REGD . NO . D. L. ( N ) 04/0007 /2003-05 रजिस्ट्री सं. डी. एल. ( एन.) 04/0007/2003-05
भारतको राजपत्र The Gazette of India
प्राधिकार से प्रकाशित
PUBLISHED BY AUTHORITY
साप्ताहिक
WEEKLY
नई दिल्ली, फरवरी 12 फरवरी 18 , 2012 , शनिवार/माघ 23 माघ 29 , 1933
सं. 7 ]
No. 7 ] NEW DELHI , FEBRUARY 12- FEBRUARY 18 , 2012, SATURDAY/MAGHA 23- MAGHA 29, 1933
1 इस भाग में भिन्न पृष्ठ संख्या दी जाती है जिससे कि यह पृथक संकलन के रूप में रखा जा सके । Separate Paging is given to this Part in order that it may be filed as a separate compilation .
भाग II-खण्ड -उप-खण्ड ( ii) PART II-Section 3-Sub- section (ii )
1 भारत सरकार के मंत्रालयों ( रक्षा मंत्रालय को छोड़कर ) द्वारा जारी किए गए सांविधिक आदेश और अधिसूचनाएं Statutory Orders and Notifications Issued by the Ministries of the Government of India (Other than the Ministry of Defence)
कार्मिक , लोक शिकायत एवं पेंशन मंत्रालय
1
(कार्मिक एवं प्रशिक्षण विभाग )
नई दिल्ली, 31 जनवरी , 2012
का. आ . 601.-केन्द्रीय सरकार आतंकवादी और विघटनकारी गतिविधि ( निवारण ) अधिनियम 1987 ( 1987 काअधिनियम संख्या 28 ) की धारा 13 की उप- धारा ( 1 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए उक्त अधिनियम के अन्तर्गत मणिपुर राज्य में उपरोक्त अधिनियम की धारा 9 के अन्तर्गत गठित नामित न्यायालय , इम्फाल में दिल्ली विशेष पुलिस संगठन द्वारा जांच किए गए मामला संख्या आर सी 2( एस)/89/एसआईयू- V/एसआईसी- II/एसपीई/नई दिल्ली [ एफआईआर 152 ( 4 )/89 थाना इम्फाल ( कुमारी वंदना मलिक तथा अन्य हत्याकांड ) और उससे जुड़े अथवा उसके साथ घटित अन्य मामलों को संचालित करने के लिए एतद्वारा श्री पी. इबोमचा सिंह , अधिवक्ता को गठित नामित न्यायालय में विशेष लोक अभियोजक के रूप में नियुक्त करती है ।
[फा. सं. 225/4/2012- ए.वी.डी. - 11 ]
राजीव जैन, अवर सचिव
(1301)
367 GI/2012 1302
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 18 , 2012/MAGHA 29 , 1933
[PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii )]
MINISTRY OF PERSONNEL, PUBLIC GRIEVANCES AND PENSIONS
(Department of Personnel and Training)
New Delhi , the 31st January, 2012
S.O. 601.- In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section ( 1 ) of Section 13 of the Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention ) Act, 1987 (Act No. 28 of 1987) , the Central Government hereby appoints Shri P. Ibomcha Singh, Advocate as Special Public Prosecutor for conducting trial of RC- 2 ( S )/89 - SIU. V/CBI/ SPE/New Delhi (Murder of MsVandanaMalik and others) in the Designated Court at Imphal (Manipur ) constituted under the provisions of Section 9 oftheTerrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention ) Act , 1987 and Appeals/Revisions in Appellate/Revisional Court and any other matter connected therewith or incidental thereto.
[F. No. 225/ 4/2012-AVD - II ] RAJIV JAIN, Under Secy.
नई दिल्ली, 6 फरवरी , 2012
का. आ. 602.- केन्द्रीय सरकार एतद्वारा दिल्ली विशेष पुलिस स्थापना अधिनियम , 1946 ( 1946 का अधिनियम सं. 25 ) की धारा 6 के साथ पठित धारा 5 की उपधारा ( 1 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए गोवा राज्य सरकार, गृह विभाग ( सामान्य) , सचिवालय, पोरवोरिम की दिनांक 28-10-2011 की अधिसूचना सं. 2/ 107/2011 /एचडी ( जी ) द्वारा प्राप्त सहमति से श्रीमती अर्चना देसाई के लापता होने के संबंध में भारतीय दंड संहिता , 1860 ( 1860 का अधिनियम सं. 45 ) की धारा 498- ए, 342 और 323 के अधीन पुलिस स्टेशन-मारगांव ( गोवा ) में दर्ज अपराध सं. 203/2011 का तथा उपर्युक्त अपराधों के सम्बन्ध में प्रयास , दुष्प्रेरण तथा षडयंत्र अथवा उन्ही तथ्यों से उद्भूत किसी अन्य अपराध/अपराधों का अन्वेषण करने के सम्बन्ध में दिल्ली विशेष पुलिस स्थापना के सदस्यों की शक्तियों और क्षेत्राधिकार का विस्तार सम्पूर्ण गोवा राज्य के सम्बन्ध में करती है ।
[फा. सं. 228/07/2012- एवीडी- II ]
राजीव जैन , अवर सचिव
New Delhi , the 6th February, 2012
S.O. 602. In exercise of the powers conferred by sub - section ( 1 ) of Section 5, read with Section 6 of the Delhi Special Police Establishment Act, 1946 (Act No. 25 of 1946) , the Central Government with the consent of the State Government ofGoa, Home Department ( General ) , Secretariat, Porvorim, vide Notification No. 2 / 107 /2011 - HD ( G) dated 28-10-2011 . hereby extends the powers and jurisdiction of the members of the Delhi Special Police Establishment to the whole of the State ofGoa for investigation of Crime No. 203/2011 under Sections 498-A, 342 and 323 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (Act No. 45 of 1860) registered at Police Station Margao ( Goa) relating to missing of Mrs. Archana Desai and attempt, abetment and conspiracy in relation to or in connection with the above mentioned offence and any other offence /offences committed in the course of the same transaction or arising out of the same facts.
[F. No. 228/07/2012- AVD- II ] RAJIV JAIN , Under Secy.
नई दिल्ली, 6 फरवरी , 2012
का. आ. 603.-केन्द्रीय सरकार एतद्वारा दिल्ली विशेष पुलिस स्थापना अधिनियम , 1946 ( 1946 का अधिनियम सं. 25 ) की धारा 6 के साथ पठित धारा 5 की उपधारा ( 1 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए महाराष्ट्र राज्य सरकार , गृह विभाग की दिनांक 19-10-2011 की अधिसूचना सं. 1109/सीआर-218/पोल-12 द्वारा प्राप्त सहमति से सिनेफ्रा इंजीनियरिंग एंड कंस्ट्रक्शन कंपनी , पूणे में दुर्विनियोग के संबंध में पुलिस स्टेशन- बूंद गार्डन , पुणे ( महाराष्ट्र ) में दर्ज सीआर सं. 387/2009 का तथा उपर्युक्त अपराधों के सम्बन्ध में प्रयास, दुष्प्रेरण तथा षडयंत्र अथवा उन्ही तथ्यों से उद्भूत किसी अन्य अपराध/अपराधों का अन्वेषण करने के सम्बन्ध में दिल्ली विशेष पुलिस स्थापना के सदस्यों की शक्तियों और क्षेत्राधिकार का विस्तार सम्पूर्ण महाराष्ट्र राज्य के सम्बन्ध में करती है ।
[फा. सं. 228/8/2012- एवीडी- II ]
राजीव जैन , अवर सचिव 1303 भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 18 , 2012/माघ 29 , 1933
[ भाग II- खंड 3 ( ii) ]
New Delhi , the 6th February, 2012
S.O. 603. In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section ( 1 ) of Section 5 read with Section 6 of the Delhi Special PoliceEstablishment Act, 1946 (Act No. 25 of 1946) , the Central Government with the consent ofthe State Government ofMaharashtra, Home Department vide Notification No. CII 1109/CR- 218/POL- 12 dated 19-10-2011 , extends the powers and jurisdiction ofthe members ofthe Delhi Special Police Establishment to the whole of the State of Maharashtra for investigation ofC.R. No. 387/2009 registered at Police Station Bund Garden, Pune (Maharashtra) relating to misappropriation in Synefra Engg. and Construction Co. Pune and attempt , abetment and conspiracy in relation to or in connection with the above mentioned offence and any other offence/offences committed in course of the same transaction or arising out of the same facts.
[F. No. 228/8/2012- AVD- II ] RAJIV JAIN , Under Secy.
वित्त मंत्रालय
(वित्तीय सेवाएं विभाग )
नई दिल्ली, 3 फरवरी , 2012
का. आ. 604.- राष्ट्रीयकृत बैंक ( प्रबंध एवं प्रकीर्ण उपबंध ) स्कीम , 1970/1980 के खंड 3 के उप- खंड ( 1 ) और खखंड 8 के उप - खंड ( 1 ) के साथ पठित , बैंककारी कंपनी ( उपक्रमों का अर्जन एवं अंतरण ) अधिनियम , 1970/1980 की धारा 9 की उप - धारा ( 3 ) के खंड ( क ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए , केन्द्रीय सरकार , भारतीय रिजर्व बैंक से परामर्श करने के पश्चात्, एतद्द्वारा , इलाहाबाद बैंक के महाप्रबंधक श्री अमर लाल दौलतानी ( जन्म तिथि 13-3-1955 ) को उनके पदभार ग्रहण करने की तारीख से 31-3-2015 तक अर्थात् उनकी अधिवर्षिता की तारीख तक अथवा अगले आदेशों तक , जो भी पहले हो , कार्पोरेशन बैंक के कार्यपालक निदेशक के रूप में नियुक्त करती है ।
[फा. सं. 4/5/2010- बीओ-1 ] विजय मल्होत्रा , अवर सचिव
MINISTRY OF FINANCE
(Department of Financial Services )
New Delhi , the 3rd February, 2012
S.O. 604. In exercise of the powers conferred by clause ( a ) of sub - section (3 ) of Section 9 of The Banking Companies (Acquisition and 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 and Miscellaneous Provisions ) Scheme , 1970/1980, the Central Government, after consultation with the Reserve Bank of India , hereby appoints Shri Amar Lal Daultani (DoB : 13-3-1955) . General Manager , Allahabad Bank as Executive Director, Corporation Bank, with effect from the date of his taking over charge ofthe post till 31-3-2015 , i.e. the date of his superannuation or until further orders , whichever is earlier.
[F. No. 4/5/2010-BO-11
VIJAY MALHOTRA, Under Secy.
नई दिल्ली, 7 फरवरी , 2012
का. आ. 605.- भारतीय रिजर्व बैंक अधिनियम , 1934 की धारा 8 की उप- धारा ( 1 ) के खण्ड ( घ ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए , केन्द्रीय सरकार, एतद्द्वारा , श्री डी. के. मित्तल , सचिव, वित्तीय सेवाएं विभाग , वित्त मंत्रालय को तत्काल प्रभाव से और अगले आदेशों तक , भारतीय रिजर्व बैंक के केन्द्रीय निदेशक मंडल में निदेशक के रूप में नामित करती है ।
[फा. सं. 1 / 1 / 2012 - बीओ -1 ]
श्रेया गुहा , निदेशक
New Delhi , the 7th February, 2012
S.O. 605. In exercise of the powers conferred by clause (d) of sub -section ( 1 ) of Section 8 of the Reserve Bank of India Act , 1934, the Central Government hereby nominates Shri D. K. Mittal , Secretary, Department of Financial Services.
1304
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 18 , 2012/MAGHA 29, 1933
[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii ) ]
Ministry of Finance , to be a director on the Central Board of Directors of Reserve Bank of India with immediate effect and until further orders .
[F. No. 1/ 1/2012 -BO -I ] SREYA GUHA, Director
मानव संसाधन विकास मंत्रालय
( उच्चतर शिक्षा विभाग )
(राजभाषा यूनिट)
नई दिल्ली , 3 फरवरी , 2012
का. आ. 606.-केन्द्रीय सरकार, राजभाषा ( संघ के शासकीय प्रयोजनों के लिए प्रयोग ) नियम , 1976 के नियम 10 के उप - नियम 4 के अनुसरण में, मानव संसाधन विकास मध्य ( स्कूल शिक्षा एवं साक्षरता विभाग ) के अंतर्गत , जवाहर नवोदय विद्यालय , धनानसू, जिला लुधियाना ( पंजाब ) को , ऐसे कार्यालय के रूप में , जिसके 80 प्रतिशत से अधिक कर्मचारी वृन्द ने हिन्दी का कार्यसाधक ज्ञान प्राप्त कर लिया है , अधिसूचित करती है ।
[सं. 11011-1/2011 - रा.भा.ए. ] अनन्त कुमार सिंह, संयुक्त सचिव
MINISTRY OF HUMAN RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT
(Department of Higher Education)
(O.L. UNIT)
New Delhi , the 3rd February, 2012
S.O. 606. -In pursuance of sub -rule (4) of rule 10 of the Official Languages (Use for Official Purposes of the Union) Rules , 1976, the Certral Government hereby notifies Jawahar Navodaya Vidyalaya, Dhanansu, Distt . Ludhiana (Punjab ) under the Ministry of Human Resource Development , (Deptt . of School Education & Literacy ) as office , whose more than 80% members of the staff have acquired working knowledge ofHindi .
[No. 11011-1/2011 -O.L.U.J ANANT KUMAR SINGH, Jt . Secy.
नई दिल्ली , 7 फरवरी , 2012
का. आ. 607.--सार्वजनिक परिसर ( अनधिकृत अधिभोक्ता बेदखली ) अधिनियम , 1971 ( 1971 का 40 ) की धारा 3 के द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए और केन्द्र सरकार एतद्वारा श्री सतीश कुमार, सहायक रजिस्ट्रार, डॉ. हरिसिंह गौड़ विश्वविद्यालय , सागर को भारत सरकार के राजपत्रित अधिकारी के पद के समकक्ष सम्पदा अधिकारी के रूप में उपर्युक्त अधिनियम के उद्देश्यार्थ इस अधिसूचना के सरकारी राजपत्र में प्रकाशन की नारीत्र वर्षों की अवधि के लिए नियुक्त करती है , जो डॉ. हरिसिंह गौड़ विश्वविद्यालय , सागर के प्रशासनिक नियंत्रण के तहत और इसके स्वामित्व आले सार्वजनिक परिसरों से संबंधित उपरोक्त अधिनियम के द्वारा या उसके तहत प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग और संपदा अधिकारी के लिए अधिर पे कर्तव्यों का निर्वहन करेगा ।
[सं. एफ. 56-10/2011 -डेस्क ( यू) ] आर. पी . तिवारी , अवर सचिव
Delhi , the 7th February, 2012
S.O. 607. In exercise of th powers conferred by Section 3 of the Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Act , 1971 ( 40 of 1971 ) . Contral Government hereby appoints Shri Satish Kumar , Assistant Registrar, Dr. Harisingh Gour Vishwavidyalaya, Sagar, being an officer equivalent to the rank of a Gazetted Officer of Government of India to be Estate Officer for a period of 2 years from the date of publication of this notification in the Official Gazette for the pusposes of the said Act, who shall exercisethe powers conferred, and perform the duties imposed , on the Estate Officer by 1305 भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 18 , 2012/माघ 29 , 1933
[ भाग II-खंड 3 ( ii) ]
or under the said Act, in respect of the public premises belonging to and under the administrative control of the Dr. Harisingh Gour Vishwavidyalaya, Sagar .
[No. F. 56-10/2011 - Desk (U ) ] R. P. TEWARI , Under Secy .
स्वास्थ्यएवं परिवार कल्याण मंत्रालय
(स्वास्थ्यएवं परिवार कल्याण विभाग )
नई दिल्ली, 16 जनवरी , 2012
का.आ. 608.-केन्द्रीय सरकार , भारतीय चिकित्सा परिषद् अधिनियम , 1956 ( 1956 का 102 ) की धारा 11 की उप - धारा ( 2 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए भारतीय आयुर्विज्ञान परिषद् से परामर्श करने के बाद अर्हता की नामावली में परिवर्तन के कारण उक्त अधिनियम की प्रथम अनुसूची में निम्नलिखित और संशोधन करती है अर्थात्:
उक्त अनुसूची में :
(क ) " नागपुर विश्वविद्यालय/आरटीएम नागपुर , विश्वविद्यालय " के समक्ष शीर्षक " मान्यताप्राप्त चिकित्सा अर्हता " [ इसके बाद कालम ( 2 ) के रूप में संदर्भित ] के अन्तर्गत शीर्षक " पंजीकरण के लिए संक्षेपण " [ इसके बाद कालम ( 3 ) के रूप में संदर्भित ] , के अंतर्गत अंतिम प्रविष्टि एवं उससे संबंधित प्रविष्टि के बाद निम्नलिखित को अंतः स्थापित किया जाएगा , नामतः:-
(3)
(2)
एम डी ( रेडियो डायग्नोसिस )
" डाक्टर ऑफ मेडिसिन ( रेडियो डायग्नोसिस ) "
(यह एक मान्यताप्राप्त चिकित्सा अर्हता होगी जब यह इंदिरा गांधी मेडिकल कॉलेज , नागपुर, महाराष्ट्र में प्रशिक्षित किए जा रहे विद्यार्थियों के बारे में नागपुर विश्वविद्यालय/आरटीएम, नागुपर , विश्वविद्यालय द्वारा 1990 से 2006 में अथवा उसके बाद प्रदान की गई हो ) ।
(ख ) " महाराष्ट्र स्वास्थ्य विज्ञान विश्वविद्यालय , नासिक " के समक्ष शीर्षक " मान्यताप्राप्त चिकित्सा अर्हता [ इसके बाद कालम ( 2 ) के रूप में संदर्भित ] के अन्तर्गत शीर्षक " पंजीकरण के लिए संक्षेपण " [ इसके बाद कालम ( 3 ) के रूप में संदर्भित ] , के अंतर्गत अंतिम प्रविष्टि एवं उससे संबंधित प्रविष्टि के बाद निम्नलिखित को अंतः स्थापित किया जाएगा , नामतः:-
(3)
(2)
एम डी ( रेडियो डायग्नोसिस )
" डाक्टर ऑफ मेडिसिन ( रेडियो डायग्नोसिस ) "
(यह एक मान्यताप्राप्त चिकित्सा अर्हता होगी जब यह इंदिरा गांधी मेडिकल कॉलेज , नागपुर , महाराष्ट्र में प्रशिक्षित किए जा रहे विद्यार्थियों के बारे में महाराष्ट्र स्वास्थ्य विज्ञान विश्वविद्यालय , नासिक द्वारा 2006 में अथवा उसके बाद प्रदान की गई हो ) ।
सभी के लिए टिप्पणी : 1. स्नातकोत्तर पाठ्यक्रम को प्रदान की गई ऐसी मान्यता की अधिकतम अवधि 5 वर्षों के लिए होगी जिसके उपरांत इसका नवीकरण कराना होगा ।
2. मान्यता को उप - खंड 4 की आवश्यकता के अनुसार समय पर नवीकरण न कराए जाने पर संबंधित स्नातकोत्तर पाठ्यक्रम में प्रवेश निरपवाद रूप से बंद हो जाएंगे ।
[सं. यू 12012/33/2011 - एमई ( पी- II ) ]
अनीता त्रिपाठी , अवर सचिव
MINISTRY OF HEALTH AND FAMILY WELFARE
(Department ofHealth and Family Welfare)
New Delhi , the 16th January, 2012
S.O. 608. In exercise of the powers conferred by sub - section ( 2) of Section 11 of the Indian Medical Council Act, 1956 ( 102 of 1956 ) , the Central Government , after consulting the Medical Council of India, hereby makes the following further amendments in the First Schedule to the said Act , due to change of nomenclature of the qualification namely:-
1308
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 18 , 2012/MAGHA 29 , 1933
[PART II-SEC. 3 ( ii )]
(2)
(3)
trained at Mahatma Gandhi Medical College & Research Institute, Puducherry onor after April, 2011) .
Note to all: i . 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. 12012/78/2011 -ME(P -II)} ANITA TRIPATHI , Under Secy.
नई दिल्ली, 17 जनवरी , 2012
का.आ. 610.-केन्द्रीय सरकार , भारतीय चिकित्सा परिषद् अधिनियम , 1956 ( 1956 का 102 ) की धारा 11 की उप - धारा ( 2 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए भारतीय आयुर्विज्ञान परिषद् से परामर्श करने के बाद अर्हता की नामावली में परिवर्तन के कारण उक्त अधिनियम की प्रथम अनुसूची में निम्नलिखित और संशोधन करती है अर्थात्:
उक्तअनुसूची में :
( क ) " कानपुर विश्वविद्यालय , उत्तर प्रदेश के समक्ष शीर्षक " " मान्यता प्राप्त चिकित्सा अर्हता " [ इसके बाद कालम ( 2 ) के रूप में संदर्भित ] के अन्तर्गत शीर्षक " पंजीकरण के लिए संक्षेपण " [ इसके बाद कालम ( 3 ) के रूप में संदर्भित ] , के अंतर्गत अंतिम प्रविष्टि एवं उससे संबंधित प्रविष्टि के बाद निम्नलिखित को अंतः स्थापित किया जाएगा , नामत :
(3)
(2)
" डाक्टर ऑफ मेडिसिन ( फोरेन्सिक मेडिसिन ) " एम डी ( फोरेन्सिक मेडिसिन )
(यह एक मान्यताप्राप्त चिकित्सा अर्हता होगी जब यह जीएसवीएम मेडिकल कॉलेज, कानपुर, उत्तर प्रदेश में प्रशिक्षित किए जा रहे विद्यार्थियों के बारे में कानपुर विश्वविद्यालय , उत्तर प्रदेश द्वारा 1976 में अथवा उसके बाद प्रदान की गई हो ) ।
(ख) " श्री साहूजी महाराज विश्वविद्यालय , उत्तर प्रदेश " के समक्ष शीर्षक " मान्यताप्राप्त चिकित्सा अर्हता " [ इसके बाद कालम ( 2 ) के रूप में संदर्भित ] के अन्तर्गत शीर्षक " पंजीकरण के लिए संक्षेपण " [ इसके बाद कालम ( 3 ) के रूप में संदर्भित ] , के अंतर्गत अंतिम प्रविष्टि एवं उससे संबंधित प्रविष्टि के बाद निम्नलिखित को अंतः स्थापित किया जाएगा, नामतः:-
(3)
(2)
एम डी ( फोरेन्सिक मेडिसिन )
" डाक्टर ऑफ मेडिसिन ( फोरेन्सिक मेडिसिन ) "
(यह एक मान्यताप्राप्त चिकित्सा अर्हता होगी जब यह जीएसवीएम मेडिकल कॉलेज , कानपुर, उत्तर प्रदेश में प्रशिक्षित किए जा रहे विद्यार्थियों के बारे में श्री साहूजी महाराज विश्वविद्यालय, उत्तर प्रदेश द्वारा 1976 में अथवा उसके बाद प्रदान की गई हो ) ।
( ग ) " छत्रपति साहूजी महाराज विश्वविद्यालय , कानपुर , उत्तर प्रदेश " के समक्ष शीर्षक " मान्यताप्राप्त चिकित्सा अर्हता " [ इसके बाद कालम (2 ) के रूप में संदर्भित ] के अन्तर्गत शीर्षक " पंजीकरण के लिए संक्षेपण " [ इसके बाद कालम ( 3 ) के रूप में संदर्भित ] , के अंतर्गत अंतिम प्रविष्टि एवं उससे संबंधित प्रविष्टि के बाद निम्नलिखित को अंतः स्थापित किया जाएगा , नामतः :----
(3)
(2)
एम डी ( फोरेन्सिक मेडिसिन)
" डाक्टर ऑफ मेडिसिन ( फोरेन्सिक मेडिसिन ) "
(यह एक मान्यताप्राप्त चिकित्सा अर्हता होगी जब यह जीएसवीएम मेडिकल कॉलेज , कानपुर , उत्तर प्रदेश में प्रशिक्षित किए जा रहे विद्यार्थियों के बारे में छत्रपति साहूजी 1309 [ भाग II-खंड 3 ( ii ) ]
भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 18 , 2012/माघ 29 , 1933
महाराज विश्वविद्यालय , कानपुर , उत्तर प्रदेश द्वारा 1976 में अथवा उसके बाद प्रदान की गई हो) ।
सभी के लिए टिप्पणी 1. स्नातकोत्तर पाठ्यक्रम को प्रदान की गई ऐसी मान्यता की अधिकतम अवधि 5 वर्षों के लिए होगी जिसके उपरांत इसका नवीकरण कराना होगा ।
2. मान्यता को उप - खंड 4 की आवश्यकता के अनुसार समय पर नवीकरण न कराए जाने पर संबंधित स्नातकोत्तर पाठ्यक्रम में प्रवेश निरपवाद रूप से बंद हो जाएंगे ।
[सं. यू 12012/ 107/2011 - एमई ( पी- II ) ] अनीता त्रिपाठी, अवर सचिव
New Delhi , the 17th January, 2012
S.O. 610. In exercise of the powers conferred by sub- section (2) of Section 11 of the Indian Medical Council Act, 1956 ( 102 of 1956 ), the Central Government , after consulting Medical Council of India, hereby makes the following further amendments in the First Schedule to the said Act, due to change in name of affiliating University namely :-
Inthe said Schedule:
(a)Against "University ofKanpur, Uttar Pradesh " under the heading ' Recognised Medical Qualification' (hereinafter referred to as column (2) ] , after the last entry and entry relating thereto under the heading ' Abbreviation for Registration ' [hereinafter referred to as column (3 ) ) , the following shall be inserted, namely:
(3)
(2)
MD (Forensic Medicine)
"Doctor ofMedicine (Forensic Medicine) "
1 (This shall be a recognised medical qualification when granted by University of Kanpur , Uttar Pradesh in respect of the students being trained atGS . V.M. Medical College, Kanpur, Uttar Pradesh on or after 1976) .
1 (b) Against " Sri Shahu Ji Maharaj University, Uttar Pradesh " under the heading ' Recognised Medical Qualification ' [hereinafter referred to as column ( 2) ] , after the last entry and entry relating thereto under the heading 'Abbreviation for Registration' [hereinafter referred to as column (3 ) ] , the following shall be inserted, namely:
1
(3)
(2)
"Doctor ofMedicine (Forensic Medicine) " MD (Forensic Medicine)
(This shall be a recognised medical qualification when granted by Shri Shahu Ji Maharaj University, Uttar Pradesh in respect of the students being trained at GS. V.M. Medical College , Kanpur, Uttar Pradesh on or after 1976).
1
(3)
(3) Against " Chhatarpati Shahu Ji Maharaj University , Kanpur, Uttar Pradesh " under the heading 'Recognised Medical Qualification ' ( hereinafter referred to as column (2 ) ] , after the last entry and entry relating thereto under the heading 'Abbreviation for Registration ' [ hereinafter referred to as column (3 ) ] , the following shall be inserted, namely : (2)
"Doctor ofMedicine (Forensic Medicine) " MD (Forensic Medicine)
(This shall be a recognised medical qualification when granted by Shri Chhatarpati Shahu Ji Maharaj University, Kanpur, Uttar Pradesh in respect ofthe students being trained at GS. V.M. Medical College, Kanpur , Uttar Pradesh on or after 1976) .
Note to all : 1. The recognition so granted to a Postgraduate Course shall be for a Maximum period of 5 years , upon which itshall have to be renewed .
2. Failure to seek timely renewal of recognition as required in sub -clause- 4 shall invariably result in stoppage of admissions to the concerned Postgraduate Course.
[No. U. 12012/ 107/2011 -ME (P. - II ) ]
ANITA TRIPATHI , Under Secy.
367 GI /2012-2 1310
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 18 , 2012/MAGHA 29 , 1933
[PART II-SEC. 3 ( ii ) ]
उपभोक्तामामले , खाद्य और सार्वजनिक वितरण मंत्रालय
(उपभोक्ता मामले विभाग )
नई दिल्ली, 31 अक्तूबर , 2011
का. आ. 611.-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 पदमनी इंडस्ट्रीज, 3 मंगल हाउसिंग सोसायटी , श्यादरी नगर, सांगली-416416 महाराष्ट्र द्वारा विनिर्मित विशेष यथार्थता ( यथार्थता वर्ग -1 ) वाले " पीएक्सए " श्रृंखला के अंकक सूचन सहित अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण ( टेबलटॉप टाइप ) के मॉडल का, जिसके ब्रांड का नाम " अकॉर्ड " है ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/09/ 10/378 समनुदेशित किया गया है, अनुमोदन प्रमाणपत्र जारी करती है ;
उक्त मॉडल एक इलैक्ट्रो मैगनेटिक फोर्स कम्पेनसेशन प्रिंसिपल पर आधारित अस्वचालित (टेबलटॉप प्रकार ) तोलन उपकरण है । इसकी अधिकतम क्षमता 120 ग्रा. है और न्यूनतम क्षमता 100 मि.ग्रा. है । सत्यापन मापमान अंतराल ( ई ) 1 मि.ग्रा. है । इसमें एक आधेयतुलन युक्ति है जिसका शत प्रतिशत व्यवकलनात्मक धारित आधेयतुलन प्रभाव है । लिक्विड क्रिस्टल डायोड ( एल सी डी ) प्रदर्श तोलन परिणाम उपदर्शित करता है । उपकरण 230 वोल्ट और 50 हर्ट्ज प्रत्यावर्ती धारा विद्युत प्रदाय पर कार्य करता है ।
15-PLATE
PAN
CAL LORDISPLAY TARE
Leg
आकृति-2: मॉडल को सालिग करने का योजनाबद्ध डायग्राम ।
डिस्पले की बॉडी में छेदों से सीलिंग वायर निकाल कर सीलिंग किया जाता है । मॉडल को सीलबंद करने के उपबंध का एक प्ररूपी योजनाबद्ध डायग्राम उपरोक्त दिया गया 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 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. या उससे अधिक के " ई " मान के लिए 50,000 तक के रेंज में सत्यापन मापमान अंतराल ( एन ) सहित 50 कि.ग्रा. तक की अधिकतम क्षमता वाले हैं और " ई" मान 1 × 10 *, 2 × 10* , 5 × 10*, के हैं , जो धनात्मक या ऋणात्मक पूर्णांक या शून्य के समतुल्य हैं ।
[फा. सं. डब्ल्यू एम-21 ( 187) /2010 ] बी. एन. दीक्षित , निदेशक, विधिक माप विज्ञान 1311 भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 18 , 2012/माघ 29 , 1933
[भाग II-खंड 3 ( ii ) ]
MINISTRY OF CONSUMER AFFAIRS, FOOD AND PUBLIC DISTRIBUTION
(Department ofConsumerAffairs)
NewDelhi, the 31st October, 2011
S.O. 611. 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 ofWeights and Measures (Approval ofModels) Rules, 1987 and the said model is likely to maintain its accuracy over periods ofsustained use andto render accurate service under varied conditions ;
Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub-sections (7) and (8) of Section 36 ofthe saidAct, the Central Government hereby issues and publishes the certificate of approval of the Model of non-automatic weighing instrument (Table top type ) with digital indication of Special accuracy (Accuracy class-1) ofseries "PXA" and with brand name " ACCORD " (hereinafter referred to as the said model ) , manufactured by M/s. Padmini Industries, 3, Mangal Housing Society, Sahyadri Nagar, Sangali-416416, Maharashtra and which is assigned the approval mark IND/09/10/378;
The said model is an electro magnetic force compensation principle based non-automatic weighing instrument (Table Top Type) with a maximum capacity of 120 g and minimum capacity of 100 mg. The verification scale interval (e) is 1mg. It has a tare device with a 100 per cent subtractive retained tare effect. The LCD display indicates the weighing result. The instrument operates on 230 Volts and 50 Hertz alternative current power supply.
Figure-1
PLATE
PAN
ICADISPLAY
Les
Figure-2 : Schematic Diagram of sealing provision of themodel.
Sealing is done by passing the sealing wire from the body ofthe scale through holes .A typical schematic diagram of sealing provision of the model is given above .
Adip switch has also been provided in A/D card/mother board to disable access to external calibration .
Further, in exercise ofthe powers conferred by sub-section ( 12) of Section 36 ofthe said Act , the Central Government hereby declares that this certificate of approval ofthe said model shall also cover the weighing instruments ofsimilar make, accuracy andperformance of same series with maximum capacity up to 50 kg with verification scale interval (n) in the range of50,000 or above for ' e' value of 1 mg . or more and with ' e' value of 1 × 10k, 2× 10kor 5 × 10% , where k is a positive or negative whole number or equal to zero , manufactured by the same manufacturer in accordance with the same principle, design and with the same materials with which, the said approved model has been manufactured.
