maharashtra -421 301

2112

2003 45. 7959714 28/07/2009

Silverand SilverAlloys ,

Jewellery/Artefacts-

Fineness andMarking

Reliance Retail Limited, Shop No.G-9 ,Ground Floor , Phase I , R City, L.B.S. Marg , Ghatkoper (W) Maharashtra -400 077

1417

1999 7961596 05/08/2009

46.

Gold andGoldAlloys ,

49. 7962396 07/08/2009

GoldandGoldAlloys ,

(5)

(6) (7) (8 ) ( 9 ) 52. 7966004 20/08/2009

1417

1999

Gold and GoldAlloys , Jewellery/Artefacts- Fineness andMarking

Parekh Gold House Pvt. Ltd. , 29/ A, Siddhpura Industrial Estate, Plot No. 3 , Gaywadi Road, Goregaon (W) , Maharashtra-400 062

53. 7967915 20/08/2009

398

1992 Polycab Wires Pvt . Ltd. , Hico House, 1st Floor, 771 , Pandit Satwalekar Marg,Mahim, Maharashtra -400 016

Aluminium Conductors for Overhead Transmission Purposes: Part 5Aluminium Conductors-Gal Steel Rein- forced for Extra High Voltage (400 Kv andAbove)

54. 7967612 24/08/2009

1417

1999

Gold andGoldAlloys , Jewellery/ Artefacts- Fineness and Marking

Kavit Gold, Shop No. 9 , Baba Kachru Gaikwad Chawl, Gautam Nagar Rahivasi Seva Sangh , Behram Baug, Jogesh wari , Maharashtra -400 102

55. 7967511 25/08/2009

1417

1999

Gold andGoldAlloys , Jewellery/Artefacts- Fineness and Marking

Heerachand Jewellers Pvt. Ltd. , 236, Pancharatna Building , Opera House, Mumbai , Maharashtra -400 004

56. 7966913 25/08/2009

1786

1985

High Strength Deformed Steel Bars and Wires for Concrete Reinforcement

Shri Saptashringi Ispat Pvt. Ltd., GotNo. 228 , At Post Lakhmapur, Tal: Dindori , Distt. Nashik, Maharashtra - 423 213

57. 7967814 26/08/2009

1417

1999

Gold andGoldAlloys , Jewellery/ Artefacts- Fineness and Marking

Mangalore Jewellery Works, 11 & 12-A, Bhiwandiwala Building, L.N. Road, Matunga (C. Rly. ) Maharashtra-400 019

58. 7969111 01/09/2009

2202 1

1999

Wooden Flush Door shutters ( Solid Core Type) : Part 1 Plywood Face Panels

Maple Mouldins Pvt . Ltd. , MSSIDCS PlotNo. 24, 20OD Based, Industrial Complex,Village- Gandhre , Tal -Wada, Dist-Thane , Wada , Maharashtra -421 303

59. 7969212 02/09/2009

1659

Block Boards

2004 Maple Mouldins Pvt . Ltd. , MSSIDCS Plot No. 24, 20OD Based, Industrial Complex , Village- Gandhre, Tal -Wada , Distt. - Thane , Wada , Maharashtra -421 303 6265 भारत का राजपत्र : सितम्बर 3 , 2011 / भाद्र 12 , 1933

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

(1) (2) (3)

(4)

(5)

(6) ( 7) ( 8 ) ( 9 )

1786

1985 60. 7969414 03/09/2009

High Strength Deformed

Steel Bars and Wires for

Concrete Reinforcement

Mohit Ispat Limited, PlotNo. 1 , Navelim Village,Bicholim Industrial Estate, Bicholim North Goa, Panjim , Goa-403001

1417

1999 61. 7971094 04/09/2009

Gold and Gold Alloys ,

Jewellery/Artefacts-

Fineness and Marking

Deepsons Ornaments , Shop No. 34, R.N.A. Arcade , Crystal Avenue Co. , Op. Soc. Ltd. , Lokhandwala Complex, Andheri (W) , Maharashtra- 400053

1786

1985 62. 7970395 07/09/2009

High Strength Deformed

Steel Bars and Wires for

Concrete Reinforcement

GutNo. 195, Village Vadavali Uchat Kondla Ambe Metsteel Pvt . Ltd. , Road, Thane , Wada , Maharashtra - 421303

9537

1985

63. 7970601 07/09/2009 Madhur Plast , Shed No. 9, Opp . Sheela Apartment, Radhabai Chowk , Thane , Ulhasnagar , Maharashtra- 421003

Conduits for Electrical Installations : Part 3 Rigid Plain Conduits of Insulating materials (Superseding IS: 2509)

9537

1985 64. 7975611 07/09/2009 Ultra Polymers , Survey No. 338/2 , Nr. PatelGround , Kachigam , Daman& Diu-396210

Conduits for Electrical Installations : Part 3 Rigid PlainConduits of Insulating materials ( Superseding IS: 2509)

4984

1995 65. 7971704 09/09/2009

High Density Polyethylene Pipesfor Potable Water Supplies

Royal Plastics , GutNo. 574 , 1A/ 1B , Agra Road, Opp . Ramesh Petrol Pump, Chandnpuri , Shivar, Nashik Malegaon , Maharashtra- 423203

2003

2112

66. 797397 09/09/2009

Silver Silver and Silver Alloys , Jewellery/Artefacts- Fineness and Marking

Sadgun Jewellers Pvt . Ltd. , Plot No. 97 , Phase - II , 3rd Floor , Street No. 16 , M.I.D.C. Greater Bombay, Andheri (E) , Maharashtra -400093

1417

1999 67. 7971195 09/09/2009

GoldandGoldAlloys ,

Jewellery/Artefacts-

Fineness and Marking

Jewels by Queenie, C001 , I & III , 23 , New Poornima Apts . , C Wing , Ground Floor, Peddar Road, Mumbai , Maharashtra-400026 6266

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 3 , 2011 / BHADRA 12 , 1933

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

(4)

(5)

(6) ( 7) ( 8 ) ( 9 ) 68: 7971296 09/09/2009

1417

1999

Gold and Gold Alloys , Jewellery/Artefacts- Fineness and Marking

Sadgun Jewellers Pvt. Ltd. , Plot No. 97 , Phase- II , 3rd Floor , Street No. 16, M.I.D.C. Greater Bombay, Andheri (E) , Maharashtra - 400093

69. 7972605 11/09/2009

1417

1999

Gold and GoldAlloys , Jewellery/ Artefacts- Fineness and Marking

Popular Gold, 64, Galleria , Hiranandani Gardens , Powai , Andheri ( E) , Maharashtra - 400076

70. 7972096 11/09/2009

14735

1999 Tulsi Extrusions Ltd. , Unit 1 (Moulding Division ) N-99, 100-108 , MIDC Area Jalgaon , Maharashtra - 425003

Unplsticized Polyvinyl Chloride (UPVC ) Injection Moulded Fittings for Soil and Waste Discharge System for Inside and Outside Buildings Including Ventilation and Rain Water System

71. 7973809 16/09/2009

1417

1999

Gold and GoldAlloys , Jewellery/Artefacts- Fineness and Marking

Shreeram Jewellers , Vraj Vihar, Shop No. 7 , Sec . 17 , Opp . Welcome SuperMarket , Raigarh , AIROLI, Maharashtra- 400708

72. 7974104 18/09/2009

8808

1999

Burners for Oil Pressure Stoves and Oil Pressure Heaters

Shankar Mahadev Enterprises, Swimming Pool Road, Near Budha Vihar, Behind, Municipal Corpn . Ulhasnagar, Maharashtra - 421003

73. 7974508 23/09/2009

1417

1999

Gold and Gold Alloys , Jewellery/ Artefacts- Fineness and Marking

Sabine Jewellers , 7, Suratwala Bldg . , RajaRammohan Marg , 211 /A, Prarthana Samaj , Charni Road , Maharashtra -400004

74. 7975813 29/09/2009

1417

1999

Gold and GoldAlloys , Jewellery/ Artefacts- Fineness and Marking

Shangar Jewellers , Shop No. 7 - C , Sierra Tower, Lokhandwala , Township ,Akruti Road, GreaterBombay, Kandivali (E), Maharashtra - 400101

75. 7975914 29/09/2009

1417

1999

Gold and Gold Alloys , Jewellery/Artefacts- Fineness and Marking

International Gemological Institute ( I) Pvt. Ltd. , 402/404, Mani Mahal , 11/21 , Mathew Road, Opera House , Mumbai , Maharashtra -400004 6267 भारत का राजपत्र : सितम्बर 3 , 2011 / भाद्र 12, 1933

3( ii) ]

1-खण्ड

( 7) ( 8 ) ( 9 )

(6)

(4)

Fineness and Marking

K.G. Jewellers Shop No. 801/802 , Zaveri Bazar, Siru Chowk , Thane , Ulhasnagar , Maharashtra - 421002

1999

1417

08/10/2009

7979215

Gold and Gold Alloys , Jewellery / Artefacts Fineness and Marking

Aabhushan Jewellers , Shop No. 5, l'air Lawn Bldg. , Plot No. 182 , Opp . Ayyappa Temple , Sec . 17 , Nerul , Navi Mumbai , Maharashtra - 400706

Fineness and Marking

Jai Parasnath Jewellers Kakad Market , 3rd Floor, 301/306 , Kalbadevi Road, Mumbai, Maharashtra -400002

1999

1417

30/10/2009

7983004

Gold and GoldAlloys ,

Jewellery/ Artefacts-

Fineness and Marking

KBJ Jewellery Pvt. Ltd. , 66/66A, 3rd FLoor, KBJ Plaza, Zaveri Bazar , Mumbai, Maharashtra - 400002

1999

1417

30/10/2009

7983105

Gold andGold Alloys ,

Jewellery/Artefacts

Fineness and Marking

AU Finja Jewels , Gound Floor, J.K. Bldg . II , Mehra Estate, L.B.S. Marg , Vikhroli , Mumbai , Maharashtra -400079

4302 GI/11-10 6268

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 3 , 2011 /BHADRA 12 , 1933

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

(4)

(5)

( 6) ( 7 ) ( 8 ) ( 9 ) 85. 7985109 12/11/2009

1417

1999

Gold andGoldAlloys , Jewellery/ Artefacts- Fineness and Marking

P.K, Jewels , 4/B, Shyamkamal Agarwal Market , Tejpal Road. Opp. Crunchy Munchy Hotel , Vile Parle ( E) Maharashtra - 400057

86. 7985210 12/11/2009

1417

1999

Gold andGoldAlloys . Jewellery/ Artefacts- Fineness and Marking

Pednekar Jewellers , Shop No. A- 1 .Ground Floor, Bicholim Municipal Market . North Goa

7085311 12 11 2009

1417

1999

Gold and Gold Alloys . Jewellery/Artefacts Fineness and Marking

Rajendra Jewellers Grampanchayat Bldg.. Shop No. 9. Station Road. Vasind . Thane . Tal . Shahapur. Maharashtra -421604

88 79869109 20: 11/2009

1417

1999

Gold and GoldAlloys . Jewellery/ Artefacts Fineness and Marking

Hemlata Jewellers , Shop No. 33. Station Road. Opp .Bank ofBaroda . Thane , Ambernath (W) . Maharashtra - 421501

89 7987012 20/11/2009

1417

1999

Goldand Gold Alloys . Jewellery/Artefacts-- Fineness and Marking

Mrghraj Jewellers . Station Road . Bazar Peth . Thane (W) , Maharashtra -400601

90. 7987113 20/11/2009

1417

1999

Gold and Gold Alloys , Jewellery/Artefacts- Fineness and Marking

Shri Suraj Jewellers . 309/45 , Station Road. Thane ,Ambarnath (E) . Maharashtra - 421501

91. 7987214 20/11/2009

1417

1999

Gold and GoldAlloys , Jewellery/Artefacts.. Fineness and Marking

Arihant Jewellers . 7, Venus Apartment , Navghar Road, Thane, Bhayander(E ), Maharashtra - 401105

92. 7987315 20/11/2009

1417

1999

Gold andGold Alloys . Jewellery/Artefacts- Fineness and Marking

Maas International , 624, Parekh Market, 39 , Kennedy Bridge, Opera House , Mumbai , Maharashtra -401105

93 7989723 1/12/2009

1417

1999

Gold and GoldAlloys , Jewellery/Artefacts Fineness and Marking

Reliance Retail Limited Sanghi Motors Property, 39, A Hughes Road, Next to Westside Retail , Mumbai, Maharashtra-400007

7989319 2/12/2009

1417

1999

Polypropylene- Randon Copolymer Pipes ForHot And Cold Water Supplies

The Suprerne Industries Limited Unit No III . Gate No. 47, 47/2 , 48 to 50. 55 to 66 . 69,7072 & 73 Jalgaon- 6269 भारत का राजपत्र : सितम्बर 3 , 2011 / भाद्र 12 , 1933

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

( 7 ) ( 8 ) ( 9 )

(5)

(6)

(4)

(2)

(1)

Aurangabad State Highway, atPost Gadegaon , Tal- Jamner , Dist Jalgaon , Maharashtra - 425114

1999

1417

95. 7989925 3/12/2009

GoldandGoldAlloys ,

Jewellery/Artefacts-

Fineness and Marking

Hema Gold & Silver 8, Shamadas Gandhi Marg , Princess Street, Opp . Mangaldas Market , Mumbai , Maharashtra -400002

1417

1999 96. 7989824 3/12/2009

Jewellery/Artefacts-

Fineness and Marking

Hardik Saraf Shiv Road , Birla Gate , Thane , Ulhasnagar, Maharashtra

1999

1417

22/12/2009

7993411

102.

Gold and Gold Alloys ,

Jewellery/Artefacts-

Fineness and Marking

Austone 507, Aarpee Bushan Centre , MIDC , Road No. 11 , GUFIC Compound , Behind Tunga Paradise , Andheri , Maharashtra- 400093 6270

(1) (2) (3)

(4) 103. 7994514 24/12/2009 Minakshi Jewellers Tarapur Road, Chitralay, Opp. B.A.R.C. Gate, Thane, Boisar (W) Maharashtra-401504

104. 7995516 31/12/2009 Balagi Industries Sector 17 , Opp. Sangam Travels , Near BK No. 825 , Ulhasnagar, Maharashtra - 421003

105. 7996417 6/1/2010 Mahesh Jewellers Deepmani Apartment, Opp.Ailway Gate , Thane , Badlapur East , Maharashtra -421503

106. 7996518 6/1/2010 Raj Jewellers Shop No. 90, L K Market , 3rd Lane , Zaveri Bazar, Maharashtra-400002

107. 7997116 8/1/2010 Manhar Jewellers 3 , Qureshi Mahal , MMC Road, Mahim, Maharashtra - 400016

108. 7997217 8/1/2010 Zaveri Chand Bhurabhai Zaveri 56/A, Ground Floor, Zariwala Mansion, Huges Road, Gamevi , Zaveri Bazar, Maharashtra- 400002 109. 7997318 8/1/2010 Addora Jewels 147 - C, Panchratna, MP Marg , Opera House , Maharashtra-400004 110. 7997419 8/01/2010 Suresh Jewellers 101, 1st Cotton Exchange 'Building, 175 , Kalbadevi Road , Maharashtra-400002

111. 7997722 11/01/2010 SKY Gold Pvt . Ltd. , Room No. 9, 2nd Floor, 60/62, Govind Niwas , Dhanji Street , Mumbai , Maharashtra - 400003 112. 7997823 11/01/2010 Temple Designs LLP Plot No. R- 1 , 2nd Floor , Cama Indl . Estate , Walbhat Road, Opp . Bajang Nagar , Goregaon ( East ) , Maharashtra - 400063

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 3 , 2011 /BHADRA 12 , 1933

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

(6) ( 7) ( 8 ) ( 9 )

1417

1999 Gold and GoldAlloys , Jewellery/ Artefacts- Fineness and Marking

1417

1999 Gold andGoldAlloys , Jewellery/ Artefacts- Fineness and Marking

1417

1999 Gold andGoldAlloys , Jewellery/Artefacts- Fineness and Marking

1417

1999 Gold andGoldAlloys , Jewellery/Artefacts- Fineness and Marking

1417

1999 Gold andGoldAlloys , Jewellery/ Artefacts- Fineness and Marking

1417

1999 Gold andGoldAlloys , Jewellery/ Artefacts- Fineness and Marking

1417

1999 Gold and GoldAlloys , Jewellery/ Artefacts-- Fineness and Marking

1417

1999 Gold and GoldAlloys , Jewellery/Artefacts- Fineness and Marking

1417

1999 Gold and GoldAlloys , Jewellery/Artefacts- Fineness and Marking

1417

1999 Gold and GoldAlloys , Jewellery/Artefacts- Fineness and Marking भारत का राजपत्र : सितम्बर 3 , 2011 / भाद्र 12 , 1933

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii ) ]

(4)

(2) (3)

(1)

11/01/2010

7997924

113.

K. P. Industries Shubh Industrial Estate , Sector No. 2, Gala No. 11 , Gaurai Pada , Thane , Vasai (E), Maharashtra-401208 11/01/2010

7998926

114.

Kitec Industries (India ) Ltd. , Survey No. 99/2 , Madhuban Indl . Area, Madhuban Dam Road , Rokholi , Silvassa , Dadra and Nagar Haveli-396230

19/01/2010

7999019

15.

Milan Jewellers Bldg. No. 213, 4 , Behram Mansion, Near Worli Post Office, Worli , Maharashtra -400018 19/01/2010

7999120

116.

Rani International 35 -D, Sneh Sadan , 101/102, Main Avenue Road, Santacruz West , Maharashtra - 400054 19/01/2010

7999221

117.

Keshrimal Kapurchand & Co. Vishnu Mandir Chawl , Bazar Peth , Gheladevi Chowk, Thane , Kalyan (West ) Maharashtra-421301 20/01/2010

3603449

118.

Galada Power & Telecommunication Ltd. , Survey No. 319, Behind Ispl Ind. Ltd. , VillageKhadoli, P. O. Raknoli , Silvassa, Dadra and NagarHaveli- 396230 20/01/2010

3600342

119.

Uzuri Jewels Pvt. Ltd. , 211/212, Keytuo Indl . , Estate , Near MIDC Police Station Andheri East , Maharashtra -400059 21/01/2010

3600544

120.

Gold Star Jewellery India Pvt . Ltd. , PlotNo. 8 , Royal Star Arcade, Western Indl . Estate , Opp . Seepzses , MIDC Andheri (E) Maharashtra

21/01/2010

3600645

121.

Kajal Gold Palace Shop No. 4 , Pranit Apartment, Fodrej Hill Road, Khadakpada, Thane , Kalyan West , Maharashtra -421301

6271

( 7) ( 8 ) ( 9 )

(6)

(5)

1982

1660

Wrought Aluminium Utensils- Part 1: Cooking Table , Serving Storing and Banking Utensils

1992

13592

UPVC Pipes for Soil and Waste Discharge Systems Inside Buildings inluding Ventilation and Rainwater System

1999

1417

Gold andGoldAlloys , Jewellery/Artefacts-- Fineness and Marking

1999

1417

Gold andGoldAlloys , Jewellery/Artefacts- Fineness and Marking

1999

1417

Gold and Gold Alloys , Jewellery/ Artefacts- Fineness and Marking

1999

1417

Goldand GoldAlloys , Jewellery/Artefacts- Fineness and Marking

1999

1417

Gold and GoldAlloys , Jewellery/Artefacts- Fineness and Marking

1999

1417

Gold and GoldAlloys , Jewellery/Artefacts- Fineness and Marking

1999

1417

Gold and GoldAlloys , Jewellery/Artefacts- Fineness and Marking 6272

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 3 , 2011 /BHADRA 12, 1933

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

(4)

(5)

(6) ( 7) (8 ) ( 9 ) 122. 3601243 25-01-2010

1417

1999

Gold and Gold Alloys , Jewellery/Artefacts- Fineness and Marking

Pednerkar Jewellers Pvt Ltd. Sai Sneha, Opp. IDBI Bank Behind MTNL M.L. Co. Housing Society Road, Old Panvel , Raigarh , Panvel Maharashtra- 410206

123. 3601344 25-01-2010

1417

1999

Gold and GoldAlloys , Jewellery/Artefacts- Fineness and Marking

Takle Gems & Jewellery Shop No. 25 , Woodland Towers, OldGangapur Naka, Nashik, Maharashtra- 422002

124. 3601445 25-01-2010

1417

1999

Gold andGoldAlloys , Jewellery/Artefacts- Fineness and Marking

Ravi Jewellers Shop No. 5, Bhima SavitriBuilding, Station Road, Katemanivali Thane , Kalyan , Maharashtra- 421306

125. 3602649 29-01-2010

1417

1999

Gold andGoldAlloys , Jewellery/Artefacts- Fineness and Marking

Mayura Jewellers 8, Hansa Villa, Near Apna Bazar , Jawaharlal Nehru Road, Mulund (W), Maharashtra -400080

126. 3602447 01-02-2010

15801

2008

Polypropylane - Random CopolymerPipes ForHot and Cold WaterSupplies

Prince Pipes & F Firrings Pvt. Ltd. 132/1/1/3 , Athal Road, VillageAthal , Silvassa Dadra And Nagar Haveli- 396230

127. 3606354 09-02-2010

1417

1999

Gold andGoldAlloys , Jewellery/ Artefacts- Fineness and Marking

Ashpura Jewellers Shop No.6 , Janardan Arcade , Opp . Bank of Baroda, Main Road, Thane , Dahanu Road, Maharashtra -401602

128. 3607255 09-02-2010

4984

1995

HighDensity Polyethylene Pipes For Potable Water Supplies

Kitec Industries (India) Ltd. Survey No. 99/2- P. 8 Madhuban Indis Area , Madhuban Dam Road , Rakholi , Silvassa , Dadra And Nagar Haveli - 396230

129. 3606758 12-02-2010

2112

2003

Silver And Silver Alloys, Jewellery/ Artefacts-Fineness AndMarking

Suvarnaraj India Pvt . Ltd. 1 & 2/7 , Backbay View, 4th Floor, 3 -A, Mama Parmanand Marg , Mumbai , Maharashtra - 400004 6273 भारत का राजपत्र सितम्बर 3 , 2011/ भाद्र 12 , 1933

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

(6) ( 7 ) ( 8 ) ( 9 )

(5)

(2)

(4)

(3)

(1)

1999

1417

12-02-2010

130. 3606657

Gold and GoldAlloys ,

Jewellery/Artefacts-

Fineness and Marking

Suvarnaraj India Pvt. Ltd. 1 & 2/7 , BackbayView,. 4th Floor, 3 -A, Mama Parmanand Marg, Mumbai , Maharashtra- 400004

1999

1417

12-02-2010

131. 3606960

Gold and GoldAlloys ,

136.

Electrical Installations : Part 3 Rigid Plain Conduits of Insulating Materials Superseding IS : 2509)

Mega Plast Chalta No. 71 , Sheet No. 30, Amit Industrial Area, Bhauji Nagar, Vithal Wadi , Rly. Station Road, Near New India Saw Mill , Ulhasnagar Maharashtra -421003

2006

3196

02-03-2010

3612046

137.

Confidence Petroleum India Ltd. Unit- II Survey No. 34/1 , 34/2 , VillagePaud, Raigarh, Khalapur Maharashtra - 410207

Welded Low Carbon Steel Cylinders Exceeding 5 Litre WaterCapacity for Low Pressure Liquefiable Gases- Part1: Cylinders for Liquefied Petroleum Gases (LPG) 6274

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 3 , 2011 /BHADRA 12, 1933

(1 ) (2) (3)

(4)

138. 3613048 08-03-2010 Vijay Sabre Safety Pvt. Ltd. Plot No. 35, Chandivali Village , Off. Saki Vihar Road, Andheri (East) Mumbai , Maharashtra-400072 139. 3613553 09-03-2010 Krishna Jewellers Shop No. 25, Prabhakar Naik Shopping Complex , Opp . Bhaji Market, Thane, Wada , Maharashtra -421303 140. 3614454 10-03-2010 Maple Moulding Pvt . Ltd. M.S.S.I.C. Plot No. 24, Wood Base Industrial Complex , VillageGandhre, Thane , Wada, Maharashtra -421303 141. 3616054 17-03-2010 Sanguine Industries Office No. 20, 1st Floor , Parekh Market, 39 JSS Road, Opera House , Maharashtra - 400004 142. 3617561 25-03-2010 Asian Plywood GateNo. 214, Village Shivle, Taluka Murbad , Dist . Thane , Maharashtra -421301 143. 3619262 31-03-2010 Mishrilal Saraf H. No. 2/3151/1 , SarafBazar , Gandhi Chowk , Jalgaon Bhusaval , Maharashtra - 425201 144. 3619363 31-03-2010 Radheyshyam Mishrilal Saraf & Sons H. No. 2/3151/1 , C.S. No. 1343 SarafDazar, Gandhi Chowk, Jalgaon Bhusaval, Maharashtra -425201 145. 3619666 31-03-2010 R.R. Raikar Jewellers ClovisDcosta Road , Near M.G. Market , North Goa, Margoa Goa-403601

[PART II -SEC . 3( ii)!

(5)

(6) (7) (8 ) ( 9 )

2925

1984

Industrial Safely Helmets

1417

1999

Gold andGoldAlloys , Jewellery/Artefacts Fineness And Marking

303

1989

Plywood for General Purposes

1417

1999

Gold andGoldAlloys , Jewellery/Arefacts Fineness And Marking

303

1989

Plywood for General Purposes

1417

1999

Gold andGoldAlloys , Jewellery/Artefacts Fineness And Marking

1417

1999

Gold and GoldAlloys , Jewellery/Artefacts Fineness And Marking

1417

1999

Gold andGold Alloys , Jewellery/Artefacts Fineness And Marking

[ No. CMD/13 ; 11 ] Dr. S. L. PALKAR, Director & Head ( MDM - II ) 6275 भारत का राजपत्र: सितम्बर 3 , 2011 / भाद्र 12 , 1933

| भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

कोयला मंत्रालय

आदेश

नई दिल्ली, 26 अगस्त, 2011

का.आ. 2347.-कोयला धारक क्षेत्र ( अर्जन और विकास ) अधिनियम , 1957 ( 1957 का 20 ) ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त अधिनियम कहा गया है ) की धारा 9 की उप - धारा ( 1 ) के अधीन जारी की गई भारत सरकार के कोयला मंत्रालय की अधिसूचना संख्यांक का.आ. 582 तारीख 18 फरवरी , 2011 जो भारत के राजपत्र के भाग II , खण्ड-3 , उप- खण्ड ( ii ) तारीख 26 फरवरी , 2011 में प्रकाशित होने पर उक्त अधिसूचना से संलग्न अनुसूची में वर्णित भूमि और भूमि में , या उस पर के सभी अधिकार, ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त भूमि कहा गया है ) उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 10 की उप - धारा ( 1 ) के अधीन , सभी विल्लंगमों से मुक्त होकर, आत्यांतिक रूप से केन्द्रीय सरकार में निहित हो गए थे । और केन्द्रीय सरकार को यह समाधान हो गया है कि साउथ ईस्टर्न कोलफील्ड्स लिमिटेड , सीपत रोड, डाकघर संख्या 60 , जिला-बिलासपुर-495 006 ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त सरकारी कंपनी कहा गया है ) ऐसे निबंधनों और शर्तों का , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार इस निमित्त अधिरोपित करना उचित समझे , अनुपालन करने के लिए तैयार है ;

अतः , अब , केन्द्रीय सरकार , कोयला धारक क्षेत्र ( अधिग्रहण और विकास ) अधिनियम , 1957 की धारा 11 की उप - धारा ( 1 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए , यह निदेश देती है कि इस प्रकार निहित उक्त 45.996 हेक्टर ( लगभग ) भूमि और उस पर के सभी अधिकार , तारीख 26 फरवरी , 2011 से केन्द्रीय सरकार में इस प्रकार निहित बने रहने की बजाए , निम्नलिखित निबंधनों और शर्तों के अधीन रहते हुए , उक्त सरकारी कंपनी में निहित हो जाएंगे , अर्थात्:-

1. उक्त सरकारी कंपनी , उक्त अधिनियम के उपबंधों के अधीन यथा अवधारित प्रतिकर , ब्याज , नुकसान और वैसी ही मदों की बाबत किए गये सभी संदायों की केन्द्रीय सरकार को प्रतिपूर्ति करेगी ;

2. उक्त सरकारी कंपनी द्वारा शर्त ( 1 ) के अधीन , केन्द्रीय सरकार को संदेय रकमों का अवधारण करने के प्रयोजन के लिए एक अधिकरण का गठन किया जाएगा तथा ऐसे किसी अधिकरण और ऐसे अधिकरण की सहायता करने के लिए नियुक्त व्यक्तियों के संबंध में उपगत सभी व्यय , उक्त कंपनी द्वारा वहन किये जायेंगे और इसी प्रकार निहित उक्त भूमि में या उस पर के अधिकार के लिये या उसके संबंध में जैसे अपील आदि सभी विधिक कार्यवाहियों की बाबत उपगत , सभी व्यय भी, इसी प्रकार उक्त सरकारी कंपनी द्वारा वहन किये जाएंगे ;

.. 3. उक्त सरकारी कंपनी , केन्द्रीय सरकार या उसके पदाधारियों की , ऐसे किसी अन्य व्यय के संबंध में, क्षतिपूर्ति करेगी , जो इस प्रकार निहित उक्त भूमि में या उस पर के अधिकारों के बारे में , केन्द्रीय सरकार या उसके पदधारियों द्वारा या उनके विरूद्ध किन्हीं कार्यवाहियों के संबंध में आवश्यक हो;

4. उक्त सरकारी कंपनी को , केन्द्रीय सरकार के पूर्व अनुमोदन के बिना , उक्त भूमि और भूमि में या उसके ऊपर इस प्रकार निहित अधिकार को किसी अन्य व्यक्ति को अंतरित करने की शक्ति नहीं होगी और

5. उक्त सरकारी कंपनी , ऐसे निदेशों और शताँ का , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार द्वारा , जब कभी आवश्यक हो , उक्त भूमि के विशिष्ट क्षेत्रों के लिये दिए जाएं या अधिरोपित की जाए , पालन करेगी ।

[फा. सं. 43015/20/2009- पी आर आई डब्ल्यू-1 ] एस. सी. भाटिया , निदेशक

MINISTRY OF COAL

ORDER

New Delhi , the 26th August, 2011

S.O. 2347.- Whereas , on the publication of the notification of the Government of India in the Ministry of Coal number S.O. 582, dated the 18th February, 2011 published in the Gazette of India, Part - II , Section -3 , Sub - section ( ii ) dated the 26th February, 2011 , issued under sub -section (1 ) of Section 9 ofthe Coal Bearing Areas (Acquisition and Development ) Act, 1957 (20 of 1957) , (hereinafter referred to as the said Act) , the lands and all rights in or over the land described in the Schedule appended to the said notification (hereinafter referred to as the said land) vested absolutely in the Central Government free from all encumbrances under sub- section (1 ) of Section 10 of the saidAct;

Andwhereas, the Central Government is satisfied that the South Eastern Coalfields Limited , Seepat Road, Post Box number 60, District Bilaspur-495 006 (hereinafter referred to as the Government Company) is willing to comply with such terms and conditions as the Central Government thinks fit to impose in this behalf;

Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub - section ( 1 ) of Section 11 of the Coal Bearing Areas (Acquisition and Development ) Act, 1957, the Central Government hereby directs that the said lands measuring 45.996 hectares (approximately) and all rights in or over the said lands so vested shall with effect from the 26th February, 2011 , instead ofcontinuing to so vest in the Central Government , shall vest in the Government Company, subject to the following terms and conditions , namely:-

3202GI /11-11 6276

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 3 , 2011 /BHADRA 12 , 1933

[PART II- SEC . 3 (ii ) ] 1. The saidGovernment Company shall reimburse to the Central Government all payments made in respect of compensation, interest, damages and the like , as determined under the provisions of the said Act ;

2. ATribunal shall be constituted for the purpose of determining the amounts payable to the Central Government by the saidGovernment Company under conditions ( 1 ) and all expenditure incurred in connection with any such tribunal and persons appointed to assist the tribunal shall be borne by the Government Company and similarly, all expenditure incurred in respect ofall legal proceedings like appeals , etc. for or in connection with the rights , in or over the said lands , so vested, shall also be borne by the Government Company ;

3. The said Government Company shall indemnify the Central Government or its officials against any other exponditune that may be necessary in connection with any proceedings by or against the Central Government or its officials regarding the rights in or over the said lands so vested ;

4. Thesaid Government Company shall have no power to transfer the said land to any other persons without the previous approval ofthe Central Government ; and

5. The said Government Company shall abide by such direction and conditions as may be given or imposed by the Central Government for particular areas of the said land, as and when necessary.

[F. No.43015/20/2009 - PRIW-I ] S. C. BHATIA, Director

आदेश

नई दिल्ली, 29 अगस्त , 2011

वा. अङ्ग, 2348. कोयला धारक क्षेत्र ( अर्जन और विकास ) अधिनियम , 1957 ( 1957 का 20 ) ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त अधिनियम कहा गया है ) की धारा 9 की उप- धारा ( 1 ) के अधीन जारी भारत सरकार के कोयला मंत्रालय की अधिसूचना संख्यांक का.आ. 3031 तारीखा 28 अक्तूबर, 2009 को भारत के राजपत्र , भाग II , खण्ड-3 , उप- खण्ड ( ii ) तारीख 7 नवम्बर , 2009 में प्रकाशित होने पर उक्त अधिसूखना से संलग्न अनुसूची में वर्णित भूमि ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त भूमि कहा गया है ) में खनिज के खनन , खदान, बोर करने , उनकी खुदाई करने और खनिजों को तलाश करने , उन्हें प्राप्त करने , उन पर कार्य करने और उन्हें ले जाने के लिए अधिकार उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 10 की उमधारा ( 1 ) के अधीन , सभी विल्लंगमों से मुक्त होकर, आत्यांतिक रूप से केन्द्रीय सरकार में निहित हो गए ;

और केन्द्रीय सरकार का समाधान हो गया है कि वेस्टर्न कोलफील्ड्स लिमिटेड, नागपुर ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् सरकारी कंपनी कहा गया है ) ऐसे निबंधनों और शतों का, जिन्हे केन्द्रीय सरकार इस निमित्त अधिरोपित करना अचित समझे, अनुपालन करने के लिए तैयार है ;

अतः , अब , केन्द्रीय सरकार, उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 11 की उप - धारा ( 1 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए, यह निदेश देती है कि इस प्रकार निहित उक्त भूमि में और उस पर के पूर्वोक्त अधिकार , केन्द्रीय सरकार में इस प्रकार निहित बने रहने की बजाए , तारीख 7 नवम्बर, 2009 से निम्नलिखित निबंधनों और शर्तों के अधीन रहते हुए , सरकारी कंपनी में निहित हो जाएंगे , अर्थात्:-

1. सरकारी कंपनी , उक्त अधिनियम के उपबंधों के अधीन यथा अवधारित प्रतिकर, ब्याज , नुकसानों और वैसी ही मदों की बाबत किए गये सभी संदायों की केन्द्रीय सरकार को प्रतिपूर्ति करेगी ;

2. सरकारी कंपनी द्वारा शर्त ( 1 ) के अधीन केन्द्रीय सरकार को संदेय रकमों का अवधारण करने के प्रयोजन के लिए एक अधिकरण का गठन किया जाएगा तथाः ऐसे किसी अधिकरण और ऐसे अधिकरण की सहायता करने के लिए नियुक्त व्यक्तियों के संबंध में उपगत सभी व्यय , सरकारी कंपनी द्वास वहन किये जायेंगे और इसी प्रकार निहित उक्त भूमि में या उस पर के अधिकारों के लिए या उनके संबंध में अपील आदि सभी विधिक कार्यवाहियों की बाबत उपगत, सभी व्यय भी , इस प्रकार सरकारी कंपनी द्वारा वहन किए जाएंगे ;

3. सरकारी कंपनी , केन्द्रीय सरकार या उसके पदधारियों की , ऐसे किसी अन्य व्यय के संबंध में क्षतिपूर्ति करेगी, जो इस प्रकार निहित उक्त भूमि में था उस पर के पूर्वोक्त अधिकारों के बारे में, केन्द्रीय सरकार या उसके पदधारियों द्वारा या उनके विरूद्ध किन्हीं कार्यवाहियों के संबंध में आवश्यक हो ;

4. सरकारी कंपनी को, केन्द्रीय सरकार के पूर्व अनुमोदन के बिना , उक्त भूमि में पूर्वोक्त अधिकारों को किसी अन्य व्यक्ति को अंतरित करने की शक्ति नहीं होगी और

5. सरकारी कंपनी, पेसे निर्देशों और शतों का जो केन्द्रीय सरकार द्वारा , जब कभी आवश्यक हो , उक्त भूमि के विशिष्ट क्षेत्रों के लिए विए जाएं या अधिसेपित किए जाएं पालन करेगी ।

[फा. सं. 43015/1/2005-पी आर आई डब्ल्यू-1 ]

एस. सी. भाटिया, निदेशक

ORDER 6277 भारत का राजपत्र: सिप्तम्बर 3 , 2011 / भाद्र 12 , 1933

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

New Delhi , the 29th August , 2011

S.O. 2348.-Whereas , on the publication of the notification of the Government of India in the Ministry of Coal number S.O. 3031 , dated the 28th October , 2009 , in Part - II , Section- 3 , Sub- section ( ii ) of Gazette of India , dated the 7th November, 2009, issued under sub- section ( 1 ) of Section 9 of the Coal Bearing Areas (Acquisition and Development) Act, 1957 ( 20 of 1957), (hereinafter referrred to as the said Act) , the rights to mine quarry, bore dig and search for win, work and carry away minerals in the lands described in the Schedule appended to the said notification (hereinafter referredto as the said land) vested absolutely in the Central Government free from all encumbrances under sub - section ( 1 ) ofSection 10 of the said Act;

And whereas , the Central Government is satisfied that the Western Coalfields Limited, Nagpur ( hereinafter referred to as the Government Company ) is willing to comply with such terms and conditions as the Central Government thinks fit to impose in this behalf;

Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub- section ( 1 ) of Section 11 of the said Act, the Central Government hereby directs that the aforesaid rights in or over the said land so vested shall with effect from 7thNovember, 2009 instead of continuing to so vest in the Central Government, vest in the Government Company, subject to the following terms and conditions , namely :--

1. The Government Company shall reimburse to the Central Government all payments made in respect of compensation, interest , damages and the like , as determined under the provisions of the said Act;

2. A Tribunal shall be constituted for the purpose ofdetermining the amounts payable to the Central Government by the said Government Company under conditions ( 1 ) and all expenditure incurred in connection with any such tribunal and persons appointed to assist the tribunal shall be borne by the said Government Company and similarly, all expenditure incurred in respect of all legal proceedings like appeals , etc. for or in connection with the rights , in or over the said lands , so vested, shall also be borne by the Government Company;

3. The Government Company shall indemnify the Central Government or its officials against any other expenditure that may be necessary in connection with any proceedings by or against the Central Government or its officials regarding the aforesaid rights in the said lands so vested ;

4. The Government Company shall have no power to transfer the aforesaid rights in the said lands so vested to any other persons without the prior approval of the Central Government ; and

5. The Government Company shall abide by such direction and conditions as may be given or imposed by the Central Government for particular areas of the said land , as and when necessary.

[F. No. 43015/1/2005 - PRIW- I ] S. C. BHATIA , Director

नई दिल्ली , 29 अगस्त, 2011

का.आ. 2349. केन्द्रीय सरकार को यह प्रतीत होता है कि इससे उपाबद्ध अनुसूची में उल्लिखित भूमि में कोयला अभिप्राप्त किए जाने की संभावना है ;

उक्त अनुसूची में विहित भूमि के अंतर्गत आने वाले क्षेत्र के ब्यौरे रेखांक संख्या एसईसीएल/बीएसपी/जीएम ( पीएलजी )/ भूमि/403 तारीख 17 मार्च , 2011 का निरीक्षण कलेक्टर, उमरिया ( मध्य प्रदेश ) के कार्यालय में या कोयला नियंत्रक , 1 , कांउसिल हाऊस स्ट्रीट, कोलकाता- 700001 के कार्यालय में या साऊथ ईस्टर्न कोलफील्ड्स लिमिटेड ( राजस्व अनुभाग ) सीपत रोड , बिलासपुर -495006 (छत्तीसगढ़ ) के कार्यालय में किया जा सकता है ।

अतः अब, केन्द्रीय सरकार कोयला धारक क्षेत्र ( अर्जन और विकास ) अधिनियम , 1957 ( 1957 का 20 ) ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त अधिनियम कहा गया है ) की धारा 4 की उपधारा ( 1 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए, उक्त अनुसूची में वर्णित भूमि से कोयले का पूर्वेक्षण करने के अपने आशय की सूचना देती है ;

उक्त अनुसूची में विहित भूमि में हितबद्ध कोई व्यक्ति-

( i ) संपूर्ण भूमि या उसके किसी भाग के अर्जन या ऐसी भूमि में या उस पर के किन्हीं अधिकारों के प्रति आक्षेप कर सकेगा; या ( ii ) भूमि में के किसी हित के प्रतिकर या ऐसी भूमि में या उस पर के किन्हीं अधिकारों का दावा कर सकेगा; या

( iii ) प्रभावहीन हो गई पूर्वेक्षण अनुज्ञप्तियों, खनन पट्टों के अधीन अर्जित किये जाने पर अधिकारों के लिए प्रतिकर प्राप्त कर सकेगा और उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 13 की उपधारा ( 7 ) में निर्दिष्ट भूमि के कोरों से संग्रहण या अन्य खनिज नमूनों तथा उनके सम्यक्विश्लेषण को तथा किसी अन्य सुसंगत अभिलेख या सामग्रियों की निर्मित से संबंधित सभी मानचित्र चार्ट और अन्य दस्तावेज 6278

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: SEPTEMBER 3 , 2011 /BHADRA 12, 1933

[PART II-SEC. 3 (ii) ] परिदत्त कर सकेगा ।

इस अधिसूचना के राजपत्र में प्रकाशन की तारीख से नब्बे दिन के भीतर , भारसाधक अधिकारी या विभागाध्यक्ष ( राजस्व ) साऊथ ईस्टर्न कोलफील्ड्स लिमिटेड, सीपत रोड, बिलासपुर-495006 ( छत्तीसगढ़ ) को भेजेंगे ।

अनुसूची

पिनौरा डिपिलरिंग ब्लाक फेज- II

जोहिला क्षेत्र

जिला-उमरिया ( मध्य प्रदेश )

( रेखांक संख्या एसईसीएल/ बीएसपी/जीएम ( पीएलजी )/ भूमि/403 तारीख 17 मार्च , 2011 )

तहसील-नौरोजाबाद

जिला-उमरिया

ग्राम का नाम

क्षेत्रफल ( हेक्टर में )

टिप्पणियां क्रम सं.

जनरल संख्यांक

पटवारी हल्का

संख्यांक

6 1.

देवरी अमहाई

334

भाग 2.

पिनौरा

413

41.003

भाग

कुल:- 103,000 हेक्टर ( लगभग ) या 254.51 एकड़ ( लगभग ) सीमा वर्णन:

क-ख : रेखा ग्राम देवरी अमहाई - महुरा के सम्मिलित सीमा में बिन्दु ' क ' से आरंभ होती है और ग्राम देवरी अमहाई के मध्य भाग से होती हुई ग्राम पिनौरा में प्रवेश करती है और ग्राम पिनौरा के मध्य भाग से होती हुई बिन्दु ' ख ' पर मिलती है । ख - ग : रेखा ग्राम पिनौरा के पश्चिमी भाग से होती हुई ग्राम पिनौरा में बिन्दु ' ग ' पर मिलती है ।

ग - घ : रेखा ग्राम पिनौरा से होती हुई ग्राम देवरी अमहाई में प्रवेश करती है और ग्राम देवरी अमहाई के दक्षिणी भाग से होती हुई ग्राम देवरी अमहाई- महुरा के सम्मिलित सीमा में बिन्दु ' घ ' पर मिलती है ।

घ -क : रेखा ग्राम देवरी अमहाई - महुरा के भागतः सम्मिलित सीमा से होती हुई आरंभिक बिन्दु ' क ' पर मिलती है ।

[फा. सं. 43015/05/2011- पी.आर.आई.डब्ल्यू-1 ]

एस. सी. भाटिया, निदेशक

New Delhi , the 29th August , 2011

S. O. 2349. Whereas , it appears to the Central Government that Coal is likely to be obtained from the lands mentioned in the Schedule annexed hereto;

And whereas , the plan bearing number SECL/ BSP/ GM ( PLG )/Land/403 , dated the 17th March , 2011 containing details of the area of land described in the said Schedule may be inspected at the office of the Collector, Umaria (Madhya Pradesh ) or at the office of the Coal Controller , 1, Council House Street , Kolkata - 700001 or at the office of the South Eastern Coalfields Limited ( Revenue Section ) , Seepat Road, Bilaspur - 495006 ( Chhattisgarh);

Now, therefore , in exercise of the powers conferred by sub - section ( 1 ) of Section 4 of the Coal Bearing Areas (Acquisition and Development) Act , 1957 (20 of 1957 ) , (hereinafter referred to as the said Act ) , the Central Government hereby gives notice of its intention to prospect for coal from lands described in the said schedule:

6279 भारत का राजपत्र : सितम्बर 3 , 2011 / भाद्र 12, 1933

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii ) ]

Anypersons interested in the land described in the said Schedule may -

(i) Object to the acquisition of the whole or any part ofthe land, or of any rights in or over such land, or (ii) claim an interest in compensation ifthe land or any rights in or over such land, or

(iii) seek compensation for prospecting licences ceasing to have effect , rights under mining lease being acquired, and deliver all maps , charts,and other documents relating to the land, collection from the land of cores or other mineral samples and due analysis thereof and the preparation of any other relevant record or materials referred to in sub- section (7) of Section 13 of the saidAct .

to the Office- In- Charge or Head of the Department ( (Revenue) South Eastern Coalfields Limited , Seepat Road, Bilaspur- 495006 (Chhattisgarh ) ; within a period of ninety days from the date of publication of this notification in the Official Gazette.

SCHEDULE

PINOURA DEPILLARING BLOCK, Phase- Ind

JOHILLA AREA

DISTRICT- UMARIA (MADHYA PRADESH)

[Plan bearing number SECL/ BSP /GM (PLG)/Land/ 403 , dated the 17th March, 2011 ]

DISTRICT- UMARIA

TAHSIL- NOWROZABAD

Remarks

Area in hectares

Patwari Halka Number

General Number

Sl. No.

Name of Village

Part

61.997

334

DeoriAmhai

Part

41.003

413

Pinoura

2 .

TOTAL : 103.000 Hectares ( approximately) or 254.51 acres ( approximately ) BOUNDARY DESCRIPTION :

A-B Line starts from Point ' A' on the common boundary of village Mahura - Deori Amhai and passes through middle part of village Deori Amhai then enter and passes through middle part of village Pinoura and meets at Point 'B' .

B-C Line passes through western part of village Pinoura and meets at Point ' C' .

C-D Line passes through southern part of village Pinoura then enter and passes through southern part of village Deori Amhai and meets at Point ' D ' on the common boundary of villages Mahura -Deori Amhai .

D-A Line passes along partly common boundary of village Mahura -Deori Amhai and meets at starting Point 'A' .

[F. No. 43015 /05 / 2011 - PRIW- I ]

S. C. BHATIA , Director

नई दिल्ली , 29 अगस्त, 2011

का.आ. 2350.-केन्द्रीय सरकार को यह प्रतीत होता है, कि इससे उपाबद्ध अनुसूची में उल्लेखित परिक्षेत्र की भूमि में कोयला अभिप्राप्त होने की संभावना है ;

और उक्त अनुसूची में वर्णित भूमि के क्षेत्र के अंतर्विष्ट अतः अब इस असूिचना के अंतर्गत आने वाले रेखांक संख्या सी-1 ( ई ) III / एफएफआर/ 858-0511 तारीख 20 मई , 2011 का निरीक्षण वेस्टर्न कोलफील्ड्स लिमिटेड , ( राजस्व विभाग ) कोल इस्टेट , सिविल लाईन्स , नागपुर- 440001 ( महाराष्ट्र ) के कार्यालय में या मुख्य महाप्रबंधक ( एक्सप्लोरेशन प्रभाग ) , केन्द्रीय खान योजना एवं डिजाइन संस्थान , 6280

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 3 , 2011/BHADRA 12 , 1933

[ PART II- SEC . 3 ( ii ) ] गोंडवाना पॅलेस , कांके रोड, रांची 834 001 के कार्यालय में या कोयला नियंत्रक , 1 , कांउसिल हाउस स्ट्रीट , कोलकाता कार्यालय में या जिला कलेक्टर जिला - बैतूल ( मध्य प्रदेश ) के कार्यालय में किया जा सकता है ; 700 001 के अतः अब, केन्द्रीय सरकार कोयला धारक क्षेत्र ( अर्जन और विकास ) अधिनियम , 1957 ( 1957 का 20 ) ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त अधिनियम कहा गया है ) की धारा 4 की उपधारा ( 1 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए , इसमें कोयले का पूर्वेक्षण करने के अपने आशय की सूचना देती है ।.

उक्त अनुसूची में विहित भूमि में हितबद्ध कोई व्यक्ति-

( i ) संपूर्ण भूमि या उसके किसी भाग या ऐसी भूमि में या उसके ऊपर किसी अधिकार के अर्जन पर आक्षेप , या

( ii ) भूमि या ऐसी भूमि में या पर कोई अधिकार के प्रतिकर के हित के यदि कोई दावा , या

( iii ) खनन पट्टा अर्जन करने के अधीन अधिकारों की पूर्वेक्षण अनुज्ञप्ति प्रभावहीन हो जाने और भूमि संबंधी सभी नक्शे, चार्टों तथा अन्य दस्तावेज़ों का परिदान , अयस्कों या अन्य खनिजों के नमूनों का संग्रहण और उनका सम्यक् विश्लेषण करने के लिए तथा उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 13 की उपधारा ( 7 ) में निर्दिष्ट कोई अन्य सुसंगत अभिलेखों या सामग्रियों की तैयारी कि लिए प्रतिकर । इस अधिसूचना के राजपत्र में प्रकाशन की तारीख से नब्बे दिनों के भीतर , मुख्य महाप्रबंधक वेस्टर्न कोलफील्ड्स लिमिटेड , पाथाखेड़ा क्षेत्र , पोस्ट पाथाखेड़ा, तहसील घोड़ाडोंगरी , जिला बैतूल ( मध्य प्रदेश ) या महाप्रबंधक वेस्टर्न कोलफील्ड्स लिमिटेड , भूमि और राजस्व विभाग कोल ईस्टेट , सिविल लाईन्स, नागपुर -440 001 ( महाराष्ट्र ) को भेजेगा ।

अनुसूची

तावा - III अंडरग्राउंड माईन

पाथाखेड़ा क्षेत्र

जिला - बैतूल ( मध्य प्रदेश )

( ब्यौरे रेखांक संख्या सी-1 ( ई ) /III /एफएफआर /858-0511 तारीख 20 मई , 2011 )

"सभी अधिकार "

ग्राम का नाम

तहसील

क्रम सं.

कम्पार्टमेंट संख्या

पटवारी सर्किल संख्या

1. गांधीग्राम

174/2

घोडा- डोंगरी

"खनन अधिकार "

ग्राम का नाम

तहसील

क्रम सं.

कम्पार्टमेंट संख्या

पटवारी सर्किल संख्या

1. भोगई खापा

घोडा- डोंगरी

2. गांधीग्राम

घोडा- डोंगरी

3. गांधीग्राम

174/2 और ।।

घोडा- डोंगरी

जिला

क्षेत्रफल ( हेक्टर में )

टिप्पणियां

वन

निजी सरकारी

कुल

0.00 7.650 7.650

बैतूल 0.00

भाग कुल क्षेत्र : 7.650 हेक्टर ( लगभग )

या 18.903 एकड़ ( लगभग)

जिला

टिप्पणियां निजी

क्षेत्रफल ( हेक्टर में ) सरकारी वन

कुल

40.820 0.190 0.00 41.010 भाग बैतूल

11.601 3.639 0.00 15.240 भाग बैतूल

25.866

बैतूल 0.00 0.00

25.866 भाग कुल क्षेत्र : 82.116 हेक्टर ( लगभग )

या 202.908 एकड़ ( लगभग ) 6281 भारत का राजपत्र : सितम्बर 3 , 2011 / भाद्र 12 , 1933

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

"खनन अधिकार "

"सभी अधिकार " +

=कुल क्षेत्रफल

82.116

7.650

- 89.766 हेक्टर ( लगभग )

या

18.903

202-908

= 221.811 एकड़ ( लगभग )

सीमा वर्णन :

"सभी अधिकार "

क-ख -ग- घ-ड़-

च- छ- ज - क : रेखा बिन्दु ' क ' तावा एक्सटेंशन ब्लाक की अधिग्रहित विद्यमान खनन क्षेत्र से आरंभ होती है और बिन्दु ' ख'-' ग'-' घ'-' ड'-' च''छ '' ज' के पास से गुजरती हुई आरंभिक बिन्दु ' क ' पर मिलती है ।

"खनन अधिकार "

झ- अ- ट : रेखा बिन्दु ' झ ' ग्राम गांधीग्राम में तावा एक्सटेंशन ब्लाक क्षेत्र की विद्यमान सीमा से लगकर आरंभ होती है फिर बिन्दु ' ञ ' के पास से गुजरती हुई और ग्राम गांधीग्राम और ग्राम भोगई खापा की सम्मिलित ग्राम सीमा पर बिन्दु ' ट ' पर मिलती है ।

ट-ठ : रेखा विद्यमान पीकेडी- III ब्लाक की सीमा से लगकर गुजरती है और बिन्दु' ठ ' पर मिलती है ।

ठ-ड -ढ : रेखा ग्राम भोगई खापा से होकर गुजरती है फिर बिन्दु ' ड ' के पास से गुजरती हुई और ग्राम भोगई खापा और ग्राम गांधीग्राम की ग्राम सीमा पर बिन्दु ' ढ ' पर मिलती है ।

- झ : रेखा ग्राम गांधीग्राम से होकर गुजरती है फिर बिन्दु ' ण ' के पास से गुजरती हुई और आरंभिक बिन्दु ' झ' पर मिलती है । ढ- ण

[फा.सं. 43015/4/201। पीआरआईडब्ल्यू-1 ]

एस. सी. भाटिया , निदेशक New Delhi , the 29th August, 2011

S. O. 2350. Whereas , it appears to the Central Government that Coal is likely to be obtained from the lands in the locality mentioned in the Schedule annexed hereto;

And Whereas , the plan bearing number C - 1 ( E) III/FFR/ 858-0511 , dated the 20th May, 2011 containing ofthe areas of lands described in the said Schedule may be inspected at the office ofthe Western Coalfields limited ( Revenue Department ) , CoalEstate, Civil Lines , Nagpur - 440 001 (Maharashtra) or at the office of the Chief General Manager ( Exploration Division ), Central Mine Planning and Design Institute , Gondwana Palace , Kanke Road , Ranchi - 834 001 or at the office of the Coal Controller , 1 , Council House Street , Kolkata - 700001 or at the office of the District Collector . District -Betul ( Madhya Pradesh) ;

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

Any persons interested in the land described in the said Schedules may -

(i) Object to the acquisition of the whole or any part of the land , or of any rights in or over such land , or (ii) claim an interest in compensation if the land or any rights in or over such land , or

(iii) seek compensation for prospecting licences ceasing to have effect , rights under mining leases being acquired . and deliver all maps , charts and other documents relating to the land , collection from the land of cores or other mineral samples and due analysis thereof and the preparation of any other relevant record or materials referred to in sub- section (7 ) of Section 13 of the said Act .

tothe Office ofthe ChiefGeneral Manager , Western Coalfields Limited, Pathakhera Area , Post Pathakhera . Tahsil Ghoradongri , District - Betul (Madhya Pradesh) or General Manager, Western Coalfields Limited, Land and Revenue Department . Coal Estate , Civil Lines , Nagpur - 440 001 ( Maharashtra ) within ninety days from the date of publication of this notification in the Official Gazette .