[F. No. WM-21 ( 187)/2010] B. N. DIXIT, Director of Legal Metrology 1312
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 18, 2012/MAGHA 29, 1933
[PART II-Sac.3(ii) ]
नई दिल्ली, 31 अक्तूबर, 2011
का. आ. 612.-केन्द्रीय सरकार का, विहित प्राधिकारी द्वारा जारी मॉडल अनुमोदन प्रमाण पत्र के साथ 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 ए एंड डी कंपनी लि. , 3-23-14 , हिगाशी, इकेबुकुरो , तोशिमा- कु,, टोक्यो-170-0013 जापान द्वारा विनिर्मित उच्च यथार्थता ( यथार्थता वर्ग- II ) वाले " एफएक्स " श्रृंखला के अंकक सूचन सहित अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण ( टेबलटॉप टाइप ) के मॉडल का, जिसके ब्रांड का नाम " ए एंड डी" है ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे मैसर्स ए एंड डी इंस्ट्रूमेंट्स इंडिया ( प्रा. ) लि. , 509, उद्योग विहार- V, गुडगांव , हरियाणा-122016 द्वारा भारत में विपणीत किया गया है और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/09/ 10/189 समनुदेशित किया गया है , अनुमोदन प्रमाणपत्र जारी करती है;
उक्तमॉडल एक इलैक्ट्रो मैगनेटिक फोर्स कम्पेनसेशन प्रिंसिपल पर आधारित अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण ( टेबलटॉप टाइप ) है । इसकी अधिकतम क्षमता 320 ग्रा. है और न्यूनत्तम क्षमता 200 मि.ग्रा. है । सत्यापन मापमान अंतराल ( ई ) 10 मि.ग्रा. है । इसमें एक आधेयतुलन युक्तिहै जिसका शत प्रतिशत व्यवकलनात्मक धारित आधेयतुलन प्रभाव है । वैक्यूम फ्लारेसेंट ( वीएफडी ) प्रदर्श तोलन परिणाम उपदर्शित करता है । उपकरण 230 वोल्ट और 50 हर्ट्ज प्रत्यावर्ती धारा विद्युत प्रदाय पर कार्य करता है ।
आकृति-1
आकृति-2: मॉडल को सीलिंग करने का योजनाबद्ध डायग्राम ।
डिस्पले की बॉडी में से सीलिंग वायर निकाल कर डिस्पले पर सीलिंग की जाती है । सील के साथ जुड़े हुए डिस्पले के बेस प्लेट और टॉप कवर में बने दो छेदों में से सीलिंग वायर निकाल कर सील से जोड़ा गया है । मॉडल को सीलबंद करने के उपबंध का एक प्ररूपी योजनाबद्ध डायग्राम 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 त 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 के उअंतर्गत उसी विनिर्माता द्वारा उसी सिद्धांत , डिजाइन के अनुसार और उसी सामग्री से जिससे उक्तअनुमोदित मॉडल का विनिर्माण किया गा 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 के रेंज में सत्यापन मापमान अंतराल ( एन ) और 100 मि.ग्रा. या उससे अधिक के " ई " मान के लिए 5,000 से 100,000 तक की रेंज में सत्यापन मापमान अंतराल ( एन ) सहित 1200 ग्रा. तक की अधिकतम क्षमता वाले हैं और " ई " मान 1 ×10*, 2 × 0 , 5 × 10 *, के हैं , जो धनात्मक या ऋणात्मक पूर्णांक या शून्य के समतुल्य हैं ।
[फा. सं. डब्ल्यूएम-21 ( 117 )/2010 ]
बी. एन. दीक्षित , निदेशक, विधिक माप विज्ञान 1313 भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 18 , 2012/माष 29 , 1933
[भाग II-खंड 3 ( ii ) ]
NewDelhi, the 31st October, 2011
S.O. 612. 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 ofthe Standards ofWeights and Measures Act, 1976 (60 of 1976) and the Standards of Weights and Measures (ApprovalofModels) Rules, 1987 and the said model is likely to maintain its accuracy over periods of sustained use andto render accurate service under varied conditions ;
Now, therefore, in exercise 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 " FX " and with brand name " A&D" (hereinafter referred to as the said model), manufactured by M/s A& D Company Ltd. , 3-23-14 , Higashi- Ikebukuro, Toshima -Ku, Tokyo, 170-0013 Japan and marketed in India by M/ s . A&D Instruments India (P) Ltd. 509, Udyog Vihar-V, Gurgaon, Haryana- 122016, India which is assigned the approval mark IND/09 /10/ 189;
The said model is an electro magnetic force compensation principle based non -automatic weighing instrument (TableTop Type) with a maximum capacity of 320 g and minimum capacity of 200 mg. The verification scale interval (e) is 10mg. It has a tare device with a 100 per cent subtractive retained tare effect . The Vacuum Fluorescent Display ( VFD ) indicates the weighing result. The instrument operates on 230 Volts and 50 Hertz alternative current power supply.
Figure- 1
Figure- 2: Schematic diagram of sealing provision of the model.
Sealing is done on the display by passing the sealing wire from the body of the display. The seal is connected by hole in base plate and top cover of display, then seal wire is passed through these two holes attached with seal . A typical schematic diagram of sealing provision of the model is given above.
The instrument has external control to calibration . A dip switch has also been provided in A/D card/Mother board to disable access to external calibration .
Further, in exercise ofthe powers conferred by sub-section ( 12) of Section 36 ofthe 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 and performance of same series with maximum capacity up to 1200 g and with number of verification scale interval (n) in the range of 100 to 100,000 for ' e ' value of 1 mg to 50 mg and with number ofverification scale interval ( n) in the range of5,000 to 100,000 for ' e' value of 100 mg. or more and with ' e' value of 1 × 10 , 2 × 10kor 5 × 10%, where k is a positive or negative whole number or equal to zero , manufactured by the same manufacturer in accordance with the same principle, design and with the same materials with which, the approved Model has been manufactured.
[F. No. WM- 21 (117)/2010 ]
B. N. DIXIT, Director of Legal Metrology THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 18, 2012/ MAGHA 29, 1933
[PART II- SEC . 3( ii )]
नई दिल्ली, 31 अक्तूबर, 2011
48, 613. केन्द्रीय सरकार का, विहित प्राधिकारी द्वारा जारी मॉडल अनुमोदन प्रमाण पत्र के साथ उसे प्रस्तुत रिपोर्ट पर विचार पश्चात् यह समाधान हो गया है कि उक्त रिपोर्ट में वर्णित मॉडल ( नीचे दी गई आकृति देखें ) बाट और माप मानक अधिनियम , 1976 50 तथा बाट और माप मानक ( मॉडलों का अनुमोदन ) नियम, 1987 के उपबंधों के अनुरूप है और इस बात की संभावना है कि गार 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 क्रभ मैसर्स ए एंड डी कंपनी लि. , 3-23-14, हिगाशी, इकेबुकुरो, तोशिमा- कु. टोक्यो-170-0013 जापान द्वारा विनिर्मित उच्च यथार्थता ( यथार्थता 31) वाले " ईकेवी" श्रृंखला के अंकक सूचन सहित अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण ( टेबलटॉप प्रकार ) के मॉडल का, जिसके ब्रांड का नाम एंड डी " है ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे मैसर्स ए एंड डी इंस्ट्रूमेंट्स इंडिया ( प्रा. ) लि. , 509 , उद्योग विहार- V, गुडमंत्र,हरियाणा-122016 द्वारा भारत में विपणीत किया गया है जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/09/ 10/ 190 समनुदेशित किया गया है , अनुमोदन प्रमाण प ० जारी करती है;
अवत मॉडल एक विकृत्त गेज प्रकार का भार सैल आधारित अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण ( टेबल टॉप टाइप ) है । इसकी अधिकतम 610 ग्रा. है और न्यूनतम क्षमता 200 मि.ग्रा. है । सत्यापन मापमान अंतराल ( ई ) 10 मि.ग्रा. है । इसमें एक आधेयतुलन युक्ति है जिसका प्रतिशत व्यवकलनात्मक धारित आधेयतुलन प्रभाव है । लिक्विड क्रिस्टल डायोड ( एल सी डी ) प्रदर्श तोलन परिणाम उपदर्शित करता है । उपकरण 230 वोल्ट और 50 हर्ट्ज प्रत्यावर्ती धारा विद्युत प्रदाय पर कार्य करता है ।
seal wire
Metal son
PlasticPlatk (Switch luside)
आकृति-2: मॉडल को सीलिंग करने का योजनाबद्ध डायग्राम ।
डिस्पले की बॉडी में से सीलिंग वायर निकाल कर डिस्पले पर सीलिंग की जाती है । सील के साथ जुड़े हुए डिस्पले के बेस प्लेट और टॉप कवर में बने दो छेदों में से सीलिंग वायर निकाल कर सील से जोड़ा गया है । मॉडल को सीलबंद करने के उपबंध का एक प्ररूपी योजनाबद्ध डायग्राम 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 उवर पॉडल 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 के रेंज में सत्यापन मापमान अंतराल ( एन ) और 100 मि.ग्रा. या उससे अधिक के " ई " मान के लिए 5,000 से 1,00,000 तक की रेंज में सत्यापन मापमान अंतराल ( एन ) सहित 1200 ग्रा. तक की अधिकतम क्षमता वाले हैं और " ई" मान 1 × 10*, 2× 10*, 5 × 10*, के हैं, जो धनात्मक या ऋणात्मक पूर्णांक या शून्य के समतुल्य हैं ।
[फा. सं. डब्ल्यूएम-21 ( 117 )/2010 ] बी. एन. दीक्षित , निदेशक , विधिक माप विज्ञान 1315 भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 18 , 2012/माघ 29 , 1933
[भाग II-खंड 3 ( ii) ]
New Delhi , the 31st October, 2011
S.O. 613. 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 ofModels) 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 "EKV " and with brand name " A&D" (hereinafter referred to as the said model ) , manufactured by M/s A&D Company Ltd. , 3-23-14 , Higashi- likebukuro , Toshima -Ku, Tokyo , 170-0013 Japan and marketed in India by M/ s. A&D Instruments India (P ) Ltd. 509, Udyog Vihar-V, Gurgaon, Haryana- 122016, India which is assigned the approval mark IND/09 /10/190;
The said model is a strain gauge type load cell based non - automatic weighing instrument (Table Top Type) with a maximum capacity of610 g and minimum capacity of 200 mg. The verification scale interval (e ) is 10 mg. It has a tare device with a 100 per cent subtractive retained tare effect . The Liquid Crystal Display (LCD) indicates the weighing result . The instrument operates on 230 Volts and 50 Hertz alternative current power supply.
Figure-1: Model
seal wire
Metal son
Plastic Plate (Smirch Inside)
Figure- 2: Schematic diagram of sealing provision of the model.
Sealing is done on the right side/back side of the display by passing the sealing wire from the body of the display. The seal is connected by hole in base plate and top cover of display, than seal wire is pass through these two holes attached with seal . Atypical schematic diagram of sealing provision of the model is given above .
The instrument has external control to calibration . Adip switch has also been provided in A/D card/Mother board to disable access to external calibration .
Further, in exercise ofthe 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 and performance of same series with maximum capacity up to 1200 g and with number of verification scale interval ( n) in the range of 100 to 1,00,000 for ' e ' value of 1 mg to 50 mg and with number ofverification scale interval (n) in the range of 5,000 to 1,00,000 for ' e ' value of 100 mg . or more and with ' e ' value of 1 × 10 , 2 × 10 or 5 × 10% , k being 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 (117)/2010]
B. N. DIXIT, Director of Legal Metrology 1316
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 18 , 2012/MAGHA 29, 1933
[PART II SEC . 3 (ii )]
नई दिल्ली, 31 अक्तूबर, 2011
का. आ. 614.-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 बूंडर - बार डिस्पेंसिंग सिस्टम , आटोमेटिक बार कंट्रोल आईएनसी 790 , इयूबैंक्स ड्राइव , वैकाविले, कैलिफोर्निया -95688 द्वारा विनिर्मित मॉडल ऑफ आटोमेटिक लिकर मैजर ऑफ मॉडल " साइक्लोन " , जिसके ब्रांड का नाम " बूंडर- बार " है ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे मैसर्स एक्रूक्स बार जोन इम्पैक्स प्रा. लि. , डी-26, एल जी एफ, लाजपत नगर-2, नई दिल्ली-110024 द्वारा भारत में बिक्री से पूर्व अथवा बाद में बिना किसी परिवर्तन के विक्रीत किया गया है और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/09/ 10/592 समनुदेशित किया गया है, अनुमोदन प्रमाणपत्र जारी करती है;
उक्त मॉडल एक स्वचालित लिकर ( द्रव्य ) माप है जिसकी एक समय पर भराव क्षमता 30 मि.लि. है । इसका उपयोग लिकर , बियर , शराब , सोडा आदि जैसे द्रव्य उत्पादों को भरने के लिए किया जाता है । यह एक पेय डिस्पेंसिंग उपस्कर है जहां एक इलैक्ट्रानिक स्विच पम्प और वाल्व को सही, पूर्व योजित भाग में पेय डिस्पेंस करने के लिए चालू करता है । बूंडर - बार डिस्पेंसिंग सिस्टम को कंप्यूटर द्वारा पेय की विशिष्ट मात्रा को डिस्पेंस करने के लिए विशिष्ट समय में विशिष्ट वाल्व को खोलने के साथ विशिष्ट इलैक्ट्रानिक स्विच के साथ सम्बद्ध किया जाता है । डिस्पेंसिंग स्टेशन पर पेय को डालने के लिए बटन दबाया जाता है । यह एक डिस्पेंसिंग डिवाइस है जहां एक केन्द्रीय एकक है जिसके साथ कोड के माध्यम से रिंग रीडर लगा हुआ है । बोतल को पोरर से साथ फिट और सील किया जाता है । लिकर बोतल से केवल तब डिस्पेंस होगा जब पोरर फिट बोतल को रिंग रीडर में से निकाला जाता है ।
Seal withlead
आकृति-2 : मॉडल को सीलिंग करने के लिए सीलिंग प्रावधान
बूंडर - बार के माध्यम से डिस्पेंस किए गए पेय को तालाबंद बैंक रूप में रखा गया है जो पेय स्रोत तक अनाधिकृत पहुंच को रोकता है । पेय को मापने में उपयोग होने वाले उपकरण को तालाबंद कैबिनेट या बैक रूप में रखा जा सकता है ताकि डिस्पेंसिंग स्विच और नोज़ल तक केवल उपयोगकर्ता की पहुंच हो ।
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 , डिज़ाइन 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 30 मि.लि. तक की अधिकतम क्षमता वाले हैं ।
[फा. सं. डब्ल्यूएम-21 ( 341 )/2010]
बी. एन. दीक्षित , निदेशक , विधिक माप विज्ञान 1317 [भाग II-खंड 3 ( ii) ]
भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 18 , 2012/माघ 29, 1933
NewDelhi , the 31st October, 2011
S.O. 614. 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 ofWeights and Measures Act, 1976 (60 of 1976) and the Standards of Weights and Measures (Approval ofModels ) 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 ofapproval of the Model of Automatic Liquor Measure of Model" Cyclone" with Brand Name " Wunder-Bar " (herein referred to as the said Model ) manufactured by M/s . Wunder- BarDispensing Systems , Automatic Bar Controls INC 790 , Eubanks Drive, Vacaville, California -95688 and sold in India without any alteration before or after sale by M/s . Arcux Bar Zone Impex Pvt. Ltd. , D- 26, LGF, Lajpat Nagar -2, New Delhi- 110024 and which is assigned the approval mark IND/09/ 10/592;
The said model is an Automatic Liquor Measure with a filling capacity of30 ml . at a time . It is used for filling the liquid products like liquor, beer, wine, soda etc. It is a computerized beverage dispensing equipment where an electronic switch activates a pump( s) and valve(s ) to dispense beverages in accurate, pre-programmed portions. Wunder- Bar dispensing systems are programmed by computer to associate particular electronic switches with opening particular valves for a particular amount of time in order to dispense a particular amount of liquid. Abutton is pressed at the dispensing station to pour a drink . It is a dispensing device where there is a central unit to which a ring reader is attached through a cord. The bottles are fitted with pourers and sealed. The liquor will dispensed from the bottle only when the pourer fitted bottle is taken through the ring reader.
Figure-1: Model
Sealwithlead
Figure-2 : Schematic diagram of the sealing provision of the model
Beverage dispensed through Wunder -Bar is kept in a locked back room which prevents unauthorized access to a beverage source . Equipment used to measure beverages can be mounted in locked cabinets or back rooms so that only the dispensing switch and nozzle is accessible to the user.
Further, in exercise ofthe powers conferred by sub- section ( 12 ) of Section 36 ofthe said Act, the Central Government hereby declares that this certificate of approval ofthe said Model shall also cover the weighing instruments of similar make , accuracy and performance of same series with maximum capacity up to 30 ml . 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 (341 )/2010 ]
B. N. DIXIT, Director of Legal Metrology
367 GI /2012-3 1318
THEGAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 18 , 2012/MAGHA 29 , 1933
[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii) ]
नई दिल्ली , 31 अक्तूबर , 2011
का. आ. 615.-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 वृंडर- बार डिस्पेंसिंग सिस्टम, आटोमेटिक बार कंट्रोल आईएनसी 790 , इयूबैंक्स ड्राइव , वैकाविले, कैलिफोर्निया -95688 द्वारा विनिर्मित आटोमेटिक लिकर मैजर के मॉडल का जिसके ब्रांड का नाम " वेंडर बार " है ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे मैसर्स एक्रूक्स बार जोन इम्पैक्स प्रा. लि. , डी-26, एल जी एफ, लाजपत नगर -2 , नई दिल्ली-110024 द्वारा भारत में बिक्री से पूर्व अथवा बाद में बिना किसी परिवर्तन के बिक्रीत किया गया है और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/09/10/593 समनुदेशित किया गया है , अनुमोदन प्रमाणपत्र जारी करती है;
उक्त मॉडल एक स्वचालित लिकर ( द्रव्य ) गाप है जिसकी एक समय पर भराव क्षमता 100 मि.लि. है । इसका उपयोग लिकर, बियर, शराब , सोडा आदि जैसे द्रव्य उत्पादों को भरने के लिए किया जाता है । एक इलैक्ट्रोनिक स्विचदाबयुक्त वाल्व पूर्व निर्धारित समय के लिए पेय पम्प को आरंभ करने के लिए लगाया गया है । जब पम्प को आरंभ किया जाता है , पम्प में से द्रव्य नलियों के माध्यम से डिस्पेंसिंग स्टेशन पर निकलती है । तदुपरांत डिस्पेंसिंग नोज़ल के माध्यम से पेय को डिस्पेंस होने के लिए एक पूर्व निर्धारित समय पर वाल्व खुल जाती है ।
आकृति -1
6.50
2900
562
ודידו
275
12 C
आकृति-2 : मॉडल को सीलिंग करने के लिए सीलिंग प्रावधान
बूंडर - बार के माध्यम से डिस्पेंस किए गए पेय को तालाबंद बैक रूप में रखा गया है जो पेय स्रोत तक अनाधिकृत पहुंच को रोकता है । पेय को मापने में उपयोग होने वाले उपकरण को तालाबंद कैबिनेट या बैक रूप में रखा जा सकता है ताकि डिस्पेंसिंग स्विच और नोज़ल तक केवल उपयोगकर्ता की पहुंच हो ।
और केन्द्रीय सरकार उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 की उप- धारा ( 12 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए यह घोषणा करती है किउक्त मॉडल के अनुमोदन के इस प्रमाणपत्र के अंतर्गत उसी विनिर्माता द्वारा उसी सिद्धांत , डिज़ाइन के अनुसार और उसी सामग्री से जिससे उक्त अनुमोदित मॉडल का विनिर्माण किया गया है, विनिर्मित उसी श्रृंखला के वैसे ही मेक , यथार्थता और कार्यपालन के तोलन उपकरण भी होंगे जो 100 मि.लि. तक की अधिकतम क्षमता वाले हैं ।
[फा. सं. डब्ल्यू एम -21 (341 ) /2010]
बी. एन. दीक्षित, निदेशक , विधिक माप विज्ञान 1319 [ भाग II-खंड 3 ( ii ) ]
भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 18 , 2012/माघ 29 , 1933
New Delhi , the 31st October, 2011
S.O. 615. 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 ofModels ) 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 Automatic Liquor Measure with Brand Name " Wunder -Bar " ( herein referred to as the said Model) manufactured by M/ s . Wunder-Bar Dispensing Systems, Automatic Bar Controis INC 790, Eubanks Drive, Vacaville , California -95688 and sold in India without any alteration before or after sale by M/s. Arcux Bar Zone Impex Pvt . Ltd. , D - 26 , LGF, Lajpat Nagar- 2, New Delhi - 110024 and which is assigned the approval mark IND/09/10/593 ;
The said model is an Automatic Liquor Measure with a filling capacity of 100 ml . at a time . It is used for filling the liquid products like liquor, beer, wine, soda etc. An electronic switch opens a pressurized valve to fire the beverage pump for a pre - set amount of time . When the pump is fired, liquid is forced out of the pump through tubes to the dispensing station . Simultaneously a valve opens at the dispensing station for a pre- set mount of time to allow the beverage to dispense through thedispensing nozzle .
Figure- 1: Model
8.50
2900
562
ןזידו
275
2.1
12 CABLE
Figure- 2 : Schematic diagram of the sealing provision of the model.
Beverage dispensed through Wunder-Bar is kept in a locked back room which prevents unauthorized access to a beverage source. Equipment used to measure beverages can be mounted in locked cabinets or back rooms so that only the dispensing switch and nozzle is accessible to the user.
Further, in exercise ofthe 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 with maximum capacity up to 100 ml. manufactured by the same manufacturer in accordance withthe same principle , design and with the same materials with which, the said approved model has been manufactured.
[F. No. WM-21 (341)/2010 ]
B. N. DIXIT, Director of Legal Metrology 1320
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 18 , 2012/ MAGHA 29 , 1933
[PART II-SEC. 3 (ii ) ]
नई दिल्ली, 31 अक्तूबर , 2011
का. आ. 616.-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 तुलसी ट्रेडिंग कंपनी , 68 , बालीगंज सरकुलर रोड, थर्ड फ्लोर, अन्नपूर्णा अपार्टमेंट, कोलकाता -19 द्वारा विनिर्मित यथार्थता वर्ग 0.5 वाले " पीटीएचडब्ल्यू" श्रृंखला के डिस्कंटिन्युअस टोटलाइजिंग स्वचालित तोलन उपकरण ( टोटलाइजिंग हुपर व्हीयर ) अंकक सूचन सहित , के मॉडल का, जिसके ब्रांड का नाम " तुलसी " है ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/09/10/29 समनुदेशित किया गया है, अनुमोदन प्रमाणपत्र जारी करती है;
उक्त मॉडल एक विकृत गेज प्रकार का भार सेल आधारित डिस्कॉटन्युअस टोटलाइजिंग स्वचालित तोलन उपकरण ( टोटलाइजिंग हुपर व्हीयर ) है । इसकी अधिकतम क्षमता 50 कि.ग्रा. है और न्यूनतम क्षमता 100 ग्रा. है । सत्यापन मापमान अंतराल ( डीटी ) 5 ग्रा. है । इसमें एक आधेयतुलन युक्ति है जिसका शत प्रतिशत व्यवकलनात्मक धारित आधेयतुलन प्रभाव है । प्रकाश उत्सर्जक डायोड ( एल ई डी ) तोल परिणाम प्रदर्शित करता है । उपकरण 230 वोल्ट और 50 हर्ट्ज प्रत्यावर्ती धारा विद्युत प्रदाय पर कार्य करता है ।
आकृति-1
PROVISION FOR SEALING
SIAMPING
आकृति-2: मॉडल को सीलिंग करने का योजनाबद्ध डायग्राम ।
स्केल की बॉडी के होल्स में से सीलिंग वायर निकाल कर सीलिंग की जाती है । मॉडल को सीलबंद करने के उपबंध का एक प्ररूपी योजनाबद्ध डायग्राम ऊपर दिया गया है ।
उपकरण में बाहरी केलिब्रेशन तक पहुंच की सुविधा है । बाहरी केलिब्रेशन तक पहुंच को रोकने के लिए ए/ डी कार्ड/मदर बोर्ड में डिप स्विच भी दिया गया है ।
और केन्द्रीय सरकार उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 की उप - धारा ( 12 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों 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 100 कि.ग्रा. तक की अधिकतम क्षमता वाले हैं और " ई " मान 1 × 10* , 2 × 10*, 5 × 10 *, के हैं, जो धनात्मक या ऋणात्मक पूर्णांक या शून्य के समतुल्य हैं ।
[फा. सं. डब्ल्यूएम-21 ( 285 ) /2010 ] बी. एन. दीक्षित , निदेशक, विधिक माप विज्ञान [ भाग II-खंड 3 (ii ) ]
1321 भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 18 , 2012/माघ 29, 1933
NewDelhi , the 31st October, 2011
S.O. 616. 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 ofModels) Rules, 1987 and the said model is likely to maintain its accuracy over periods of sustained use and to render accurate service under varied conditions;
Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub-sections (7) and (8) of Section 36 of the said Act , the Central Government hereby issues and publishes the certificate ofapproval ofthe Model ofAutomatic weighing instrument Discontinuous Totalizing Automatic weighing instrument (Totalizing Hopper Weigher) with digital indication of Accuracy class -0.5 of series " PTHW" and with brand name ' TULSI ' (hereinafter referred to as the said model ) , manufacturedby M/ s. Tulsi Trading Company, 68, Ballygunge Circular Road, 3rd Floor, Annapurna Appartment, Kolkata- 19 and which is assigned the approval mark IND/09/ 10/29 ;
The said model is strain gauge type load cell based Automatic weighing instrument Discontinuous Totalizing Automatic weighing instrument (Totalizing Hopper Weigher) with a maximum capacity of 50 kg . and minimum capacity of 100 g . The scale interval (d) is 5 g. The Light Emitting Diode (LED) display indicates the weighing results. The instrument operates on 230 Volts and 50 Hertz alternative current power supply.
Figure-1: Model (Hopper)
PROVISION FOR SEALING
LEADPLUGFOR STAMPING
Figure- 2 : Schematic diagram of the sealing provision 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. Adip switch has also been provided in A/D card/Motherboard to disable access to external calibration .
Further , in exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section ( 12) of Section 36 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 capacities up to 100 kg. with verification scale interval (n) in the range of500 to 10,000 for ' e' value of 5 g. or more and with ' e' value of 1 × 10 , 2 × 10kor 5 × 10 , where k is a positive or negative whole number or equal to zero , manufactured by the same manufacturer in accordance with the same principle , design and with the same materials with which , the said approved Model has been manufactured.
[F. No. WM -21 (285 )/2010] B. N. DIXIT, Director of Legal Metrology 1322
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 18, 2012/MAGHA 29, 1933
[PART II SBC. 3 ( ii) ]
नई दिल्ली, 31 अक्तूबर, 2011
का. आ. 617.--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 हुएमैसर्स मल्टिस्पीड गिअर्स प्रा. लि. , 153 तीसरा तल, लीला बिल्डिंग, ओखला इंडस्ट्रीयल एस्टेट, फेज III, नई दिल्ली-110020 द्वारा विनिर्मित " एएफएम-99" श्रृंखला के अंकक सूचन सहित " आटो फेयर मीटर " के मॉडल का, जिसके ब्रांड का नाम " एमएसजी " है ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/09/ 10/627 समनुदेशित किया गया है , अनुमोदन प्रमाणपत्र जारी करती है;
उक्तमॉडल " आटो फेयर मीटर " 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 फसन है जो प्राधिकृत शुल्क के अनुसार अनुपूरक भाड़े से स्वतंत्र है । मीटर की रीडिंग प्रकाश उत्सर्जक डायोड ( एल ई डी ) द्वारा दर्शायी जाती है । टैक्सी मीटर का ' के ' फैक्टर 1700 प्लसेस प्रति किलोमीटर पर चलता है । इंडीकेटर में 5 अंक अधिकतम किराया सूचन के लिए, 4 अंक अधिकतम दूरी दर्शाने के लिए और 3 अंक अधिकतम समय दर्शाने के लिए है ।
आकृति-1
Screw
Sealing Wire
Seal
आकृति-2: मॉडल को सीलिंग करने का योजनाबद्ध डायाग्राम ।
सील और स्टाम्प के सत्यापन के लिए दिए गए दो स्क्रू होल्ज वाले में से लीडिड वायर निकाल कर मीटर की रियर बाटम साइड में सीलिंग की जाती है । सील से छेड़ - छाड़ 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 ( 362) /2010 ]
बी. एन. दीक्षित, निदेशक , विधिक माप विज्ञान [ भाग II-खंड 3 ( ii ) ]
भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 18 , 2012/माघ 29, 1933
1323
New Delhi, the 31st October, 2011
S.O. 617.-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 ofWeights and Measures Act, 1976 (60 of 1976) and the Standards of Weights andMeasures (approval ofModels) Rules, 1987 and the said model is likely to maintain its accuracy over periods of sustained use andto render accurate service under varied conditions;
Now, therefore, in exercise ofthe powers conferred by sub-section (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 "Auto Fare Meter" with digital indication (hereinafter referred to as the said model) of" AFM-99 " series and with brand name " MSG" manufactured by M/sMultispeedGears Pvt Ltd, 153, 3rd Floor, Leela Building, Okhla Industrial Estate, Phase III , New Delhi - 110020 and which is assigned the approval mark IND/09/ 10/627;
The said model of" Auto Fare Meter" is a measuring instrument which totalizes continuously and indicates the fare at any moment ofjourney the charges payable by the passenger of a public vehicle as function of the distance traveled andbelow a certain speed, the fare is calculated as function of the time taken. This being independent ofsupplementary charges according to the authorized tariffs . The reading ofthe meter is indicated by the Light Emitting Diode (LED) . The 'k ' factor ofthe Taxi Meter is 1700 pulses per kilometer. The indicator have 5 digits for maximum fare indication, 4 digits for Maximum distance and 3 digits for waiting time indication (inminutes).
Figure-1
AUTOFARL 上比
Mounting
Mouning Screw
Sealing Wire
Seal
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 wirewill be passed to receive the verification seal and stamp. The meter cannot be opened without tamapering the seal. A schematic diagram of sealing provision of the model is given above.
[F. No. WM-21 (362)/2010]
B. N. DIXIT, Director of Legal Metrology [PART II-SEC. 3 ( ii )) THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 18 , 2012/MAGHA 29 , 1933
1324
नई दिल्ली, 31 अक्तूबर , 2011
का. आ. 618.- 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 प्राइम टेलेलिंक प्रा. लि. , प्लाट नं. एफ 76( ए-1 ) , रोड नं. 5 सी , वी के आई एरिया , जयपुर -30213 द्वारा विनिर्मित मध्यम यथार्थता (यथार्थता वर्ग- III ) वाले " पीटीटी " श्रृंखला के अंकक सूचन सहित अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण ( टेबल टॉप टाइप ) के माडल का, जिसके ब्रांड का नाम " प्राइम " है ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/09 / 10/326 समनुदेशित किया गया है, अनुमोदन प्रमाणपत्र जारी करती है;
उक्त मॉडल एक विकृत गेज प्रकार का भार सेल आधारित अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण ( टेबल टॉप प्रकार ) है । इसकी अधिकतम क्षमता 30 कि. ग्रा. और न्यूनतम क्षमता 100 ग्रा. है । सत्यापन मापमान अन्तराल ( ई ) 5 ग्रा. है । इसमें एक आधेयतुलन युक्ति है जिसका शत प्रतिशत व्यवकलनात्मक धारित आधेयतुलन प्रभाव है । प्रकाश उत्सर्जक डायोड ( एल ई डी ) प्रदर्श तोलन परिणाम उपदर्शित करता है । उपकरण 230 वोल्ट और 50 हर्ट्ज प्रत्यावर्ती धारा विद्युत प्रदाय पर कार्य करता है ।
आकृति-1
Lead seal
StampingPlate PRIME
kg
आकृति-2 : मॉडल को सीलिंग करने का योजनाबद्ध डायाग्राम ।
स्केल की बॉटम के चारों कोनों में चार हैड होल्ज स्क्रूज हैं । स्क्रूज के हैड होल में से सील वायर निकाला जा सकता है और सील को प्लग्ड एवं स्टाम्पड किया जा सकता है । वेइंग मशीन को कपटपूर्ण व्यवहार के लिए खोले जाने से रोकने के लिए सीलिंग की जाती है । मॉडल को सीलबंद करने के उपबंध का एक प्ररूपी योजनाबद्ध डायग्राम ऊपर दिया गया है ।
उपकरण में बाहरी केलिब्रेशन तक पहुंच की सुविधा है । बाहरी केलिब्रेशन तक पहुंच को रोकने के लिए ए/डी कार्ड/ मदर बोर्ड में डिप स्विच भी दिया गया है ।
और केन्द्रीय सरकार उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 की उप - धारा ( 12 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए यह घोषणा करती है कि उक्त मॉडल के अनुमोदन के इस प्रमाणपत्र के अंतर्गत उसी विनिर्माता द्वारा उसी सिद्धांत , डिज़ाइन के अनुसार और उसी सामग्री से जिससे उक्त अनुमोदित मॉडल का विनिर्माण किया गया है, विनिर्मित उसी श्रृंखला के वैसे ही मेक , यथार्थता और कार्यपालन के तोलन उपकरण भी होंगे जो 100 मि. ग्रा. से 2 ग्रा. तक के " ई " मान के लिए 100 से 10,000 तक के रेंज में सत्यापन मापमान अंतराल ( एन ) और 5 ग्रा. या उससे अधिक के " ई " मान के लिए 500 से 10,000 तक की रेंज में सत्यापन मापमान अंतराल ( एन ) सहित 50 कि. ग्रा. तक की अधिकतम क्षमता वाले हैं और " ई " मान 1 × 10 के, 2 × 10 के, 5 × 10*, के हैं, जो धनात्मक या ऋणात्मक पूर्णांक या शून्य के समतुल्य हैं ।
[फा. सं. डब्ल्यू एम -21 (211 )/2010 ] बी. एन. दीक्षित , निदेशक , विधिक माप विज्ञान 1325 भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 18 , 2012/माघ 29 , 1933
[ भाग II-खंड 3 ( ii) ]
New Delhi , the 31st October , 2011
S.O. 618. 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 ofModels) 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 - section (7 ) and (8) of Section 36 of the said Act, the Central Government hereby issues and publishes the certificate of approval of the model of non- automatic weighing instrument (Table top type ) with digital indication ofMedium Accuracy (Accuracy class - III) of series "PTT " and with brand name "PRIME" (hereinafter referred to as the said model ) , manufactured by M/s. Prime Telelink Pvt . Ltd. , Plot No. F-76 (A- 1 ), Road No. -5C, VKI Area, Jaipur -302013 which is assigned the approval mark IND/09/10/326.
The said model is a strain gauge type load cell based non - automatic weighing instrument (Table top type) with a maximum capacity of 30 kg and minimum capacity of 100 g. The verification scale interval (e) is 5 g. It has a tare device with a 100 percent substractive retained tare effect. The Light Emitting Diode (LED ) display indicates the weighing result. The instrument operates on 230 Volts, 50 Hertz alternative current power supply.
Figure-1
Lead seal
Stamping Plate PRIME
kg
Figure-2: Schematic Diagram of sealing provision of the model.
The scale has four head hole screws in four corners in its bottom . Through this head hole of the screws the seal wire can pass through and seal can be plugged and stamped. Sealing shall be done to prevent opening of the weighing machine for fraudulent practice . Atypical schematic diagram of sealing provision of the model is given above.
The instrument has external conrtrol to calibration. Adip 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 ofthe 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 andperformance of same series with maximum capacity up to 50 kg and with number of verification scale inerval (n ) in the range of 100 to 10,000 for ' e ' value of 100 mg to 2g and with number of verification scale interval (n) in the range of500 to 10,000 for ' e' value of 5g or more and with ' e ' value 1 × 10k, 2 × 10k, or.5 × 10k, k being the positive or nevative 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 (211 )/2010 ]
B. N. DIXIT, Director of Legal Metrology
367GI /2012-4 1326
THEGAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 18, 2012/MAGHA 29, 1933
[PART II-SEC. 3 (ii ) ]
नई दिल्ली, 31 अक्तूबर, 2011
का. आ. 619.-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 केंद्रीय सरकार , उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 की उप- धारा ( 7 ) और उप- धारा ( 8 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए मैसर्स प्राइम टेलेलिंक प्रा. लि. , प्लाट नं. एफ 76 ( ए-1 ) , रोड नं. 5 सी, वी के आई एरिया , जयपुर-302013 द्वारा विनिर्मित मध्यम यथार्थता ( यथार्थता वर्ग- III ) वाले " पीटीपी " श्रृंखला के अंकक सूचन सहित अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण ( प्लेटफार्म टाइप ) के मॉडल का, जिसके ब्रांड का नाम " प्राइम " है ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/09 / 10/ 327 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 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 ।
आकृति-1
Stamping plate
000019
Lead seal
(Indicator of the Platform Scale- Front Side
Stamping Plate
Sealingwire,
Lead seal
आकृति-2 : मॉडल को सीलिंग करने का योजनाबद्ध डायाग्राम ।
स्केल की बॉडी के होल्स में से सीलिंग वायर निकाल कर सीलिंग की जाती है । मॉडल को सीलबंद करने के उपबंध का एक प्ररूपी योजनाबद्ध डायग्राम ऊपर दिया गया है ।
उपकरण में बाहरी केलिब्रेशन तक पहुंच की सुविधा है । बाहरी केलिब्रेशन तक पहुंच को रोकने के लिए ए/ डी कार्ड/मदर बोर्ड में डिप स्विच भी दिया गया है ।
और केन्द्रीय सरकार उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 की उप- धारा ( 12 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए यह घोषणा करती है कि उक्त मॉडल के अनुमोदन के इस प्रमाणपत्र के अंतर्गत उसी विनिर्माता द्वारा उसी सिद्धांत , डिज़ाइन के अनुसार और उसी सामग्री से जिससे उक्त अनुमोदित मॉडल का विनिर्माण किया गया है, विनिर्मित उसी श्रृंखला के वैसे ही मेक , यथार्थता और कार्यपालन के तोलन उपकरण भी होंगे जो 100 मि. ग्रा. से 2 ग्रा. तक के " ई " मान के लिए 100 से 10,000 तक के रेंज में सत्यापन मापमान अंतराल ( एन ) और 5 ग्रा. या उससे अधिक के " ई " मान के लिए 500 से 10,000 तक की रेंज में सत्यापन मापमान अंतराल ( एन ) सहित 50 कि. ग्रा. से 5,000 कि. ग्रा. तक की अधिकतम क्षमता वाले हैं और " ई " मान 1 × 10* , 2 × 10 * , 5 × 10* , के हैं , जो धनात्मक या ऋणात्मक पूर्णांक या शून्य के समतुल्य हैं ।
[फा. सं. डब्ल्यू एम-21 ( 211) /2010 ] बी. एन. दीक्षित, निदेशक , विधिक माप विज्ञान [ भाग II-खंड 3 ( ii) ]
1327 भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 18, 2012/माघ 29, 1933
New Delhi , the 31st October, 2011
S.O. 619. 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 andMeasures (Approval ofModels ) Rules, 1987 and the said model is likely to maintain its accuracy over periods of sustained use andto render accurate service under varied conditions;
Now, therefore, in exercise 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 " PRIME " (hereinafter referred to as the said model ) , manufactured by M/s . Prime Telelink Pvt . Ltd. , Plot No. F -76 (A- 1 ), Road No. -5C, VKI Area, Jaipur - 302013 which is assigned the approval mark IND/09/ 10/327.
The said model is a stain gauge type load cell based non - automatic weighing instrument (Platform type) with a maximum 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 percent substractive retained tare effect . The light emitting diode (LED) display indicates the weighing result. The instrument operates on 230 Volts , 50 Hertz alternative current power supply.
Figure-1: Model
Stamping plate
ka
0000
Lead seal
findicator of the Platform Scale- Front Side )
Stamping Plate
Lead seal
Sealingwire
Figure -2 : Schematic Diagram of sealing provision 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 . Adip switch has also been provided in A/D Card/Mother board to disable access to external calibration .
Further, in exercise of the powers conferredby sub- section ( 12 ) ofSection 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 . & up to 5,000 kg. with verification scale inerval (n) in the range of 100 to 10,000 for ' e ' value of 100 mg to 2g and with number of verification scale interval ( n) in the range of500 to 10,000 for ' e ' value of 5g. or more and with ' e ' value 1 × 10k , 2 × 10% , or 5 × 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 ( 211 )/2010 ] B. N. DIXIT, Director of Legal Metrology 1328
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 18 , 2012/MAGHA 29 , 1933
[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii)]
नई दिल्ली, 31 अक्तूबर , 2011
का. आ. 620.-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 स्टरलिंग वेइंग सिस्टम , प्लाट नं. बी-71 , सेक्टर -25 , जी आई डी सी, गांधीनगर-382025 , गुजरात द्वारा विनिर्मित उच्च यथार्थता ( यथार्थता वर्ग- II ) वाले " एस टी जे -13 " श्रृंखला के अंकक सूचन सहित अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण ( टेबलटॉप टाइप ) के मॉडल का, जिसके ब्रांड का नाम " स्टरलिंग " है ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/09 / 10/ 561 समनुदेशित किया गया है, अनुमोदन प्रमाणपत्र जारी करती है;
उक्त मॉडल एक विकृत गेज प्रकार का भार सेल आधारित अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण ( टेबलटॉप प्रकार ) है । इसकी अधिकतम क्षमता 30 कि. ग्रा. 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 ।
SEAL WITH STAMPING PNA
OTHER SIDE SEALING
STERLING
B2085
आकृति-2 : मॉडल को सीलिंग करने का योजनाबद्ध डायाग्राम ।
डिस्पले की बॉडी में से सीलिंग वायर निकाल कर डिस्पले पर सीलिंग की जाती है । सील के साथ जुड़े हुए डिस्पले के बेस प्लेट और टॉप कवर में बने दो छेदों में से सीलिंग वायर निकाल कर सील से जोड़ा गया है । मॉडल को सीलबंद करने के उपबंध का एक प्ररूपी योजनाबद्ध डायग्राम ऊपर दिया गया है ।
उपकरण में बाहरी केलिब्रेशन तक पहुंच की सुविधा है । बाहरी केलिब्रेशन तक पहुंच को रोकने के लिए ए/डी कार्ड/ मदर बोर्ड में डिप स्विच भी दिया गया है ।
और केन्द्रीय सरकार उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 की उप- धारा ( 12 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए यह घोषणा करती है कि उक्त मॉडल के अनुमोदन के इस प्रमाणपत्र के अंतर्गत उसी विनिर्माता द्वारा उसी सिद्धांत , डिज़ाइन 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 के रेंज में सत्यापन मापमान अंतराल ( एन ) और 100 मि. ग्रा. या उससे अधिक के " ई " मान के लिए 5,000 से 1,00,000 तक की रेंज में सत्यापन मापमान अंतराल ( एन ) सहित 50 कि. ग्रा. तक की अधि कतम क्षमता वाले हैं और " ई " मान 1 × 10* , 2× 10* , 5 × 10* , के हैं, जो धनात्मक या ऋणात्मक पूर्णांक या शून्य के समतुल्य हैं ।
[फा. सं. डब्ल्यूएम-21 ( 323 ) /2010 ] बी. एन. दीक्षित , निदेशक, विधिक माप विज्ञान 1329 [ भाग II-खंड 3 ( ii ) ]
भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 18 , 2012/माघ 29 , 1933
New Delhi , the 31st October , 2011
S.O. 620. 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 " STJ - 13 " and with brand name " STERLING" ( hereinafter referred to as the said model ) , manufactured by M/s. Sterling Weighing System , Plot No. B-71 , Sector-25 , G I. D.C. , Gandhinagar- 382025, Gujarat and which is assigned the approval mark IND/09/ 10/561 ;
The said model is a stain gauge type load cell based non -automatic weighing instrument ( Table top type ) with a maximum capacity of 30 kg. and minimum capacity of 100 g . The verification scale interval ( e) is 2 g. It has a tare device with a 100 percent subtractive retained tare effect . The Light Emitting Diode (LED ) display indicates the weighing result . The instrument operates on 230 Volts, 50 Hertz alternative current power supply.
Figure- 1
SEAL WITH STAMPING PLA
OTHER SIDE SEALING
B2085
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 hole in base plate and top cover of display, then seal wire is passed through these two holes attached with seal . A typical schematic diagram of sealing provision of the model is given above .
The instrument has external control to calibration . Adip switch has also been provided in A/D Card/mother board to disable access to external calibration .
Further , in exercise 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 witin maximum capacity up to 50 kg . with verification scale interval (n ) in the range of 100 to 1,00,000 for ' e' value of 1 mg to 50 mg. and with verification scale interval (n) in the range of 5,000 to 1,00,000 for ' e' value of 100 mg or more and with ' e ' value of 1 × 10k, 2 × 10%, or 5 × 10k , where k is a positive or negative whole number or equal to zero , manufactured by the same manufacturer in accordance with the same principle , design and with the same materials with which , the approved model has been manufactured.
[F. No. WM-21 (323 )/2010 ]
B. N. DIXIT, Director of Legal Metrology 1330
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 18 , 2012/MAGHA 29 , 1933
[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii ) ]
नई दिल्ली , 31 अक्तूबर , 2011
का. आ. 621.-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 स्टरलिंग वेइंग सिस्टम , प्लाट नं. बी -71 , सेक्टर -25 , जी आई डी सी, गांधीनगर -382025 , गुजरात द्वारा विनिर्मित मध्यम यथार्थता ( यथार्थता वर्ग- III ) वाले " एस टी टी-11 " श्रृंखला के अंकक सूचन सहित अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण ( टेबल टॉप टाइप ) के मॉडल का , जिसके ब्रांड का नाम " स्टरलिंग " है ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/09/ 10/562 समनुदेशित किया गया है , अनुमोदन प्रमाणपत्र जारी करती है;
उक्तमॉडल एक विकृत गेज प्रकार का भार सेल आधारित अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण ( टेबल टॉप प्रकार है । इसकी अधिकतम क्षमता 30 कि. ग्रा. और न्यूनतम क्षमता 100 ग्रा. है । सत्यापन मापमान अन्तराल ( ई ) 5 ग्रा. है । इसमें एक आधेयतुलन युक्ति है जिसका शत प्रतिशत व्यवकलनात्मक धारित आधेयतुलन प्रभाव है । प्रकाश उत्सर्जक डायोड ( एल ई डी ) प्रदर्श तोलन परिणाम उपदर्शित करता है । उपकरण 230 वोल्ट और 50 हर्ट्ज प्रत्यावर्ती धारा विद्युत प्रदाय पर कार्य करता है ।
आकृति -1
MANS
STAMPINGPLATE BALIHO
LOAD SEAL
ON
OFF
888888
ON-OFF
TARE
Z
ZERO
OTHER SIR BALING
82083
आकृति-2: मॉडल को सीलिंग करने का योजनाबद्ध डायग्राम ।
डिस्पले की बॉडी में से सीलिंग वायर निकाल कर डिस्पले पर सीलिंग की जाती है । सील के साथ जुड़े हुए डिस्पले के बेस प्लेट और टॉप कवर में बने दो छेदों में से सीलिंग वायर निकाल कर सील से जोड़ा गया है । मॉडल को सीलबंद करने के उपबंध का एक प्ररूपी योजनाबद्ध डायग्राम 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 , डिज़ाइन 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 2 ग्रा. तक के " ई " मान के लिए 100 से 10,000 तक के रेंज में सत्यापन मापमान अंतराल ( एन ) और 5 ग्रा. या उससे अधिक के " ई " मान के लिए 500 से 10,000 तक की रेंज में सत्यापन मापमान अंतराल ( एन ) सहित 50 कि. ग्रा. तक की अधिकतम क्षमता वाले हैं और " ई " मान 1 × 10 , 2 × 10*, 5× 10* , के हैं , जो धनात्मक या ऋणात्मक पूर्णांक या शून्य के समतुल्य हैं ।
[फा. सं. डब्ल्यूएम-21 ( 323 )/2010 ] बी. एन. दीक्षित , निदेशक, विधिक माप विज्ञान [ भाग II-खंड 3 ( ii ) ]
1331 भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 18 , 2012/माघ 29 , 1933
New Delhi , the 31st October, 2011
S.O. 621.-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 andto render accurate service under varied conditions;
Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub- sections (7) and (8 ) of Section 36 of the said Act , the Central Government hereby issues and publishes the certificate of approval of the model of non - automatic weighing instrument (Table Top Type ) with digital indication ofMedium Accuracy (Accuracy class- III) of series " STT- 11 " and with brand name " STERLING " (hereinafter referred to as the said model ) , manufactured by M/s . Sterling Weighing System, Plot No.B- 71 , Sector- 25 , G I. D.C. , Gandhinagar - 382025 , Gujarat and which is assigned the approval mark IND/09/ 10/562;
The said model is a strain gauge type load cell based non - automatic weighing instrument (Table Top Type) with a maximum capacity of 30 kg . and minimum capacity of 100 g. The verification scale interval (e ) is 5 g . It has a tare device with a 100 percent substractive retained tare effect. The Light Emitting Diode (LED) Display indicates the weighing result . The instrument operates on 230 Volts, 50 Hertz alternative current power supply.
Figure-1
MANS
STERLING
STAMPINOPLATE MALINO
LOADSEAL
ON OFR
888888
ON-OFF.
TARE
ZERO
STEALING
179 OTHER BIS MALING
182083
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 hole in base plate and top cover of display, then seal wire is passed through these two holes attached with seal . A typical schematic diagram of sealing provision of the model is given above .
The instrument has external control to calibration . 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 50 kg . with verification scale interval (n) in the range of 100 to 10,000 for ' e ' value of 1 mg . to 2 g . and with verification scale interval ( n) in the range of 5,00 to 10,000 for ' e ' value of 5 g. or more and with ' e ' value of 1 × 10k , 2 × 10k , or 5 × 10k , where k is a positive or negative whole number or equal to zero , manufactured by the same manufacturer in accordance with the same principle , design and with the same materials with which , the said approved model has been manufactured .
[F. No. WM -21 ( 323 )/2010 ] B. N. DIXIT, Director of Legal Metrology 1332
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: FEBRUARY 18 , 2012/MAGHA 29 , 1933
[PART II-SEC. 3 ( ii )]
नई दिल्ली, 31 अक्तूबर, 2011
का. आ. 622.-केन्द्रीय सरकार का, विहित प्राधिकारी द्वारा उसे प्रस्तुत रिपोर्ट पर विचार करने के पश्चात् यह समाधान हो गया है कि उक्त रिपोर्ट में वर्णित मॉडल ( नीचे दी गई आकृति देखें ) बाट और माप मानक अधिनियम, 1976 ( 1976 का 60 ) तथा बाट और माप मानक (मॉडलों का अनुमोदन ) नियम , 1987 के उपबंधों के अनुरूप है और इस बात की संभावना है कि लगातार प्रयोग की अवधि में भी उक्त मॉडल यथार्थता बनाए रखेगा और विभिन्न परिस्थितियों में उपयुक्त सेवा प्रदान करता रहेगा;
अतः अब केन्द्रीय सरकार, उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 की उपधारा (7 ) और उपधारा ( 8 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए मैसर्स स्टरलिंग वेइंग सिस्टम , प्लाट नं. बी-71 , सेक्टर -25 , जी आई डी सी गांधीनगर-382025 , गुजरात द्वारा विनिर्मित मध्यम यथार्थता ( यथार्थता वर्ग- III ) वाले " एस टी पी-7 " श्रृंखला के अंकक सूचन सहित अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण ( प्लेटफार्म टाइप ) के मॉडल का, जिसके ब्रांड का नाम " स्टरलिंग " है ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/09/ 10/563 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 1,000 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 ।
CGUAR SE
SALAM
BALL WTH STAMPINGPLATF
82084
आकृति-2: मॉडल को सीलिंग करने का योजनाबद्ध डायग्राम ।
डिस्पले की बॉडी में से सीलिंग वायर निकाल कर डिस्पले पर सीलिंग की जाती है । सील के साथ जुड़े हुए डिस्पले के बेस प्लेट और टॉप कवर में बने दो छेदों में से सीलिंग वायर निकाल कर सील से जोड़ा गया है । मॉडल को सीलबंद करने के उपबंध का एक प्ररूपी योजनाबद्ध डायग्राम उपरोक्त दिया गया है ।
उपकरण में बाहरी केलिब्रेशन तक पहुंच की सुविधा है । बाहरी केलिब्रेशन तक पहुंच को रोकने के लिए ए/ डी कार्ड /मदर बोर्ड में डिप स्विच भी दिया गया है ।
और केन्द्रीय सरकार उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 की उपधारा ( 12 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए यह घोषणा करती है कि उक्त मॉडल के अनुमोदन के इस प्रमाणपत्र के अंतर्गत उसी विनिर्माता द्वारा उसी सिद्धांत , डिज़ाइन 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 1 × 10 , 2× 10 *, 5 × 10* के, हैं, जो धनात्मक या ऋणात्मक पूर्णांक या शून्य के समतुल्य हैं ।
[फा. सं. डब्ल्यू एम-21 ( 323 ) /2010 ] बी. एन. दीक्षित , निदेशक , विधिक माप विज्ञान [भाग II-खंड 3 (ii ) ]
भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 18 , 2012/माघ 29 , 1933
1333
NewDelhi, the 31st October, 2011
S.O. 622. 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) ofseries " STP- 7" and with brand name " STERLING " ( hereinafter referred to as the said model ) , manufactured by M/s . Sterling Weighing System, Plot No.B-71 , Sector-25 , G I. D.C. , Gandhinagar- 382025 , Gujarat and which is assigned the approval mark IND/09/ 10/563 ;
Thesaid model is a strain gauge type load cell based non-automatic weighing instrument (Platform type ) with a maximum capacity of 1,000 kg . and minimum capacity of2 kg. The verification scale interval (e) is 100 g. It has a tare device with a 100 per cent substractive 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
STANTING PLATI
82084
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 hole in base plate and top cover of display, then seal wire is passed through these two holes attached with seal . A typical schematic diagram of sealing provision of the model is given above.
The instrument has external control to calibration . A dip switch has also been provided in A/D Card/mother board to disable access to external calibration .
Further, in exercise ofthe power conferred by sub -section ( 12) of Section 36 of the said Act, the Central Government hereby declares that this certificate of approval of the said model shall also cover the weighing instruments of similar make, accuracy and performance of same series with maximum capacity above 50 kg. and upto 5000 kg. with verification scale interval ( n) in the range of 500 to 10,000 for ' e' value of 5 g. or more and with ' e' value of 1 × 10 , 2 × 10 , or 5 × 10k, where k is a positive or negative whole number or equal to zero manufactured by the same manufacturer in accordance with the same principle, design and with the same materials with which, the said approved model has been manufactured.
[F. No. WM-21 ( 323 )/2010 ]
B. N. DIXIT, Director of Legal Metrology
367 G1 /2012-5 1334
[PART II-SEC. 3 (ii )] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 18 , 2012/ MAGHA 29, 1933
नई दिल्ली , 31 अक्तूबर, 2011
का. आ. 623.-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 स्टरलिंग वेइंग सिस्टम , प्लाट नं. बी-71 , सेक्टर -25 , जी आई डी सी, गांधीनगर -382025 गुजरात द्वारा विनिर्मित मध्यम यथार्थता ( यथार्थता वर्ग- III ) वाले " एसटीडब्ल्यू-5 " श्रृंखला के अंकक सूचन सहित अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण ( इलेक्ट्रानिक वेब्रिज ) के मॉडल का , जिसके ब्रांड का नाम " स्टरलिंग " है ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/09/ 10/564 समनुदेशित किया गया है, अनुमोदन प्रमाणपत्र जारी करती है;
उक्तमॉडल एक विकृत गेज प्रकार का भार सेल आधारित अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण ( इलेक्ट्रानिक वेब्रिज ) है । इसकी अधिकतम क्षमता 50 टन है और न्यूनतम क्षमता 100 कि. ग्रा. है । सत्यापन मापमान अंतराल ( ई ) 5 कि. ग्रा. है । इसमें एक आधेयतुलन युक्ति है जिसका शत प्रतिशत व्यवकलनात्मक धारित आधेयतुलन प्रभाव है । प्रकाश उत्सर्जक डायोड ( एल ई डी ) तोलन परिणाम उपदर्शित करता है । उपकरण 230 वोल्ट और 50 हर्ट्ज प्रत्यावर्ती धारा विद्युत प्रदाय पर कार्य करता है ।
STERLING
OTHER SIDE SEALING
SEAL WITH
STAMPING PLATE
आकृति-2 : मॉडल को सीलिंग करने का योजनाबद्ध डायग्राम ।
डिस्पले की बॉडी में से सीलिंग वायर निकाल कर डिस्पले के राइट साइड/बैक साइड में सीलिंग की जाती है । सील के साथ जुड़े हुए डिस्पले के बेस प्लेट और टॉप कवर में वने दो छेदों में से सीलिंग वायर निकाल कर सील से जोड़ा गया है । मॉडल को सीलबंद करने के उपबंध का एक प्ररूपी योजनाबद्ध डायग्राम उपरोक्त दिया गया है ।
उपकरण में बाहरी केलिब्रेशन तक पहुंच की सुविधा है । बाहरी केलिब्रेशन तक पहुंच को रोकने के लिए ए/डी कार्ड/ मदर बोर्ड में डिप स्विच भी दिया गया है ।
और केन्द्रीय सरकार उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 की उपधारा ( 12 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए यह घोषणा करती है किउक्त मॉडल के अनुमोदन के इस प्रमाणपत्र के अंतर्गत उसी विनिर्माता द्वारा उसी सिद्धांत , डिज़ाइन 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 5 टन से 200 टन तक की अधिकतम क्षमता वाले हैं और " ई " मान 1 × 10*, 2× 10*, 5 × 10 * , के हैं, जो धनात्मक या ऋणात्मक पूर्णांक या शून्य के समतुल्य हैं ।
[फा. सं. डब्ल्यूएम -21 ( 323 )/2010 ] बी. एन. दीक्षित , निदेशक, विधिक माप विज्ञान [ भाग II-खंड 3 (ii) ]
भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 18 , 2012/माघ 29 , 1933
1335
New Delhi , the 31st October, 2011
S.O. 623. 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 and certificate of approval of the model of non- automatic weighing instrument (Electronic Weighbridge) with digital indication of Medium Accuracy ( Accuracy class - III ) of series " STW-5 " and with brand name " STERLING" ( hereinafter referred to as the said model ) , manufactured by M/s Sterling Weighing System, Plot No. B-71 , Sector-25, GI.D.C. , Gandhinagar- 382025, Gujarat and which is assigned the approval mark IND/09/10/ 564;
The said model is a strain gauge type load cell based non - automatic weighing instrument (Electronic Weighbridge) with a maximum capacity of 50 tonne and minimum capacity of 100 kg. The verification scale interval (e) is 5 kg. 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.
Figure-1
STERLING
OTHER SI SEALING
SEAL WITH
STAMPING PLATE
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 hole in base plate & top cover of display, then seal wire is passed through these two holes attached with seal . Atypical schematic diagram of sealing provision of the model is given above.
The instrument has external control to calibration. 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 with maximum capacity above 5 tonne and upto 200 tonne with verification scale interval (n) in the range of 500 to 10,000 for ' e ' value of 5g. or above and with ' e ' value of 1 × 10% , 2 × 10k or 5× 10k , where k is a positive or negative whole number or equal to zero , manufactured by the same manufacturer in accordance with the same principle, design and with the same materials with which, the said approved model has been manufactured.
[F. No. WM-21 (323 )/2010 ]
B. N. DIXIT, Director of Legal Metrology [PART II-SEC . 3 (ii )] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 18 , 2012/MAGHA 29, 1933
1336
नई दिल्ली, 31 अक्तूबर , 2011
का. आ. 624.- केन्द्रीय सरकार का, विहित प्राधिकारी द्वारा उसे प्रस्तुत रिपोर्ट पर विचार करने के पश्चात् यह समाधान हो गया है किउक्तरिपोर्ट में वर्णित मॉडल ( नीचे दी गई आकृति देखें ) बाट और माप मानक अधिनियम , 1976 ( 1976 का 60 ) तथा बाट और माप मानक (मॉडलों का अनुमोदन ) नियम , 1987 के उपबंधों के अनुरूप है और इस बात की संभावना है कि लगातार प्रयोग की अवधि में भी उक्त मॉडल यथार्थता बनाए रखेगा और विभिन्न परिस्थितियों में उपयुक्त सेवा प्रदान करता रहेगा;
अतः अब केन्द्रीय सरकार, उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 की उप- धारा ( 7 ) और उप- धारा ( 8 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए मैसर्स कालटैक इंस्ट्रूमेंट्स प्लॉट नं. 23 , प्रथम तल , श्री श्री नगर , स्वरूप नगर , वेंकटेश्वर टेम्पल रोड, उप्पाल , हैदराबाद , आंध्र प्रदेश द्वारा विनिर्मित मध्यम यथार्थता ( यथार्थता वर्ग- III ) वाले " सीटीपीएफ " श्रृंखला के अंकक सूचन सहित अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण ( प्लेटफार्म टाइप ) के मॉडल का , जिसके ब्रांड का नाम " कालटैक" है ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/09/ 10/35 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 : ,000 कि.ग्रा. और न्यूनतम क्षमता 4 कि. ग्रा. है । सत्यापन मापमान अंतराल ( ई ) 200 ग्रा. है । इसमें एक आधेयतुलन युक्ति है जिसका शत प्रतिशत व्यवकलनात्मक धारित आधेयतुलन प्रभाव है । प्रकाश उत्सर्जक डायोड ( एल ई डी) प्रदर्श तोलन परिणाम उपदर्शित करता है । उपकरण 230 वोल्ट और 50 हर्ट्ज प्रत्यावर्ती धारा विद्युत प्रदाय पर कार्य करता है ।
आकृति-2: मॉडल को सीलिंग करने का योजनाबद्ध डायग्राम ।
डिस्पले की बॉडी में से सीलिंग वायर निकाल कर डिस्पले के दायीं ओर पीछे की ओर सीलिंग की जाती है । सील के साथ जुड़े हुए डिस्पले के बेस प्लेट और टॉप कवर में बने दो छेदों में से सीलिंग वायर निकाल कर सील से जोड़ा गया है । मॉडल को सीलबंद करने के उपबंध का एक प्ररूपी योजनाबद्ध डायग्राम उपरोक्त दिया गया है ।
उपकरण में बाहरी केलिब्रेशन तक पहुंच की सुविधा है । बाहरी केलिब्रेशन तक पहुंच को रोकने के लिए ए/डी कार्ड/मदर बोर्ड में डिप स्विच भी दिया गया है ।
और केन्द्रीय सरकार उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 की उपधारा ( 12 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए यह घोषणा करती है कि उक्त मॉडल के अनुमोदन के इस प्रमाणपत्र के अंतर्गत उसी विनिर्माता द्वारा उसी सिद्धांत , डिज़ाइन 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 1 × 10*, 2× 10 * , 5× 10 *, के हैं, जो धनात्मक या ऋणात्मक पूर्णांक या शून्य के समतुल्य हैं ।
[फा. सं. डब्ल्यू एम-21 (35 )/2010 ] बी. एन. दीक्षित, निदेशक, विधिक माप विज्ञान 1337 [ भाग II-खंड 3 (ii) ]
भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 18 , 2012/माघ 29 , 1933
New Delhi , the 31st October, 2011
S.O. 624. 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 givenbelow) is in conformity with the provisions of the Standards ofWeights and Measures Act, 1976 (60 of 1976) and the Standards ofWeights and Measures (Approval of Models) Rules, 1987 and the said model is likely to maintain its accuracy over periods of sustained use and to render accurate service under varied conditions;
Now, therefore, in exercise ofthe powers conferred by sub-sections (7) and (8) of Section 36 of the said Act, the Central Government hereby issues and publishes and certificate of approval of the model of non-automatic weighing instrument (Platform type ) with digital indication of Medium Accuracy (Accuracy class- III) of series "CTPF" and with brand name " CALTECH" (hereinafter referred to as the said model) , manufactured by M/ s Caltech Instruments, Plot No. 23 , First Floor, Sri Sri Nagar, Swaroop Nagar, Venketeshwara Temple Road, Uppal , Hyderabad, A.P. which is assigned the approval mark IND/09/10/35;
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 4 kg. The verification scale interval (e) is 200g. It has a tare device with a 100per cent subtractive retained tare effect . The Light Emitting Diode (LED) display indicates the weighing result . The instrument operates on 230 Volts, 50 Hertz alternative current power supply.
Figure-1
Figure- 2 : Schematic diagram of sealing provision of themodel.
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 hole in base plate & top cover of display, then seal wire is passed through these two holes attached with seal . A typical schematic diagram of sealing provision of the model is given above.
The instrument has external control to calibration. 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 with maximum capacity above 50 kg upto 5000 kg . with verification scale interval (n) in the range of 500 to 10,000 for ' e ' value of 5g or more and with ' e ' value of 1 × 10k , 2 × 10 or 5 × 10k, where k is a positive or negative whole number or equal to zero , manufactured by the same manufacturer in accordance with the same principle , design and with the same materials with which, the said approved model has been manufactured.
[F. No. WM-21 (35)/2010 ]
B. N. DIXIT, Director of Legal Metrology 1338
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 18, 2012/MAGHA 29, 1933
[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii ) ]
नई दिल्ली, 31 अक्तूबर, 2011
का. आ. 625.-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 कालटैक इंस्ट्रूमेंट्स प्लॉट नं. 23 , प्रथम तल , श्री श्रीनगर , स्वरूप नगर , वेंकटेश्वर टेम्पल रोड , उप्पाल हैदराबाद, आंध्र प्रदेश द्वारा विनिर्मित उच्च यथार्थता ( यथार्थता वर्ग- II ) वाले " सीटीटीएम " श्रृंखला के अंकक सूचन सहित अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण ( टेबल टॉप टाइप ) के मॉडल का, जिसके ब्रांड का नाम " कालटैक " है ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/09/10/33 समनुदेशित किया गया है , अनुमोदन प्रमाणपत्र जारी करती है;
उक्त मॉडल एक विकृत गेज प्रकार का भार सेल आधारित अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण ( टेबल टॉप प्रकार ) है । इसकी अधिकतम क्षमता 30 कि.ग्रा. और न्यूनतम क्षमता 100 ग्रा. है । सत्यापन मापमान अंतराल ( ई ) 2 ग्रा. है । इसमें एक आधेयतुलन युक्ति है जिसका शत प्रतिशत व्यवकलनात्मक धारित आधेयतुलन प्रभाव है । प्रकाश उत्सर्जक डायोड ( एल ई डी ) प्रदर्श तोलन परिणाम उपदर्शित करता है । उपकरण 230 वोल्ट और 50 हर्ट्ज प्रत्यावर्ती धारा विद्युत प्रदाय पर कार्य करता है ।
000
SEALING Poul
आकृति-2 : मॉडल को सीलिंग करने का योजनाबद्ध डायग्राम ।
डिस्पले की बॉडी में से सीलिंग वायर निकाल कर डिस्पले के दायीं ओर पीछे की ओर सीलिंग की जाती है । सील के साथ जुड़े हुए डिस्पले के बेस प्लेट और टॉप कवर में बने दो छेदों में से सीलिंग वायर निकाल कर सील से जोड़ा गया है । मॉडल को सीलबंद करने के उपबंध का एक प्ररूपी योजनाबद्ध डायग्राम उपरोक्त दिया गया है ।
उपकरण में बाहरी केलिब्रेशन तक पहुंच की सुविधा है । बाहरी केलिब्रेशन तक पहुंच को रोकने के लिए ए/डी कार्ड/ मदर बोर्ड में डिप स्विच भी दिया गया है ।
और केन्द्रीय सरकार उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 की 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 , डिज़ाइन 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 के 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 1× 10 * , 2× 10*, 5 × 10*, के हैं, जो धनात्मक या ऋणात्मक पूर्णांक या शून्य के समतुल्य हैं ।
[फा. सं. डब्ल्यू एम -21 (35 )/2010 ] बी. एन. दीक्षित , निदेशक, विधिक माप विज्ञान 1339 [ भाग II-खंड 3 (ii ) ]
भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 18 , 2012/माघ 29 , 1933
NewDelhi , the 31st October, 2011
S.O. 625. 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 (ApprovalofModels ) 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 and 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 " CTTM " and with brand name " CALTECH" (hereinafter referred to as the said model ) , manufactured by M/s Caltech Instruments , Plot No. 23 , First Floor, Sri Sri Nagar, Swaroop Nagar, Venketeshwara Temple Road, Uppal Hyderabad, A.P. which is assigned the approval mark IND/09/ 10/33;
The said model is a strain gauge type load cellbased non - automatic weighing instrument (Tabletop type) with a maximum capacity of 30 kg and minimum capacity of 100 g . The verification scale interval (e) is 2 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 , 50 Hertz alternative current power supply.
Figure- 1
STAMY PLAT
000
NG POINT
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 hole in base plate & top cover of display, then seal wire is passed through these two holes attached with seal . A typical schematic diagram of sealing provision of the model is given above.