6282

[PART II- SEC . 3 (ii)] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 3 , 2011 /BHADRA 12, 1933

SCHEDULE

TAWA- III UNDERGROUND MINE

PATHAKHERA AREA

DISTRICT- BETUL (MADHYA PRADESH)

[Plan bearing number C - 1 ( E) III/FFR/ 855-0511 , dated the 20th May, 2011 ]

"ALL RIGHTS "

District

Area

Remarks Name of

Patwari

Tahsil

Compart-

Sl. No.

Circle ment

(inhectares)

Village

Total Number Number

Ten . Govt. Forest

0.00 0.00 7.650

Part 78

174/2

Betul

7.650 1. Grandhigram

Ghora- dongri

Total area: 7.650 hectares (approximately)

or 18.903 acres ( approximately) "MINING RIGHTS "

Sl .

Patwari

Remarks

Tahsil District

Name of

Compart-

No.

ment

Area (inhectares)

Village

Number

Govt. Forest Total Circle Number

Ten.

40.820

0.00 41.010 Part

Betul

0.190

1. Bhogai Khapa

Ghora- dongri

Part 78

Betul

11.601 3.639 0.00 15.240 Gandhigram

Ghora- dongri

0.00 25.866 25.866

Betul 0.00

Part 2.

Gandhigram

174/2 & 11

Ghora- dongri

Total area : 82.116 hectares ( approximately )

or202.908 acres ( approximately) " ALL RIGHTS " + "MINING RIGHTS "

TOTAL AREA

82.116

7.650

89.766 hectares (approximately)

202.908

18.903

221.811 acres ( approximately)

BOUNDARY DESCRIPTION :

" ALL RIGHT "

A- B-C -D-E-

F-G-H- Line starts from Point ' A' on existing acquired mining rights of Tawa Extension Block and passes nearby Point A: 'B' - ' C ' - ' D ' - ' E ' - ' F ' - ' G ' - ' H ' and meets at starting Point 'A' .

"MINING RIGHTS "

I-J-K: Line startsfrom Point ' I ' along existing boundary line of Tawa Extension Block in village Gandhigram then passes nearby Point ' J ' and meets at Point ' K ' on common village boundary of villages Gandhigram and Bhogai Khapa.

6283 भारत का राजपत्र : सितम्बर 3 , 2011/ भाद्र 12 , 1933

[-भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

K-L: Line passes along boundary of existing PKD- III and meets at Point 'L' .

L-M -N : Line passes through village Bhogai Khapa then passes nearby Point ' M ' and meets at Point ' N ' on village boundary ofvillages Bhogai Khapa and Gandhigram .

N-O- I : Line passes through village Gandhigram then passes nearby Point ' O ' and meets at starting Point ' I' .

[F. No. 43015 /4/2011 - PRIW- I ] S. C. BHATIA, Director

नई दिल्ली, 29 अगस्त, 2011

का.आ. 2351.-केन्द्रीय सरकार , ने कोयला धारक क्षेत्र ( अर्जन और विकास ) अधिनियम , 1957 ( 1957 का 20 ) ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त अधिनियम कहा गया है ) की धारा7 कीउप - धारा ( 1 ) के अधीन जारी भारत सरकार के कोयला मंत्रालय की अधिसूचना संख्या का.आ. 1584 तारीख 21 जून , 2010 द्वारा जो भारत के राजपत्र भाग II , खण्ड-3 , उप- खण्ड ( ii ) तारीख 26 जून , 2010 में प्रकाशित की गई थी , उस अधिसूचना से उपाबद्ध अनुसूची में यथा विनिर्दिष्ट अवस्थापन में ऐसी भूमि में , या उस पर के सभी अधिकारों के अर्जन करने के अपने आशय की सूचना दी थी ;

और सक्षम प्राधिकारी ने उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 8 के अनुसरण में केन्द्रीय सरकार को अपनी रिपोर्ट दे दी है ;

और केन्द्रीय सरकार का, पूर्वोक्त रिपोर्ट पर विचार करने के पश्चात् और महाराष्ट्र सरकार से परामर्श करने के पश्चात् यह समाधान हो गया है कि इसे संलग्न अनुसूची में यथा वर्णित 692.18 हेक्टर ( लगभग ) या 1710: 37 एकड़ ( लगभग ) माप वाली भूमि और ऐसी भूमि में या उस पर के सभी अधिकार अर्जित किए जाने चाहिए ;

अतः अब केन्द्रीय सरकार , कोयला धारक क्षेत्र ( अर्जन और विकास ) अधिनियम , 1957 ( 1957 का 20 ) की धारा 9 की उप - धारा ( 1 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए यह घोषणा करती है कि अनुसूची में वर्णित 692.18 हेक्टर ( लगभग ) या 1710.37 एकड़ ( लगभग ) माप वाली भूमि में या उस पर के सभी अधिकार अर्जित किए जाते हैं ।

इस अधिसूचना के अन्तर्गत आने वाले क्षेत्र के रेखांक संख्या सी -1 ( ई ) /III /जेजेएनआर/ 844-1110 , तारीख 24 नवम्बर, 2010 का निरीक्षण कलेक्टर , यवतमाल ( महाराष्ट्र ) के कार्यालय में या कोयला नियंत्रक , 1 , कांउसिल हाउस स्ट्रीट , कोलकाता ( पिन-700001 के कार्यालय में या महाप्रबंधक वेस्टर्न कोलफील्ड्स लिमिटेड ( राजस्व विभाग ) , कोल एस्टेट , सिविल लाइन्स, नागपुर -440001 ( महाराष्ट्र) के कार्यालय में किया जा सकता है ।

अनुसूची

कोलार पिंपरी एक्सटेंशन ओपनकास्ट ब्लॉक

वणी नार्थ एरिया

जिला- यवतमाल ( महाराष्ट्र)

[रेखांक संख्या सी-1 ( ई ) / III/जेजेएनआर/ 844-1110 , तारीख 24 नवम्बर , 2010 ]

सभी अधिकार :

'भाग -क'

टिप्पणियां

जिला (क्षेत्रफल हेक्टर में)

तहसील

ग्राम का नाम

क्रम सं.

पटवारी सर्किल संख्या

भाग

130.00

यवतमाल

वणी

कोलेरा

भाग

125.00

यवतमाल

वणी

कोना

भाग

298.00

यवतमाल

वणी

ब्राहमणी

कुल : - 553.00 हेक्टर ( लगभग ) या 1366.46 एकड़ ( लगभग )

3202GI/11-12 6284

सभी अधिकार :

ग्राम का नाम

क्रम सं.

पटवारी सर्किल. संख्या 1

3 1.

नोकरी

कार :

ग्राम का नाम

सं

पटवारी सर्किल संख्या 1

3 1.

गोवारी

31 सभी अधिकार :

ग्राम का नाम

क्रम सं

पटवारी सर्किल संख्या 2

3 1.

गोवारी

31 2.

पिपरी

32 3.

आगासी

32 कुल क्षेत्र ( सभी अधिकार ) :

+ 'भाग -क'

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 3, 2011 /BHADRA 12, 1933

[PART II-SEC. 3( ii) ] 'भाग

तहसील जिला क्षेत्रफल हेक्टर में

टिप्पणयां 4

7 वणी

यवतमाल 1.75

भाग कुल:- 1.75 हेक्टर ( लगभग ) या 4.32 एकड़ ( लगभग )

'भाग -ग'

तहसील जिला (क्षेत्रफल हेक्टर में )

टिप्पणयां 4

7 वणी

यवतमाल 14.50

भाग कुल :- 14.50 हेक्टर ( लगभग ) या 35.83 एकड़ ( लगभग )

'भाग -घ'

तहसील

जिला

टिप्पणयां

( क्षेत्रफल हेक्टर में )

7 वणी

41.77

यवतमाल

भाग वणी

यवतमाल 1.16

भाग वणी

80.00

यवतमाल

भाग कुल: - 122.93 हेक्टर ( लगभग ) या 303.76 एकड़ ( लगभग )

'भाग-ग'+

'भाग -ख'

553.00

1.75

या

1366.46

4.32

+ ग्राम में अर्जित किए गए प्लॉट संख्यांक:

'भाग-घ' = कुल क्षेत्रफल

14.50

122.93

692-18 हेक्टर ( लगभग ) 35.83

303.76 =

1710.37 एकड़ ( लगभग) 6285 भारत का राजपत्र: सितम्बर 3 , 2011 / भाद्र 12 , 1933

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3(ii) ]

'भाग -क'

ग्राम कोलेरा में अर्जित किए गए प्लॉट संख्यांक:

124/1 , 124/2 , 130/1 , 130/2 , 131 , 132, 133 , 134/1 , 134/2 , 134/3 , 134/4 , 135 , 136 , 137/1 , 137/2 , 138 , 139/1 , 139/2 , 140, 141 , 142, 143 , 144/1 , 144/2 , 145/1 , 145/2 , 145/3 , 146 , 147 148 , 149/1 , 149/2 , 150, 151/1 , 151/2 , 152 , 156/1 , 156/2 , 157158 , 159 , 160 , सरकारी सड़क , 163 , 164 , 165 , 166, 167 , 168/1 , 168/2 , 169 , 170/1 , 170/2 , 171/1 , 171 / 1 क , 171/2 , 171 /3 क , 171/3ख , 171/4 , 172/1 , 172/2 , 172/ 3 क , 172/3ख , 172/3 ग, 173/1, 173/2 , 174/1 , 174/2 , 175 1

ग्राम कोना में अर्जित किए गए प्लॉट संख्यांक:

94, 95, 96 , 97 , 98 , 99 , 100, 101 , 102 , 103 , 104/1 , 104/2 , 105 , 106 , 107 , 108/1 , 108/2 , 112/1 , 112/2 , 112/3 , 113 , 114 , 115 , 116/1 , 116/2, 117/1 , 117/2क , 117/2 ख , 118/1 , 118 /2 क , 118/ 2ख , 119/1 , 119/2 , 120 , 121/1 , 121/2 , 122 , 123 , 124 , 125/1क , 125/ 1 ख , 125/2 क , 125/ 2 ख , 126/1 , 126/2 , 136/1 , 136/2 , 136/3 , 137/1 , 137/2 , 141 , 142 , 143 , 144, 145 , 146 , 147/1 , 147/2 , 148/1 , 148/2 , 148/3 , 149 , 150 , 151 , 152 , 153 , 154 , 155 , 159 , 160/1 , 160/2 , 160/3 , 172/1 , 172/2 , सरकारी सड़क । ग्राम ब्राहमणी में अर्जित किए गए प्लॉट संख्यांक:

1 , 2, 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16, 17 , 18,19 , 20/1 , 20/2 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 , 25 , 26 , 27 , 28 , 29, 30 , 31 , 32 , 33 , 34 , 35 , 36 , 37 , 38 , 39/1 , 39/2, 40 , 41 , 42, 43 , 44, 45, 46, 47 , 48 , 49 , 50 , 51 , 52 , 53 , 54 , 55/ 1 क , 55/1 ख , 55/2 , 55/3, 55/4 , 56/1 , 56/2 , 56/3 , 56/4 , 57/1 , 57/2 , 57/3 , 58/1 , 58/2 , 58/3 , 59, 60 , 61 , 62 , 63 , 64 , 65/1 , 65/2 , 65/3 , 66 , 67 , 72 , 73, 74 , 75 , 76 , 77 , 78 , 79/ 1 क , 79/ 1 ख , 79/2, 80, 81 , 82 , 83 , 84 , 85 , 86 , 87 , 88 , 89 , 90 , 91 , 92/1 , 92/2 , 92/3 , 93 , 94 , 95/1 , 95/2, 96, 97/1 , 97/2 , 98 /1 क , 98/ 1 ख , 98/2, 99 , 100 , 101 , 102 , 103 , 104, 105 , 106, 107, 108 , 109 , 110 , 111 , 112, 113 , 114/1 , 114/2 , 115 , 116 , 117, 118 , 119 , 120 , 121 , 122 , 123/1 , 123/2 , 124 , 125 , 126 , 127 , 128 , 129 , 130 , 131 , 132 , 133 , 134, 135 , 136 , 137 , 138 , 139 , 140 , 141 , 142 , 143 ,144 , 145 , सरकारी सड़क ।

'भाग-ख'

ग्राम गोवारी में अर्जित किए गए प्लॉट संख्यांक:

'भाग-ग'

ग्राम गोवारी में अर्जित किए गए प्लॉट संख्यांक:

1 , 2, 3 , 4 , सरकारी आबादी , 5/1 , 5/2 , 5/3 , 150 , 151 , 152 1

'भाग -घ'

ग्राम गोवारी में अर्जित किए गए प्लॉट संख्यांक:

9/1 , 9/2 , 10/1 , 10/2 , 10/3 , 11/1 , 11/2 , 12/1 , 12/ 1 क, 12/2, 13/1 , 13/2 , 13/3 , 14/1 , 14/2 , 14/3 , 15 , 16 , 17/1 , 17/ 1 क, 17/2 , 18/1 , 18/2 , 23 , 24 , 28 1

ग्राम पिंपरी में अर्जित किए गए प्लॉट संख्यांक:

3, 5/1 , 5/2 1

ग्राम आगासी में अर्जित किए गए प्लॉट संख्यांक :

1/3, 1 /4क 1 /4ख , 1/4 , 1/4 , 1/5, 2/1 , 2/2, 2/2 , 2/2ख , 2/3 , 2/4 , 2/4का , 2/4ख , 2/4 , 2/4घ , 3/1 , 3/2 , 3/3 , 4/1 , 4/2 , 4/3, 4/3क, 4/4, 5/1 , 5/2 , 6/1 , 6/ 1क , 6/2, 6/3 ,6/4, 6/4क, 7/2, 7/2क , 7/3 , 7/3 क , 7/4, 8/1 , 8/1 क, 8/2 , 9 , 10/1 , 10/ 1 क , 10/2 , 10/3 , 10/4 , 10/5 , 11/1 , 11/2 , 12/1 , 12/2 , 12/2 क , 12/3 , 12/4 , 12/5 , 13 / 1 क, 13 / 1 ख , 13 / 1 ग , 13/2, 13/3 , 13/4 , 14 , सरकारी । सीमा वर्णन:

'भाग- क'

क-ख-ग- घ- 6286

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 3 , 2011 /BHADRA 12, 1933

[ PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii) ] -ड. -च-छ : रेखा ग्राम कोलेरा में बिन्दु ' क ' से आरंभ होती है और बिन्दु ' ख ' ' ग' -' घ '-' ड़ ' के पास से गुजरती हुई प्लॉट संख्यांक 175 , 173/1 , 173/2 , 171/1 , 163 , 160 ( सरकारी ) , की बाह्य सीमा से लगकर गुजरती है फिर सड़क से लगकर गुजरती है , सड़क पार करती है फिर प्लॉट संख्यांक 156 , 150 , 151/1 , 151/2 , 152 , 132 , 131 , 130/2 , 130/1 की बाह्य सीमा से लगकर गुजरती है और बिन्दु ' छ ' पर मिलती है ।

छ-ज-झ : रेखा ग्राम कोलेरा से होकर प्लॉट संख्यांक 130/1 , 134/2 , 134/4 , 124/1 , 124/2 की बाह्य सीमा से लगकर गुजरती है फिर ग्राम कोलेरा और ग्राम ब्राह्मणी की सम्मिलित ग्राम सीमा को पार करती है और ग्राम ब्राहमणी से होकर प्लॉट संख्यांक 141 , 143, 144 , 145 की बाह्य सीमा से लगकर गुजरती है फिर सड़क पार करती है फिर प्लॉट संख्यांक 133 , 132 , 131 , 130 , 129 , 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 15 की बाह्य सीमा से गुजरती है फिर बिन्दु ' ज ' के पास से लगकर गुजरती हुई प्लॉट संख्यांक 16 , 17 , 19 , 37/2 , 37/1 , 38 , 42 , 43 , 44 ,45 ,46 ,47 ,48 की बाह्य सीमा से लगकर गुजरती है और ग्राम ब्राहमणी , कोना एवं ग्राम निलापुर के तिराहे पर बिन्दु ' झ ' पर मिलती है ।

झ-ज-ट-

ठ-ड : रेखा ग्राम कोना से होकर बिन्दु ' ञ ' ' ट' -' ठ ' के पास से गुजरती हुई प्लॉट संख्यांक 119, 120, 121 , 124 , 125/2 , 125/1 , 126/2 , 126/1 , 136 , 137/2 , 137/1 , 141 , 155 , 159 , 160/1 , 160/2 , 160/3 , 153 , 152 , 150 , 172/2 , 172/1 , 97 , 96 , 95,94 की बाह्य सीमा से लगकर गुजरती है फिर बिन्दु ' ड ' पर मिलती है ।

ड-ढ़-क: रेखा ग्राम कोना से होकर बिन्दु ' ढ ' के पास से गुजरती हुई प्लॉट संख्यांक 94 , 108/1 , 108 , 113 , 112/3 , 112/2 , 112/1 की बाह्य सीमा से लगकर गुजरती है फिर ग्राम कोना और ग्राम ब्राहमणी की सम्मिलित ग्रः सीमा को पार करती है फिर ग्राम ब्राहमणी से होकर प्लॉट संख्यांक 58/3 , 59 , 60 , 61 , 62 ,63 , 67 , 72 की बाह्य सीमासेकर गुजरती है फिर ग्राम ब्राहमणी और ग्राम कोलेरा की सम्मिलित ग्राम सीमा को पार करती है फिर ग्राम कोलेरा की सम्मिलित ग्राम सीमा को पार करती है फिर ग्राम कोलेरा से होकर प्लॉट संख्या 175 की बाह्य सीमा से लगकर गुजरती है और आरंभिक बिन्दु ' क ' पर मिलती है । 'भाग- ख'

ण-त- थ-

द-ण : रेखा ग्राम गोवारी में बिन्दु'ण' से आरंभ होती है और बिन्दु ' त'-' थ' -' द ' के पास से गुजरती हुई प्लॉट संख्यांक 95 की बाह्य सीमा से लगकर गुजरती है और आरंभिक बिन्दु ' ण ' मिलती है ।

'भाग- ग'

ध-न-प-

फ-ध: रेखा ग्राम गोवारी में बिन्दु ' ध ' से आरंभ होती है और बिदु ' न ' ' प' -' फ' के पास से गुजरती हुई प्लॉट संख्यांक 5/3 , 5/2 , 5/1 की बाह्य सीमा से होकर गुजरती है फिर सड़क पार करती है फिर आबादी की बाह्य सीमा से होकर गुजरती है और प्लॉट संख्यांक 150 , 151 , 152 , 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , की बाह्य सीमा से होकर गुजरती है और आरंभिक बिन्दु ' ध ' पर मिलती है । 'भाग- घ'

ब- भ- म ब : रेखा ग्राम गोवारी में बिन्दु ' ब ' से आरंभ होती है और बिन्दु ' भ '-' म ' के पास से गुजरती हुई वर्धा नदी के किनारे से और प्लॉट संख्यांक 9/1 , 9/2 , 10/3 , 10/2 , 10/1 , 11/1 , 12/1 , 13/1 की बाह्य सीमा से होकर गुजरती है फिर ग्राम गोवारी और गाम आगासी सम्मिलित ग्राम सीमा को पार करती है और ग्राम आगासी से होकर वर्धा नदी के किनारे से और प्लॉट संख्यांक 4/1 , 3/1, 2/1 , 2/2 , 2 /2 क , 2/ 2 ख , 2/3 , 2/4 , 2/4क1 , 2/4ख , 2/4 ग , 2/4घ, 1/3 , 1 / 4क, 1/ 4ख , 1/4 , 1/5 , 14 ( सरकारी ) , 13/2, 13/3 , 13/4 , 11/2 , 10/1 , 10/1 क , 10/2, 10/3 , 10/4 , 10/5 की बाह्य सीमा से लगकर गुजरती है फिर ग्राम आगासी और ग्राम पिंपरी की सम्मिलित ग्राम सीमा को पार करती है और ग्राम पिंपरी से होकर प्लॉट संख्यांक 3 , 5/2 , 5/1 की बाह्य सीष्णा से लगकर गुजरती है फिर ग्राम पिंपरी और ग्राम आगासी की सम्मिलित ग्राम सीमा को पार करती है और ग्राम आगासी से होकर प्लॉट संख्यांक 7/2 , 7/2क, 7/3 , 7 /3 क , 7/4 की बाह्य सीमा से लगकर गुजरती है फिर ग्राम आगासी और ग्राम गोवारी की सम्मिलित ग्राम सीमा को पार करती है फिर ग्राम गोवारी से होकर प्लॉट संख्यांक 18/1 , 18/2 , 17/2 , 17/1 , 16 15 , 23 , 24 , 28 , 10/1 , 10/2 , 10/3 , 9/2 , 9/1 की बाह्य सीमा से होकर गुजरती है और आरंभिक बिन्दु ' ब ' पर मिलती है ।

[सं. 43015/ 15/2008- पीआरआईडब्ल्यू-1 ]

एस. सी. भाटिया , निदेशक 6287 भारत का राजपत्र : सितम्बर 3 , 2011 / भाद्र 12 , 1933

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

New Delhi , the 29th August , 2011

S.O. 2351. Whereas by the notification of the Government of India in the Ministry of Coal number S. O. 1584 , dated the 21st June , 2010, issued under sub - section ( 1 ) of Section 7 of the Coal Bearing Areas (Acquisition and Development ) Act , 1957 (20 of 1957 ) (hereinafter referred to as the said Act) and published in the Gazette of India, Part II , Section 3 , Sub- section ( ii ) dated the 26th June , 2010, the Central Government gave notice of its intention to acquire all rights in or over such land in the locality specified in the Schedule appended to that notification ;

And whereas , the competent authority in pursuance of Section 8 of the said Act, has made his report to the Central Government ;

Andwhereas , the Central Government after considering the aforesaid report and after consulting the Government ofMaharashtra, is satisfied that all rights in or over the land measuring 692.18 hectares ( approximately ) or 1710.37 acres (approximately) as described in the Schedule appended hereto , should be acquired;

Now, therefore , in exercise of the powers conferred by Sub - section ( 1 ) of Section 9 of the Coal Bearing Areas (Acquisition and Development) Act, 1957, (20 of 1957) the Central Government hereby declares that all rights in or over the land measuring 692.18 hectares (approximately) or 1710.37 acres ( approximately) as described in the Schedule are hereby acquired.

The plan bearing number C- 1 ( E ) III/ JJNR/ 844-1110, dated the 24th November, 2010 of the arca covered by this notification, may be inspected in the Office of the Collector, Yavatmal (Maharashtra) or at the Office of the Coal Controller, 1, Council House Street, Kolkata (Pin- 700 001 ) or at the Office of the General Manager, Western Coalfields Limited (Revenue Department) , Coal Estate , Civil Lines , Nagpur - 440001 (Maharashtra) .

SCHEDULE

Kolar Pimpri Extension Opencast Block Wani NorthArea.

DISTRICT- YAVATMAL (MAHARASHTRA)

[Plan bearing number : C - 1 ( E) III/JJNR/844-1110, dated the 24th November, 2010 ]

All Rights:

PART -' A'

Remarks

Area in hectares

District

Tahsil

Sl. No.

Name of Village

Patwari Circle number

Part

130.00

Yavatmal

Wani

Kolera

Part

125.00

Yavatmal

Wani

Kona

Part

298.00

Yavatmal

Wani

Brahmani

Total : 553.00 hectares ( approximately)

or 1366.46 acres ( approximately)

All Rights :

PART - ' B '

Remarks

Area in hectares

District

Tahsil

SI . Name of No. Village

Patwari Circle number

Part

175

Wani

Yavatmal

Gowari

Total: 1.75 hectares (approximately)

or 4.32 acres (approximately) 6288

[PART II-SEC . 3 (i ) ) THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 3 , 2011 /BHADRA 12, 1933

All Rights :

PART - ' C'

Remarks

Area in hectares

Tahsil

District

SL Name of No. Village

Patwari Circle number

Part

14.50

Wani

Yavatmal

1. Gowari

Total: 14.50 hectares ( approximately) or 35.83 acres ( approximately)

AllRights:

PART - ' D'

Remarks

District

Area in hectares

Tahsil

SL No.

Name of Village

Patwari Circle number

7 3

41.77

Part

Wani

Yavatmal

Gowari

Part

1.16

Wani

Yavatmal

Pimpri

Part

80.00

Wani

Yavatmal

Agashi

Total : 122.93 hectares (approximately) or 303.76 acres ( approximately) Total Area ( All Rights) :

TOTAL AREA

PART -' C'

PART-' D '

PART- ' B ' +

PART-' A' +

14.50

+ 122.93

553.00

+ 1.75

692.18 hectares ( approximately)

+ 303.76

35.83

1366.46 + 4.32

1710.37 acres ( approximately) Plots to be acquired in village :

PART-' A'

Plotnumbers acquired in village Kolera:

124/1 , 124/2, 130/1 , 130/2 , 131 , 132 , 133, 134/1 , 134/2, 134/3 , 134/4, 135, 136, 137/1 , 137/2, 138 , 139/1 , 139/2, 140, 141 , 142, 143 , 144/1 , 144/2, 145/1 , 145/2, 145/3 , 146, 147 148 , 149/1 , 149/2, 150, 151/1 , 151/2 , 152, 156/1 , 156/2, 157 158 , 159, 160, Government Road, 163, 164, 165, 166, 167, 168/1 , 168/2, 169 , 170/1 , 170/2 , 171/1 , 171 / 1A, 171/2 , 171 / 3A, 171/38 , 171/4 , 172/1 , 172/2, 172 / 3A, 172 /3B , 172/ 3C , 173/1 , 173/2 , 174/1 , 174/2, 175.

Plotnumbers acquired in village Kona :

94, 95, 96, 97, 98, 99, 100, 102, 103 , 104/1 , 104/2 , 105, 106, 107 , 108/1 , 108/2 , 112/1 , 112/2 , 112/3 , 113 , 114, 115, 116/1 , 116/2 , 117/1 , 117/ 2A, 117/ 2B , 118/1 , 118 /2A, 118/28 , 119/1 , 119/2 , 120, 121/1 , 121/2 , 122 , 123, 124, 125 / 1A, 125 / 1B, 125/2A, 125/2B, 126/1 , 126/2, 136/1 , 136/2 , 136/3 , 137/1 , 137/2, 141 , 142, 143, 144, 145, 146, 147/1 , 147/2 , 148/1 , 148/2 , 148/3, 149, 150, 151 , 152, 153, 154, 155 , 159, 160/1 , 160/2 , 160/3 , 172/1 , 172/2 , Government Road.

6289 भारत का राजपत्र : सितम्बर 3 , 2011 /भाद्र 12 , 1933

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

Plotnumbers acquired in village Brahmani:

1, 2, 3 , 4, 5 , 6 , 7, 8 , 9 , 10, 11 , 12, 13, -14, 15 , 16, 17, 18 , 19, 20/1 , 20/2 , 21 , 22, 23 , 24, 25, 26, 27 , 28 , 29, 30, 31 , 32/1 , 32/2, 33 , 34, 35 , 36, 37, 38 , 39/1 , 39/2, 40, 41 , 42, 43 , 44, 45,46,47,48, 49, 50, 51 , 52, 53 , 54, 55/14, 55/18, 5/2, 55/3 , 55/4,56/ 1,56/2 , 56/3 , 56/4,57/1 , 57/2, 57/3 , 58/1 , 58/2, 58/3, 59, 60, 61 , 62, 63 , 64, 65/1 , 65/2, 65/3, 66, 67, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76,77, 78, 79/14, 79/13, 79/2, 80, 81 , 82, 83 , 84, 85, 86, 87, 88 , 89, 90, 91, 92/1 , 92/2, 92/3 , 93 , 94, 95/1 , 95/2, 96, 97/1,97/2, 98/1A, 98/ 1B, 98/2, 99, 100, 101, 102, 103, 104, 105, 106, 107, 108 , 109, 110, III, 112, 113, 114/1 , 114/2, 115, 116, 117, 118, 119, 120, 121, 122, 123/1 , 123/2, 124, 125, 126, 127, 128, 129, 130, 131 , 132, 133, 134, 135, 136, 137, 138, 139, 140, 141 , 142, 143, 144, 145, Govemment Road.

PART- ' B '

Plot numbers acquired in village Gowari:

PART- ' C'

Plot numbers acquired in village Gowari:

1, 2, 3 , 4, Government Gaothan (Abadi ), 5/1 , 5/2 , 5/3 , 150, 151 , 152.

PART- ' D'

Plotnumbers acquired in village Gowari:

9/1,9/2 , 10/1 , 10/2 , 10/3 , ΙΠ/Ι , 11/2 , 12/1 , 12/ 1A, 12/2 , 13/1 , 13/2, 13/3 , 14/1 , 14/2 , 14/3 , 15, 16, 17/1 , 17/ 1A, 17/2, 18/1 , 18/2, 23, 24, 28 .

Plotnumbers acquired in village Pimpri :

3,5/1,5/2.

Plotnumbers acquired in village Agashi:

1/3 , 1 /4A, 1 /4B , 1 /4C, 1 /4D, 1/5 , 2/ 1,2/2 , 2/ 2A, 2/ 2B , 2/3 , 2/4A, 2/ 4A1 , 2/4B , 2/4C, 2/4D, 3/1 , 3/2, 3/3 , 4/1 , 4/2, 4/3 , 4/3A, 4/4, 5/1 , 5/2 ,6/1 , 6/1A, 6/2 , 6/3 , 6/4 , 6/4A, 7/2 , 7/2A, 7/3 , 7/3A, 7/4,8/1 , 8 / 1A, 8/2 , 9, 10/1 , 10/1A , 10/2 , 10/3 , 10/4, 10/5 , III , 11/ 2, 12/1 , 12/2 , 12/24, 12/3 , 12/4 , 12/5 , 13/ 1A, 13 / 1B, 13/ 1C, 13/2, 13/3 , 13/4 , 14, Government

Boundary description:

PART- 'A'

A-B-C-D- E-F-G : Line start from Point 'A' in village Kolea and passes nearby Point ' B ' - ' C ' - 'D ' - ' E' - ' F ' along with the outer boundary ofplot numbers 175 , 173/1 , 173/2, 171/1 , 163 , 160 (Govt . ) , then passes along the road, crosses road then again passes along with the outer boundary ofplot numbers 156, 150, 151/1 , 151/2, 152, 132, 131 , 130/2 , 130/1 , and meets at Point ' G' .

G-H-I:

Line passes through village Kolera along with the outer boundary ofplot numbers 130/1 , 134/2, 134/4, 124/1 , 124/2 , then crosses common village boundary ofvillages Kolera and Brahmani and passes through village Brahmani along with the outer boundary ofplot numbers 141 , 143 , 144, 145 , crosses road, then again passes along with the outer boundary ofplot numbers 133 , 132, 131 , 130, 129, 1, 2 , 3 , 4, 9, 10, 11 , 15, thenpasses nearby Point ' H ' and then passes along with the outer boundary of plot numbers 16, 17, 19, 37/2, 37/1 , 38,42, 43, 44,45, 46, 47, 48 and meets at Point ' I ' on tri -junction ofvillages Brahmani , Kona and Nilapur.

I-J-K- L- Line passes through village Kona nearby Point ' J ' - ' K ' - ' L' along with the outer boundary ofplot numbers 119, 120, M: 121 , 124, 125/2 , 125/1 , 126/2 , 126/1 , 136, 137/2, 137/1 , 141 , 155, 159, 160/1 , 160/2, 160/3 , 153, 152, 150, 172/2 , 172/1 , 97, 96 , 95, 94 and meets at Point 'M' .

M-N-A: Line passes nearby Point ' N' . through village Kona along with the outer boundary ofplot numbers 94, 108/1 , 108/2 , 113 , 112/3 , 112/2 , 112/1 , then crosses common village boundary of villages Kona and 6290

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 3 , 2011 /BHADRA 12, 1933

[PART II-SEC. 3( ii ) ] Brahmani , then passes through village Brahmani along with the outer boundary of plot numbers 58/3 , 59, 60, 61 , 62, 63, 67, 72 , then passes common village boundary of villages Brahmani and Kolera, then passes through village Kolera along with the outer boundary ofplot number 175 and meets at starting Point 'A' .

PART-' B'

O-P-Q

Line starts from Point ' O ' in village Gowari and passes nearby Point ' P ' - ' Q ' - ' R ' , along with the outer boundary of R-O : plot number 95 and meets at starting Point ' O ' .

PART -' C'

S- T-U

Line starts from Point ' S' in village Gowari and passes nearby Point ' T ' - ' U' - ' V ' , along with the outer boundary of V- S : plot numbers 5/3 , 5/2 , 5/1 , crosses road, then passes along the outer boundary of Gaothan (Abadi) and plot numbers 150, 151 , 152 , 1 , 2, 3 4 , and at meet starting Point ' S' .

PART- 'D'

W- X-Y-W

Line starts from Point ' W' in village Gowari and passes nearby Point ' X " - ' Y' , along the Bank ofWardha River and outer boundary ofplot numbers 9/1 , 9/2, 10/3,2 , 10/1 , 11/1 , 12/1 , 13/1 , crosses common village boundary of villages Gowari and Agasi and passes through village Agashi along with Bank of Wardha River and outer boundary ofplot numbers 4/1 , 3/1 , 2/1 , 2/2 , 2 /2A, 2/ 2B, 2/3 , 2/ 4A, 2/ 4A1 , 2 /4B , 2/4C, 2 / 4D, 1/3 , 1/4A, 1/4B, 1/4C, 1/5 , 14 (Government) , 13/2, 13/3 , 13/4, 11/2 , 10/1 , 10/1A, 10/2 , 10/3 , 10/4,10/5 , then crosses common village boundary of villages Agashi and Pimpri and passes through village Pimpri along with the outer boundary ofplot numbers 3 , 5/2, 5/1 , again crosses common village boundary of villages Pimpri and Agashi and passes through village Agashi along withthe outer boundary of plot numbers 7/2, 7/2A, 7/3 , 7/3A, 7/4 , then again crosses common village boundary of villages Agashi and Gowari thenpasses through village Gowari , along with the outer boundary of plot numbers 18/1 , 18/2 , 17/2 , 17/1 , 16,15 , 23 , 24, 28 , 10/1 , 10/2, 10/3 , 9/2, 9/1 , and meets at starting Point ' W' .

[No. 43015/ 15/2008 - PRIW- I ] S. C. BHATIA , Director

आदेश

नई दिल्ली, 29 अगस्त, 2011

का.आ. 2352.-कोयला धारक क्षेत्र ( अर्जन और विकास ) अधिनियम , 1957 ( 1957 का 20 ) ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त अधिनियम कहा गया है ) की धारा 9 की उप- धारा ( 1 ) के अधीन जारी की गई भारत सरकार में कोयला मंत्रालय की अधिसूचना संख्यांक का.आ. 423 तारीख 10 फरवरी , 2011 के भारत के राजपत्र के भाग II , खण्ड -3 , उप- खण्ड ( ii ) तारीख 12 फरवरी , 2011 में प्रकाशित होने पर उक्त अधिसूचना से संलग्न अनुसूची में वर्णित भूमि और भूमि में , या उस पर के सभी अधिकार, ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त भूमि कहा गया है ) उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 10 की उप - धारा ( 1 ) के अधीन, सभी विल्लंगमों से मुक्त होकर , आत्यंतिक रूप में केन्द्रीय सरकार में निहित हो गए थे । और केन्द्रीय सरकार का यह समाधान हो गया है कि साउथ ईस्टर्न कोलफील्ड्स लिमिटेड , सीपत रोड , डाकघर संख्या 60 , जिला-बिलासपुर-495006 ( छत्तीसगढ़ ) ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त सरकारी कंपनी कहा गया है ) ऐसे निबंधनों और शर्तों का , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार इस निमित्त अधिरोपित करना उचित समझे , अनुपालन करने के लिए तैयार है ;

अतः , अब , केन्द्रीय सरकार कोयला धारक क्षेत्र ( अधिग्रहण और विकास ) अधिनियम , 1957 की धारा 11 की उप - धारा ( 1 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए , यह निदेश देती है कि इस प्रकार निहित उक्त 131.721 हेक्टर ( लगभग ) भूमि और उस पर के सभी अधिकार , तारीख 12 फरवरी , 2011 से केन्द्रीय सरकार में इस प्रकार निहित बने रहने के सिवाय , निम्नलिखित निबंधनों और शर्तों के अधीन रहते हुर , उक्त सरकारी कंपनी में निहित हो जाएंगे , अर्थात्:-

1. उक्त सरकारी कंपनी , उक्त अधिनियम के उपबंधों के अधीन यथा अवधारित प्रतिकर, ब्याज , हानि और वैसी ही मदों की बाबतं किए गये सभी संदायों की केन्द्रीय सरकार को प्रतिपूर्ति करेगी ;

2. उक्त सरकारी कंपनी द्वारा शर्त ( 1 ) के अधीन केन्द्रीय सरकार को संदेय रकमों का अवधारण करने के प्रयोजन के लिए उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 14 के अधीन अधिकरण का गठन किया जाएगा तथा ऐसे किसी अधिकरण और ऐसे अधिकरण की सहायता करने के लिए नियुक्त व्यक्तियों के संबंध में उपगत सभी व्यय , उक्त कंपनी द्वारा वहन किये जायेंगे और इस प्रकार निहित उक्त भूमि में या उस पर के अधिकार 6291 भारत का राजपत्र : सितम्बर 3 , 2011/ भाद्र 12, 1933

भाय खण्ड 3 (ii) )

लिये या उनके संबंध में जैसे अपील आदि सभी विधिक कार्यवाहियों की बाबत उपगत , सभी व्यय भी , इसी प्रकार उक्त सरकारी कंपनी द्वारा हन किये आएंगे ;

3. उक्त सरकारी कंपनी , केन्द्रीय सरकार या उसके पदधारियों की , ऐसे किसी अन्य व्यय के संबंध में क्षतिपूर्ति करेगी , जो इस प्रकार अहित उक्त भूमि में था उस पर के अधिकारों के बारे में, केन्द्रीय सरकार या उसके पदधारियों द्वारा या उनके विरुद्ध किन्हीं कार्यवाहियों के संबंध आवश्यक हो;

4. उक्त सरकारी कंपनी को, केन्द्रीय सरकार के पूर्व अनुमोदन के बिना , उक्त भूमि और भूमि में या उसके ऊपर इस प्रकार निहित अधिकार को किसी अन्य व्यक्ति को अंतरित करने की शक्ति नहीं होगी ; और

5. उक्त सरकारी कंपनी , ऐसे निदेशों और शर्तों का , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार द्वारा , जब कभी आवश्यक हो , उक्त भूमि के विशिष्ट क्षेत्रों के लिये दिए जाएं या अधिरोपित की जाए, पालन करेगी ।

[फा. सं. 43015 /31 /2008- पी. आर. आई. डब्ल्यू- I ]

एस. सी. भाटिया , निदेशक

ORDER

New Delhi , the 29th August , 2011

S. O. 2352. Whereas , on the publication of the notification of the Government of India in the Ministry ofCoal , number S.O. 423 , dated the 10th February, 2011 published in the Gazette of India, Part - II , Section 3 , Sub- section ( ii ) dated the 12th February, 2011 issued under sub- section ( 1 ) of Section 9 of the Coal Bearing Areas (Acquisition and Development) Act, 1957 (20 of 1957) (hereinafter referred to as the said Act) , the land and surface rights in or over the Coal Bearing Areas Acquisition and Development) Act, 1957 such lands described in the Schedule appended to the said notification (hereinafter eferred to as the said land) vested absolutely in the Central Government free from all encumbrances under sub - section ( 1 ) ofSection 10 of the said Act;

hand whereas , the Central Government is satisfied that the South Eastern Coalfields Limited, Seepat Road, Post Box amber- 60 , District-Bilaspur -495006 (Chhattisgarh) (hereinafter referred to as the Government Company) is willingto comply with such terms and conditions as the Central Government thinks fit to impose in this behalf;

Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub- section ( 1 ) of Section 11 of the Coal Bearing Areas Acquisition and Development) Act, 1957 , the Central Government hereby direct that the said lands measuring 131.721 Rectares (approximately ) and surface rights in or over the said lands so vested shall with effect from the 12th February, 2011 instead of continuing to so vest in the Central Government, shall vest in the said Government Company, subject to the Following terms and conditions , namely :

(1) theGovernment Company shall reimburse to the Central Government all payments made in respect of compensation, tant, daraages and the like , as determined under the provisions of the said Act;

(2) a Tribunal shall be constituted under section 14 of the said Act, for the purpose of determining the amounts payable to the Central Government by the said Government Company under condition (1 ) and all expenditure incurred in consection with any such tribunal and persons appointed to assist the tribunal shall be borne by the said Government etc. foror in connection with Company and similarly, all expenditure incurred in respect ofall legal proceedings like appe: igate, in or over the said land, so vested, shall also be borne by the said Government Company

(3) the saidGovernment Company shall indemnify the Central Government or its officials against any other expenditure any be necessary in connection with any proceedings by or against the Central Government or its officials regarding Alghts in or over the said land so vested;

(+) the saidGovernment Company shall have no power to transfer the said land to any other persons without the prior pproval of the Central Government; and

(5) the said Government Company shall abide by such directions and conditions as may be given or imposed by the Cositzal Government for particular areas of the said land, as and when necessary.

[F. No. 43015/ 31/2008 - PRIW - I]

S. C. BHATIA, Director 3202 GI/11-13 6292

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 3 , 2011 /BHADRA 12, 1933

श्रम और रोजगार मंत्रालय नई दिल्ली, 3 अगस्त, 2011

का.आ. 2353. औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 (1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार मध्य रेलवे के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच , अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण , पुणे के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 220/2007 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 14-7-2011 को प्राप्त हुआ था । [सं. एल-41012/87/2007- आईआर ( बी-1 ) ]

[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii )] (1 ) and sub - section (2A) of Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 as mentioned in the schedule as under:

SCHEDULE

"Whether the action of the management of Central Railway Pune of not considering the serviced rendered by the applicant before reinstatement is correct or not? If not what relief should be provided to him. Briefly stated the second party's case is as under ? "

रमेश सिंह , डेस्क अधिकारी

MINISTRY OF LABOUR AND EMPLOYMENT New Delhi , the 3rd August , 2011 S.O. 2353. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 220/ 2007) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal- cum- Labour Court , Pune as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of Central Railway and their workman, received by the Central Government on 14-7-2011 .

[No. L-41012/ 87/2007 - IR (B -I ) ] RAMESH SINGH , Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE PERSIDING OFFICER, FIRST LABOUR COURT, PUNE

(Presided overby Mr. M.S. Bodhankar) REF. IDA . No. 220 of 2007

The Divisional Railway Manager, Central Railway, Pune

2.The second party has filed his statement of claim vide Ex. 9. It is submitted that he was appointed as a Booking Clerk (Railway tickets ) from 4-9-63 . He was permanent since 14-9-63 . His service record was clear and clean.He has got all the benefits as per Government Rules . However, his services were illegally terminated on 17-3- 86. No show cause notice was issued, no domestic enquiry was conducted and no opportunity was given to him to defendhimself. He had completed 23 and half years service without breaks . After illegal termination he had filed review appeal on 9-9-86 before the appellate authority under rule 25 ofD & ARules . That appeal was decided and concerned officer had issued the following order on 29-1-87 .

"Taking into consideration his family circumstances , I have decided to reemploy him as a office clerk on humanitarian ground . "

.... First Party

AND

Shri [ KV Joshi ] V.K. Joshi

House No. 309A, 3rd floor, Matrukrupa Building Near Gonkos Maruti Mandir, Kasba Peth , Pune- 1

3. This order was issued and the second party was directed to deposit the outstanding debit of Rs . 18,558 . Accordingly, the first party offered reemployment to him and he joined the duty with the first party on 13-2-87 . After reemployment he completed 16 years 8 months.and 3 days in service without break and retired on 31-10-03. He had completed in all 39 years of his service . Thus he is entitled to all the benefits of retirement i.e. Medical facility (Medical Cards ) and tow sets of complementary passes and 39 years pension benefits etc.

.... Second Party

Reference Under Section 10 ( 1 ) (C ) R/ W Section 12 (5) of Industrial Disputes Act .

APPEARANCE : Mr. Uplenchwar Adv. for first party Mr. Kalane Adv. for second party

AWARD

(Delivered on this 9th day of June 2011) 1. This reference is made to this Court vide order No. L-41012/87 /2007 - IR (B - I ) , Desk Officer, Govt.of India Ministry of Labour New Delhi under clause ( d) of sub - section 4. It is further submitted that while giving the pension the first party only considered the service of 16 years 8 months 3 days of the period from 29-1-87 to 31-10-03 . It has not considered the service of 23 and half years from 2-10-63 to 17-3-86. Thus as per Rule 39 of RS ( Pension) Rule 93 and Railway Board Circular dt. 3-6-99 , the service ofsecond party be counted for pension . He has been kept away from the benefits of pension of 39 years service, DCRG and free medical aid by the first party. As per the pass manual of railway indicates that employee on completion of 20-25 years service is entitled for two sets of passes . It is further submitted that after persuasion for 5 years , second party has been favoured with one set of first class pass . The harassement tendered to the second party affected his health and subsequent loss of approximately 75,000 on account of issue of pass for a period of 5 years . He was not covered in the retired 6293 भारत का राजपत्र : सितम्बर 3 , 2011 / भाद्र 12, 1933

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

evidence. The argument advanced by Ld. Adv. Mr. Kalane for the second party and Ld. Adv. Uplenchwar for the firstparty is heard.

As to Issue No. 1

employees liberalised health scheme which automatically covered employee appointed after 1-1-89 on payment of One time payment equal to last month's basic pay at the ime of retirement. When he retired after the second spell of service , he was refused to deposit the said basic pay or deduction from his last pay drawn by him . He was advised by letter that he is not eligible for fresh medical treatment. Thus loss of Rs . 50,000 is caused to him . The provident fund amount for first spell of service is still lying with railway administration . The second party has thus sought for allowing the reference and for declaring that his services is counted from 14-9-63 to 13-2-87 and he has completed 39 years of service without break with the first party and that he is entitled for pension benefits, DCRC , 2 sets ofpasses and medical benefits etc. along with interest and arrears be paid. He also claimed Rs . 60,000 towards loss on travel account .

5. The first party has filed its reply vide Ex . 30 and all the adverse allegations are denied . It is submitted that the second party has retired and hence this court has no jurisdiction to try the reference. The appointment of the second party and his working in the two spells and his reappointment is admitted. It is submitted that he was appointed after considering his mercy appeal of the family circumstances . Now he has no right to ask any relief on the basis of his past service rendered by him . The object of mercy of appeal is only to give service and not the benefits . He is not entitled for settlement pass as per the said order because it could not be issued beyond a period of two years after retirement . The second party is not entitled to get the benefits of RELHS since he has not completed 20 years of service . The first party prayed for rejection of claim of second party.

6. The following issues are framed by my Ld . Predecessor . I have recorded my findings on them for the reasons that follows :

FINDINGS

ISSUES

In the negative

8. the second party has swore that he had served withthe first party from 14-1-63 to 17-3-86 and from 29-1-87 to 31-10-2003 . His serving to with the first party is not in dispute.He has stated that he is entitled for all retirement benefits such as medical facility , two sets of complementary passes and 39 years pension benefits etc. as he had completed 23 and halfyears of service i.e. From 14-1-03 to 17-3-86 continuously and 16 years 8 months and 3 days in second spell i.e. total 39 years . He stated thatthe first party has not considered the service rendered by him from 14-1-63 to 17-3-86 for pensionary benefits, free medical aid and DCRG. As per his contention as per Rule 39 of RS (Pension) 1993 and Railway Board Circular Dt. 3-6-99, his service was to be counted for pension . He stated that as per Pass Manual , a railway employee on completion of 20 to 25 years of service is entitled for two sets of first class passes which he is entitled to get in view ofhis period of service of 39 years . He stated that after 5 years ofpersuation he was given one pass . He submitted thatdue to harassment tendered to him affected him and hisfamily and loss of Rs . 75000 on account of restriction of issue ofpass for a period of 5 years . He submitted that railway had introduced RELHS retired employees liberalised health scheme . The scheme covered to the employees appointed after 1-1-89 on payment on one time payment equal to last months basic pay at the time of retirement . He was retired after the second spell of service , he was refused to deposit the said basic pay or deduction from his last pay drawn . He moved the matter to railway where he was advised that he is not eligible for fresh medical treatment. He claimed the entire loss during the last 5 years about Rs . 50,000 to be reimbursed . He submitted that provident fund was also not paid to him . His service was terminated without observing proper procedure and rules.

1.Whether the action of the management of the Central Railway, Pune of not considering the services rendered by the second party before reinstatement in correct ?

Entitled for

getting counted

2. If not what relief should be provided to the second party ?

39years ofservice

forpension

benefits , 2 sets

9. During his cross examination , the second party denied that his appointment was fresh. He admitted that in his order of reemployment , it is mentioned that he was reemployed fresh. He admitted that on humanitarian ground he was taken in the revised pay scale and no complaint was made with regard to his service benefits . He admitted that he was taken fresh . He admitted that he has applied for the passes to the Railway and the Railway had informed him that he was not entitled to get it.

ofpasses and

medical benefits

Asperfinal order

3. What order ?

REASONS

10. Ld . Adv. Mr. Kalane for the second party argued that he had served for 39 years , he was reemployed in service 29-1-87 and prior to it, he rendered continuous service from 14-9-63 to 17-3-86 and such appointment was not a fresh appointment but still this factor has not been 7. In this matter the second party has examined himself vide Ex . 14. The first party did not adduce any 6294

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 3 , 2011 /BHADRA 12, 1933

[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii) ] considered while giving pension benefits and as the past record was not considered as per the provisions of rule39 ofRS (Pension) Rules , he is entitled to get his past service counted as qualifying service and he is entitled to get all the reliefs he has sought for. Ld. Adv. Mr. Kalane has placed reliance on the MS Pension Rules and Railway. Servants Pass Rules for his argument.

11. On the other hand Ld. Adv. Mr. Uplenchwar argued that the appointment of the second party w.e.f. 29-1-87 was fresh for all pursposes , previous service cannot be calculated for such purpose and the qualifying service has to be for 25 years and he is not entitled to get pass as the qualifying service is not completed. He submitted that there is a mention in the affidavit of the secondparty in para No. 1 line No. 4 that he had got all the benefits as per Govt . Rules and no clarification is given for the same. Such question was put to the second party in his cross -examination where he has clarified that he had got the benefits for second spell of his service . Here it is observed that the dispute is raised since all the pension benefits which as per the contention of the second party should have been received by him ; have not been given to him, when he retired from the service . In the letter Ex . 19 dt.8-9-05 it is mentioned that-

15. Thus in the light of these provisions , it is clear that the past service of a reinstated employee is to be counted as qualifying service . In view of this position, I observe conclude and hold that the past service of the second party was to be counted as qualifying service and thus the previous service of 23 and half years was to be counted and it would thus mean that he had completed total 39 years of service without break with the first party. The second party has also claimed 2 sets of passes as per the provisions of Railway Servant (Pass ) Rules 1996. In the provisions of post retirement complementary passes , itisthat the Class III staff is to be provided with 2 sets of passes per annum who has done 25 years of service and over. In the further provisions it is also laid down that in the case of Railway Employees Governed by the pension rules the breaks in service which are condoned for the purpose of pension and - death- cum-retirement gratuity may be condoned for the purpose of post retirement complementary passes and service preceding the break counted for the purpose ofpost retirement complementary passes. Apart from this , in the letter given by the first partyto the Regional Commissioner , Pune on 8-9-05 vide Ex. 19, it is mentioned that the above named after putting 16years, 8 months and 3 days service retired on 31-10-03 onsuperannuation, hence he is not entitled for the benefits on RELHS , as he has not completed 20 years of service. It is further mentioned that he is also not entitled to get the complementary pass since not completed minimum of 20 years of service as per the provisions .

" The above named after putting 16 years 8 months and 3 days service retired on 31-10-2003 on superannuation , hence he is not entitled for the benefit RELHS hence not completed 20 years of service . Similary he is also not entitled to get the complementary pass since not completed minimum of20 years of service as per the provisions . "

Thus as per contention of the first party as the second party has not completed 20 years of service he is not entitled to get the complementary pass .

12. As per Ex . 20 the CPO (C) has communicated the order of CCSBB to DRM ( P) BB whereby the order of re -employment was passed . In this order, it is nowhere mentioned that the appointment is fresh . However, in the appointment order Ex . 21 , it is mentioned that he is re-employed fresh . Thus the word fresh which does not find place in the original order of re - employing the second party has been inserted in this order .

13. The circular ofGovt. of India dt. 3-6-99 is placed on record. It is the circular of Central Government . Bythis circular the procedure of appointment fresh was directed to be discontinued . This is order of 99 whereas the second party was appointed in 1987.

16. Thus considering this position, I observe that as per Rule 39 of the MS Pension Rules since the second party has completed 39 years of service with the first party he is found entitled to get 2 sets of passes as well the benefit of RELH Scheme . Apart from this , when the qualified service of the second party is calculated to 39 years , I observe that he is entitled to get the pensionary benefits as per his qualified service to get the same. It is clear that he has been given such benefits for the period of 16 years and thus he is found entitled to get such benefits considering his service tenure of 39 years . The second partyhas claimed compensation of Rs. 60,000 for not giving such passes . However , there is no evidence on record as to on what basis such calculation has been effected. Thus , I observe that such monetary claim for non- supply ofthe passes is not established . However, the second party has succeeded in showing his entitlement of passes . In view ofthis position, I observe , concluded and hold that the action ofthe management of the Central Railway, Pune of not considering the services rendered by the second party before reinstatement is not correct. With this view of the matter, holding it accordingly, I answer Issue No. 1 in the . affirmative.

As to Issue Nos . 2 and 3

14. Here in the R.S. (Pension ) Rules 1998 it is mentioned in Rule No. 39 that " Counting the past service on reinstatement ( 1 ) A railway servant who is dismissed, removed or compulsorily retired from service , but is reinstated on appeal review, is entitled to count his past service as qualifying service."

18. The second party has sought for the relief of declaration about his entitlement of his tenure in service भारत का राजपत्र: सितम्बर 3 , 2011 / भाद्र 12 , 1933

भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

with pension benefits DCRC and 2 sets of passes and medical benefits , in view of the findings recorded for Issue "To . 1, I observe that the second party is found entitled to zet the benefit of the declaration that the second party is entitled to get his service counted from 14-9-63 to 13-2-87 or the purposes of getting the service benefits and that has completed 39 years in service along with the Dension benefits DCRC , 2 sets of passes and medical senefits . The applicant is not found entitled to get the elief as to the payment ofthe loss of travel account facility as he has not substantiated his entitlement for the same and interest on provident fund does not lie for consideration . The first party shall bear its own cost of stigation and shall pay cost of litigation of Rs . 1500 (Rs . One thousand five hundred only ) to the second party. With this view of the matter, holding it accordingly I proceed to pass the following order.

ORDER

6295 New Delhi , the 4th August , 2011

S.O. 2354. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the Award ( Ref. No. 134/ 2002) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal- cum- Labour Court , Nagpur as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the management of Rayatwari SubArea ofWestern Coalfields Limited, and their workmen, received by the Central Government on 4-8-2011 .