The instrument has external control to calibration. Adip switch has also been provided in A/D card/Mother board to disable access to external calibration .
Further, in exercise 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 with maximum capacity upto 50 kg and with number ofverification scale interval (n) in the range of 100 to 50,000 for ' e ' value of 1 mg to 50 mg and with number of verification scale interval (n) in the range of5,000 to 50,000 for ' e ' value of 100 mg or more and with ' e ' value of 1 × 10k , 2 × 10kor5 × 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 (35 )/2010 ]
B. N. DIXIT, Director of Legal Metrology 1340
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 18 , 2012/MAGHA 29, 1933
[PART II-SEC. 3 (ii )]
नई दिल्ली , 31 अक्तूबर, 2011
का. आ. 626.-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 उक्तमॉडल यथार्थता बनाए रखेगा और विभिन्न परिस्थितियों में उपयुक्त सेवा प्रदान करता रहेगा;
अतः अब केन्द्रीय सरकार , उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 36 की उपधारा ( 7 ) और उपधारा ( 8 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए मैसर्स कालटैक इंस्ट्रूमेंट्स प्लॉट नं. 23 , प्रथम तल , श्री श्री नगर , स्वरूप नगर , वेंकटेश्वर टेम्पल रोड , उप्पाल, हैदराबाद, आंध्र प्रदेश द्वारा विनिर्मित उच्च यथार्थता ( यथार्थता वर्ग- II ) वाले " सीटीपीबी " श्रृंखला के अंकक सूचन सहित अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण ( प्लेटफार्म टाइप ) के मॉडल का, जिसके ब्रांड का नाम " कालटैक " है ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त मॉडल कहा गया है ) और जिसे अनुमोदन चिह्न आई एन डी/09/ 10/34 समनुदेशित किया गया है , अनुमोदन प्रमाणपत्र जारी करती है;
उक्त मॉडल एक विकृत गेज प्रकार का भार सेल आधारित अस्वचालित तोलन उपकरण ( प्लेटफार्म प्रकार ) है । इसकी अधिकतम क्षमता 600 कि.ग्रा. और न्यूनतम क्षमता 2.5 कि. ग्रा. है । सत्यापन मापमान अंतराल ( 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 ।
आकृति-2: मॉडल को सीलिंग करने का योजनाबद्ध डायग्राम ।
स्केल के फ्रंट , दायीं और बायीं ओर छेद बनाकर और स्केल की बाटम और टाप बाडी में से सीलिंग वायर निकाल कर सीलिंग की जाती है । मशीन को कपटपूर्ण व्यवहार के लिए खोले जाने से रोकने के लिए भी सीलिंग की जाती है । मॉडल के सीलिंग प्रावधान का स्कीमवार डायग्राम ऊपर दिया गया है ।
उपकरण में 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 किउक्त मॉडल के अनुमोदन के इस प्रमाणपत्र के अंतर्गत उसी विनिर्माता द्वारा उसी सिद्धांत , डिज़ाइन के अनुसार और उसी सामग्री से जिससे उक्त अनुमोदित मॉडल का विनिर्माण किया गया है , विनिर्मित उसी श्रृंखला के वैसे ही मेक , यथार्थता और कार्यपालन के तोलन उपकरण भी होंगे जो 100 मि. ग्रा. या उससे अधिक के लिए 5,000 से 50,000 तक की रेंज में सत्यापन मापमान अंतराल ( एन ) सहित 50 कि.ग्रा. से 5,000 कि.ग्रा. तक की अधिकतम क्षमता वाले हैं और " ई" मान 1× 10*, 2 × 10*, 5× 10 *, के हैं, जो धनात्मक या ऋणात्मक पूर्णांक या शून्य के समतुल्य हैं ।
[फा. सं. डब्ल्यूएम-21 ( 35 )/2010 ] बी. एन. दीक्षित , निदेशक , विधिक माप विज्ञान [ भाग II-खंड 3 (ii) ]
भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 18 , 2012/माघ 29 , 1933
1341
NewDelhi , the 31st October, 2011
S.O. 626. 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 andMeasures (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 of approval of the model of non- automatic weighing instrument (Platform type) with digital indication of High Accuracy ( Accuracy Class- II) of series " CTPB" and with brand name " CALTECH" (hereinafter referred to as the said model ) , manufactured by M/ s Caltech Instruments, Plot No. 23 , First Floor, Sri Sri Nagar, Swaroop Nagar , Venketeshwara Temple Road, Uppal , Hyderabad, A.P. which is assigned the approval mark IND/09/ 10/34;
The said model is a strain gauge type load cell based non-automatic weighing instrument (Platform type) with a maximum capacity of 600 kg and minimum capacity of 2.5 kg. The verification scale interval (e ) is 50g. 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.
Figure-1
Fimure-2 Sealing Diagram
Figure- 2: Schematic diagram of sealing provision of the model.
Sealing is done through the holes made in front, right and left side of the indicator, then sealing wire is passed through bottom and top body of scales . Sealing shall be done to prevent opening of the weighing machine for fraudulent practice. A typical schematic diagram of sealing provision of the model is given above.
The instrument has external control to calibration. A dip switch has also been provided in A/D card/ mother board todisable access to external calibration.
Further, in exercise of the 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 with maximum capacity above 50 kg and upto 5,000 kg. with verification scale interval (n) in the range of 5,000 to 50,000 for ' e' value of 100 mg or more and with' e ' value of 1 × 10% , 2 × 10* or 5x10 , 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 ( 35)/2010]
B. N. DIXIT, Director ofLegal Metrology
367 Gl/ 2012-6 1342
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: FEBRUARY 18, 2012/MAGHA 29, 1933
[PART II-SBC. 3(ii )]
(भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो )
नईदिल्ली , 31 जनवरी, 2012
का. आ. 627.--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 नीचे जिन भारतीय मानकों के विवरण अनुसूची में दिए गए हैं वे स्थापित हो गए हैं ।
अनुसूची
स्थापित तिथि क्रम स्थापित भारतीय मानक( कों ) की संख्या संख्या वर्ष और शीर्षक
नये भारतीय मानक द्वारा अतिक्रमित भारतीय मानक अथवा मानकों, यदि कोई हो, की संख्या और वर्ष
(2)
(1)
(3)
(4)
31अक्टूबर 2011 1. आईएस 4152 : 2011 बोर्डशिप पर अग्निशमन के प्रयोजनों के लिए जोड़रहित कार्बन डाई- आक्साइड सिलिंडर- विशिष्टि (तीसरा पुनरीक्षण)
आईएस 4152 : 1989 समुद्री जहाज में अग्निशमन कार्यों के लिए सीवनहीन कार्बन डाईआक्साइड सिलिंडर की विशिष्टि ( दूसरा पुनरीक्षण)
31अक्टूबर 2011
आई एस 11311 : 1985 भूमिगत खानों में प्रयोग में आने वाले लोडरों की तकनीकी अपेक्षाएं
2. आईएस 11311 : 2011 भूमिगत खानों में प्रयोग में आने वाले लोडरों की तकनीकी अपेक्षाएं ( पहला पुनरीक्षण)
31दिसम्बर 2011 3. आई एस/ आईएसओ 8643 1997 मिट्टी उठाने कीमशीनरी- द्रवचालित उत्खनित्र एवं बैकहो लोडर बूम - उतार नियंत्रण यंत्र-अपेक्षाएं एवं परीक्षण
31दिसम्बर 2011 4. आई एस/ आईएसओ 10968 : 2004 मिट्टी उठाने की मशीनरी- चालक के नियंत्रण
इन भारतीय मानकों की प्रतियां भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो , मानक भवन , 9 , बहादुर शाह जफर मार्ग, नई दिल्ली-110002 , क्षेत्रीय कार्यालयों : कोलकाता, चण्डीगढ़ , चेन्नई, मुम्बई तथा शाखा कार्यालयों : अहमदाबाद , बंगलौर, भोपाल , भुवनेश्वर, कोयम्बतूर, गुवाहाटी , हैदराबाद , जयपुर, कानपुर, नागपुर, पटना , पूणे तथा तिरूवनंतापुरम में बिक्री हेतु उपलब्ध हैं । भारतीय मानकों को http://www.standardsbis.in द्वारा इंटरनैट पर खरीदा जा सकता है ।
[संदर्भ : एम.ई.डी./जी-2 : 1 ]
जे. ए. सिद्दीकी, वैज्ञानिक ' ई ' , निदेशक ( यांत्रिक इंजीनियरिंग )
(BUREAU OF INDIAN STANDARDS)
New Delhi , the 31st January, 2012
S.O. 627. 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. & Year of the Indian Standards No. Established
No. & year of Indian Standards, if any, Superseded by the New Indian Standard
(3)
(4) (1)
31 October 2011 1. IS 4152 : 2011 Seamless Carbon Dioxide Cylinders for Fire Fighting Purposes on Board Ship-Specification (Third Revision)
IS4152: 1989 Specification for Seamless CarbonDioxide Cylinders for Fire Fighting Purposes on Board Ship (Second Revision) [ भाग II-खंड 3 (ii ) ]
1343 भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 18 , 2012/माघ 29 , 1933
(1) (2)
(3)
(4)
31 October 2011
IS11311 : 1985 Technical Requirements forLoaders for Use in Underground Mines
2. IS 11311 : 2011 Technical Requirements for Loaders for Use in Underground Mines(First Revision)
31 December 2011 3. IS/ISO 8643 : 1997 Earth Moving Machinery-Hydraulic Excavator and Backhoe Loader Boom-Lowering Control Device-Requirements and Tests
31 December 2011 4. IS/ISO 10968: 2004 Earth Moving Machinery Operator's Controls
Copy of these Standards are available for sale with the Bureau of Indian Standards, Manak Bhavan , 9 Bahadur Shah Zafar Marg , New Delhi 110 002 and Regional Offices : Kolkata, Chandigarh, Chennai , Mumbai and also Branch Offices:Ahmedabad, Bangalore , Bhopal , Bhubaneshwar, Coimbatore , Guwahati , Hyderabad, Jaipur, Kanpur, Nagpur, Patna, Pune, Thiruvananthapuram . On - line purchase of Indian Standard can be made at: http://www.standardsbis.in.
[Ref. MED/G-2: 1 ]
J.A. SIDDIQUI, Scientist ' E' , Director (Mechanical Engineering)
नई दिल्ली, 31 जनवरी, 2012
का. आ. 628.-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 स्थापित भारतीय मानक(कों ) की संख्या संख्या वर्ष और शीर्षक
नये भारतीय मानक द्वारा अतिक्रमित भारतीय मानक अथवा मानकों, यदि कोई हो , की संख्या और वर्ष
(1) (2)
(3)
(4)
31जनवरी 2012
1. आईएस 15978 : 2012 साइफेनोथ्रिन तकनीकी-विशिष्टि
2. आईएस 15979: 2012 साइफेनोथ्रिन
31जनवरी 2012
ईसी-विशिष्टि
इन भारतीय मानक (कों) की प्रतियां भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो , मानक भवन, 9 , बहादुर शाह जफर मार्ग , नई दिल्ली-110002 , क्षेत्रीय कार्यालयों : नई दिल्ली, कोलकाता , चण्डीगढ़ , चेन्नई , मुम्बई तथा शाखा कार्यालयों : अहमदाबाद , बंगलौर , भोपाल , भुवनेश्वर , कोयम्बतूर , गुवाहाटी, हैदराबाद, जयपुर, कानपुर, नागपुर , पटना, पूणे तथा तिरूवनंतापुरम में बिक्री हेतु उपलब्ध हैं ।
[संदर्भ: एफएडी/जी-128 ]
डॉ. आर. के. बजाज , वैज्ञानिक ' एफ' एवं प्रमुख ( खाद्य एवं कृषि)
New Delhi , the 31st January, 2012
S.O. 628. 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 ofwhich are given in the Schedule hereto annexed have been established on the date indicated against each:
SCHEDULE
Date of Established Sl . No. & Year of the Indian Standards No. Established
No. & year of Indian Standards , if any, Superseded by the New Indian Standard
(1)
(3)
(4)
31January 2012
1. IS 15978 : 2012 Cyphenothrin, Technical- Specification
31 January 2012
2. IS 15979 : 2012 Cyphenothrin, EC- Specification [PART II-SEC. 3 ( ii ) ] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 18 , 2012/MAGHA 29 , 1933
1344
Copy ofthese Standards are available for sale with the Bureau of Indian Standards, Manak Bhavan, 9 Bahadur Shah Zafar Marg , New Delhi 110 002 and Regional Offices: New Delhi, Kolkata , Chandigarh, Chennai , Mumbai and also Branch Offices : Ahmedabad, Bangalore , Bhopal , Bhubaneshwar , Coimbatore, Guwahati , Hyderabad, Jaipur, Kanpur, Nagpur, Patna, Pune, Thiruvananthapuram.
[Ref. FAD/G-128]
Dr. R.K. BAJAJ, Scientist ' F ' and Head (Food & Agri . )
नई दिल्ली, 1 फरवरी , 2012
का. आ. 629.- भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो नियम 1987 के नियम 7 उपनियम ( 1 ) के खंड ( ख ) के अनुसरण में भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो एतद्वारा अधिसूचित करता है कि जिन भारतीय मानकों के विवरण नीचे अनुसूची में दिए गए हैं वे स्थापित हो गए हैं ।
अनुसूची
स्थापित तिथि क्रम स्थापित भारतीय मानक (कों ) की संख्या, संख्या वर्ष और शीर्षक
नये भारतीय मानक द्वारा अतिक्रमित भारतीय मानक अथवा मानकों, यदि कोई हो, की संख्या और वर्ष
(4) (2)
(3)
(1)
31दिसम्बर 2011
IS 12871 : 1989
1. आईएस 12871 : 2011/ आई एस ओ
12743 : 2006 तांबा , सीसा , जिंक और निकल सान्द्र- धातु और नमी के अंश ज्ञात करने के लिए
नमूने लेने की प्रक्रिया (पहला पुनरीक्षण )
इस भारतीय मानक की प्रतियां भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो , मानक भवन , 9 , बहादुर शाह जफर मार्ग, नई दिल्ली -110002 , क्षेत्रीय कार्यालयों : नई दिल्ली, कोलकाता , चण्डीगढ़ , चेन्नई , मुम्बई तथा शाखा कार्यालयों अहमदाबाद , बंगलौर , भोपाल , भुवनेश्वर , कोयम्बतूर , गुवाहाटी, हैदराबाद, जयपुर , कानपुर , नागपुर, पटना, पूणे तथा तिरूवनंतापुरम में बिक्री हेतु उपलब्ध हैं ।
[संदर्भ: एमटीडी 13/टी -110 ]
पी. घोष , वैज्ञानिक ' एफ ' एवं प्रमुख ( एमटीडी)
New Delhi , the 1st February, 2012
S.O. 629. In pursuance of clause (b ) ofsub - 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 indicate against each:
SCHEDULE
Date of Established Sl. No. & Year of the Indian Standards No. Established
No. & year of Indian Standards , if any, Superseded by the New Indian Standard
(4) (1)
(3)
31 December 2011
IS 12871 : 1989
1. IS 12871 : 2011 /ISO 12743 : 2006 Copper
Lead, Zinc and Nickel Concentrates- Sampling Procedures for Determination ofMetal and Moiture Content (First Revision)
Copyofthis Standard is available for sale with the Bureau of Indian Standards , Manak Bhavan, 9 Bahadur Shah ZafarMarg, New Delhi - 110002 and Regional Offices : New Delhi , Kolkata, Chandigarh, Chennai, Mumbai and also Branch Offices:Ahmedabad, Bangalore , Bhopal , Bhubaneshwar, Coimbatore , Guwahati , Hyderabad, Jaipur, Kanpur, Nagpur, Patna, Pune, Thiruvananthapuram .
[Ref. MTD 13/T- 110 ]
P. GHOSH, Scientist ' F ' and Head (MTD) 1345 [भाग II-खंड 3 (ii) ]
भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 18 , 2012/माघ 29, 1933
नईदिल्ली , 1 फरवरी , 2012
का. आ. 630.-भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो नियम 1987 के नियम 7 उपनियम ( 1 ) के खंड ( ख ) के अनुसरण में भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो एतद्वारा अधिसूचित करता है कि नीचे अनुसूची में दिए गए मानक( कों) में संशोधन किया गया/किये गये हैं ।
अनुसूची
संशोधन की संख्या और तिथि
स्थापित तिथि
क्रम संशोधित भारतीय मानक ( कों ) की संख्या , संख्या वर्ष और शीर्षक
( 1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
31दिसम्बर 2011
संशोधन संख्या नं. 2 ,
दिसम्बर 2011
1. आईएस 13204 : 1995 ताप रोधन के लिए दृढ़ फिनालीय फोम -विशिष्टि
31दिसम्बर 2011
संशोधन संख्या नं. 1,
दिसम्बर 2011
2. आई एस 14164 : 2008-80° से. अधिक और 750° से. तक तापमानों के लिए तापरोधन सामग्रियों के औद्योगिक अनुप्रयोग और फिनिशिंग- रीति संहिता ( पहला पुनरीक्षण )
31दिसम्बर 2011 3. आई एस 15402 2003 सिरैमिक रेशे के कंबल ऊष्मारोधनि-विशिष्टि
संशोधन संख्या नं. 1,
दिसम्बर 2011
इन भारतीय मानकों की प्रतियों भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो , मानक भवन , 9 , बहादुर शाह जफर मार्ग , नई दिल्ली-110002 , क्षेत्रीय कार्यालयों : नई दिल्ली, कोलकाता , चण्डीगढ़ , चेन्नई, मुम्बई तथा शाखा कार्यालयों : अहमदाबाद, बंगलौर , भोपाल , भुवनेश्वर, कोयम्बतूर , गुवाहाटी, हैदराबाद , जयपुर , कानपुर , नागपुर, पटना, पूणे तथा तिरूवनंतापुरम में बिक्री हेतु उपलब्ध हैं । भारतीय मानकों को http:// www.standardsbis.in द्वारा इंटरनैट पर खरीदा जा सकता है ।
[संदर्भ : सीएचडी 27/आईएस 13204 , 14164 और 15402 ] ई. देवेन्द्र, वैज्ञानिक ' जी' एवं प्रमुख ( रसायन )
New Delhi , the 1st February, 2012
S.O. 630. In pursuance of clause (b ) of sub- rule ( 1 ) of Rule 7 of the Bureau of Indian Standards Rules , 1987, theBureau of Indian Standards hereby notifies that amendments to the Indian Standards, particulars of which are given in the Schedule hereto annexed have been issued:
SCHEDULE
Sl. No. & Year of the amended Indian
No. & year of the amendment
No. Standards Established
Date from which the amendment shall have effect
(4)
(3)
(1)
31 December 2011
Amendment No. 2,
December, 2011
1. IS 13204 : 1995 Rigid Phenolic Foam for thermalinsulation-Specification
31December 2011
Amendment No. 1 ,
December 2011
2. IS 14164: 2008 Industrial Application and finishings to thermal insulation materials at temperatures above- 80° C and up to 750 ° C-Code of practice (First Revision)
31December 2011
Amendment No. 1
December 2011
3. IS 15402 : 2003 Ceramic Fibre Blanket insulation-Specification
Copyofthese Standards are available for sale with the Bureau of Indian Standards , Manak Bhavan, 9 Bahadur Shah Zafar Marg, New Delhi- 110002 and Regional Offices: New Delhi , Kolkata, Chandigarh , Chennai , Mumbai and also Branch Offices: Ahmedabad, Bangalore , Bhopal , Bhubaneshwar, Coimbatore , Guwahati , Hyderabad, Jaipur, Kanpur, Nagpur, Patna, Pune, Thiruvananthapuram. On - line purchase of Indian Standard can be made at : http://www.standardsbis.in.
[Ref. CHD 27/1S 13204, 14164 & 15402] E. DEVENDAR, Scientist ' G ' andHead(Chemical ) 1346
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 18, 2012/MAGHA 29, 1933
[PART II Sac. 3 (i ) ]
नई दिल्ली , 6 फरवरी , 2012
का. आ. 631.-भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो नियम, 1987 के नियम 7 के उप - नियम ( 1 ) के खंड ( ख) के अनुसरण में भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो एतद्द्वारा अधिसूचित करता है कि जिस भारतीय मानक का विवरण नीचे अनुसूची में दिए गया है वह स्थापित हो गया है ।
अनुसूची
स्थापित तिथि क्रम स्थापित भारतीय मानक ( कों ) की संख्या, संख्या वर्ष और शीर्षक
नये भारतीय मानक द्वारा अतिक्रमित भारतीय मानक अथवा मानकों, यदि कोई हो, की संख्या और वर्ष
(2)
(1)
(3)
(4)
27 जनवरी , 2012 1. आईएस 2026 ( भाग 1 ) : 2011 पॉवर ट्रांसफार्मर भाग 1 सामान्य ( द्वितीय पुनरीक्षण)
इस भारतीय मानक की एक प्रति भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो , मानक भवन, 9 , बहादुर शाह जफर मार्ग , नई दिल्ली -110002 , क्षेत्रीय कार्यालयों : नई दिल्ली , कोलकाता, चण्डीगढ़ , चेन्नई, मुम्बई तथा शाखा कार्यालयों अहमदाबाद , बंगलौर, भोपाल , भुवनेश्वर , कोयम्बतूर, गुवाहाटी, हैदराबाद, जयपुर , कानपुर, नागपुर, पटना, पूणे तथा तिरूवनंतापुरम में बिक्री हेतु उपलब्ध हैं ।
[संदर्भ: ईटी 16/टी-2 ]
आर. के. त्रेहन , वैज्ञानिक ' ई ' एवं प्रमुख ( विद्युत तकनीकी)
NewDelhi , the 6th February , 2012
S.O. 631. 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 ofwhich are given in the Schedule hereto annexed have been established on the date indicated against each:
SCHEDULE
Date ofEstablishment Sl. No. & Year of the Indian Standards No.
No. & year of Indian Standards , if any, superseded by the New Indian Standard
(1)
(4)
27 January, 2012 1. IS 2026 (Part 1) : 2011 Power Transformers: Part1 General (Second Revision)
Copy of this Standards is available for sale with the Bureau of Indian Standards , Manak Bhavan, 9, Bahadur Shah Zafar Marg, New Delhi 110002 and its Regional Offices : New Delhi , Kolkata, Chandigarh, Chennai , Mumbai and also Branch Offices : Ahmedabad, Bangalore, Bhopal , Bhubaneshwar, Coimbatore , Guwahati, Hyderabad, Jaipur, Kanpur, Nagpur, Patna, Pune, Thiruvananthapuram.
[Ref. ET 16/T-2]
R. K. TREHAN , Scientist 'E' and Head (Electrotechnical )
नई दिल्ली, 6 फरवरी , 2012
का. आ. 632.-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 जिस भारतीय मानक का विवरण नीचे अनुसूची में दिया गया है वह स्थापित हो गया है :
अनुसूची
स्थापित तिथि क्रम स्थापित भारतीय मानक ( कों) की संख्या संख्या वर्ष और शीर्षक
नये भारतीय मानक द्वारा अतिक्रमित भारतीय मानक अथवा मानकों, यदि कोई हो, की संख्या और वर्ष
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
31 दिसम्बर, 2011 1. आईएस/आई एस ओ 31000 2009 जोखिम प्रबंधन- सिद्धांत और मार्गदर्शी सिद्धांत [ भाग II-खंड 3( ii ) ]
1347
भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 18 , 2012/माष 29, 1933
इस मानक की प्रतियां भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो , मानक भवन , 9 , बहादुर शाह जफर मार्ग , नई दिल्ली-110002 , क्षेत्रीय कार्यालयों : नई दिल्ली , कोलकाता , चण्डीगढ़ , चेन्नई , मुम्बई तथा शाखा कार्यालयों अहमदाबाद , बंगलौर, भोपाल, भुवनेश्वर, कोयम्बतूर , गुवाहाटी, हैदराबाद, जयपुर, कानपुर , नागपुर, पटना, पूणे तथा तिरूवनंतापुरम में बिक्री हेतु उपलब्ध हैं ।
[संदर्भ: एम एस डी/जी-8 अधिसूचना ]
निर्मल कुमार पाल , वैज्ञानिक ' एफ' एवं प्रमुख ( प्रबन्ध एवं तंत्र विभाग )
NewDelhi , the6th February , 2012
S.O. 632. In pursuance of clause (b) of sub- rule ( 1) of Rule 7 ofthe Bureau of Indian Standards Rules, 1987, the Bureau of Indian Standards hereby notifies that the Indian Standards, particulars of which are given in the Schedule hereto annexed have been established on the date indicated against each :
SCHEDULE
Sl. No. & Year of the Indian Standards Established
No.
Date ofEstablishment
No. & year of Indian Standards, if any, superseded by the New Indian Standard
(1)
1. IS/ISO 31000: 2009 Risk Management Principles and Guidelines
(4)
31December, 2011
Copy of above Standards is 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, Bangalore, Bhopal , Bhubaneshwar, Coimbatore, Guwahati , Hyderabad, Jaipur , Kanpur, Nagpur, Patna, Pune, and Thiruvananthapuram.
[Ref. MSD/G-8 Notification]
NIRMAL KUMAR PAL , Scientist ' F ' & Head (Management & Systems Department )
नई दिल्ली, 7 फरवरी , 2012
का. आ. 633.- भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो ( प्रमाणन) विनियम , 1988 के विनियम ( 4 ) के उप-विनियम ( 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
भारतीय मानक का शीर्षक
लाइसेंसधारी का नाम एवं पता
क्रम लाइसेंस संख्या संख्या
स्वीकृति करने कीतिथिवर्ष/माह
3
4 1 2
01-01-2012
1. 3787990
भामा सं. / भाग/ खण्ड/वर्ष
6
5
मा मा 1293 : 2005 250 वोल्टता और 16 एम्पीअर्स तक रेटित धारा के प्लग्स और सॉकेट आउटलेटस
मै. पॉलीकॅब वायर प्रा. लि. , ई-56 , एमआइडीसी, अंबाड , नासिक- 422010, महाराष्ट्र
09-01-2012
2. 3788588
भामा 4250 : 1980 बिजली के घरेलू खाद्य मिक्सर (द्रवीपरक और ग्राइन्डर )
मै. मिलन अप्लायंसेस , डी-16 , शिव भोले लघु उद्योग , एल.बी.एस. मार्ग , विक्रोली-
पश्चिम, मुम्बई -400083
10-01-2012
3. 3789893
भामा 3854 : 1997 घरेलू और सामान प्रयोजनों के लिए स्विच
मै. हेरक्यूलस इण्डस्ट्रीज , गीता उद्योग नगर सं. 3 , गाला सं. 123 , विलेज : गोखीबरे , वसई-पूर्व,
जिला-ठाणे-401 208 [PART II-SBC. 3(ii)]
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 18, 2012/MAGHA 29, 1933
1348
4 1
2
3
12-01-2012
4. 3794179
6
5
भा. मा. 694 : 1990 1100 वो. तक एवं सहित कार्य कारी वोल्टता के लिए पीवीसी रोधित केबल
मै. आरोन वायर एन्ड केबल्स, गाला सं. 6 एवं 7 , शिवालय इस्टेट, बर्मा शेल पेट्रोल पंप के आगे , भूतपाडा, वालिव ठाणे , वसई-पूर्व, पिन-401 208
20-01-2012
5. 3794078
भा. मा. 1554
( भाग 1 ) : 1988 पी वी सी रोधित ( भारी ड्यूटी ) विद्युत केबल : भाग 1100 वोल्ट कार्यकारी वोल्टता तक व सहित केलिए
मै. आरोन वायर एन्ड केबल्स , गाला सं. 6 एवं 7 , शिवालय इस्टेट, बर्मा शेल पेट्रोल पंप के आगे, भूतपाडा, वालिव ठाणे , वसई- पूर्व, पिन-401 208
[सं. के. प्र.वि./ 13 : 11 ]
एस. बी. रॉय , वैज्ञानिक ' एफ' एवं प्रमुख (एम डी एम- III )
NewDelhi , the 7th February , 2012
S.O. 633. In pursuance of sub- regulation (5 ) of Regulation 4 of the Bureau of Indian Standards (Certification) Regulations , 1988, the Bureau of Indian Standards hereby notifies the grant of licences particulars of which are given below inthe following Schedule:
SCHEDULE
Grantdate
St. Licence No. No.
Product
IS No./Part/Sec . Year
Name and address (factory)
ofthe party
4
3
1 2
06-01-2012
1. 3787990
6
5
IS 60898: Part 1: 2002
Polycab Wires Pvt . Ltd. , E-56, MIDC, Ambad, Nashik-422010, Maharashtra
09-01-2012
2. 3788588
Electrical accessories-Circuit breakers for over current protection for household and similar installations, part 1-circuit breakers foracoperation .
IS 4250 : 1980 Domestic electric food- mixers (liquidizers and grinders)
MilanAppliances , D- 16, Shiv Bhole Laghu Udyog, LBS Marg, VikhroliWest, Mumbai-400083
10-01-2012
3. 3789893
IS3854: 1997 Switches for domestic and similarpurposes
Hercules Industries, GeetaUdyogNagar No. 3 , GalaNo. 123,Village Gokhiware, Vasai (E) , Thane-401 208
12-01-2012
4. 3794179
IS694: 1990 PVC insulated cables for working voltages upto and including 1100V.
AaronWires & Cables, GalaNos . 6 & 7 , Shivalay Indl .Estate, Next to Burma Shell Petrol Pump, Bhootpada, Waliv -Thane , Vasai (East) , Pin-401208 1349 [ भाग II-खंड 3 ( ii ) ]
भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 18, 2012/माघ 29 , 1933
1 2
3
4
6
5
5. 3794078
20-01-2012
PVC insulated (Heavy duty) IS 1554: Part 1:
electric cables : Part 1 for 1988
working voltages upto and
including 1100 v.
AaronWires & Cables, GalaNos . 6 & 7 , Shivalay Indi . Estate, Next to Burma Shell Petrol Punip, Bhootpada, Waliv-Thane, Vasai (East) ,
Pin-401208
[No. CMD/ 13 : 11 ]
S. B. ROY, Scientist ' F' & Head (MDM - III )
नई दिल्ली, 7 फरवरी , 2012
का. आ. 634.- भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो नियम, 1987 के नियम 7 के उपनियम ( 1 ) के खंड ( ख ) के अनुसरण में भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो एतद्वारा अधिसूचित करता है कि जिस भारतीय मानकों के विवरण नीचें अनुसूची में दिए गए हैं वे स्थापित हो गये हैं :
अनुसूची
स्थापित तिथि
क्रम स्थापित भारतीय मानक ( कों ) की संख्या, संख्या वर्ष और शीर्षक
नये भारतीय मानक द्वारा अतिक्रमित भारतीय मानक अथवा मानकों, यदि कोई हो , की संख्या और वर्ष
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
07 फरवरी , 2012
1. आईएस 16101 : 2012 सामान्य प्रकाश व्यवस्था- एल ई डी और एल ई डी मौड्यूल- शब्दावली और परिभाषाएं
07 फरवरी , 2012
2. आईएस 16102 ( भाग 1 ) : 2012 सामान्य प्रकाश सेवाओं के लिए स्वतः जलने वाले एल ई डी लैम्प भाग 1 सुरक्षा अपेक्षाएं
07 फरवरी , 2012
3. आईएस 16102 ( भाग 2 ) : 2012 सामान्य प्रकाश सेवाओं के लिए स्वतः जलने वाले एल ई डी लैम्प भाग 2 कार्यकारिता अपेक्षाएं
07 फरवरी, 2012
4. आईएस 16103 ( भाग 1 ) : 2012 सामान्य प्रकाश व्यवस्था के लिए एल ई डी लैम्प मौडयूल- सुरक्षा अपेक्षाएं
07 फरवरी , 2012
5. आईएस 15885 ( भाग 2/अनुभाग 13 ) : 2012 लैम्प कंट्रोल गियर भाग 2 : विशिष्ट अपेक्षाएं अनुभाग 13 : एल ई डी मौड्यूलों के लिए डी सी या ए सी सप्लाई वाले इलैक्ट्रॉनी कंट्रोल गियर
07 फरवरी , 2012
6. आईएस 16104 : 2012 एल ई डी मौड्यूलों के लिए डी सी या ए सी सप्लाई वाले इलैक्ट्रॉनी कंट्रोल गियर की कार्यकारिता अपेक्षाएं
07 फरवरी , 2012
7. आईएस 16105 : 2012 एल ई डी स्त्रोत की ल्युमिन देख- रेख के लिए मापन पद्धतियां
07 फरवरी , 2012
8. आईएस 16106 : 2012 सॉलिड स्टेट लाइटिंग एल ई डी उत्पादों के विद्युतीय एवं मीटरी मापन कीपद्धति
07 फरवरी , 2012
9. आईएस 16108 : 2012 लैम्पों और लैम्प प्रणाली की फोटोबॉयोलोजिकल सुरक्षा
367 GI /2012-7 1350
[PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii )] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 18 , 2012/MAGHA 29, 1933
इन भारतीय मानकों की प्रतियां भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो , मानक भवन , 9 , बहादुर शाह जफर मार्ग , नई दिल्ली-110002 , क्षेत्रीय कार्यालयों : नई दिल्ली, कोलकाता, चण्डीगढ़, चेन्नई , मुम्बई तथा शाखा कार्यालयों : अहमदाबाद , बंगलौर, भोपाल , भुवनेश्वर , कोयम्बतूर, गुवाहाटी, हैदराबाद, जयपुर, कानपुर, नागपुर, पटना, पूणे तथा तिरूवनंतापुरम में बिक्री हेतु उपलब्ध हैं ।
[संदर्भ : ईटी 23/टी-104 , टी-97, टी-98 , टी -99 , टी-101 , टी-102 , टी-103 , टी-105 , टी-106 ] आर. के. त्रेहन , वैज्ञानिक ' ई ' एवं प्रमुख ( विद्युत तकनीकी)
New Delhi , the 7th February, 2012
S.O. 634. In pursuance of clause (b) ofsub- 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 issued:
SCHEDULE
Date of Established Sl . No. & Year of the Indian Standards
No.
No. & year of Indian Standards , if any, Superseded bythe New Indian Standard
(4)
(β)
(2)
(1)
07 February, 2012 1. IS 16101 : 2012 General Lighting Leads and Led Modules -terms and definitions
07 February, 2012 2. IS 16102 (Part 1) : 2012 Self-ballasted Led- Lamps for General Lighting Services Part 1- Safety Requirements .
07 February, 2012 3. IS 16102 (Part 2) : 2012 Self-ballastedLed- Lamps forGeneral Lighting Services Part 2-- Performance requirements
07 February, 2012 4. IS 16103 (Part 1) : 2012 Led-modules for General Lighting-Safety requirements
07 February, 2012 5. IS 15885 (Part 2/ Sec 13 ) : 2012 Lamp Control Gear Part 2 Particular Requirements Section 13 d.c. OR a.c. supplied electronic control gearled modules
07 February, 2012 6. IS 16104 : 2012 d.c. OR a.c. Supplied Electronic ControlGear for Led Modules-Performance requirements.
07 February, 2012 7. IS 16105 : 2012 Method of measurement of Lumenmaintenance of solid state light (LED) sources .
07 February, 2012 & IS 16106 : 2012 Method ofelectrical and Photometric measurements of solid state Lighting (LED) products.
07 February, 2012 9. IS 16108 : 2012 Photobiological Safety of Lamps and Lamp Systems.
Copy ofthese Standards are available for sale with the Bureau of Indian Standards , Manak Bhavan, 9 Bahadur Shah Zafar Marg, New Delhi - 110002 and Regional Offices : New Delhi, Kolkata, Chandigarh, Chennai , Mumbai and also Branch Offices: Ahmedabad, Bangalore, Bhopal , Bhubaneshwar, Coimbatore , Guwahati , Hyderabad, Jaipur, Kanpur, Nagpur , Patna, Pune, Thiruvananthapuram.
[Ref. ET 23 /T- 104, T-97, T-98, T-99, T- 101 , T- 102, T- 103 , T- 105 , T- 106 ]
R. K. TREHAN, Scientist ' E ' and Head (Electrotechnical) [ भा । II-खंड 3 ( ii ) ]
1351
भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 18 , 2012/माघ 29, 1933
पेट्रोलियम और प्राकृतिक गैस मंत्रालय
नई दिल्ली , 8 फरवरी, 2012
का. आ. 635.-भारत सरकार ने पेट्रोलियम और खनिज पाईपलाइन ( भूमि में उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन ) अधिनियम , 1962 ( 1962का 50 ) ( जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त अधिनियम कहा गया है ) की धारा 3 की उप- धारा ( 1 ) के अधीन जारी भारत सरकार के पेट्रोलियम और प्राकृतिक गैस मंत्रालय की अधिसूचना सं. का. आ. 2816 ( अ ) , तारीख 4-11-2011 द्वारा उस अधिसूचना से संलग्न अनुसूची में विनिर्दिष्ट भूमि में ओ.एन.जी.सी. लिमिटेड द्वारा त्रिपुरा राज्य में सोनामुरा जी.सी. एस. से बगाबासा पाइपलाईन परियोजना के माध्यम से प्राकृतिक गैस के परिवहन के लिए पाइपलाईन बिछाने के प्रयोजन के लिए उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन करने के अपने आशय की घोषणा की थी;
और, उक्त राजपत्रित अधिसूचना की प्रतियां जनता को तारीख 5-11-2010 से 5-12-2010 तक उपलब्ध करा दी गई थी;
और सक्षम प्राधिकारी ने जनता से प्राप्त आक्षेपों पर विचार कर लिया है और उन्हें अनुज्ञात कर दिया गया है ;
और सक्षम प्राधिकारी ने, उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 6 की उप - धारा ( 1 ) के अधीन भारत सरकार को अपनी रिपोर्ट दे दी है ;
और भारत सरकार ने , उक्त रिपोर्ट पर विचार करने के पश्चात् और संतुष्ट हो जाने पर उक्त भूमि पाइपलाईन बिछाने के लिए अपेक्षित है, उसमें उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन करने का विनिश्चय किया है ;
अतः अब, भारत सरकार , उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 6 की उप- धारा ( 1 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए, यह घोषणा करती है कि इस अधिसूचना के संलग्न अनुसूची में विनिर्दिष्ट भूमि में पाइपलाइन बिछाने के लिए उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन किया जाता है ;
और भारत सरकार ने , उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 6 की उप - धारा ( 4 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए , निर्देश देती है कि पाइपलाईन बिछाने के लिए भूमि में उपयोग का अधिकार , इस घोषणा के प्रकाशन की तारीख को , भारत सरकार में निहित होने के बजाए, पाइपलाइने बिछाने का प्रस्ताव करने वाली ओ.एन.जी.सी. लिमिटेड में निहित होगा और तदुपरि, भूमि में ऐसे उपयोग का अधिकार , इस प्रकार अधोरोपित निबन्धनों और शर्तों के अधीन रहते हुए, सभी विल्लंगमों से मुक्त, ओ.एन.जी.सी. लिमिटेड में निहित होगा ।
अनुसूची
भूमि अनुसूची: मौजा: पूर्भ जुमेरदेपा
जिला
मौजा
उप-संभाग्
क्रम सं
4
3
1
2
1.
पश्चिम त्रिपुरा सोनामुरा पूर्भ जुमेरदेपा
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11 .
प्लॉटसं.
खसरा सं.
भूमिका वर्ग एकड़ में क्षेत्रफल
8 5
7
6
0.34 292
टिला
747/ p
0.16
टिला
748/p
0.06
लूंगा
749/p
0.03 272
752/p
लूंगा
0.15 497
लूंगा
751/p
0.02 547
लूंगा
755/p
0.15
लूंगा
761/p
0.08
नाल
774/p
0.02
771/p
पुकुर पार
0.01
772/p
पुकुर
0.30 521
लूंगा
760/p
0.02 549
नाल
883/p
टिला
0.11 620
744
4238
0.03 466
नाल
884
0.01 33
लूंगा
1239/p
नाल
0.12 243
1331/p
0.01
नाल
1332/p
0.03 223
नाल
1423/p 1352
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 18 , 2012/MAGHA 29 , 1933
[PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii)]
7
8
4
6
3
2
5
1
0.02
12.
753
लूंगा
154
पूर्भ जुमेरदेपाजारी
पश्चिम त्रिपुरा सोनामुरा
[भाग II-खंड 3 ( ii) ] भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 18 , 2012/ माघ 29 , 1933 1353
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
35. पश्चिम त्रिपुरा सोनामुरा पूर्भ जुमेरदेपा जारी 214 2858/p लूंगा 0.05
36. 249 2829/p 756 बस्तु लूंगा 0.04 0.05
37. 13. 240 195 2844/p 885 नाल लूंगा 0.01 0.08
38. 14. 227 194 3856/p 1409/p नाल नाल 0.02 0.20
39. 15. 311 167/1 3533 1262/p नाल चारा-टिला 0.16 0.08
40. 318 167/3 3589/p नाल नाल 0.18 0.26
1420/p
41. 344 2853/p नाल टिला 0.03 0.10
16. 424/2 1336/p
42. 532 3562/p नाल 0.01
17. 472 1330/p नाल 0.30
3565 नाल 0.28
18. 317 1507/p नाल 0.04
43. 202 3563/p नाल 0.25
1541/p नाल 0.02
44. 459 3554/p नाल 0.16
1539/p नाल 0.07
45. 98 3555/p नाल 0.01
19. 329 1536/p नाल 0.03
46. 49 3559/p नाल 0.50
20. 133 1540/p नाल 0.14
47. 237 3848/p नाल 0.07
1535/p नाल 0.01
48. 282/1 1070 बस्तु 0.02
21. 103/1 1239 लूंगा 0.03
282/2 4268/p
4357
49. 379 3844/p नाल 0.05
22. 376 1494/p नाल 0.10
3846/p नाल 0.23
23. 535 1538/p नाल 0.16
50. 686 3796/p टिला 0.22
24. 170 2784/p नाल 0.01
51. 711 3882/p पुकुर 0.01
2812/p नाल 0.28
3884/p भिटि 0.01
2811/p नाल 0.20
52. 70 3513/p नाल 0.01
25. 168 3585/p नाल 0.04
53. 303/1 3536/p नाल 0.18
26. 66/1 2786/p नाल 0.12
3528/p नाल 0.03
66/2 2785/p नाल 0.05
54. 98 3535/p नाल 0.03
27. 73 2845/p बस्तु 0.06
55. 386 3843/p नाल 0.23
2848/p चारा (0.09 0.04
56. 454 3578/p नाल
237 2851/p नाल टिला 0.06 0.30
57. 4264/p
72 2850/p नाल बिटि 0.02 0.04
58. 3591/p
59. 28. 378 72 3595/p 2854/p नाल नाल 0.04 0.04
60. 96 1537/p 2855/p नाल नाल 0.02 0.18
61. 29. 33 85 1241/p 3514/p भागन नाल 0.03 0.08
62. 30. 433 53 1411/p 3841/p नाल नाल 0.01 0.16
63. 31. 450/2 20 1417/p 3592 पुकुर पार नाल 0.03 0.03
64. 32. 117 491 1322/p 3628/p नाल नाल 0.03 0.02
33. 432/1& 1326/p 2841/p धोरा (नाल) नाल 0.04 0.01
432/2 1327/p नाल 0.07
34. 320/1 452 1319/p 3833/p पुकुर पार 0.02 0.04
65. बस्तु
3837/p नाल नाल 0.16 0.14
1321/p
3839/p नाल नाल 0.05 0.03
1328/p
371 909/p 3840/p नाल नाल 0.06 0.20
66.
1810/p 3836/p नाल नाल 0.04 0.22
1493/p 3832/p नाल पुकुर 0.06 0.02
1495/p 3831/p नाल नाल 0.18 0.01
1354
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 18 , 2012/MAGHA 29, 1933
[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii ) ]
3
1
2
4
5
6
7
8
67.
चारा
0.01
750/p
620
पश्चिमत्रिपुरा सोनामुरा पूर्भ जुमेरदेपा जारी
68.
0.02
128
धोरा
1325/p
69.
142
908
0.07
पुकुर पार
नाल
0.08
889/p
चारा
0.01
906/p
785
0.18
लूंगा
780
0.09
नाल
70.
0.17
190
लूंगा
886/p
नाल
0.04
887/p
0.03
नाल
910/p
नाल
0.02
912/p
71.
101
0.16
लूंगा
781/p
0.15
नाल
777/ p
72.
548
धोरा
0.30
783/p
488/2
2837
0.04 73.
नाल
74.
106/1
चारा
0.03
2830/p
नाल
0.01
2836/p
75.
250
2818
0.06
पुकुर
0.10
2815
नाल
0.01
2817/p
पुकुर पार
नाल
0.02
2816/p
चारा
2831/p
0.02
नाल
2835/p
76.
491
नाल
0.01
1836/p
0.01 77.
385/1
चारा (टिला)
2810/p
नाल
0.20
3598/p
62
78.
0.30
नाल
2783/p
1807
नाल
79.
391
0.03
0.20
69/1
नाल
80.
1421 /p
नाल
0.05
1506/p
0.10
1804
नाल
0.04
417
नाल
81.
1422/p
0.01
नाल
1802/p
0.02
नाल
1821/p
281
नाल
0.18 82.
1424/p
0.16
नाल
1496/p
0.03
नाल
1508/p
नाल
0.24
1533 /p
नाल
0.01
1796/p
0.02
नाल
1820/p
432/1
नाल
0.01 83.
1798/p
0.01
नाल
1803/p
297
नाल
84.
0.02
1794/p [ भाग II-खंड 3 ( ii ) ]
1355 भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 18 , 2012/माघ 29 , 1933
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
85.
नाल
0.10
861
पूर्भ जुमेरदेपा-जारी
पश्चिम त्रिपुरा सोनामुरा
1830/p
नाल
0.02
7793/p
नाल
0.08
2778/p
2779
नाल
0.22
86.
280/2
चारा
0.02
3590/p
नाल
87.
185
नाल
0.01
3575/p
नाल
0.01
3574/ p
0.01
नाल
3573/p
88.
217/1
0.04
नाल
3522/p
89.
427/1
नाल
0.02
1833/p
90.
167/2
नाल
0.05
1263/p
लूंगा
91.
450/13
नाल
0.01
1412/p
नाल
0.09
1809/p
नाल
0.01
1813/p
नाल
0.09
1808/p
नाल
0.03
1413/p
92.
858
1827
0.03
भागन
टिला
1831
नाल
0.03
93.
159
1832
0.02
नाल
94.
884
787
0.10
टिला
95.
363
762
0.08
लूंगा
786
0.12
लूंगा
96.
648
0.16
788/p
बस्तु
टिला
147
97.
0.02
899/p
लूंगा
0.01
898/p
पुकुर पार
0.02
894/p
पुकुर
0.01
नाल
1351/p
0.01
893/p
पुकुर
0.03
लूंगा
891 /p
935
98.
टिला
0.07
3878/p
362/1
चारा
99.
0.01
2838/p
356/2
(टिला)
नाल
0.02
2842/p
नाल
0.02
2843/p
162
नाल
100.
0.12
1320/p
नाल
0.08
1350/ p
0.04
लूंगा
900/p
902
0.08
बस्तु
130
नाल
0.02
2852/p
101.
1356
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 18, 2012/MAGHA 29 , 1933
3
1
2
4
102.
पूर्भ जुमेरदेपा जारी पश्चिमत्रिपुरा सोनामुरा
[PART II-SEC. 3 (ii )]
5
6
7
8
नाल
0.04
280/4
2897/p
280/3
103.
0.12
नाल
3602/p
चारा
0.01
3594/p
0.22
नाल
3597/p
चारा
0.02 3593/p
304
104.
105.
106.
107.
108.
109.
नाल
0.16
2857/p
144
नाल
0.30
3543/p
143
0.12
नाल
3527/p
0.24
नाल
3552/p
0.10
नाल
3561/p
513
नाल
0.14 3564/p
351
नाल
0.28 3572/ p
नाल
0.20 3578/p
0.10 3580/p
पुकुर (नाल)
नाल
488/1
110.
111.
0.12 3583/p
0.10 542
नाल
3584/p
नाल
0.07
201
3586/p
नाल
0.20
451
112.
1329/ p
235
113.
114.
115.
116.
जोड़
नाल
0.05
1823/p
0.03
नाल
1824/p
142/2
नाल
0.07
780/p
0.13
785/p
लूंगा
1333
चारा
0.10 1/16
1265
0.13
बस्तु
चारा
0.03 1/56
3791
0.22
टिला
1/34
3793
चारा
0.04 1/80
882/p
टिला
0.03
763/p
0.06 1/112
1826/p
बस्तु(टिला)
टिला
0.02 808
1/81
चारा
0.01 809
0.07 811
चारा
0.05 1/177
3795/p
बस्तु(टिला)
0.10
टिला
1/79
757/p
नाला
0.11 1/13
901/p
0.14 6/3
874
टिला
18.57
[फा. सं. ओ-36011 / 17/ 2010 - ओएनजी- II ]
आर. एस. सिकदर, अवर सचिव
MINISTRY OF PETROLEUM AND NATURAL GAS
New Delhi , the 8th February, 2012
S.O. 635. Whereas by notification of Government of India in Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Gas number S.O. 2816 (E) dated 04-11-2010 issued under sub - section ( 1 ) of Section 3 of the Petroleum and Minerals Pipelines ( Acquisition of
Right ofUsers in Land) Act , 1962 (50 of 1962 ) ( hereinafter referred to as the said Act ) , Government of India declared its [भाग II-खंड 3 (ii ) ]
भारत का राजपत्र: फरवरी 18 , 2012/माष 29, 1933
1357
05-12-2010. Andwhereas copies of the said Gazette notification were made available to the public from 05-11-2010 to intentionto acquire the Right of User in the Land specified in the Schedule appended to that notification for the purpose of laying pipeline for transportation of natural gas through Sonamura GCS-Bagabasa pipeline project in the State of Tripura, ONGC Limited. And whereas the objections received from the public have been considered and disallowed by the Competent Authority. Andwhereas the Competent Authority has, under sub-section ( 1 ) of Section 6 of the said Act submitted its report toGovernment of India: Andwhereas Government of India after considering the said report and on being satisfied that the said land is required for laying the pipelines , has decided to acquire the Right ofUser therein: Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferredby sub-section ( i ) ofthe Section 6 of the said Act, Government of Indiaherebydeclares that the Right of User in the land specified in the Schedule appended to this notification is hereby acquired for laying the pipeline with the land Schedule annexed hereto. And, further in exercise of the power conferred by sub-section (4) of Section 6 of said Act, Government of India hereby directs that the Right of User in the Land for laying the pipeline shall , instead ofvesting in Government of India , vest, on this date of publication of the declaration, in the ONGC Limited, subject to the terms and conditions so imposed, free from all encumbrances .
SCHEDULE
Schedule of land : Mouza-Purba-Jumer depa
Sl . No. District Sub-Division Mouza Khatian PlotNo. Class of Area in
No. land Acre
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
8
1. South Tripura Sonamura Purbajumerdepa 292 747/p Tilla
0.34
748/p Tilla 0.16
749/p Lunga 0.06
2. 272 752/p
Lunga 0.03
3. 497 751/p
Lunga 0.15
4. 547 755/p
Lunga 0.02
761/p Lunga 0.15
774/p Nal 0.08
771/p Pukur-par 0.02
772/p Pukur 0.01
5. 521 760/p Lunga 0.30
6. 549 883/p Nal 0.02
7. 620 744 Tilla 0.11
4238
8. 466 884 Nal 0.03
9. 33 1239/p Lunga 0.01
10. 243 1331/p Nal 0.12
1332/p Nal 0.01
11. 223 1423/p Nal 0.03
12. 154 753 Lunga 0.02
756 Lunga 0.05
13. 195 885 Lunga 0.08
14. 194 1409/p Nal 0.20
15. 167/1 1262/p Chara-Tilla 0.08
167/3 1420/p Nal 0.26
16. 424/2 1336/p Tilla 0.10
17. 472 1330/p Nal 0.30
18. 317 1507/p Nal 004
1541/p Nal 0.02
1539/p Nal 0.07
1358
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 18, 2012/MAGHA 29, 1933
[PART II-SEC. 3 ( ii )]
6
7
8
4
3
5
1
2
19. South Tripura Sonamura Purbajumerdepa- 329 1536/p Nal 0.03
20. Contd. 133 1540/p Nal 0.14
1535/p Nal 0,01
21. 103/1 1239 Lunga 0.03
4357
22. 376 1494/p Nal 0.10
23. 535 1538/p Nal 0.16
24. 170 2784/p Nal 0.01
2812/p Nal 0.28
2811 /p Nal 0.20
25. 168 3585/p Nal 0.04
26. 66/1 2786/p Nal 0.12
66/2 2785/p Nal 0.05
27. 73 2845/p Bastu 0.06
2848/p Chara 0.04
2851/p Tilla 0.30
2850/p Bhiti 0.04
28. 72 2854/p Nal 0.04
2855/p Nal 0.18
29. 85 3514/p Nal 0.08
30. 53 3841/p Nal 0.16
31. 20 3592 Nal 0.03
32. 491 3628/p Nal 0.02
33. 432/1 2841/p Nal 0.01
432/2
34. 452 3833 /p Pukur Par 0.04
3837/p Nal 0.14
3839/p Nal 0.03
3840/p Nal 0.20
3836/p Nal 0.22
3832/p Pukur 0.02
3831/p Nal 0.01
35. 214 2858/p Lunga 0.05
" 36 : 249 2829/p Bastu 0.04
240 2844/p Nal 0.01
1
38. 227 2856/p Nal 0.02
39. 311 3533 Nal 0.16
40. 318 3589/p Nal 0.18
41. 344 2853/p Nal 0.03
42. 532 3562/p Nal 0.01
3565 Nal 0.28
43. 202 3563/p Nal 0.25
44. 459 3554/p Nal 0.16
45. 98 3555/p Nal 0.01
46. 49 3559/p Nal 0.50
47. 237 3848/p Nal 0.07
48. 282/1 1070 Bastu 0.02
282/2 4268/p
49. 379 3844/p Nal 0.05
3846/p Nal 0.23
1359
भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 18 , 2012/माघ 29 , 1933
[भाग II-खंड 3 (ii) ]
8
7
6
4
5
3
2
1
0.22
Tilla
3796/p
50.
686
Purbajumerdepa-
South Tripura Sonamura
0.01 Contd.
Pukur
711
3882/p
51.
0.01
Bhiti
3884/p
0.01
70
Nal
52.
3513/p
0.18
Nal
303/1
53.
3536/p
0.03
Nal
3528/p
0.03
Nal
98
3535/p
54.
0.23
Nal
386
3843/p
55.
0.09
454
Nal
3578/p
56.
0.06
Nal
237
4264/p
57.
0.02
Nal
72
3591/p
58.
0.04
Nal
378
3595/p
59.
0.02
Nal
96
1537/p
60.
0.03
33
1241 /p
Bagan
61.
0.01
Nal
433
1411 /p
62.
0.03
450/2
1417/p
Pukurpar
63.
0.03
Nal
117
1322/p
64.
0.04
1326/p
Dora(Nal)
0.07
Nal
1327/p
0.02
320/1
Bastu
1319/p
65.
0.16
Nal
1321/p
0.05
Nal
1328/p
0.06
Nal
371
909/p
66.
0.04
Nal
1810/p
0.06
Nal
1493/p
0.18
Nal
1495/p
0.01
Chara
620
750/p
67.
0.02
Dora
128
1325/p
68.
0.07
908
142
Pukurpar
69.
0.08
Nal
889/p
0.01
Chara
906/p
0.18
785
Lunga
0.09
780
Nal
0.17
190
Lunga
886/p
70.
0.04
Nal
887/p
0.03
Nal
910/p
0.02
Nal
912/p
0.16
101
Lunga
781/p
71.
0.15
Nal
777/p
0.30
Dora
548
783/p
72.
0.04
Nal
2837
488/2
73.
0.03
Chara
106/1
2830/p
74.
0.01
Nal
2836/p
0.06
Pukur
2818
250
75.
0.10
Nal
2815
0.01
Pukurpar
2817/p
0.02
Nal
2816/p
Chara
2831/p
0.02
Nal
2835/p 1360
[PART II--SEC . 3 ( ii) ] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 18 , 2012/MAGHA 29 , 1933
1
7
2
3
4
5
8
6
76.
0.01
Nal
SouthTripura Sonamura
491
1836/p
Purbajumerdepa-
Contd.
77.
385/1
0.01
Chara(Tilla)
2810/p
Nal
0.20
3598/p
78.
62
0.30
Nal
2783/p
79.
391
1807
Nal
0.03
80.
69/1
Nal
0.20
1421/p
0.05
Nal
1506/p
Nal
1804
0.10
81.
417
Nal
0.04
1422/p
0.01
Nal
1802/p
Nal
0.02
1821/p
82.
281
Nal
0.18
1424/p
Nal
0.16
1496/p
Nal
0.03
1508/p
0.24
Nal
1533/p
Nal
0.01
1796/p
Nal
0.02
1820/p
83.
432/1
Nal
0.01
1798/p
0.01
Nal
1803/p
84.
297
0.02
Nal
1794/p
85.
861
Nal
0.10
1830/p
Nal
0.02
7793/p
0.08
Nal
2778/p
2779
Nal
0.22
86.
280/2
0.02
Chara
3590/p
Nal
87.
Nal
0.01
185
3575/p
Nal
0.01
3574/p
0.01
Nal
3573/p
88.
217/1
Nal
0.04
3522/p
89.
427/1
0.02
Nal
1833/p
90.
167/2
0.05
Chara
1263/p
Lunga
91.
Nal
450/13
0.01
1412/p
0.09
Nal
1809/p
0.01
Nal
1813/p
0.09
Nal
1808/p
0.03
Nal
1413/p
1827
92.
858
0.03
Bagan
Tilla
1831
Nal
0.03
93.
0.02
159
1832
Nal
94.
787
Tilla
0.10
884
95.
762
0.08
363
Lunga
786
0.12
Lunga
96.
648
0.16
Bastu
788/p
Tilla
97.
0.02
147
Lunga
899/p
0.01
898/p
Pukurpar
Pukur
0.02
894/p
Nal
0.01
1351/p
Pukur
0.01
893/p
0.03
891/p
Lunga [ भाग II-खंड 3 ( ii ) ]
1361 भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 18 , 2012/माघ 29 , 1933
1
2
3
4
6
5
7
8
98.
Tilla
0.07 South Tripura Sonamura
3878/p
935
Purbajumerdepa
Contd.
99.
362/1
Chara
0.01
2838/p
362/2
(Tilla)
Nal
0.02
2842/p
Nal
0.02
2843/p
100.
162
Nal
0.12
1320/p
Nal
0.08
1350/p
0.04
Lunga
900/p
Bastu
0.08
902
101.
130
Nal
0.02
2852/p
102.
280/4
Nal
0.04
2897/p
Nal
280/3
0.12
3602/p
Chara
0.01
3594/p
0.22
Nal
3597/p
Chara
0.02
3593/p
103.
304
Nal
0.16
2857/p
104.
0.30
144
Nal
3543/p
105.
143
Nal
0.12
3527/p
0.24
Nal
3552/p
106.
0.10
Nal
3561/p
107.
513
0.14
Nal
3564/p
108.
351
Nal
0.28
3572/p
0.20
Nal
3578/p
0.10
3580/p
Pukur(Nal)
109.
488/1
Nal
0.12
3583/p
110.
542
Nal
0,10
3584/p
111.
201
Nal
0.07
3586/p
112.
451
Nal
0.20
1329/p
113.
235
0.05
Nal
1823/p
Nal
0.03
1824/p
114.
142/2
0.07
Nal
780/p
0.13
785/p
Lunga
115.
1/16
1333
Chara
0.10
0.13
1265
Bastu
1/56
3791
Chara
0.03
1/34
3793
0.22
Tilla
1/80
0.04
Chara
882/p
0.03
Tilla
763/p
1/112
0.06
Bastu(Tilla)
1826/p
1/81
808
Tilla
0.02
809
Chara
0.01
811
0.07
Chara
1/177
0.05
3795/p
Bastu(Tilla)
Tilla
0.10
1/79
757/p
Nala
0.11
1/13
901/p
874
116.
Tilla
0.14
6/3
18.57 Total
[F. No. 0-36011/17/2010 -ONG - II]
R.S. SIKDAR , Under Secy.
1362
[PART II-SEC. 3 (ii )]
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 18 , 2012/MAGHA 29 , 1933
नई दिल्ली, 8 फरवरी , 2012
का. आ. 636. भारत सरकार ने पेट्रोलियम और खनिज पाइपलाइन ( भूमि में उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन ) अधिनियम , 1962 (1962 का 50 ) (जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त अधिनियम कहा गया है ) की धारा 3 की उप - धारा ( 1 ) के अधीन जारी भारत सरकार के पेट्रोलियम और प्राकृतिक गैस मंत्रालय की अधिसूचना सं. का.आ. 2437 (ई) , तारीख 23-09-2010 द्वारा उस अधिसूचना से संलग्न अनुसूची में विनिर्दिष्ट भूमि में ओ.एन.जी.सी. लिमिटेड द्वारा त्रिपुरा राज्य में निम्बुतलि से बगाबसा पाइपलाईन परियोजना के माध्यम से प्राकृतिक गैस के परिवहन के लिए पाइपलाईन बिछाने के प्रयोजन के लिए उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन करने के अपने आशय की घोषणा की थी;
और, उक्त राजपत्रित अधिसूचना की प्रतियां जनता के तारीख26-10-2010 से 24-11-2010 तक उपलब्ध करा दी गई थी; और सक्षम प्राधिकारी ने जनता से प्राप्त आक्षेपों पर विचार कर लिया है और उन्हें अनुज्ञात कर दिया गया है ; और सक्षम प्राधिकारी ने , उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 6 की उप- धारा ( 1 ) के अधीन भारत सरकार को अपनी रिपोर्ट दे दी है ;
और भारत सरकार ने, उक्त रिपोर्ट पर विचार करने के पश्चात् और संतुष्ट हो जाने पर उक्त भूमि में पाइपलाईन बिछाने के लिए अपेक्षित है , उसमें उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन करने का विनिश्चय किया है ;
अतः अब , भारत सरकार , उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 6 की उप - धारा ( 1 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए, यह घोषणा करती है कि इस अधिसूचना के संलग्न अनुसूची में विनिर्दिष्ट भूमि में पाइपलाइन बिछाने के लिए उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन किया जाता है;
और भारत सरकार ने , उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 6 की उप - धारा ( 4 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए , निर्देश देती है कि पाइपलाइन बिछाने के लिए भूमि में उपयोग का अधिकार , इस घोषणा के प्रकाशन की तारीख को, भारत सरकार में निहित होने के बजाए, पाइपलाइनें बिछाने का प्रस्ताव करने वाली ओ.एन.जी.सी. लिमिटेड में निहित होगा और तदुपरि, भूमि में ऐसे उपयोग का अधिकार, इस प्रकार अधिरोपित निबन्धनों और शर्तों के अधीन रहते हुए , सभी विल्लंगमों से मुक्त, ओ.एन.जी.सी. लिमिटेड में निहित होगा ।
अनुसूची
उप-संभाग: विशालगद
तहसील: निहालचन्द्रनगर
मौजा: निहालचन्द्रनगर
भूमि अनुसूची: मौजा: नेहलचन्द्रनगर
मौजा
उप-संभाग्
क्रम जिला सं
4
3
1
2
नेहलचन्द्रनगर
1.
बिशालगद्
पश्चिमी त्रिपुरा
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
प्लॉट सं.
खसरा सं.
भूमिका वर्ग क्षेत्रफल एकड़ में
8
7
6
5
0.08
नाल
85/1
2955/p
0.07
नाल
2956/p
0.08
नाल
2957/p
0.20
नाल
1150
2958/p
0.07
टिला
824
3334/p
0.18
नाल
1921
3298/p
0.07
नाल
1922
3299/p
0.04
नाल
3299/7447
1974
0.05
चारा
2071
3328/p
0.06
नाल
890
3300/p
0.12
नाल
2089
3301/p
0.04
नाल
2035
3302/p
0.14
नाल
3303/p
0.14
नाल
763
2775/p
0.04
नाल
764/1
2788/p
0.02
नाल
2789/p
0.16
नाल
785/2
2787/p
0.08
नाल
2880/p [ भाग II-खंड 3 ( ii ) ]
1363
भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 18, 2012/माघ 29 , 1933
1
2
4
3
6
7
5
8
12. पश्चिमी त्रिपुरा बिशालगद् नेहलचन्द्रनगर-जारी 785/1 लूंगा
6711 /p 0.03
785/2 6710/p लूंगा 0.06
6271/p नाल 0.04
6273/p पुकूर 0.08
6267/p चारा 0.04
6274/p पुकूर 0.10
13. 6/3 2700/p 0.01
बस्तु
14. 869/7 2774/p नाल 0.13
15. 1466 2661/p नाल 0.03
16. 2078 2662/p नाल 0.12
17. 801/2 5881/7405 लूंगा 0.02
18. 870 2637/p नाल 0.11
19. 1552 2636/p नाल 0.15
20. 1221 2639/p नाल 0.08
2651/p नाल 0.14
2652/p नाल 0.06
2891/p नाल 0.08
21. 564 2654/p नाल 0.12
22. 187 2649/p नाल 0.07
23. 188 2934/p नाल 0.04
24. 78/1 6250/p नाल 0.10
78/2 6251/p नाल 0,20
6291/p चारा 0.01
25. 455 2791/p नाल 0.04
26. 432/2 2889/p नाल 0.06
27. 868 2803/p नाल 0.26
28. 1995/1 2790/p नाल 0.07
29 f 1907 2855/p नाल 0.07
30. 654/2 2856/p नाल 0.22
31. 988 2854/7501 नाल 0.03
32. 350 2887/p नाल 0.02
2888/p नाल (0,04
2953/p नाल 0,17
33. 347 2890/p नाल 0.11
34. 383/1 2874/p नाल 0,20
35. 332/1 2927/p नाल 0.02
2928/p नाल 0.13
332/2 6330/p नाल 0.09
6332/p नाल 0.07
36. 759/2 7422/p नाल 0.07
[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii ) ]
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: FEBRUARY 18 , 2012/MAGHA 29 , 1933
1364
8
7
6
4
5
3
2
1
0.05
नाल
379
2935/p
नेहलचन्द्रनगर-जारी
37.
पश्चिमी त्रिपुरा बिशालगद्
494 2933/p नाल 0.03
38.
61/2 2934/p नाल 0.06
39.
7416/p
1747 3407/p नाल 0.14
40.
2944/p नाल 0.32
721 2949/p नाल 0.25
41.
2950/p नाल 0.30
917/2 2951 /p टिला 0.04
42.
296 2954/p नाल 0.14
43.
448 6331/p नाल 0.01
44.
6451/p नाल 0,07
6452/p नाल 0.02
6453/p नाल 0.06
1697 3304/p चारा 0.14
45.
1290 3291/p भागन् 0.02
46.
1057 3290/p भागन् 0.04
47.
1208 6326/p नाल 0.11
48.
1150 6327/p नाल 0.07
49.
255 6166/p लूंगा 0.10
50.
6328/p नाल 0.08
6329/p नाल 0.11
6708/p लूंगा 0.11
6709/p लूंगा 0.02
1197 6321/p टिला 0.12
51.
961/1 चारा 0.10
52. 6333/p
175 6450/p नाल 0.11
53.
499 नाल 0.20
54. 6449/p
497 6474/p टिला 0.16
55.
लूंगा 0.45
192/1 6572/p
192/2
6490/p दुभा 0.02
959/1
57.
6496/p चारा 0.06
594
58.
2026 6511/p लूंगा 0.16
59.
1097 6508/p पुकूर-पर 0.04
60.
पुकूर 0.16
6509/p
6510/p लूंगा 0.12
602 6162/p भस्तु 0.01
61.
831 6163/p टिला 0.05
62.