[No. L- 22012/4/2002- IR (CM - II) ] D.S.S. SRINIVASA RAO , Desk Officer ANNEXURE

BEFORE SHRIJ. P. CHAND, PRESIDING OFFICER, CGIT-CUM- LABOUR COURT, NAGPUR

Date: 14-7-2011

Case No. CGIT/NGP/ 134/2002

Party No. 1

1. The reference is allowed.

2. It is hereby declared that the second party is entitled to get his service for the period from 14-9-63 to 13-2-87 counted for pension benefits and he has completed 39 years of service.

: The Sub Area Manager, Rayatwari Sub Area of Western Coalfields Ltd. , Post Rayatwari , Dist. Chandrapur (MS)

VERSUS

PartyNo. 2

3. It is hereby further declared that second party is entitled for pension benefits with 2 sets of passes with medical benefits .

4.The first party is directed to give pension benefits counting the period of service of the second party of 39 years.

5. The first party do give 2 complementary sets of passes to the second party along with the medical card.

6. The first party shal ! bear its own cost of litigation and shall pay cost of litigation of Rs . 1500 ( Rs . One thousand five hundred only ) to the second party.

M.S. BODHANKAR, Presiding Officer Pune

Dt. 9th June , 2011

नई दिल्ली , 4अगस्त , 2011

का.आ. 2354.-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में , केन्द्रीय सरकार डब्ल्यू.सी. लिमिटेड एवं 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 134/2002 ) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 4-8-2011 को प्राप्त हुआ था।

[सं. एल-22012/4/2002- आई आर ( सीएम- II ) ]

डी. एस. एस. श्रीनिवास राव , डेस्क अधिकारी : Shri S.R. Pendre , GeneralSecretary, Lal Bavata Koyala Kamgar Union , Bhiwapur, Ward No. 27 , Post & Dist. Chandrapur (MS) .

AWARD

(Dated: 14th July, 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 ) ( " the Act " in short) , the Central Government has referred the Industrial dispute between the employers , in relation to the management ofthe Rayatwari Sub Arca, Western Coalfields Limited and their workman, Shri Evraj Nilkanth Kamble for adjudication , as per letter No. L- 22012 / 4 / 2002 - IR( CM - II ) dated 14-8-2002, with the following schedule :---

"Whether the action of the management of Rayatwari Sub Area of Western Coalfields Limited in terminating the services of Shri Evraj Nilkanth, Kamble vide order No. 344dt . 5-5-97 is legal and justified? If not , to what relief is the workman is entitled?"

2. Being noticed, the workman , Shri Evraj Nilkanth Kamble (" the workman " in short ) , filed his statement of claim and the management of Rayatwari Sub Area ofWCL (" the Party No. 1" in short ) filed the written statement .

The case of the workman is that he was working as an underground tub loader in Durgapur Rayatwari Colliery since 1990 and the loading of coals was being done in the said colliery in three shifts i.e. A, B & C and whenever, he 6296

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 3 , 2011 /BHADRA 12 , 1933

PART II- SEC . 3 ( ii ) ]

8-12-96 and he did not file any reply to the charge sheet and notice was issued to the workman intimating him the date of enquiry and complete an detailed procedure was followed by the Inquiry Officer while conducting the enquiry and full opportunity of hearing and representation was given to the workman and the enquiry was conducted bycomplying with the principles of natural justice and the allegation made by the workman are totally false and baseless and the workman is not entitled for any relief.

4. As this is a case of dismissal of the workman from service, after holding the departmental enquiry, the question of the validity of the departmental enquiry was taken as a preliminary issue for consideration and as per order dtd . 9-2-2007, the departmental enquiry was held to be legal proper and in accordance with the principles of naturaljustice.

5. It is necessary to mention here that after passing of the order on the validity of the enquiry, neither the workman nor the union representative appeared in the case .

6. Perused the record . The workman has not challenged the findings of the Inquiry Officer and quantum of punishment in the statement of claim . Taking into consideration the evidence on record, the findings of the inquiry officer, the submissions made by the learned advocate for the management, the fact that the workman admitted the charges leveled against him and the prove serious misconduct of the workman of habitual remaining absent unauthorizedly, I find that the findings are not perversed and the punishment imposed against the workman is not shockingly disproportionate . Therefore, there is not scope to interfere with the punishment imposed against the workman . Hence , it is ordered:

ORDER

went to attend his duty in B & C shifts , he was being informed by the Shift Incharge of having no work for him and he was being sent back without marking of his attendance and the management engaged machines for loading coal in tubs to reduce manpower and as such , he was not allowed to perform duty in B & C shifts and therefore , he was unable to complete the required attendance and charge sheet No. 3611 dtd . 8-12-96 , under the clauses 26.24 and 26.30 of the standing orders was issued against him by the party No. 1 on the allegation of remaining unauthorized absence and habitual absenteeism and Shri R.G. Gedam was appointment as the Inquiry Officer as per office order No. 6338 dtd. 10-3-97 and the Inquiry Officerdid not issue any notice , intimating him about the date and time of the sitting of the enquiry and on 17-3-97 , when he was on duty, the Inquiry Officer called for him to attend the enquiry and as per the direction of the inquiry officer, he participated in the enquiry and when he was asked to admit or deny the charges , he admitted the charges , as he was not aware about the procedure of the departmental enquiry and he was not allowed to engage co -worker for his defence and on 18-3-97 , he was again called for by the Inquiry Officer to his office and after some days , while he was on duty, the Inquiry Officer called him and handed over the order of dismissal bearing No. 344 dtd . 5-5-97. The further case of the workman is that the enquiry is defective as notice of the enquiry was not given to him by the Inquiry Officer, he was no given proper opportunity to defend himself in the enquiry , no show- cause notice was issued , copies of the enquiry papers and the enquiry report were not supplied to him and the enquiry is not fair andproper and principles of natural justice were not followed and for that the order of dismissal is also defective and vitiated. The workman has prayed to set aside the order of dismissal and to reinstate him in service with continuity and all ancillary reliefs .

The action of the management of Rayatwari Sub Area of Western Coalfields Limited in terminating the services of Shri Evraj Nilkanth Kamble , vide order No. 1 344 dtd. 5-5-97 is legal and justified . The workman is not entitled for any relief.

J. P. CHAND , Presiding Officer

नई दिल्ली, 4 अगस्त, 2011

का.आ. 2355.-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 (1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में , केन्द्रीय सरकार एस.ई.सी.एल. एवं 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 117/2003 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 4-8-2011 को प्राप्त हुआ था। 3.The party No. 1 in its writting statement has pleaded inter-alia that the workman was working as a badali piece rated loader from 21-5-90 and not as an underground tub loader and the workman was extremely irregular in attaining his duty and was in the chronic habit of remaining absent from duty and he attended 112 days , 156 days , 70 days 119 days , 83 days , 133 days , 124 days and 37 days in the years 1990 , 1991 , 1992 , 1993 , 1994, 1995 , 1996 and till February, 1997 respectively and the workman was never sent back without assigning any work to him , when he came to attend his duty in B & C relay and the workman remained absent unauthorisedly, without prior permission or information or leave and no document was produced by him before the Inquiry Officer regarding his sickness , though he alleged that due to sickness he remained absent and the workman admitted his guilt before the Inquiry Officerand the story now developed by him in paragraph No. 7 is nothing but an afterthought and for such unauthorized absent, the workman was charge sheeted on

[सं. एल-22012/205/ 2001- आई आर ( सीएम- II ) ] डी. एस. एस. श्रीनिवास राव , डेस्क अधिकारी 6297 भारत का राजपत्र : सितम्बर 3 , 2011 /भाद्र 12 , 1933

भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

New Delhi , the 4th August, 2011

S.O. 2355. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 117/ 2003 ) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal- cum- Labour Court , Jabalpur as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the management of SECL, and their workmen , received by the Central Government on 4-8-2011 .

[No. L- 22012/205 /2001 - IR (CM - II) ]

D. S. S. SRINIVASA RAO, Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

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

No. CGIT /LC/ R/ 117/2003

oprator Grade - III Group D w.e.f. 22-1-1984. He was promoted as Excavator Operator Grade III inGroup C w.e.f. 10-11-89 . Thereafter he filed an application for change ofhis cadre due to his ill health as he was unable to perform physical job . His case was considered and he was selected as Clerk Grade III w.e.f. 30-6-1994 . He was relieved accordingly from Kusmunda Project . Before selection of the post of clerk , the management did query that ifhe was ready to accept the initial pay of clerk Grade, his case would be considered . The workman submitted his willingness to the Sub Area Manager that he was ready to accept the initial pay of Clerk Grade III . Accordingly the workman was selected to the post of clerk Grade III and joined the same but after accepting the aforsaid post , the workman submitted representation for protection of pay. His representation was rejected by the management and he was offered to join his original post if so liked within 7 days of the order. Thus there is no merit in the claim of the workman and the reference be answered in favour of the management .

Presiding Officer : Shri Mohd. Shakir Hasan

4. The following issues are framed for adjudication- Shri V.M. Manohar , Secretary, Madhya Pradesh Koyala Shramik

Sangh (CITU) , Qtr. No. M -509,

I. Whether the action of the management in not providing pay protection to the workman while posting him as clerk is legal and justified?

Vikas Nagar, Kusmunda,

II . To what relief the workman is entitled?

PO Kusmunda Colliery,

...Workman

Korba (Chhittishgarh)

5. Issue No. I

Versus

The ChiefGeneral Manager ,

SECL, Kusmunda Area ,

PO Kusmunda Colliery,

...Management

Distt . Korba , Chhittisgarh

AWARD

Passed on this 21st day of July , 2011

1. The Government of India, Ministry of Labour vide its Notification No. L- 22012 /205 / 2001 - IR( CM- II ) dated 24-6-2003 has referred the following dispute for adjudication by this tribunal:----

"Whether the action of the management of Kusmunda Area of SECL , in not providing pay protection to Shri Sunil Kumar Pandey while posting him as clerk is legal and justified? If not, to what relief the workman is entitled ? "

2. The Union/ workman appeared in the case on 29-11-04 did not file statement of claim till 5-11-09 . Lastly the reference is proceeded exparte against the Union / workman on 5-11-09 .

To prove the case , the management has adduced oral and documentary evidence . The management witness Shri Iqbal Singh is Area Personnel Manager at Kusmunda Area of SECL . He has stated that the workman filed an application for change of his cadre on the ground of till health . The management has filed the application which is marked as Exhibit M.S. This application shows that the workman had himself given application for lighter work on account of his illness . This witness has further stated that management did query from the workman that if he would be ready to accept the initial pay of clerk Grade III , his case would be considered . The management has filed the said letter which is marked as Exhibit M/ 7 which shows that query was made on 1-2-1994 from the workman .He has stated that the workman gave reply showing to join on initial pay clerk Grade - III . The said reply is filed which is marked as Exhibit M/ 8 . This itself shows that the workman had himself accepted the offer of initial pay on change of cadre . He has further stated that after accepting the said post , the workman gave representation for pay protection contrary to the willingness . The said representation is filed which is marked as Exhibit M/ 11 . He has stated that the management rejected the representation of protection of pay and offered him to return on the original post within 7 days . The said letter is filed and marked as Exhibit M/ 12 . Thus it is clear that the workman accepted the change of cadre and initial pay 3. The management appeared and filed Written Statement . The case of the management in short is that the workman Shri Sunil Kumar Pandey was intially appointed as general Mazdoor, Category - I w.e.f. 11-6-1980. Thereafter he was selected to the post of Poclain 6298

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 3 , 2011 /BHADRA 12,1933

himself voluntarily. This shows that the management is justified in not protecting the pay on his change of cadre. This issue is decided against the workman and in favour ofthe inanagement.

6. Issue No. II

Onthe basis of the discussion made above , it is evident that there is no case of the workman . He is not entitled to any relief. The reference isaccordingly answered .

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

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

MOHD. SHAKIR HASAN, Presiding Officer नई दिल्ली, 4 अगस्त, 2011

का.आ. 2356.-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 (1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में , केन्द्रीय सरकार डब्ल्यू.सी. लिमिटेड 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 32/2005 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 4-8-2011 को प्राप्त हुआ था । [सं. एल -22012/98 /2004- आई आर ( सीएम- II ) ] डी. एस. एस. श्रीनिवास राव , डेस्क अधिकारी New Delhi , the 4th August , 2011

S.O. 2356. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 32/2005 ) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal - cum- Labour Court , Nagpur as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the management of New Majari U/G Sut Area of Western Coalfields Limited, and their workmen, received by the Central Government on 4-8-2011.

[No. L- 22012/98/ 2004- IR (CM - II ) ] D.S.S. SRINIVASA RAO , Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

BEFORE SHRI J. P. CHAND, PERSIDING OFFICER, CGIT-CUM-LABOUR COURT, NAGPUR Case No. CGIT / NGP /32 / 2005

Date: 20-7-2011 PartyNo. 1 : The Sub Area Manager ,

New Majari U/G. Sub Area of WCL PO : Sasti . Tah.- Rajura , Distt . Chandrapur (M.S. )

Versus

PartyNo. 2 : Shri B.S. Ishwarkar, Working President

[PART II-SEC. 3 (ii)]

National Colliery Mazdoor Congress , Br. Chandrapur Area , Vitthal Mandir Ward,VijayBhawan, Chandrapur (M.S. )

AWARD

(Dated: 20th 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 Govemment has referred the industrial dipsute between the employers , in relation to the management of New Majari U/G Sub Area of Western Coalfields Ltd. and their workman. Shri Prakash Joseph Talawar, for adjudication , as per letter No. L- 22012/98/2004- IR(CM- II) dated 14-2-2005 , with the following schedule:-

"Whether the action of the management in relation to New Majari U/G Sub Area of Western Coalfields Limited in terminating the services ofShri Prakash Joseph Talawar , Clerk , New Majari Colliery No. 3 vide office No. वेकोलि/एनएमसी-3/प्रबंधक/ कार्मिक/ 2002/2308 dated 24-1-2002 is legal and justified ? If not, to what is the workanan entitied? "

2.0 receipt of the reference , parties were notice to file their re pective statement of claim and written statement, in response to which , the workman filed the statement of claim andhe management of WCL ( " Party No. 1 " in short) filed the withon statement.

The case of the workman is that he was selected and appointed as a General Mazdoor category I by the party No. and on - 1-89 , he was promoted as clerk grade III and while he was working as a cicrk in new Majri U/G sub area , on 2-3-2001 a charge sheet was submitted against him on the allegations ofhis committing different acts of misconduct , such as tampering with the attendance register and overwriting and initialing his attendance on some specified dates . on which he had been marked absent earlier, by the controlling officer, as he had not attendance his duties and that of habitual absenteeism and he was asked to show cause within 72 hours and as he did not submit the show cause within time , the party No. 1 decided to conduct departmental enquiry against him and Shri D.C. Gupta was appointed as the enquiry officer and on 24-3-2001 , he submitted his show cause denying the chargos and in the departmental enquiry, the enquiry officer found the charges levelled against him to have been proved and submitted his report to the Disciplinary Authority on 28-6-2001 and on 14-1-2002 . a show cause notice was served on him along with the report of the enquiry officer and he submitted his reply on 15-1-2002 and the Disciplinary Authority passed the orders for termination of his service on 24-1-2002 . The further case of the workman is that the charges framed against him were vague , false and baseless and the enquiry was defective and 6299 भारत का राजपत्र : सितम्बरं 3 , 2011/ भाद्र 12 , 1933

-खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

gal and the order ofdismissal from service is improper, Jel and shockingly disproportionate.

Labour Court 2 Lucknow ) , 2001 LAB IC - 2367 ( Syed Rahimuddin Vs. Director General CSIR), 1996 Lab IC 462 (B.C. Chaturvedi Vs. Union of India ) , 2003 Lab IC- 757 (Regional Manager, UPSRTC Vs. Hotilal ), 2005 Lab IC -4158 (V. Ramana Vs. APSRTC) , 2005 Lab IC- 854 (Bharat Forge Co. Ltd. Vs. Uttam Manohar Nakate).

7. Perused the record including the documents relating to the departmental enquiry and found that the findings of the enquiry officer are based on evidence on record. The enquiry officer has assigned reasons in support ofhisfindings .The findings are found to be not perversed. Applying the principles enunciated by the Hon'ble Apex Court inthe decisions relied on by the party No. 1 to the facts and the circumstance of the present case , it is found that the punishment of dismissal from service imposed against the workman is not shockingly disproportionate to the proved misconducts of the workman in a proper and legaldepartmental enquiry and as such, there is no scope to interfere with the order punishment . Hence it is ordered:

ORDER

3. The Party No. lin its written statement has pleaded the workman was working in New Majri U/G No. 3 as a , before he was terminated from service , vide order d24-1-2002 and the workman had become habitual in amitting acts of misconducts and he tampered with the dance register and made overwriting and initial his dance on the dates , on which, he had been marked Past and had not attended his duty and he was also a itual absentee and as such , charge sheet dated 3-2001 was issued against him and as the workman did submit the show cause within the stipulated time, it decided to start a department enquiry against him and D.C. Gupta was appointed as the enquiry officer and workman participated in the enquiry and the enquiry conduced by following the principles ofnatural justice the enquiry officer after analyzing the evidence juced by the parties before him , found the workman to guilty of the charges and accordingly submitted his 021 and the Disciplinary Authority after considering the Ousness of the misconduct, passed the order ofdismissal 'n service and the departmental enquiry held against workman was just and proper and the punishment sed out against him is legal and proportionate to the cre and the workman is not entitled for any relief.

The action of the management of in relation to New Majri U/G Sub Area of Western Coalfields Limited in terminating the services of Shri Prakash Joseph Talawar , Clerk , New Majri Colliery No. 3 vide office No. वेकोलि/एनएमसी -3/प्रबंधक/कार्मिक/2002/2308 dated 24-1-2002 is legal and justified. The workman is not entitled for any relief.

J. P. CHAND , Presiding Offier

नई दिल्ली, 4 अगस्त, 2011

As this is a case of dismissal from service of the kman , after holding a departmental enquiry, the question the validity of the enquiry had been taken up as a minary issue and as per order dated 9-9-2010 , the rumental enquiry was held to be proper, legal and in ondance with the principles of naturaljustice.

5. It is necessary to mention here that after filing of statement of claim , neither the workman nor the union pred in this case to participate in the further ceeding.

का.आ. 2357. औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार एफ.सी.आई के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच , अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण , सं. 1 , नई दिल्ली के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 215/2011 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 4-8-2011 को प्राप्त हुआ था!

[सं. एल-22012/313/ 2007- आई आर ( सीएम- II ) ] डी. एस. एस. श्रीनिवास राव , डेस्क अधिकारी

New Delhi , the 4th August , 2011

S.O. 2357.-In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 215/ 2011) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal cum- Labour Court, No.1 , New Delhi as shown in the Annexure inthe Industrial Dispute between the management of Food Corporation of India , and their workmen , received by the Central Government on 4-8-2011 .

[No. L- 22012/313/2007 - IR ( CM - II) ] D.S.S. SRINIVASA RAO, Desk Officer 6. In his argument , it was submitted by the learned ocate for the party No.1 that the workman has not aded in his statement of claim that the report of the airy officer was perversed and therefore , there is no essity to examine the issue , in absence of any specific ding from the side of the workman and on perusal of . findings of the enquiry officer , it can be found that the Rugs are based on the materials on record and are not osed to the evidence on record and the enquiry officer analyzed the evidence in a rational and objective aner and has given logical and dispassionate finding, hout any element of bias and prejudice and it can also found from the record that the punishment imposed ainst the workman is not shockingly disproportionate to proved misconducts in a duly conducted departmental juiry. In support of such contentions , reliance was iced on the decisions reported in AIR 1972 SC - 2182 Banarus Electric light and power Co. Ltd. Vs. The

202 GI /11-14 6300

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 3 , 2011 /BHADRA 12 , 1933

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

Onconsideration of the failure report , the appropriate Government referred the dispute to this Tribunal, vide order No. L- 22012/ 313 /2007 - IR (CM - II ) New Delhi dated 12-5-2008 , with following terms:

BEFORE DR. R. K. YADAV, PRESIDING OFFICER, CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL NO . 1 , KARKARDOOMA COURTS COMPLEX

DELHI

I.D. No. 215/2011

The Organising Secretary,

Food Corporation of India Worker Union,

"Whether the action of the management of Food Corporation of India in not promoting Shri Ram Kishan, Mandal to the post of Sardar in Narela Depot is legal and justified? To what relief is the workman concerned entitled? "

.... Workman

8585 , Arakashan Road , Paharganj , New Delhi - 110055

Versus

The Chairman- cum-Managing Director,

Food Corporation of India ,

16-20 , Barakhamba Lane ,

New Delhi - 110001

.....Management

AWARD

3. Claim statement was filed by the Union projecting that gang - wise seniority was to be considered for promotion ofdepartmental laboures to the next higher rank . It has been asserted that post of a Sardar fell vacant in gang No. I - B of Narela Depot on 1-5-05 and Sh . Ram Kishan was entitled to be promoted to that post by virtue of gang - wise seniority criteria , as per settlement dated 24-5-84. Willful delay in promotion of Sh . Ram Kishan cannot deprive him ofhis right to promotion. It was pleaded that the Tribunal may direct the Corporation to promote him on the said posts , on the basis of gang - wise seniority.

4. The Corporation demurred the claim pleading that clause 7 of settlement dated 24-5-84 was terminated vide notice dated 24-2-06 , served on the Union . Gang-wise seniority was replaced by depot - wise seniority after re- organization of labour gangs , where ever required . The strength of Narela Depot projects that there were 33 gangswith 30 Sardar , 29 Mandals and 337 handling labours . After reorganization/ merger of incomplete gangs , there was requirement of 28 Sardar and 28 Mandals . Two Sardars and oneMandal were surplus in the said depot. Industrial dispute , raised by the Union, was resolved by way of tripartite settlement dated 7-11-07. In view of the changed position action of the Corporation in not promoting Sh . Ram Kishan is legal and justified . Even otherwise promotion cannot be claimed as a matter of right . It has been projected that the dispute , raised by the Union is , Unsustainable .

Gang-wise seniority, along with other attributes like physical fitness and suitability for the job etc. , was agreed to be considered for promotion of departmental labour ranks , vide memorandum of settlement dated 24th ofMay, 1984, entered into between the Food Corporation of India (inshort the Corporation ) and F.C.J. Workers Union ( in short the Union ) . It was further agreed upon that in case of LRP Sardars and Mandals are in existence in the depot , they will be given first preference in taking the place of regular vacancies of Sardars and Mandals whenever occuring and the promotee Sardars or Mandal from the gang will take the place of L.R.P. Sardar and Mandal. Where ever a suitable candidate is not available within the Gang , depot-wise seniority was to be made criteria for promotion, and Local Depot Council concerned was to be consulted on 24th of Feb. 2006 , circular No. 7/2006 was issued by the Corporation whereas criteria of gang- wise seniority for promotion to the post of Mandal and Sardars was change to depot- wise seniority. The circular, referred above, became a bone of contention and the Union served a notice dated 12-12-2006 on the Corporation, intimating their proposal to go on strike in all depots of the Corporation, after expiry of notice period of 14 days . Regional Labour Commissioner ( Central ) Kolkata , intervened and memorandum of settlement dated 7-11-07 was entered into, during the course of conciliation proceedings . On the strength of the said settlement promotion policy of gang- wise seniority was replaced by depot - wise seniority.

5. During the course of adjudication process , an application was moved by Sh . Ram Kishan on 27-7-2010, detailing therein that he has been promoted to the post of Sardar and as such the reference has become infructuous. The Union also moved an application projecting that the aforsaid: workers are not parties to the dispute . The dispute was raised by the Union , claiming thatthe workman , referred above, were entitled to promotion from dates on gang - wise seniority criteria. A community interest was raised in the form of the dispute , which cannot be frustrated by the workman . The Corporation also moved anapplication pleaded therein that the workman concerned was promoted on the strength of conditional order , which has been challenged before High Court of Delhi . The Corporation claimed that the matter may be adjourned sine- die , awaiting outcome of the writ petition, so moved.

2. A post of Sardar fell vacent in gang No. 1 - B of Nerela Depot on 1-5-05 Sh . Ram Kishan , the Mandal , became entitled for promotion to that post. The Union served demand notice dated 6th Dec. 2006 , on the Corporation for promotion of Sh . Ram Kishan . When needful was not done , an industrial dispute was raised before the conciliation officer. The Corporation resisted the claim and conciliation proceedings ended in failure .

6301 भारत का राजपत्र : सितम्बर 3 , 2011 / भाद्र 12 , 1933

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

6. Parties, including the workman were called upon to file his affidavits , on changed circumstances . Sh . Ram Kishan projects that he has been promoted to the post of Sardar, vide order dated 22-4-2010 . When dispute was raised he was member of the Union , but subsequently in the year 2010 , he has obtained membership of F.C.I. Handling Workers Union. He claims that in the event ofhis promotion, the dispute nowhere subsists. According to him an award may be passed.

from a retrospective date , while the Corporation asserted that gang - wise seniority was replaced with depot- wise seniority criteria . Therefore the question , which is to be adjudicated , is as to whether the action of the Corporation in not promoting the workman is legal and justified. For adjudication of this primary question , rival parties have presented contradictory claims. Incidental question , which the Tribunal is supposed to adjudicate is as to whether promotion is to be made on gang- wise seniority or depot- wise seniority. Therefore on promotion of the workman with effect from 22-4-10 primary question has become infructuous . However incidental question needs adjudication to answer the bone of contention raised by the Union .

7. Shri Promod Kumar Nayak, Vice President of the Union, swears in his affidavit that Sh. Ram Kishan has violated the terms of settlement dated 24-4-84, when he has accepted his belated promotion order on 22-4-10. According to him , the workman is not a party to the dispute, which was sponsored by the Union . He asserts thatthe controversy was not limited only to his promotion but it was related to timely order ofpromotion, based on settlement dated 24-4-84 .

10. The industrial dispute raised by the Union pertainstoterms of employment or conditions of labour of the workman . Though the dispute was espoused by Union, yet the workman is beneficiary of the adjudication of process . In such a situation , when main dispute , referred for adjudication , becomes infructuous the Union cannot claim that the workman is a stranger and he may not be heard over the matter. It may be that at the time of espousal of the dispute , the Union was haunted with the ideaofadjudication ofthe issue so that future dispute may not crop up in respect of similarly placed departmental labour. But that idea of the Union and its pleadings in the claim statement cannot knock down real beneficiaries , whose promotional issue was raised for adjudication .

8. Shri K.G. Ranjan, Assistant General Manager of the Corporation , projects that clause 7 of settlement dated 24-5-84 provides for promotion on gang - wise seniority, subject to fitness and clearance of physical endurance test. However depot- wise seniority was mentioned as base seniority. With the passage of time, number of persons in a labour gang reduced, owing to various reasons . It resulted into reduction of labour strength in gang which ultimetely adversely affected the output of a gang. In view of changed scenario was a need to renew clause 7 of settlement dated 24-5-84 . Based on study of Saxena Committee , circular No. 7 of 2006 was issued. Policy decision taken by the Corporation emerge out of settlement dated 7-11-07 . Circular dated 20-11-07 was issued to enforce terms of settlement dated 7-11-07. He announces that the workman was promoted in contravention of circulars Nos . 7/2006, 11/07 and settlement dated 7-11-07 . FCI Handling Workers Union filed a writ petition (civil ) No. 3256 of 2010 seeking quashment of circular Nos . 7/2006 and settlement dated 7-11-07. High Court of Delhi , vide its orders dated 12-5-10 and 17-5-2010 , has directed the Corporation to maintain status quo pertaining to the aforsaid circulars and settlement respectively. The Union also filed a writ petition (c) No. 3151/10 , assailing promotion orders of the workman , which petition has been clubbed with the aforsaid writ petition . Promotion of the workman is also subject matter of the writ petitions , pending adjudication beforeHigh Court ofDelhi.

11. Without adjudication of the incidental issue , the Tribunal is not supposed to leave the process of adjudication in between . However the situation has changed. Writ petitions have been filed , which pend adjudication . Circulars issued by the Corporation touching its promotional policy of departmental labours and settlement dated 7-11-07 are under challenge in those writ petitions , besides the promotional order dated 22-4-10, issued in favour ofthe workman . Thus it is evident that the incidental question , which is yet to be adjudicated, is subject of adjudication in writ petitions referred above . Though the Tribunal has not been restrained by the High Court in proceedings with adjudication , yet it would be unadvisable to proceed further, sicne it would be productive of multiplication of litigation. The award of the Tribunal , on the incidental question referred above would be assailed before the court ofwrit jurisdiction , which would add to its docket . Adjournment of the matter sine -die would also not be in the interest of parties , since it would hang like sword of Damocles over the workman . Under these circumstances it would be apt for the Tribunal not to proceed with adjudication of incidental question and to leave the matter with an observation that outcome of the decision of the writ court will govern the answer of the said question.

9.As emerge out of the reference order, the Tribunal was required to adjudicate as to whether action of the Corporation in not promoting the workman to the post of Sardar was legal and justified and to what relief he was entitled. In response to that reference order, the Union projected a claim for promotion on gang-wise seniority 6302

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 3 , 2011 /BHADRA 12, 1933

[PART II-SEC . 3(

The Chariman- cum-Managing Director, Food Corporation of India, 16-20 , Barakhamba Lane , NewDelhi - 110001 .

....Manageme

AWARD 12. In view of reasons detailed above , it is announced that in the event ofpromotion ofthe workman on 22-4-10 primary question referred for adjudication became infructuous . Incidental question , as to whether the workman was entitled to promotion on gang -wise seniority or depot- wise seniority , would follow the rule which would be announced by the High Court of Delhi in the aforsaid writ petitions . An award , is accordingly, passed. It be sent to appropriate Government for publication.

Dr. R. K. YADAV, Presiding Officer

Dated: 22-7-2011

नई दिल्ली, 4 अगस्त, 2011

का.आ. 2358. औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार एफ.सी.आई. के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच , अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालय सं. 1 , नई दिल्ली के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 216/2011 ) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 4-8-2011 को प्राप्त हुआ था।

[ सं. एल -22012/314/2007- आई आर( सीएम- II ) ] डी. एस. एस. श्रीनिवास राव , डेस्क अधिकारी

New Delhi , the 4th August , 2011

Gang-wise seniority, along with other attributes 1 : physical fitness and suitability for the job etc. , was agre to be considered for promotion of departmental labo ranks , vide memorandum of settlement dated 24th ofM 1984, entered into between the Food Corporation of Ind (inshort the Corporation ) and F.C.I. Workers Union short the Union) . It was further agreed upon that in case L.R.P. Sardars and Mandals are in existence in the dep they will be given first preference in taking the place regular vacancies of Sardars and Mandals whenev occurring and the promotee Sardars or Mandal from t gang will take the place of L. R. P. Sardar and Mand Where ever a suitable candidate is not available within t Gang, depot-wise seniorty was to be made critera f promotion, and Local Depot Council concerned was to consulted on 24th of Feb. 2006 , circular No. 7/2006 w issued by the Corporation whereby criteria of gang- wi seniority for promotion to the post of Mandal and Sarda was change to depot - wise seniority. The circular, referr above , became a bone of contention and the Union serv a notice dated 12-12-2006 on the Corporation , intimatin their proposal to go on strike in all depots of the Corporatio after expiry of notice period of 14 days . Regional Labo Commissioner ( Central ) Kolkatta , intervened ar memorandum of settlement dated 7-11-07 was entered int during the course of conciliation proceedings . On th strength of the said settlement promotion policy of gan: wise seniority was replaced by depot - wise seniority.

S.O. 2358. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) , the Central Government hereby publishes the Award ( Ref. No. 216/ 2011) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal- cum- Labour Court , No. 1 , New Delhi as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the management of Food Corporation of India , and their workmen , received by the Central Government on 4-8-2011 .

[No. L -22012/314/2007 - IR ( CM - II ) ]

D. S. S. SRINIVASA RAO , Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

BEFORE DR. R. K. YADAV, PERSIDING OFFICER, CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL NO . 1 , KARKARDOOMA COURTS COMPLEX

DELHI

I. D. No. 216/2011

2. A post of Sardar fell vacant in gang No. 9 -B Narela Depot on 1-4-04 Mohd. Abzal , the Mandal , becam entitled for promotion to that post . Likewise a post < Mandal was lying vacant it gang No. 16 of the said dep and Mohd. Atik was entitled for promotion to that pos The Union served demand notice dated 8th Dec. 2006 , с the Corporation for promotion of Mohd . Abza and Mohd. Atik . When needful was not done , an industri : dispute was raised before the conciliation officer. Th Corporation resisted the claim and conciliation proceeding ended in failure. On considered of the failure report th appropriate Government referred the dispute to thi Tribunal , vide order No. L - 22012/ 314/ 2007 - IR ( CM- II ) Nev Delhi, dated 12-05-2008 , with followingterms:

The Organising Secretary,

Food Corporation of India Worker Union , 8585, Arakashan Road,

Paharganj .

New Delhi - 110055 .

Workman

Versus

"Whether the action of the management of Foo Corporation of India in not promoting Md . Abza Mandal to the post of Sardar and Md . Ati Handling Labour to the post of Mandal in Narel Depot is legal and justified ? To what relief is th workman concerned entitled? " 6303

भारत का राजपत्र सितम्बर 3 , 2011/ भाद्र 12, 1933

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

was raised they were members of the Union, but. subsequently in the year 2010 they have obtained membership of F. C. I. Handling Workers Union . They claim that in the event of their promotion, the dispute nowhere subsists . According to them , an award may be passed.

3. Claim statement was filed by the Union projecting that gang -wise seniority was to be considered for promotion of departmental laboures to the next higher rank . It has been asserted that post of a Sardar fell vacant in gang No. 9 -B ofNarela Depot on 1-4-04 and Mohd . Abzal was entitled to be promoted to that post by virtue of gang -wise seniority criteria, as per settlement dated 24-5-84 . A post ofMandal was also lying vacant in gang No. 16 of the said depot and Mohd. Atik , being the senior most handling labour in the said gang , was entitled to be promoted to that post. Willfuldelay in promotion of Shri Abzal and Atik cannot deprive them of their right to promotion. It was pleaded that the Tribunal maydirect the Corporation to promote them on the said posts , on the basis of gang-wise seniority.

7. Shri Promod Kumar Nayak , Vice President ofthe Union, swears in his affidavit that Mohd. Abzal and Mohd. Atik have violated the terms of settlement dated 24-4-84, when their accepted they have belated promotion order on 22-4-10. According to him , the workman are not a parties to the dispute , which was sponsored by the Union. He asserts that the controversy was not limited onlyto their promotion but it was related to timely order of promotion, based on settlement dated 24-4-84.

4.The Corporation demurred the claim pleading that clause 7 of the settlement dated 24-5-84 was terminated vide notice dated 24-2-06 , served on the Union . Gang-wise seniority was replaced by Depot wise seniority after re- organization of labour gangs , where ever required. The strength of Narela Depot projects that there were 33 gangs with 30 Sardars , 29 Mandals and 337 handling labours . After reorganization/ merger of incomplete gangs . there was requirement of 28 Sardars and 28 Mandals . Two Sardars and one Mandal were surplus in the said Depot . Industrial Dispute , raised by the Union, was resolved by way oftripartite settlement dated 7-11-07. In view of the changed position action of the Corporation in not promoting Mohd . Abzal and Mohd. Atik is legal and justified. Even otherwise promotion cannot be claimed as a matter of right . It has been projected that the dispute , raised by the Union is , Unsustainable .

8. Shri K. G. Rajan, Assistant General Manager of the Corporation , projects that clause 7 of settlement dated 24-5-84 provides for promotion on gang - wise seniority, subject to fitness and clearance of physical endurance test. However depot- wise seniority was mentioned as base seniority. With the passage of time, number of persons in a labour gang reduced , owing to various reasons. It resulted into reduction of labour strength in gang which ultimetely adversely affected the output of a gang. In view of changed scenario there was a need to renew clause 7 of settlement dated 24-5-84. Based on study of Saxena Committee, circular No. 7 of 2006 was issued. Policy decision taken by the Corporation emerge out of settlement dated 7-11-07 . Circular dated 20-11-07 was issued to enforce terms of settlement dated 7-11-07. He announces that the workmen were promoted in contravention of circulars Nos . 7/2006 , 11/07 and settlement dated 7-11-07 . F.C.I. Handling Workers Union filed a writ petition (civil ) No. 3256 of 2010 seeking quashment ofcircular Nos . 7/2006, 11/2007 and settlement dated 7-11-07. High Court of Delhi , vide its orders dated 12-5-10 and 17-5-2010 , has directed the Corporation to maintain status quo pertaining to the aforsaid circulars and settlement respectively . The Union also filed a writ petition (c) No. 3151/10 , assailing promotion orders of the workmen, which petition has been clubbed with the aforsaid writ petition. Promotions of the workman are also subject matter of the writ petitions , pending adjudication before High Court of Delhi .

5. During the course of adjudication process , an application was moved by Mohd . Abzal and Mohd. Atik on27-7-2010 , detailing therein that he have been promoted tothe post of Sardar and Mandal respectively and as such the reference has become infructuous . The Union also moved an application projecting that the aforsaid worker are not parties to the dispute . The dispute was raised by the Union, claiming that the workman , referred above , were entitled to promotion from retrospective dates on gang- wise seniority criteria . A community interest was raised in the form of the dispute , which cannot be frustrated by the workman . The Corporation also moved an application pleading therein that the workman concerned were promoted on the strength of conditional order( s ) , which have been challenged before High Court of Delhi . The Corporation claimed that the matter may be adjourned sine-die , awaiting outcome of the writ petition , so moved.

9.As emerge out of the reference order , the Tribunal was required to adjudicate as to whether action of the Corporation in not promoting the workmen to the post of Sardar and Mandal was legal and justified and to what relief they were entitled . In response to that reference order, the Union projected a claim for promotion on gang- wise seniority from a retrospective date , while the Corporation asserted that gang - wise seniority was replaced with depot- wise seniority criteria. Therfore the 6. Parties , including the workmen , were called upon to file their respective affidavits , on changed circumstances . Mohd. Abzal and Mohd . Atik project that he was been promoted to the post of Sardar and Mandal respectively, vide order(s ) dated 22-4-2010 . When dispute 6304

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 3 , 2011 /BHADRA 12 , 1933

[PART II-SEC. 3 ( ii ) ]

became infructuous. Incidental question, as to whether the workmen were entitled to promotion on gang-wise seniority or depot- wise seniority, would follow the rule which would be announced by the High Court ofDelhi in the aforsaid writ petitions . An award , is accordingly, passed. It be sent to appropriate Govt . for publication . Dated: 22-7-2011

Dr. R. K. YADAV, Presiding Officer नई दिल्ली , 5 अगस्त, 2011 question, which is to be adjudicated, is as to whether the action ofthe Corporation in not promoting the workmen is legal and justified. For adjudication of this primary question , rival parties have presented contradictory claims. Incidental question, which the Tribunal is supposed to adjudicate is as to whether promotion is to be made on gang-wise seniority or depot- wise seniority. Therefore on promotion of the workmen with effect from 22-4-10 primary question has become infructuous. However incidental question needs adjudication to answer the bone of contention raised by the Union .

का.आ. 2359.-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 न. -1 के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 98/89 ) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 5-8-2011 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल-20012/34/1989- आई आर( सी- I ) ] डी. एस. एस. श्रीनिवास राव , डेस्क अधिकारी New Delhi , the 5th August , 2011 10. The industrial dispute raised by the Union pertains toterms of employment or conditions of labour of the workmen. Though the dispute was espoused by the Union, yet theworkmen are beneficiary of the adjudication of process . In such a situation, when maindispute , referred for adjudication, becomes infructuous the Union cannot claim that the workmen are stranger and they may not be heard over the matter. It may be that at the time of espousal of the dispute , the Union was haunted with the idea of adjudication of the issue so that future dispute may not crop up in respect of similarly placed departmental labour. But that idea of the Union and its pleadings in the claim statement cannot knock down real beneficiaries , whose promotional issue was raised for adjudication.

S.O. 2359. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 98/1998) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal - cum- Labour Court No.1 , Dhanbad , as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the management of M/ s . BCCL and their workman , which was received by the Central Government on 5-8-2011 .

[No. L.- 22012/34/ 1989 - IR (C- I) ] D.S.S. SRINIVASA RAO , Desk Officer ANNEXURE

BEFORE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL NO . 1 , DHANBAD

Inthe matter of a reference U/ s . 10( 1) ( d) (2A) of I.D.Act . Reference No. 98 of 1998

Parties: Employers in relation to the management of Mudidih Colliery ofM/ s . B.C.C. Ltd. AND Theirworkman

Present: Shri H. M. Singh , Presiding Officer APPEARANCES:

Forthe Employers : Shri H.Nath , Advocate .

11.Without adjudication of the incidental issue , the Tribunal is not supposed to leave the process of adjudication in between . However the situation has changed. Writ petitions have been filed, which pend adjudication . Circulars issued by the Corporation touching its promotional policy of departmental labours and settlement dated 7-11-07 are under challenge in those writ petitions , besides the promotional order dated 22-4-10 , issued in favour of the workmen . Thus it is evident that the incidental question , which is yet to be adjudicated, is subject of adjudication in writ petitions referred above . Though the Tribunal has not been restrained by the High Court in proceedings with adjudication , yet it would be unadvisable to proceed further, sicne it would be productive of multiplication of litigation. The award of the Tribunal , on the incidental question referred above would be assailed before the court of writ jurisdiction , which would add to its docket . Adjournment of the matter sine- die would also not be in the interests of parties , since it would hang like sword of Damocles over the workmen . Under these circumstances it would be apt for the Tribunal not to proceed with adjudication of incidental question and to leave the matter with an observation that outcome of the decison of the writcourt will govern the answer of the said question .

For the Workman : Shri S.N. Goswami , Advocate

State : Jharkhand

Industry: Coal 12. In view of reasons detailed above , it is announced that in the event ofpromotion of the workmen on 22-4-10 primary question referred for adjuciation

Dated the 25-7-2011 6305 भारत का राजपत्र : सितम्बर 3 , 2011 / भाद्र 12 , 1933

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

AWARD

workman, but he did not submit any reply and did not join atArea No. XII and started absenting . In the year 1989 he has raised the present dispute on the false allegation that he was stopped from his duties by the management of Mudidih Colliery.

By Order No. L- 20012/ 34/89 - IR( Coal - I ) dated 28-8-89 the Central Government in the Ministry of Labour has , in exercise of the powers conferred by clause (d ) of sub - section ( 1 ) and sub - section (2A) of Section 10 of the I.D. Act , 1947, referred the following dispute for adjudication to this Tribunal :

In such circumstances , it has been prayed that this Hon'ble Tribunal be pleased to pass an award holding that the concerned workman is not entitled to any relief.

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

"Whether the action of the management of Mudidih Colliery of Sijua Area No. V of M/ s. Bharat Coking Coal Ltd. in stopping Shri Sakaldeo Singh , Attendance Clerk from duty is justified? If not , to whatrelief is the workman entitled?"

sides . 5.No oral evidence has been produced by any of the 2. The case of the concerned workman is that he was a permanent employee of Mudidih Colliery Area No. V of BCCL working as Attendance Clerk. He was transferred to Chanch Victoria Area No. XII of BCCL by Personnel Manager vide order dated 21-5-1976 and he was released videoffice order dated 26-5-76 . But he was allowed to join hisduty at Chanch Victoria due to vagueness of the office order , nor he was allowed to join at Mudidih Colliery in spite of giving representation to the management. But neither the management of Mudidih Colliery nor Chanch Victoria Colliery had taken responsibility for joining in duty to the concerned workman . The concerned workman has been restraining to join in duty and in stopping to perform duty without complying with Sec . 25 - F of I.D. Act is unjustified , illegal , arbitrary which amounts to wrongful stoppage of work and he is legally entitled for re- instatement in the service with backwages .

It has been prayed that this Hon'ble Tribunal be pleased to pass an award in favour of the workman by directing the management to re - instate the concerned workman with back wages since 26-5-76 till the date ofhis resumption ofduty.

6. Main argument advanced on behalf of the concerned workman is that he has been stopped by the management from duty. It has been argued that he was transferred by Mudidih Colliery where he was working as Attendance Clerk as permanent employee of that colliery and worked as Attendance Clerk continuously, but he had beentransferred to Chanch - Victoria Colliery by office order dated 21-5-76 and he was released vide officer order No. 1365 dated 26-5-76 and he had not been allowed to join at Chanch- Victoria Colliery nor he was allowed to join at Mididih Colliery though he had given representation to the management . It has also been argued that he was transferred and released from Mudidih Colliery without giving details of his salary, scale of pay etc. The concerned workman for this purpose moved application before the General Manager , Sijua Area on 16-11-1987 to resume his duty but he was not allowed. He also gave another application on 29-5-76 which was received by the management on 29-5-76 and also General Manager , Area No. V on 31-5-76 that he was not allowed to join in the capacity ofAttendance Clerk , but no action was taken by the management. It only shows that the management official was adamant to harass the workman without his fault . Another letter was issued by the management to the concerned workman for not joining duty. It only shows that one side management does not allow to join duty and in issuing letter they are adamant to harass the workman in another way. The concerned workman died on 25-1-1999 during the pendency of the case and his son , Viswa Vijay Singh , was substituted in place of the concerned deceased employee , Sakaldeo Singh.

7. Considering the above facts and circumstances , it shows that the action of the management Mudidih Colliery ofSiju Area No. V of M/ s. Bharat Coking Coal Ltd. stopping thathe is entitled 50% back wages from the date of stopage of his duty till his death i.e. 25-1-1999 . Management is directed to implement the award within 30 days from the date ofpublication of the award.

This is my Award.

H. M. SINGII , Presiding Officer 3. The case ofthe management is that the concerned workman was never stopped from his duties . It has been submitted that an office order dated 21-5-76 was issued from the office of the Director (Personnel ) transferring six workman from one area to another with the approval of the competent person . The concerned workman was transferred from Mudidih Colliery, Area No. V toArea No. XII , Chanch - Victoria Area , and he was released vide order dated 25-5-76 . The Peon went to the residence of the concerned workman to deliver the letter on 25-5-76 , 28-5-76, 3-6-76 and 11-6-76. But as the concerned workman left the colliery to avoid his transfer, the peon could not personally hand- over the letter to him . Therefore the letters were sent by registered post which was returned back with the postal remarks that the concerned workman was not available at his home . He declared sick in the meantime and left the colliery for the reasons best known to him . The ChiefPersonnel Manager of BCCL issued a letter dated 24/ 26-6-76 by regd . post calling explanation from the concerned 6306

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 3, 2011 /BHADRA 12 , 1933

[ PART II -SEC . 3 ( ii ) ] नई दिल्ली, 5 अगस्त, 2011

का.आ. 2360.-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में , केन्द्रीय सरकार उत्तर रेलवे के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच , अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण कानपुर के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 291/99 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , उगे केन्द्रीय सरकार को 4-8-2011 को प्राप्त हुआ था।

[सं. एल-41011/14/99- आईआर ( बी-1 ) ]

रमेश सिंह, डेस्क अधिकारी

New Delhi , the 5thAugust , 2011

S.O. 2360. -In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 291/99) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal- cum - Labour Court , Kanpur now as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between employers in relation to the management of Northern Railway and their workmen , received by the Central Government on 4-8-2011 .

[No. L-41011/ 14/99 - IR (B - I) ]

RAMESH SINGH , Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

BEFORE SHRI RAM PARKASH , HJS , PRESIDING OFFICER, CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL - CUM- LABOUR COURT, KANPUR

Industrial Dispute No.291 of 99

BETWEEN

Sri Dina Nath Tewari , Divisional Organization Secretary, Uttar Railway Karmchari Union, 119/74 , Kanpur.

And The Divisional Railway Manager, Northern Railway, Allahabad.

AWARD

1. Central Government MoL New Delhi vide notification No. 1-41011 /14/99 /IR(B - 1) dated 26-10-99 , has referred the following dispute for adjudication to this tribunal-

2.Whether the action of the management of Northern Railway in terminating the services of Sri Ram Krapal wit effectfrom6-1-97, is justified? If not what reliefthe workmar is entitled to ?

4.It is alleged that the claimant Sri Ram Krapal was appointed as a casual gang - man by the opposite party on 14-03-74 under PWI Head Quarter Northern Railway Kanpur and after completion of 120 days he was made regular. At the time of regular he was also been awarded wages under the Payment of Wages Act . As he was getting wages under Payment of Wages Act so the department sent a letter to him in the year 1996 for taking him on duty, but when the claimant reached therefor duty he was not caken on duty. On this he started writing registered letters to the department . There was a case pending for his regularization before ALC ( C ) Kanpur , at the same time he was taken on duty by the opposite party on 21-5-97 . While he was taken' on duty on 21-5-97 , he was not asked to submit any explaination which shows that he has been innocent and did not remained absent unauthorized manner. During the pendency of the conciliation proceedings before ALC ( C ) Kanpur, the opposite party issued a charge sheet dated 8-5-97 served upon him on 23-5-97 . He submitted the reply dated 29-5-97 showing aim to be innocent and saying that he always was willing to serve but he was not taken on duty . But the disciplinary authority without considering his explanation on the charges levelled against him appointed an enquiry officer on 9-5-97 The appointment officer was made with a malafide intention with a motive to punish him . The claimant was sent a registered letter dated 5-7-97 by Assistant 1 ivision Engineer N.R. Etawah , which was received by him on 9-7-97 at his home and replied by him on 10-7-97 . He expressed that he has not been absent since 26-6-97 but remained present on 26 and 27-6-97 . He was also given duty pass on 27-6-97 , which was dated 25- 6-97 wherein he was directed to report for his duty under Sahukar Gang man at Bhupatsarai railway station and a receipt of that letter was also taken from him . On 29-6-97 and 30-6-97 there was Weekly holidays and after seeking permission he had come to his residence Kanpur where he deli ill on 1-7-97 and he sent a telegram about his illness 13-7-97. He remained under the treatmemt of a private doctor till 10-8-97 . While he was to report for his duties on 11-8-97 in the way he met with an accident and seriously injured as a result ofwhich he was admitted in the railway hospital on 11-8-97 and submitted written information to this effect on 20-8-97 to Sr. Divisional Engineer Etawah . On the basis of his information he was issued a sick memo by the concern officer on 20-8-97 . Railway doctor has also received a certificate dated 20-8-97 that he remained sick El 18-10-97 . On 19-10-97 he presented himselfpresented for duty after giving an application . Thereafter getting leave on 21-10-97 and on 22-10-97 he came to his home at Kanpur, where his wife was seriously ill on this he made an application for extending his leave for 12 days and sent the same by registered . It is contended by the claimant that though he was not present on duty during period from 29-5-97 till the date passing of the final orders by the 3. Brief facts are - 6307 भारत का राजपत्र: सितम्बर 3 , 2011 /भाद्र 12 , 1933

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii ) ]

10. Whether the domestic inquiry conducted by the management was fair and proper.

disciplinary authority but he remained under medical treatment by a private doctor and was also remained under treatment of railway doctor. His presence was only for one or two days .

11. To decide this issue a fair opportunity of hearing was given to both the parties . In this respect the claimant has adduced himself as W.W.1 the opposite party has . adduced evidence of Sri PN Singh M.W.1 .

5. During the period of inquiry he received communication regarding progress of domestic inquiry and on account of his illness he made a request that due to his illness he is completely unable to participate in the domestic enquiry but that request was ignored and the concerned authorities in an arbitrary and illegal manner concluded an ex - party inquiry against him and punished accordingly.

12.After examining the oral as well as documentary evidence the aforesaid preliminary issue was decided by me on 4-4-2011 by a detailed order by holding that the enquiry conducted by the management against the claimant was vitiated. In that order I have given an opportunity to the opposite party to prove the charges before this tribunal . But despite several dates the opposite party failed to produce any cogent and direct evidence in support of the charges .

6.Opposite party has filed written statement wherein it is stated that on 9-10-82 hundred casual labourers on account ofbeing surplus at Kanpur were shifted to Etawah under PWI Etawah . Sri Ram Krapal reached Kanpur on 16-10-82 , and pressed the P /WI to mark him present for the period 9-10-82 to 16-10-82 though he did not attend the duties during that period . The PWI refused to mark him present . Thereupon there was a serious marpit. 48 workmen including Sri Ram Krapal were retrenched. Thereupon ALC Kanpur had conciliation proceedings and it was settled that all the 48 workers involved in the dispute will be reinstated and the period of their absence will be treated as dies non . All the relevant documents have been annexed with the reply of the opposite party. According to the above settlement Sri Ram Krapal did not report for duty hence he remained retrenched employee . However the claimant on false pretext filed 17 cases , though certain cases were decided in his favour. In one of the case which was running in civil court the standoff the railway was thatthe claimant was a retrenched employee was accepted . It is undisputed fact that the claimant was retrenched employee and he never reported for duty. The claimant approached the administration he was assigned the duty he took the pass and papers for joining duty but did not report for duty and had been submitting false letters . Thereupon a full fledged disciplinary proceeding was initiated and the claimant was removed from his services . He also preferred an appeal and the same was rejected. It is also stated that this court has no jurisdiction . They have also filed Para wise comments denying the aversion ofthe claimant . It is also stated that there was no deviation of law and rules of natural justice in the conduct of inquiry and award of punishment were fully complied with . Therefore , the claim of the claimant lacks merit and is liable to be rejected.

7. The claimant has also filed rejoinder but nothing new has been stated therein except reiterating the facts of the claim statement .

13. Initially burden lies upon the management to prove the charges but they failed to prove the charges . Even then the claimant produced himself in evidence and proved his case but the management failed to discharge.their burden , therefore in the given circumstances of the case the tribunal has no hesitation to believe the claim of the workman . medically examined and the doctor has declared him fit. In the year October 1982 he was transferred and made to work under Assistant Engineer Special Etawah from Kanpur. He has appeared before Sri P.N Singh PWI on 9-10-82 , who has written to Sri Pal a mate saying that he will be taken on duty. Accordingly his name was entered in the attendance sheet at serial no.15 and there is an endorsement of joining his duty on 9-10-82 . PWI has asked the mate to mark his attendance but the column against his name in the attendance register remained unmarked most of the time due to which PWI started feeling animosity against the claimant . On 16-10-82 the claimant was on duty at the place of 1102/325 , where the PWI Sri PN Singh came there to see the site . The claimant again made a request that his attendance is not being marked in the attendance register . Onthis the PWI misbehaved with him and there was a hot discussion . The persons who were present there intervened. On this a fake complaint was sent to GRP Phaphoond ' on 16-10-82 . It shows that the claimant was present at his working place on 16-10-82 . Thereafter the PWI stopped taking work from the claimant and other gang manwho were present on 16-10-82 . The matter was sent to ALC Kanpur and according to compromise in between the parties on 31-1-83 . 47 gang men were taken on work on 7-2-83 . Claimant also reached at the place of his duty praying that he should also be taken on work but he was refused . When the claimant was taken on duty and he was not paid wages accordingly, then he made complaint under Payment ofWages Act , 1936. The cases are 609/83 and on words which are mentioned in Para 6 of the claimant statemet and certain cases are still pending .

8. Both the parties have filed the documentary evidence.

14. Therefore from the above discussion I hold that the action of the management in terminating the services 9. Before deciding the case on merits a preliminary issue has been farmed in this case which is as follow.

3202 GI /11-15 6308

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 3 , 2011 /BHADRA 12, 1933

[ PART II-SEC. 3 ( ii)]

AWARD

ofthe workman with effect from 6-11-97 is neither legal nor justified . Accordingly the workman is entitled to be reinstated in service with consequential benefits attached withthe post.

15. Accordingly for the reasons given above the reference is answered in favour of the workman and against the management .

By Order No. L - 20012/ 303 / 89 - IR (Coal I ) dated 13-7-90 the Central Government in the Ministry of Labour has , in exercise of the powers conferred by clause ( d) of sub - sec ( 1 ) and sub sec . (2A) of Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 , referred the following dispute for adjudication to this Tribunal :

Dt.: 25-7-11

RAM PARKASH , Presiding Officer नई दिल्ली, 5 अगस्त, 2011

"Whether the action of the management of Moonidih Project , M/ s . Bharat Coking Coal Ltd. , P.O. Moonidih , Dist. Dhanbad in stopping three increment of Shri A.N. Dwivedi , Foreman - in- Charge under order dated 15-/ 17-12-87 was justified? If not , whatrelief the workman is entitled?"

2. The case of the concerned workman is that he was issued a charge - sheet dated 12-12-1985 , which reads as का.आ. 2361 ,-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. - 1 के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 158/90) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 5-8-2011 को प्राप्त हुआ था।

[सं. एल-20012/303/1989- आईआर ( सी- I ) ] डी.एस.एस. श्रीनिवास राव , डेस्क अधिकारी New Delhi , the 5th August , 2011

" It has been reported that on 21-11-85 in the first shift at about 11-00 A.M. while you were supervising the job of salveging of old cable from Shift No. 1 , the cable slipped and this resulted a fotal and one serious accident . Thus you have not absorved the safety provision as per Mines Rules and Regulation while supervising the above job . Your above acts amounts to miscounduct as per Certified Standing Orders applicable to moonidih Project onaccount of the following charges : --

17( i ) ( f) Habitual or serious neglect of work.

17( i ) ( q) Any breach of Mines Act , 1952 or any otherAct of any Rules regulations bye - laws thereunder or any Standing Orders . "

S.O. 2361. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) , the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 158/ 1990) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal- cum- Labour Court - 1 , Dhanbad as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between employers in relation to the management of M/ s . BCCL and their workmen which was receivedby the Central Government on 5-8-2011 .

[No. L- 20012/303 / 1989 - IR (C - I) ] D.S.S. SRINIVASA RAO , Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL No. 1, DHANBAD

Inthe matter of a refrence U/ s . 10( 1 ) ( d) (2A) of I.D. Act .

Reference No. 158 of 1990

Parties : Employers in relation to the management of Moonidih Project of M/ s . B.C.C. Ltd.

AND

Their Workman

Present : Shri H. N. Singh, Presiding Officer .

Shri Dwivedi was requested to sumbit written explanation to Supdt . of Mines , Moonidih within 3 days of receipt of chage- sheet . He replied to the charge- sheet and submitted that the denial of adequate opportunity to defend himself amounts to miscarriage ofjustice . Prior to issue of the charge- sheet there was a preliminary enquiry held by Shri A. K. Mimdya , Safety Officer, Sri K. K. Mishra , Safety Engineer, Moonidih on the basis of the enquiry held by them. All they did not specifically find the concerned workman guilty ofnegligence in duty. A domostic enquiry was ordered under which the concerned workman was found guilty for violation of Regulation- 190 and was awarded punishment by the management for denying him three annual increments . He filed a reprosentation to the management to set aside the punishement order which was not accepted . Then an industrial dispute was raised which ended is failure and then the dispute has been referred to this Tribunal for adjudication .

Appearences:

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

For the Workman : Shri B. B. Dwivedi , Advocate.

State : Jharkhand

Industry: Coal

Dated, the 27-7-2011

Ithas been submitted that the concerned workman did not get proper opportunity to give a proper explanation and therefore , was highly prejudiced. The enquiry officer should have provided in that opportunity to defend himself properly. In this respect proper action was not taken by the Enquiry Officer. Director General of Himes Safety did not 6309 भारत का राजपत्र सितम्बर 3 , 2011 / भाद्र 12 , 1933

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

The concerned workman has filed documents which have been marked as Exts . W- 1 to W- 5 , on formal proof.

lodge any criminal case against the concerned workman for any violation of Coal Mines Regulation under Clause- 190. It has been submitted that the concerned workman was not governed by a Standing Order ofMoonidih Colliery for the reason that he was appointed by N.C.D.C.

6. Main argument advanced on behalf of the concerned workman is that the management illegally stopped his increments by order dated 15/ 17-12-87 on the ground of charge- sheet issued on 12-12-85 regarding incident taken place on 21-11-85 at 11 AM under Clause

17( 1 ) ( f)= " Habitual or serious neglect of work " and It has been prayed that the punishment of withholding 3 annual increments by the management is unjustified and the Hon'ble Tribunal be pleased to pass an award setting aside the order of punishment and directing the management to pay back wages and other emolements as admissible to him .

17(1 ) ( q) " Any breach of the Mines Act, 1985 or any other Act or any rules , regulations or bye- laws thereunder, or of any Standing Orders ."

7. The mangement argued that the concerned workman was chargesheeted , an enquiry was conducted and after enquiry he was found to be neglect of work under Clause 18 ( 1 ) ( f) and Clause 17( i ) ( q) of Certified Standing Orders .

8. The workman's representative argued that he is not covered by Certified Standing Orders of Monidih Project as he is covered by National Coal Development Corporation and on this ground the charge- sheet is illegal and against the law. The management has failed to give any explanation that the Certified Standing Order of Moonidih Project is applicable to the concerned workman .

9. Another argument advanced on behalf of the management is that the concerned workman is supervisory staff drawing salary of Rs . 1600 per month, so he is not a workman under I.D. Act and so this dispute is not an industrial dispute . But in this respect the management has not filed any document to show that the concerned workman is a supervisory staff and getting more than Rs. 1600 p.m.

10. Another argument advanced on behalf of the concerned workman is that D.G.M.S. conducted enquiry in which he was not found responsible . He was working under instruction ofEngineer - Incharge .

3. The case of the management is that the concerned workman performs mainly supervisory duties and draws wages more than Rs . 1600 per month . Therefore , he is not a workman as per provision of Sec . 2(s) of the I.D. Act and the present reference is not arising out of any industrial dispute . The concerned workman . Foreman - Incharge B. L. Shivnarayan committed serious contravention of Regulation 190 of the C.M.R. 1957 by deviating from normal procedure of Salvaging Cables installed inpits and adopting some unscientific procedure in a manner amounting to negligent acts on 21-11-85 at No. 1 Pit of Moonidih Project which resulted in death of B. L. Shivnarayan , the Engineer - Incharge of the job and serious injury to Sri Ishwar Manjhi , a workman engaged on that job . A chargesheet dated 12-12-85 was issued to the concerned workman on the allegation of commission of misconduct of neglect of work . He replied to the charge- sheet on 18-5-85 shifting the responsibility to late B. L. , Shivnarayan. The management appointed Sri H. R ,. Uppal , Supdt . Engineer ( E & M ) as Enquiry Officer by letter dated 22/23-10-86 to conduct the departmental enquiry relating to the chargesheet issued to the concerned workman . In the enquiry the concerned workman was given full opportunity to defend himself. After conducting enquiry the Enquriy Officer submitted his report on 29-9-87 holding the concerned workman guilty of the misconduct alleged against him . The matter was examined by competent authority and the G.M./Chief Mining Engineer approved for imposition of punishment on the concerned workman. The Supdt. of Moonidih Project issued the order of punishment by his letter dated 15/17-12-87 stopping three increments to him. It has been submitted that imposition of punishment is legal and justified.

It has been prayed that the Hon'ble Tribunal be pleased to pass the award holding that the concerned workman is not entitled to any relief:

In this respect enquiry report submitted by M.Н. mallick, Dy. C.M.E. ( Safety) , A.K. Ghosh, Addl . C.M.E.- (Safety) and S.P. Mukherjee , Supt . Eng . (Safety) and they found responsibility of only late Shivanarayan , whose fetel accident caused and he was highly experienced engineer and he was supervising the job and DGMS Enquiry Committee found no responsibility of the concerned workman regarding above accident . In this respect whole reponsibility was on late Shivnarayan , who was experienced engineer and who was supervising the job.

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

5.No oral evidence has been given by either side .

Another letter which has been written by DGMS dated 28-4-1986 which states that (i ) Sri B. L. Shivanarayan, Engineer , supervising the job ensured that , the operation of cable lifting was carried out by his subordinates in a safe manner , and thus the provision of Reg . 50(d) of Coal Mines Regulations , 1957 , not been contravened.

The management has filed documents which have beenmarked as Exts . M - 1 to M - 8 , on formal proof.

6310

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 3 , 2011 /BHADRA 12 , 1933

[ PART II-SEC. 3 (ii) ]

New Delhi , the 5th August , 2011 ( ii ) Sri A. N. Dwivedi , Foreman Incharge and competent person not omitted to ensure that , the binding ofthe cable were adequately done , and thus the provisions ofReg . 190 of Coal Mines Regulations , 1957 , not been negligently contravened.

S.O. 2362.- In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) , the Central Government hereby publishes the Award ( Ref. No. 163 / 2000) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal - cum- Labour Court- 1 , Dhanbad as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of M / s . BCCL. and their workman , which was received by the Central Government on 5-8-2011 .

In the above report it has been mentioned that A. Ν . Dwivedi Foreman Incharge is also held responsible for his failure to ensure that , the cable was adequately bound with the Winch rope , and thus he omitted to ensure safety of work persons . He is thus hold responsible for contravention of Reg . 190 of Coal Mines Regulations , 1967 , which caused the accident .

[No. 1-20012-135/ 1997- IR ( C - I )| D.S.S. SRINIVASA RAO , Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL No. 1 , DHANBAD In the enquiry no oportunity was given to the concerned workman for submitting his case and this enquiry was conducted in absence and back of the concerned workman , which cannot help the management (Ext . M-4) .

In the matter of a reference U /s . 10 ( 1 ) ( d) ( 2A) of 1.D. Act . Reference No. 163 of 2000

Parties : Employers in relation to the management of Katras Area of M/ s . B.C.C. Ltd.

AND

TheirWorkman

PRESENT : Shri H. M. Singh , Presiding Officer APPEARENCES :

Another argument advanced on behalf of the concerned workman that he was acquitted from criminal court as per Ext . W- 4 under Sec . 304(A) , 337 , 338 and 287 I.P.C. So , the enquiry report can not be ground for stoppage of his increments . Ext . W-4 shows that the Judicial Magistrate , 1st Class , Dhanbad vide order dated 30-7-91 acquitted the concerned workman under Sec . 304(A) , 337 , 338 and 287 I.P.C. and held the prosecution has failed to establish the negligence of the accused persons by cogent evidence. So, the withholding of the increments workman cannot be justified by the management .

Forthe Employers For the Workers Shri D. K. Verma , Advocate : Shri S. Bose , Treasurer , Rashtriya Colliery Mazdoor Sangh

State : Jharkhand

Industry: Coal Dated, the 26-7-2011

AWARD

11. Considering the above facts and circumstances , I hold that the action of the management of Moonidih Project, M/ s . B.C.C. Ltd. , P.O. Moonidih , Dist. Dhanbad in stopping three increments of Shri A. N. Dwivedi , Foreman- in- charge under order dated 15 / 17-12-87 was unjustified. So, the order of punishment of withholding three annual increments by the management is set aside and the concerned workman is entitled to be paid back wages accordingly. The management is directed to implement the award within 30 days from the date of publication of the Award.

This is my Award.

By Order No. L -20012/ 135 / 97 - IR ( C - I ) dated 26-5-2000 the Central Government in the Ministry of Labour has , in exercise of the powers conferred by clause (d) of sub -sec. ( 1) and sub - sec . (2A) of Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 , referred the following dispute for adjudication to this Tribunal :

H. M. SINGH, Presiding Officer

नई दिल्ली, 5 अगस्त , 2011

"Whether the demand of the Rashtriya Colliery Mazdoor Sangh from the management of M/s . BCCL , Katras Area that Shri Ajab Lal Sharma , workman may bedeclared medically unfit for continued employment due to his heart problem is justified? If so , to what relief is the workman entitled? " का.आ. 2362.-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. -1 के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 163/2000 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 5-8-2011 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल-20012/135/1997- आईआर (सी- I ) ] डी.एस.एस. श्रीनिवास राव , डेस्क अधिकारी

2. The case of the concerned workman is that he is a permanent employee in clerical cadre at Salanpur Colliery. During early 1992 he felt uncomfortable due to physical trouble and got himself admitted for treatment in the employer's Hospital in Katras Area. When no relief was receivedby him from the hospital treatment , the matter was taken by the union with the General Manager of Katras 6311 भारत का राजपत्र सितम्बर 3 , 2011 /भाद्र 12, 1933

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

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

5.The concerned workman produced himself as WM- 1 and proved documents as Exts . W- 1 to W- 5 and " X " for identification .

Prasad. The management has produced MW- 1 , Naresh

6. Main argument advanced on behalf of the concerned workman is that the management not declared him medically unfit.

Area. On his request , the C.M.D. of M/ s . BCCL was pleased to refer him to Bokaro Steel Plant General Hospital for conducting ' X ' Ray examination whereafter a fresh Medical Board was formed at Koyla Nagar Central Hospital on 1-12-94 . No result was communicated to the concerned workman and he continued to suffer with his unknown ailments from which he has not recovered till date . The concerned workman could not concentrate on his daily routine much less to speak about performing duties as a clerk under the management . So he requested the management that he be given the benefit of medical unfit so that he can put his dependent son on a job under the management and he himself go back to his village home and pass time peacefully. In this respect no action has been taken by the management.

In this respect the management has argued that he was found fit . His medical examination was conducted two times and was found medically fit to perforım his job . So he has demanded false claim for medical unfitness at the verge of retirement and to get his son employed.

In this respectWW- 1 in his cross - examination stated that I was referred to Apex Medical Board on 10-3-93.

Under such circumstances , it has been prayed that the Hon'ble Tribunal be pleased to pass an award in favour ofthe concerned workman and direct the management to allow him all the benefits of medical unfitness as provided in the service conditions of the workman and also allow any other or further relief as may deem fit and proper .

He also admited that he was supernnuated w.e.f. 6-12-94 . He was referred to Bokaro General Hospital . After report ofBokaro General Hospital he was examined by the ApexMedical Board of the Management .

In this respect the concerned workman has filed Ext . W- 3 which shows that he was found medically fit by MedicalBoard. So there is no question that he should be declared unfit by the management . Ii only shows that he wants to get employment of his son on the ground of medical unfitness at the verge of his superannuation .

7. The management argued the dispute was referred after superannuation of the concerned workman in the year 1997 to get his dependent son employed on the ground of medical unfitness which is unconstitutional and void .

8. considering the above facts and circumstances , I hold that the demand of the Rashtriya Colliery Mazdoor Sangh from the management of M/s . B.C.C.L. , Katras Area that Sri Ajablal Sharma, Workman, may be declared medically unfit for continuing employment due to his heart problem is not justified and hence the concerned workman is not entitled to any relief.

This is my Award.

H. M. SINGII , Presiding Officer

नई दिल्ली , 5 अगस्त , 2011

3. The case of the management is that the concerned workman with a view to get his dependent employed made anattempt to indicate that he was medically unfit on account of heart trouble and demanded from the management to get him medically examined and to declare him medically unfit for continuing to the employment in the capacity of a clerk. The management referred his case to the Medical Board ofM/ s . BCCL, constituted at Koyla Bhawan Hospital and he was examined on 10-3-93 by the Apex Medical Board and he was declared medically fit to continue on his original job .His date of birth was 6-12-34 and he was scheduled to be superannuated w.e.f.6-12-94 . Therefore , he made another attempt to get himself medically examined by the Bokaro Medical Hospital for his examination. After receipt ofthe report from Bokaro Hospital , the Apex Medical Board was constituted to examine his case on 1-12-94 and they examined the case of the concerned workman in detail . Bokaro General Hospital indicated TMT report as positive and on that basis , it was examined and found that he was having schaemic heart disease which generally appears after a person cross the age of 50 and i.e. not a serious type ofdisease for declaring any workman unfit for his job. He continued to work on his original job and was superannuted w.e.f. 6-12-94 . It has been submitted that demand for employment ofdependent in Public Sector Undertaking is unconstitutional and void and only on compassionate ground, suitable cases are considered for employment of dependents . He continued to work till the date of his superannuation and his service was never terminated on theground ofmedical unfitness , as Such , he cannot demand any reliefby way of employment of dependent .

का.आ. 2363.-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार भारतीय जीवन बीमा निगम के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच , अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण , मुम्बई के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 10/2006 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 5-8-201 । को प्राप्त हुआ था।

[सं. एल -17012/29/2004 आईआर ( बी-1 ) ]

रमेश सिंह , डेस्क अधिकारी It has been prayed that the Tribunal be pleased to pass the award holding that the concerned workman is not entitled to any relief.

6312

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: SEPTEMBER 3 , 2011 /BHADRA 12 , 1933

[ PART II-SEC. 3 (ii ) ] New Delhi , the 5th August, 2011

S.O. 2363. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947 ) , the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. CGIT- 1/10 of2006) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal- cum- Labour Court No. 1 , Mumbai now as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the management of Life Insurance Corporation of India , The St. Divisional Manager, B - 26 , Sudamapuri Society , Life Insurance of India , Divisional Office , Army School and their workmen , received by the Central Government on 5-8-2011.

Peonon temporary basis for the period from 2-11-1999 to 30-11-1999 and thereafter he was appointed for the period from 2-12-1999 to 31-12-1999. After 31-12-1999 he was not issued any letter of appointment and instead some fresh person was appointed on the post held by him on temporary basis . The workman has prayed that the action of the first party in not continuing his services is in violation of the provisions of Sections 25 - G and 25 - H of the Act and that the termination of his services w.e.f. 31-12-1999 is illegal and unjustified. He has also prayed that he be reinstated by the first party w.e.f. 1-1-2000 with all consequential benefits arising out of such employment .

[No. L- 17012/29 /2004- IR (B- I) ] RAMESH SINGH, Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL No. 1 , MUMBAI Justic G. S. Sarraf, Presiding Officer Refence No. CGIT- 1/ 10 of 2006

PARTIES: Employers in relation to the management of Life Insurance Corporation of India

3.According to the written statement filed by the first party the workman is unnecessarily litigating without having any right of any nature whatsoever . The claim made by the workman is wholly misconceived and is not maintainable . Sections 25-G and 25 - II of the Act are not applicable to the second party. According to the written statement there is no right of absorption or reinstatement to a person who was appointed purely on temporary basis against leave vacancy as in the case of the second party workman . The first party has , therefore , prayed that the claim ofthe second party workman be rejected.

AND

4. The second party workman filed rejoinder.

TheirWorkman ( Arun Shankar Howale)

APPEARENCES :

For the Management : Mr. Bhalerao , Adv.

For the Workman : Mr. Umesh Nabar , Adv .

5. The second party workman filed his affidavit and he was cross - examined by learned counsel for the first party .An affidavit of one Prabhakar Tukaram Shelar was filed on behalf ofthe first party and he was cross - examined by learned counsel for the second party workman .

State : Maharashtra

6. Heard learned counsels for the parties .

Mumbai , dated, the 8th day of July 2011 .

AWARD

Inexercise of powers conferred under clasue ( d) of sub- section ( 1 ) of Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( hereinafter referred to as the Act) the Central Government has referred the following dispute for adjudication to this Tribunal :

7. It is clearfrom the letters of appointment that the second party workman was appointed against a temporary vacancy purely on temporary basis and strictly for the period mentioned in the appointment letters . The second party workman has worked for less than 90 days in total and he was last appointed for the period from 2-12-1999 to 31-12-1999 . He raised controversy regarding his employment for the first time in 2002 that is after an expiry of more than three years . He was cross - examined on 28-2-2011 and there he stated that he was 44 years old .

"Whether the action of the management of LIC of India in terminating the services of Shri Arun Shankar Howale w.e.f 1-1-2000 is justified or not ? If not , what reliefhe is entitled to and from which date ?"

8. Temporary employee cannot claim to be made permanent on the expiry of his term of appointment . It is not open to the Court to prevent regular recruitment at the instance of temporary employee whose period of employment has come to an end. Thus in my opinion the second party workman is not entitled to any relief in this matter.

9. The reference is answered in the manner stated hereinabove and it is held that the second party workman isnot entitled to any relief.

10. An Award is made accordingly.

2.As per the statement of claim filed by the second party workman he was issued letterdt . 22-9-99 by the first party informing him that one post of peon was to be filled in on temporary basis with the Branch Manager of the first party at Miraj Branch and calling upon him to remain present at the branch office with original documents on 29-9-1999 . He accordingly attended the office of Branch Manager , Miraj Branch where he was interviewed and thereafter a letter of appointmentdt . 1-10-1999 was issued to him for the period from 4-10-1999 to 31-10-1999 . Не accordingly joined the services of the first party at Miraj Branch . He was thereafter issued another letter of appointment on 2-11-1999 appointing him on the post of

JUSTICE G. S. SARRAF, Presiding Officer 6313 भारत का राजपत्र : सितम्बर 3 , 2011 / भाद्र 12 , 1933

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

AWARD

नई दिल्ली, 8 अगस्त, 2011

Passed on this 22nd day of July, 2011

1. The Government of India , Ministry of Labour vide its Notification No. L-41012/ 195/2001 - IR(B - I ) dated 22-3-2002 has referred the following dispute for adjudication by this tribunal:-

का.आ. 2364.- औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसराण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार दक्षिण पूर्व रेलवे 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/48/02 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 5-8-2011 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल-41012/195/2001- आईआर ( बी- I ) ]

"Whether the action of the Railways through AEN, South Eastern Railways , Manendragarh in removing the services of Shri Bharat S/ o Ramjiwan , Gangman w.e.f. 13-8-1998 is justified? If not, to what reliefthe workman is entitled?"

रमेश सिंह , डेस्क अधिकारी

New Delhi , the 8th August, 2011

S.O. 2364. 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/48/02 ) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal- cum-Labour Court , Jabalpur as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the management of South Eastern Railway, Bilaspur Division, (MP) and their workmen, received by the Central Government on 5-8-2011 .

[No. L-41012/ 195/2001 - IR (B- I) ]

RAMESH SINGH , Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

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

No. CGIT/LC /R/48 /02

Presiding Officer : Shri Mohd. Shakir Hasan

Shri B.S. Naidu ,

Vice President, AIREC ,

2. The case of the Union/ workman in short is that the workman was initially appointed as a Gangman and was posted under Permanent Way Inspector, South Eastern Railway, Bijuri . He was served with a charge- sheet dt. 9-12-1997 for unauthorized absent w.e.f. 24-7-90 . The same was received by him on 1-2-1998 . He submitted his reply on 7-2-1998 wherein he categorically stated the reasons for his absence . He was mentally sick . The management initiated departmental enquiry and Shri N. C. Mandal , CIO was appointed as Eriquiry Officer who informed the workman to attend the enquiry on 11-4-1998. It is alleged that the workman was not given proper opportunity to engage Defence Asstt . The workman requested to supply the copy of the statement but he was refused to provide the same . The Enquiry Officer did not provide the documents mentioned in the charge -sheet . There was no Presenting Officer and the Enquiry Officer also acted as a Presenting officer. After completion ofthe enquiry, the Enquiry Officer submitted his enquiry report which was supplied to him on 8-8-98 . The Enquiry was conducted in a single day and there was no name of the witness who had given any statement before the Enquiry Officer without giving any time , the order of removal from service was issued by the Assistant Engineer , SE Railway on 13-8-1998 who was not appointing authority. The workman preferred an appeal against the removal order but the said appeal was not decided. On these grounds , it is submitted that the removal order dated 13-8-1998 be set aside and the workman be reinstated with back wages .

145, Keshular Aulas , Samritivan Turning Point, Ramkishore Nagar , Bilaspur

...Workman

Versus

The Sr. DEN,

South Eastern Railway, Bilaspur Division, Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh

The Sr. DPO , South Eastern Railway, Bilaspur Divison, Bilaspur ( Chhattisgarh )

3. The management appeared and filed Written Statement. The case of the management , interalia , is that the statement ofclaim is filed by one Shri B , S. Naidu , said to be Vice Chairman ofA.I.R.C. who is not'an office bearer ofthe Registered Union . It is stated that the workman was habitual absentee and since 24-7-90 , he was unauthorized absent from duty. He was admittedly chargesheeted . He accepted the charges during the enquiry and therefore he was removed from the service on his committing serious misconduct . He had not intimated about his sickness , nor submitted unfit certificate from the Railway Doctor. It is stated that he appeared in the departmental enquiry without any Defence Counsel though he was advised to

...Management 6314

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 3 , 2011 /BHADRA 12, 1933

[PART II-SEC. 3 ( ii) ]

and the principle of natural justice was followed . He had voluntarily accepted the charges . This shows that there is no illegality in the departmental proceeding specially in absence of any evidence in rebuttal . I find that the departmental proceeding conducted by the management against the workman is legal and proper. This issue is , thus , decided in favour of the management .

8. Issue No. II

engage his Defence Counsel . In the instant case , the departmental enquiry was mainly based on documentary evidence and there was no need of nomination of Presenting Officer as per rule. It is stated that sufficient opportunity was provided to the delinquent workman but he had himself accepted the charges of his unauthorized absence . Assistant Engineer was appointing authority of the Gangman and he was rightly removed him from his service . On these grounds , it is submitted that the reference be answered in favour of the management.

4. On the basis of the pleadings of the parties , the following issues are settled for adjudication-

1. whether the departmental proceeding conducted by the management against the workman is legal and proper?

Considering the discussion made above , I find that the delinquent workman had voluntarily accepted the charges in departmental enquiry and there is no other evidence in rebuttal . Thus it is clear that the action of the management in removing the workman from service for long absence of about seven years is justified and proper. This issue is also decided in favour of the management .

9. Issue No. III

ΙΙ . Whether the action of the management in removing the workman from services w.e.f. 13-8-98 is justified?

To what other relief, the workman is entitled?

I find that there is no merit and the punishment appears to be just and proper. I further find that there is no need to interfere in the punishment order awarded to the workman by the management . Accordingly the reference is answered .

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

5. During the course of proceeding the Union/ workman became absent and the workman did not turn up for cross-examination . As such evidence is of no use . Lastly the reference is proceeded exparte against the Union/workman on 10-1-2011 .

6. Issue No. I

11. 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 नई दिल्ली , 8 अगस्त, 2011

का.आ. 2365.-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसराण में , केन्द्रीय सरकार न्यूकीलियर पावर कार्पोरेशन एवं के 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 53/2008 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 8-8-2011 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल -42012/262/2002 आईआर ( सीएम- II ) ] डी.एस.एस. श्रीनिवास राव , डेस्क अधिकारी New Delhi , the 8th August , 2011 Since the proceeding is exparte against the Union/ workman and therefore this issue is taken up alongwith other issues and is not taken up as preliminary issue . It is an admitted fact that the chargesheet dated 9-12-1997 was received by the workman and he submitted his reply of the chargesheet. It is also admitted that the workman appeared in the departmental proceeding . The notice dated 27-3-98 ( Paper No. 10) filed by the management which shows that the workman was directed in appear in the enquiry on 11-4-98 with Defence Representative but the workman admittedly appeared in the enquiry without any Defence Representative . This shows that the opportunity was given to the workman to defend himself . The statement of the delinquent workman adduced before the Enquiry Officer shows that the workman had admitted the charges of unauthorized absence. The statement further shows that he had deposed voluntarily. There is no other evidence in rebuttal to prove that the statement was taken in coercion or duress . The documentary evidence clearly shows that the opportunity was given to the workman to defend himself.

S.O. 2365. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) , the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 53/2008) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal- cum - Labour Court- 2 , Mumbai as shown in the Annexure , in the Industrial Dispute between the management of Nuclear Power Corporation , and their workmen , received by the Central Government on 8-8-2011 .

[No. L -42012/ 262/2002 - IR ( CM - II ) ] D. S.S. SRINIVASA RAO, Desk Officer 7. The management has examined one witness . The management witness Shri R. Shankaran is Asstt . Personnel officer at Bilaspur. He has supported the case of the management . He has stated that the workman was habitual absentee and was continuous absent since 24-7-90 . He had not submitted Private Medical Certificate as per rule nor any Unfit Certificate of the Railway doctor of the long absence . He had participated in the departmental enquiry 6315 भारत का राजपत्र : सितम्बर 3, 2011 / भाद्र 12 , 1933

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

ANNEXURE

like Mr. Chopdekar, ( d ) refusing to accept letter dated 2-3-96 from Mr. K. K. Singh .

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL No. 2, MUMBAI

PRESENT : K. B. KATAKE , Presiding Officer/ Judge

REFERENCE No. CGIT- 2/53 of 2008

EMPLOYERS IN RELATION TO THE MANAGEMENT OF NUCLEAR POWER CORPORATION

M/ s . Nuclear Power Corporation

Tarapur Atomic Power Station,

P.O. TAPP, Distt . Thane 401 504 .

AND

THEIR WORKMEN

Shri Anant L. Nikam

P.O. Kulwandi Vadachi Wadi ,

Tah . Taluka Khed ,

Distt . Ratnagiri ,

Ratnagiri (MS) .

3. The workman denied all the charges by his explanationdt. 25-5-96 . As the inquiry could not be started within 6 months , he requested the management to drop the charges . Accordingly managementdropped the charges and revoked his suspension . The workman , thereafter went to the office and tried to serve a letter to Mr. Rajappan , Manager ( P & IR ) in which he demanded all his dues and promotion . Mr. Rajappan refused to accept the letter. Therefore he sent the letter by fax . They did not reply his letter . He then wrote another letter by registered AD to the Station Director , Chief Administration Officer. He was not allowed to resume duty . He also did not get any reply. Therefore he filed a writ petition before Hon'ble High Court . The management submitted a report before Hon'ble High Court . Hon'ble High Court disposed of the writand directed him to report the duty . However he was not allowed to resume the duty. His identity card was confiscated by Assistant Security Officer. He lodged police complaint and the security officer then issued him the receipt of identity card.

APPEARANCES :

Mr. V. J. Kantharia

Forthe Employer :

Adv. i/b Rajesh Kothari & Co.

Forthe Workman :

In person.

Mumbai , dated the 8th July , 2011 .

AWARD PART- I

The Government of India , Ministry of Labour and Employmentby its Order No. L-42012/ 262/ 2002- IR (C - II ) , dated 8-5-2003 sent this reference to CGIT No. 1 , Mumbai . Thereafter as per order dt . 1-7-2008 in exercise of the powers conferred by clause (d) of sub- section ( 1) and sub - section 2 (A) of Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 have referred the following industrial dispute to this Tribunal for adjudication:

"Whether the action of the management by dismissing the services of Sh. Nikam with effect from 7-6-2002 is justified and legal ? If not , to what relief the workman concerned is entitled to ?"

4.Again he approached Hon'ble High Court . Hon'ble High Court directed him to approach the Industrial Tribunal . In the mearnwhile management served him with second chargesheetdt . 16-3-99 . As the matter was pending before Hon'ble High Court , workman did not file any reply to the chargesheet. However he went to office to attend the inquiry. They did not allow him to enter in the office . So he could not attend the inquiry on 27-11-1999 . On next dates , he attended the inquiry. The 10 has not recorded the statement of the witnesses as per their say . IO recorded their statements as per his whim . The management witnesses were not examined in presence of the workman . The workman was not allowed to examine his witness . His statement was also not recorded . The IO submitted his report . The workman was dismissed from service without any show cause notice . No wages were paid to him during the period of suspension . No opportunity was given to the workman to cross examine the witnesses . He was also not allowed to examine his witness . No documents were shown to him . Opportunity was not given to him to file his written say. The inquiry is not fair and proper . It violates principles ofnatural justice . Therefore , the workman prays thatthe order of dismissal be set aside and he be reinstated in service with full backwages and continuity of service.

5. The first party resisted the statement ofclaim vide its written statement at Ex - 5 . Accordingto them, the second party workman was appointed as a Watchman. However he was in a habit of late coming and used to remain absent unauthorisedly and without permission . Numbers of letters were issued to him . However he did not show any improvement . On the other hand he left the 2.After receipt of the reference , both the parties were duly served with notices . In response to the notice, the second party union has filed its statement of claim at Ex-3 . According to them , the workman under reference was serving with Nuclear Power Corporation . He was suspended by the order dated 23-5-1996 . He asked the reason for his suspension . They issued charge- sheet dt . 19-4-1996 alleging that the workman was unauthorisedly absent from 18-12-95 to 29-12-95, (b ) he refused to accept letterdt . 24-1-96 from one Shri Chopdekar and Shri Pandey on 27-1-96 and 31-1-96 , (c) for quarrelling with Chopdekar on 21-2-96 and saying that he had not seen such a person

3202GI/11-16 6316

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 3 , 2011 /BHADRA 12 , 1933

PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii ) ]

REASONS

Issues nos.1 & 2: -

head quarter without permission from 18-12-1995 to 12-01-1996 and remained absent . Showcause notice was issued to him . Assistant Security Officer tried to serve the second party with the notice. However second party refused to accept the same . On the other hand, he used threatening language to him who is a superior officer of the second party. Therefore , another showcause notice was issued to the second party . The second party was then placed under suspension and disciplinary proceeding was started against him . Second party had also picked up quarrel with his superior and threatened him. The second party also refused to accept official communications . Therefore he was chargesheeted . The second party vide his letter dtd. 25-05-1996 denied all the charges leveled against him.

8. In this case at the outset , I would like to point out that the workman herein has filed his affidavit at Ex - 24 wherein he has not made any reference in respect of fairness of inquiry or any illegality therein. This two paragraphs affidavit Ex - 24 is totally irrelevant to the subject matter. In this respect , I would like to point out that the Hon'ble High Court has given direction to provide legal aid to the workman . Inspite of repeated insistence , the second party workman refused to accept legal aid of any advocate . He was adamant and repeatedly refused to accept any legal aid . Though in his statement of claim he has tried to raise certain points in respect of fairness and legality of the inquiry , he has not led any evidence to that effect . He has tried to raise the point that, he was not allowed to take part in the inquiry proceedings etc. It is also alleged that there was violation of principle of natural justice . In this respect , it is the case of the first party management that the workman was adamant . According to them, inspite of service of notice of inquiry , sometimes he remained absent . According to them , he cross - examined only one witness and did not cross - examine the other witnesses . The Inquiry Officer, Mr. P.K. Khare , S.O.F. Head ( Industrial Safety and Fire ) in his affidavit at Ex - 25 says thatthe second party workman did not appear in the inquiry proceeding on 27-11-99 . Therefore the hearing was adjourned to 22-12-99 . According to him the workman appeared in person on 22-12-99 and acknowledged the receipt of chargesheet . He denied the charges leveled against him and raised frivolous pleas . He further says that the hearing of the inquiry was adjourned to 10-02-2000. He further says that on 7-1-2000 he wrote a letter to the second party and informed him the fresh date of hearing . On 10-2-2000 second party appeared in the hearing . He also signed the minutes . He further say that next hearing took place on 6-4-2000 . Presenting officer of first party submitted documentary evidence . Second party did not produce any evidence and only raised frivolous pleas of pendency of court proceedings and decisions of

courts .

6. The disciplinary proceedings were initiated against the second party on two occasions . The chargesheet dated 19-4-1996 was issued to the second party and the inquiry proceeding was conducted against him. Before initiating proceeding , second party was suspended After completion of inquiry proceedings and pending decisions , suspension of second party was revoked vide order dtd . 9-2-1998 and he was directed to resume his duties . However inspite of service of several letters , the second party remained absent unauthorisedly. Therefore second chargesheet dtd. 16-3-99 was issued against him . Even in the second inquiry proceedings second party did not show any interest . He raised some frivolous and baseless pleas before the Inquiry Officer . Evenafter the copy of the inquiry report was sent to him , he remained silent. He also did not prefer appeal against the order of disciplinary authority. They denied that the evidence was not recorded as per the version of the witnesses . They denied that the second party workman was not given an opportunity to defend himself. According to them, sometimes he willfully remained absent . They denied that he was not allowed to cross - examine the witnesses and was not allowed to lead his evidence . Accordingto them , the inquiry was fair and proper. The second party workman willfully remained absent. He is not interested in work . He was not punctual and careful in his duty. Therefore his services were rightly terminated by the disciplinary authority. Therefore they pray that the reference be dismissed with cost .

7. Following are the preliminary issues framed by my Ld . Predecessor for my determination . I record my indings thereon for the reasons to follow:

Findings

Yes

1. Whether Inquiry is fair and proper ?

No.

2. Whether findings are perverse?

3. What order?

As per final order .

9. This witness further says that on 9/5/2000 second party appeared before him and stated that he had come to jointhe duty and had not come for the inquiry proceeding and left his office . Therefore the inquiry was held exparte . He again informed the next date to the second party. However the second party remained absent and hearing was proceeded exparte . He says that full and fair opportunity was given to the second party to defend himself. Copies of documents and minutes were provided tothe second party. According to him , inspite of sufficient opportunity given to the second party, he neglected the inquiry proceeding . Therefore it cannot be said that there is violation of principles of natural justice .

6317 भारत का राजपत्र : सितम्बर 3 , 2011/ भाद्र 12 , 1933

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

witness of management Mr.Khare has also deposed to that effect in his affidavit at Ex - 25 . Ilis version is not challenged or denied in his cross - examination. Furthermore in this respect the workman has also not stated anything in his affidavit Ex - 24 . Therefore it cannot be said that the workman was entitled to get subsistence allowance and that the inquiry is bad for want of subsistence allowance .

10. Neither version of this witness was challenged in his cross -examination at Ex - 25 nor in the affidavit of workman at Ex - 24 . In short , the workman was chargesheeted and he was knowing the dates of hearing . He also appeared before the inquiry officer on few occasions and willfully remained absent on other occasions . He remained absent on some dates at his own anddid not willfully cross examine witnesses . Therefore it cannot be said that there was violation of principles of nature justice.

13. From the evidence on record , i.c. the unchallenged affidavit of witness of first party, it is clear that fair and proper opportunity was given to the workman to defend himself, he willfully remained absent . There is no other illegality or defect in the inquiry . Therefore I hold that inquiry was fair and proper. The IO has recorded the statements of the witnesses . The fact is not disputed that the second party workman was absent from duty though he was asked to resume his duties . In the circumstances , findings of the inquiry officer cannot be called perverse. As a result I decide this point no.2 in the negative . Thus I proceed to pass the following order:

ORDER

The inquiry held against the workman is fair and proper. The findings of the inquiry officer are not perverse .

Asadequacy of punishment is mainly the question of law, there is no scope for any oral evidence . Therefore parties are directed to argue or file their respective written arguments on 26-09-2011 on the point of adequacy of punishment.

Date: 08-07-2011

11. In the statement of claim the workman has raised two points while challenging the inquiry proceeding. The first point is the inquiry officer Mr. P.K.Khare was junior to Mr. V.K.Poti who had chargesheeted the workman . Therefore , according to the workman the inquiry is unfair and illegal. In this respect , in his written argument the workman has resorted to Madras High Court ruling in Rajgopal lyyer V/ s . State of Madras AIR 1955 Mad. 182. According to the workman , Madras High Court observed that the inquiry officer should not be under the control of the complaining officer or who has chargesheeted the workman. In the case at hand though inquiry officer Mr. P.K.Khare has admitted in his cross at Ex - 25 that he is junior to Mr. Poti who has chargesheeted the workman it cannot be said that Mr. Khare is under the control of Mr. Poti or working under him. He may be junior to Mr. Poti . That does not mean he was under the control of Mr. Poti. In short this ruling does not extend any help to the workman .

K. B. KATAKIE, Presiding Officer

नई दिल्ली, 8 अगस्त , 2011

का.आ. 2366. औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 (1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार एसईसीएल 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 196/1998 ) को प्रकाशित करती है. जोकेन्द्रीय सरकार को 8-8-2011 को प्राप्त हुआ था।

[सं. एल-22012/434/1996 आईआर( सी- II ) ] डी.एस.एस. श्रीनिवास राव , डेस्क अधिकारी

New Delhi , the 8th August . 2011

S.O. 2366. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ), the Central Government hereby publishes the Award ( Ref. No. 196 1998) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal- cum- Labour Court , Jabalpur as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between employers in relation to the management of SECI . and their workman , which was received by the Central Government on 8-8-2011 .

[No. L- 22012 434 / 1996- IR ( C - II) ] D.S.S. SRINIVASA RAO , Desk Officer 12. The workman has raised another point in his statement ofclaim that the first party was not paying 75 % ofhis pay by way of subsistence allowance and they were paying only 50% of his pay by way of subsistence allowance . Therefore , according to workman the inquiry was not proper. He has referred to the case of Fakirbhai Pholbhai Solanki AIR 1986 page 1168. According to him , in that case it was held that the inquiry cannot be said proper if subsistence allowance is not paid at the rate of 75 % of pay of the employees . In this respect , the Ld adv. for the first party pointed out that in respect of the first chargesheet of absenteeism from 18-12-1995 to 12-1-1996, the workman was suspended . However as inquiry could notbe concluded within time , his suspension was revoked and the workman was directed to resume his duty. However the workman has not reported the duty, therefore another chargesheet for absenteeism was served upon him on 16-3-1999. It is the case of the management that after revocation of the earlier suspension order , the workman was directed to resume his duties . However he willfully remained absent . Therefore the first party was constrained to issue second chargesheet dated 16-3-1999 . According to them, the workman was not under suspension. On the other hand he remained absent willfully therefore, question of paying subsistence allowance @ 75% of the pay of workman after 90 days of suspension does not arise . The 6318

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 3 , 2011 /BHADRA 12, 1933

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

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

objection. The claim of the workman for promotion in Mechanical cadre does not arise as he was working in different cadre as Pump Operator Cat - III on his own consent. It is submitted that the reference be answered in favour of the management .

No. CGIT/LC/R/ 196/98

4.The following issues are framed for adjudication- Presiding Officer: Shri Mohd. Shakir Hasan

The Secretary,

Rashtriya Koyla Khadan Mazdoor Sangh ( INTUC ) , Br. Deepika Project , PO Gevra Project , Distt . Bilaspur (MP)

Whether the action of the management in promoting from Mechanical Fitter Helper Cat- II to Pump Khalasi Cat - III and not promoting him as Mechanical Fitter Cat - IV and onward promotion as Mechanical Fitter Cat V & VI is justified?

...Workman

Π. To what relief the workman is entitled?

Versus

5. Issue No. I

The Sub Area Manager, SECL, Deepika Project, POGevra Project, Distt. Bilaspur (MP)

...Management

AWARD

Passed on this 6th day of July, 2011

1. The Government of India, Ministry of Labour vide its Notification No.L - 22012/434/96- IR(C - II ) dated 19-8-98 has referred the following dispute for adjudication by this tribunal :-

" Whether the action of the management of SECL , Deepika Project, PO Gevra Project , Distt . Bilaspur in promoting Shri Gyan Das S/ o Lati Ram from Mech . FitterHelper Cat - II in Pump Khalasi Cat- III vide order dated 26-3-94 and not promoting him as Mech. Fitter Cat- IV and onward promotion as Mech . Fitter Cat -V &VI etc. isjustified? If not, to what relief Shri Gyan Das(workman) is entitled to ? "

2. The workman did not appear inspite of proper notice by registered post . Lastly the then Tribunal proceeded the reference exparte against the workman on 14-2-2007.

To prove the case , the management has adduced oral and documentary evidence . The management has filed extract of cadre scheme of mechanical fitter and operational pump khalasi /Driver /Operator which are ExhibitM/ l and M/ 2 . This shows that Cadre Schemes of Mechanical fitter and Pump Operator are different. Exhibit M/3 is the photocopy of service Register of the workman . This shows that he was appointed on 14-2-1969 in CCL and his date of retirement was 30-8-1999 . The management has examined one witness in the case namely Shri Varghese Abraham . He was Personal Manager in Deepika Project of SECL. He has supported the case of the management. He has stated that the workman was promotedfrom Mechanical Fitter Helper Cat - II to Pump Khalasi Cat- II vide order dated 23-3-1994 instead of Mechanical Fitter Cat - III . He has further stated at Para - 6 that he accepted the said promotion without any objection . This shows that his cadre scheme was changed from mechanical cadre to Pump Operator and he had not raised any objection . This shows that once he had accepted the change of cadre then he cannot claim promotion in the previous cadre . His evidence is unrebutted . There is no other evidence to show that he had not accepted the change of cadre on promotion as Pump Khalasi Cat - II . This issue is decided in favour of the management and against the workman .

6. Issue No. II

On the basis of the discussion made above , the workman is not entitled to any relief. The reference is , accordingly, answered .

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

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

3. The management appeared and filed Written Statement in the case . The case of the management in short is that the workman Shri Gyan Das was initially appointed as piece rated worker w.e.f. 14-2-1969 by the Central Coalfields Ltd. He was promoted to the post of Mechanical Fitter Helper Cat - II w.e.f. 18-5-1986 . He accepted the promotion without any objection . Consequently he was transferred from C.C.L to SECL and was posted at Deepika Project of Gevra Area . He joined thiere on 24-6-89 . It is stated that despite the fact that the services of the workman was not satisfactory, he was promoted to the post of Pump Operator Cat - III w.e.f. 26-3-94 . Не ассepted the said promotion without any

MOHD. SHAKIR HASAN . Presiding Officer 6319 भारत का राजपत्र : सितम्बर 3 , 2011 / भाद्र 12 , 1933

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

नई दिल्ली , 8 अगस्त, 2011

"Whether the action of the management of CPWD (represented through the Superintending Engineer , Central Circle, Nagpur, Executive Engineer, Division No. I & II , CPWD, Nagpur) in terminating/stoppage ofwork of Shri Prakash Dansingh Bania , Motor Lorry Driverw.e.f. 24-10-1999 is legal or valid? Ifnot , then for what relief the said workman is entitled to? " का.आ. 2367.--औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में , केन्द्रीय सरकार सी.पी.डब्ल्यू.डी प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच , अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण , नागपुर के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 42/2001 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 8-8-2011 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल-42012/18 /2000- आई आर ( सी- II ) ]

डी.एस.एस. श्रीनिवास राव , डेस्क अधिकारी New Delhi , the 8th August, 2011

2.Onreceipt of the reference , parties were notice to file their respective statement of claim and written statement, in response to which, the Central P.W.D , Mazdoor Union ("the Union' in short ) filed the statement of claim on behalf of the workman , Sh. Prakash Dansingh Bania (" the workman" in short) and the management of C.P.W.D. , Nagpur (" Party No. 1 " in short) filed the written statement.

S.O. 2367. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref- No. 42/2001 ) ofthe 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 CPWD , and their workmen, which was received by the Central Government on 8-8-2011 .

[No. L-42012/18 /2000- IR (C - II )]

D. S. S. SRINIVASA RAO , Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

BEFORE SHRI J.P. CHAND , PRESIDING OFFICER, CGIT-CUM- LABOUR COURT, NAGPUR

Date: 18-07-2011

Case No.CGIT /NGP /42/ 2001

Party No.1 (a) : The Superintending Engineer , Nagpur Central Circle , Central Public Works Deptt. Seminary Hills , Nagpur - 6

(b) : The Executive Engineer, Central Division No.I , Central Public Works Deptt . , Katol Road , Nagpur -440013 ,

Versus

PartyNo.2 : The Secretary Central PWD Mazdoor Union, Branch Office , Near Police Chowki Seminary Hills , Nagpur-440006.

AWARD

(Dated: 18th July, 2011)

The case of the workman as presented by the union , inthe statement of claim is that the workman was working asa motor lorry driver since June , 1993 on work order/hand receipt basis with the Central Public Works Division No. I and II continuously till October, 99 and he was getting the minimum wages of the motor lorry driver grade III i.e. Rs .4500 per month, in which, Pay, DA, HRA and CCA were included and he was being treated as a regular driver and there were five vehicles in Division no - .II of Central Public Works Department , Nagpur but there were only two regular drivers , so the remaining three Vehicles were being operated by the drivers either appointed on daily rated basis or on work order basis which amounted to unfair labour practice by the party No. 1 and such fact was stated by the party No. 1 in the statement , Annexure - IV and though the workman was working continuously against a regular and permanent post , he was being engaged in the work either onhand receipt or work order basis and the workman took the vehicle , Tata Sumo bearing No. MH - 31 AG - 9019 on 06-08-99 to Navegaon Dam for site inspection , with the Superintending Engineer and Executive Engineer and while returning from the Dam site, the Tata Sumo met with a minor accident , due to rash driving ofa truck, coming from the opposite direction and due to the damage caused to the Tata Sumo , the Executive Engineer, Division II on 10-08-99 called for an explanation from the workman mentioning there in to show cause as to why the amount of damage to the vehicle should not be recovered from his salary and the workman submitted his reply stating that he was not responsible for the accident and consequent damage to the vehicle and the memo issued by the Executive Engineer, Division II shows that management was treating the workman as their employee and hence " recovery from salary " was mentioned in the memo and such type or memo can only be issued to an employee .

It is further pleaded by the union that in order to punish the workman , the party No. 1 issued order dated 16-8-99, and transferred the said Tata Sumo alongwith the workman to the office ofthe Asstt . Engineer, Amravati w.e.f. 18-8-99, but as the union protested against such action, only the vehicle was sent to the office of Asstt . Engineer , Amravati and the workman was transferred to Central Division No. III , but as there was no vacant post of driver, 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 CPWD and their workman , Shri Prakash Dansingh Bania , Motor lorry Driver for adjudication , as perletter No.L -42012/ 18 /2000- IR ( C -II ) dated 25-6-2001 , with the following schedule: - 6320

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: SEPTEMBER 3 , 2011 / BHADRA 12 , 1933

PART II-SEC. 3 ( ii ) ]

working in group " D" post and post of driver fall in group " C" post and the case of the workman was examined by the Chief Engineer and as it was found that the action taken by the Superintending Engineer and Executive Engineer was justified , no interference was made by him and as such , the workman is not entitled to any relief.

4. The parties have led oral evidence , besides relying on documentary evidence . The workman has examined himself as a witness . Shri R. P. Singh , the Executive Engineer, CPWD has been examined as a witness on behalf of the party No. I.

The workman in his examination - in - chief, which is on affidavit , has reiterated the facts mentioned in the statement of claim . In his cross -examination , he has stated that he was engaged in the regular post of driver and not on contract basis but he has not filed any paper showing in support of his claim of regular appointment and management was issuing work order and on the basis of work order , he was working and the contents of document No. I are correct .

the workman reported back to Central Division No. II and submitted his joining report on 25-10-99 , but he was not allowed to join his duty in the said division and again he was transferred to Central Division No. I , by letter dated 28-10-99 and accordingly, the workman submitted his joining report at Division No. I , but he was not allowed to joinhis duties and thereafter, the workman was not allowed to join his duties though he approached the authorities from time to time and thus , the action of the management amounts to termination of the services of the workman and is illegal and unfair labour practice and though the union took up the case of the workman with the party No. 1 , in the meeting held on 24-12-99 and party No. 1 assured that the matter would be looked into by the Chief Engineer , nothing was done by the party No. 1 to reinstate the workman in services and the post of driver is still vacant in the Divisions and CGIT No. 2 , Mumbai in reference No. 2/11 of 1997 and C.A.T. , Jabalpur bench in O.A. No. 786/96 had directed to regularize some employees similarly situated like the present workman and as such , the workman is entitled to be reinstated in service with continuity and all consequential benefits .

5. The witness examined on behalf of the party No. I has also reiterated the facts mentioned in the written statement . In his cross - examination , he has stated that work order is one of the forms of engaging labour on contract basis and the department used to pay a lump sum amount as per work order.

3. The Party No. 1 in its written statement has pleaded inter -alia that the workman was working as a motor lorry driverfrom April 93 to October 99 on contract basis , as per work order and he was not the employee of C.P.W.D and he was not appointed at any point of time and the workman was given the contract by work order since April , 1993 and the workman while accepting the contract had also agreed to the terms and conditions of the contract and one of the conditions stipulated there in was that the workman should not claim any right for service or regularization and there was also a condition that the said contract is temporary and can be terminated at any month without giving any notice in advance and the workman having agreed to all the conditions , continued to perform he contract which continued till October, 1999 and the said contract was issued in the form of work order and at present there are only four vehicles in the division and one of then was scraped and hence , there is no need of any driver an since the service of the workman was not required , the contract was terminated and there was no unfair labour practice .

6. It was submitted by the learned advocate for the workman that the workman was working as a motor lorry driverfrom 24-6-93 in a regular post and there were five vehicles and against live sanctioned post ofdrivers , the division had only two regular drivers and three drivers including the workman were engaged on work order basis and in order to deprive the workman of regularization , the management engaged him on work order and hand receipt basis but the payment made to him exposes their design and payment made to workman was according to the pay ofa regular driver and Exhibits III E & F, show payment of Pay , D.A. , HRA , CCA , and T. A, which are payable to a regular employce and not to a contractor and as such , it is clear that the workman was a regular employee and not a contract and it is common knowledge that a contractor is never transferred from one city to another and transfer of services is the incidence of Govt . employees and in view ofthe transfer of the workman as per transfer order dated 16-8-99 , it is clearly established that the workman was an employee and the statement , Annexure IV clearly shows that the workman is an employee and not a contractor and in similar cases , CGIT, Mumbai II and CAT, Jabalpur bench have ordered for regularization of the employees and as such , the workman is entitled for reinstatement in service with consequential benefits .

It is also pleaded by the party No. 1 that as per the requirement at Amravati , the said vehicle was transferred along with the workman and as the workman refused to go to Amravati , the vehicle was only sent to Amravati and as there was no vacancy with Executive Engineer, Div . II , he was transferred to Div. III , so that if requirement is there , his services may be taken but there was also no requirement ofdriver , hence he was transferred to Div. I and at Division I also there was no vacancy and as it was found that the services ofthe workman were no more required , after expiry ofwork order dated 28-8-99 , which was for two months , the work order was not renewed and the demand of the union for regularization of the workman is not justified , as because, as per Government Rules , the temporary status and regularization can be given only to the employee

7. On the other hand , it was submitted by the management that the workman in his evidence on affidavit has admitted that he was engaged by the party No. 1 as per work order issued from time to time and work orders filed by the workman show that his appointment was for a specific 6321 भारत का राजपत्र सितम्बर 3 , 2011 / भाद्र 12 , 1933

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

period with the condition that he would not claim any government service and in his cross - examination also, the workman has admitted that his employment was on the basis of work orders and as such , it cannot be said that he was in regular employment and it is well settled by the Hon'ble Apex Court in number of decisions that engagement ofany person on work order is not employment in Government Service and as such , the workman is not entitled for any relief and the submission made by the workman that as he was transferred to Amravati , he is deemed to be an employee is not a correct inference, as because , a contractual employee can be asked to perform the work at different places as per the requirement of work and the same cannot be equated with transfer and the workman was not appointed as per Rules of Recruitment into a civil post and as such , it cannot be inferred that the workman was appointed or engaged against a civil post and for mentioning about payment of Pay, DA, HRA , CСА & TA in the work order , it cannot be inferred that the workman was engaged in civil post and the submission made by the workman that he has been dismissed from service is incorrect, as because , after the contractual period was over, his engagement ipso facto came to an end and for that the workman is not entitled for any relief

8.Before delving into the merits of the matter, I think it apposite to mention the settle principles enunciated by the Hon'ble Apex Court ( Constitutional Bench ) reported in AIR 2006 Supreme Court/ 1860 (Secretary State ofKarnataka other Vs. Uma Devi and others ) , which is on the point of regularization of daily wager, temporary/ contractual employees appointed in violation of constitutional scheme . The Hon'ble Apex Court have held that:

9.Keeping in view the settled principles as enunciated by the the Hon'ble Apex Court , the present case at hand is to be considered .

that he started working as motor lorry driver from June 1993 on work order /hand receipt basis . In his evidence before this Tribunal , which is on affidavit also , the workman has stated that he was workings as motor lorry driver since June 93 on work order/ hand receipt basis in division nos . I & II of CPWD , Nagpur. The workman has also filed some documents in support of his claim . The documents filed by the workman show that on 24-6-93 he was given a work order to work for three months from the date ofthe issue of the work order on contract basis for a sum of Rs . 1870 per month, for maintenance of Government Vehicle and providing services for driving the vehicle within normal duty hours , and for driving the vehicle beyond the normal duty hours on payment of Rs.15 per hour . The said document also shows that some conditions were imposed by the party no.1 and one of the conditions was that the contractor shall not have any claim for government service . Subsequently also , fresh work orders were issued in favour ofthe workman and on the basis of such work orders , the workman worked with party no . 1 as a driver. In the subsequent work orders , the condition that the contractor shall not have any claim for the government service was there. It is found that in subsequent work orders , it was also mentioned that the services of the workman was purely temporary and can be terminated any month without any advance notice . It is also found that the last work order issued in favour of the workman was on 28-8-99 , for working for two months i.e. from 28-8-99 to 27-10-99. The document Annexure - IV filed by the workman also shows that he was engaged by work order. The oral evidence adduced by the parties and the documents file by the workman himself clearly establish that the workman was never appointed or treated as a regular employee by the party no . I. Admittedly, in work order dated 26-9-98 and 1-3-99 , there is mention about basic pay, DA , HRA , CCA & T.A. , but from the same, it cannot be presumed that the workman was treated as a regular employee in view of the issuance successive work orders , where it has been clearly mentioned that the engagement was on contractual basis . In the later issued by the Executive Engineer dated 10-899 , it has been mentioned that the workman should show cause as to why the damage should be recovered from his salary. It is also found from the documents that the workman was transferred to Amravati along with the vehicle . As the Executive Engineer mentioned in his letter that the damage should be recovered from the salary of the workman or that he was transferred to Amravati , it cannot be said that the workman was a regular employee . Hence , I find no force in the contentions raised by the learned advocate for the workman . In view of the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court as mentioned above, the judgments of the CGIT Mumbai - II and CAT Jabalpur Bench, about which the workman has mentioned in his statement of claim , are of no help to his case. It is clear that by work order dated 28-08-99 , the workman was engaged for two months on contract basis and after the contract was over, the same was neither renewed nor any fresh work order was issued in his favour and as such , it cannot be said that there was termination of Admittedly, the workman has not claimed either in the statement of claim , or in his evidence that his appointment was in terms of the relevant rules and after a proper competition among qualified persons . On the other hand , he has specifically pleaded in his statement of claim 6322

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 3 , 2011 /BHADRA 12 , 1933

[ PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii )] services of the workman by way of retrenchment. Hence it isordered:

ORDER

"Whether the action of the Sub Area Manager , Kurasia Group of Mines of SECI . in taking work of raising munshi from Sh . Babloo Dey, Cat . I mazdoor and not regularizing him in the post of Raising Munshi (clerk Gr.III ) is legal and justified ? If not , whatrelief the workman is entitled to ? " The action ofthe management of CPWD ( represented through the Superintending Engineer , Central Circle , Nagpur, Executive Engineer, Division No. I & II , CPWD , Nagpur) in terminating/ stoppage of work of Shri Prakash Dansingh Bania, Motor Lorry Driver w.e.f. 24-10-1999 is legal and valid. The workman is not entitled for any relief.