6164/p लूंगा 0.12
[ भाग II-खंड 3 ( ii ) ]
1365 भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 18 , 2012/माघ 29 , 1933
1
2
3
4
6
5
7
8
63.
43/2
नेहलचन्द्रनगर-जारी
टिला
0.12 पश्चिमी त्रिपुरा बिशालगद्
6185/p
64.
1870
0.35
टिला
6703/p
65.
1853
0.26
टिला
6264/p
0.30
टिला
6265/p
0.04
टिला
6266/p
66.
785
0.07
लूंगा
6263/p
चारा
0.03
6267/p
(टिला)
67.
800/2
नाल
0.20
6248/p
800/1
टिला
0.08
6488/p
68.
1419
6246
नाल
0.15
69.
399
नाल
0.30
6242/p
70.
1/56
नाल
0.07
3346/p
1/19
0.01
दुभा
6244/p
11.22
कुल
मौजा : गोनियामारा
तहसील : गोनियामारा
उप-संभाग: बिशालगद
भूमि अनुसूची : मौजा: गोनियामारा
जिला
खसरा सं.
मौजा
प्लॉट सं.
भूमि का वर्ग
उप-संभाग्
क्रम सं
एकड़ मे क्षेत्रफल
3
5
2
4
6
8 1
7
1.
गोनियामारा
1012
टिला
0.04
पश्चिमी त्रिपुरा बिशालगद्
7489/p
2.
1244
0.18
टिला
244/p
3.
1338
0.20
नाल
1022/p
4.
1491
0.08
1040/p
चारा (नाल)
5.
नाल
1353
0.12
1418/p
6.
1303
0.16
नाल
1445/p
7.
1936
नाल
0.07
2407/7350
8.
1907
0.01
2681/p
भस्तु
9.
0.03
2696/p
भस्तु
626
0.05 10.
चारा
926/p
नाल
0.10
217/p
0.20
नाल
218/p
चारा
0.06
219/p
नाल
0.08
216/p
670/1
नाल
0.10
303
11.
0.25
नाल
1451
0.25
1174
टिला
248p
12.
0.04
737
लूंगा
253/p
13.
367 G1 /2012-9 1366
THEGAZETTE OF INDIA: FEBRUARY 18 , 2012/MAGHA 29, 1933
1
2
3
4
14.
[PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii ) ]
5
6
7
8
974
गोनियामारा जारी
पश्चिमी त्रिपुरा बिशालगद्
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
24.
25.
26.
टिला
247/p
0.02
टिला
254/p
0.50
टिला
243/p
0.07
229/p
0.10
लूंगा
टिला
0.20 230/p
0.04 231/p
लूंगा
232/p
0.30
लूंगा
1073
0.08 228/p
लूंगा
1206
भागन
233/p
0.01
550/2
टिला
222/p
0.01
434
टिला
292/p
0.01
टिला
0.25 296/p
310/2
नाल
293
0.04
नाल
0.04 295/p
762/1
नाल
302/p
0.08
874/2
टिला
0.02 908/p
1377
0.30
टिला
909/p
588/1
0.38
टिला
906/p
588/2
चारा
0.15 1915 /p
टिला
0.03 916/p
740
नाल
0.06 924/p
927
नाल
0.12
नाल
0.14 1015/p
1133
नाल
0.10 930/p
980
27.
28.
29.
30.
नाल
0.15 1011 /p
774
नाल
0.20 1012/p
1370
नाल
0.08 1013/p
25
नाल
0.08 1016/p
380
31.
32.
नाल
0.03 1017/p
1020
चारा
0.03
1005
0.08
टिला
1018/p
472
33.
34.
35.
36.
नाल
0.15 1024/ p
1491
नाल
0.36 1039/p
1493
नाल
0.23 1092/p
नाल
0.08 1044/p
624
990
भागन
0.06
1146/3
37.
नाल
0.02 1049/p
नाल
0.01 1050/p
1159
38.
0.05
टिला
1047/p
1900
39.
नाल
0.04
1053/p
274/1
40.
टिला
0.01 1055/p
320
नाल
0.12 1063/p
7490
[भाग II-खंड 3 (ii ) ] भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 18 , 2012/माघ 29 , 1933 1367
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
41. पश्चिमी त्रिपुरा बिशालगद् गोनियामारा -जारी 762/3 1058/p नाल 0.10
762/4 1057/p चारा 0.02
42. 883/2 & 3 1411/p नाल 0.01
1442/p नाल 0.01
1443/p नाल 0.03
1063/p नाल 0.04
43. 672/2 1066/p नाल 0.10
1401/p नाल 0.10
1409/ p नाल 0.02
44. 1354 1410/ p चारा 0.04
45. 161/1 2767/ p नाल 0.45
14/22p चारा 0.17
46. 1355/1 1446/p नाल 0.20
47. 1049 1402/p नाल 0.12
48. 220 2708 नाल 0.12
221 2736 नाल 0,06
49. 1/62 2791 नाल 0.13
1/48 7045/p सडक 0.04
1/4 1025/p सडक 0.10
1/5 1026/p नाल 0.03
1/3 215/p लूंगा 0.20
1/7 301/p टिला 0.10
50. 824 27/94 चारा 0.10
51 . 918 2734/p नाल 0.10
52. 671 2739/p नाल 0,12
2738/p नाल 0.12
53. 1296/1 2704/p नाल 0.07
1296/2 2696/p भस्तु 0.03
2695/p भागन 0.01
2698/p टिला 0.04
54. 1232 2706/p नाल 0.14
55. 1668 2709/ p नाल 0.04
56. 1714 2710/p नाल 0.03
57. 666 2691/p नाल 0.10
58. 1966 2680/p नाल 0.07
59. 1034 2689/p नाल 0.08
60. 1332/1 2523/p नाल 0.03
61. 563/2 2524/p नाल 0.10
62. 210 2529/p पुकुर 0,02
1255/1 & 2 2511/p नाल 0.14
63.
2520/ p नाल 0.12
1368
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 18 , 2012/MAGHA 29 , 1933
1
4 2
3
64.
[PART II SEC. 3(ii) ]
6
7
8 5
1246
नाल
0.01
गोनियामारा जारी
पश्चिमी त्रिपुरा बिशालगद् 2164/p
2165/p नाल 0.03
65. 146 2166/p चारा 0.06
66. 1936 2467/p नाल 0.14
67. 1937 2408/p चारा 0.07
68. 541/1 2409/p चारा 0.03
69. 540/2 2416/p नाल 0.60
70. 1/30 2418/p टिला 0.22
71. 630 2306/p पुकूर 0.03
72. 964/3 2398/p टिला 0.10
73. 757 4395/p नाल 0.22
74. 662/1 4386/p नाल 0.16
4366/p भागन 0.02
75. 545 4397/p टिला 0.02
4389/p टिला 0.02
76. 594 4390/p नाल 0.30
77. 949 4388 टिला 0.12
78. 686/1 4180 नाल 0.08
4382 टिला 0.10
79. 3/4 4403 टिला 0.03
4380 टिला 0.03
80. 1/20 4353 टिला 0.01
81. 476 4367 नाल 0.16
82. 886 4350 नाल 0.16
83. 1027 4344 पुकूर 0.06
4343 पुकुर 0.02
84. 1029 4457 नाल 0.01
85. 1803 4465 नाल 0.02
86. 1987 4810/p नाल 0.10
4811/p नाल 0.12
87. 1186/1 4491/p नाल 0.02
4490/p धुभा 0.04
88. 1109 4485/p नाल 0.02
89. 898 4463/p नाल 0.02
90. 951 4447/p भस्तु 0.02
91. 692 4498/p चारा 0.08
4496/p नाल 0.12
92. 675 4455/p नाल 0.08
4456/p नाल 0.08
93. 346/1 4357/p भागन 0.16
[ भाग II-खंड 3 ( ii ) ]
भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 18 , 2012/ माघ 29, 1933
1369
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
94. पश्चिमी त्रिपुरा
808/2
गोनियामारा जारी
बिशालगद्
नाल
4809/p
0.05
95.
1759
नाल
4500/p
0.04
96.
659/3
नाल
4346/p
0.03
97.
701
नाल
0.05
4394/p
98.
1125
नाल
4351/p
0.20
कुल
14.30
अनुसूची
मौजा: पुरातल राजनगर
तहसील: मधुपुर
उप-संभाग: बिशालगद्
भूमि अनुसूची: मौजा: पुरातल राजनगर
जिला
उप-संभाग मौजा
खसरा सं.
प्लॉट सं.
भूमि का वर्ग
क्रम सं
एकड़ में क्षेत्रफल
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
1.
पश्चिमी त्रिपुरा
46
बिशालगद् पुरातल राजनगर
0.25
1025/p
बस्तु/टिला
2.
634
नाल
0.15
1045/p
नाल
0.22
1047/p
नाल
1048/p
0.06
3.
1464
टिला
1044/p
0.08
4.
803
1052
चारा/टिला
0.10
803/1
नाल
0.52
1050/p
803/3
नाल
0.12
1063/p
803/4
टिला
1517/p
0.13
803/5
नाल
1065/p
0.08
चारा/नाल
1066/p
0.04
5.
684
टिला
0.10
1062/p
0.07
चारा/टिला
1061/p
6.
626
नाल
1064/p
0.18
चारा/टिला
0.04
1067/p
टिला
0.08
1073/p
7.
388
नाल
0.08
1110/p
8.
1379
0.18
1106/p
लूंगा
0.02
1108/p
चारा (टिला)
9.
648
चारा/टिला
0.02
1103/p
चारा/टिला
0.02
1107/p
10.
1569
0.05
1102/p
लूंगा
0.08
1105/p
लूंगा
11.
863/1 &863/2
1101/p चारा/टिला 0.06 1092/p लूंगा 0.08 1100/p लूंगा 0.04 1093/p चारा/टिला 0.08 1091/p चारा (लूंगा ) 0.03 1087/p चारा ( नाल) 0.06
1370
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 18, 2012/MAGHA 29, 1933
4 1
2
3
12.
[PART II-SEC. 3 ( ii ) ]
5
6
7
8
0.06
पुरातल राजनगर- 862
पश्चिमी त्रिपुरा बिशालगद् 1094/p लूंगा
जारी
13. 861 1090/p चारा/लूंगा 0.03
14. 1401 1520/p टिला 0.03
15. 515 1086/p चारा/टिला 0.09
1084/p टिला 0.39
16. 223 1082/p टिला 0.03
923 1523/p टिला 0.01
17. 938 6180/p बागन्/टिला 0.17
18. 1/42 1522/ p टिला 0.54
कुल 4.37
अनुसूची
मौजा : के.के. नगर तहसील: चरिलाम उप-संभाग: बिशालगद
भूमिअनुसूची: मौजा: के. के. नगर
क्रम जिला उप-संभाग् मौजा खसरा सं. प्लॉट सं. भूमिकावर्ग एकड़ में
सं क्षेत्रफल
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
1. पश्चिमी त्रिपुरा बिशालगद् के.के . नगर 2006 3363/p नाल 0.16
2. 2030 3364/p नाल 0.02
3. 84/2 3366/p नाल 0.28
84/3 3388/p नाल 0.08
3389/p नाल 0.27
4. 3151 3366/p नाल 0.90
11891
5. 3224 3367/p नाल 0.01
6. 2168/1 3387/p नाल 0.12
7. 888 3419/p नाल 0.13
8 1293/3 3418/p नाल 0.05
1293/4 3417 नाल 0.05
3426/p चारा 0.10
9. 2699 3427/p नाल 0.25
10. 2790 3425/p चारा 0.01
11. 1294 3416/p नाल 0.01
12. 991 3429/p नाल 0.01
3433/p नाल 0.15
13. 1562 3430/p नाल 0.04
3431/p नाल 0.11
14. 1556 3493 नाल 0.11
15. 1511/1 3501/p नाल 0.01
16. 527 3432/p नाल 0.18
[ भाग II-खंड 3 ( ii ) ]
भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 18, 2012/माघ 29 , 1933
1371
1
2
4
3
5
6
7
8
17.
पश्चिमी त्रिपुरा बिशालगद् के.के. नगर-जारी 2479/3
नाल
0.10
3437 /p
18.
2477
चारा
0.22
3776/p
19.
92/9
नाल
3438/p
0.02
92/2
नाल
0.26
3817/p
92/5
3818/p
0.04
पुकूर
0.42
3819/p
पुकूर-पार
भागन
3793 /p
20.
73/2
3498
0.05
नाल
21 .
94/1
नाल
0.07
10473/p
नाल
10475/p
0.15
22.
3029
नाल
0.01
10479/p
23.
2972
नाल
0.10
10474/p
नाल
0.01
10441/p
24.
96/2
नाल
0.01
10485/p
25.
2723
नाल
0.02
10743/p
नाल
0.05
10410/p
26.
1422
नाल
0.06
3494/p
27.
1415
नाल
9876
0.11
11416/p
28.
2291
नाल
0.09
3497/p
नाल
3499/p
0.11
29.
2087/1
नाल
0.04
10892/p
2087/2
नाल
0.01
10891/p
30.
2329
3746
नाल
0.01
10891 /p
31.
2390
नाल
0.12
3789/p
0.21
3790/p
भिटि(नाल)
32.
1/117
3783
चारा
0.06
नाल
0.03
3792/p
33.
2290/1
0.01
3811/p
भस्तु
3813
0.02
पुकूर
0.07
3814/p
पुकूर
नाल
3820/p
0.02
34.
161/2
4474
0.01
भस्तु
11247
35.
12.22
चारा
0.29
3775/p
चारा
3784/p
0.02
चारा
0,04
3786/p
36.
1036
नाल
0.08
3788/p [PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii )]
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 18 , 2012 /MAGHA 29 , 1933
1372
3
4
2
1
8
7
6
5
0.09
1386
दुभा
के.के. नगर-जारी
[ भाग II-खंड 3 (ii ) ] भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 18 , 2012/माघ 29 , 1933 1373
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
66. पश्चिमी त्रिपुरा बिशालगद् के.के. नगर-जारी 1025 10294/p नाल 0.01
67. 2775 10313/p नाल 0.22
68. 2302/2 10312/p नाल 0.01
37. पश्चिमी त्रिपुरा बिशालगद् 3816/p
69. 1824 10317/p नाल नाल 0.21 0.07
38. 1811 3815/p
70. 641/1 10321 /p नाल 0.01 0.09
39. 3075 4474/p भस्तु
71. 2394 10319/p नाल चारा 0.03 0.13
4477/p
72. 1836 10318 नाल 0.03 0.01
4476 भस्तु
11404/p 4478 चारा 0.12
73. 1401/1 10318/p नाल 0.12
4479 भागन 0.03
74. 749/1 10318 नाल 0.10
1581 4492/p टिला 0.21
40.
11405/p
625 4494/p भागन 0.45
41.
75. 425/4 10278 नाल 0.01
1/21 4497/p सडक 0.08
42. 11402/p
1/119 4503/p टिला 0.06
76. 214/2 10528/p नाल 0.24
1932 4516/p चारा 0.18
43. 10506/p नाल 0.27
2096 4526/p नाल 0.05 0.20
44. 10505/p नाल
1281 4526/p नाल नाल 0.03 0.01
77. 45. 1802 10333 /p
11242 नाल 0.14
78. 1541 10507/p
1748 4532/p नाल 0.08 0.12
46. 10508/p नाल
750 4533/p नाल 0.01 0.06
79. 47. 932/2 10521/p नाल
1895 4531/p नाल नाल 0.11 0.29
48. 932/3 10509/p
71/2 4573/p नाल 0.04 0.22
49. 10438/p नाल
1222/1 4575/p नाल नाल 0.05 0.24
50. 10510/p
914 2960 9860 नाल नाल 0.01 0.09
80. 51. 3500/p
2714 10484/p 11772 नाल 0.01
81 .
9861/p नाल 0.09 0.10
82. 1724 10483/p नाल
2671 2820 9863/p चारा नाल 0.05 0.19
83. 52. 3777/p
1816 9865/p नाल नाल 0,07 0.18
84. 53. 1116 10482/p
2590 2402 9866/p नाल नाल 0.19 0.17
85. 54. 10481/p
2534 10480/p 9873 नाल नाल 0.03 0.05
86.
702/1 2312 10448/p 9871/p नाल नाल 0.15 0.02
55.
1816 10476/p 9872/p नाल नाल 0.13 0.19
56.
1700/1 2418 10467/p 9877 नाल नाल 0.03 0.06
87. 57.
10439/p नाल नाल 0.03 0.01
58. 1824/4 9878/p
1284/1 10440/p नाल नाल 0.11 0.07
59. 9875/p
2720 10443/p नाल 0.07 0,20
88. 2333/1 9883/p नाल
60.
1442 10442/p नाल 0.07 0.01
89. 371 10300/p नाल
61.
1482/1 10740/p नाल 0.07
10297/p नाल 0.21
1204 10447/p नाल 0.03
90. 984 10296/p नाल 0.01
62.
1020/2 10409/p नाल नाल 0.01 0.06
91 . 3074 10298/p
63.
853/2 10295/p नाल 0.06
64.
601/2 10310/p नाल 0.17
65.
367 GI/2012-10 1374
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 18 , 2012 /MAGHA 29, 1933
[PART II-SEC. 3 (ii)]
4
7
8 1
2
3
6
5
92.
के.के. नगर-जारी
65
नाल
0.12
10741/p
पश्त्तिमी त्रिपुरा बिशालगद्
738
93.
0.04
10744/p
पुकूर-पार
0.01
10746/p
पुकुर
13.48
कुल
अनुसूची
तहसील : घनियामारा
मौजा: ब्रजपुर
उप-संभाग: बिशालगद्
भूमि अनुसूची मौजा : ब्रजपुर
क्रम जिला उप-संभाग् मौजा खसरा सं. प्लॉट सं. भूमि का वर्ग एकड़ में
सं क्षेत्रफल
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
1. पश्चिमी त्रिपुरा बिशालगद् ब्रजपुर 1006 2431 /p नाल 004
2 716 2432/p नाल 0.20
2538/p नाल 0.10
3. 457 2434/p नाल 0.18
4. 35/1 2435/p माल 0.15
5 1670 2636/p पुकूर (नाल) 0.01
6. 1051 2439/p नाल 0.13
7. 1984 2456/p नाल 0.01
8. 1501 2455/ p नाल 0.09
9. 529 2440 नाल 0.44
10. 1356 2458/p नाल 0.07
11. 775 2461/p नाल 0.01
12. 837 2460/p 0.10
13. 1212 2462/p नाल 0.11
617 2463 /p नाल 0.08
15. 176 2464 /p नाल 11.02
16. 59 8093/ p नाल 0.11
17. 240 2465/p नाल 0.09
18. 2109 2469/p नाल 0.01
19. 130 2468/p नाल 0.10
20 632/1 2475/ p नाल 0.12.
2487/p नाल 0.00
2541/ p नाल 0.19
21. 677 2472/p नाल 0.10
1041 2476/p नाल 0.11
661 2479/p नाल 0.11
1011 2585/ p पुकूर पर 0.10
2582 2536/p नाल 0.19
[ भाग II-खंड 3 ( ii ) ]
1375
भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 18 , 2012 /माघ 29 , 1933
1
2
3
4
26.
पश्चिमी त्रिपुरा बिशालगद् ब्रजपुर---जारी
27.
28.
29.
30.
31.
32.
33.
34.
35.
36.
37.
38
39.
40.
41.
42.
43.
44.
45.
16
47,
49
50
51.
5
6
8
186
नाल
0.01 2539/p
633
नाल
0.07 2542/p
1501
नाल
0.09 2544/p
182
नाल
0.02 2543/p
1794
0.12
नाल
4600/p
706
नाल
0.19 4601/p
1918
0.01
नाल
4620/p
1689
4615
नाल
0.02
1420
नाल
0.04 4614/p
नाल
0.15 4618/p
1216
नाल
6.06 6050/p
1945
नाल
011 2548/p
नाल
0.23 2553/p
523/4
नाल
0,09 2563/p
नाल
0.12 2561/p
583
0.09
नाल
8123 /p
110/1
नाल
0.13 2840/p
511
0.04
नाल
6033/p
1390
नाल
0.12 3386/p
1345/2
नाल
0.08 2549/ p
2376
1013
नाल
2839/p
1670
नाल
0.11 5078/p
643/1
नाल
0.05
5079/p
1074
नाल
5082/p
375
नाल
0.18 5084/p
नाल
0.03 5085/p
1021
नाल
3366/p
0.40
59
नाल
2465
0.11
नाल
0.04 8093/p
368
0.16
नाल
3367/p
नाल
0.01 6032/p
1341
नाल
0.05
6049/p
0.10 3371 /p
नाल
019
3381/p
629/2
नाल
016 3373/
969
নাল
0.14 3374/
नाल
6065/p
नाल
3375/p
चारा/टिला
1769
6091/p
1315
4916
िित/निल
0.14
8082/p [PART II-SEC. 3 ( ii )]
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 18 , 2012/MAGHA 29 , 1933
1376
[भाग II-खंड 3 (ii) ] भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 18 , 2012/माघ 29 , 1933 1377
1 2 3 4
5 6 7 8
1 2 3 4
86. पश्चिमी त्रिपुरा बिशालगद् ब्रजपुर-जारी
87. 1461 6092/p नाल 0.01
57. पश्चिमी त्रिपुरा बिशालगद् ब्रजपुर-जारी
1992 6100/p चारा 0.01
88. 58.
411 6101/p टिला 0.25
89. 59.
2609 3387 नाल 0.10
60.
8098/p
741 3391/p नाल 0.03
90 61.
1076 6102/p चारा (टिला) 0.05
91. 62.
6103/p नाल 0.13
92.
6132/p नाल 0.46
93.
1394 6157/p नाल 0.01
94. 63.
1203 6156/p नाल 0.30
64.
1012 6155/p नाल 0.02
95 65.
1464/1 6162/p नाल 0.08
66.
1464/2 6242/p नाल 0.22
97.
469 6163/p नाल 0.10
67.
2261 6257/p नाल 0.12
99 68.
2264 6258/p नाल 0.07
69.
6259/p नाल 0.04
100.
नाल 0.25
70. 1448 6295/p
6229/p नाल 0.01
101.
6230/p नाल 0.12
6234/p नाल 0.11
102.
6233 /p नाल 0.04
71. 1284
103.
1219 4559/p नाल 0.01
104. 72.
नाल 0,26
73. 169 4556/p
105.
212 4401/p नाल 0.03
74.
नाल 0.20
4549/p
1546 नाल 0.15
75. 4402/p
4548/p नाल 0.43
1511 नाल 0.01
76. 4547/p
1595 4415/p नाल 0.11
77.
नाल 0.39
34/1 4413/p
78.
4418/p बालु-चर 0.07
129 4552/p नाल 0.01
79.
4557/p नाल 0.25
80. 1141
4400 नाल 0.04
377
81.
284 4393/p नाल 0.04
82.
43 4399/p नाल 0.02
83.
1407 4398/p नाल 0.17
84.
1910 4394/p नाल 0.11
85.
कुल
5 6 7 8
479 4390/p नाल 0.17
1634/4 4360/p नाल 0.08
2008 4361/p नाल 0.14
533 4343/p नाल 0.07
4345/p नाल 0.03
4344/p नाल 0.04
1333 4347/p नाल 0.05
1553 4340/p नाल 0.06
728 4333/p चारा/टिला 0.01
557/1 4619/p नाल 0.10
1419 4431/p नाल 0.25
4430/p नाल 0.11
1777 4438/p दुबा/लूंगा 0.03
84 6282/p नाल 0.08
1206 6232 नाल 0.02
667 6231 /p नाल 0.34
979 6226/p नाल 0.16
2627/p नाल 0.10
893 6280/p नाल 0.10
6281/p नाल 0.22
1671 4424/p नाल 0.11
4425/p नाल 0.14
321 4391/p नाल 0.04
1444/2 4432/p चारा 0.01
1160 4434/p नाल 0.03
1/19 2157/p नाल 0.02
14.57
उप-संभाग: बिशालगद
तहसील : दविशन चरिलम
मौजा: दक्शिन चरिलम
भूमि अनुसूची: मौजा: दक्शिन चरिलम
मौजा जिला
क्रम
उप-संभाग्
सं
4
3
2
1
दक्शिनचरिलम 1.
पश्चिमी त्रिपुरा बिशालगद्
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
प्लॉट सं.
खसरा सं.
भूमिकावर्ग एकड़ में क्षेत्रफल
8 6
7
5
0.18
नाल
186
144/p
0.01
522
बालुचर/नाल
124/p
0.01
नाल
940
146/p
0.12
नाल
935
122/p
0.24
856
बालुचर/नाल
123/p
0.12
नाल
1163
121/p
0.02
नाल
119/p
0.12
नाल
507
82/p 1378
[PART II-SEC . 3( ii ) ] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 18 , 2012/MAGHA 29, 1933
6
7
8
4
1
2
3
5
0.08
नाल
8.
दक्शिन चरिलम- 1775
440/p
पश्चिमी त्रिपुरा बिशालगद्
जारी
004
363
9.
बस्तु/नाल
53/p
0.02
398
नाल
10.
60/p
नाल
0.04
413
11.
81/p
0.02
नाल
50/p
0.33
नाल
12.
620
51/p
0.08
91
नाल
13.
48/p
0.02
81
नाल
14.
47/p
0.14
30
नाल
0.01
45/
नाल
0.02
नाल
15
1055
46/p
0.03
733
16.
बस्तु/नाल
37/p
011
270
30/0
17.
बस्तु/नाल
0.01
भूता/नाल
31/0
0.04
नाल
32/p
0.02
259
18.
29/ p
बस्तु/टिला
0.07
801/1
नाल
19.
427/p
0.16
801/2
428/p
बस्तु/नाल
0.02
धूबा/नाल
420/ p
012
नाल
430/p
0.18
नाल
439/p
608
नाल
441/p
नाल
0.04
441/6052
1802
20.
चारा/टिला
0,11
1108/1
21.
49/p
0.13
चारा/नाल
1108/2
450/p
1002
नाल
466/p
0.10
नाल
451/p
008
नाल
464/p
नाल
0.01
448/p
नाल
465/ p
001
286
22.
443/p
पुकूर पार/नाल
0.02
नाल
1078
23.
460/p
0.02
नाल
462/p
016
नाल
514/p
नाल
0.24
369
24.
510/ p
नाल
0,20
176
463/p
25.
010
नाल
927
26.
515/p
नाल
230
4791/p
27.
008
नाल
4792/p
नाल
0.20
4793/p [ भाग II-खंड 3 ( ii ) ]
भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 18 , 2012/माघ 29 , 1933
1379
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
28. पश्चिमी त्रिपुरा बिशालगद् दक्शिनचरिलम-
244 4802/p नाल 0.02
जारी
4697/p नाल 0.08
29.
242/2 4472/p
चारा/नाल 0.08
30.
239 4493 नाल
0.08
31.
185 4696/p नाल
0.08
4695/p नाल 0.06
32.
1128 4788/p नाल 0.20
4773/p नाल 0.02
4804/p नाल 0.24
33. 53
4794/p नाल 0.06
34.
1078 516/p नाल 0.10
35
106 528/p नाल
0.02
529/p नाल 0.01
36.
96 517 /p
नाल 0.12
37.
619 524/p नाल 0.28
525/p नाल 0.04
526/p चारा/नाल 0.01
38. 158
572/p नाल 0.12
39. 495
570/p नाल 0.10
571 /p नाल 0.04
40 66/2 2627/p नाल 0.13
2572/p नाल 0.08
41
947/1 2628/p नाल 0.01
47
533/3 2571 / p नाल 0.14
13.
630 2569/p नाल 0.08
44
1036 2558/p जाल 0.08
45.
425/2 2912/p नाल 0.08
45
983/2 2556/p नाल 0.08
47.
426/1 2527 नाल 0.08
426/3 2919/p नाल 0.02
2531 /p नाल 0.06
2528/p नाल 0.07
323 2198/p नाल 0.01
40 183
2920/p नाल 0.05
50 303
2525/p नाल 0.05
51. 385
3719/p चारा/नाल 0.10
52.
922 3770/p चारा/नाल 0.15
53. 964
3768/ p चारा/नाल 0.08
54. 1100
3769/p चारा/नाल 0.04
55. 896
3767/p चारा/नाल 0.13
[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii ) ]
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: FEBRUARY 18 , 2012 /MAGHA 29, 1933
1380
4
3
2
1
8
7
6
5
0.09
चारा/टिला
3764/p
820/1
दक्शिनचरिलम
56.
बिशालगद्
पश्चिमी त्रिपुरा
जारी
57.
58.
59.
60.
61.
62.
63.
64.
65.
66.
67.
68.
69.
70.
71.
72.
73.
74.
75.
76.
77 .
78.
79.
80.
0.02
चारा/टिला
3763/p
0.02
बस्तु/नाल
3794/p
0.04
नाल
341
3765/p
0.02
चारा/नाल
3762/p
538
0.10
नाल
3760/p
0.17
बस्तु/टिला
3862/p
1488
0.04
नाल
3963/p
997/3
0.08
नाल
3941/p
0.04
नाल
3942/p
0.05
नाल
3964/p
0.05
नाल
3960/p
1672
0.04
चारा/नाल
291
3958/p
0.10
चारा/नाल
3825/p
0.12
चारा/नाल
3826/p
0.16
नाल
996
3827/p
0.12
नाल
3828/p
0.10
नाल
215
3833/p
0.20
नाल
379
3834/p
0.04
नाल
195
3856/p
0.07
नाल
58
3840/p
0,27
टिला
1445
3855/p
0.06
चारा/टिला
3853/p
0.26
नाल
709
3854/p
0.02
टिला
3882/p
1382
0.05
टिला
4302/p
0.16
टिला
1640
4299/p
0.24
टिला
4300/p
1653
0.12
नाल
2626/p
83
0.06
नाल
1047
3747/p
0.05
नाल
3748/p
0.29
नाल
1268/p
1681
0.13
नाल
1963
1305/p
0.12
नाल
338
4693/p
0.02
भाल
430/2
4651/p
0.02
नाल
4650/p
0.15
नाल
4652/p
0.09
नाल
4353/p
0.13
नाल
221/2
1192/p
0.18
नाल
2738/p
0.01
नाल
947
1315/p
[ भाग II-खंड 3( ii ) ] भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 18 , 2012/माघ 29 , 1933 1381
1 2 3 4
81. पश्चिमीत्रिपुरा बिशालगद् दक्शिन चरिलम
परी
82.
83.
84.
85.
86.
87.
88.
89.
90.
91.
92.
93.
94.
95.
6.
97.
98.
99.
100.
101.
102.
103 .
104.
105.
106.
107.
108.
109.
367 G1 /2012-11
5 6 7 8
1644 580/p नाल 0.26
1080
1269/p नाल 0.10
1075 581/p नाल 0.02
1798 823/p नाल 0,20
1889 828/p नाल 0.19
1829 2643/p नाल 0.10
657 2526 नाल 0.05
1732 4807/p नाल 0.02
767 4692/p नाल 0.16
4691/p नाल 0.16
1294 1359/p बिटि 0.11
(नाल)
1057 1382/p नाल 0.12
1961/1 1307 चारा (नाल) 0.06
1335 1380/p टिला 0.06
1381/p 'चारा (नाल) 0.06
1306 चारा (नाल) 0.10
198 1266 नाल 0.37
221/3 1319/p नाल 0,03
2703/p नाल 0.12
2745/p नाल 0.10
2740/p नाल 0.26
336/2 1318/p नाल 0.26
26 1316/p नाल 0.13
1037 1314/p नाल 0.18
162 1331/p नाल 0.01
1312/p नाल 0.05
425/3 2641/p नाल 0.15
638 3773/p नाल 0.04
275 3771/p नाल 0.12
3772/p नाल 0.12
862 145/p नाल 0.16
530/1 54 नाल 0.19
83/p नाल 0.18
79/p नाल 0.02
103 49/p नाल 0.07
1125 3746/p चारा (नाल) 0.12
215 3824 चारा (नाल) 0,09
3833/p नाल 0.10
503 3957/p चारा (नाल) 0.03
1763 1308/p चारा (नाल) 0.01
1382
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 18 , 2012/MAGHA 29, 1933
1
2
3
4
110.
[PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii )]
6
5
7
8
नाल
0.08
दक्शिन चरिलम-425/2
पश्चिमी त्रिपुरा बिशालगद् 2912/p
जारी
111. 589 2557/p नाल 0.06
112. 762/1 567/p नाल 0.09
113 . 39 573/p नाल 0.13
114. 526 576/p नाल 0.04
115. 760 579/p नाल 0.20
116. 37 578/p नाल 0.04
117 . 260 850/p नाल 0.07
849/p नाल 0,04
856/p नाल 0.18
118. 441 855/ p नाल 0.03
119. 173 839/p नाल 0.10
120. 232 818/p नाल 0.22
121 . 299 822/p नाल 0.04
122 . 1081 824/p चारा (नाल) 0.01
123. 347 826/p नाल 0.03
124. 1014 827/ p नाल 0.10
125. 336 806/p नाल 0.01
126. 348 805/p नाल 0.40
127. 792 804/p नाल 0.04
128. 221 1191/p नाल 0.02
129. 1031 1270/p नाल 0.14
130. 296 1267/p नाल 0.10
131 . 310 2735/p नाल 0.18
2746/p नाल 0.01
132. 834/2 2712 नाल 0.10
133. 210 2693/p नाल 0.12
134. 163/1 2694/p नाल 0.09
135. 651 2697/p नाल 0.03
136. 786 2695/p नाल 0,20
137. 765 2698/p नाल 0.03
138. 1455 4330/p नाल 0.03
139. 631 4803/p नाल 0.10
140. 1007 4805/p नाल 0.22
141. 723 4767/ p नाल 0.31
142. 719 4747/ p नाल 0.01
143. 905 4742/p नाल 0.20
144. 308 4749/p नाल 0.23
145. 790 4750/p 0.01
146 459 4699/p नाल 0.29
147. 1128/3 4746/p नाल 0.26
[ भाग II-खखंड 3 (ii) ]
1383
भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 18 , 2012/माघ 29 , 1933
1
2
3
4
148.