2. The Union/workman did not appear to raise the dispute . Lastly the reference is proceeded exparte against the workman on 17-11-09 .

J.P. CHAND , Presiding Officer

नई दिल्ली, 8 अगस्त, 2011

का.आ. 2368.-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में , केन्द्रीय सरकार एस.ई.सी.एल एवं 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 49/1996 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 08-08-2011 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

3. The management appeared and filed Written Statement . The case of the management in short is that the workman was initially appointed as General Mazdoor . He was regularized on the post of General Mazdoor Cat- I on 5-9-87. Thereafter he was promoted time to time and promoted upto the rank of Cat- III vide order dated 7-9-02. He was never worked or employed as Raising Munshi clerk , Grade III at any time. It is stated that he was not entitledto be regularized on the post of raising Munshi as the same was of different cadre scheme . It is submitted that the reference be answered in favour of the management.

[सं. एल-22012/216/95- आई आर ( सी- II ) ] डी.एस.एस. श्रीनिवास राव , डेस्क अधिकारी

4. The following issues are framed for adjudication-

New Delhi , the 8th August, 2011

I. Whether the action of the management in taking work of raising munshi from the workman is legal andjustified?

II . Whether the action of the management in not regularizing him on the said post is justified?

S.O.2368 .-- In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref- No. 49/1996) ofthe Central Government Industrial Tribunal - cum - Labour Court , Jabalpur as shown in the Annexure in the industrial dispute between the employers in relation to the management of SECL , and their workmen , which was received by the Central Government on 08-08-2011.

III . To what relief the workman is entitled?

[ No. L- 22012/216/95 - IR ( C - II ) ]

5. Issue No. 1

D.S.S. SRINIVASA RAO , Desk Officer ANNEXURE

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

No. CGIT / LC /R/49/96

PRESIDING OFFICER: SHRI MOHD. SHAKIR HASAN

The President ,

Rashtriya Koyla Mazdoor Sangh , Chirimiri Area, Godaripara,

PostKurasia Colliery ,

Workman

Distt . Surguja (MP )

Versus

Sub Area Manager , Kurasia Group of Mines ,

PostKurasia Colliery, Distt . Surguja (MP) . Management

AWARD

Passed on this 19th day of July, 2011

The burden was on the workman to prove that he was working as raising munshi but the Union/ workman had not appeared to prove the same . However the management's contention is that he never worked or employed as Raising Munshi by the management . The management witness Shri Ashok Kr . Biswas is working as Dy. Manager ( Personnel ) atKurasia Colliery. He has come to support the case ofthe management . He has stated that the workman was appointed as General Mazdoor in SECI .. Chirimiri Area. The service conditions of the employees are governed by National Coal Wage Agreement ( in short NCW A) There are different cadre scheme . He has stated that he was promoted time to time . His service record ( Exhibit M/ 2 ) shows that he was promoted to Category III . He has stated that he was never authorized to work in clerical cadre by the Competent Authority . There is no other evidence in rebuttal of the evidence of the management . There is no reason to disbelieve the evidence of this witness .

1. The Government of India , Ministry of Labour vide its Notification No.L - 22012 (216)/95 - IR( C - II ) dated 14-2-96 has referred the following dispute for adjudication by this tribunal: -

6. The management has filed copy of Form B ( Exhibit M/ 1 ) Service Register ( Exhibit M 2 ) and order of regularization as General Mazdoor Cat - I ( Exhibit M/3 ) . These 6323 भारत का राजपत्र : सितम्बर 3 , 2011/ भाद्र 12, 1933

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

ANNEXURE

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

JABALPUR

NO.CGIT/LC/R/86/92

PRESIDING OFFICER: SHRI MOHD. SHAKIR HASAN

Shri Raghuvir Upadhayay,

Gram: Navanagar,

all documents clearly show that he was appointed as General mazdoor and had never worked as Raising Munshi in the clerical cadre . There is no document in rebuttal of these documents to show that the workman had ever worked as Raising Munshi . Thus it is obvious that the management had never taken the work of Raising Munshi from the workman . This issue is decided in favour of the management and against the workman.

Post Kachani ,

Workman

Distt. Sidhi (MP)

7. Issue No. II

Versus

General Manager (P) ,

NCL , Post Singrauli Colliery,

.Management

Distt. Sidhi (MP)

AWARD

Considering the discussion made above , it is clear that the workman had never worked as Raising Munshi and therefore the question to regularize on the said post doesnot arise . This issue is accordingly answered.

Passed on this 20th day of July, 2011

8. Issue No. III

1. TheGovernment of India, Ministry of Labour vide its Notification No. L- 22012/44/92- IR( C - II ) dated 30-4-92 has referred the following dispute for adjudication by this tribunal:-

It is evident that the evidence shows that he was General mazdoor and was promoted to Category III and had not worked as Raising Munshi . Therefore he is not entitled to any relief. The reference is , accordingly answered.

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

"Whether the action of the General Manager (Personnel ) , Northern Coalfields Ltd. , Singrauli PO Singrauli Colliery, Distt . Sidhi in dismissing Shri Raghubir Upadhyay, Asstt . Security Sub- Inspector from Company's services w.e.f. 5-10-90 is legaland justified? If not , to what relief the workman isentitled to ? "

10. Let the copies of the award be sent to the Government ofIndia , Ministry of Labour and Employment as per rules.

MOHD . SHAKIR HASAN, Presiding Officer नई दिल्ली , 8 अगस्त, 2011

का.आ. 2369.-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार एन.सी.एल. के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच , अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालय , जबलपुर के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 86/1992 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 8-8-2011 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल-22012/44/1992- आई आर ( सी- II ) ] डी. एस. एस. श्रीनिवास राव , डेस्क अधिकारी

New Delhi , the 8th August , 2011

2. The case of the workman, in short , is that he was appointedas Security Guard on 3-6-74 with the management and was promoted to the post of Asstt . Security Sub Inspector. It is stated that he suddenly became ill on 5-10-90 and was unconscious when he was removed to his house by his co- workers . He was being treated by the State Hospital and had Informed the management time to time. He was show caused on 18-7-90 and came to know on 22-7-90 from publication in the newspaper. He gave reply ofthe show cause with a request to quash the proceeding . It is stated that when he was declared fit by the Doctor to join duty on 22-10-90, he came on 24-10-90 tojoin his duty but he was served with removal order dated 5-10-90from services of the management . The workman gave several representationto the management for re - consideration but the same was rejected on 14-12-90 . It is stated that the workman was denied opportunity to defend himself and was terminated from services on 5-10-90 illegally. It is submitted that removal order dated 5-10-90 be set aside and the workman be reinstated.

S. O. 2369. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 86/1992 ) ofthe Central Government Industrial Tribunal- cum- Labour Court , Jabalpur as shown in the Annexure in the industrial dispute between the employers in relation to the management of NCL , and their workmen , which was received by the Central Government on 8-8-2011.

3. The management appeared and filed Written Statement . The case of the management , interalia, is that admittedly the workman was working as Asstt . Security Sub Inspector in the Central Stores , Singrauli . He was transferred from Jhingurda to SECL . Bilaspur on 12-4-90. He received the order on 25-4-90. On the same day, he was relieved by the General Manager(P) . Thereafter the Stores Officer, Central Stores , Jhingurda directed the delinquent workman to hand over the charge to Shri K. Bhagat but instead of handing over charge he left the place of work [No. L - 22012/44/92 - IR ( C - II ) ] D. S. S. SRINIVASA RAO , Desk Officer

3202GI/11-17 6324

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 3 , 2011 /BHADRA 12, 1933

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

serious in nature and there is no reason to interfere in the punishment order awarded by the Disciplinary Authority. I find that punishment awarded to him is justified. This issue is also decided in favour of the management .

8. Issue No. III

Considering the above aspect of the case , I find that the workman is not entitled to any relief. Accordingly the reference is answered .

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

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

MOHD. SHAKIR HASAN , Presiding Officer नई दिल्ली , 8 अगस्त, 2011 after asking for 2 days casual leave . He never returned on duty nor reported on duty at Bilaspur. On 3-5-90 he sent a letter that he would join on recovery from illness but without any leave application. Again he sent another application alongwith medical certificate on 25-6-90 . He never applied for any leave . It was intimated to the management that on 11-7-90 he appeared before the Judicial Magistrate, Waidhan and gave statement in some criminal case . It was apparent that he was not interested to perform duty. He was , thereafter, directed to appear before Chief Medical Officer ofthe company on 27-7-90 for checkup . A charge sheet was issued to him on 18-7-90 . Shri S. M. Singh , General Manager (Welfare ) was appointed as Enquiry Officer . Inspite of proper notice , he did not appear in the enquiry and the enquiry was conducted exparte . The Enquiry Officer submitted his enquiry report dated 24-8-90 holding him guilty of the charges . The Disciplinary Authority agreed with the findings of the enquiry officer passed the order of dismissal from service on 5-10-90 . It is submitted that the action of the management is justified and the reference be accordingly answered in favour of the management.

4. On the basis of the pleadings of the parties , the following issues are for decision-

I. Whether the departmental enquiry conducted bythe management against the workman is just and proper?

का.आ. 2370.-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 (1947 का 14) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में , केन्द्रीय सरकार एस.ई.सी.एल. के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच , अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालय , जबलपुर के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 150/1991 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 8-8-2011 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

II . whether the action of the management in dismissing the workman w.e.f. -5-10-90 by the management isjustified?

III . To what relief, the workman is entitled ?

[सं. एल-22012/180/1991 आई आर ( सी- II ) ] डी. एस. एस. श्रीनिवास राव , डेस्क अधिकारी New Delhi , the 8th August , 2011 5. The workman died during the course ofproceeding . His legal heirs were substituted vide order dated 2-11-2001. Subsequently the legal heirs absented and the reference is proceeded exparte against the legal heirs on 27-8-2010.

6. Issue No. 1

S.O. 2370.- In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award ( Ref. No. 150/ 1991) 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 SECL , and their workmen , which was received by the Central Government on 8-8-2011 .

[No. L- 22012-180/ 1991 - IR ( C - II)] D. S. S. SRINIVASA RAO , Desk Officer ANNEXURE

This issue is taken up as preliminary issue . The then Tribunal after considering the entire materials on record came to the finding that the departmental enquiry did not suffer from any legal infirmity and passed the order on 2-11-2001 that the departmental enquiry conducted against the workman is just and proper. It is further observed that the management is not required to lead any evidence to prove the alleged misconduct of the workman . Thus this issue is already decided on 2-11-2001 as a preliminary issue.

7. Issue No. II

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

NO . CGIT/LC/ R/ 150/91

PRESIDING OFFICER : SHRI MOHD . SHAKIR HASAN

Shri John Freeman ,

On the basis of discussion made above , it is clear that there is finding that the misconduct against the workman appears to have been proved and therefore there was no eed to prove further the alleged misconduct . It appears that the workman had disobeyed the order of the management of handing over charge on transfer form the place and became absent without any sound reason specially because he was appearing in the criminal court during the same period. The misconduct appears to be

Ex. SecurityGuard, Jarahabhata , Tehsil & Distt. Surguja (MP) 6325 भारत का राजपत्र सितम्बर 3 , 2011 / भाद्र 12 , 1933

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

Versus

action of the management is justified and the reference be answered accordingly.

The General Manager ,

Chirimiri Area of SECL,

4. On the basis of the pleadings of both the parties , the following issues are for adjudication

PostWest Chirimiri Colliery,

.. Management

Distt. Surguja (MP)

AWARD

1. Whether the departmental enquiry conducted by the management against the workman is proper and legal ?

Passed on this 25th day of July, 2011

II . Whether the action of the management in dismissing the workman from services is legal and justified?

III . To what relief the workman is entitled?

1. The Government of India , Ministry of Labour vide its Notification No. L - 22012/ 180/91 - IR(Coal- II ) dated 21- 8-91 has referred the following dispute for adjudication by this tribunal :-

5. Issue No. 1

"Whether the action of the management of Dy. GeneralManager ( AHQ) Chirimiri Area of SECL in dismissing from services of their workman Shri John Freeman , Security Guard,GM Office , Chirimiri is legal and justified ? If not , to what relief the workman is entitled to ?"

This issue is taken up as a preliminary issue . The then Tribunal after minute examination of the departmental enquiry papers found and hold that the departmental enquiry conducted against the workman is legal and proper on 23-7-2003 . Thus this issue is already decided as preliminary issue .

6. Issue No. II

2. The case of the workman, in short is that the workman was posted in GM office , Chirimiri Area of SECL. He was show caused on 15-9-89 for his misbehaviour committed on 19-8-89 while he was on duty. He was also found in drunken stage . He filed his reply but the same was not found satisfactory by the management and departmental proceeding was initiated. Shri J.P. Goyal , Deputy CME was appointed as Enquiry Officer. After enquiry, the Enquiry Officer found him guilty of the charges and submitted his enquiry report. It is stated that the workman had not been supplied documents and the competent witnesses were not examined in the proceeding . Itis stated that there was violation of mandatory provision of law. It is stated that the punishment of dismissal from service is severe and disproportionate to the alleged misconduct . It is submitted that the reference be answered in favour of the workman and the workman be reinstated with full back wages .

It appears that either the parties have not examined any fresh evidence in the case and have relied the evidence adduced before the Enquiry Officer. The enquiry paper clearly shows that admittedly the workman was security guard and he was on duty on 19-8-89 . He was found sleeping in a drunken stage . This charge appears to have beenfound proved by the Enquiry Officer. It also appears that the Enquiry Officer had also found that the workman had misbehaved with the authority on questioning him . The enquiry papers show that the witnesses had supported the case and the finding of the Enquiry Officer appears to be not perverse . I do not find any reason to interfere in the finding of the Enquiry Officer . It also appears that the misconduct proved against the workman has justified the punishment awarded by the Disciplinary Authority . Ido not find any reason. to interfere in the punishment order. This issue is accordingly answered in favour of the management and against the workman .

7. Issue No. III

Considering the discussion made above , I find that the workman is not entitled to any relief. The reference is accordingly answered.

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

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

MOHD. SHAKIR HASAN , Presiding Officer नई दिल्ली, 8 अगस्त, 2011

का.आ. 2371.-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार एस.सी. के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच , अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण, 3. The management appeared and contested the reference by filing Written Statement . The case of the management , interalia , is that the workman was admittedly working as Security Guard in the Office ofGeneral Manager, Chirimiri Area . It is stated that on 19-8-89 at about 2AM , he was found sleeping in drunken stage by the Personnel Manager, Chirimiri Area. On asking from him , he misbehaved with him and also with Shri Sharma , Sr. P. O. and Driver of the Dy. CME . He also caught hold the driver and tried to assault him . He was charge sheeted on 1-9-89 . His reply was not satisfactory and Disciplinary Authority initiated a departmental proceeding . Admittedly Shri G.P. Goel was appointed as Enquiry Officer who conducted enquiry after giving full opportunity to defend himself. The Enquiry Officer found him guilty of the charges and submitted his enquiry report . The proper authority after taking approval from the competent authority passed the order dated 2-7-90 of dismissal from service . It is stated that the workman had committed serious acts of misconduct and therefore the punishment was proper and just and he was not fit to be retained in service . It is submitted that the 6326

गोदावरीखानी के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 166/1996 ) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 8-8-2011 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल-22013/1/2011- आई आर ( सी- II ) ]

डी. एस. एस. श्रीनिवास राव , डेस्क अधिकारी

New Delhi , the 8th August, 2011 S.O. 2371. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award ( LCID No. 166/ 1996) of the Industrial Tribunal - cum- Labour Court , Godavarikhani as shown in the Annexure in the industrial dispute between the employers in relation to the management of Singareni Collieries , and their workmen, which was received by the Central Government on 8-8-2011 .

[No. L- 22013 /1/2011 - IR( C - II) ] D. S. S. SRINIVASA RAO , Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CHAIRMAN, INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL- CUM- LABOUR COURT, GODAVARIKHANI Present: Sri M. Syamala Rao , BA . , B.LL. , Chairman - cum- PresidingOfficer.

Monday, the 18th Day of July, 2011 Industrial Dispute No. 166 of 1996 Between:

Kurma Mallaiah S/ o. Kurma Narayana , Aged about 34 years , Occ : Badli Filler, R/ o .Addaguntapalli , Godavarikhani , Karimnagar District

Petitioner

AND

1. The Collicry Manager , IIA Incline , Godavarikhani .

2. The General Manager, Singareni Collieries , RamagundamArea- I .

3. The Managing Director , Singareni Collieries , Kothagudem , Khammam District

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: SEPTEMBER 3 , 2011 /BHADRA 12 , 1933

PART II -SEC. 3 ( ii) ] ofSingareni Collieries and got appointees on 31-10-1972 and retired from service in 1994 on voluntarily grounds and as such he has become unfit for further service and his service was terminated through Proc . , No. P RGI//B/2245 , dt . 29-5-1994 . The respondent provided an employmentto his son i.e. petitioner herein on compassionate grounds . The name ofthe petitioner is Kurma Mallaiah S/o . Narayana and in other words the petitioner is called as Thippaveni Mallaiah , the services of father of the petitioner was terminated by the 2nd respondent .

3. The petitioner herein was given employment in the month of June , 1994. The petitioner discharged his duties to the fullest satisfaction of his superiors till upto the removal from service by the 2nd respondent i.e. , General Manager, Ramagundam Area - Idt. 16-2-1996 .

4. The petitioner belongs to Kurma (Golla ) caste , surname recorded in service record of his father as Kurma i.e. , caste name . Infact family surname of the petitioner is Thippanaveni . In Kurma (Golla) family persons will called with two names , likewise the name of the father of the petitioner is though Narayana and he is also called as Sailu in the house .

5.And that the Superintendent of Police, Karimnagar has informed to the G.. M. that on verification of the petitioner's character some adverse remarks were came to lime light . But this is not correct . The contention of the respondent is that the petitioner got entered into company's services fraudulently by impersonation is an offence of cheating is false and denied. The petitioner never cheated to company. The petitioner's son of Kurma Narayana . The police of I- Town , Godavarikhani , filed false case against the petitioner U/ Sec . 148 , 324 , r/ w Sec . 149 IPC in crime No. 185/1992 on the file of JFCM , Sulthanabad and the court acquitted the accused . The petitioner is the right man of right father , but in home he is called Thippaveni Mallaiah , the petitioner belongs to Kurma ( family) caste , therefore the surname called as Kurma .

Respondents

This Industrial Dispute petition U/Sec . 2-A (2) of I.D. Act, coming on before me for final hearing on 21-06-2011 , upon perusing all the documents on record and upon hearing the arguments of Sri T. Ravinder Singh, Advocate, for the petitioner and Sri D. Krishnamurthy, Advocate, fof the respondents , having stood over for consideration till this date, the court passed the following :-

AWARD

1. This is an Industrial Dispute petition filed by the petitioner U/ Sec . 2 -A (2) of I.D. Act , 1947 to direct the respondent to reinstate him into service with continuity and all other attendant benefits including back wages .

2. The brief averments of the petition are that the father of the petitioner one Kurma Narayana is an employee

6.And that the respondent/ management after utilizing the services of the petitioner for 18 months , removed him from service is bad, arbitrary and against to the principles of natural justice . The respondent did not conduct any enquiry and did not give any charger sheet and did not give any charge memo to the petitioner and violated the provision of Sec . 25 F of ID Act . The petitioner is very poor man having 3 children and he got employment in place of his father who retired on ill -health grounds . Therefore removing the services of the petitioner under the above said proceedings of R - 2 is bad and liable to be set aside. The petitioner cannot get any alternate employment at anywhere , as such he has become age bar and his family. children fallen on road after removal from service , are suffering for food and clothes . The respondent's company is Central Government . The employee under the control of the said government . The petitioner's case can be entertained in the IT - cum- Labour- Court in W.P. No. 8395- 89 on the file of the High Court ofjudicature at Hyderabad. Therefore prays an award as above .

6327 भारत का राजपत्र : सितम्बर 3 , 2011 / भाद्र 12 , 1933

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

7.Respondent No. 1 and 2 filed their counter denying the allegations in the petition and R- 3 filed a memo adopted their counter . R- 1 also filed additional counter .

petitioner's father is Narayana and his surname is Kurma and that the father of the petitioner never stated during his service that his surname is Thippanaveni and he is also called a Sailu at his home . And that after the dismissal of the petitioner based on the antecedents report of Superintendent of Police , Karimnagar, the petitioner for the 1st time is stating that his family surname is Thippanaveni and his father is also called as Sailu at his house . The petitioner is coming up with the above plea onlyto cover up his act of impersonation after verification of antecedents report submitted by the Superintendent of Police , Karimnagar . In view of antecedents report dt . 5-1-1996 of Superintendent of Police , Karimnagar , the petitioner was dis - empanelled from the services of respondent companypany with immediate effect vide letter dt. 16/23-2-1996, as such he is not entitled for reinstatement .

10. Previously this I.D. , was disposed off by this Tribunal on 19-7-2000 by passing an award by allowing the I.D. , petition with a direction that the petitioner shall be reinstated into service with back wages and continuity of service giving liberty to the Respondent company to conduct enquiry against the petitioner with regard to allegation of impersonation after giving an opportunity to the petitioner to prove that there was no impersonation and if impersonation is proved , the respondent company shall take action against the petitioner.

11. Challenging the said award , the respondent's company filed writ petition No. 25427/2002 to stay the operation of the award passed by this Tribunal , it was dismissed . On that writ appeal was preferred by the respondent company in W.A.No.326/ 2001 . In the said writ appeal the Hon'ble High Court ofA.P. , set aside the award passed by this Tribunal and remitted the matter to this tribunal for fresh disposal after giving opportunity to the workman as well as the management to lead evidence.

12. After remitting back the matter to this Tribunal and after appearance of the parties WW- 1 to WW- 5 are examined and Ex . W- 1 to Ex . W- 11 are marked on behalf of the petitioner . MW - 1 is examined and Ex . M - 1 to Ex. M -4 are marked on behalf of the respondent's .

13.Heard both sides , perused the material papers on record.

14. Since no departmental enquiry was conducted against the petitioner before removal of his services , no preliminary issues arises for consideration .

15.Now the points that arises for consideration are:

1. Whether removal of the petitioner from service is bad , arbitrary and against to the principles of naturaljustice?

2. Whether this Tribunal has no jurisdiction to decide the present I.D. ?

3. To what relief?

16. POINT NO . 1 :

8. The brief averments of their counter are that the petitioner entered into service of the respondent company as a dependent of Kurma Narayana who retired voluntarily from the services on the health ground. The petitioner has falsely described himself as Kurma Mallaiah , but subsequently it has come to the notice of the dependent company that the name of the petitioner is Thippanaboina Mallaiah , S/o . Sailu . The petitioner has wrongly claimed himself son of Kurma Mallaiah who was working in the defendant company in order to get a job in the dependent company as a " dependent " . It is false to allege that the petitioner is son of Kurma Narayana. The petitioner was appointed to work as Badli , at 2- A Incline , Godavarikhani vide order No.P.RG - 1 / 5 /4845 , dt . 30-11-1994 . In the said office order it is specifically mentioned that the appointment is subject to verification of antecedents of the petitioner and it is also mentioned that the services of the petitioner will be terminated in case adverse remarks are received from police authorities . In fact the petitioner was given employment in the month November , 1994. And that Superintendent of Police , Karimnagar vide letter No. 684/ 22/SB /VR/ 95 ,dt. 5-1-1996 informed the respondent No. 2 that the petitioner was a militant of SIKASA , a central organization of CPI ML PW Group . Further the Superintendent of Police , Karimnagar has informed that the original name of the petitioner is Thippanaboina Mallaiah , S/ o. Sailu and he was involved as an accused in Crime No. 236/1991 U/ Sec . 148 , 324 r/w Sec . 149 IPC of GDK- I town police station. The Superintendent of Police , Karimnagar has clearly stated that the appointment of the petitioner in the respondent company is undeniable after verification of the antecedents of the petitioner. After receiving the verification report from Superintendent of Police , Karimnagar the respondent company authorities have terminated the services of the petitioner vide letter No. P. RG - 1 /8 / 845 , dt . 23-2-1996 and that the petitioner is not a regular employee of the respondent company and his services are not regularized as for the standing orders of the company as such the issuing of charge memo in conducting enquiry U/Sec . 25 (F ) of ID Act , does not arise . The petitioner is not entitled for reinstatement. The respondent company is not responsible for any alterative employment to the petitioner and that this court has no jurisdiction to decide the present dispute as the respondent's company deals in coal mining which is Central Government subject and not the subject of the State Government . Therefore the Industrial Tribunal having central jurisdiction only competent to decide the above dispute . The industrial tribunal Godavarikhani is vested with only State jurisdiction . Therefore this tribunal is not competent to decide the above dispute . Hence , the above petition is liable to be dismissed with costs . Therefore prayed to dismiss the petition with costs .

It is the case of the petitioner the respondent management after utilizing the services of the petitioner for 9. The brief averments of the additional counter of R- 1 are that as per company records , the name of the 6328

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 3 , 2011/BHADRA 12 , 1933

18 months , removed him from service is bad , arbitrary and against to the principles of natural justice and the respondent did not conduct any enquiry and did not give any charge sheet or charge memo to the petitioner and violated the provisions of Sec . 25 of 1D Act .

17.No doubt, no enquiry was conducted before the petitioner dis - empanelled from the services of the respondent company on 16/23-2-1996. While it is so the case ofthe respondent is that the petitioner is not a regular employee and his services are not regularised as per the standings orders of the company. As such issue of charge sheet and conducting enquiry does not arise and it will not comewithin the purview ofSec . 2(oo) and 25 (F) of ID Act .

18. The petitioner's services were terminated subject the conditions laid down in his appointment orders i.e. , afterverification of his antecedents and if the antecedents are found to be unsatisfactory, his services are liable for termination and that the police report shows that the petitioner impersonated himself Kurma Mallaiah , as such the petitioner was dis -empanelled from the service.

19. WW- 1 is the petitioner himself, his evidence is thatthey belongs to "Kurma " (Golla) family and the caste name was recorded in service record of his father Narayana as his surname. The surname of his father is Thippanaveni and his father Narayana also called as Sailu in the house and in the village . In Kurma caste , most of the persons will be called with dual names and that his elder son Narayana , his father blessed with 6 children , he being elder, he was appointed in the company on the compassionate grounds , when his father retired from service voluntarily when he became unfit for service .

20. His further evidence is that the police either enquired him or his family members , only basing on the charge sheet in Crime No. 236/1991 later numbered as CC 185/1992 on the file of JMFC; Sulthanabad U/ Sec . 148 , 324 r /w 149 IPC and the said case was ended in acquittal . The complaint in the said case , with bore against the elders who pacified the matrimonial matter levelled case claiming that SIKASA extremists bet him demanding to lead matrimonial life with his wife and that it was no extremist case and that the petitioner is not extremist, except said case no cases pending against him . The report ofthe police based on the charge sheet levelled against the petitioner in the said case . And the police not enquired by person verification with the petitioner , his family members or with hisneighbours. He marked Ex . W- 1 to Ex . W- 11 . In cross examination he stated that he has not mentioned in the petition that his surname of his father was recorded as Kurma in the records of Singareni Collieries Co. Ltd. but his actual surname is Thippananeveni and that he got it mentioned in his petition that because he is elder son , his appointment was compassionate appointment . He further stated he has applied to the respondent for compassionate appointment due to retirement of his father. He has not filed into court the copy of said application. He has not got it mentioned in the above application his surname as Kurma@ Thippanaboina. He has not filed into this Tribunal

[PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii) ] any of the documents pertaining to his father such as service register, identity card, family medical book etc. , to show that his surname is Kurma @ Thippanaboina and that his father's name is Narayana@ Sailu . He has not filed into this Tribunal the voters list, voters card and ration card showing that his surname is Kurma @ Thippanaboina andthat his father's name is Narayana@ Sailu .

21. But in his further chief examination he marked Ex.W- 1 to Ex. W- 11 . In further cross examination, he stated it is true that Ex . W- 2 & W-3 are subsequent to the period after the ID is remitted back to this Tribunal . He has not filed any documents to disprove that the antecedents reports by the police is false . He also further stated that he do not know howmany other accused are there along with him in C.C. , 185/1992 on the file of JMFC , Sulthanabad covered by Ex . W- 1 and stated his name is shown as A- 2 in the above judgment. He also further stated that it is true that his age is shown as 42 years in Ex.W- 2 . Ex.W- 3 is standing in the name his wife and it is true that his name and age are shown differently in all Exs.W- 1 to W- 11 . WW- 2 is the father of the petitioner. WW- 3 is an independent witness worked along with the petitioner. WW-4 is an illiterate witness who do not know the contents of the chief affidavit. WW- 5 is a witness belongs to the same caste of the petitioner.

22. The evidence of WW-2 , WW-3 and WW- 5 is fully in corroboration with and in support of the evidence ofWW- 1 which shows that the petitioner belongs to Kurma community, but his actual surname is Thippanaveni . Their evidence also shows that none of them were examined by the police about the name and surname of the Petitioner and his father. The evidence of WW -4 in his cross examination is that the contents of his chief sworn affidavit are not read over to him and explained in Telugu before obtaining thumb impression on it and that he do not know the contents of the chief sworn affidavit , because he is an illiterate . So in the light of the above , no value can be attached to his evidence .

23. Ex.W- 1 is the C.C. , ofjudgment in C.C.No. 185/ 1992 on the file of JMFC , Sulthanabad . The petitioner is shown as Thippanaboina Mallaiah , S/o . Sailu as an A - 2 in thatcase , but not as Kurma Mallaiah , S/o . Narayana in the said judgment . Ex . W- 2 is the information of Sub Divisional Police Officer , Godavarikhani to Thippanaboina Mallaiah furnished under Right to Information Act informing that as per the records of I - town , Godavarikhani , the applicant Thippanaboina Mallaiah was involved in crime No. 236/ 1991 U/ Sec . 148 , 324 r/w 149 IPC of P.S. , Godavarikhani I- town. In this case the applicant was arrested on 30-5-1992 and remanded to judicial custody. After trial the case was acquitted against the applicant on 9-10-1995 vide CC .. No. 185/1992 . He was further not involved in any other cases as per the records of P.S. , GDK I - town . So this document along with the evidence of WW- 1 , shows CC . No. 185/1992 was ended with acquittal in which Thippanaboina Mallaiah , S/o . Sailu as A- 2 and further shows that he was not involved in any other cases .

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

6329 भारत का राजपत्र : सितम्बर 3 , 2011 / भाद्र 12 , 1933

further shows that his appointment in S.C. Company Ltd. , is undesirable since he may spread dis -affection among the workers against the company and also the Government . He may also invite strikes and other labour problems in the Company. It shows this report was based on that Thippanaboina Mallaiah was being A- 2 in the C.C.No.185/ 1992 on the file of JMFC , Sulthanabad and he was found that he was a militant of SIKASA and nothing else . It do not reveal from whom and from where the police verified the antecedents of Thippanaboina Mallaiah , to show that he was militant of SIKASA and how they came to conclusion the same Thippanaboina Mallaiah gave his name as Kurma Mallaiah falsely. The later part ofthe report shows it is only based on surmises and the police by apprehending that the Thippanaboina Mallaiah may spread dis - affection among the workers against the company and also the Government and may also invite strikes and other labour problems in the company. So , there is no basis for the police for sending this report against Thippanaboina Mallaiah . Simply because he is involved in a case U/ Sec . 148 , 324 r/ w.149 IPC , it cannot be said that Thippanaboina Mallaiah is a militant of SIKASA and that he gave his name falsely as Kurma Mallaiah . Moreover the above IPC case was ended in acquittal , likewise there is no basis for the police for coming to a conclusion that his appointment is undesirable in the S.C. Company Ltd. , and to report that he may spread disaffection among the workers against the company and also to the Government and also invite strikes and other labour problems in the company.

24. No doubt Ex . W- 3 & W-4 are subsequent to the date of remand of the matter to this Tribunal . Ex . W- 3 standing in the name ofKurma Komaramma, W/ o. Mallaiah . Ex . W-4 is standing in the name of Mallaiah Thippanaboina , S/ o. Sailu . Ex . W- 5 is a piece of document. Accordingto the evidence of WW- 1 it is a sheet in the house hold card supplied to him . (For marking documents an objection is raised by other side and it is marked subject to said objection) .Whatever it may be since it is a par ofdocument and not a full pledged document , no evidentiary value can be attached to it . Ex . W- 6 is family medical attendant book issued by the respondent to Kurma Mallaiah . In this his wifes name is noted as Komaramma and father's name is noted as Narayana . It is evidence ofWW- 1 Komaramma is his wife , Narayana is his father . Ex.W- 7 is the voluntary retirement proceedings of the respondent of Kurma Narayana along with 6 others . Ex.W- 8 is a dependent certificate showing that Mallaiah is son of Kurma Narayana his dependent. Ex . W- 9 is the appointment order of the petitioner as Badli Filler in place of Narayana in the respondent company. It shows his employment in the company is subject to verification of antecedents and if adverse reports are received from the police authorities , on verification of antecedents , their appointment in the company is liable to be cancelled . Ex. W- 10 is the letter issued to the petitioner by the respondent dt . 16/23-02-1996 which shows that the petitioner was dis - empanelled from the services of the company with immediate effect . Ex . W- 11 is the medical unfit letter dt . 18-5-1994 in respect of Kurma Narayana declaring he is unfit for further services in the respondent company, issued by the Medical Superintendent , Area Hospital , Godavarikhani.

25. From the above evidence it can be rightly concluded that the petitioner is Thippanaboina Mallaiah andbecause he belongs to Kurma community is also known as Kurma Mallaiah and that his father's name is Thippanaboina Narayana and also called as Kurma Sailu.

26. Ex.M -2 verification of character and antecedents of Kurma Mallaiah reported by Superintendent of Police , Karimnagar to the General Manager, Ramagundam Area , Ramagundam.

27. The respondent did not file any documents to show that the respondent called character verification and antecedent reports in respect of the petitioner or Kurma Mallaiah to the Superintendent of Police , Karimnagar. This document do not show that the General Manager , Ramagundam Area - I is the General Manager of Singareni Collieries Company, Ramagundam Area - I because it is not mentioned in the document General Manager, Singareni Collieries .

29. So there is no documentary evidence to show that there is another person by name Kurma Mallaiah . In Ex. M- 2 also it is not mentioned there is another person by name Kurma Mallaiah is in existence than the petitioner. No enquiry was conducted by the respondent to ascertain whether there was any other person by name Kurma Mallaiah other than the petitioner . No details are therein in Ex. M - 2 about the petitioner involving in other criminal cases as a SIKASA member. These are the facts admitted by MW- 1 in his cross examination . Further this MW-1 is admitted in cross examination , according to certificate furnished by the petitioner his caste is Golla ( Shepherd) . Golla people also called as Kurma . So , from this also it can be rightly said Thippanaboina Mallaiah is also known as and called as Kurma Mallaiah . , The record placed by the petitioner coupled with the oral evidence produced on his side, established the same fact . Then the question of impersonation does not arise and there is no material proof to show that the petitioner himself impersonated as Kurma Mallaiah instead of Thippanaboina Mallaiah and got appointed in the respondent company in place of Kurma Narayana.

28.Whatever it may be , from this it can be said police sent this report shows when the police verified and found Kurma Mallaiah was a militant of SIKASA of Central Organisation of CPI ML PW Group . His original name is Thippanaboina Mallaiah , S /o . Sailu , but he gave his name as Kurma Mallaiah falsely. He was involved as an accused in Crime No. 236/1991 of Godavarikhani I - town P.S. , It

30. In the present case , no enquiry was conducted bythe respondent with regard to the impersonation before removing/dis-empanelment from service and no notice was given to the petitioner about impersonation . Therefore , I hold removal ofthe petitioner from service is bad, arbitrary and even against to the principles of natural justice . The point is answered accordingly.

6330

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 3, 2011 /BHADRA 12 , 1933

31. POINT NO . 2 : -

It is the case of the respondent this court has no jurisdiction to decide the present dispute as the respondent company deals in Coal Mining which is Central Government subject and not the subject of the State Government . Therefore, the Industrial Tribunal having Central jurisdiction only competent to decide the above dispute and the Industrial Tribunal at Godavarikhani is vested with only State Jurisdiction, therefore , this Tribunal is not competent to decide the above dispute . Hence , the petition is liable to be dismissed with costs .

32. In a case reported in 1998 (5) ALD - 16 ( D.B) in a writpetition between U. Chinnappa Vrs . Cotton Corporation of India and others ; the Division Bench of High Court held-"we will assume that in so far as the dismissed or retrenched workman is able to approach the Labour Court straight- away, the power of the Central Government to make a reference of the dispute may be whittled down protanto and in that sense a conflict or repugnancy with sub- section (2) of Section 2(A) and Section 10 ( 1 ) r/w sub- section ( 1 ) of Section 2 - A and Section 3 of the Act. Even then, the Presidential assent given under Article 254 (2 ) makes the State law prevail over the provisions of the Central law to the extent of repugnancy. " . It also further observed Industrial Disputes Act , 1947, Section 2 - A(2 )— Not confined to workmen employed in Industrial undertakings of State Government- It applies also to workmen engaged in Central Government undertakings .

33. If the plea of the respondent is considered in the light of the above case law, it falls to the ground , because , Section 2 -A(2) of ID Act, 1947 applies both to the workmen employed in Industrial undertakings of State Government and also to the workmen engaged in Central Government undertakings .

34. In other words , it can be said it is for the workman to approach U/ Sec.2 - A(2 ) of I.D. , Act , either to the Industrial Tribunals having Central jurisdiction and also the Tribunals having State jurisdiction.

35. In view of the above , I hold that this Tribunal is havingjurisdiction to decide the industrial dispute on hand. The point is answered accordingly.

36. POINT NO . 3 : -

In view of my findings on Point No.1 , I am under considered opinion that the order of dis - empanelment of the petitioner is not justified and as such it is set - aside and the respondent is directed to reinstate the petitioner into service with continuity of service , but without any other benefits within the 30 daysfrom the date of Gazette publication of this award . But in the circumstances , each party do bear their own costs .

Typed to my dictation directly by Typist , corrected and pronounced by me in the open court on this , the 18th day ofJuly, 2011 .

SRI . M. SYAMALA RAO, Chairman - cum- Presiding Officer

[ PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii ) ] Appendix of Evidence Witnesses Examined

Forworkman: -

WW- 1 Kurma Mallaiah - petitioner

WW- 2 Kurma Narayana @ Sailu

WW-3 Dasari Narsaiah

WW-4 Nune Rajesham

WW-5 Bashaboina Odelu

ForManagement -

MW- 1 A.Udaya Mohan , Welfare Officer . EXHIBITS

ForWorkman: -

Ex.W- 1 Dt . 9-10-1995 WW-1 C.C. , of judgment in C.C. No. 185/ 1992 of JMFC , Sulthanabad Ex.W-2 Dt. 6-10-2010 Letter issued to the petitioner by theSub -Divisional Police Officer, Godavarikhani

Ex.W-3 Dt. 5-04-2008 Rajiv Arogya Sree card No. WAP. 208504100277

Ex.W-4 Dt .

Election Commission of India Identity card issued to the petitioner

Ex.W-5 Dt . One sheet of house hold card of the petitioner

Ex.W-6 Dt. Medical attendant book issued to the petitioner by respondent bearing No. 011738

Ex.W-7 Dt. 29/30-5-1994 Voluntary retirement letter of father of the petitioner Ex.W-8 Dt . 27-04-1993 Dependent Certificate Ex.W-9 Dt . 28/30-11-1994 Office order ( appointment order) Ex.W- 10Dt. 16/23-2-1996 Letter issued to the petitioner by the respondent for adverse

remarks with regard to

antecedents dis -empanelment Ex.W- 11Dt . 18-05-1994 Medical unfit letter of father of the petitioner

ForManagement: -

Ex . M- 1 Dt. 28/30-11-1994 Office order WW- 1

Ex . M- 2 Dt. 5-01-1996 WW- 1

Report of Superintendent of Police , Karimnagar submitted to the General Manager , SCCL , RG - I , Godavarikhani regarding verification of character and antecedents of Sri Kurma Mallaiah , S /o . Narayana Ex . M- 3 Dt. 16/23-02-1996 Letter issued to the petitioner by WW- 1

the respondent for adverse remarks with regard to antecedents -dis -empanelment .

Ex . M-4Dt . 12-08-1994 Attestation form of the petitioner.

6331 [भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : सितम्बर 3 , 2011/ भाद्र 12 , 1933

नई दिल्ली, 8 अगस्त, 2011

का.आ. 2372.-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में , केन्द्रीय सरकार कन्टेनर कार्पोरेशन ऑफ इण्डिया 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 11/2008 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 8-8-2011 को प्राप्त हुआ था।

[सं. एल-41012/135/ 1998- आईआर ( बी-1 ) ] रमेश सिंह , डेस्क अधिकारी

New Delhi , the 8th August , 2011

Act, 1947 against the management Container Corporation ofIndia (Concor ) Ltd, on account of their failure /refusal to seek approval of the punishment from this tribunal under Section 33 of the Act for his removal from service vide impugned punishment order dated 26-3-2004 by way of disciplinary action against him during the pendency of the industrial dispute No. 160/1999 titled as " The General Secretary, Corporation of India ( CONCOR) Employees Union Versus Senior Manager, Container Corporation of India Ltd. " wherein the applicant is a workman concerned. According to the applicant/complainant he was a regular employee ofthe respondent management till his dismissal by way ofdisciplinary action vide impugned order darted 26-3-2004 . That ID No. 160/1999 was referred for adjudication to this tribunal by the appropriate Govt . vide reference order No.L-41012/ 135/ 98 /IR ( B - 1 ) dated 17-5-1999 with the following terms of reference:

S.O. 2372. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. LCA/ ID No. 11/2008 ) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal- cum- Labour Court No. 2, Delhi as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the management of Container Corporation of India Ltd. , Kanishka and their workmen , received by the Central Government on 8-8-2011 .

"Whether the action of the management of Container Corporation of India Ltd. , Ashoka Road, New Delhi in not giving to its Employees any incentives for family planning for promoting small family norms of the Govt . isjustified? If not to what relief and benefits the employees are entitled to? "

[No. L -41012/ 135/ 1998- IR ( B - I) ] RAMESH SINGH , Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

IN THE COURT OF SHRI SATNAM SINGH, PRESIDING OFFICER CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM - LABOUR COURT- II, ROOM NO . 33 , BLOCK- A, GF, KARKARDOOMA COURT COMPLEX, KARKARDOOMA, DELHI

LCA/ ID No. 11/2008

APLICATION UNDER SECTION 33A OF THE INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES ACT, 1947

IN THE MATTER OF :

Shri Sanjeev Kumar,

Son of Shri Pritam Singh 7A , Pocket- L, Sheikh Sarai - II New Delhi - 110017.

Complainant/ Applicant

VERSUS

The Managing Director Container Corporation of India(Concor ) Ltd. Concor Bhawan , C - 3 Mathura Road, NewDelhi- 110076

Respondent/Management

That in ID . No. 160/1999 a prayer has been made for grantofbenefits of the incentives for adopting small family norms to all the employees of the respondent management . That on 26-3-2004 ID No. 160/1999 was pending before this court. That on 14-3-2004 the matter was adjourned to 26-5-2004 for cross - examination of the workman. That ID No.160/ 1999 is an ID espoused by the employees of the respondent management through Container Corporation of India Employees Union ( hereinafter referred to as "Union" ) and the applicant/ workman is a member of the said Union since 1997. The applicant/ workman is also one of the signatories to the letter of espousal of ID No.160/ 1999. Copies of the espousal letters have been enclosed. That even otherwise ID No. 160/1999 is in the nature of general demands made on behalf of all the employees of the respondent management and all the employees as well as the respondent management would be bound by the final award passed in the said ID. That if the said reference is answered against the respondent management , the applicant/ workman would be the beneficiary of the same and if the same is answered against the Union the said award would be binding against the applicant/workman . That till date the respondent management has not granted any incentive for family planning for promoting small family norms to the applicant/ workman which have been demanded by the workmen in ID No. 160/1999 . That ID No. 160/1999 is pending till date.

AWARD

2. It is further the case of the applicant/complainant that certain persons had managed to get a no dispute award passed from this tribunal by playing fraud upon it .

Complainant/ applicant Shri Sanjeev Kumar has filed anapplication under Section 33 A of the Industrial Disputes

3202 GI/11-18 [PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii) ] 6332

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: SEPTEMBER 3 , 2011 /BHADRA 12 , 1933

However, within 30 days of the passing of the said award dated4-1-2006 appropriate application inter alia was filed by the Union and this tribunal issued notices to the concerned parties . That the applicant/workman was a protected workman for the year 2002-3 as declared by the Asstt . Labour Commissioner and claim for the year 2003-4 was duly filedbefore the said authority which is pending till date. That the respondent management was obliged to take appropriate permission from this tribunal before dismissing the applicant/workman or in any case was required at least to take an approval of such dismissal .

order dated 22-7-2003 issued show cause notice to the workman proposing the punishment of removal from service . The applicant/workman replied the same vide representation dated 25-8-2003 . That on 26-3-2004 i.e. after 8 months of the show cause notice the impugned punishment order was passed and the applicant/ workman was removed from service with malafide and oblique motive . That the respondent management was / is under statutory obligation to make the application simultaneously for approval of the action taken before this tribunal where ID No.160/ 1999 is pending in which the applicant/workman is the workman concerned but the respondent management has again failed to do so .

4.It is further the case of the applicant/ complainant that the respondent management by design moved an application bearing OP No. 15/06 seeking approval under Section 33 (2) (b) of the Act before the Industrial Tribunal, Delhi which related to 74 other workmen of the respondent management specifically mentioned in the list attached with the reference in which the name of the applicant/ workman is not mentioned . That on 7-7-2004 Industrial Tribunal II, Delhi dismissed the approval application OP No.15/2006 . That on 9-7-2004 the applicant/workman reported to join the duties . However, he received letter dated 12-7-2004 in which it was stated that in view of the findings of learned ID No. II the punitive action taken still continues to exist. The respondent management preferred awrit petition challenging the order dated 7-7-2004 of ID No. II , Delhi and the order dated 7-7-2004 was set aside by the Hon'ble High Court vide its order dated 2-12-2004 with certain observations . That in view of the above said admitted position, the learned ID No. II Delhi was again pleased to dismiss OP No.15 /2004 vide order dated 2-3-2006 and it has attained finality as the same was not chalienged by either of the parties . That subsequent to order dated 2-3-2006 the applicant/workman reported for duty but the respondent management illegally and arbitrarily refused to allow him to resume his duty. That the applicant/workman filed a writ petition ( Civil ) No.5316 inthe Hon'ble High Court of Delhi but the said writ petition was dismissed vide Hon'ble High Court order/judgment dated 2-11-2006 . That in view of the observations of the Hon'ble High Court the applicant/ workman haş filed the present application under Section 33A of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. That the enquiry conducted against the applicant/workma was in complete violation of principles of natural justice and the Enquiry Officer had conducted the enquiry in a biased manner .

5. It is emphatically alleged by the applicant/ workman that he has also not been paid/ tendered full one month's wages at the time of passing of the impugned dismissal order thereby contravening the mandatory provisions of Section 33 of the Act . The applicant / workman, therefore , has prayed as under :

3. The applicant/ complaint has further submitted that he joined the respondent management on 16-4-1996 as Senior Asstt . and was posted at Inland Container Depot , Tughlakabad , Okhla Phase- I , New Delhi - 110020 . On 13-1- 1999 he was suspended and on 25-2-1999 a charge sheet was issued to him for conducting domestic enquiry. Without following the principles of natural justice, the enquiry officer submitted the enquiry report dated 30-5-2000 with conclusion that three charges out of four had been proved and subsequently the applicant/ workman was removed from service vide order dated 12-7-2000 . That the respondent management was under statutory obligation to make application simultaneously for approval of the action taken from this tribunal where industrial dispute No. 160/1999 was pending , as per Section 33 ( 2) (b ) ofthe Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 after passing the final order of dismissal but the respondent management did not do so . That on appeal of the applicant/ workman the appellate authority vide order dated 13-9-2000 ordered to keep the punishment for removal from service in abeyance and further issued the direction for de- novo enquiry of the charges . That again at the instance of the respondent management the same enquiry officer submitted another enquiry report dated 23-3-2001 with the same conclusion without following the principles of natural justice . That on the representation of the applicant/ workman the respondent management vide its order dated 24-7-2001 set aside the punishment for removal from service iniposed vide order dated 12-7-2000 and further issued the direction to enquire the charges de - novo. That it is necessary to mention here that the respondent management has admitted in its order dated 24-7-2001 that the enquiry conducted by the enquiry officer was violative . That the above mentioned facts clearly indicate the mischievous conduct of the respondent management . That again third time at the instance of the respondent management the enquiry was conducted by another enquiry officer without granting reasonable opportunity to the workman to defend himself and without following the principles of natural justice submitted the enquiry report dated 20-11-2002 with the conclusion that two charges (2 and 3 ) are proved and two charges i.e. 1 and 4 are not proved. That the disciplinary authority vide its order dated 25-5-2003 observed that charge No. 1 was also proved and vide 6333 भारत का राजपत्र : सितम्बर 3 , 2011 / भाद्र 12 , 1933

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

"(a) Hold the respondent management guilty of violation of Section 33 of the Industrial DisputesAct, 1947 AND/OR

(b) Quash the charge sheet dated 25-2-1999 will all consequential proceedings thereto , AND/ OR

respondent management has denied that they were required to move an application for approval in ID No. 160/ 1999 as according to them the applicant was not a workman concerned in ID No.160/ 1999. That the enquiry officers have conducted the enquiries properly and disciplinary authority went through the entire records and passed appropriate orders. The respondent management therefore has prayed for the dismissal of the application moved by the applicant/claimant.

(c) The impugned punishment order bearing no CON/HR/201/561 - III/920 dated 26-3-2004may kindly be declared null and void/set aside, AND/OR

(d) An award may also be passed thereby directing the respondent management to treat the applicant/workman continuing in service and pay all arrears of wages/ emoluments and all consequential relief(s ) & benefit (s ) since August, 1998 in the interest ofjustice ."

7. By filing a rejoinder the applicant/claimant has controverted the pleas and submissions made from the side of the respondent management and has reiterated his own submissions made in his application moved under Section 33A of the ID Act, 1947. The applicant/ complainant has clarified that he is not on the rolls of ICD Dhandari Kalan Distt . Ludhiana . That he is on the rolls of the respondent herein i.e. M/ s . Container Corporation of India, Kanishka Office Plaza, 4th floor , Ashoka Road, New Delhi videoffer of appointment letter dated 29-3-1996. That ICD Ludhiana is one of the integrated part of the respondent. That inthe approval application OP No. 15/2004 as well as before the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi the respondent was stating that the applicant is employed as a Senior Assistant with the respondent corporation and with effect from 20-7-2002 he was transferred and posted at ICD Dhandari Kalan , Distt . Ludhiana. The respondent thus is estopped from contending that he is on the rolls of ICD Dhandari Kalan , Distt. Ludhiana. That the complainant was signatory to the letter of espousal at serial no.75 in ID No. 160/1999 and he is the workman concerned in the said ID.

8. On the pleadings of the parties the following issues were framed on 3-6-2010.

(1 ) Whether Mr. Sanjeev Kumar applicant is a concerned workman or not in ID No. 160/1999 . ΟΡΒΡ.

(2) Relief.

framed: On6-12-2010 the following additional issue was also

Additional Issue :

Ifissue no . 1 framed on 3-6-2010 is answered in the affirmative , whether the respondent management has contravened Section 33 of the ID Act , 1947 or not ?

9. Insupport of its case the applicant/ complainant has examined himself as WW1 . He has filed a detailed affidavitby way of his evidence . He has been subjected todetailed cross -examination by the A/R ofthe respondent corporation. Apart from him , he has also examined three. more witnesses , namely Ranjeev Kumar WW. 2, Binay Kamar Choudhary WW3 and Suresh Kumar Ranga WW4 . In rebuttal to the above evidence , the respondent management has examined Shri Rajeev Bhardwaj , its Group General Manager ( HR) as MW1 . He has also filed his 6. The respondent management has contested the application filed by claimant/ applicant and in its reply/ written statement it is submitted that the applicant was not a workman concerned in ID No.1 60/1999 and therefore , the present application is liable to be dismissed . That since 20-7-02 he was working in ICD Dhandari Kalan , Distt . Ludhiana and was on the rolls of the said ICD while prior to that he was working in ICD Tughlakabad, New Delhi and it is mentioned that each ICD is a separate establishment . That ID No. 160/1999 was not pending before this tribunal when the present application has been filed as the award dated 4-1-2006 had been passed in this case. That it was admitted by the Container Corporation ofIndia Employees Union in the proceedings in ID No. 160/ 1999 that no industrial dispute existed between the parties as Container Corporation of India Ltd. already had a policy on " incentive" for adopting small family norms and moreover the alleged espousal was not given by the Union for raising this frivolous and non existent dispute . The reference thus itself was without jurisdiction as the dispute was never an industrial dispute in law. That as the applicant was on the rolls of Dhandari Kalan , Distt. Ludhiana he was not a party to the alleged dispute in ID No. 160/1999 as the said dispute had not been raised by the workmen of ICD Dhandari Kalan , Distt . Ludhiana . The appropriate Govt . in respect of the industrial dispute regarding workmen of ICD Dhandari Kalan , Distt . Ludhiana would be the Punjab Govt. That the alleged letter of espousal shows that none of the workmen employed in any of the Company's establishment either ICD Tughlakabad were signatories to the same. That it is not a case of the applicant/ complainant that he applied for the grant of benefits under the Company's policy and that he was not granted the same . That in order to avail the benefits under the policy the applicant was required to make an application satisfy the conditions of eligibility for grant of benefits under the policy. That there is no averment that the applicant satisfied the conditions of eligibility. The 6334

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 3 , 2011 /BHADRA 12, 1933

[PART II-SEC. 3 ( ii)]

Seventh Industrial Tribunal , West Bengal and others 199 LAB.I.C. (NOC) 13 ( Cal).

detailed affidavit by way of evidence . He toc has been subjected to a detailed cross -examination by the applicant & hisA/R.