दक्शिन चरिलम
पश्चिमी त्रिपुरा बिशालगद्
जारी
149.
150
151 .
152.
153 .
154.
155.
156.
157.
158.
159.
कुल
मौजा : बर्जला
5
6
7
8
नाल
0.09 430/1
4648/p
431/2
नाल
0.10 4645/p
नाल
0.07 4454/p
845/1
0.10
नाल
4643/p
843/3
0.12
नाल
4642/p
911/2
0.01
नाल
4452/p
0.12
4462/p
चारा (नाल)
242/2
0.08 4472
चारा (नाल)
893
नाल
0.10
4492/p
928
नाल
0.01
34/p
1798
नाल
0.20 823/p
1/62
0.04
रास्ता
4332/p
1/66
0.02 4474/p
चारा (नाल)
1/67
0.06
4477/ p
शासन (नाल)
0.02
4479/p
चारा (नाल)
5093/
1/38
रास्ता
0.01
5677/p
1/31
0.16
रास्ता
4301/p
0.56 1/43
टिला
4298/p
1/4
नाल
0.02 1300
1/4
0.06
नाल
840/p
1/10
0.08
नाल
2530/p
1/10
नाल
0.08
2529/p
3801
1/54
0.09
पुकूर (नाल)
चारा (टिला)
0.04 3802/p
1/43
टिला
0.56
4298/p
1/49
1300
नाल
0.02
नाल
0.04
4657/p
3/4
नाल
0.08
4453/p
23.71
तहसील : गोलाघाटी
भूमि अनुसूची: मौजा : बर्जला
जिला
मौजा क्रम
उप-संभाग्
सं.
4 1
2
3
बर्जला 1.
पश्चिमी त्रिपुरा बिशालगद्
2.
3.
4.
उप-संभाग: बिशालगद्
खसरा स.
प्लॉट सं.
भूमि का वर्ग एकड़ में क्षेत्रफल
5
6
7
8
60
नाल
0.09
212/ p
96/1
नाल
0.17
338/p
नाल
0.12 349
336/ p
0.12 239
नाल
330/p 1384
[PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii) ]
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 18 , 2012/MAGHA 29, 1933
3
1
2
4
5.
7
8 6
5
नाल
0.10
दक्शिनचरिलम- 134
पश्चिमी त्रिपुरा बिशालगद् 323/p
जारी 0.08
6. 298 317/p नाल
7. 297 386/p नाल 0.15
387/p नाल 0.01
8. 1012 227 नाल 0.46
9. 207/1,2 & 3 533 नाल 0.01
534 नाल 0.04
535 नाल 0.10
536 नाल 0.07
544 नाल 0.02
545 नाल 0.10
10. 253 530 नाल 0.09
11. 216 717/p नाल 0.19
12. 342 725 नाल 0.09
1898 नाल 0.04
13. 165 329 नाल 0.10
14. 73 2016 सड़क 0.07
2017 सड़क 0.10
15. 156 2022 नाल 0.18
2023 नाल 0,19
2018 चारा (नाल) 0.06
16. 1005 724 नाल 0.03
17. 26 2025 चारा (नाल) 0.12
18. 110 2029 चारा ( नाल) 0.02
19. 310 1958/p भालू चर 0.21
20. 315/1 1971/p चारा ( नाल) 0.05
1974 नाल 0.06
21. 315/2 1972/p नाल 0.08
315/3 1973/p नाल 0.08
22.
23 . 264 1967/p नाल 0.18
24. 342 1898/p नाल 0.03
25. 224 1897/p नाल 0.18
26. 187 1899/p नाल 0.02
27. 257 1902/p नाल 0.45
28. 259 1855/p नाल 0.11
29. 9/1 1856/p नाल 0.22
30. 265 1857/p नाल 0.26
31. 277/2 1825/p नाल 0.20
1385
भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 18, 2012/माघ 29 , 1933
[ भाग II-खंड 3 ( ii) ]
4
3
1
2
32.
7
8 6
5
पश्चिमी त्रिपुरा बिशालगद् दक्शिनचरिलम- 65 1826/p नाल 0.31
जारी
1828/p नाल 0.01
2399/p नाल 0.09
33. 148 2397/ p नाल 0.26
34. 135 2401/p नाल 0.18
35. 237 2334/p नाल 0.15
36. 52 2432/p नाल 0.21
37. 238 2427/p नाल 0.20
38. 319 2453/p नाल 0.32
39. 189 2450/p नाल 0.22
40. 035 2458/p नाल 0.23
2459/p नाल 0.01
41 . 162 2457/p नाल 0.24
42. 684 389/p नाल 0.07
390/p नाल 0.09
391/p नाल 0.05
12 1831 नाल 0.05
43.
44. 121 344 नाल 0.14
377 210 चारा (नाल) 0.01
45.
48 213/p नाल 0.16
46.
756 385/p नाल 0.18
47.
661 384/p नाल 0.07
48.
1085 1854/p नाल 0.12
49.
1035 2071 नाल 0.14
50.
942 2026/p चारा 0.01
51.
2027/p चारा 0.03
65/2 2398/p नाल 0.10
52.
318 239/p चारा (नाल) 0.24
53.
268 219/p नाल 0.22
54.
1007 337/p नाल 0.02
55.
199/2 721/p नाल 0.12
56.
234 720/p नाल 0.02
57.
435 552/p नाल 0.03
58.
245 320/p नाल 0.10
59.
999 383/p नाल 0.05
60.
511 1904/p नाल 0.01
61.
264 1967/p नाल 0.14
62.
1015 नाल 0.04
63. 392/p
943 393/p नाल 0.08
64.
नाल 0.02
65. 1081 232/p
1386
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 18 , 2012 /MAGHA 29, 1933
[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii) ]
4
2
3
5
6
1
7
8
66.
0.04
नाल
266
दविशन चरिलम-
388/p
पश्चिमी त्रिपुरा बिशालगद्
जारी
67.
199/2
0.04
1795/p
दुभा (नाल)
1/92
68.
0.03
2031/p
भालू चर
69.
183
0.01
नाल
230/p
70.
943
0.13
नाल
340/p
71 .
65
0.10
नाल
1827/p
72.
2/2
0.10
नाल
320/ p
73.
199/1
नाल
0.11
723/p
74.
224
नाल
0.10
1897/p
75.
171/1
नाल
0.03
1905/p
2425
नाल
0.17
1853
0.03
0.02
1830
नाल
10.67
कुल
मौजा: आम्थली
तहसील: आम्थली
उप-संभाग : बिशालगद
भूमिअनुसूची: मौजा: आम्थली
क्रम जिला उप-संभाग् भौजा खसरा सं. प्लॉट सं. भूमि का वर्ग एकड़ में
सं क्षेत्रफल
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
1. पश्चिमी त्रिपुरा बिशालगद् आम्थली 197/2 627 नाल 0.50
2. 78 626 नाल 0.01
3. 420 625 नाल 0.28
4. 355/3 624 नाल 0.03
5. 357/1 639 चारा 0.08
357/2 640 नाल 0.10
6. 915 642 नाल 0.19
7. 166 609 नाल 0.06
8. 375 643 नाल 0.09
9. 74 1160 नाल 0.10
10. 407 1159 नाल 0.21
11. 404 1154 नाल 0.18
12. 163 1155 नाल 0.08
13. 64/3 1152/p नाल 0.06
14. 34/2 1150/p नाल 0.06
1347/p 0.21
15. 1/109 1176 नाल 0.17
16. 146 1177 नाल 0.10
17. 376 1181 नाल 0.24
18. 1/109 1184 नाल 0.04
19. 15/2 1185/ नाल 0.21
5462 [ भाग II-खंड 3 ( ii ) ]
भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 18 , 2012/माघ 29 , 1933
1
2
3
4
20.
आम्थली-जारी
पश्चिमी त्रिपुरा बिशालगद्
21.
22.
23.
24.
25.
26.
27.
28.
29.
30.
31.
32.
33.
34.
35.
36.
37.
38.
39.
40
41.
42.
43.
44.
15.
46.
47.
48.
49.
50.
1387
5
6
7
8
1/12
रास्ता
नाल
0.04
(1341)
1/134
1398
नाल
0.25
246/2
5437
नाल
0.21
246
नाल
0.20 1348/p
820
1352
नाल
0.15
1353
नाल
0.03
472/1
1355
नाल
0.08
1363
नाल
0.05
357/1
नाल
0.01 637/p
102
नाल
1151/p
0.34
1/09
नाल
0.05 1173/p
15/2
1185/
नाल
0.24
5462/p
1143
नाल
0.50 1129/p
नाल
2024/p
0.06
1144
नाल
0.12 2060/p
नाल
2068/p
0.10
315/3
0.10
नाल
2023/p
459/1
चारा
2067/p
0.05
नाल
0.11 2072/p
222
नाल
2076/p
0.18
179
2085/
नाल
0.13
147/2
2516/p
0.04
लायक पथित
157/3
लायक पथित
2511/p
0.04
84
2084
नाल
0.12
787
नाल
0.01 2087/p
516
0.04
नाल
2090/p
546
2100
नाल
0.14
26
नाल
0.02 2219/p
521/4
नाल
0.30 2220/p
152/1
नाल
0.18 2228/p
नाल
2227/p
0.04
नाल
2229/ p
0,13
360
नाल
0.03 2230/p
449
2232
नाल
0.09
0.18
नाल
2401/p
चारा
0.02 2400/p
458/2
नाल
2475/p
0.01
545
2404
नाल
0.01
45/1
नाल
2396/p
0.04
104
नाल
0.11 5488/p
330
नाल
2403/p
0.01
434
चारा
0.06 2479/p
0.03 2480/p
वास्तू [PART II-SEC. 3 (ii ) ]
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 18 , 2012/ MAGHA 29 , 1933
1388
4
3
2
1
8
7
6
5
0.06
नाल
387/3
2477/p
आम्थली-जारी
51. पश्चिमी त्रिपुरा बिशालगद्
52.
53.
54.
55.
56.
57.
58.
59.
60.
61.
62.
63.
64.
65.
66.
67.
68.
69.
70.
71.
72.
0.01
चारा
2506/p
0.01
नाल
2508/p
0.08
नाल
59
2478/p
0.12
चारा
955
2507/p
0.02
नाल
2505/p
931
0.03
नाल
2484/p
0.05
नाल
757
2503/p
0,06
नाल
174/1
2510/p
0.01
नाल
2509/p
0.10
नाल
751
2512/p
0.16
2502
बास्तु
0.04
नाल
434/5
2514/p
0.02
नाल
290
3532/ p
0.03
नाल
3533/p
0.10
नाल
3535/p
0.04
नाल
3534/p
0.15
नाल
62/2
3544/p
0.01
नाल
62/1
3545/p
0.02
नाल
933
3543/p
0.23
नाल
791
3547/p
0.04
नाल
197/3
3553/p
0.03
नाल
3554/p
0.04
नाल
267
3547
5410
0.18
नाल
532/2
3708/p
0.02
नाल
3704/p
0.07
नाल
439/2
3707/p
0.10
नाल
3705/p
0.04
नाल
3706/p
0.18
नाल
327/1
3700/p
0.08
नाल
323
3720/p
0.11
नाल
3721/p
0.21
नाल
3719/p
15/1
0.04
नाल
3723/p
0.20
नाल
112
3736/p
0.03
नाल
3738/p
0.02
नाल
3737/p
0.08
नाल
314/1
3743/p
0.03
नाल
3742/p
0.04
44/2
3920/p
0.08
नाल
213
3919/p
0.01
नाल
3918/p [भाग II-खंड 3 (ii ) ]
1389
भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 18, 2012/माष 29 , 1933
1
2
4
3
73.
आम्थली-जारी
पश्चिमी त्रिपुरा बिशालगद्
74.
75.
76.
Π.
78.
79.
80.
81.
82.
83.
84.
85.
86.
87.
88.
89.
90.
367 G1/2012-12
7
6
5
8
184/2
नाल
0.04 3913/p
नाल
0.01
3911 /p
0.05 3912
183/2
नाल
239/3
नाल
0.02 3924/p
0.06 4106
नाल
306
0.09 4107
नाल
302/3
नाल
0.08
4112/p
302/4
नाल
0.04
4159/p
नाल
0.02 302/5
4158/p
0.05 302/6
नाल
4378/p
0.02
नाल
7379/p
0.01
नाल
4525/p
नाल
0.14 4528/p
0.10
नाल
4501/p
नाल
0.03
4499/p
0.32
नाल
4950/p
0.18
नाल
210/1
4109/p
0.10 61/1
नाल
4110/p
नाल
0.01
4103/p
0.01
नाल
4102/p
409/2
नाल
0.01
4161/p
नाल
0.01
4160/p
0.02 89/1
नाल
4157/p
0.08
नाल
513/2
4150/ p
0.04
नाल
4380/p
0.05
नाल
4381/p
0.04
नाल
4382/p
0.02
नाल
4383/p
नाल
0.08 503
4377/p
0.05
नाल
157/2
4375/p
0.05
नाल
4376/p
0.08
नाल
4149/p
0.01 327/1
नाल
4152/ p
0.06
नाल
303
4370/p
0.05 241.1
नाल
4374/p
0.05
नाल
93
4527 /p
0.02
नाल
1130
4530/p
0.12
नाल
324/1
4516/p
0.05
नाल
324/2
4517/p
0.12
नाल
4514/p
0.13
नाल
4508/p 1390
THEGAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 18, 2012/MAGHA 29, 1933
1
2
3
4
91.
[PART II SEC. 3 (ii )]
5
6
7
8
53
आम्थली-जारी
पश्चिमी त्रिपुरा विशालगद्
92.
93.
94.
95.
96.
97.
98.
99.
100.
101.
102.
103.
104.
105.
106.
107.
108.
109.
110.
111.
112.
113.
नाल
4512/p
0.04
नाल
0.09 4513/p
171/3
नाल
0.10 4507/p
नाल
0.01 4506/p
1/46
टिला
4476/p
0.01
1/197
टिला
4477/p
0.04
778
नाल
4502/p
0.06
461/1
398
नाल
4500/p
0.08
नाल
4870/p
0.01
302/8
4498/p
0.11
बास्तू
501
नाल
4497/p
0.08
1/98
0.02 4496/p
सड़क
513/1
नाल
0.06 4495/p
नाल
4494/p
0.01
नाल
4874/p
0.04
4949/p
नाल
0.28
474
4951 /p
नाल
0.05
302/7
नाल
0.06 4952/p
392
नाल
0.10 4946/p
161
4943/p
नाल
0.12
नाल
4939/p
0.02
299/1
चारा
4934/p
0.06
299/3
चारा
4933/p
0.02
299/2
4932/p
0.06
मिटि
4928/p
0.08
चारा
4929/p
0.09
19
नाल
4938/p
0.05
50
नाल
0.02 4937/p
नाल
4936/p
0.01
73
नाल
0.09 4925/p
218
मिटि
0.19 4920/p
263
4924
मिटि
0.05
4923
मिटि
0.01
239/1
नाल
0.15 4919/p
240
नाल
0.30 5915/p
196/5
0.06
नाल
5147/p
381/1
नाल
5142/p
0.13
0.18 5148/p
0.10
नाल
5150/p [ भाग II-खंड 3 (ii ) ]
भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 18 , 2012/माघ 29 , 1933
1391
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
114.
आम्थली-जारी 56/2
पश्चिमी त्रिपुरा बिशालगद्
नाल
5164/p
0.10
56/3
नाल
5158/p
0.09
56/1
नाल
5163/p
0.10
नाल
5162/p
0.02
नाल
5186/p
0.01
115.
412
नाल
5165/p
0.09
नाल
5166/p
0.11
नाल
5185/p
0.18
116.
202/1
नाल
5192/p
0.13
202/4
नाल
5193/p
0.14
202/3
5191/p
0.02
सड़क
नाल
5289/p
0.05
नाल
5288/p
0.09
117.
371/2
नाल
5017/p
0.16
37/3
5017
नाल
0.12
5407
118.
1/46
नाल
5016/p
0.32
1/214
टिला
5018/p
0.04
1/52
5151 /p
टिला
0.08
5140
नाल
0.11
119.
479/1
नाल
5287/p
0.08
479/2
नाल
5282/p
0.07
नाल
5276/p
0.02
5275/p
नाल
0.06
120.
247
नाल
5280/p
0.05
5279/p
नाल
0.04
नाल
5278/p
0.06
121 .
458
नाल
5277/p
0.04
नाल
5274/p
0.02
122.
17
नाल
5273/p
0.01
नाल
5272/p
0.13
123.
12
नाल
5267/p
0.16
नाल
5265/p
0.08
नाल
5264/p
0.03
124.
502/1
नाल
5330/p
0.08
502/2
नाल
5261/p
0.01
502/3
नाल
5262/p
0.05
नाल
0.10
5255/p
नाल
5334/p
0.11 1392
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 18 , 2012/MAGHA 29, 1933
4 2
3
1
125.
[PART II-SEC. 3( ii) ]
7
5
6
8
नाल
0.01
आम्थली-जारी
पश्चिमी त्रिपुरा बिशालगद्
126.
127.
128.
129.
130.
131 .
132.
133.
134.
कुल
ौजा : पदमा नगर
418/1
5263/p
नाल
0.11
5260/p
204
0.10
नाल
5254/p
100/3
5330
0,06
नाल
100/1
5504/p
451/1
चारा
0.30
5332/p
97
0.08
5368/p
लूंगा
97
0.06
लूंगा
5366/p
0.25 1/230
टिला
5348/p
1/232
0.30
लूंगा
5361/p
1/229
भिटि
0.01 5364/p
चारा
0.01
5363/p
5362
0.01
बास्तू
1/57
0.11
5360/p
लूंगा
1/58
0.45
5350/p
लूंगा
टिला
0.20 1/234
5403/p
0.22 1/231
लूंगा
5351 /p
345
नाल
0.11
2102/p
546
0.15
नाल
2100/p
21.89
तहसील: आमतली
भूमि अनुसूची: मौजा : पदमा नगर
जिला
मौजा
उप-संभाग्
क्रम सं
4 2
1
3
1.
पदमा नगर
पश्चिमी त्रिपुरा बिशालगद्
2.
3.
कुल
उप-संभाग: बिशालगद
खसरा सं.
प्लॉट सं.
भूमि का वर्ग एकड़ में क्षेत्रफल
7
8 6
5
टिला
237
1705
0.03
1884
0.12 1704
टिला
1/64
0.58 1705
टिला
1/06
0.73
[फा. सं. ओ -36011/13/2010- ओएनजी- II ]
आर. एस. सिकदर , अवर सचिव [ भाग II-खंड 3 (ii) ]
1393
भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 18, 2012/माघ 29 , 1933
NewDelhi , the 8th February, 2012
S.O. 636. Whereas by notification of Government of India in Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Gas number S.O. 2437 (E) dated 23-9-2010 issued under sub-section ( 1 ) of Section 3 ofthe Petroleum and Minerals Pipelines (Acquisition of Right of User in Land) Act , 1962 (50 of 1962) (hereinafter referred to as the said Act ), Government of India declared its intentionto acquire the Right of User in the Land specified in the Schedule appended to that notification for the purpose of laying pipeline for transportation of natural gas through Nimbutali -Bagabasa in the State of Tripura, ONGC Limited.
Andwhereas copies of the said Gazette notification were made available to the public from 26-10-2010 to 24-11-2010.
And whereas the objections received from the public have been considered and disallowed by the Competent Authority.
Andwhereas the Competent Authority has, under sub - section ( 1) of Section 6 of the said Act , submitted its report to Government of India :
And whereas Government of India after considering the said report and on being satisfied that the said land is required for laying the pipelines, has decided to acquire the Right of User therein ;
Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub - section ( i) of the Section 6 of the said Act , Government of India hereby declares that the right of user in the Land specified in the Schedule appended to this notification is hereby acquired for laying the pipeline with the land Schedule annexed hereto.
And, further in exercise of the power conferred by sub -section (4) of Section 6 of said Act , Government of India hereby directs that the Right of User in the land for laying the pipeline shall, instead of vesting in Government of India , vest . on this date ofpublication of the declaration, in the ONGC Limited , subject to the terms and conditions so imposed, free from all encumbrances.
Mouja : Nehalchandra Nagar
Sub-Division-Bishalghar
T.K.--Nehalchandra Nagar
Schedule of Land:
SL No. District Sub-Division Mouja Khatian Plot No. Classification Area in
No. ofLand Acre
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8)
1. West Bishalghar Nehalchandra 85/1 2955/p Nal 0.08
Nagar Nal 0.07
2956/p
2957/p Nal 0.08
2. 1150 2958/p Nal 0.20
3. 824 3334/p Tilla 0.07
4. 1921 3298/p Nal 0.18
5. 1922 3299/p Nal 0.07
6. 1974 3299/ Nal 0.04
7447
7. 2071 3328/p Chara 0.05
8. 890 3300/p Nal 0.06
9. 2089 3301/p Nal 0.12
2035 3302/p Nal 0.04
3303/p Nal 0.14
10. 763 2775/p Nal 0.14
11. 764/1 2788/p Nal 0.04
2789/p Nal 0.02
785/2 2787/p Nal 0.16
2880/p Nal 0.08
1394
THE GAZETTEOF INDIA : FEBRUARY 18 , 2012/MAGHA 29, 1933
(1) (2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
12. West
[PART II-SEC. 3( ii)]
(6)
(7)
(8)
Nehalchandra
785/1
Bishalghar
Nagar-Contd.
785/2
13.
6/3
14.
869/7
15.
1466
16.
2078
17.
801/2
18.
870
19.
1552
20.
1221
21.
564
22.
187
23.
188
24.
78/1
78/2
25.
455
26.
432/2
27.
868
28.
1995/1
29.
1907
30.
654/2
31.
988
32.
350
33.
347
34.
383/1
35.
332/1
332/2 6711 /p
0.03
Lunga
0.06 6710/p
Lunga
Nal
0.04 6271/p
Pukur
6273/p
0.08
Chara
6267/p
0.04
Pukur
6274/p
0.10
0.01
Bastu
2700/p
Nal
2774/p
0.13
Nal
2661/p
0.03
Nal
0.12 2662/p
0.02 5881
Lunga
7405
Nal
2637/p
0.11
Nal
2636/p
0.15
Nal
2639/p
0.08
Nal
0.14 2651/p
Nal
0.06 2652/p
Nal
0.08 2891/p
Nal
0.12 2654/p
Nal
0.07 2649/p
Nal
0.04 2934/p
Nal
0.10 6250/p
Nal
0.20 6251/p
Chara
0.01 6291/p
Nal
0.04 2791 /p
Nal
0.06 2889/p
Nal
0.26 2803/p
Nal
O.C, 2790/p
Nal
0.07 2855/p
Nal
0.22 2856/p
2854/
Nal
0.03
7501
Nal
0.02 2887/p
Nal
0.04 2888/p
Nal
0.17 2953/p
Nal
0.11 2890/p
Nal
0.20 2874/p
Nal
0.02 2927/p
Nal
0.13 2928/p
Nal
0.09 6330/p
Nal
0.07 6332/p [ भाग II-खंड 3 ( ii ) ]
भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 18 , 2012/माघ 29, 1933
1395
(1) (2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
(6)
(7)
(8)
36. West
759/2
Bishalghar
Nal
7422/p
0.07
37.
Nehalchandra Nagar-Contd.
379
Nal
2935/p
0.05
38.
494
Nal
2933/p
0.03
39.
61/2
Nal
2934/p
0.06
7416/p
40.
1747
Nal
3407/p
0.14
2944/p
Nal
0.32
41.
721
Nal
2949/p
0.25
Nal
2950/p
0.30
42.
917/2
Tilla
2951/p
0.04
43.
296
2954/p
Nal
0.14
44.
448
Nal
6331/p
0.01
Nal
0.07
6451/p
Nal
6452/p
0.02
Nal
0.06
6453/p
45.
1697
Chara
3304/p
0.14
46.
1290
3291/p
0.02
Bagan
47.
1057
3290/p
0.04
Bagan
48.
1208
Nal
6326/p
0.11
49.
1150
6327/p
Nal
0.07
50.
255
6166/p
0.10
Lunga
Nal
6328/p
0.08
Nal
6329/p
0.11
6708/p
0.11
Lunga
6709/p
0.02
Lunga
51.
1197
Tilla
6321/p
0.12
52.
961/1
Chara
0.10
6333/p
53.
175
Nal
6450/p
0.11
54.
499
Nal
6449/p
0.20
55.
497
Tilla
6474/p
0.16
56.
192/1
6572/p
0.45
Lunga
192/2
57.
959/1
Doba
6490/p
0.02
58
594
Chara
6496/p
0.06
59.
2026
0.16
6511/p
Lunga
60.
1097
Pukur
0.04
6508/p
0.16
6509/p
par
Pukur
0.12
6510/p
Lunga
61.
602
Bhiti
0.01
6162/p 1396
[PART II-SEC. 3 (ii ) ] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 18, 2012/MAGHA 29 , 1933
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8)
62. West Nehalchandra 831 6163/p Tilla 0.05
Bishalghar
Nagar-Contd. 6164/p Lunga 0.12
63. 43/2 6185/p Tilla 0.12
64. 1870 6703/p Tilla 0.35
65. 1853 6264/p Tilla 0.26
6265/p Tilla 0.30
6266/p Tilla 0.04
66. 785 6263/p Lunga 0.07
6267/p Chara 0.03
(tilla)
67. 800/2 6248/p Nal 0.20
800/1 6488/p Tilla 0.08
68. 1419 6246 Nal 0.15
69. 399 6242/p Nal 0.30
70. 1/56 3346/p Nal 0.07
1/19 6244/p Duba 0.01
Total 11.22
T.K.-Ganiamara
Sub-Division-Bishalghar
Mouja: Ganiamara
Schedule of Land :
PlotNo.
Sl. No. District
Mouja
Sub-Division
Area in Acre
Classification ofLand
Khatian No.
(8)
(6)
(7)
(5)
(3)
(4)
(1) (2)
0.04
Tilla
1012
Ganiamara
1. West
7489/p
Bishalghar
0.18
Tilla
1244
2.
244/p
0.20
Nal
1338
1022/p
3.
0.08
1491
4.
Chara(Nal )
1040/p
0.12
Nal
1353
1418/p
5.
0.16
Nal
1303
1445/p
6.
0.07
2407/
Nal
1936
7.
7350
Bastu
0.01
1907
2681/p
8.
0.03
Bastu
9.
2696/p
0.05
Chara
626
926/p
10.
0.10
Nal
217/p
0.20
Nal
218/p
0.06
Chara
219/p
0.08
Nal
216/p
0.10
Nal
303
670/1
11.
0.25
1451
Nal 1397
भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 18 , 2012/माष 29 , 1933
[ भाग II-खंड 3 ( ii) ]
(8)
(7)
(6)
(4)
(5)
(3)
(1) (2)
0.25
Tilla
248p
12. West
1174
Ganiamara Contd.
Bishalghar
0.04
Lunga
737
253/p
13.
0.02
Tilla
974
247/p
14.
0.50
Tilla
254/p
0.07
Tilla
243/p
0.10
229/p
Lunga
0.02
Tilla
230/p
0.04
231/p
Lunga
0.30
Lunga
232/ p
0.08
1073
228/p
Lunga
15.
0.01
1206
Bagan
233/p
16.
0.01
Tilla
550/2
222/p
17.
0.01
Tilla
434
292/p
18.
0.25
Tilla
296/p
0.04
Nal
293
310/2
19.
0.04
Nal
295/p
0.08
Nal
762/1
302/p
20.
0.02
Tilla
874/2
908/p
21.
0.30
Tilla
1377
909/p
22.
0.38
Tilla
588/1
906/p
23.
0.15
Chara
588/2
1915/p
0.03
Tilla
916/p
0.06
Nal
740
924/p
24.
0.12
Nal
927
0.14
Nal
1015/p
0.10
Nal
1133
930/p
25.
0.15
Nal
980
1011 /p
26.
0.20
Nal
774
1012/p
27.
0.08
Nal
1370
1013/p
28.
0.08
Nal
25
1016/p
29.
0.03
Nal
380
1017/p
30.
0.03
Chara
1020
0.08
Tilla
1005
1018/p
31.
0.15
Nal
472
1024/p
32.
0.36
Nal
1491
1039/p
33.
0.23
Nal
1493
1092/p
34.
0.08
Nal
1044/p
0.06
990
Bagan
624
35.
0.02
Nal
1146/3
1049/p
36.
0.01
Nal
1050/p
0.05
Tilla
1159
1047/p
37.
367GI/2012-13 1398
THEGAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 18, 2012/ MAGHA 29, 1933
(1)
(3)
(2)
(4)
[PART II-SEC. 3 ( ii ) ]
(5)
38. West
Bishalghar
(7)
(6)
(8)
Nal
Ganiamara-Contd. 1900
1053/p 0.04
39. 274/1 Tilla
1055/p 0.01
40. 320 Nal
1063/p 0.12
7490
41. 762/3 1058/p
Nal 0.10
762/4 1057/p Chara 0.02
42. 883/2& 3 1411 /p Nal
0.01
1442/p Nal 0.01
1443/p Nal 0.03
1063/p Nal 0.04
43. 672/2 Nal
1066/p 0.10
1401/p Nal 0.10
1409/p Nal 0.02
44. 1354 1410/p Chara 0.04
45. 161/1 Nal
2767/p 0.45
14/22p Chara 0.17
46. 1355/1 1446/p Nal 0,20
47. 1049 Nal
1402/p 0.12
48. 220 2708 Nal 0.12
221 2736 Nal 0.06
49. 1/62 2791 Nala 0.13
1/48 7045/p Road 0.04
1/4 1025/p Road 0.10
1/5 1026/p Nal 0.03
1/3 215/p Longa 0.20
17 301/p Tilla 0.10
50. 824 27/94 Chara
0,10
51 . 918 2734/p Nal
0.10
52. 671 2739/p Nal
0.12
2738/p Nal 0.12
53 1296/1 0.07
2704/p Nal
1296/2 2696/p Bastu 0.03
2695/p Bagan 0.01
2698/p Tilla 0.04
54. 1232 2706/p Nal 0.14
55. 1668 2709/p Nal 0.04
56 1714 Nal
2710 /p 0.03
57. 666 2691/p Nal 0.10
58. 1966 2680 Nal 0.07
59. 1034 2689/p Nal 0.08
1332/1 2523/ p Nal 0.03
[ भाग II-खंड 3 ( ii ) ]
1399 भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 18 , 2012/माघ 29 , 1933
(1) (2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
(6)
(7)
(8)
61. West
563/2
Bishalghar Ganiamara Contd.
Nal
0.10
2524/p
62.
210
Pukur
0.02
2529/p
63.
Nal
1255/1 & 2
0.14
2511/p
Nal
0.12
2520/p
64.
1246
Nal
0.01
2164/p
Nal
0.03
2165/p
65.
146
0.06
Chara
2166/p
66.
1936
Nal
0.14
2467/p
67.
1937
0.07
Chara
2408/p
68.
541/1
0.03
Chara
2409/p
69.
540/2
0.60
Nal
2416/p
70.
1/30
0.22
Tila
2418/p
71.
630
Pukur
0.03
2306/p
72.
964/3
0.10
Tilla
2398/p
73.
757
Nal
0.22
4395/p
74.
662/1
Nal
0.16
4386/p
0.02
4366/p
Bagan
75.
545
Tilla
0.02
4397/p
Tilla
0.02
4389/p
76.
594
Nal
0.30
4390/p
77.
949
Tilla
0.12
34388/p
78.
686/1
0.08
Nal
4180/p
Tilla
0.10
4382/p
79.
3/4
Tilla
0.03
4403/p
Tilla
0.03
4380/p
80.
1/20
Tilla
4353 /p
0.01
81.
476
Nal
0.16
4367/p
82.
886
Nal
0.16
4350/p
83.
1027
Pukur
0.06
4344/p
Pukur
0.02
4343/p
84.
1029
0.01
Nal
4457/p
85.
1803
Nal
0.02
4465/p
86.
1987
Nal
0.10
4810/p
Nal
0.12
4811/p
87.
1186/1
Nal
0.02
4491/p
Daba
0.04
4490/p
88.
1109
Nal
0.02
4485/p
89.
898
Nal
0.02
4463/p
90.
951
Bastu
0.02
4447/p
91.
692
0.08
Chara
4498/p
Nal
0.12
4496/p [PART II-SEC. 3 ( ii) ]
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 18 , 2012/MAGHA 29, 1933
1400
(8)
(7)
(6)
(5)
(4)
(3)
(1) (2)
0.08
Nal
675
4455/p
Ganiamara Contd.
92. West
Bishalghar
0.08
Nal
4456/p
0.16
346/1
Bagan
4357/p
93.
0.05
Nal
808/2
4809/p
94.
0.04
Nal
1759
4500/p
95.
0.03
Nal
659/3
4346/p
96.
0.05
Nal
701
4349/p
97.
0.20
Nal
1125
4351/p
98.
14.30
Total
Sub-Division-Bishalghar
T.K.-Madhupur
Mouja: Purathal Rajnagar
Schedule of Land :
PlotNo.
District
Sl. No.
Sub-Division Mouja
Area in Acre
Classification ofLand
Khatian No.
(8)
(7)
(6)
(5)
(3)
(4)
(1) (2)
0.25
Bastu/Tilla
1025/p
1.
Purathal Rajnagar 46
West Tripura Bishalghar
0.15
Nal
634
1045/p
2.
0.22
Nal
1047/p
0.06
Nal
1048/p
0.08
Tilla
1464
1044/p
3.
0.10
Chara/Tilla
1052
803
4.
803/1
0.52
Nal
803/3
1050/p
0.12
Nal
803/4
1063/p
0.13
Tilla
803/5
1517/p
0.08
Nal
1065/p
0.04
Chara/Nal
1066/p
0.10
Tilla
684
1062/p
5.
0.07
Chara/Tilla
1061/p
0.18
Nal
626
1064/p
6.
0.04
Chara/Nal
1067/p
0.08
Tilla
1073/p
0.08
Nal
388
1110/p
7.
0.18
1379
Lunga
1106/p
8
0.02
Chara(Tilla)
1108/p
0.02
Chara/Tilla
648
1103/p
9.