10. I have perused the entire record and have also heard the learned AR for the parties . I have also gone through the written submissions filed by them in this case . Various authorities relief upon by the parties have also been gone through by me . My findings on the issues are as under:

Issues No. 1, 2 & Addl . issue :

Mr. Rajeev Bhardwaj MW1 the witness of the management in cross - examination has admitted that they had not challenged the espousal or the reference order or the proceedings which have taken place in ID No.160/ 1999. He was asked if he knew that Mr. Sanjeev Kumar was a signatory to the espousal which ultimately lead to the reference in ID No. 160/1999 he stated that he did not know about the same. In other words , no challenge could be made to the claim of applicant/ claimant Mr. Sanjeev Kumar that he was one of the signatories to the letter of espousal of ID No.160/ 1999 . Mr. Sanjeev Kumar in his evidence has asserted that ID No. 160/1999 is a industrial dispute espoused by the workmen of the respondent management and he is one of the signatories to the letter ofespousal Ex . WW1 / 9 at serial no.75 marked at point A. Mr. Sanjeev Kumar has also asserted that ID No. 160/1999 isa collective one in the nature of general demands made onbehalf of the workmen of the respondent management affecting their rights as a class and they would be bound by the decision/ final award passed in the said ID. Mr. Rajeev Bhardwaj MW1 in cross - examination has also admitted that the alleged dispute in ID No. 160/1999 was a collective dispute . The term ' concerned workman ' cannot be given a narrow construction and it includes all workmen by whom the dispute has been raised as well as those workmen who will be bound by the award . The word ' concerned' connotes a kind of specific , direct interest in any legal proceedings , to which he may not be individually a party, when a result or adjudication is capable of directly affecting him favourably or prejudicially according to the result . Aworkman who is likely to benefit or get adversely affected by any decision will be a ' workman concerned' in such dispute. In view of all this it has to be held that Mr. Sanjeev Kumar is a workman concerned in ID No.160/1999 . The plea of the respondent management that Mr. Sanjeev Kumar was an employee of ICD Dhandari Kalan Distt . Ludhiana and therefore could not be workman concerned in ID No. 160/1999 as it did not pertain to ICD Dhandari Kalan , District Ludhiana has no legs to stand upon . The industrial dispute in ID No.160/1999 is between the Container Corporation of India and its employees of Kanishka Shopping Plaza , Ashoka Road , New Delhi and the applicant/ complainant is on the rolls of respondent corporation at Kanishka Office Plaza , Ashoka Road, New Delhi and even if he was transferred later on to ICD Dhandari Kalan , Distt . Ludhiana that would not make him un-connected with the dispute referred to in ID No.160/ 1999.

11. All these issues of this case are inter- connected and so I proceed to decide them together. During the recording of the evidence on 20-7-2011 , learned AR for the parties submitted that they would confine their arguments on the issue whether Mr. Sanjeev Kumar is a concerned workman or not in ID No.160/ 1999 only. In other words , theydid not want to touch the enquiry part which resulted in the dismissal of applicant/ complainant Mr. Sanjeev Kumar. ID No.160/ 1999 was pending in this tribunal since 1999. With the consent ofboth the sides file of ID No. 160/ 1999 and the proceedings conducted therein have also beenlooked into for deciding the present application . The file of ID No. 160/1999 shows that on 17-11-2005 the case was adjourned for recording cross - examination of the workman to 16-3-2006. In between on 4-1-2006 the president and other office bearers of the workers union came to the court and informed the court that the parties had arrived at a settlement . My learned predecessor recorded the statement of the parties and passed a no dispute award in this case on 4-1-2006 . The alleged General Secretary of the union subsequently moved an application for recalling the no dispute award and the said application has been dismissed vide order dated 16-5-2011 . It is submitted from the side of the applicant/ complainant that the aforesaid orders are now the subject matter of writ petitions no.3728/ 2011 and 3974/2011 which are pending before the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi . It is submitted from the side of the applicant/ complainant that a no dispute award is no award in the eyes of law as the said award was not passed on interim or final determination of the industrial dispute referred to this tribunal . It is submitted that the tribunal jurisdiction was limited to decide the dispute on merits and not by holding that there was no dispute between the parties . So long as the dispute remains unsettled and the proceedings come to an end without adjudicating the dispute between the parties , there is no conclusion of the proceedings and the proceedings shall not be deemed to have been concluded and ID No. 160/1999 has to be held as pending . There is substance in this argument from the side of the applicant/ complainant and it has to be held that ID No. 160/1999 was pending on 26-3-2004 when the workman was removed from service . Reference in this connection is invited to the case of G. K. Sarkar Vs. State ofWest Bengal & Ors (Calcutta High Court ) FLR 1988 (56) and B. R. Herman & Mohatta ( India) Pvt . Ltd. Vs. The

12. It is contended from the side of the management that there was no dispute between the parties as the scheme ofgrant of incentives for adopting small family norms was in existence in the respondent corporation from the very beginning and so the reference itself was bad. If the 6335 भारत का राजपत्र : सितम्बर 3 , 2011 / भाद्र 12 , 1933

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

take a position that such order is not inoperative or void till it is set aside under Section 33A notwithstanding the contravention of Section 33 (2) (b) Proviso driving the employee to have recourse to one or more proceedings by making a complaint under Section 33A or top raise another industrial dispute or to make a complaint under Section 31 ( 1 ) . Such an approach destroys the protection specifically and expressly given to an employee under the said proviso as against possible victimization , unfair labour practice or harassment because of pendency of industrial dispute so that an employee can be saved from hardship ofunemployment ?

Ithas further been observed in this ruling that " if approval is not given , nothing more is required to be done by the employee as it will have to be deemed that the order of discharge or dismissal had never been passed. Consequence of it is that the employce is deemed to have continued in service entitling him to all the benefits available . This being the position there is no need of a separate or specific order for his reinstatement . " reference itself was bad and ought not to have been made by the Central Govt. , what prevented the respondent corporation from taking appropriate steps against the order of reference . As already pointed out , Mr. Rajeev Bhardwaj , MWI has admitted that they have not challenged either the espousal or the reference order made inthe case ID No. 160/1999 . It does not lie it their mouth now to contend that the reference order itself was bad. It is not a case where the reference order made by the Central Govt . has been declared to be invalid by an appropriate forum. In view of all this the authorities on this point relied upon from the side of the respondent corporation do not help their case and it has to be held that ID No.160/1999 was pending when the order of removal from service of Mr. Sanjeev Kumar was passed in this case on 26-3-2004 . It is not in dispute in this case that no application has been made by the respondent corporation before this tribunal where the proceedings were pending , for approval ofthe action taken by them against Mr. Sanjeev Kumar . Mr. Sanjeev Kumar has also asserted that he has not even been paid wages for one month when the order dated 26-3-2004 was passed against him . That being the position, Section 33 ( 2 ) ( b ) has been clearly violated by the management corporation in this case and the grievance of Mr. Sanjeev Kumar applicant/ complainant is required to be settled under Section 33 of the ID Act . The filing of an application in any other ID including ID No. 22/2002 would beabsolutely of no benefit to the respondent management as the said application was not a proper application and the application was required to be moved only before this tribunal . Even no relief has been given by any other tribunal also to the management corporation in the case of removal from service ofMr. Sanjeev Kumar. In the landmark judgment in Jaipur Zila Sahakari Bhoomi Vikas Bank Ltd. Vs. Shri Ram Gopal Sharma and others , 2002 LAB LC.513 , the Hon'ble Supreme Court has observed as under:

13. In view of what has been discussed above , issue no . 1 is answered in the affirmative and in favour of Mr. Sanjeev Kumar applicant/ complainant . Since issue no . 1 has been answered in the affirmative the additional issue framed on 6-12-2010 is answered that the respondent management has contravened Section 33 of the ID Act , 1947 and as regards the relief the same has to be in accordance with the landmark judgment of Jaipur Zila Sahakari Bhoomi Vikas Bank Ltd. ( Supra) , The application filed by Mr. Sanjeev Kumar complainant/ applicant under Section 33A of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 is therefore allowed and relief in terms of the mandate of Jaipur Zilla Sahakari Bhoomi Vikas Bank Ltd. (Supra ) as quoted above is granted to the applicant/ complainant Mr. Sanjeev Kumar. By way of additional clarification it is ordered that the punishment order dated 26-3-2004 is hereby declared null and void and as if the same had never been passed and the applicant/ complaint Mr. Sanjeev Kumar shall be deemed to be in service entitling him to all the benefits available .

Dated: 27-7-2011

SATNAM SINGH , Presiding Officer नई दिल्ली , 8 अगस्त , 2011

का.आ. 2373.-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 (1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार एच.डी.एफ. सी. बैंक लि. के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच , अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण , मुम्बई के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 8/2011 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 8-8-2011 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल -12012/50/2010- आईआर (बी-1 ) ] रमेश सिंह , डेस्क अधिकारी "Not making an application under Section 33 ( 2)(b) seeking approval or withdrawing an application once made before any order is made thereon , is a clear case of contravention of the Proviso to Section 33 (2) (b) .An employer who does not make an application under Section 33 (2) (b ) or withdraws the one made , cannot be rewarded by relieving him ofthe statutory obligation created on himto make such an application if it is so done , he will be happier or more comfortable than an employer who obeys the command of law and makes an application inviting scrutiny of the authority in the matter ofgranting approval ofthe action taken byhim. Adherence to and obedience of law should be obvious and , necessary in a system governed byrule oflaw. An employer by design can avoid to make an application after dismissing or discharging an employee or file it and withdraw before any order is passed on it , on its merits , to 6336

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 3 , 2011 / BHADRA 12, 1933

New Delhi , the 8th August , 2011

S.O. 2373. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) , the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 8/2011 ) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal - cum- Labour Court No. 2, Mumbai as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the management of HDFC Bank Limited, Human Resource Division and their workmen, received by the Central Government on 8-8-2011 .

[No. L - 12012/50/2010- IR (B - I ) ] RAMESH SINGH , Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL NO . 2 MUMBAI PRESENT

Κ. Β . ΚΑΤΑΚΕ , Presiding Officer Reference No. CGIT- 2/8 of 2011

EMPLOYERS IN RELATION TO THE MANAGEMENT OF HDFC BANK LIMITED

The Assistant Vice President HDFC Bank Ltd. HumanResource Division HDFC Bank House , 2nd floor Senapati Bapat Marg Lower Parel Mumbai 400013 .

AND Their Workmen

Shri Pradeep Kumar Pandey C/o . Maharashtra Employees Union

Kokanpada KurarVillage Malad(E) Mumbai 400097

APPEARANCES :

No appearance.

Forthe Employer For the Workmen

No appearance .

Mumbai , dated the 8th July 2011 .

AWARD

The Government of India , Ministry of Labour & Employment by its Order No.L- 12012/ 50/ 2010 - IR (B - 1 ) , dated 9-3-2011 in exercise of the powers conferred by clause ( d) of sub - section ( 1 ) and sub - section 2 ( A) of Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 have referred the following industrial dispute to this Tribunal for adjudication:

"Whether the action of the management of HDFC

PART II- SEC. 3 ( ii) ) Bank Ltd. In terminating services of Shri Pradeep Kumar Pandey, Ex - Customer Relationship Officer with effect from 26-8-2009 is legal and justified? To what relief the workman is entitled? " 2.Notices were issued to both the parties . However second party though duly served , remained absent. Registered AD receipt to that effect is at Ex- 4 . The second party union did not appear and file the statement of claim . Without Statement of claim , the reference cannot be decided on merits and the same deserves to be rejected. Thus I pass the following order:

ORDER

Reference stands rejected for want of prosecution . Date: 8-7-2011

K. B. KATAKE , Presiding Officer/Judge नई दिल्ली , 8 अगस्त, 2011

का.आ. 2374.-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में , केन्द्रीय सरकार मध्य रेलवे. के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच , अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालय , मुम्बई के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 11/2007 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 8-8-2011 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल-41012/22/2006- आईआर ( बी -1 ) ] रमेश सिंह , डेस्क अधिकारी New Delhi , the 8th August , 2011

S.O. 2374.- In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) , the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 11/2007) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal -cum- Labour Court No. 1 , Mumbai as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the management of Carriage andWagon Workshop, Central Railway, Mumbai and their workmen , received by the Central Government on 8-8-2011 .

[No. L-41012/22/2006- IR (B- I) ] RAMESH SINGH , Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL NO . 1 MUMBAI

JUSTICE GS . SARRAF, Presiding Officer REFERENCE NO . CGIT - 1 / 11 OF 2007 Parties : Employers in relation to the management of Carriage and Wagon Workshop , Central Railway [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

And

Their Workman Late K.S.Gaikwad represented by his legal heir Smt . Bhagirathi

APPEARANCES :

;Ms. Fernandes , Adv. Forthe managegement

:Mr. J.P. Sawant, Adv. For the Workman

: Maharashtra State

Mumbai , dated the 8th day of July, 2011.

AWARD

1. In exercise ofpowers conferred by clause (d) of sub- section ( 1 ) and sub-section (2A) or Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act 1947 (hereinafter referred to as theAct) the Central Government has referred the following dispute for adjudication to this Tribunal .

"Whether the action ofmanagement of the Chief Workshop Manager, Carriage and Wagon Workshop , Central Railway, Matunga , Mumbai in recovering the wages paid to the employee late Shri Kisan S. Gaikwad from the retirement benefits and pension of Smt . Bhagirath Kisan Gaikwad is justified? If not, what relief widow/ wife Smt. Bhagirath Kisan Gaikwad is entitled to ? " 2.According to the statement of claim submitted by Smt . Bhagirath Kisan Gaikwad wife and legal heir to the deceased workman K.S. Gaikwad ( hereinafter referred to as the legal heir to the workman) the workman K. S.Gaikwad was employed by the management of Central Railway in its Carriage and Wagon Work Shop , Mumbai (hereinafter referred to as the management ) w.e.f. 24-4-1979 and he was in continuous employment in the capacity of Electric Fitter- II . The workman expired on 8-8-1998 while in service. The legal heir to the workman was entitled to receive the full amounts of Death- cum- Retirement Gratuity, Savings Fund, Provident Fund, Family pension and Dearness allowance in respect of the deceased. The legal heir to the workman approached the management for claiming the legal dues but instead the management asked her to deposite Rs . 92,188 as the balance recoveries of overdrawn wages which were paid to the deceased as wages for the period from 1-7-1993 to 8-8-1998 as according to the management the deceased should have retired w.e.f. 30-6- 1993 and his services for the period from 1-7-1993 to 1998 could not be counted for any purpose . According to the statement ofclaim management has been recovering the amount of Rs. 2,93,642from her pension amount in instalments illegally and without giving her any opportunity to explain . The deceased continued in service ofthe management and it was of no consequence that he should have retired on 30-6-1993 as per his date ofbirth. The deceased earned wages for the work he performed . According to the statement of claim the action of the

6337

भारत का राजपत्र : सितम्बर 3 , 2011 /भाद्र 12 , 1933

management in recovering the earned wages to the extent ofRs.2,93,642 from terminal dues in respect ofthe workman is illegal , unjustified and she being the legal heir to the workman is entitled to receive the amounts and benefits ofterminal dues without any deduction and with interest @18% per annum .

3. The first party filed its written statement wherein itisstated that the workman K. S. Gaikwad was appointed on 24-4-1979 and his exact date ofbirth as per the certificate supplied by him is 1-7-1935. He was , therefore, due for retirement on 30-6-1993 after completing the age of58 years. Due to oversight his name was not published in the list of staff that was due for retirement on superannuation during the year 1993 and thereby the workman erroneously continued in service till his death on 8-8-1998 and thus he overstayed in service for five years one month and eight days . The amount of wages for overstay period was worked out as Rs.2,93,642 . The amount payable towards on superannuation on 30-6-1993 was also worked out as 2,01,454. Therefore, the legal heir to the workman was advised to deposit an amount of Rs . 92,188 (Learned counsel for the legal heir to the workman has stated that the entire amount has now been recovered) . Accordingto the written statement the action of the management in recovering the overdrawn amount from pension of the workman is justified and legal.

4. Legal heir to the workman filed rejoinder.

5. An affidavit of Bhaskar Kisan Gaikwad has been filed on behalf ofthe legal heir to the workman and he has been cross - examined by learned counsel for the management. The management has filed an affidavit of D.N.Dadilwar who has been cross - examined by learned counsel for the legal heir to the workman.

6. Heard Shri Sawant learned counsel for the legal heir to the workman and Ms. Fernandes on behalf of the management.

7. Two questions arise:

(1) Whether legal representatives of the deceased workman are entitled to institute an industrial dispute under the provisions of the Act? (2) Whether the wages paid for the overstay period are recoverable from pension benefits of the workman?

8. There is no dispute that in the event of death of the workman during pendency of the proceedings the legal representatives or heirs can continue the proceedings . If pending proceedings can be continued by the legal heirs/ representatives of the deceased workman there is no good reason to hold that such legal representatives/ heirs cannot institute the proceedings before the Industrial Tribunal . If legal representatives /heirs of the deceased workman have locus standi to continue an industrial dispute instituted by such workman then they are also competent to institute 6338

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: SEPTEMBER 3 , 2011/BHADRA 12, 1933

[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii) ]

प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 8-8-2011 को प्राप्त हुआ था।

such industrial dispute after his death . I am supported by a decision of the Andhra Pradesh High Court reported in 1995 II CLR 870.

[सं. एल -40011 / 1 / 1997- आईआर (डीयू) ] जोहन तोपनो , अवर सचिव 9. As regards the second question it has been held by the Apex Court in 1997 ( 2) VI All India Services Law Journal 130 as under:

New Delhi , the 8th August , 2011

S.O. 2375.- In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 100/ 1998) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal- cum- Labour Court No. 2, Dhanbad as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employes in relationto the management of Department of Telecom and their workmen, which was received by the Central Government on 8-8-2011 .

[No. L-40011 / 1/ 1997 - IR (DU) ] JOHAN TOPNO , Under Secy.

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. 100 of 1998

Parties:

"The learned Counsel for the petitioner contends that since the petitioner has worked during the period, he is entitled to the payment of the pay and allowance from 1-6-1991 to 26-6-1994 and that he is also entitled to the payment of Provisional Pension , Death- cum-retirement gratuity, leave encashment, commutation of pension amount , GPF money and the amount deposited under CGHS on the plea that he retired from service on May 31 , 1994. We are aghast to notice the boldness with which it is claimed that he is entitled to all the benefits with effect from the above said date when admittedly he was to retire onMay 31 , 1991. It would be an obvious case of absolute irresponsibility on the part of the officer concerned in the Establishment in the concerned section for not taking any action to have the petitioner retired from service on his attaining superannuation . It is true that the petitioner worked during that period, but when he is not to continue to be in service as per law, he has no right to claim the salary etc. It is not the case that he was re -employed in the public interest , after attaining superannuation . Under these circumstances , wedo not find any illegality in the action taken by the authorities in refusing to grant the benefits . "

Employers in relation to the management of Telecommunication Department , Ranchi and their workmen.

APPEARANCES :

Onbehalf of the workmen

:Mr. D. Mukherjee , Advocate 10. I am of the view that the above judgement is fully applicable to the facts of the present case and in view of the judgement of the Apex Court the legal heir to the workman is not entitled to get the amount which the management has already recovered.

Onbehalf of the employers

:Mr. Shushil Prasad, Advocate

State : Jharkhand

Industry : Tale communication 11. It is , therefore , held that the action of the management in recovering the wages paid to the deceased workman from the retirement benefits and pension is fully justified.

Dated, Dhanbad, the 21st July 2011 .

AWARD

12. An Award is passed accordingly. JUSTICE G. S. SARRAF , Presiding Officer नई दिल्ली , 8 अगस्त, 2011

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-40011 /1 /97 - IR ( DU ) dated, the 10th March , 1998 .

SCHEDULE

का.आ. 2375.-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 (1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में , केन्द्रीय सरकार दूरसंचार विभाग के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच , अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण नं. 2 , धनबाद के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 100/98 ) को

"Kyya Mahaparvandhak , Dursanchar Vivag . Ranchi key Dwara 167 ( Annexure ) A.CG - 17 Mazdooro key Sthaikaran key Swal Ko Nakar 6339 भारत का राजपत्र : सितम्बर 3 , 2011 / भाद्र 12 , 1933

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

Quamsuddin Ansari on behalf of the management have beenproduced and examined.

Dena Kanha Tak Wajib Evam Nayaprada Hain? Yadi Nahi to Karmkar Kis Anutosh key Hakdar Hain?"

2. The case of the workmen is that workman Jakir Hussain and other concerned workmen as per enclosed list have been working in different permanent nature ofjob such as Exchange Maintenance , Cable , Line, store P.C.M. continuously by putting in more than 240 days attendance on each calendar year directly under the control and supervision of the management , rendering services and producing goods for the benefit of Telecommunication Management . Though they have been working as permanent workmen , the Management neither regularised their services nor is paying them their wages on regular pay scale par with other permanent workmen on the principle of"equal pay for equal work " despite their several times representation for it . Seeing the adamant attitude of the management, their elected representatives raised the industrial dispute before the ALC( C) Ranchi for it which also failed for the adoption of anti - labour attempt by the Management in course of its conciliation proceeding , hence it resulted in the reference for adjudication. Thus the action ofthe Management in not regularising and paying regular pay scale to the workmen is illegal arbitrary, unjustified, vindictive and exploitation .

The workmen in their rejoinder have categorically denied all the allegations of the Management.

On going through the evidences as adduced on behalf ofboth the parties , I find that WW- 1 Md . Aarshad, one of the workmen deposing for self as well as his rest workmen, has admitted that these workmen are working as a Casual Workers under the management and some of them also discharged their duties as Cable Man and Line Manetc. According to them they performed the job continuous in nature under the supervision of S.D.O. Telephone from 10-00 A.M. to 5 P.M. every day just as the permanent workers worked with them but they get leser wages as contrasted with the wages of the permanent workmen. The workmen have been working continuousaly by putting their attendance for more than 240 days in each year since 1991 , 1992 as per the copy ofthe letterdt. 19-3- 96 issued by the G.M. Telephone ( District Ranchi ) addressed to the ALC ( C ) , Ranchi ( Ext . W - 1 ) enclosed herewith the copy of the list of workmen numbering 196 (W- 1/ 1 ) . They are discharging their duties continuously for years together and the management pays them their wages @ Rs . 65 per day (per capita ) , but on their representation to the management for regularisation , the management refused to do so , and raising the industrial dispute for conciliation before the AL.C (C ) concerned but on its failure resulted in this reference for adjudication . Thiswitness has admitted not to have any paper to show the working of the workmen for 240 days each year under the management (voluntarily stated the witness that all the papers are lying with the management in this regard) and also not to possess any documents to show they are still working under the management. Having disagreed with comments of the DGM Telephone ( Ext. W- 1 and W- 1 / 1 ) concerning the works performed by them , the witness has claimedthat his name appears at Sl . No. 153 ofthe aforesaid Management's list of casual labourers ( Ext . W- 1 / 1 ) , though admittedly the names of the workmen were not forwarded bythe Employment Exchange prior to their engagement by the management.

3. Whereas with specific denials to the allegations ofthe workmen the case of the management is that neither the enclosed list of workmen has been received along with the written statement nor S/Shri Jakir Hussin and others are the workmen of the department. The department is employing only regular staff for such maintenance oriented job, so it has not employed any such workmen . As such rendering services and producing goods for the benefit of the telecommunication does not arise just as to their regularisation . They have never represented their case individually. The alleged elected five representatives are not the workers of the department . They do not have any legal , bonafide , reliable documents and records for consideration by the management. Moreover there is total ban an engagement of casual labour in the department on regular basis since April , 1985 , since thereafter no casual labour is being engaged , so the management cannot regularise such workmen. The Management/Department has not any specific direction to regularise these alleged workmen. So no question of regularisation and retrospective payment of arrear to the alleged workmen arises.

FINDING WITH REASONS

5. Likewise the statement of Parmanand Sharma WW- 2 as one of the workmen appears to be quite corroborative to the evidence of his colleague Md. Arshad (WW- 1 ) . He has stated that though the workmen have been working the job of maintenance of exchange , cable , line, store , PCM and others since long under the direct control and supervision of the management , yet they are called as casual workmen despite the aforesaid job being ofpermanent in nature which are also performed by regular and permanent workmen. To him , they have been continuously rendering the services for the benefit of the management , even than their services has not been regularised on the ground of no relationship of employer and employee exists beteween them and the management which is totally false . The witness has claimed that Identity Carddt. 14-9-94 ( Ext . W- 2- with objection ) was issued by 4. In the instant case, WW- 1 Md . Aarshad, WW- 2 Parmanand Sharma on behalf of the workmen and MW- 1

3202GI /11-19 6340

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 3 , 2011/ BHADRA 12. 1933

PART II-SEC . 3 (ii) ] themanagement . The witness ( WW - 2) has admitted notto possess any proof of the payment of wages except one for the year 1994 which was done after taking his signature on paperACG Form XVII .

from making temporary appointments , regular appointment must be the rules direction for re - engagement of such persons in any other work would make judicial process another mode of recruitment de - hoars the rules (paras 10, 12,22 , 24 , 27 , and 40) .'

8. On the punctilious study of the aforesaid Constitutional Bench Authority cited by Mr. D. K. Verma , the Ld . Advocate for the management I find that the Hon'ble Apex Court ( CB ) has been pleased to hold under its para 44 that' in cases of irregular appointments (not illegal appointment ) of duly qualified persons in sanctioned posts working for 10 years or more appointed not under cover of orders of Courts or Tribunals , their regularisation may be considered as one time measure .'

6. Whereas the statement of MW - 1 Kamaruddin Ansari as Senior T.O.A. , the Office of the G.M. , BSNL , Ranchi is that all the alleged labourers of this case were never engaged against permanent vacancy under direct control ofthe management under BSNL or D.O.T. , rather labourers were engaged by the SDO concerned for some urgent works , on day to day basis , for which they are paid byhim through Form SEGXVII , but no Identity card(Ext. W- 2) , a fake one , was issued to any alleged workmen by themanagement , nor the SDO is the authority to issue it as per rules , as all the 1. Cards issued under the signature of theDivisional Engineer ( Administration) the Office ofthe GM Telephone/BSNL Ranchi . It is the SDO concerned who was the competent authority to say the period of their engagement and to pay them their wages . The ACG existed inthe Telephone department as well as present in the BSNL who is still functioning for both the Telephone and the BSNL and the present BSNL may account for the period and the wage of the workmen's engagement .

9. In the light of the aforesaid cited authorities on behalf of both the aforesaid Constitution Bench is binding upon all in view of the present case as it stands before me for adjudication . In the instant case , I find the alleged Identity Card (Ext . W- 2) of Parmanand Sharma one alleged workman under the signature S.D.O. , P ( W) Ranchi in lack of specific Sl . No. etc. appears to be a document of impeachable character because it does not stand in natural order of maintenance of Identity Cards of the management's employees . It is an admitted fact that the workmenhave no any document to show their continuous service still under the management , yet according to the oral evidences of WW- 1 and WW- 2 the workmen have been working as casual workers by discharging their duties as cableman , lineman etc. under the Ranchi Sub- division (Telecom) under the supervision of DO Telephone since 1991 and 1992 by putting their attendance for more than 240 days in each year , but the list of the casual labourers (Ext . W- 1 / 1 ) as per the letter dt . 19-3-96 of the G.M. , Telephone, District Ranchi proves that out of the total 167 scheduled, workmen 22 workmen who have performed their duties under the management for more than 240 days in the year 1993 and 1994 concerned as under :

SI .

Name of the workman

Year

Sl . Sch . No. Sl . No.

No. ofthe list (Ext. W- 1/ 1 )

1 2

1. 94

Md . Shahid

1994

2. 95

Sabih Hassan

-do-

3. 102

Santosh Kumar Verma

-do-

4. 103

RanjitKumar ( Singh)

-do-

5. 99

Satish Kumar Mishra

6: 98

7. Highlighting the case of the workmen the plea of Mr. D.Mukherjee , the Ld . Advocate for the Union/workmen is that ' the object of security of tenure , essential for an employee , can be attended by regularisation within a reasonable period and labour laws being beneficial piece oflegislation , benefits must go to the labour' [ 2006( 2 ) JLJR page 80( SC ) workman of Bhurkunda Colliery - versus- Management, paras 6 , 7 , 9 & 11 ] . I find that it has also been held by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the aforsaid ruling under para-12 that ' effort must be to regularise the work- charged employees and casual labours as far as and as early as possible subject to qualifications and availability ofwork' . Onthe other hand the contention of Mr. D. K. Verma , the Ld . Advocate for the management based on the authority 2008 (4) JLJR page 212, Emp. in re . Mgt . of Food Corpn . of India v. Union of India ( SC ) , as held therein , is that ' temporary employees , even if they have worked for more than240 days in a calendar year cannot claim any right for automatic regularisation of their services even in cases where there are regular posts and vacancies , procedure :laid for appointment has to be followed ( para - 14) ' . Further argument of the Ld. Counsel for the management in the light of Constitutional Bench of the Hon'ble Apex Court :decision reported in 2006( 2 ) JLJR 282 ( SC ) , Secretarty, State of Karnataka, varsus Uma Devi is that ' when statutory rules are framed under Act, 309 of the Union Constitution the only fair means to adopt is to make appointments based on the rules so framed but the employees engaged without following due process or the rules did not acquire any right , so the Court cannot direct absorption regularisation , or re - engagement or permanency of such employees ( paras 5 , 30 and 21 ) , ' ' though the Government is not precluded

-do-

Dhanjec Singh 6341 भारत का राजपत्र सितम्बर 3 , 2011 / भाद्र 12 , 1933

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

1 2

9. श्री पोलपुस तिर्की

-do-

7. 100

10. श्री लालू महतो

Nagina Prasad

-do-

8. 104 57

Manas (Dev) Choudhary

11. श्री जय नारायण साहू

1993

9. 111 60

12. श्री सोमरा तिर्की

Nawal Kishore Singh/ (Prasad)

-do-

FaleOraon

13. श्री बहनु उरफ

10. 112 61

-do-

11. 114 63

14. श्री बाहा कच्छप

Jagdish Prasad

-do-

Sudarsan Ram

12. 120 64

15. श्री जोन प्रिंस

-do-

13. 121 66

Mahali Tirkey

16. श्री बबलू तिर्की

-do-

14. 119 67

Ramchandra Sah(u )

17. श्री मो. रहीमुद्दीन

-do-

15. 122

Ramakant Singh

-do-

18. श्री गोपाल यादव

16. 123 70

Sudhuwa Kachhap

-do-

Budhnath Paswan

17. 110 71

19. श्री नवीन कुमार पाण्डेय

-do-

Kamlesh Kumar

18. 82

20. श्री सबीर अंसारी

-do-

SunilGari

19. 115 74

21. श्री लोथा कच्छप

1994

Bucha Minz

20. 137

-do-

ललकुं तिग्गा

Md. Riaz

22. श्री

21. 86 122

-do-

Lakhiram Rajwad

22.88 124

महाबीर कच्छप

23. श्री

24. श्री जोसेफ सिंह

25. श्री करम सिंह तिर्की

26. श्री मनी साहू

27. श्री सुनील सिंह

28. श्री मोजूबुल रहमान

29. श्री मौ. अरज

30. श्री सकूर अंसारी

Except the aforesaid 22 workmen none of the other 145 workmen named in the schedule has completed 240 days attendance in any calendar year , so whose regularisation was justly refused by the management , therefore the aforesaid 145 workmen are not entitled to any relief. But the denial of the management to the aforesaid 22 workmen for their regularisation was though legally justified yet in view of their services under the management for more than 240 days in the respective calendar year 1993 and 1994 concerned the aforesaid 22 wormen's regularisation may be considered by the management against the sanctioned post if filled up through public employment as per the rules .

31. श्री सुकरा लकड़ा

KISHORI RAM , Presiding Officer

32. श्री इरफान अली

अनुबन्ध-2

33. श्री अमाहुद्दीन अंसारी

ए.सी.बी. - 17 मजदूरों के नाम:-

34. श्री मुस्ताक अंसारी

1. श्री जाकिर हुसैन

35. श्री रामवृक्ष गौप

2. श्री कृष्ण कुमार ठाकुर

36. श्री दिनेश

3. श्री जीवन उरदेव

37. श्री राम विलास सिंह

4. श्री उज्जवल टोप्पो

38. श्री मौ. सलाउद्दीन

5. श्री सुखरान टोप्पो

39. श्री बाल चन्द्र महतो

6. श्री इन्द्रनाथ साहू

7. श्री संतोष एक्का

40. श्री पोलुस एक्का

8. श्री धर्मचन्द पाम्पिया

41. श्री महमूद आलम 6342

42. श्री धनी साहू

43. श्री राम नाथ सिंह 44. श्री बिरसा एक्का

45. श्री कृपाल, एक्का 46. श्री मौ. हुसैन

47. श्री मौ. क्लीम अंसारी 48. श्री विपीन कुमार

49. श्री रामचन्द्र सिंह

50. श्री मौ . सलीम

51. श्री मौ . सलील उल्लाह 52. श्री बवला एडे सौर 53. श्री सयूर्ग प्रसाद

54. श्री छएतू पाल

55. श्री कंस्य कुमार तिवारी 56. श्री रामायण प्रसाद सिंह 57. श्री कैसव शर्मा

58. श्री मौ. रिजवान अहमद 59. श्री संजय कुमार शर्मा 60. श्री अजय कुमार शर्मा 61. श्री तारकेश्वर राय

62. श्री हु. कृष्णा यादव 63. श्री हुमका मुण्डा

64. श्री मदरू कच्छप

65. श्री विपिन कुमार मंडल 66. श्री जोर्ज एक्का

67. श्री सुरेश तिर्की

68. श्री सुरेश लकड़ा

69. श्री राज किशोर प्रसाद 70. श्री सुनिल कुमार श्रीवास्तव 71. श्री कृष्णा साहू

72. श्री अनुग्रह टोप्पो

73. श्री भनिपरवा उद्रांव

74. श्री राजनी रोबीन लकड़ा

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 3 , 2011 /BHADRA 12 , 1933

[ PART II-SEC. 3 ( ii) ] 75. श्री प्रभू महतो

76. श्री शिलेदन कुमार

77. श्री लखन प्रसाद यादव

78. श्री यदूनन्दन भगत

79. श्री राम बाबू प्रसाद

80. श्री सुबोध सिंह

81. श्री रामप्रवेश राम

82. श्री कमलेश कुमार

83. श्री उमेश प्रसाद

84. श्री अरविन्द कुमार

85. श्री मौ . मोसीन खान

86. श्री मौ. रियाज

87. श्री मौ. समसुन हौदस

88. श्री लखी राम रजवार

89. श्री मनोज कुमार सिन्हा

90. श्री सतीश प्रसाद

91. श्री दिना नाथ सिंह

92. श्री जीतू कच्छप

93. श्री मौ. आतिक

94. श्री मौ. साहीद

95. श्री सब्बी

96. श्री सुभग शर्मा

97. श्री मौ. अमंजद

98. श्री धन्जी सिंह

99. श्री सतीश कुमार मिश्रा

100. श्री नगीना प्रसाद

101. श्री संजय कुमार सिंह

102. श्री संतोष कुमार वर्मा

103. श्री रंजीत कुमार

104. श्री मानस चौधरी

105. श्री सुनिल कुमार

106. श्री मनोज कुमार

107. श्री दिनेश प्रसाद यादव 6343 भारत का राजपत्र : सितम्बर 3 , 2011 / भाद्र 12 , 1933

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

141. श्री अहमद अली

108. श्री कमलेश कुमार सिंह

142. श्री अनिल कुमार पासवान

109. श्री राज किशोर यादव

143. श्री लक्ष्मी सिंह

110. श्री बुध नाथ पासवान

144. श्री शशिकान्त मेहता

111. श्री नवल किशोर प्रसाद

145. श्री बिन्दा प्रसाद

112. श्री पले उराव

146. श्री शिवजी प्रसाद

113. श्री बलेश्वर कुमार पाल

147. श्री यूसुफ अंसारी

114. श्री जगदीश प्रसाद

148. श्री मौ. मुस्ताक अहमद

115. श्री सुनील गाडी

149. श्री मौ . मुख्तार अंसारी

116. श्री कपील प्रसाद

150. श्री मौ. शमशाद अंसारी

117. श्री कामता प्रसाद

151. श्री परमानन्द शर्मा

118. श्री कृष्णा कुमार

152. श्री मौ. अकबर अंसारी

119. श्री रामचन्द्र साहू

153. श्री मौ. महबूब अंसारी

120. श्री सुदर्शन राम

154. श्री मौ. अली

121. श्री महली तिर्की

155. श्री मौ. नूरहसन

122. श्री रामा कान्त सिंह

156. श्री आइनुल अंसारी

123. श्री सुधवा कच्छप

157. श्री रामकुमार शर्मा

124. श्री मनोज कुमार ठाकुर

158. श्री राजबहादुर सिंह

125. श्री जितेन्द्र कुमार

159. श्री कुलेन्द्र कुमार

126. श्री सुभाष चन्द्र बोस

160. श्री महंगु राय

127. श्री सियाराम भगत

161. श्री अनिल पासवान

128. श्री दयानन्द प्रसाद

162. श्री मौ. जाकिर हुसैन

129. श्री संतोष कुमार

163. श्री असलम अंसारी

130. श्री अजीत कुमार

164. श्री मौ. एकराम अंसारी

131. श्री दुलारचन्द्र प्रसाद

165. श्री बालेश्वर यादव

132. श्री शमशाद अली अंसारी

166. श्री आजीत तिर्की

133. श्री सुबोध प्रसाद

167. श्री संजय टोप्पो

134. श्री सुधरजीत कच्छप

एम. के. चौधरी , सहायक श्रमायुक्त ( केन्द्रीय ) रांची 135. श्री कृष्ण महतो

नई दिल्ली, 8 अगस्त, 2011

136. श्री पिरसा गाडी

का.आ. 2376.-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 (1947 137. श्री बुप्पा प्रिंज

का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार दूर संचार 138. श्री लोविया

139. श्री सचिन कुमार दास

बीच , अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक

विभाग के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालय , कानपुर के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 45/2000 ) 140. श्री सुरेन्द्र कुमार सिंह 6344

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 3 , 2011 /BHADRA 12, 1933

को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 8-8-2011 को प्राप्त हुआ था।

[सं. एल-40012/454/99- आईआर ( डीयू) ] जोहन तोपनो , अवर सचिव New Delhi , the 8th August , 2011

S.O. 2376.- In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 45/ 2000) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal - cum- Labour Court, Kanpur as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of Department of Telecom and their workmen , received by the Central Government on 8-8-2011.

[No. L -40012/454/99 - IR (DU) ] JOHAN TOPNO , Under Secy.

ANNEXURE

BEFORE SRI RAM PARKASH, PRESIDING OFFICER CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL -CUM- LABOR COURT , KANPUR

Industrial Dispute No. 45 of 2000 Ravindra Kumar Mishra , C/ o Vishnu Shukla , UP Mechanical Technical & Genl . Wokers Union , L- 21 , Baага - 6 , Kanpur.

And

The District Telecom Manager, Department of Telecom , Government of India , Etawah .

AWARD

1. Central Government , Mol , New Delhi vide notification No. L40012/454/99- IR(DU) dated 3-3-2000 has referred the following dispute for adjudication to this tribunal-

2.Whether the action of the management of Telecom Etawah in terminating the services of Sh . Ravindra Kumar Mishra w.e.f. 12-2-99 is justified? If not what relief the workman is entitled to?

3. Brief facts are----

4. The claimant Ravindra Kumar Mishra ( now deceased) is being represented by his wife Smt. Neelam Mishra by order of the tribunal dated 6-5-2002 . Sri Ravindra Kumar Mishra has filed his claim statement alleging that he was in continuous employment with the opposite party with effect from 23-8-97 , and was working at the post of

[PART II-SEC . 3( ii)] driver . At the time of appointment he was not given any appointment letter. His work was up to the entire satisfaction of his superiors . Due to male practices prevalent in the department he could not be made permanent . He was not paid the graded pay sale ofdriver but he was paid only at the rate of 77.62 paisa per day arbitrarily. He was also not paid other existing benefits and social security prevalent in the opposite party. He was performing the duties of the driver regularly and on monthly basis but he was not treated as a daily rated workman and not as monthly rated employee . The management with sole intent to give artificial breaks compelled him to draw his salary in the name and style of Mr. Ravindra Kumar Mishra for part of the month and for rest of the month he was paid wages in the fictitious name of Saurabh Singh , though there was no character of Saurabh Singh in existence but the applicant was not having any other option, he was compelled to accept the unfair practice illegally imposed upon him by the management without any willingness ofhis own during the tenure of his service inthe name of so called fictitious name of Saurabh Singh . He was permanently driving the Ambassador Car No. UP 75 B- 1352 and the fact can be verified from writing / filling ofthe log book of the said car.

5. There are three posts of driver existing in the department but only one driver is engaged permanently as such two post of driver are still lying vacant .

6. He requested several times for regularizing his service and for giving him his regular pay scale but the department gave assurance only. When he pressurized to full fill his request the opposite party terminated his services by an oral order dated 12-2-99 illegally and unlawfully without fulfilling the provisions of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947. After his termination the opposite party recruited one new person Mr. Raffiuddin without exercising the due process as such they violated the provisions of Section 25H of the Act . No charge sheet was ever issued tothe complainant therefore , the dispensation of his services by the opposite party is illegal and against the principle ofnatural justice and accordingly is attractive of the provisions of Unfair Labor Practice . Accordingly he has prayed that the action of the management in dispensing his services be held to be illegal and he be declared to be reinstated in the services of the opposite party with full back wages , continuity of service and all consequential benefits .

7. Opposite party has filed the written statement refuting entire claim of the claimant . They stated that the claimant was never engaged or employed for the post driver in the department so question of termination does not arise . He was not given any assurance for being him made regular or permanent on the post of driver . When he was not employed so the question of writing the log book of the car does not arise . It is stated that there is one post ofdriver. It is stated that there was only one post of driver 6345 भारत का राजपत्र : सितम्बर 3 , 2011 / भाद्र 12 , 1933

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii ) ]

ofsection 25F of the Act, ifyes whether any benefit canbe given to her being his wife and his legal heirs .

16. It is true that initially the burden lies on the claimant side to prove her case and if prima facie as in the present case where the deceased has expired , claimant is able to discharge her burden then a heavy burden shifts upon the shoulder ofthe opposite party to prove otherwise.

lying vacant in Doorsanchar Etawah which was filled from the employment exchange on 15-2-2000 , being of a schedule caste candidate . It is also stated that the department has . not engaged any person in the name of Mr. Raffiuddin. When he was never engaged or employed so the question of notice or notice pay does not arise . Therefore , they have not committed any breach of any of the provisions ofthe Industrial Disputes Act ; therefore , the claim is liable to be rejected.

8.Both the parties have filed documentary as well oral evidence .

9. Both the parties have adduced oral evidence .

10. From the side of the claimant Smt Neelam Mishra has been produced as W.W.L. Opposite party has produced M.W.1 Sri Mohammad Irshad , SDO , Administration , Etawah .

11. Heard and perused the record thoroughly and deeply.

12. It is a fact that the claimant Sri Ravindra Kumar Mishra had expired during the pendency of the case and his wife Smt . Neelam Mishra has been substituted a Legal heir of the deceased and she was produced in evidence

17. I have examined the statement of MW1 . He stated in the chief that the deceased claimant may have been engagedby some officer of the department by the opposite party. The officer who has engaged him in emergency work he has not sought permission from the competent authority. Sri Ravindra Kumar Mishra was not given any fixed salary. Hisstatement is against the version of the pleadings of the opposite party. In the written statement they have specifically denied the engagement or appointment ofthe deceased claimant . Here he says that Sri Mishra had been engaged for emergency work and some part of his statement he states that he might have been engaged and in the cross he states that he does not have any personal knowledge regarding the deceased claimant . He states that he does not know the working period of the claimant deceased as to from what date he was engaged and up to for what.date he worked in the department . He states that he could not identify the signatures of the officer who had beenposted during the period 1997-2001 . But he admitted that the vehicle UP 75-1352 is an official vehicle . He does not knowwho was the driver being engaged in emergency.

13. She stated that her husband Ravindra Kumar Mishra was employed as a driver in the year August 1997 and worked there till 12-2-99 under the opposite party. During this period he worked there continuously and also during this period he used to get Rs.77.62 paisa per day as wages. She stated that documents vide list dated 8-3-2001 were handed over to her by her husband which have been filed. She stated that the original of these documents are with the opposite party. This fact stated was stated by her husband . They have summoned the original documents from the opposite party but they did not file the same .

18.Opposite party has filed certain receipts of the diesel in original vide list 14-5-08 . When MW 1 was confronted with documents questioning as to which officer has signed the diesel slips then he showed his ignorance. The claimant side has also filed several diesel receipts (photocopies ) which bears the signature of Ravindra Kumar Mishra . When I inquired from the authorized representative from the opposite party that why they can filed certain receipts of 1997 to 1999 of particular dates , what was the hitch of not filing the original receipts of those dates which had already been filed by the deceased claimant . Whereas the claimant had been pressing the opposite party from the initial stage to produce the original records.

14. When her husband was removed from service no notice or notice pay or retrenchment was paid to him . She further stated that her husband worked for more 300 dayscontinuously and this fact can be verified from paper No. 23/44 to 23/80 . These are the photocopies of the log book . She further stated that the salary of her husband was being paid by vouchers . She goes on to state on oath that her husband was deputed on car no . UP 75B - 1352 to drivethe same which was the car of the department . Paper no.23 / 29 to 23/43 is the photocopies of the receipts of the diesel used in the car. There are signatures of her husband over the same . Paper No. 23/16-23/ 18 , 23/22 and 23/24 bear the signature of her husband which is the photocopies. It is also stated that after the death of her husband the opposite party pressed her not to prosecute the case and take the compensation.

19. Claimant has specifically stated that a log book was maintained in the department . The claimant has filed the photocopies of the log book starting from August 1997 to 12-2-99 . Whether a log book was being maintained or not, in the pleadings the opposite party stated that log book was not being maintained. But this factdoes not appear to be true . In the examination in chief M.W. 1 made contradictory statements . At one stage he stated that no log book is issued from the department and in the same sequence he stated that log book is filled by the officer and signed by thedriver. When the witness MW.1 was confronted in the cross examination with the pages of the logbook bearing signatures of the claimant then he stated that there are certain signatures in the log of which a few appears to be in the hand writing of some officers .

15. From the facts and circumstances a short question now to be decided is whether the deceased Sri Ravindra Kumar Mishra was ever employed or engaged by the opposite party I yes whether he has completed more than 240 days of continuous service and whether any right has accrued in his favour under the provisions 6346

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 3 , 2011 /BHADRA 12 , 1933

[ PART II-SEC. 3( 1 )]

been adduced by the bank to rebut even this piéce of evidence produced by the workman .

24. I have considered the facts of the present case . In the present case there are several payment vouchers which bears the signature of the deceased elaimant which show that the payment of wages was made to the claimant deceased as driver. There is log book it appears to be in seriatim from the period 1997 to 1999. M.W.I admitted that the same bears signatures of some of the officers of the department.

20. When a question was put to him whether there was any permanent driver during the period 1997 to 2001 , he expressed his ignorance on this point. It shows that the officer was not having any knowledge of the case and the opposite party knowingly or otherwise did not produce some competent officer or the officer who had engaged the deceased claimant , who could have given best evidence . This fact is also inferred because M.W.1 at page three admitted in evidence that Sri Ravindra Kumar Mishra had been engaged as a driver in emergency and he had driventhe vehicle of the department.

21. MW.1 also admitted the authenticity of the payment vouchers like paper no.23 / 16 and 23/18 . He also admitted that the payment was made to Sri Ravindra Kumar Mishra by the officer on vouchers through the department . The claimant side has field several documents including payment vouchers . Opposite party was directed to file the entire original document which was summoned by the claimant through an application supported by affidavit . Opposite party had not filed any objection against that application and learned predecessor vide order dated 17-5-2007 directed the opposite party to file the original documents but the opposite party did not file the original document and did not disclose cogent reason , so an order was passed by learned predecessor on 11-9-2007 that a legal presumption will be drawn at appropriate time.

25. Therefore , considering all the facts and circumstances and the evidence in the case I am of the view that the deceased claimant was engaged or employed by the opposite party as a driver , though no appointment letter was issued to him . But under the provision of Industrial Disputes Act , which are of the nature of social legislation , which prohibits the exploitation of the human resources by big ones being supply more and demand less , it does not make any difference in between engagement like temporary worker. Here we have to see whether a right has accrued to the claimant who has put in continuous service . Here in this case I am of the view that the deceased workman has put in 240 days or more before his termination preceding 12 calendar months . Therefore a right has accrued to him under section 25F of theAct. It is a fact that opposite party had not given any notice, notice pay or retrenchment compensation to the workman before terminating his services .

26. Therefore , for the reasons disclosed above , it is held that the termination of the services of the deceased claimant is neither legal nor justified .

27. But during the pendency of the case it was brought to the notice of the tribunal that the claimant died and in his place his wife was substituted in his place to press the claim .

22.The claimant side has produced several decisions of the Hon'ble High Court and Apex Court . They have placed reliance upon a decision 2005 (07 ) FLR 431 Allahabad High Court between Mahak Singh and Presiding Officer IT Meerut . In this case it was found that the employer failed to produce best evidence on record- onus was on employers , they failed to fulfil the same without any reason therefore Labour Court was obliged to draw an inference under section 114 of illustration (g ) of the Indian Evidence Act . It has also been found in the case that what was permanent nature of work was taken from the workman but alleged to have been engaged to meet casual and temporary requirement of work without any evidence held it amounts to unfair labour practice.

28. Under these circumstances reinstatement of the claimant cannot be ordered but it is ordered that the management should pay entire monitory benefits in the shape of back wages to the wife of the deceased claimant within one month from the date of publication of the award .

29. Before parting with it may also be pointed out that this fact was also brought to the notice of the tribunal that the claimant during the pendency of the case was murdered and his wife claimed appointment on compassionate ground . But in the facts and circumstances ofthe case tribunal dos not find any force in her contention. However it would be appropriate in the facts and circumstances of the case that the wife of the deceased claimant is awarded Rs.25000 as compensation in addition to the benefits which has accrued to the deceased claimant like back wages from the date of his termination .

30.Reference is answered accordingly in favour of the claimant and against the opposite party.

23. In another case 2005 ( 105 ) FLR 383 SC between Bank of Baroda & Gheemar Bhai . In this case the Hon'ble Apex Court held that while there is no doubt in law that the burden of prove that the claimant was in employment of the management primarily lies on the workman who claims to be a workman . The degree of such proves so require would vary from case to case . In the instant case has established the fact which of course has not been denied by the bank that he did work as a driver of the car belonging to the bank during the relevant period which comes to more than 240 days of work . He has produced three vouchers which showed that he had been paid certain sum of money towards his wage and the said amount has been debited to the account of the bank. As against this as found by the fora below no evidence what soever has

RAM PARKASII , Presiding Officer 6347 भारत का राजपत्र : सितम्बर 3 , 2011/ भाद्र 12 , 1933

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

S/o . Narayanan Nair,

नई दिल्ली, 8 अगस्त, 2011

Electrician CPWD ( E ) , Government of India Press , Koratty, Thrissur District .

This case coming up for final hearing on 18-07-2011 and this Tribunal-cum- Labour Court on 25-07-2011 passed the following.

AWARD

का. आ. 2377. औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 (1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में , केन्द्रीय सरकार सीपीडब्ल्यूडी के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच , अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण अरनाकुलम, कोचीन के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 1/2009 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 8-8-2011 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल -42011 /44/2008- आई. आर. (डी.यू. ) ]

जोहन तोपनो , अवर सचिव

New Delhi , the 8th August , 2011

After having two rounds of litigation before the Ernakulam Bench of the Central Administrative Tribunal between Sri T. K. Babu and Sri N.Madhusoodanan Nair as to the seniority of their service industrial dispute was raised by the union challenging the fixation ofthe seniority inthe seniority list published on 23-04-2007 of the Work Charged Staff (Electrical ) as on 01-04-2007 pursuant to the direction ofthe Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) vide order dated 30-06-2003 in OA 239/2003 and the same has led to this reference under Section 10 ( 1 ) (d) ofthe Industrial DisputesAct 1947 .

2. The reference is:

S. O. 2377. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Dispute Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 1/2009) ofthe Central Government Industrial Tribunal cum Labour Court Ernakulam, Cochin as shown in the Annexure , in the Industrial dispute between the employers in relation to the management of CPWD and their workman , which was received by the Central Government on 08-08-2011 .

[No. L-42011 /44/2008 - IR (DU) ] JOHAN TOPNO , Under Secy.

"Whether the action ofthe management of C.P.W.D. in fixing the seniority of Shri Madhusoodhanan Nair ahead of Shri Babu contrary to their own statement in the earlier dispute and in spite of Shri Babu completing 240 days in the year 1987 , ahead of Shri Madhusoodhanan Nair is fair and justifiable ? If not , what relief is Shri T.K. Babu entitled to ?

ANNEXURE

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

Present: Shri . D. Sreevallabhan , B. Sc . , LL . B. , Presiding Officer

(Monday the 25th day of July, 2011 / 3rd Shravana , 1933 )

I.D. 1/2009

Union :

The Secretary,

Central PWD Mazdoor Union , Income Tax Office Building , Mananchira ,

Calicut-673 001 .

By Adv. Shri Ashok B. Shenoy.

Management:

3.Both the employees commenced their service as NMR workers. The seniority was fixed by considering completion of 240 days continuous service in two consecutive years . In the seniority list published in the year 2004 Shri T.K.Babu was placed above Shri N.Madhusoodanan Nair since he was found to have completed 240 days of service before completion by Shri Madhusoodanan Nair. Shri Babu was Sl . No. 34 and Shri . Madhusoodanan Nair, was scrial No. 38 in that seniority list . But later it was revised pursuant to the direction in the above said order of the Central Administrative Tribunal . Shri Madhusoodanan Nair was found to have completed 240 days on 13-10-1987 and Shri Babu on 16-10-1987 and thereby Shri Madhusoodanan Nair was placed above him in the revised seniority list . Their seniority number was given as 31 for Madhusoodanan Nair and 32 for Shri Babu in the Official Memorandum dated 09-02-2007 issued after revising the seniority. Now in the published seniority list ofWireman (Kerala Unit ) for 2007-2008 serial No. 30 is Madhusoodanan Nair and serial No. 31 is Shri Babu .

The Superintending Engineer ( Co- ordination , CPWD , Southern Region , 'G' Wing, 1st Floor, Rajaji Bhawan , Besant Nagar , Chennai - 600 090.

ByAdv. Shri Cyriac Kurian .

4. In the claim statement of the union filed by Sri Babu in his capacity as the Secretary of CPWD Mazdoor Union , Calicut Branch it is alleged that the Addl .Respondent: N. Madhusoodanan Nair,

3202G1/11-20 6348

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 3 , 2011 /BHADRA 12, 1933

[PART II-SEC. 3 ( ii ) ]

Babu vide O.M. No. 55/17/2007 ( Coord) SR/93 dated 09-02-2007 after revising the earlier seniority list in compliance with the direction in the order dated 30-06-2003 in OA No. 239/2003 of the Ernakulam Bench of the Central Administrative Tribunal . It is because of the different treatment in considering the paid holidays Shri Babu was placed above Sri Madhusoodanan Nair in the earlier seniority list . There was a mistake in the calculation ofthe paid holidays and it is after the direction of the Central Administrative Tribunal there was proper computation as to the working days of the two workers . If there was any grievance with regard to the order of the Central Administrative Tribunal Shri Babu could have approached the Hon'ble High Court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India.

revised seniority list was prepared without affording an opportunity of hearing to him as per the order dated 30-06-2003 of the Central Administrative Tribunal and also inviolation of the two reports of the Executive Engineer (Elect) , CCED/CPWD, Coimbatore (Letter No. 10(5)/98/ CCED/AB/2625 dated 02-11-1998) and Executive Engineer (Elect), TEED/CPWD, Trivandrum (Letter No. 3 ( 18 )/TCED/ 2/2032 dated 29-08-2002) . He was the first Wireman in the seniority list among the qualified hands to get promotion in the vacancy of Electrician arose on 8-10-2006 in Kerala. But he was not given promotion in spite ofhis represetitations dated 09-10-2006 , 03-02-2007 and 06-02-2007 to the Superintending Engineer and thereby a dispute was raised before the Assistant Labour Commissioner ( Central) , Cochin on 18-06-2007 . Shri Madhusoodanan Nair was not qualified to be promoted as Electrician as on the date of arising the vacancy. He was afi Electrical Khalasi till 21-01-2002 and could not have acquired supervisory permit without completing two years service as Wireman to appear for Electrical TradeTest. But Shri Babu passed Electrical Trade Test conducted by the department on 03-05-2005 . Hence Shri .Madhusoodanan Nair cannot be placed above him in the seniority list . The revised seniority list is not prepared in accordance with the proper procedure or correct seniority and it is with full of factual errors . So the action of the management in fixing the seniority of Shri Madhusoodanan Nair ahead of Shri Babu is against their own statement in the earlier dispute and hence not justified.

6. Shri Madhusoodanan Nair filed IA 4/2010 to get himself impleaded as additional respondent in this proceeding and the same was allowed by my learned predecessor in office vide order dated 19-04-2010 .After impleadment he filed written statement denying the allegations in the claim statement and adopting the contentions in the written statement of the management . It is further contended that Shri Babu has no right to file the claim statement as the Secretary of the union since he ceased to be a member of that union as he gotpromotion as Junior Engineer on 19-05-2009 and hence became a member of the Administrative branch. In the seniority list in respect of Wireman issued vide Letter No. 10/2/ 18 /2004/ Coord/ SR/ 128 dated 12-02-2004 necessary amendment was made with regard to the seniority of Sri Madhusoodanan Nair and Babu in compliance with the order dated 30-06-2003 of the Ernakulam Bench of the CentralAdministrative Tribunal and Sri N. Madhusoodanan Nairwas declared senior to Sri . Babu in the seniority list of Wireman issued vide No. 10/ 2 / 18 / 2007 / Coord/SR/44 (H) dated 23-04-2007 . He was promoted in the vacancy of Electrician since he was the first eligible Wireman with test qualification for promotion . The seniority was refixed as itwas found that different treatment was given in respect ofpaid holidays while preparing the carlier seniority list . Shri Babu was afforded opportunity for hearing and thereby he had responded through his letters dated 04- 09-2003 and 01-11-2003 .

7.Uniondid not file any rejoinder in spite of granting several adjournments after filing written statement by the management and also after filing written statement by the additional respondent.

5. The contentions put forward in the written statement filed by the management are that the claim petition is not maintainable before this Tribunal since the statutory remedy for the union or any affected party is to approach the Central Administrative Tribunal . Pursuant to the order dated 30-06-2007 of the Ernakulam Bench of the Central Administrative Tribunal the seniority list in respect of Wireman issued vide letter No. 10/2 / 18/ 2004/ coord/ SR/ 128 dated 12-02-2004 was revised and necessary amendment has been made in respect of Shri Madhusoodanan Nair and Shri Babu in the seniority listvide letter No. 10/2 / 18 /2007/SE/ ( Coord) / 44 (H ) dated 23-04-2007 by declaring Shri Madhusoodanan Nair as senior to St. T.K. Babu after considering the vouchers , registers and other relevant documents and on finding that Shri Madhusoodanan Nair has completed 240 days of service in two consecutive years on 13-10-1987 while Shri Babu completed it on on 16-10-1987 . Since Shri Madhusoodanan Nair being the senior and passed the trade test for the promotional post of Electrician he was promoted in the vacancy of Electrician . The revised seniority list was prepared on the basis of vouchers and other records and hence it was not necessary to afford opportunity for hearing to both of them in fixing the seniority. Shri N. Madhusoodanan Nair was placed above

8. No evidence , either oral or documentary, was adduced by the Union . Management has also not adduced any oral evidence . The documents produced by the management were marked on consent as Exts . M1 to M4 . Additional respondent was got examined as MW1 and Ext. M5 was marked. At the time when the case was taken 6349 भारत का राजपत्र : सितम्बर 3 , 2011 / भाद्र 12 , 1933

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii) ]

up for hearing after closing the evidence learned counsel for the union relinquished the vakalath after reporting nos instructions .

9. The points for determination are:

1. Whether there can be adjudication of the dispute before this Tribunal and whether Sri T.K.Babu is competent to file the claim statement ?

2. Whether the refixation of seniority by the management by placing Sri Madhusoodanan Nair ahead of Sri Babu contrary to their statement in the earlier dispute and in spite of completion of240 days service by Sri Babu in the year 1987 ahead of Sri Madhusoodanan Nair is fair and justifiable and if not what relief he is entitled to ?

10. Point No. 1 : The dispute as to the seniority of the two workmen was taken up by each of them before the Central Administrative Tribunal. It is in OA 239/2003 filed by Sri Madhusoodanan Nair direction was given to reconsider the issue of seniority as per the order dated 30th June 2003 , copy of which is Ext . M2 . It is after the refixation of the seniority this industrial dispute was raised by the union and thereby the reference was made to this Tribunal to consider the fairness and justifiability ofplacing Sri Madhusoodanan Nair ahead of Sri Babu against the admission made by the management in that case before the Central Administrative Tribunal . It is an industrial dispute since it is regarding the question of seniority of two workmen in an industrial establishment . Nothing was argued by the learned counsel either for the management or for the additional respondent to substantiate the contention as to the maintainability of such a reference before this Tribunal .

vouchers , registers and other relevant documents which would show the number of days of work Sri Madhusoodanan Nair and Sri . Babu had put in two consecutive years . In pursuance of that order it was reconsidered and Sri Madhusoodanan Nair was placed ahead of Sri Babu after revising the earlier seniority list as per order dated 24-11-2003 of the Superintending Engineer (Coord) . After considering the available documents it was found that Sri Madhusoodanan Nair had completed 240 days on 13-10-1987 and Sri Babu on 16-10-1987. Afterwards office memorandum dated 09-02-2007 , copy of which is Ext . M3 , was issued by the Superintending Engineer (Coord) modifying the seniority list by placing Sri Madhusoodanan Nair ahead of Babu . Ext . M1 is the copy of the Seniority list of Work Charged Staff (Electrical ) as on 01-04-2007 under Kerala uriit published on 23-04-2007 wherein also Sri Madhusoodanan Nair is placed above Sri Babu in seniority. It is the case of the union that the revised seniority list was prepared without affording any opportunity of hearing to Sri Babu and also without considering the reports of the two Superintending Engineers . As per Ext . M2 order Sri Babu was to be given opportunity for being heard while reconsidering the question of inter se seniority. It is contended by the additional respondent that Sri Babu wasafforded opportunity for hearing and he has availed itby sending letters dated 04-09-2003 and 01-11-2003. Hehasproduced Ext . M5 order to satisfy that Sri . Babu was given the opportunity to be heard as per the order dated 19-03-2009 of the Central Administrative Tribunal but the same was not availed by him in spite of repeated notices and thereby that order dated 19-03-2010 was passed by the Superintending Engineer ( Coord) upholding the earlier order dated 24-11-2003 refixing the seniority.

11. At the time of raising the industrial dispute Sri Babu was the Secretary of the union. There is a contention that later he was appointed as Junior Engineer on 19-05-2009 and thereby he ceased to be the member of the union and hence the reference cannot be proceeded with. But as on the date of the reference and at the time of filing the claim statement he was the Secretary. After making the reference this Tribunal is bound to answer the same and hence it cannot be said that there is no necessity to continue with the proceedings .

12. Point No. 2 : It is not in dispute that in the

13. The claimant did not adduce any evidence before this Tribunal to satisfy that the refixation of the seniority was done in an improper or illegal manner. He was already appointed as Junior Engineer on 19-05-2009 after the reference in this case . His grievance as to the refixation of seniority without affording opportunity for hearing need not be considered in view of Ext . M5 erder since he is seen to have been afforded opportunity for hearing as per the direction of the Central Administrative Tribunal . In this case it is to be independently proved that the refixation of seniority by revising the seniority list was not proper by adducing evidence. As the union failed to adduce any evidence to prove it , it can be held that the action of the management of CPWD in fixing the seniority of SriMadhusoodanan Nair ahead of Sri Babu pursuant to thedirection of the Central Administrative Tribunal is fair and justifiable.

seniority list published on 12-02-2004 Sri Babu was senior to Sri Madhusoodanan Nair. The copy of that seniority list was not produced in this case either by the union or by the management . Challenge was made by Sri Madhusoodanan Nair with regard to the seniority given to Sri Babu in that seniority list by filing OA 239/2003 before the Central Administrative Tribunal , Ernakulam . As per Ext . M2 order the Central Administrative Tribunal directed the management to reconsider the issue of seniority on the basis of the 6350

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 3 , 2011 /BHADRA 12 , 1933

In the result an award is passed finding that the action ofthe management of CPWD in fixing the seniority of Sri Madhusoodanan Nair ahead of Shri Babu contrary to their own statement in the earlier dispute is fair and justiflable .

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

Dictated to the Personal Assistant , transcribed and typed by her, corrected and passed by me on this the 25thday of July, 2011 .

D. SREEVALLABHAN , Presiding Officer

Appendix

Witness for the Union- Nil .

Witness for the Managements

MW1 Madhusoodanan Nair, Electrician , CPWD ( E) , Government of India Press , Koratty.

Exhibit for the Union Nil .

Exhibits for the Managements

M1- Photocopy of Seniority list of WC Staff (Electrical) as on 01-04-2007 under Kerala Unit .

M 2- Photocopy of the Central Administrative Tribunal's Order dated 30-06-2003 in OΟ.Α. No. 239/2003 .

M3- Photocopy of the Office Memorandum No. 55(17 ) 2007 Coord SR 93 dated 09-02-2007.

M4- Photocopy of the Office Order No. 55 ( 17 ) 2003 Coord SR 1306 dated 24-11-2003 .

M5- Photocopy of the Office Memorandum No. O.A. No.768-2006 Coord SR 2010/257 dated 19-03-2010.

नई दिल्ली , 9 अगस्त, 2011

का. आ. 2378 औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 (1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में , केन्द्रीय सरकार बिहार क्षेत्रीय ग्रामीण बैंक के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच , अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण , पटना के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 35 ( सी) 2007) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 09-08-2011 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल-12012/ 55/2007- आई आर ( बी-1 ) ]

रमेश सिंह , डेस्क अधिकारी New Delhi , the 9th August , 2011

S. O. 2378--In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central

( PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii ) ] Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 35 ( C) of2007 ofthe Industrial Tribunal , Patna (Bihar ) as shown in the Annexure , in the Industrial dispute betweenthe management of Bihar Kshetriya Gramin Bank , and their workmen , received by the Central Government on 09-08-2011 .

[No. L - 12012/ 55 / 2007 - IR ( B - I ) ]

RAMESH SINGH , Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE PRESIDING OFFICER, INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL , SHRAM BHAWAN , BAILEY ROAD , PATNA

References Case io . 35 ( C ) of 2007 .

ngh Chowk , Munger (Bihar)

Kumar Manoj Priya ,

' cretary , Bihar Provincial

203. Hariom Commercial Between the manager at of Bihar Kshetriya Gramin Bank, Head Office , Bhagat and threir workman represented by the Deput Bank Employees ' Associa Complex , New Dakbungi .. d. Patna- 1 ( Bihar )

: For the Management

Sr Shivaji Pandey, Sr. Advocate , B. N. Tiwari , and Shri B. B. Sharan , Advocates .

For the Workman : Sri Devi Kant Jha , Advocate & Sri Birendra Kumar Jha , Advocate .

AWARD

Patna , dated the 14th July, 2011

By adjudication Order No. -12012/ 55 / 2007 - IR( B - I ) dated 8-10-2007 , the Government of India , Ministry of Labour, New Delhi under clause ( d ) of Sub - Section ( 1 ) and Sub- Section ( 2A) of Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( hereinafter called ' the Act ' for brevity ) has referred the following dispute between the management ofBihar Kshetriya Gramin Bank, Head Office , Bhagat Singh Chowk, Munger, Bihar and their workman Sri Kumar Manoj Priya , represented by the Deputy Secretary, Bihar Provincial Bank Employees ' Association , 203 , Hariom Commercial Complex , New Dakbunglow Road , Patna - 1 (Bihar) for adjudication to this Tribunal on following:

"Whether the action of the Management of Bihar Kshetriya Gramin Bank in terminating services of Sri Kumar Manoj Priya by issuing circular to the Concerned Branch Manager without complying Section 25 - F & not maintaining status que as per Section 33 ( 1 ) of the I.D. Act and not regularising and reinstating and not giving him permanent status in a regular post of messenger- cum- sweeper is legal and justified? If not what relief Sri Kumar Manoj Priya is entitled to ? " 6351 भारत का राजपत्र : सितम्बर 3 , 2011 / भाद्र 12 , 1933

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

retrenchment compensation . Status quo as required under Sec . 33 ofthe Industrial Disputes Act- was not maintained. The action of the management in terminating the service ofthe workman is retrenchment and the management did not follow the rules 77 of the Industrial Disputes Central rules and did not display the name of the workman in the category of the workman in accordance with their seniority. Further the case of the workman is that the management committed an unfair labour practice by keeping on tenterhooks without absorbing him as permanent . Further the case of the workman is that he was working against a permanent post in Nathnagar Branch of the Bank since 30-10-2000.

3. Management of Bihar Kshetriya Gramin Bank, Munger have filed their written statement . Their case is thatBihar Kshetriya Gramin Bank, Munger ( hereinafter referred to as Bank) has been created under Regional Rural Banks Act , 1976 with 50% share belonging to the Central Govt . 15% share belonging to the State Govt . 15% and 35% share belonging to the Sponsoring Bank . The Bank is guided by the Circulars of the Govt. of India , Reserve Bank of India and NABARD . Bank is State within the meaning of Article 12 of Constitution of India and as such the appointment and the employment in the Bank against rule and regulation and article 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India is nullity and any person appointed without following rules and regulations will not be protected under the provisions of Industrial Disputes Act somuch so under Sec . 25 - F of the Industrial Disputes Act . The appointment of any employee without advertisement or without calling name from Employment Exchange, without following procedure for appointment and without adhering to rule of reservation is nullity and are treated as back door employment and will not give any right to such employee under any law. Ministry of Finance Department ofbanking issued a circular vide D/ O . No. F. O. - 27 / 75 - SC 26thNovember, 1975 , whereby and whereunder decided the class and strength of Officer and Employees to be appointed by Regional Rural Bank viz - Branch Manager, Field Officer/Accountant , Clerk, Junior Clerk and this circular also provides for their emoluments . This circular specifically says that no peon or his equavalent by any designations would be employed by Regional Rural Banks . Services ofthose who are reported to have been appointed already may be dispenced with immediately.

4. Bhagalpur - Banka Kshetriya Gramin Bank was amalgamated with Bihar Kshetriya Gramin Bank . Branch Managers of Kshetriya Gramin Bank beyond needs and against the rules and regulations had employed number of persons in each Branch on daily wages . They were engaged on daily wages without any adverstisement , without calling the name from the Employment Exchange and without following the rule and regulation of employment in violation of article 14 and 16 of Constitution 2. On notice parties appreared. On behalf of workman , Bihar Provincial Employees ' Association appreared and filed Statement of Claim. It has been pleaded in the statement of claim that the workman Kumar Manoj Priya (hereinafter referred to as the workman ) was appointed at Nath Nagar Branch of Bhagalpur Banka Kshetriya Gramin Bank as a Sweeper w.e.f. 30-10-2000 in a proper manner and on the instructions of Head Office ofthe Bank at Bhagalpur. Initially he was paid very meagre wages . He was employed for full days work . His daily wages was increased from time to time . Later on the Head Office of the Bank vide letter dated 22-9-2003 inhanced the daily wages of the workman to Rs . 81.67 and this continued till Sept. , 2008. He was paid Festival Advance. He was also paid bonus for 2001. He was paid wages through vouchers . He worked for 563 days . Later on the management ofBihar Kshetriya Gramin Bank, Head Office , Munger issued a circular proposing termination of services of the workman from 16-9-2006 who were not appointed in terms of circular of the Bank . The workman apprehending termination ofhis services in violations of Sec . 25 - F of the Industrial Dispute Act made a representation on 11-9-2006 to the Assistant Labour Commissioner (Central ), Patna , who took steps by issuing notice to the Chairman , Munger Kshetriya Gramin Bank , HeadOffice , Munger fixing 15-9-2006 and simultaniously attention ofthe management was drawn towards Sec. 33 ( 1 ) ofthe I.D. Actduring the pendency of Industrial Dispute . On15-9-2006 both the parties appeared before A.L.C. The representative of the management asked for adjournment. In the course of proceeding the representative of the management agreed to maintain status quo as per Sec. 33( 1) of the Industrial Disputes Act and the proceeding was adjourned to 3-11-2006 . In course of conciliation proceeding on next date Bihar Provincial Employee ' Association , Patna espoused an Industrial Dispute for regularisation of services of the workmen and subsequently on 16-10-2006 served a notice threatningto launch egitation programme including strike if the workman was retrenched and not regularised. The Assistant Labour Commissioner ( Central ) Patna vide his letter dated 20-9-2006 intimated result of the proceeding held in his office on 15-9-2006 , in which the management's representative had agreed to maintain status quo as per Sec . 33 ofthe I.D. Act . However the management terminated the services of the workman w.e.f. 15-9-2006 in violation ofSec . 25 - F and Sec . 33 ( 1 ) of the Industrial Disputes Act . the approval of conciliation Officer was not taken for termination of services of the workman. After failure report from Assistant Labour Commissioner this Industrial Dispute has been referred to this Tribunal for adjudication . In a nut shell the case of the workman is that he had put in more than 240 days of continuous service within 12 month proceeding the date ofhis termination . His services were terminated without any notice and notice pay and without 6352

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 3 , 2011 /BHADRA 12 , 1933

PART II- SEC . 3 ( ii) ]

(v) To what relief Kumar Manoj Priya is entitled to ?

of India . Service Regulation made by Bihar Kshetriya Gramin Bank is not applicable to any person engaged temporarily on daily wages and as such they are not treated asemployees of the Bank . Having considered the problem of part time messenger- cum- sweeper employed by Kshetriya Gramin Bank all other India . NABARD issued a Circular to treat as regular employee of R.R.B. all such messenger - cum- sweeper who were in service as on 22-2-1991 and who had completed 240 days of continuous service . It was one time regularisation . It is the case of the Bank that in a Branch where there was already full time messenger any person engaged after 22-2-1991 as sweeper or on any other designation on daily wages was against the circular of the Central Govt . as well as the NABARD and all engagement of those class of persons arç illegal , nullity and such person is not entitled to protection u/ s . 25 -F ofIndustrial Disputes Act. Wtih the general pleadings as aforesaid , it has been specificallly pleaded that the workmen concerned in this reference was engaged on daily wages without following the rules of appointment , whithout advertisement , without calling the names from the Employment Exchange , without following proves of selection and without following rules of reservation. The workman was not given any appointment letter and it was verbal engagement on part time basis . Further the case of the Bank is that the workman Kumar Manoj Priya was not member of the Union . Therefore Bihar Provincial Gramin Bank Employees ' Association has no right to represent the workman in this case . In reply to specific pleading of the statement of claim regarding employment of the workman and his working continuously since 30-10-2000, there is no specific denial . It has been repeatedly said in the pleading of the Bank that Sec . 25 - F of the Industrial Disputes Act is not applicable in this case and the workman is not entitled to any relief.

5. On the basis of terms of reference and pleadings of the parties following questions are required to be decided in this reference .

( i ) Whether workman Kumar Manoj Priya has proved thathe worked for 240 days or more continuously within 12 months immediately preceding termination of his service ?

( ii) Whether the action of the management in terminating the services of Shri Kumar Manoj Priya , without complying with Section 25 - F of Industrial Disputes Act is legal and justified?

6. Question ( i ) : the case of the workman is that he wasapppointed/ engaged w.e.f. 30-10-2000. He has put in a total number of 563 days of services . He had completed more than 240 days of continuous service in each year particularily within 12 months immediately preceding his termination from 16-9-2006 . This claim of the workman has not been denied specifically by the Bank in written statement . Rather the witness examined on behalf of the Bank M.W. 1 Sri Anil Kumar, who is a Senior Manager (Personnel ) of Bihar Kshetriya Gramin Bank , Munger state in his cross - examination ( Paragraph 22 ) that he did not know as to for how many days continuous of the workmen worked but he was removed from work without notice . No pay in lieu of notice was given to workman and no compensation was given to the workman . This statement by a SeniorManager of Personnel Department of the Bank in the witness Box is can did admission of the case of the workman that he was removed/terminated without any notice and compensation . Besides this admission by the management the workman examined as W.W. 1 has also stated that he worked from 30-10-2000 within 12 months preceding the date of his termination he had completed 240 days of continuous service . He has produced documentary evidence also . Ext . W/ 1 is the letter from the HeadOffice of the Bank on the basis of which the workman was appointed . Letter dated 9-10-2002 granting festival advance is Ext . W/3 . A report sent by Nathnagar Branch tothe Head Office for regularisation is Ext . W/ 4. This report shows that he had worked for more than 563 days as on 2-4-2002 . Order of Provident Fund Commissioner is Ext . W/ 12 which indicates that the workman worked for the period from 30-10-2000 to Sept. , 2006 and he was paid a sum of Rs . 1,31,298 payment voucher for the month of Sept. 2006 is Ext . W/ 13 . The workman filed a petition dated 13-2-2009 praying therein to call for certain documents which was allowed and the Tribunal vide order dated 13-2-2009 directed the Bank to produce the documents called for in that petition . In that petition , interalia , at serial no . 18 Nominal Muster Roll and Wage Register for the period from 30-10-2000 to 16-9-2000 was called for and at serial No. 19 Attendance Register for working of the workman from 30-10-2000 to 16-9-2006 was called for. There two documents could have been evidence of the fact that the workman worked . It was argued on behalf of the workman that adverse inference should be drawn against Bank for not producing there documents inspite of direction ofthe Tribunal dated 13-2-2009, (iii) Whether the action of the management is not maintaining status quo as per Sec . 33 of the Industrial Disputes Act is legal and justified?

Inthis regard law is well settled . In Director , Fisheries Terminal Division V. Bhikubhai Meghajibhai Chavda AIR 2010 SC 1238 it was held :

(iv) Whether the action of the management is not regularising and reinstating and not giving Kumar Manoj Priya permanent status on a regular post of messenger- cum- sweeper is legal and justified?

" Section 25-B of the Act definee continuous service " . In terms of sub - section ( 2 ) of Section 25 - B that if a workman during a period of twelve 6353 भारत का राजपत्र : सितम्बर 3 , 2011 / भाद्र 12 , 1933

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

calendar months preceding the date with reference to which calculation is to be made, has actually worked under the employer 240 days within a period of one year, he will be deemed to be in continuous service . The respondent claims he was employed in the year 1985 as a Watchman and his services were retrenched in the year 1991 land during the period between 1985 to 1991 , he had worked for a period of more than 240 days . The burden of proof is on the respondent to show that he had worked for 240 days in preceding twelve months prior to his alleged retrenchment . The law on this issue appears to be now well settled. This court in the case of R. M. Yellatty V. Assistant Excutive Engineer (2006 ) 1 SCC 106 (2005 AIR SCW 6103 ) , has observed:

by the Bank is that Bihar Kshetriya Garmin Bank, Munger has been created under the Regional Rural Bank Act, 1976. It is guided by the direction and circulars issued by the CentralGovernment/ Reserve Bank of India/NABARD. The workman was earlier illegally engaged by local Management of a Branch of Bhagalpur - Banka Kshetriya Gramin Bank without advertising the vacancy without calling for the names from the Employment Exchange and without following any procedure of appointment . Later on Bhagalpur-Banka Kshetriya Gramin Bank merged with Bihar Kshetriya Gramin Bank . In 1991 by a circular part timemessengar- cum - sweeper who had completed 240days ofcontinuous service were ordered to be treated as regular employee of R. R. Bs . In the same circular there was complete ban on further employment of part time or full time sweeper or messengar. The workman was engaged on30-10-2000 and as stated above without any notification of vacancy, without any advertisement , without calling for names from Employment Exchange , and without following any procedure. Such an employment is illegal and the person appointment has no legal right . His engagement was nullity and he will not get the protection ofSection- 25 - F of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947. The learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the management argued this aspect of the case vehemently. In this regard reliance was placed by the learned Counsel for the management on Constitution Bench decision of Hon'ble Apex Court in Secretary, State of Karnataka Vs. Uma Devi and others AIR - 2006 SC 1806-

"However, applying general principles and on reading the aforsaid judgements , we find that his Court, has repeatedly taken the view that the burden of proof is on the claimant to show that he had worked for 240 days in a given year. This burden is discharged only upon the workman stepping up in the witness box . This burden is discharged upon the workman adducing cogent evidence , both oral and documentary. In cases of termination of services of daily waged earners , there will be no letter of appointment of termination . There will also be no receipt of proofofpayment. Thus in most cases , the workman (the claimant) can only call upon the employer to produce before the Court the nominal muster roll for the given period , the letter of appointment oftermination , ifany, the wage register, the attendance register, etc. Drawing of adverse inference ultimately would depend thereafter on the facts of each case" .

Inthe case in hand there is no specific denial by the Bank that the workman was not engaged or he did not work for 240 days continuously in preceding twelve calendar months from the date of his termination . W.W.1 Kumar Manoj Priya the workman himself has stated on oath in the witness box that he worked for more than 240 days within 12 months immediatly before termination of his services . It is well settled that in such cases documents of appointment attendance and payment of wages may not to with the workman . There documents were called for from the management but inspite of direction by the Tribunal , were not produced. Under such circumstances , this is a fit case where adverse inference should be drawn against the management . Having considered the leadings and evidence as also the circumstances of non production of important documents by Bank inspite of calling and direction ofTribunal , I hold that the workman worked for more than 240 days continuously within twelve months immediatly preceding termination of his services .

"Unless the appointment is in terms of the relevant rules and after a proper competition among qualified persons , the same would not confer any right on the appointee . If it is a contractual appointment the appointment comes to an e2nd at the end of the contract, if it were an engagement or appointment on daily wages or casual basis , the same would come to an end when it is discontinued Similarly , a temporary employee could not claim to be made permanent on the expiry of his terms of appointment . It has also to be clarified that merely because a temporary employee or a casual wage worker is continued for a time beyond the term of his appointment , he would not be entitled to be absorbed in regular service of such continuance , ifthe original appointment was not made by following a due process of selection as envisaged by the relevant rules. It is not open to the Court to prevent regular recruitment at the instance of temporary employee whose period of employment has come to an end or ofadhoc employees who by the very nature of their appointment, do not acquire any right. High Courts acting under Art 226 of the Constitution of India , should not ordinarily issue directions for absorption , regularization , or permanent continuance unless the recruitment itself was made regularly and in terms of 7. Question No. ( ii ) : The main defence put forward 6354

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: SEPTEMBER 3 , 2011 /BHADRA 12 , 1933

[ PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii ) ]

10. Question ( iii) : The case of the workman is that having sensed the termination of this services on the basis ofso called circular of NABARD he made representation on 11-9-2006 to the Assistant Labour Commissioner (Central ) , Patna to intervene in the Industrial Dispute for amicable settlement of the matter . A.I..C . , Patna issued notice to the Chairman of the Bank fixing 15-9-2006 for conciliation . On 15-9-2006 parties appeared before A. L.C. , . Patna and representative of the management sought for an adjournment for a month . However in course of proceeding the management's representative agreed to maintain status quo as per Sec . 33 ( i) of the Industrial DisputeAct during the pendency of an Industrial Dispute . But the management terminated the services of the workmanw.e.f. 16-9-2006 .

the constitutional scheme . Merely because , an employee had continued under cover of an order of Court , which is described as litigious employment, he would not be entitled to any right to be absorbed or made permanent in the service . In fact , in such cases , the High Court may not be justified in issuing interim directions , since , after all , if ultimately the employee approching it is found entitled to relief. It may possible for it to mould the relief in such a manner that ultimately no prejudice will be caused to him , whereas an interim direction to continue his employment would hold up the regular procedure for selection or impose on the State the burden of paying an employee who is really not required . The Courts must be careful in ensuring that they do riot interfere unduly with the economic arrangement of its affairs by the State or its instrumentalities or lend themselves the instrument to facilitate the by passing ofthe constitutional and statutory mandates .

8. The learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the workman argued that the case before the Hon'ble: Apex Court in the matter of Uma Devi was not a case under Industrial Disputes Act . The case before the Hon'ble Apex Court was only limited on the question of regularisation. The Industrial Disputes Act has provisions for protection of interest of the workman and any retrenchment or termination of service without complying with the required provisions is illegal and the workınan so retrenched or dismissed deserves relief of reinstatetement with full back wages . The learned Counsel further argued that it is not that the workman in this case was engaged by the local manager without approval of the Head Office of the Bank. Ext . W/ 1 is a letter dated 27-10-2000 from Head Office of Bhagalpur - Banka Kshetriya Gramin Bank as it thenwas regarding employment of the workman and on the basis of that letter he was appointed .

11. The learned Counsel for the workman argued that when an Industrial dispute was pending for conciliation before the Conciliation Officer, it was mandatory for the management to comply with the provisions of Sec . 33 ( 1 ) and 33 (2 ) of the Industrial Disputes Act . The management did not obtain the permission of the Conciliation officer to terminate the service of the workman . The management did not even apply for such permission . The Learned Counsel for the workman argued that the order of termination of service of the workman under such circumstances is nullity in eye of law and nonest . Under circumstances the workman should be treated as in employment without any break of his service . Inthis regard the Learned Counsel for the workman relied upon Jaipur , Zila Sahakari Bhumi Vikash Bank Ltd. , Vs. Ram Gopal Sharma & Ors . wherein Hon'ble Apex Court held that proviso to Sec . 33 ( 2 ) (b ) are mandatory and its compliance is must to make an order of discharge or dismissal passed under Sec . 33 ( 2 ) ( b ) operative . The proviso can not be diluted or dispensed by the employer. He can not disobey the mandatory provision and then say that the order or discharge or dismissal made in contravention of Sec . 33 (2 ) (b) is not void or inoperative. The protections afforded to a workman under the said provisions can not be taken away. It was held by the Hon'ble Apex Court :---

9. This is a case under Industrial Disputes Act . Admittedly the termination of service of the workman was based on a circular of NABARD requiring R.B.Bs. to discontinue with the services of persons engaged as sweeper or messengar on daily wages basis or on part time basis . Admittedly no notice was given to the workman . No pay was given to the workman . No compensation was given to him. Non - compliance of provisions of Sec . 25 - F of the Industrial Disputes Act is thus admitted. There is no dispute that provisions of Sec . 25 - F of the Industrial Disputes Act were not complied with to which in my opinion the workman was entitled . Uma Devi's case ( Supra) was not a case under Industrial Dispute Act . It was held by Hon'ble Court Krishan Singh Vs. Executive Engineer 2010 AIR SCW 1862 ( paragraph 12) that decision in Uma Devi's case relates to regularisation in public employment and has no relevance to an award under Section 11A of the Industrial Dispute Act .

" 1. Where an applications is made under Section 33 ( 2 ) ( b ) proviso , the authority before which the proceeding is pending for approval of the action taken by the employer has to examine whether the order of dismissal or discharge is bonafide; whether it was by way of victimization or unfair labour practice; whether the conditions contained in the proviso were complied with or not etc. If the authority refuses to grant approval obviously it follows that the employee continues to be in service as if the order of discharge or dismissal had never been passed . The order ofdismissal or discharge passed invoking Section 33 ( 2 ) ( b ) dismissing or भारत का राजपत्र : सितम्बर 3 , 2011 / भाद्र 12 , 1933

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

discharging an employee brings an end of relationship of the employer and employee from the date of the dismissal or discharge but that order remains incomplete and inchoate as it is subject to approval of the authority under the said provision. In other words , this relationship comes to an end dejure only when the authority grants approval . If approval is not given , nothing more is required to be done by the employee , it will have to be deemed that the order of discharge or dismissal had never been passed."

Itwas further held that---

"The view that when no application is made or the one made is withdrawn, there is no order refusal of such application on merits and as such the order of dismissal or discharge does not become void or inoperative unless set aside under Section 33 -A,. can not be accepted. Not making an application under Section 33 ( 2) ( b ) seeking approval or withdrawing an application once made before any order is made thereon, is a clear case of contravention of the proviso to Section 33 (2 )(b ) . "

12. The Learned Advocate appearing on behalf of the management argued that no Industrial Dispute was pending for Conciliation before Asstt . Labour Commissioner ( Central ) Patna on the date of dismissal or termination of service of the workman . Since there was no Industrial Dispute pending for conciliation or, there is no question of application of Sec . 33 or proviso to Sec . 33 (2)(b) of the Industrial Dispute Act . The Learned Counsel argued that the workman apprehending termination his services filed a petition before Asstt . Labour Commissioner (Central ) Patna . But it was not an industrial dispute. The Industrial Dispute was not espoused on that date by the Union or substantial number of workman or workman as class.

13. In order to appreciate the aforsaid argument by the parties it is necessary to have a look on the provisions of Sec . 33 of the Industrial Disputes Act , which reads as follows:

33 " Conditions of service , etc. , to remain unchanged under certain circumstances during pendency of proceedings-

(1) During the pendency of any conciliation proceeding before a conciliation officer or a Board or of any proceeding before ( an arbitrator or ) a Labour Court or a Tribunal or National Tribunal in respect of an Industrial Dispute , no employer shall :

(a) In regard to any matter connected with the dispute, after to the prejudice of the workman concerned in such dispute , the conditions of service 3202 GI/11-21

6355 applicable to them immediately before the commencement of such proceeding ; or

(b) For any misconduct connected with the dispute , discharge or punish , whether by dismissal or otherwise, any workman concerned in such dispute , save with the express permission in writing of the authority before which the preceeding is pending.

(2) During the pendency of any such proceeding in respect of an industrial dispute , the employer may , in accordance with the standing orders applicable to a workman concerned in such dispute ( or where there are no such standing orders , in accordance with the terms of the contract , whether express or implied, between him and the workman)

(a) alter, in regard to any matter not connected with the dispute the conditions of service applicable to thatworkman immediately before the commencement of such proceeding ; or

(b) for any misconduct not connected with the dispute, discharge of punish , whether by dismissal orotherwise , that workman :

Provided that no such workman shall be discharged or dismissed, unless he has been paid wages for one month and an application has been made by the employer to the authority before which the proceeding is pending for approval of the action taken by the employer .

(3) Not withstanding anything contained is sub- section (2) , no employer shall during the pending of any such proceeding in respect of an industrial dispute , take any action against any protected workman concerned in such dispute-

(a) by altering , to the prejudice of such protected workman, the conditions of service applicable to him immediately before the commencement of such proceeding; or

(b) by discharging or punishing whether by dismissal or otherwise , such protected workman, save with the express permission in writing of the authority before which the proceeding is pending.

Explanation - For the purposes ofthis sub -section, a " protected workman " , in relation to an establishment , means a workman who , being (member of the executive or other office bearer ) of a registered trade union connected with the establisment , is recognisd as such in accordance with rules made in this behalf.

6356

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 3 , 2011 /BHADRA 12, 1933

PART II-SEC . 3 (ii) ]

Commissioner ( Central ) Patna who issued notice to the management fixing 15-9-2006 a date for conciliation . But it was not any industrial dispute . It was not a dispute between Employer and workmen . It was petition by an individual workman apprehending termination of his services . Therefore it was not an industrial dispute . Industrial Disputes has been defined in Section 2( k ) of the Industrial Dispute Act

(4) In every establishment , the number of workman to be recognised as protected workman for the purposes of sub - section ( 3) shall be one percent of the total number of workman employed therein subject to a minimum number of vie protected workman and a maximum number of one hundred protected workman and for the aforsaid purpose, the appropriate workman Government may make rules providing for the distribution of such protected workman among various trade unions , if any, connected with the establishment and the manner in which the workman may be chosen and recognised as protected workman.

" 2( k) Industrial dispute means any disputes or difference between employers and employers , between employer and workmen , or between workman and workmen , which is connected with the employment or non - employment or the terms of employment or with the condition of Labour of any persons."

(5 ) Where an employer makes an application to a conciliation officer , Board (an arbitrator , a Labour Court Tribunal or National Tribunal under the proviso to sub - section ( 2 ) for approval ofthe action taken by him , the authority concerned shall , without delay, hear such application and pass (within a period of three months from the date of receipt of such application) , such order in relation thereto as it deems fit):

It is clear from the plain reading of the definition of the terms " Industrial Dispute " that in the dispute workmen are envolved as a class . What imparts to the dispute of a workman, the character of Industrial Dispute is that it effects the right of workmen as a class. In an Industrial Dispute at least on one side the disputant are a body of menacting collectively and not individually.

(Provided that where any such authority considers it necessary or expedient so to do , it may, for reasons to be recorded in written extend such period by such further period as it may think fit :

It was argued that it was an industrial dispute as envisaged in Section 2A of the Industrial Dispute Act which reads:

" 2A . Dismissal , etc. , of an individual workman to be deemed to be an industrial dispute.- "

Provided further that no proceedings before any such authority shall lapse merely on the ground that any period specified in this sub - section had expired without such proceedings being completed." )

"Where any employer discharges , dismisses , retrenches or otherwise terminates the services of an individual workman , any dispute or difference between that workman and his employer connected with or arising out of such discharge , dismissal , retrenchment or termination shall be deemed to be anindustrial dispute not with standing that no other workman nor any union of workmen is a party to the dispute".

It appears from plain reading of Sec . 33 that pendency ofany conciliation proceeding with respect to an industrial dispute is condition precedent for application of that Section . The Section starts with the words during the pendency of any conciliation proceeding ......... in respect ofany industrial dispute . " The provisions u/s . 33 become applicable only when a conciliation proceeding or any proceeding referred to in that Section is pending before any authority mentioned therein with respect to an industrial Dispute " . Pendency of an industrial dispute is ' sine qua non' for enforcing the Bar u/ s . 33 of the Industrial Disputes Act , Two conditions must be fulfilled to attract the bar u/s . 33 of the Act-

( i) There must be an industrial dispute and ( ii ) There must be a conciliation proceeding or any other proceeding mentioned in the Section pending before any of the authorities mentioned in the Section.

It is obvious that industrial dispute as deemed u/ s.2A may arise only after discharge , dismissal , retrenchment or otherwise termination of services of an individual workman . Discharge , dismissal , retrenchment orotherwise termination of service is condition precedent to make an individual's dispute as a deemed, industrial dispute u/ s.2A.Unless an individual workman is discharged , retrenched , dismissed or otherwiseterminated he can not raise an industrial dispute as u/ s . 2A . This difinition does not include " apprehended termination of service" as a ground to deem on individual dispute as Industrial Dispute .

14. Now let us examine whether any industrial dispute was pending on the date of termination of service of the workman. The case of the workman is that he apprehending thetermination ofhis service in the light of or on the basis ofcircular ofNABARD filed a petition before Asstt . Labour

In the case in hand , what was raised before AL.C , Patna was a dispute of " apprehended termination of service " . This kind of dispute raised by individual workman 6357 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : सितम्बर 3 , 2011 / भाद्र 12 , 1933

back wages may not be appropriate relief and only monetary compensation will meet and ends ofjustice .

can not be an industrial dispute either u/ s . 2(k) or 2A of the Industrial DisputeAct .

Recent trend of decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in such matters is in support of the argument advanced on behalf of the management . Reference to only one decision in which several other decisions of the Hon'ble Apex Court have been referred to will answer this question . InSenior Superintendent , Telegraph ( Traffic) Bhopal Vs. Santosh Kumar Singh and others AIR 2010 , it has been held.....

It was argued on behalf of workman that later on Union espoused the cause and took over the matter on 16-10-2006. Even if this argument is accepted then the industrial dispute starts from 16-10-2006 , when the union took up the cause but not before that. Particularly the espousal of industrial dispute by Association or Union can not make the Industial Dispute pending from back date on having retrospective effect . Therefore I am of the view that no industrial dispute was pending and as such no conciliation proceeding relating to that dispute was pending before Asstt . Labour Commissioner ( Central ) Patna on 15-9-2006 and as such the termination of services ofthe workman is not hit by Sec.33 ofthe Industrial Dispute Act.

" Inlast few years it has been consistently held by this Court that relief by way of reinstatement with back wages is not automatic even if termination of an employee isfound tobe illegal or is in contravention of the prescribed procedure and that monetary compensation in lieu of reinstatement and back wages in cases of such nature may be appropriate . ( See U.P. State Barasware Corpn . Ltd. , &Anr. V. Uday Narain Pandey (2006) 1 SCC 479 : Uttranchal ForestDevelopment Corpn . V. M.C. Joshi ( 2007 ) 9 SCC 353: State ofM.P. & Ors . V. Moti Lal Nehru Farmers Training Institute (2008 ) 5 SCC 75 : Jaipur Development Authority V. Ramsahai & Anr. (2006) 11 SCC 684 ; Ghaziabad Development Authority & Anr . V. Ashok Kumar &Anr . (2008) 4 SCC 261 : Mahboob Deepak Vs. Nagar Panchayat, Gajraula & Anr. (2008 ) 1 SCC 575 :

In a reçent judgement authored by one of us ( R.M. Lodha , J. ) in the case of Jagbir Singh V. Haryana State Agriculture Marketing Board and Anr. 9 ( 2009) 15 SCC 327, the aforesaid decisions were noticed and it was stated:

15.Question No. ( iv) : The Learned Counsel for the workman argued that in the matter of regularisation of service the workman in this case was discriminated against . In the light of a circular of NABARD part - time messenger- cum- sweeper or daily wager who had completed 240 days of continuous service on that date were treated as regular employee R.R.B. w.e. f. 22-2-1991 . But the workman was not treated as regular employee . His request for regularisation of his services was not considered and no heed was paid . In this case the circular to which the Learned Counsel for the workman made reference is of the year 1993. This was one time decision for one time regularisation . There was prohibition against future cmployment of daily wager in that circular . The workman was employed/engaged against that circular in the year 2000.He can not claim benefit of regularisation under that circular. Moreover the workman in this case is a daily wager . He was not appointed against any post. He did not work on any post or against any post . Therefore there is no question of regularisaion of his services .

It is true that the earlier view of this Court articulated inmany decisions reflected the legal position that if the termination an employee was found to be illegal , the reliefofreinstatement with full back wages would ordinarily follow. However, in recent post , there has beena shift in the legal position and in a long line of cases , this Court has consistently taken the view that relief by way of reinstatement with back wages is not automatic and may be wholly inappropriate in a given fact situation even though the termination ofanemployee is in contravention of the prescribed procedure . Compensation instead of reinstatement has been held to meet the ends ofjustice .

16. Question No. (v) : I have already held that the workman in this case worked for more than 240 days within 12 months immediately preceding the termination of his services . It is admitted case that he was not paid any compensation and Sec . 25 - F of the Industrial Disputes Act was not complied with . Therefore termination of services ofthe workman in this case namely Kumar Manoj Priya is bad in the eye of law not legal and not justified. Now the question is to what relief he is entitled to . The Learned Counsel for the workman argued that when the termination services of the workman is not legal and not justified for non- compliance of Sec.25 - F of the Industrial Disputes Act , he is entitled to re- instatement with full back wages .

It would be , thus , seen that by a catena of decisions in recent time, this Court has clearly laid down that an order of retrenchment passed in violation of Section 25 - F although may be set aside but an award of reinstatement should not , however , be automatically passed . The award of reinstatement with full back wages in a case where the workman has completed 240 days of work in a year preceding the date of termination, particularly, daily wagers has not been found to be proper by this Court and The Learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the management argued that even if the termination services ofthe workman is found to be illegal reinstatement with 6358

[PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii) ] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 3 , 2011 /BHADRA 12, 1933

Reference No. 26 of 2001

PARTIES:

instead compensation has been awarded. This Court has distinguished between a daily wager who does not hold a post and a permanent employee. "

Employers in relation to the management of M/ s . B.C.C.L. and their workman .

APPEARANCES :

Onbehalf of the workman : Mr. D. Mukherjee , Secretary, Bihar Colliery Kamgar Union, Jharnapara , Dhandad.

Inthis case workman Kumar Manoj Priya is a daily wager. Having regard to fact of this case and law discussed above I am of the view that a compensation of Rs . 75,000 (Rs . Seventy Five Thousand) only will meet the ends of justice and as such Kumar Manoj Priya is awarded compensation of Rs . 75,000 (Rs . Seventy Five Thousand) only.

Onbehalfofthe employers : Mr. D.K. Verma , Advocate The management is directed to make the payment of compensation to the workman Kumar Manoj Priya within the 30 days of publication of the Award .

State : Jharkhand

Industry: Coal 17. And this is myAward .

Dated, Dhanbad , the 27th July, 2011 Dictated& Corrected by me .

ORDER

HARISH CHANDRA SINGH , Presiding Officer

नई दिल्ली , 9 अगस्त, 2011

TheGovernment 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 thisTribunal for adjudication vide their order No.L -20012/ 435/2000 (C - 1) , dated the 25th Jan , 2001 .

SCHEDULE

का. आ. 2379. 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 , पटना के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 26/2001 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 09-08-2011 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल-20012/435/2000- आई आर ( सी- I ) ]

"Whether the action of the management of M/s . BCCL in not regularising the services of the workman SriAjitBouri working as Night Guard/Havildar of Dobari Colliery under Bastacolla Area is justified and legal ? If not, to what relief is the workman entitled andfrom what date ?"

डी.एस.एस. श्रीनिवास राव , डेस्क अधिकारी

New Delhi , the 9th August , 2011

2.Workman Ajit Bauri is present and filed the photo copy of office order dt . 16-05-2006 issued by the Project Officer, Dobari Colliery by which the workman along with other Sri Anil Kumar has been directed to perform his duty as Fan Attendant Mr. D.K. Verma , the Ld . Advocate for the managment is present .

S.O. 2379. - In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 26/ 2001) 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 received by the Central Government on 09-08-2011 .

[No. L-20012/435/ 2000 - 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

3. Perused the case record , it stands clear from it that a petition was filed on 13-7-2011 in behalf of the Union concerned workman Ajit Bauri and Mr. D. Mukherjee , the Secretary of the Union concerned had aiso moved it that since the petitoner /workman was not interested to contest the case, so the case may be closed and ' No dispute ' Award may be passed . The aforesaid I.d. Advocate for the management also conceded to it . The present reference case relates to non - regularisation by the management of the service ofworkman Shri Ajit Bauri working as a Night Guard/Havildar of Dobari Colliery under BastacollaAreá . The case has been pending for the evidence of the workman since 6-9-2005 , but meanwhile the workman Ajit Bauri as per office Order dt . 16-05-2006 of the Project Officer concerned has been directed to perform his duty In the matter of an Industrial Dispute under Section 10 (1) (d) ofthe I.D. Act , 1947 6359 भारत का राजपत्र सितम्बर 3 , 2011 /भाद्र 12, 1933

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii ) ]

Industry:Railway

State: Jharkhand

Dated, the 28th July, 2011

AWARD

as Fan Attendant , so far that reason he does not want to contest the case; hence , no longer the industrial dispute as raised by the Reference case exists now. Under these circumstances , the case is closed and order is passed accordingly.

KISHORI RAM , Presiding Officer

नई दिल्ली , 9 अगस्त, 2011

By order No. L- 41012 / 207/ 97 - IR ( B - I ) dated 8/17-7-98 the Central Government in the Ministry ofLabour has, in exercise of the powers conferred by clause ( d) of sub-sec . (1 ) and sub -sec . (2A) ofSection 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 , referred the following dispute for adjudication to this Tribunal :

"Whether the action of the Construction Deptt. of E.Rly. , Dhanbad in reverting Sri Sipahi Mistry from Group-CtoGroup- D cadre is justified ? If not , to whatrelief the workman is entitled ? "

का. आ. 2380. औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 (1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में , केन्द्रीय सरकार पूर्व रेलवे के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच , अनुबंध मेंनिर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण , धनबाद के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 33/1998 ) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 8-8-2011 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल-41012/207/97- आई आर ( बी-1 ) ]

रमेश सिंह , डेस्क अधिकारी

New Delhi , the 9th August, 2011

S. O. 2380. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes , Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 33/ 1998) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal , Dhanbad , as shown in the Annexure , in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of Eastern Railway and their workmen , received by the Central Government on 8-8-2011 .

[No. L-41012/207/97 - IR ( B - I ) ] RAMESH SINGH , Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL ( NO.I) DHANBAD

In the matter of an Industrial Dispute under Section 10 ( 1) ( d) (2A) of the I.D. Act .

Reference No. 33 of 1998

Parties Employers in relation to the management of Construction Dept. of Eastern Railway, Dhanbad.

AND

Their Workmen

2. The case of the concerned workman is that he was appointed as Casual Locking Fitter ( SIM ) in the Construction Wing of Signal & Telecom Department of the Senior Divisional Signal & Telecom Engineer , E. Railway, Dhanbad under the overall control ofDivisional Railway Manager , E.Rly, Dhanbad and was posted under S.I. (Con .) , Obra Dam on scale rate of casual SIM Gr.III in the year 1972 , and he continued as such till 20-12-79 and his service was regularised on the post of Khalasi on and 21-12-79 wrongfully demoted group ' D'by the Employer , whereas his services should have been regularised on the post of regular SIM ( SMS ) Gr . III directly in terms of the judgement of Hon'ble Supreme Court with effect from 1-1-81 , but this was not done by the Employer. After succeeding in the suitability test of SIM ( SMS ) Gr. III he was promoted to the post of SIM ( SMS ) Gr. III vide DSTE Con Dhanbad's letter No.SG - 651 / 17 / Con Pt . IV dated 5-4-1984 w.e.f. 2-4-1984 . The concerned workman worked onthe post of SIM (SMS)Gr. III in the scale of Rs . 260-400 + Rs . 950-1500 for 10 years , but no annual increments were adjusted to the pay of the applicant for which he is entitled to, as per rules enforced by the Govt . of India , Ministry of Railway, for the guideline of the Employer and also enforceduponthe Employer to pay and adjust ofthe annual increments every year for the period he worked continously. He was sparedby SI / Con . Obra Dam and was directed to appear before Sr. DSTE E. Rly. Dhanbad for further posting and he appeared on 7-9-94 for his posting . Without any fault of the concerned workman and -without any show cause to the concerned workman , he has been reverted to the post of Khalasi Helper by Sr. DSTE E. Rly, Dhanbad and his pay was also reduced from Rs . 1150 to Rs . 965. Thus he has been reverted in lower post and grade , without any notice under Sec . 9A of the I.D. Act .

Present : Shri H.M. Singh , Presiding Officer

APPEARANCES :

For the Employers : Shri D. G. Banerjee , Advocate

It has been prayed that the Hon'ble Tribunal be graciously pleased to hold that the action of the management in reverting the concerned workman to a lower grade is not justified and he be treated on the post of For the Workman : Shri B. B. Pandey, Advocate 6360

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 3 , 2011 /BHADRA 12, 1933

[PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii ) ] SMSGr. III continuously on and from 6-9-94 and onwards and necessary adjustment of the wage structure of the concerned workman which was reduced from Rs . 1150 to Rs . 965 p.m. be adjusted and paid to him.

was sent to Obra. Initially he was appointed as Khalasi . Hewas given ad- hoc promotion to Obra to work as Grade- III by office order dated 5-4-84 and when the work of construction was completed he was returned back to Dhanbad because there was surplus staff. He has been placed as Khalasi in the revised pay scale .

8. But main argument advanced on behalf of the workman that his pay has been reduced. As per management's witness MW- 1 , he has stated in cross- examination that I do not know whether any notice u/s . 9-A ofthe I.D Act , was issued to the concerned workman . Again he stated that the case of the concerned workman can be taken to be a case of demotion . After demotion his pay scale was fixed afresh and he started getting less than the scale which he was getting earlier at Obra on promotion.

3. The case of the management is that the concerned workman was appointed as Ad -hoc Khalasi helper on stop gap measure for utilising his services in construction organisation . H.O. service was declared surplus by Construction Department . The concerned was never reverted from Group C , to Group D Cadre by the Construction Department and the said .Khalasi Helper is not entitled to any relief. He worked as casual SIMGr. III under SI/ Cen/Obra and was empanelled as Khalasi but his service was not regularised on the post of Khalasi at any time. While working as Khalasi under the construction organisation, he was allowed to officiate as SIMGr. III for a period of 2 months for construction work only. His lien as Khalasi was being maintained under Senior DSTE/ Dhanbad and he was not to confer any claim over the seniority. He was allowed to work as temporary SIMGr . III on officiating capacity but he was not allowed to continue further.

This statement of the management's witness shows that the concerned workman was demoted to lower post and lower pay without giving notice u/s.9 -A of the I.D. Act . It shows that the management not complied with Sec . 9-A anddemoted him giving lower scale as per Ex. M-3 .

Though the management in its written statement para 7 has admitted that the concerned workman has worked as SIMGr. III and was empanelled as Khalasi at Obra . Again at para 8 of the written statement it has been stated while the workman was working as Khalasi under the construction organisation, he was allowed to officiate as SIMGr. III for a period of 2 months for construction work only. In para 9 it has been stated that he was allowed to work as temporary SIM Gr. III on officiating capacity.

Inrejoinder to the written statement of the workman the management has stated that the concerned workman was never reverted from the post ofAd- hoc SIMGr. III to Khalasi Helper. He was declared surplus by the construction wing but he was absorbed as Khalasi helper and his pay was refixed at the rate available then. Due to reduction of staff strength in construction organisation hewas sent to Sr. DSTE/DHN for absorption in open line and he was absorbed under Sr. DSTE/Dhanbad in the scale ofRs. 800-1150 (RP) and his pay was fixed at Rs . 965 in the scale ofKhalasi Helper.

4. In rejoinder to the written statement of the managment the concerned workman has stated almost same things as have been stated in the written statement .

5. The management has produced MW- 1 , Janardan Singh and proved documents as Exts . M - 1 to M -3 .

The concerned workman has produced himself as WW- 1.

The above written statement as well as management's witness shows that the management had giyen SIMGr. III to the cocerned workman and he was promoted as per Ext.M - 2 in the scale ofRs . 950-1500 w.e.f. 17-8-95 . But as per Ext . M - 3 his pay has been revised to Rs . 1130 from 1-4-92 and after that his pay has been reduced and posted as Khalasi Helper in the scale of Rs . 800-1150 and pay was fixed at Rs . 965. It shows that the concerned workmanwas not given notice u/s . 9 - A ofI.D. Act and his pay has been reduced. So , the action of the management isnotjustified.

9.Accordingly, I render the following award- 6. Main argument advanced on behlaf of the concerned workman is that he been reverted without complying Sec.9 - A of the I.D. Act , 1947. As per Ext.M -3 his pay was raised upto Rs . 1130 in normal course by giving increments , w.e.f. 1-4-92 . But he has been posted as Khalasi helper vide DSTE/DHN letter dated 2-11-93 and pay fixed at Rs . 965.

The action of the Construction Department of E. Rly, Dhanbad in reverting Sri Sipahi Mistry from group-C toGroup- D Cadre is not justified . So , he is entitled for is previous pay protection , difference of wages and other consequential benefits . Management is directed to act accordingly within 30 days form the date ofpublication of the award.

7.Management , representative argued that there is no post of Fitter Grade III , so he cannot be given that scale. It has also been argued that the concerned workman

H.M. SINGH , Presiding Officer 6361 [ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

भारत का राजपत्र : सितम्बर 3 , 2011 / भाद्र 12 , 1933

नई दिल्ली , 10 अगस्त, 2011

2004- IR ( B - II ) Dated 31-05-2004 for adjudication on the following Schedule:

SCHEDULE

"Whether the management of Bank of India is justified in imposing the punishment . of Compulsory retirement from service ' on S1 M. Prabhakar w.c.f. 18-11-2002 ? If not , what relief he is entitled to?" का.आ. 2381.-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 (1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में , केन्द्रीय सरकार बैंक ऑफ इंडिया के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच , अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/श्रम न्यायालय , बंगलौर के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 30/2004 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 10-8-2011 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल-12012/27/2004- आई आर( बी- II ) ]

रमेश सिंह , डेस्क अधिकारी

New Delhi , the 10th August , 2011

S.O. 2381. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) , the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 30/2004) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal- cum- Labour Court, Bangalore as shown in the Annexure in the industrial dispute between the management of Bank of India and their workmen , which was received by the Central Government on 10-8-2011 .

[No. L- 12012/27/2004- IR (B - II) ] RAMESH SINGH , Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

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

Dated: 15th July, 2011

rresent : Shri S. N. Navalgund, Presiding Officer

C.R.No. 30/2004

IPARTY

Shri M. Prabhakar, No.18 , Car Street . Doddaballapur Post & Taluk, Bangalore

IPARTY

2. The first party appointed as Subordinate Staff in the second party bank on 20-11-1981 was served with charge sheet dated 16-07-2002 for unauthorisedly remaining absent from duties without prior permission/ sanction from 8-6-2002 till 16-07-2002 which amounts to gross- misconduct in terms of Para 5(b ) of the Memorandum of Settlement . Since no response was received to that charge sheet the disciplinary authority appointed Shri P.i Naik , StaffOfficer asEnquiry Officer as per Ex . M2 and Shri N.K. Bagadia , Staff Officer as the Presenting Officer , as per Ex.M3 subsequently who was replaced by Shri B. Krishna as per Ex. M4 . The enquiry officer while issuing notice of enquiry to the first party fixing date of enquiry on 3-9-2002 inspite of service since he did not turn up , issuing another notice to appear on 20-9-2002 as per Ex . M7 and inspite of its due service by RPAD as per Ex.M7 ( a ) he did not turn up , the enquiry officer while receiving the documentary evidence produced by the Presenting Officer marked as MEX- 1 , MEX- 2 & MEX - 3 submitted his enquiry finding dated 7th October 2002 to the Disciplinary Authority. Then when the Disciplinary Authority issued second show cause notice to the first party he submitted his explanation to the effect that since he was suffering from Jaundice and also metwith an accident he could not attend his duties ' and he has two children studying in 7th & 9th Standard who are all depending on him lenient view may be taken while imposing the punishment . The Disciplinary Authority after affording personal hearing to the first party by his order dated 18-11-2002 passed the impugned order of the punishment of compulsory retirement from the bank's services with superannuation benefits i.e. Pension and /or PF and Gratuity as would be due otherwise under the prevailing Rules or Regulations and without disqualification from future employment , in terms of Para 6(c) ofMemorandum of Settlement on Disciplinary Matters dated 10-04-2002 , taking into account the earlier two punishments imposed for unauthorized absence.during the years 1998,1999 and 2000 for a period of 196,192 and 88 days respectively.

The Zonal Manager, Bank of India, Karnataka Zone , No.11 , K.G. Road , Bangalore- 560009

AWARD

3. Aggrieved by this punishment order the first party preferred appeal to the Zonal Manager , Karnataka Zone and Appellate Authority mentioning the same grounds mentioned in his reply to the Disciplinary Authority and theAppellateAuthority after affording personal hearing to the first party by his order dated 18-01-2003 refused to interfere in the order of Disciplinary Authority and 1. The Central Government by exercising the powers conferredby clause (d) of sub - section ( 1 ) and sub- section 2Aof Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947( 14 of 1947) has referred this dispute vide Order No. L- 12012 / 27 / 6362

[ PART -II-SEC . 3 ( ii) ] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 3 , 2011 /BHADRA 12 , 1933

confirmed the same. Aggrieved by these orders the first party raised the dispute before the Assistant Labour Commissioner ( Central ) , conciliation since did not materialize the Central Government made this reference for adjudication.

interfere in the enquiry finding as well as in the quantum of the pnishment imposed by the Disciplinary Authority upheld by the Appellate Authority. Since it is borne out from the records that prior to this twice he was punished forremaining unauthorized absent by orders dated 19-12- 2000 and 30-10-2001 by reducing time scale in terms ofPara 21 ( iv) C of 6th Bipartite Settlement , inspite of viewing his unauthorised absence leniently twice the first party having failed to improve in his conduct and also failed to explain hisunauthorized absence for the charge period, absolutely I find no reason to interfere in the enquiry finding and the punishment imposed by the disciplinary authority upheld by the Appellate Authority. Under the circumstances . I arrived at the conclusion of rejecting the reference.

7. In the result I pass the following award: AWARD

The reference is rejected arriving at the conclusion that the management of Bank of India is justified in imposing the punishment of Compulsory retirement from service on Shri M. Prabhakar w.e.f. 18-11-2002 .

(Dictated to PA transcribed by her corrected and signed by me on 15-07-2011) .

S. N. NAVALGUND , Presiding Officer

Annexure CR No.30/2004 4. After receipt of the reference pursuance to the notices issued by this tribunal both the parties entered theirappearances through their respective advocates , filed their claim statement and counter statement respectively. The first party in his claim statement submits that he who was appointed on 20-11-1984 as staff subordinate in Bank of India Yeshwanthpur branch worked sincerely and due to slight mistake he remained absent for which a capital punishment of retirement from service being imposed is not justified. He also stated in his claim statement that he being from Schedule Tribe having family consisting wife and two school going children he be ordered to be reinstated in the service . In the Counter Statement filed on behalf of the Second Party it is contended that he was in the habit of remaining unauthorized absent and on earlier two occasions taking lenient view orders were passed and this time he could not explain his unauthorized absence which amounts to grave misconduct as per Para 5(p ) of Bipartite Settlement dated 10-4-2002 the management having convinced that he has no mind to continue in service passed the impugned order of compulsory retirement with effect form 18-11-2002.

List of witnesses examined by the Management

MW1

1. Shri P.G. Naik , Deputy Chief Officer Documents exhibited for the Management

Ex.M1

1. Latter dated 16-7-2002 of the Assistant General Manager and DisciplinaryAuthority along with charge sheet dated 16-7-2002

2. Orderdated 16-7-2002 appointing Shri P.G. Ex . M2 Naik as the Enquiry Officer

3. Orderdated 16-7-2002 appointing Shri N.K. Ex . M3 Bagadia as the Presenting Officer

4. Orderdated 29-8-2002 appointing Shri B. Ex . M4 Krishna as the Presenting Officer in the place of N. K. Bagadia .

5. My Learned Predecessor while formulating the Preliminary Issue as to whether the Domestic Enquiry conducted against the first party by the second party is fair and proper " ? after receiving the evidence of enquiry officer for the second party and marking documents at Ex . M1 to M12 and after affording several opportunities to the first party to lead his evidence since the same was not availed, by order dated 2-1-2007 held the Domestic Enquiry being fair and proper . Subsequently when the matter was posted by my Learned Predecessor for arguments the first party and his counsel never turned up . After retirement of my Learned Predecessor for some time since this tribunal was vacant when notices were issued to both sides the first party entered his appearance on 3-8-2010 and later he never turned up and ultimately I have heard the arguments addressed by the learned advocate appearing for the second party on merits and proceed to pass the award.

5. Notice of the enquiry officer dated 26-8-2002 to the first party workman fixing the date date of Preliminary enquiry on 03.09.2002 Ex . M5

6. Dailyorder sheet dated 3-09-2002 . Ex.M6

7. Letter of the enquiry officer dated Ex. M7&

Ex .M7(a)

3-9-2002 to the first party workman postponing the Preliminary Enquiry fixed on03.09.2002 to 20-9-2002 ( with acknowledgement) .

6. Since there is no dispute the first party remained unauthorizedly absent covering the period of charge and failed to give his reply to the charge as well as to explain his unauthorized absence by appearing before the enquiry officer inspite of service of the notice and even before the Disciplinary Authority he could not produce any documentary evidence to substantiate that he was prevented from attending his duties for the relevant period due to either for suffering. from Jaundice or having met with an accident. Therefore , absolutely I find no reason to

8. Letter of the enquiry officer dated 20-9-2002 to the first party workman Ex. M8 6363 भारत का राजपत्र : सितम्बर 3 2011 /भाद्र 12, 1933

[भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

Reference : CGITA of 474 of2004 NewReference : ITC. 24/2002 (Old)

DivisionalRailwayManager,

WesternRailway,

...First Party

Rajkot-360 001

placing him exparty on the enquiry fixed on 20-9-2002 postponing he preliminary enquiry fixed on 3-9-2002 to 20-9-2002 along withthe RPAD ( acknowledge ment).

And their Workman

Shri Babubhai A. Patel ,

Ex.M9 Ma(a)

9. Letter of the enquiry officer dated 20-9-2002 to the first party along with the copy of the proceedings of hearing held on 20-9-2002 with acknowledgment .

10. Daily Order sheet dated 20-9-2002 Ex.M10

Nr. Jethabhai's Shop , ...Second Party New Kachhala, Station Road, At& Post: Lodra , Ta- Vijapur, Dist: Mehsana- 382835 .

11. Certificate ofposting slip under which proceedings and documents were sent Ex.M11

For the first party:- None Forthe second party: Shri H.C. Pandya, Advocate 12. Enquiry report dated 7th October, 2002 Ex.M12

AWARD

List of witnesses examined by the first party

Nil

List ofDocuments of 1st party

Nil

नई दिल्ली , 10 अगस्त, 2011

An Industrial dispute arose between employer in relation to the management of Western Railway, Rajkot and their workman , Shri Babubhai A Patoland on failure of Conciliation , the Conciliation Officer sent failure report resulting in sending this Reference for adjudication by the Appropriate Government , Government of India Ministry of labour Shram Shakti Bhavan, Rafi Marg , New Delhi vide orderNo. L-41012/ 51/2001 - IR (B - 1 ) dated 18-03-2002 in exercise of powers conferred by clause (d) of sub section (1) and sub- section 2 (A) of Section 10 of the IDAct , 1947 . Thedispute referred for adjudication to the Tribunal under the schedule at Ext . 1 is as follows :

SCHEDULE

का.आ. 2382.-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में , केन्द्रीय सरकार पश्चिम रेलवे के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच , अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालय , अहमदाबाद के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 474/2004) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 10-8-2011 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।

[सं. एल-41012 /51 /2001- आई आर ( बी-1 ) ]

रमेश सिंह , डेस्क अधिकारी

New Delhi , the 10th August , 2011

"Whether the action of the Management of Divisional Railway Manager, Western Railway, Kothi Compound, Rajkot in not calling Shri Babubhai A. Patel employed as PWI for training and thereafter not regularizing him in the post of PWI is justified? If not , what relief the concerned workman is entitled ? "

S.O. 2382. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 474/2004) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal - cum - Labour Court, Ahmedabad (Gujarat ) as shown in the Annexure in the industrial dispute between the employers in relation to the management of Western Railway and their workmen, which was received by the Central Government on 10-8- 2011.

[No. L-41012/51/2001 - IR (B - I) ] RAMESH SINGH, Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

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

Present:

Binay Kumar Sinha , Presiding Officer, CGIT- cum - Labour Court , Ahmedabad , Dated 15th June 2011

(2) Notices to the both parties the employer and the workman were issued for filing their respective statement of claim and the reply/ rejoinder statement . The second party workman appeared through lawyer and filed statement ofclaim which are as follows . His father Shri Ambalal Patei was a Railway employee serving with the administration of Western Railway, Rajkot Division . But his father diedduring service tenure , then second party workman being son of late Ambalal Patel requested to the Railway administration toappoint him on compassionate grounds in the appropriate postaccordingto his educational qualifications in terms of Railway establishment Rules in vogue . Then the Railway administration considered his request to appoint him in a suitable post on compassionate grounds and was called for screening/ interview on 30-06-1987 , vide Divisional personnel officer , Rajkot letter dated 19-06-1987 as per Annexure A/ l. He was successful in the screening on 30-06-1987 and he was considered for appointment in class - III on compassionate grounds and offer of the 3202G1/11-22 6364

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 3 , 2011 /BHADRA 12, 1933

[ PART II -SEC . 3 ( ii) ] appointment/ training as APP. PWI grade - III scale case is that the in spite of so many representations , the Railway Administration did not pay any heed to his grievances . Then a legal notice dated 17-9-1998 through his lawyer was issued to the authorities that also went in vain. Annexure-A/ 9 is the legal notice dated 12-9-1996. Further case is that DRM ( E) had never hold a Domestic Inquiry to find out the facts though the applicants was on regular appointment on compassionate ground . Than the workman made approach to the Regional Labour Commissioner ( Central ) Ahmedabad vide its application dated 31-8-1999 as per Annexure - A/ 10 , and the RLC has under taken proceedings on various dates and the Railway administration made representation to the ALC ( C ) Ahmedabad vide letter dated 17-4-2000 as per Annexure- A/ ll that the workman Pabubhai A. Patel was never appointed on the Rail ay and so , question of his reinstatement does not arres , the workman filed rejoinder to the aforesaid letter of ilway administration asserting that he was appointed o ompassionate ground in term Railway Establishment ; s that he was duly appointed and also attended the trai school and field training etc. his rejoinder dated 12 2 isAnnexure- A/ 12 . Further case ofthe workman that t .. Kailway Administration utterly failed to send him for trait ay Tum 02-07-1992 as directed/ advised by Principal Zonai Training School , Udaipur. Further case is that if the Railway administration could have considered the unauthorized absent of the workman they had taken up Disciplinary action under the discipline and Appeal Rules holding Domestic Inquiry, but no such Domestic Inquiry was held and the Railway administration has failed to show gross negligence on part of the work . Eventhe Railway administration did not serve him a notice/ order as to termination of his services rather the Railway administration are silent and failed to initiate any action against the workman. On failure of conciliation report the appropriate Government referred the dispute for adjudication by this Tribunal . On these grounds prayer has been made by the second party workman as per statement of claim directing DRM and other appropriate authority to reinstate him as PWI and send him for completing training and for regularizing him in the post of PWI in which he was appointed previously on compassionate ground with further relief to which the workman is found entitle . As per Ext. 9 , the list ofdocuments from Annexure- A/ 1 to Annexure - A/ 12 were submitted by the second party workman.

(3) The second party workman filed a pursis at Ext . 10 for sending the charter of demand/ statement of claimto the employer DRM Western Railway, Rajkot ( first party) which was sent to the first party as per Annexure and was received in the officer of the DRM ( E ) Western Railway , RajkotDivision as per Annexure - B A.D. on 17-11-2007 an application is filed by Shri S.S. Shevade , Lawyer for DRM Western Railway, Rajkot at Ext . 11 informing that he is empanelled Railway Advocate and has received telephonic Rs. 1400-2300 (RP) was made to him vide Divisional Railway Manager ( E) , Rajkot vide No. EE/B/106 dated 9-10-1987 and he was asked to complete requisite formalities- ( 1 ) To appear for medical examination at Railway Hospital Rajkot. (2)To complete attestation form for verification of character and antecedents by the Police authority and to report to superintendent 'BE' section between 10.00 hrs to 18.00 hrs , during working days . Such order is annexed as annexure A/ 2.After completion of the formalities DRME Rajkot vide his order No. EE/B/ 106 dated 6-5-1988 offfered the appointment to him APP. PWI grade -III in Engineering Department on Rajkot division and advised to attend his office immediately for verification of original certificates etc, execute Agreement and to deposit security deposit etc. and also advised to depute him for training to Zonal Training School, Udaipur from 15-7-1988 to 14-10-1988 , such order of DRM ( E) Rajkot is annexed as Annexure -A/3 . Further case is that on completion of the formalities he was sent for training to Zonal Training School Udaipur vide DRM( E) Rajkot order dated 27-11-1989 for 12 months including field training from 9-1-1990 to 2-4-1990 as per Annexure -A/4 . After completion of the class training , he was directed for field training by Assistant Engineering/ Sabarmati ( MG ), in Reference to Principal Zonal Training School, Udaipur's letter number dated 2-4-1990 and DRM (E) Rajkot No. EE/89/ 15 CAP PWIS dated Nil , he was directed for training under CPWI , Kalol from January 1992 and on completion of the said training he was directedto Principal Zonal Training School , Udaipur for further class training under CPWI, Kalol's letter No. D/ 15 dated 14-3- 1992and DRM (E) Rajkot letters No. EE/1136/ 1 Vol . III dated 18-2-1992. Unfortunately, due to falling sudden sickness he (workman) was late by about 2-1/ 2 months to report to the training School . Further case is that he was quite fresh, inexperienced and being unaware of leave/sick Rulesetc , the Principal Zonal Training School , Udaipur vide his letter No. EE/ 118/ 1 part - V dated 5-6-1992 returned to DRM Rajkot with the advice to send him ( workman ) back for training which was to commence from 2-7-1992 , as per Annexure- A/ 5. Further case is that the DRM Rajkot did not take any action on the aforesaid letter of the Principal Zonal Training School Udaipur for sending him for training to be commenced from 2-7-1992 and the Railway Administration failed either to send him for training or to initiate any action under Disciplinary Rules or Establishment Rules against him .He represented repeatedly to the DRM ( E) Rajkot but of no avail. A representation was made on 8-5-1996 to the GeneralManager Western Railway Church Gate , Mumbai as per Annexure-A/ 6. Subsequently the workman made approach to the General Manager, Western Railway, Church Gate, Mumbai through Shri S.C. Menon, General Secretary, Western Railway Employees Union , Church Gate . Through union's letter dated 12-1-1997 as per Annexure- A/ 7 , then representation was made on 6-4-1998 to General Manager, Western Railway Churchgate , as per Annexure- A/ 8 . Further 6365 भारत का राजपत्र : सितम्बर 3 , 2011 /भाद्र 12 , 1933

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

employee as PWI for his further training and thereafter no regularising him in. the post of PWI is justified or not ?

(II) Whether the second party workman is entitled to the relief as claimed through his statement of claim supported with the documents as per Annexures Ext . 9 series and also as per his affidavited evidence at Ext.17 ?

Point No. I

instruction from DRM Office . Western Railway Rajkot to appear and represent them in the above matter and he under took to file duly signed Vakilatnama on the next date, thereafter on 11-1-2001 Vakilatnama executed in favour of Shri S.S. Shevade Advocate by Divisional Personnel Officer , Western Railway, Rajkot was filed before the Presiding Officerat Labour Court at Ahmedabad in ITC No. 24/2002 . On 10-3-2004 adjournment application was filed by Shri S.S. Shevade , Railway Advocate , but no any written statement was filed on behalf ofthe first party then a notice was also sent from the Tribunal to DRM, Western Railway, Kothi Compound , Rajkot for appearing and for filing the reply- but in spite of that thereafter Shri S.S. Shevade the Railway empanelled lawyer neither appeared in this case nor filed written statement of the 1st party as per under taking. Then a pursis at Ext . 15 was filed by Shri H.C. Pandya, Advocate for the second party requesting to stop stage of filing W. S. by employer not filed since 19-06-2002 and order was passed on 30-11-2009. On this pursis closing the right of the first party filing written statement . So , first party failed to contest this Reference .

(4) The second party workman Shri Babubhai A.

Patel filed his affidavited statement in lieu of examination- in- chief at Ext . 17 dated 19-3-2009 and on the same date also filed a pursis at Ext. 18 for sending copy of affidavit (the evidence of the first party workman) dated 19-3-2009 to DRM Rajkot which was sent to the first party with. With a fresh notice issued to the first party through registered post withA.D. and the affidavited evidence of workman at Ext. 17 with notice . Ext. 19 where received in the officer of the DRM , Western Railway Kothi Compound, Rajkot . The case which was pending in the court of Industrial Tribunal (Central Rajkot ) was received on transfer in this Tribunal and record was put up on 30-12-2010 and fresh notice was issued to the both parties DRM (first party) and the workman Shri Babubhai A. Patel on 11-2-2011 informing them to appear in the Court of Tribunal on 18-3-2011 . The consequent upon issuing of the fresh notice by this Court, thesecond party workman with his lawyer Shri H.C. Pandya appeared on 18-3-2001 and filed an application that the second party has already submitted his evidence through affidavit and the 1st party remained absent throughout , did not file written statement and in spite of receiving a copy ofaffidavited evidence of the second party workman did not appear for his cross - examination and so , making prayer for keeping the record for final order and so the record was kept reserve for award.

(5) Points for consideration and determination are asfollows: -

POINTS

(6) The second party, workman Babubhai A. Patel has supported his claim , also through his affidavited evidence at Ext . 17. His evidences at Ext . 17 remained unchallenged because the first party Western Railway failed to cross - examine him. More so , there is no any pleading of the first party to justify its earlier stand taken before the ALC (Central ) that the workman Babubhai A. Patel is not appointed at any point of time. On the other hand the second party workman has been able to prove through his oral evidence and also through documents as per Ext . 9 series which have been filed in support of his pleadings with statement of claim , it is proved that the workman was appointed as apprentice PWI on compassionate ground through order No. EE/ 890/ 15 Vol ( VIII ) issued from the Divisional Office Rajkot Dated 27-11-1989 . This go to show thatBesides the workman 3 others S.I. No.1 Yogesh P. , S.I. No.2 Kurendra Kumar, S.L.No. 3 present workman and S.L.No. 4 Dasuvendra Kumar were informed on the subject of initially training to Non - gazetted staff- Engineering Department Apprentices PWI/ Mistry. Contents of letter is as follows- " you have already accepted offer of the appointment/ training issued to you earlier. Now you are required to be placed under initial training for apprentice PWI/ IOW/P - Way Mistry commencing at Zonal Training School Udaipur from 3-1-1990 to 8-4-1990. It has also been mentioned that the training period, including field training prescribed for Apprentice PWI and for other post is for 12 months during which you will be paid stipend of Rs . 1400 per month and other allowances as admissible under the rulesand those appointed candidates were asked to fill up agreement on stamp paper, attestation form for verification ofcharacter and antecedent , Certificate of character from two gazetted officers. " From the oral and documentary evidence adduced on behalf of the second party workman , it is proved that he was sent for training to Principal Zonal Training School Udaipur. It is also proved that after completion of class training at Zonal Training School , Udaipur, the workman was directed for field training by Assistant Engineer Sabarmati (MG ) with Reference to Principal Zonal Training School Udaipur. Again the workman was directed for training under CPWI Kalol from January 1992 and after completion of his training he was directed to Principal . Zonal Training School , Udaipur for further class training , thereafter the second party workman who was appointed as apprentice PWI , could not report to Zonal Training School Udaipur in time rather due to his illness he reported two and half months late to training (I ) Whether the action of the Management Divisional Manager Western Railway, Kothi Compound Rajkot in not calling the workman Shri Babubhai A. Patel 6366

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 3 , 2011 /BHADRA 12 , 1933

[ PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii) ]

A. PatelApprentice PWI for his further training and for not regularising in the post ofPWI are unjustified and improper . Point No. II

(8) In view of the findings given to point No.1 that the second party workman is found entitle for his reinstatement as Apprentice PWI and is also entitled that he be sent for completing the training and is also entitled that after completing the training for regularising in the post of PWI . This point is decided in favour of the second partyworkman .

school . So second party workman could not join the training session and the Principal Zonal Training School Udaipur vide his letter No. EE118/ 1 part - V dated 5-6-1992 informedto DRM Western Railway Rajkot and returned to the second party workman appointed App. PWI for sending him back in training which is to commence from 2-7-1992 . It has also been proved that repeated request was made through letters/ representation and also making personal contacts but no any letter was issued to him in view of the letter of Principal Zonal Training School Udaipur for again sending him for further training from 2-7-1992 .

(9) This Reference is allowed . The first party DRM (E) Rajkot , is directed to reinstate the workman Babubhai A. Patel as Apprentice PWI and the first party is further directed to send the workman for completing his part of the training at Zonal Training School Udaipur and further field training if, so required and after completion of the training period, further directed for regularising the workman in the post ofPWI .

No order as to cost .

Sent copies of this Award to the appropriate Governmentfor the needful .

BINAY KUMAR SINHA , Presiding Officer

Date: 15-6-2011 Place: Ahmedabad

नई दिल्ली , 12 अगस्त, 2011

का.आ. 2383.-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में , केन्द्रीय सरकार आकाशवाणी केन्द्र के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच , अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण , नागपुर के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या सीजीआईटी/ एनजीपी/141/2000 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 11-8-2011 को प्राप्त हुआ था।

[सं. एल -42012 / 145/1998 -आईआर ( डी यू) ] जोहन तोपनो , अवर सचिव New Delhi , the 12thAugust , 2011

S.O. 2383.-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/ 141/ 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 Akashwani Kendra and their workmen , which was received by the Central Government on 11-8-2011 .

(7) From the evidences oral and documentary it is proved that the second party workman Shri Babubhai A. Patel was appointed on compassionate ground as Apprentice PWI by the first party Railway Management and he also joined training in the Zonal Training School Udaipur where he received the training and then he also joined a field training at Sabarmati and Kalol and again he was directed to join training at Zonal Training School Udaipur, but due to his illness he could not join the training School session, rather reported late and since the training session was going on . So , he was not permitted to join the training session in the midst rather so , advise for further training from the training session starting 2-7-1992 and in this regard DRM ( E) Rajkot was also informed by the Principal through letter but thereafter the first party did not perform its part by issuing another letter directing second party workman to go and join the Zonal Training School Udaipur for completing the period of Apprentice , rather completely slept over the matter by the first party. The second party workman could not be able to complete his full training for his regularising on the post of PWI since he was appointed as Apprentice PWI getting stipend of Rs . 1400+ other permissible allowances as per letter of appointment . So , the action of the Management of Divisional Railway Manager, Western Railway, Kothi Compound , Rajkot in not calling the workman Shri Babubhai A. Patel for his further training even after his appointment as Apprentice PWI is quite unjust and improper. The completion of the total training was essential for regularising the second party workman , even though the workman failed to complete last part of one years training and so his ragularisation was to be deferred by the first party unless until the period of training is completed. So, in this regard , the action of the first party workman is not sending him for completing the training period from 2-7-1992 as per advice of the Principal , Zonal Training School , Udaipur was quite uncalled for and unjustified for debarring the second party workman for his appointment on regular basis on the post of PWI after his initial appointment as Apprentice PWI . This point is decided against the first party workman and it is held that the action ofthe firstparty in not calling the workman Shri Babubhai

[No. L-42012/ 145/1998 - IR ( DU) ] JOHAN TOPNO , Under Secy.

6367 भारत का राजपत्र सितम्बर 3 , 2011 /भाद्र -12 , 1933

| आग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii) ]

ANNEXURE

BEFORE SHRI J.P. CHAND, PRESIDING OFFICER CGIT-CUM-LABOUR COURT, NAGPUR

CaseNo.CGIT/NGP / 141 / 2000

Date: 29-7-2011 .

Party No.1

he Station Director,

Akashwani Kendra , Civil Lines , handrapur ( M.S. )442401

Versus

Party No.2

unblemished and no memo in respect of her work was issued by the partparty no. 1 and she worked continuously since March 1994 till the date of her termination , without having any break and she worked for more than 240 days with the party no . 1 , in the preceding year of the date of her termination and the mandatory provisions of the Act were not complied with , before termination of her services and as such , the termination of her services is illegal and arbitrary and she was neither given one month's notice nor paid salary in lieu of notice and retrenchment compensation , before termination of her service and the party no.1 also did not prepare and publish seniority list and appointed juniors in her place and thus violated the provisions of Sections 25 - F and section 25 -G of the Act . The workman has prayed for her reinstatement in services with full back wages and continuity in service .

Ku . Vina D/ o . Devidas Danav, Binba Ward no . 43 , Binbagate , handrapur , Distt. Chandrapur

AWARD

(Dated: 29th July, 2011 )

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 had referred the industrial lispute between the employers , in relation to the nanagement of the Akashwani Kendra and their workman , u. Vina D/ o Devidas Danav to Central Government Industrial Tribunal - cum- Labour Court Jabalpur for djudication , as per letter No.L- 42012/145 /98 - IR ( DU) dated 30-11-1998 , with the following schedule:-

"Whether the action of the Station Director , Akashwani Kendra , Chandrapur in terminating the services of Ku . Vina D/ o . Sh . Devidas Danav is legal and justified ? If not , to what relief the workman is entitled?"

3. The party no.1 in its written statement has pleaded inter - alia that the workman was engaged on assignment basis to assist in library and typing work in March 1994 and she was being paid Rs . 600 per month on hand receipt and the payment was increased to Rs . 800 per month from 1-9-1996 and the services of the workman was not terminated arbitrarily w.e.f. 16-9-1997 and as she was engaged purely as casual labour on assignment basis depending uponthe requirement of the office and she was not a regular employee , she was discontinued from service w.e.f. 12-9-1997 (mentioned in W.S. ) , as her services were no more required. It is further pleaded by the party no . 1 that there was no question of adverse entry in the record ofthe workman or issuing ofmemo against her, as she was not a regular employee and she was engaged as per the requirement of the office and the details of the payment made to her is given in the separate sheet attached to the written statement and as she was engaged as a casual labour on assignment basis , there was no question of giving one month's notice or salary in lieu of notice and no employment is available with it and no muster roll was maintained in respect of the workman and as such , the workman is not entitled for any relief.

Subsequently, the reference was transferred to this Tribunal for disposal in accordance with law.

2. On receipt of the reference , parties were noticed to file their respective statement of claim and written statement , in response to which, the workman , Ku . Vina Danav ( " the workman " in short ) filed the statement of claim and the management of the Akashwani Kendra ( " the Party No.1 " in short ) filed the written statement.

4. It is necessary to mention here that in this case on 2-8-2000 an award was passed against the workman by thisTribunal , holding that the action of the Station Director, Akashwani Kendra Chandrapur in terminating the services of Ku . Vina D/ o . Sh . Devidas Danav is legal and justified and she is not entitled to any relief. The workman challenged the said award before the Hon'ble High Court of Judicature atBombay, Nagpur Bench in WP no . 2370 of 2001 and the Hon'ble Court vide order dated 7-10-2006 was pleased to quash and set aside the award dated 2-8-2000 andto remand back the case for consideration of the same a - fresh in accordance with law.

5. It is also necessary here to mention that from 20-8-2008 the management did not appear in the case to contest the same .

The case of the workman as projected in the statement of claim is that she was appointed by party no . 1 in March 1994 and was entrusted with the work of typing and library on casual basis and she was being paid Rs . 600 per month on hand receipt and in the year 1996 she was being paid fortnightly and her salary was enhanced to Rs . 800 per month from 1-1-1996 and the party no.1 terminated her service orally on 16-9-1997 and during the entire period of her service , her record was clean and

3202 GI /11-23 6368

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 3 , 2011 /BHADRA 12, 1933

[ PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii ) ]

of an employee was found to be illegal , the relief of reinstatement with full back wages would ordinarily follow. However, in recent past there has been a shift in the legal position and in a long line of cases , this court has consistently taken the view that relief by way reinstatement with back wages is not automatic and maybe wholly inappropriate in a given fact situation even though the termination of an employee is in contravention of the prescribed procedure . Compensation instead of reinstatement has been held to meet the ends of justice " .

6. At the time of argument , it was submitted by the learned advocate for the workman that the management was directed to produce the muster roll of the workman as per order dated 11-9-2008 but the management did not produce the said document and as such , adverse inference has to be drawn against the management and as it is clear from the materials on record that the workman had completed more than 240 days of work during a period of 12 calendar months , preceding the date of termination, the termination of the services of the workman without compliance ofthe mandatory provisions ofthe Act is illegal and the workman is entitled for reinstatement in service with continuity and full back wages. In support of such contentions , reliance was placed on the decisions reported in 2007(2) SLR- 619 (Divisional Engineer Telecom BSNL Vs. Presiding Officer CGIT) and AIR 1966 SC - 75 ( Employers in relation to Digwadih Colliery Vs. the Workman) .

Keeping in view the principles enunciated in the two decisions by the Hon'ble Courts , as mentioned above , the present case at hand is to be considered.

In this case , admittedly the workman was engaged on casual basis and she was a temporary employee . It is also pleaded by the party no.1 that there is no vacancy of any post at present . So applying the principled enunciated by the Hon'ble Apex courts and taking into the consideration the entire facts and the circumstance of the case, I think that the relief of reinstatement is not justified and instead monitory compensation would meet the ends ofjustice. In my considered opinion , the compensation of Rs . 15,000 (Rupees fifteen thousand ) in lieu of reinstatement shall be appropriate , just and equitable. Hence it is ordered;

ORDER

The action of the Station Director , Akashwani Kendra , Chandrapur in terminating the services of Ku . Vina D/o . She Devidas Danav is not legal and justified . The workman isentitled for monitory compensation of Rs . 15,000 (Rupees fifteen thousand) in lieu of reinstatement . The party no . 1 isdirected to pay the compensation amount of Rs . 15,000 within one month from the date of notification of the award inthe officialGazette .

J. P. CHAND , Presiding Officer नई दिल्ली , 12 अगस्त, 2011 7. In this case, though the management has pleaded thatthe workman was engaged as a casual labour on assign ment basis , from the pleadings of the parties and the list furnished by the management along with the written statement regarding the days of work performed by the workman and other materials on record , it is found that the workman had worked for more than 240 days in the preceding 12 months from the date ofher termination . Hence the termination of the services of the workman amounts to retrenchment , in view of the definition given in section 2( oo) of the Act . It is also found that before termination of the services ofthe workman, the mandatory provisions the Section 25- F of the Act regarding one month's notice or payment of one month's wages in lieu of notice and retrenchment compensation were not complied with. Hence the retrenchment of the workman by party no . 1 is illegal . In view of such findings , there is no need to draw adverse inference against the party no.1 for non -production ofthe documents.

का.आ. 2384.-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 (1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार रीजनल फीड अनालेयटिकल लैबोरेटरी के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच , अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण भुवनेश्वर के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 171/2001 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 11-8-2011 को प्राप्त हुआ था।

[ सं. एल-42012/32/98-आईआर ( डी.यू. ) ] जोहन तोपनो , अवर सचिव 8. There is no evidence on record to come to a conclusion that any junior to the workman was engaged bythe party no. 1 in her place , in violation of Sections 25 -G and 25 -H of the Act . There is also neither any pleading nor any evidence on record to show that the workman was not gainfully employed from the date of termination. Hence is no question of payment of any back wages .

New Delhi , the 12th August , 2011 9. The only question for consideration is as to whether the workman in entitled for reinstatement in service. In this regard, I think it appropos to mention here the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in this regard as reported in 2010( 8 ) Scales ( In charge officer and another Vs. Shankar Shetty) . The Hon'ble court have held that, " It is true that the earlier view of this court articulated in many decisions reflected the legal position that if the termination

S.O. 2384.-In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the Award ( Ref. No.171 /2001 ) ofthe Central Government Industrial Tribunal- cum - Labour Court, Bhubaneswar as shown in the Annexure in the industrial dispute between the employers in relation to the management of Regional Feed Analytical Laboratory and 6369 भारत का राजपत्र : सितम्बर 3 , 2011 / भाद्र 12 , 1933

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

their workmen, which was received by the Central Government on 11-8-2011 .

[No. L-42012/32/ 1998 - IR (DU)]

JOHAN TOPNO , Under Secy.

ANNEXURE

CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL - CUM - LABOUR COURT

BHUBANESWAR

Present:

Shri J. Srivastava ,

Presiding Officer , C.G I.T. - cum- Labour Court , Bhubaneswar.

Tr. INDUSTRIAL DISPUTE CASE NO . 171/2001

Date of Passing Award - 29th July. 2011

Between:

TheManagement of the Nutritionist , Regional Feed Analytical Laboratory, Po . Nayapalli , Bhubaneswar - 751 012 , Distt . - Khurda.

itwas raised to Rs . 30 from June , 1997. He was engaged in various jobs including the job of night watchman . During his tenure of service he discharged all his duties most efficiently and diligently. He approached the 1st Party- Management several times to regularize his service but instead of regularizing his service he was refused employment with effect from 1-8-1997 without any prior notice or payment of compensation. He had continuously worked during the above period under the 1st Party- Management without any interruption and received his wagesdirectly from the Management every fortnightly by signing cash vouchers . Thus he completed one year of continuous service as provided under section 25 -B of the Industrial Disputes Act. As such he is entitled to get the compensation under Section 25 - F of the Industrial Disputes Act. The principle of natural justice has not been followed by the 1st Party- Management before termination of his service . Refusal to employment amounts to retrenchment as defined under section 2(00 ) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. Thus his termination is arbitrary, malafide and also violative of the provisions of Section 25 - H of thelndustrial Disputes Act and he is entitled to reinstatement with full back wages .

... 1st Party- Management .

(And)

Their workman Shri Jagadish Digal , C/o. Sudam Ch. Naik , Qrs . No. Type 1/17 , Ctl. Poultry Complex , Nayapalli , Bhubaneswar- 751012 .

2nd Party- Workman.

APPEARANCES :

... For the 1 st Party-Management.

M/ s . J.K. Nayak, Advocate .

... For the 2nd Party-Workman.

M/ s . S. Mishra , Advocate.

AWARD

In a reference of an industrial dispute between the employers in relation to the management of Nutritionist, Regional Feed Analytical Laboratory and their workman made by the Government of India in the Ministry of Labour vide their letter No. L-42012/32/98 - IR (DU) , dated 11-6-1998 , following dispute has come up for adjudication:

3. The 1st Party- Management has alleged in its written statement that it is not an " industry " and the Industrial Disputes Act does not apply to it . The 2nd Party -workman was a contract worker and no "employer - employee" relationship exists between them. He was engaged on contract basis to perform miscellaneous work whenever work of miscellaneous nature existed . He was not refused work so long as the work existed and he was accepting the contractual agreement . The 1st Party-Management had engaged M/ s . Anil Security Services , Bhubaneswar for security of its organization. The 2nd Party -workman was an employce of M/s . Anil Security Services , Bhubaneswar. He was getting his regular salary from the security organization . Besides that, he had also performed part time contract job for miscellaneous work while he was in full time employment of M/ s . Anil Security Services , Bhubaneswar. He was never appointed by the 1st Party-Management. It is false to allege that the 2nd Party -workman had joined his duties on 1-12-1995 and hissalary was increased from Rs . 25 to Rs . 30 per day. The piece-meal nature of occasional miscellaneous work of the office was offered to him as and when required subject to "Whether the action of the management of Regional FeedAnalytical Laboratory, Bhubaneswar in refusing workto Shri Digal is lawful and justified ? If not, to what reliefthe workman is entitled to ? "

availability of contingent funds . Even as a contract worker he has not completed 240 days of continues service in a year. He had never worked against any vacant post nor he was appointed as a casual labourer in this organization. Hence the question of appointment and retrenchment does not arise at all and the case is liable to be dismissed with cost.

4. On the pleadings of the parties following issues wereframed:

2. In pursuance of the order of reference the 2nd Party- workman filed his statement of claim and stated that he was engaged by the 1st Party - Management on his application on daily wage basis . He joined his duties on 1-12-1995 . He was initially given daily wages of Rs . 25 but 6370

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 3 , 2011 / BHADRA 12 , 1933

PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii) ] ISSUES

Services from 7-12-1996 to 23-8-1997 with certain breaks 1. Whether the action of the Management of Regional Feed Analytical Laboratory, Bhubaneswar inrefusing work to Shri Digal is lawful and justified ?

2. If not , to what relief the workman is entitled to ?

5. The 2nd Party - workman Shri Jagadish Digal has examined himself as W. W. - 1 and proved documents marked as Ext. - 1 to Ext. -4.

The 1st Party-Management has also examined one witness namely Shri Sarat Kumar Panda as M.W. - 1 and proved documents marked as Ext . - A to Ext.-J.

FINDINGS

ISSUE NO . 1

6. From the admitted facts of the case and evidence ledby the parties it comes out that the 2nd Party - workman had worked with the 1st Party - Management in dual capacity. He was first engaged as a casual worker to perform miscellaneous office work on contract basis from December, 1995 to June, 1997 and from December, 1996 to July / August , 1997 he worked with the 1st Party - Management under the contractor, M/ s . Anil Security Services . Ext . - F filed by the 1stParty-Management is the application of the 2nd Party- workman addressed to the 1st Party - Management expressing consent to perform duty of miscellaneous office work on contract basis on the conditions given in the application itself. The 2nd Party - workman has filed the copy ofthe written reply of the 1st Party - Management to the dispute raised by the 2nd Party - workman before the Assistant Labour Commissioner ( Central ) , Bhubaneswar which has been marked as Ext . - 2 . This document along with its enclosure has been admitted by M. W. - 1 Shri S.K. Panda in his cross examination by stating that " it is also a fact that the said document ( Ext . - 2 ) was filed along with an annexure detailing therein the payments made to the workman and the days on which he was engaged . The amounts shown in the annexure of Ext . - 2 were paid to the workmanbut not toM/ s .Anil Security Agency" . This means that the 2nd Party- workman had worked under the 1st Party-Management for miscellaneous office work on contract basis with a charge of Rs . 325 per fortnight. The term" contract basis " , to my mind does not mean that the 2nd Party-workman had worked under the contractor but had undertaken the work personally on a fixed fortnightly charges .Apparently, he was under the direct employment ofthe 1st Party -Management and not under any contractor. Ext. - 2 shows that the 2nd Party - workman had worked in each fortnight , excepting one fortnight in the month of April, 1996 and two fortnights each in the months of August and September, 1996 , continuously from December , 1995 to December , 1996 and then in each fortnight in the months of April to June , 1997. He had also perfomed the work of security guard under the security agency M / s . Anil Security

and absence as is revealed from Ext . - II filed by the Ist Party-Management. These two documents i.e. Ext . - 2 and Ext . -H disclose that the 2nd Party - workman had worked for certain common period in dual capacity as casual worker directly under the 1st Party- Management and as a contract worker under M/ s . Anil Security Services . M.W. - l has himself admitted that the workman was working under M/s . Anil Security service during the period from 1996 to 1997. Earlier to it he has also admitted that " at times the said security agency used to deploy the workman to provide security services to the establishment of REAL .. During those days the workman used to undertake miscellaneous work as per his under laking given under Ext.-F. The workman used to attend to our work in his leisurely hours as per his convenience " . This reflects that during the period from December, 1996 to June , 1997 the 2nd Party- workman simultaneously performed the work of security guard under M/s . Anil Security Services and also as a casual worker doing miscellaneous work under the direct employment of the 1st Party -Management . As a casual worker he thus constituted the relationship of employer and employee with the 1st Party -Management . Now it has to be seen whether the 2nd Party - workman as a casual worker has completed one year's continuous service under the Ist Party- Management from the date preceding cessation of his employment . This can be easily calculated from Annexure- II ofExt. - 2 which is an admitted document . The 2nd Party- workman has stated in his examination- in- chief that he was refused employment on 31-7-1997 , but in his cross examination he has mentioned different date of cessation ofhis employment by saying that " I was not assigned with anyjob contract with effect from 1-7-1997 " . The aforesaid Annexure- II also shows that last payment to the 2nd Party- workman was made on 1-7-1997 for the second fortnight of June , 1997. Therefore we have to calculate the period of service extending to 240 days from 1-7-1997 in the reverse direction and a period commencing from July, 1996 to June , 1997 has to be taken into account . During this period the 2nd Party -workman has not been shown to have worked for the months of August and September, 1996 and January, February & March , 1997 in Annexure - II . The 2nd Party- workman has also filed certain copies of bills for contract work marked as Ext. - 1 and Ext. - 1/ 1 to Ext. - 1 / 13 , but any of the above bills does not relate to the month of August & September , 1996 and January , February & March , 1997 . The 2nd Party - workman has not led any other documentary evidence to show and prove that he had worked for the aforesaid months also as a casual worker under the 1st Party -Management . Taking together the aforesaid period ofservice rendered by the 2nd party - workman as a casual worker it comes to a maximum of 2 10 days whereas under section 25- B one year's continuous service means 240 days service during a period of twelve calendar months preceding the date of cessation of employment . Therefore the 2nd Party - workman is not entitled to get any benefit 6371 भारत का राजपत्र सितम्बर 3 , 2011 /भाद्र 12 , 1933

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 (ii ) ]

And

The Principal , Jawahar Navodaya Vidyalaya , Village & Post Paigaon , Mathura.

AWARD

under Section 25 - F of Industrial Disputes Act and the 1st Party -Management is not obliged to give him any notice in writing indicating the reasons for his retrenchment or pay compensation in lieu thereof or for the service rendered by him. In these circumstances it cannot be held that the action ofthe Management ofRegional Feed Analytical Laboratory, Bhubaneswar in , refusing work to Shri Digal was unlawful and unjustified. This issue thus is decided against the 2nd Party-workman and in favour ofthe 1st Party - Management .

ISSUE NO. IП

1. Central Government Mol . New Delhi vide notification No. L-42012/ 169/99 - IR (DU) dated 21-12-99 has referred the following dispute for adjudication to this tribunal.

7. In view of the findings recorded in Issue No.1 , the 2nd Party- workman is not entitled to any relief whatsoever claimed.

Dictated and corected by me .

2. Whether the action of the Principal Jawahar Navodaya Vidayala Paigaon , Mathura in terminating the services of Shri Bhullan Singh with effect from 1-5-95 is legal and justified ? If not to what relief is entitled ?

J. SRIVASTAVA, Presiding Officer

नई दिल्ली , 12 अगस्त, 2011

3. At the outset it may be pointed out that the claimant Sri Bhullan Singh died during the pendency of the case and in his place his wife Smt . Chanda Devi was permitted to be substituted in place of the claimant by orderdated 9-12-2010.

का.आ. 2385.-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 औद्योगिक अधिकरण , कानपुर के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 1/2000 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 11-8-2011 को प्राप्त हुआ था।

[सं. एल -42012/169/1999- आईआर ( डी यू) ]

जोहन तोपनो, अवर सचिव New Delhi , the 12th August, 2011

S.O. 2385. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 (14 of 1947 ) , the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 1/2000) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal - cum- Labour Court , Kanpur as shown in the Annexure in the industrial dispute between the employers in relation to the management ofJawahar Navodaya Vidyalaya and their workmen , which was received by the Central Government on 11-8-2011 .

[No. L-42012/169 / 1999 - IR (DU) ]

JOHAN TOPNO , Under Secy .

ANNEXURE

BEFORE SRI RAM PARKASH, HJS , PRESIDING OFFICER, CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL -CUM -LABOR COURT, KANPUR

4. Briefly stated facts of the case as set by the deceased claimant in his statement of claim is that he was in continuous employment under the opposite party with effect from 2-7-92 Mess Helper/ Generator Operator and electrical labour. A settlement dated 6-2-95 was arrived at between the contesting parties before ALC Mathura in which it was admitted by the claimant that he was under the employment of the opposite party at the above post . It is alleged by the claimant that the opposite party on 1-5-95 dispensed with the services of the claimant without any cogent reasons . It is stated that the claimant was being paid his wages through Punjab & Singh Bank Paigaon District Mathura through his account no . 1424. There . was never any complaint of misconduct against the claimant . The case of the claimant is also that the opposite party before engaging him has predetermined to determine his services . It is stated that the claimant was in continuous service of the opposite party till 30-4-95 . He was not paid his wages for the month of March 95 and April 95 by the opposite party on the alleged date of termination of his services . In this connection it is also stated by the claimant that an order had already been passed by the Prescribed Authority under the Payment of Wage Act and orders thereof are already in possession of the opposite party . It is stated that despite efforts made by the claimant he could not get anyjob . It is stated that juniors to the claimant are still in the employment of the opposite party.

Industrial Dispute No. 1/2000

Between-

Sri Bhullan Singh , deceased through Legal heir Smt. Chanda Devi ) S/o Sh . Dhanira , Village Jatwari ,

PO Jatwari ,

5.Opposite party has filed the reply where in it has been alleged by them that the opposite party is not an Industry under Section 2 (j ) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. The educational institution is being run without anyprofit motto at the cost of the government for the poor students through MHRD , New Delhi . No fees etc. , is being District Mathura .

6372

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : SEPTEMBER 3 , 2011 /BHADRA 12 , 1933

[ PART II- SEC. 3 ( ii) ] taken from the students . No cause of action had ever risen to the claimant on 1-5-95.

a case for payment of wages before the prescribed authority under the Payment of Wages Act which was allowed against the opposite party but opposite party has contended that there is stay of the operation of the impugned order passed by the Hon'ble High Court . I have gone through the order respectfully.

6. It is alleged by them that the claimant was not working on any regular post. There was no such permanent post against which the applicant had alleged to have worked . Claimant was engaged as a part time worker according to the availability if the work. It is also stated that the claimant had worked on work need basis as casual labour and he was being paid his wages at completion of work and his services stood terminated on each and every day. He was never given any appointment letter and he was not engaged or employed after following the prescribed procedure . It is also stated that the claimant was working as a permanent employee in PSGIF Private Limited since 01-12-91 to 26-6-96 . He use to get his salary from there . He was never removed by any officer on 1-5-95 , but the claimant himself did not come for work after 25-4-95 so the question of removing him does not arise . His work and conduct was not satisfactory. Accordingly it has been alleged that the claim of the claimant is beyond the scope and ambit of the provisions of Industrial Disputes Act , hence is liable to be rejected.

7. Both the parties have filed the documentary evidence .

8. Claimant has adduced oral evidence . He produced himself as W.W.1 Bhullan Singh. Opposite party has not produced any oral evidence in support of their pleadings .

12. The contention of the opposite party that he was engaged as a part time casual worker according to the availability of the work has not been supported by any oral or documentary evidence ; therefore , these contentions does not carry any weight . Claimant has also drawn my attention towards the documents which he had filed and I have gone through these papers . Much stress has been emphasized on paper no.15/ 12 which a compromise in between the parties which took place before the AL.C Mathura. This paper has also been filed by the opposite party. In this settlement it is provided that the opposite party is ready to take the claimant in their service as daily rated employee and he will be getting the benefits as were received by him previously. It is mentioned that whenever there is any vacancy of generator operator/ electrician or mess helper the opposite party will consider the case of the workman sympathetically. It is also mentioned that after hisengagement on 31-8-94 the workman will not claim for his back wages for the period for which he did not perform hisduties . Therefore , this conciliation memorandum is admissible in evidence . Opposite party has not been able to contradict these facts .

9. Heard and perused the record.

10. Claimant has stated on oath that he has filed a claim statement and whatever is written therein is true . He has filed 10 documents which are photocopies of the original and are true and these are Ext . W.1 to W.10 .

13. From the facts and circumstances of the case it has been established and revealed that Sri Bhullan now deceased has been engaged as mess helper/generator operator since 2-7-92 and he worked there continuously and was removed from 1-5-95 . It is also found that he has completed 240 days and more continuously since the date of termination . It is also found that he was not issued any appointment letter and he was not appointed by following the prescribed procedure , there was no such sanctioned post .

11. He has been thoroughly cross examined. He has stated in his claim statement that he was engaged on 2-7-92 Mcss Helper/ Operator/Electrician and his services were terminated on 1-5-95 . He has been thoroughly cross examined on this point . But nothing has come out which makes his statement unbelivable . Suggestion was given to him that he did not work continuously which was denied . There is one more contention of the opposite party that during this period from 1-12-91 to 26-6-96 he was employed as a fulltime worker in M/ s . PSGIF Pvt . Limited Nandgaon Mathura which was totally denied by the claimant . Opposite party has not given any evidence contradicting the statement of the claimant ? If the opposite party was of a firm view that he was a permanent employee of the aforesaid firm and PI was also deducted then they could have casily summoned the record of that company but they did not filed any cogent evidence in this respect . There is one more contention of the opposite party that the claimant has left the work of his own accord on 25-4-95 , this suggestion or contention has also been denied by the claimant . It is also prayed by the claimant that he has filed

14. Now I have to see whether any right has accrued to him under section 25F of the Act . The Act does make any difference between casual labours or permanent employees . It is a social legislation . The intention of the legislation is to protect the interest of the labour class also; therefore , in my view a right has accrued to the deceased wokmen under section 251 or the Act . It has also been found that the opposite party has not complied with the provisions of Section 25F at the time of dispensation with the service of the workman . Thus they have breached the provisions of Section 25F of the Act in as much he has neither been paid any notice or notice pay or retrenchment compensation by the opposite party. therefore , it is held that the termination of the services of the claimant was neither legal nor justified.

6373 भारत का राजपत्र : सितम्बर 3 , 2011 / भाद्र 12 , 1933

[ भाग II- खण्ड 3 ( ii ) ]

15. The contention of the opposite party is that the institution is being under the Society Registration Act and there is no profit motive , no fees are being charged from the students . They are provided free accommodation etc. The claimant has opposed all these things .

commercial, for the production and the distribution of goods and service calculated to satisfy human wants and wishes (notspiritual or religious ) but inclusive of material things or services gear to celestial bliss that is making on a large scale but Prasad or food, prima facie , there is an industry in thatenterprises .Absence ofprofit motive or gain objective is irrelevant , both venture in the public joint private of other sector . The true focus in functional and decisive test is the nature of the activity viz . special emphasizes on the employer and employee relation . I have respectfully gone through the principle laid down by the Hon'ble supreme Court.

16. First of all I would like to say that this is a matter which requires to be probed on certain evidence. Opposite party has not adduced any evidence in this regard therefore , the contention of the opposite party in this regard is jected . If the opposite party might have produced some vidence the claimant side may have an opportunity to cross -examine the witness and the real facts might have come before the court .

18. Therefore , considering the facts and circumstances of the case it cannot be said that the opposite party is not an industry. Therefore , the contention of the opposite party is rejected on this point .

19. From the discussion made above , reinstatement of the workman is not possible . But the same time the benefits accruing to him on the grounds of illegal termination d his services , his wife is held to be entitled to receive the same from the opposite party.

20. Referance is therefore , answered in favour of the workman and against the opposite party.

RAM PARKASH, Presiding Officer 17. Opposite party has placed reliance upon a decision 2001 ( 91 ) FLR 176 Rajasthan High Court Anil Kumar Sharma and District Workmen Development Agency Vanbara and others . Whereas claimant side has placed reliance upon a decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of The Bangalore Water Supply and Sewerage Board versus A Rajjappa and others 1978. Lab IC page 447. In this case the Hon'ble Supreme court has laid down certain tests to conclude whether any department comes within the purview of Industry. The Hon'ble Court has held systematic activity, organized by cooperation between employer and employee , the direct and substantial element

Printed by the Manager , Government of India Press , Ring Road , Mayapuri , New Delhi - 110004 and Published by the Controller of Publications , Delhi - 110054 .