0.02
Chara/Tilla
1107/p
0.05
Lunga
1569
1102/p
10.
0.08
Lunga
1105/p 1401
भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 18 , 2012/माघ 29 , 1933
[ भाग II-खंड 3 ( ii ) ]
(7)
(8)
(6)
(5)
(4)
(3)
(1) (2)
0.06
Chara/Tilla
863/1& 863/2
Purathal
1101/p
11. West Tripura Bishalghar
0.08 Rajnagar-Contd.
Lunga
1092/p
0.04
Lunga
1100/p
0.08
Chara/Tilla
1093/p
0.03
Chara (Lunga)
1091/p
0.06
Chara(Nal)
1087/p
0.06
862
Lunga
1094/p
12.
0.03
861
Chara/Lunga
1090/p
13.
0.03
Tilla
1401
1520/p
14.
0.09
Chara/Tilla
515
1086/p
15.
0.39
Tilla
1084/p
0.03
Tilla
223
1082/p
16.
0.01
Tilla
9233
1523/p
0.17
938
6180/p
Bagan/Tilla
17.
0.54
Tilla
1/42
1522/p
18.
04.37
Total
Sub-Division-Bishalghar
T.K. -Ghaniamara
Mouja : K. K. Nagar
Schedule of Land:
PlotNo.
Mouja
District Sub-Division
Sl. No.
Area in Acre
Classification ofLand
Khatian No.
(8)
(7)
(6)
(5)
(4)
(3)
(2)
(1)
0.16
Nal
2006
3363/p
K. K. Nagar
West
Bhishalghar
1.
0.02
Nal
2030
3364/p
2.
0.28
Nal
84/2
3366/p
3.
0.08
Nal
84/3
3388/p
0.27
Nal
3389/p
0.90
Nal
3151
3366/p
4.
11891
0.01
Nal
3367/p
3224
5.
0.12
Nal
2168/1
3387/p
6.
0.13
Nal
888
3419/p
7.
0.05
Nal
1293/3
3418/p
8.
0.05
Nal
3417
1293/4
0.10
Chara
3426/p
0.25
Nal
2699
3427/p
9.
0.01
Chara
2790
3425/p
10.
0.01
Nal
1294
3416/p
11.
0.01
Nal
3429/p
991
12.
0.15
Nal
3433/p 1402
[PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii ) ]
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 18 , 2012/MAGHA 29, 1933
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8)
13. West K. K. Nagar- 1562 3430/p Nal 0.04
Bhishalghar
Contd. 0.11
3431/p Nal
14. 1556 3493 Nal 0.11
15. 1511/2 3501/p Nal 0.01
16. 527 3432/p Nal 0.18
17. 2479/3 3437/p Nal 0.10
18. 2471 3776/p Chara 0.22
19. 929 3438/p Nal 0.02
92/2 3817/p Nal 0,26
92/5 3818/p Pukur 0.04
3819/p Pukurpar 0.42
3793/p Bagan
20. 73/2 3498 Nal 0.05
21. 94/1 10473 /p Nal 0.07
10475/p Nal 0.15
22. 3029 10479/ p Nal 0.01
23. 2972 10474/p Nal 0.10
10441 /p Nal 0.01
24. 96/2 10485/p Nal 0.01
25. 2723 10743/p Nal 0.02
10410/p Nal 0.05
26. 1422 3494/p Nal 0.06
27. 1415 9876 Nal 0.11
11416/p
28. 2291 3497/p Nal 0.09
3499/p Nal 0.11
29. 2087/1 10892/p Nal 0.04
2087/2 10891/p Nal 0.01
30. 2329 3476 Nal 0.01
10891/p
31. 2390 3789/p Nal 0.12
3790/p Bhiti (Nal ) 0.21
1/117 3783 Chara 0.06
32.
3792/ p Nal 0.03
2290/1 3811/p Bastu 0.01
33.
3813 Pukur 0.02
3814/p Pukur 0.07
3820/p Nal 0.02
161/2 4474 Bastu 0.01
34.
11247 [ भाग II-खंड 3 ( ii ) ]
भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 18 , 2012/माघ 29, 1933
(1) (2) (3) (4)
35. West Bhishalghar
K. K. Nagar-
Contd.
36.
37.
38.
39.
40.
41.
42.
43.
14.
45.
46.
47.
48.
49.
50 .
52.
53.
54
55.
56.
1403
(5) (6) (7) (8)
1222 3775/p Chara
0.29
3784/p Chara 0.02
3786/p Chara 0.04
1036 3788/p Nal
0.08
1386 3816/p Duba 0.09
1811 3815/p Nal
0.07
3075 4474/p Bastu
0.09
4477/p Chara 0.13
4476 Bastu 0.01
4478 Chara 0.12
4479 Bagan 0.03
1581 4492/p Tilla
0.21
625 4494/p
Bagan 0.45
1/21 4497/p Road
0.08
1/119 4503/p Tilla
0.06
1932 4516/p Chara 0.18
2096 4526/p Nal
0.20
1281 4526/p Nal
0.01
11242
1748 4532/p Nal
0.12
750 4533 /p
Nal 0.06
1895 4531/p Nal 0.29
71/2 457.3/p Nal
0.22
1222/1 4575/p Nal
0.24
2960 9860 Nal
0.09
11772
9861/p Nal 0.10
2820 9863 /p Nal
0.19
1816 9865/p Nal
0.18
2402 9866/p
Nal 0.17
9873 Nal 0.05
2312 9871/p Nal
0.02
1816 9872/p Nal 0.19
2418 9877 Nal 0.06
58
1824/4 9878/p Nal 0.01
59.
1284/1 9875/p Nal 0.07
60.
2333/1 9883/p Nal 0.20
61. 371
10300/p Nal 0.01
10297/p Nal 0.21
62. 984
10296/p Nal 0.01
63. 3074
10298/p Nal 0.06
[PART II-SEC. 3 ( ii )]
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: FEBRUARY 18 , 2012/MAGHA 29, 1933
1404
(4)
(3)
(1) (2)
K. K. Nagar- West
Bhishalghar
64.
Contd.
65.
66.
67.
68.
69.
70.
71.
72.
73.
74.
75.
76.
77 .
78.
79.
80.
81.
82.
83.
84.
85.
86.
87.
88.
89.
90.
(8)
(6)
(5)
0.06
Nal
10295/p
853/2
0.17
Nal
10310/p
601/2
0.01
Nal
10294/p
1025
0.22
Nal
10313/p
2775
0.01
Nal
2302/2
10312/p
0.21
Nal
10317/p
1824
0.01
Nal
10321 /p
641/1
0.03
Nal
10319/p
2394
0.03
Nal
10318
1836
11404/p
0.12
Nal
10318/p
1401/1
0.10
Nal
10318
749/1
11405/p
0.01
Nal
10278
425/4
11402/p
0.24
Nal
10528/p
214/2
0.27
Nal
10506/p
0.05
Nal
10505/p
0.03
Nal
10333/p
1802
0.14
Nal
10507/p
1541
0.08
Nal
10508/p
0.01
Nal
10521 /p
932/2
0.11
Nal
10509/p
932/3
0.04
Nal
10438/p
0.05
Nal
10510/p
0.01
Nal
3500/p
914
0.01
Nal
10484/p
2714
0.09
Nal
1048 0483/p
1724
0.05
Chara
3777/p
2671
0.07
Nal
10482/p
1116
0.19
Nal
10481/p
2590
0.03
Nal
10480/p
2534
0.15
Nal
702/1
10448/p
0.13
Nal
10476/p
0.03
Nal
10467/p
1700/1
0.03
Nal
10439/p
0.11
Nal
10440/p
0.07
Nal
10443/p
2720
0.07
Nal
10442/p
1442
0.07
Nal
10740/p
1482/1
0.03
Nal
10447/p
1204 1405
भारत का रोजपत्र : फरवरी 18 , 2012/माघ 29, 1933
[ भाग II-खंड 3 ( ii ) ]
(4)
(3)
(1) (2)
West
91.
K. K. Nagar-
Bhishalghar
Contd.
92.
93.
Total
(8)
(7)
(6)
(5)
0.01
Nal
1020/2
10409/p
0.12
Nal
65
10741/p
0.04
738
Pukur-par
10744/p
0.01
Pukur
10746/p
13.48
T.K. -Charilam
Mouja: Brajapur
Schedule of Land :
Sl. No. District
Sub-Division Mouja
(3)
(4) (1) (2)
1. West
Bishalghar Brajapur
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
24.
367 GI/2012-14
Sub-Division-Bishalghar
Plot No.
Area in Acre
Class of Land
Khatian No.
(8)
(7)
(6)
(5)
0.04
Nal
1006
2431/p
0.20
Nal
716
2432/p
0.10
Nal
2538/p
0.18
Nal
457
2434/p
0.15
Nal
35/1
2435/p
0.01
Pukur
1670
2636/p
(Nal)
0.13
Nal
1051
2439/p
0.01
Nal
1984
2456/p
0.09
Nal
1501
2455/p
0.44
Nal
2440
529
0.07
Nal
1356
2458/p
0.01
Nal
715
2461/p
0.10
Nal
837
2460/p
0.11
Nal
1212
2462/p
0.08
Nal
617
2463/p
Nal
0.02
176
2464/p
0.11
Nal
59
8093/p
0.09
Nal
240
2465/p
0.01
Nal
2109
2469/p
0.10
Nal
130
2468/p
0.12
Nal
632/1
2475/p
0.09
Nal
2487/p
0.19
Nal
2541/p
0.10
Nal
677
2472/p
0.11
Nal
1041
2476/p
0.11
Nal
661
2479/p
0.10
Pukur
2585/p
1011
Par 1406
[PART II SEC . 3 ( ii) ] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: FEBRUARY 18, 2012/MAGHA 29, 1933
(1) (2) (β) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8)
25. West Bishalghar Brajapur-Contd. 2582 2536/p Nal 0.19
26. 186 2539/p Nal 0.01
27. 633 2542/p Nal 0.07
28. 1501 2544/p Nal 0.09
29. 182 2543/p Nal 0.02
30. 1794 4600/p Nal 0.12
31. 706 4601/p Nal 0.19
32 1918 4620/p Nal 0.01
33. 1689 4615 Nal 0.02
34. 1420 4614/p Nal 0.04
4618/p Nal 0.15
35. 1216 6050/p Nal 0.06
36. 1945 2548/p Nal 0.11
2553/p Nal 0.23
37. 523/4 2563 /p Nal 0.09
2561/p Nal 0.12
38 583 8123/p Nal 0.09
39. 110/1 2840/p Nal 0.13
40. 511 6033/p Nal 0.04
41. 1390 3386/p Nal 0.12
42. 1345/2 2549/p Nal 0.08
43. 2376 2839/p Nal 0.13
44. 1670 5078/p Nal 0.11
45. 643/1 5079/p Nal 0.12
1074 5082/p Nal 0.23
46.
47. 375 5084/p Nal 0.18
5085/p Nal 0.03
1021 3366/p Nal 0.40
48.
49. 59 2465/p Nal 0.11
8093/p Nal 0.04
868 3367/p Nal 0.16
50.
6032/p Nal 0.01
1341 6049/p Nal 0.05
51 .
3371/p Nal 0.10
3381/p Nal 0.19
629/2 3373/p Nal 0.06
52.
969 3374/p Nal 0.14
53.
511 6065/p Nal 0.08
54.
3375/p Nal 0.10
1769 6091/p Chara/Tilla 0.13
55.
1407
भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 18, 2012/माघ 29 , 1933
[ भाग II-खंड 3 ( ii ) ]
(4) (5) (6) の (8)
(1) (2) (3)
4916 Bhiti/Tilla 0.14
56. West Bishalghar Brajapur-Contd. 1315
8082/p
1461 6092/p Nal Q01
57.
1992 6100/p Chara
58.
411 Tilla 0.25
59. 6101/p
2609 Nal 010
60. 3387
8098/p
741 3391/p Nal 0.03
61.
6102/p Chara/Tilla 0.05
62. 1076
6103/p Nal 0.13
6132/p Nal 046
1394 6157/p Nal 001
63.
1203 6156/p Nal 0.30
64.
1012 6155/p Nal __002
65.
1464/1 6162/p Nal 0.08
66.
6242/p Nal 022
1464/2
469 6163 /p Nal 0.10
67.
6257/p Nal 0.12
68. 2261
2264 6258/p Nal 0.07
69.
Nal 0.04
6259/p
6295/p Nal 0.25
70. 1448
6229/p Nal
6230/p Nal 0.12
6234/p Nal 0.11
6233/p Nal 0.04
71 . 1284
1219 4559/p Nal 0.01
72.
169 4556/p Nal 0.26
73.
212 4401/p Nal 0.03
74.
4549/p Nal 0.20
1546 4402/p Nal 0.15
75.
Nal 0.43
4548/p
1511 4547/p Nal 0.01
76.
4415/p Nal 0.11
77. 1595
34/1 4413/p Nal 0.39
78.
Balu-char 0.07
4418/p
129 4552/p Nal 001
79.
1141 4557/p Nal 0.25
80.
4400 Nal 0.04
377
81.
Nal 0.04
284 4393/p
82.
Nal 0.02
43 4399/p
83.
Nal 0.17
1407 4398/p
84.
1408
THEGAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 18 , 2012/MAGHA 29 , 1933
[PART II-SEC. 3 ( ii ) ]
(1) (2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
(7)
(6)
(8)
85. West
Bishalghar
Nal
1910
Brajapur -Contd.
4394/p
0.11
86.
479
Nal
0.17
4390/p
87.
1634/4
Nal
0.08
4360/p
88.
2008
Nal
0.14
4361/p
89.
533
Nal
0.07
4343/p
Nal
0.03
4345/p
Nal
4344/p
0.04
90.
1333
Nal
4347/p
0.05
91.
1553
Nal
0.06
4340/p
92.
728
0.01
Chara/Tilla
4333/p
93.
557/1
Nal
0.10
4619/p
94.
1419
Nal
0.25
4431/p
Nal
4430/p
0.11
95.
1777
4438/p
0.03
Duba/Lunga
96.
84
Nal
0.08
6282/p
97.
1206
6232
Nal
0.02
98.
667
Nal
6231/p
0.34
99.
979
Nal
6226/p
0.16
Nal
0.10
2627/p
100.
893
Nal
0.10
6280/p
Nal
0.22
6281/p
101.
1671
Nal
0.11
4424/p
Nal
0.14
4425/p
102 .
1444/2
Chara
4432/p
0.01
103.
1160
Nal
0.03
4434/p
104.
1/19
Nal
0.02
2157/p
Total
14.57
Mouja: Dakshin Charilam
T.K. -Dakshin Charilam
Sub-Division Bishalghar
Schedule of Land :
Sl. No. District
PlotNo.
Sub-Division Mouja
Khatian No.
Class of Land
Area in Acre
(1) (2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
(6)
(7)
(8)
1. West
Dakshin Charilam 186
Bishalghar
Nal
0.18
144/p
2.
522
Buluchar/Nal
0.01
124/p
3.
940
Nal
0.01
146/p
4.
935
Nal
0.12
122/p
5.
856
123/p
0.24
Buluchar/Nal
6.
1163
Nal
121/p
0.12
Nal
0.02
119/p 1409
भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 18 , 2012/माघ 29 , 1933
[ भाग 1!-खंड 3 ( ii ) ]
(8)
(7)
(6)
(5)
(4)
(3)
(2)
(1)
0.12
Nal
507
Dakshin
82/p
7. West
Bishalghar
0.08
Nal
1775
Charilam-Contd.
440/p
8.
0.04
Bastu/Nal
363
53/p
9.
0.02
Nal
398
60/p
10.
0.04
Nal
413
81/p
11.
0.02
Nal
50/p
0.33
Nal
620
51/p
12.
0.08
Nal
91
48/p
13.
0.02
Nal
81
47/p
14.
0.14
Nal
36/p
0.01
Nal
45/p
0.02
Nal
1055
46/p
15.
0.03
Bastu/Nal
733
37/p
16.
0.11
Bastu/Nal
270
30/p
17.
0.01
Doba/Nal
31/p
0.04
Nal
32/p
0.02
Bastu/Tilla
259
29/p
18.
0,07
Nal
801/1
427/p
19.
0.16
Bastu/Nal
801/2
428/p
0.02
Duba/Nal
420/p
0.12
Nal
430/p
0.18
Nal
439/p
0.08
Nal
441/p
0.04
Nal
441/6052
1802
20.
0.11
Chara/Tilla
1108/1
449/p
21.
0.13
Chara/Nal
1108/2
450/p
0.02
Nal
466/p
0.10
Nal
451/p
0.08
Nal
464/p
0.01
Nal
448/p
0,03
Nal
465/p
0.01
Pukurpar/Nal
286
443/p
22.
0.02
Nal
1078
460/p
23.
0.02
Nal
462/p
0.16
Nal
514/p
0.24
Nal
369
510/p
24.
0.20
Nal
176
463/p
25.
0.10
Nal
515/p
927
26.
0.04
Nal
230
4791/p
27.
0.08
Nal
4792/p
0.26
Nal
4793/p 1410
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 18, 2012/MAGHA 29 , 1933
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5)
28. West Bishalghar Dakshin 244
Charilam-Contd.
29. 242/2
30. 239
31. 185
32. 1128
33. 53
34. 1078
35. 106
36. 96
37. 619
38. 158
39. 495
40. 66/2
41. 947/1
42. 533/3
43. 630
44. 1036
45. 425/2
46. 983/2
47. 426/1,
426/3
48. 323
49. 183
50. 303
51. 385
52. 922
53. 964
54. 1100
55. 896
[PART II-SEC. 3 ( ii ) ]
(6) (7) (8) 4802/p Nal 0.02 4697/p Nal 0.08 4472/p Chara/Nal 0.08 4493 Nal 0.08 4696/p Nal 0.08 4695/p Nal 0.06 4788/p Nal 0.20 4773/p Nal 0.02 4804/p Nal 0.24 4794/p Nal 0.06 516/p Nal 0.10 528/p Nal 0.02 529/p Nal 0.01 517/p Nal 0.12 524/p Nal 0.28 525/p Nal 0.04 526/p Chara/Nal 0.01 572/p Nal 0.12 570/p Nal 0.10 571/p Nal 0.04 2627/p Nal 0.13 2572/p Nal 0.08 2628/p Nal 0.01 2571/p Nal 0.14 2569/p Nal 0.08 2558/p Nal 0.08 2912/p Nal 0.08 2556/p Nal 0.08 2527 Nal 0.08 2919/p Nal 0.02 2531/p Nal 0,06 2528/p Nal 0.07 2198/p Nal 0.01 2920/p Nal 0.05 2525/p Nal 0.05 3719/p Chara/Nal 0.10 3770/p Chara/Nal 0.15 3768/p Chara/Nal 0.08 3769/p Chara/Nal 0.04 3767/p Chara/Nal 0.13
1411
भारत का राजपत्र: फरवरी 18 , 2012/माष 29, 1933
[ भाग II-खंड 3 (ii ) ]
(8)
(6)
(5)
(4)
(3)
(2)
(1)
0.09
Chara/Tilla
820/1
Dakshin
3764/p
West
56.
Bishalghar
Charilam-Contd.
0.02
Chara/Tilla
3763/p
0.02
Bastu/Nal
3794/p
0.04
Nal
341
3765/p
57.
0.02
Chara/Nal
538
3762/p
58.
0.10
Nal
3760/p
0.17
Bastu/Tilla
1488
3862/p
59.
0.04
Nal
997/3
3963/p
60.
0.08
Nal
3941 /p
0.04
Nal
3942/p
0.05
Nal
3964/p
0.05
Nal
1672
3960/p
61.
0.04
Chara/Nal
3958/p
291
62.
0.10
Chara/Nal
3825/p
0.12
Chara/Nal
3826/p
0.16
Nal
996
3827/p
63.
0,12
Nal
3828/p
0.10
Nal
215
3833/p
64.
0.20
Nal
379
3834/p
65.
0.04
Nal
195
3856/p
66.
0.07
Nal
58
3840/p
67.
0.27
Tilla
1445
3855/p
68.
0.06
Chara/Tilla
3853/p
0.26
Nal
709
3854/p
69.
0.02
Tilla
1382
3882/p
70.
0.05
Tilla
4302/p
0.16
Tilla
1640
4299/p
71.
0.24
Tilla
1653
4300/p
72.
0.12
Nal
83
2626/p
73.
0.06
Nal
3747/p
1047
74.
0.05
Nal
3748/p
0.29
Nal
1681
1268/p
75.
0.13
Nal
1963
1305/p
76.
0.12
Nal
338
4693/p
77.
0.02
Nal
430/2
4651/p
78.
0.02
Nal
4650/p
0.15
Nal
4652/p
0.09
Nal
4353/p
0.13
Nal
221/2
1192/p
79.
0.18
Nal
2738/p
0.01
Nal
947
1315/p
80.
1412
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 18, 2012/ MAGHA 29, 1933
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5)
81. West Bishalghar Dakshin 1644
82. Charilam Contd.
1858
83. 1075
84. 1798
85. 1889
86. 1829
87. 657
88. 1732
89. 767
90. 1294
91. 1057
92. 1961/1
93. 1335
94. 198
95. 221/3
96. 336/2
97. 26
98. 1037
99. 162
100. 425/3
101. 638
102. 275
103. 862
104. 530/1
105. 103
106. 1125
107. 215
108. 503
109. 1763
[PART II-SEC. 3( ii ) ]
(6) (7) (8)
580/p Nal 0.26
1269/p Nal 0.10
581/p Nal 0.02
823/p Nal 0.20
828/p Nal 0.19
2643/p Nal 0.10
2526 Nal 0.05
4807/p Nal 0.02
4692/p Nal 0.16
4691/p Nal 0.16
1359/p Viti 0.11
(Nal)
1382/p Nal 0.12
1307 Chara(Nal) 0.06
1380/p Tilla 0.06
1381 /p Chara(Nal) 0.06
1306 Chara(Nal ) 0.10
1266 Nal 0.37
1319/p Nal 0.03
2703/p Nal 0.12
2745/p Nal 0.10
2740/p Nal 0.26
1318/p Nal 0.26
1316/p Nal 0.13
1314/p Nal 0.18
1331/p Nal 0.01
1312/p Nal 0.05
2641/p Nal 0.15
3773/p Nal 0.04
3771/p Nal 0.12
3772/p Nal 0.12
145/p Nal 0.16
54 Nal 0.19
84/p Nal 0.18
79/p Nal 0.02
49/p Nal 0.07
3746/p Chara(Nal) 0.12
3824 Chara(Nal) 0.09
3833/p Nal 0.10
3957/p Chara(Nal) 0.03
1308/p Chara(Nal) 0.01
1413 भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 18 , 2012/माघ 29, 1933
[ भाग II-खंड 3 (ii) ]
(3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8)
(1) (2)
425/2 Nal 0.08
110. West Bishalghar Dakshin 2912/p
Charilam Contd. 589 2557/p Nal 0.06
111 .
762/1 567/p Nal 0.09
112.
573/p Nal 0.13
113. 39
526 576/p Nal 0.04
114.
760 Nal 0.20
115. 579/p
37 578/p Nal 0.04
116.
260 850/p Nal 0.07
117.
849/p Nal 0.04
856/p Nal 0.18
441 855/p Nal 0.03
118.
173 839/p Nal 0.10
119.
232 818/p Nal 0.22
120.
299 822/p Nal 0.04
121.
1081 824/p Chara 0.01
122.
(Nal)
347 826/p Nal 0.03
123.
1014 827/p Nal (0.10
124.
336 806/p Nal 0.01
125 .
348 805/p Nal (0.40
126.
792 804/p Nal 0.04
127.
221 1191/p Nal 0.02
128.
1031 1270/p Nal 0,14
129.
296 1267/p Nal (0.10
130 .
310 2735/p Nal 0.18
131 .
2746/p Nal 0.01
834/2 2712 Nal (0.10
132 .
210 2693/p Nal 0.12
133 .
163/1 2694/p Nal (0.09
134.
651 2697/p Nal 0.03
135.
786 2695/p Nal 0.20
136.
765 2698/p Nal 0.03
137.
1455 4330/p Nal 0.03
138.
631 4803/p Nal 0,10
139.
1007 4805/p Nal 0,22
140.
723 4767/p Nal 0.31
141 .
719 4747/p Nal 0,01
142.
[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii ) ] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 18 , 2012/MAGHA 29, 1933
1414
(6) (7) (8)
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5)
4742/p Nal 0.20
West Bishalghar Dakshin 905
143.
Charilam Contd. 308 Nal 0.23
144. 4749/p
790 4750/p Nal 0.01
145.
4699/p Nal 0.29
146. 459
1128/3 4746/p Nal 0.26
147.
430/1 4648/p Nal 0.09
148.
431/2 4645/p Nal 0.10
149.
4454/p Nal 0.07
845/1 4643/p Nal 0.10
150.
Nal 0.12
151 . 843/3 4642/p
Nal 0.01
152. 911/2 4452/p
4462/p Chara(Nal) 0.12
4472 Chara(Nal) 0.08
153. 242/2
Nal 0.10
154. 893 4492/p
928 34/p Nal 0.01
155.
823/p Nal 0.20
156. 1798
Path 0.04
1/62 4332/p
157.
1/66 4474/p Chara(Nal) 0.02
1/67 4477/p Shashan 0.06
(Nal)
4479/p Chara (Nal) 0.02
5093/ Path 0.01
1/38
5677/p
Path 0.16
1/31 4301/p
Tilla 0.56
1/43 4298/p
1300 Nal 0.02
1/4
Nal 0.06
1/4 840/p
Nal 0.08
1/10 2530/p
2529/p Nal 0.08
1/10
1/54 3801 Pukur(Nal) 0.09
3802/p Chara 0.04
(Tilla)
Tilla 0.56
1/43 4293/ p
1300 Nal 0.02
1/49
Nal 0.04
4657/p
158.
3/4 4453/p Nal 0.08
159.
23.71
Total 1415
भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 18 , 2012/माघ 29 , 1933
[ भाग II-खंड 3 ( ii) ]
Sub-Division-Bishalghar
T.K.-Golaghati
Mouja: Barjala
Schedule of Land :
District
SL. No.
Sub-Division Mouja
(4) (2)
(3)
(1)
1. West
Barjala
Bishalghar
2
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
PlotNo.
Classification ofLand
Area in Acre Khatian No.
(8) (6)
(7)
(5)
0.09
Nal
60
212/p
0.17
Nal
96/1
338/p
0.12
Nal
349
336/p
0.12
Nal
239
330/p
0.10
Nal
134
323/p
Nal
0.08
298
317/p
0.15
Nal
297
386/p
0.01
Nal
387/p
Nal
0.46 227
1012
0.01
Nal
533
207/1 , 2 & 3
9.
534 Nal 0.04
535 Nal 0.10
536 Nal 0.07
544 Nal 0.02
545 Nal 0.10
253 530 Nal 0.09
10.
216 717/p Nal 0.19
11.
342 725 Nal 0.09
12.
1898 Nal 0.04
165 329 Nal 0.10
13.
73 2016 Road 0.07
14.
2017 Road 0.10
156 2022 Nal 0.18
15.
2023 Nal 0.19
2018 Chara 0.06
(Nal)
1005 724 Nal 0.03
16.
26 2025 Chara 0.12
17.
(Nal)
110 2029 Chara 0.02
18.
(Nal)
310 1958/p Baluchar 0.21
19.
315/1 1971/p Chara 0.05
20.
(Nal)
1974 Nal 0.06
315/2 1972/p Nal 0.08
21 .
315/3 1973 /p Nal 0.08
22.
[PART II-SEC. 3 (ii )]
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: FEBRUARY 18 , 2012/MAGHA 29 , 1933
1416
(4)
(3)
(2)
(1)
West
(8)
(7)
(6)
(5)
0.18
Nal
1987/p
Barjala-Contd. 92
23.
Bishalghar
24.
25.
26.
27.
28.
29.
30.
31.
32.
33.
34.
35.
36.
37.
38.
39.
40.
41.
42.
43.
44.
45.
46.
47.
48.
49.
50.
51.
52.
53.
54.
55.
56.
57.
0.03
Nal
81
1890/p
0.08
Nal
1892/p
188
0.02
Nal
187
1899/p
0.45
Nal
257
1902/p
0.11
Nal
259
1855/p
0.22
Nal
9/1
1856/p
0.26
Nal
265
1857/p
0.20
Nal
277/2
1825/p
0.31
Nal
65
1826/p
0.01
Nal
1828/p
0.09
Nal
2399/p
0.26
Nal
148
2397/p
0.18
Nal
135
2401/p
0.15
Nal
237
2434/p
0.21
Nal
52
2432/p
0.20
Nal
238
2427/p
0.32
Nal
319
2453/p
0.22
Nai
189
2450/p
0.23
Nal
035
2458/p
0.01
Nal
2459/p
0.24
Nal
2457/p
162
0.07
Nal
684
389/p
0.09
Nal
390/p
0.05
Nal
391/p
0.05
Nal
1831
12
0.14
Nal
344
121
0.01 210
Chara (Nal)
377
0.16
Nal
48
213/p
0.18
Nal
756
385/p
0.07
Nal
661
384/p
0.12
Nal
1085
1854/p
0.14
Nal
2071
1035
0.01
Chara
2026/p
942
0.03
Chara
2027/p
0.10
Nal
65/2
2398/p
0.24
Chara (Nal)
318
239/p
0.22
Nal
268
219/p
0.02
Nal
1007
337/p
0.12
Nal
199/2
721/p
0.02
Nal
234
720/p 1417
भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 18 , 2012/माघ 29 , 1933
[ भाग II-खंड 3 ( ii ) ]
(4) (1)
(3)
(2)
(8)
(7)
(6)
(5)
0.03
Nal
552/p
Barjala Contd. 435
West
58.
Bishalghar
59.
60.
61.
62.
63.
64.
65.
66.
67.
68.
69.
70.
71.
72.
73.
74.
75.
Total
0.10
Nal
245
320/p
0.05
Nal
999
383/p
0.01
Nal
511
1904/p
0.14
Nal
264
1967/p
0.04
Nal
1015
392/p
0.08
Nal
943
393/p
0.02
Nal
1081
232/p
0.04
Nal
266
388/p
0.04
Duba (Nal)
199/2
1795/p
0.03
Baluchar
1/92
2031/p
0.01
Nal
183
230/p
0.13
Nal
943
340/p
0.10
Nal
65
1827/p
0.10
Nal
2/2
320/p
0.11
Nal
199/1
723/p
0.10
Nal
224
1897 /p
0.03
Nal
171/1
1905/p
10.67
Sub-Division-Bishalghar
T.K. -Amtali
Mouja: Amtali
Schedule of Land:
Mouja District Sub-Division
Sl. No.
(4)
(3)
(2)
(1)
Amtali West
Bishalghar
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
PlotNo.
Area in Acre
Classification ofLand
Khatian No.
(8)
(7)
(6)
(5)
0.50
Nal
627
197/2
0.01
Nal
626
78
0.28
Nal
625
420
0.03
Nal
624
355/3
0.08
CharaNal
639
357/1
0.10
Nal
640
357/2
0.19
Nal
642
915
0.06
Nal
609
166
0.09
Nal
643
375
0.10
Nal
1160
74
0.21
Nal
1159
407
0.18
Nal
1154
404
0.08
Nal
1155
163
0.06
Nal
64/3
1152/p
0.06
Nal
1150
38/2 [PART II-SEC. 3 (ii ) ]
1418
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 18 , 2012/MAGHA 29, 1933
[भाग II-खंड 3 ( ii ) ] भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 18 , 2012/माघ 29 , 1933 1419
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8)
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) Nal (7) 0.03 (8)
43. West Bishalghar Amtali-Contd. 360 2230/p
44. 449 2232 1176 Nal Nal 0.09 0.17
15. West Bishalghar Amtali Contd. 1/109
2401/p 1177 Nal Nal 0.18 0.10
16. 146
2400/p Chara Nal 0.02 0.24
17. 376 1181
45. 458/2 2475/p Nal 0.01
18. 1/109 1184 Nal 0.04
46. 545 2404 Nal 0.01
19. 15/2 1185/ Nal 0.21
47. 45/1 2396/p Nal 0.04
5462
48. 104 5488/p Nal 0.11
20. 1/12 Road Nal 0.04
330 2403/p Nal 0.01
49.
(1341)
50. 434 2479/p Chara 0.06
21. 1/134 1398 Nal 0.25
2480/p Bastu 0.03
22. 246/2 5437 Nal 0.21
51. 387/3 2477/p Nal 0.06
246 1348/p Nal 0,20
2506/p Chara 0.01
23 . 820 1352 Nal 0.15
2508/p Nal 0.01
1353 Nal 0.03
52. 59 2478/p Nal 0.08
24. 472/1 1355 Nal 0.08
53. 955 2507/p Chara 0.12
25. 357/1 637/p Nal 0.01
54. 931 2505/p Nal 0.02
26. 102 1151/p Nal 0.34
2484/p Nal 0.03
27. 1/09 1173/p Nala 0.05
757 2503/p Nal 0.05
55.
28. 15/2 1185/ Nal 0.24
174/1 2510/p Nal 0.06
56.
5462/p 0.01
2509/p Nal
29. 1143 1129/p Nal 0.50
751 2512/p Nal 0.10
57.
2024/p Nal 0.06
2502 Bastu 0.16
1144 2060/p Nal 0.12
434/5 2514/p Nal 0.04
2068/p Nal 0.10
58. 290 3532/p Nal 0.02
30. 315/3 2023/p Nal 0.10
3533/p Nal 0.03
31. 459/1 2067/p Chara 0.10 0.05
3535/p Nal
2072/p Nal 0.04 0.11
3534/p Nal
32. 222 2076/p Nal Nal 0.15 0.18
59. 62/2 3544/p
33. 62/1 179 2085/p Nal Nal 0.01 0.13
3545/p
34. 933 147/2 3543/p 2516/p Nal Layek 0.02 0.04
60.
791 3547/p Nal Pathit 0.23
61.
35. 197/3 157/3 3553/p 2511/p Nal Layek 0.04 (0.004
62.
3554/p Nal Pathit 0.03
267 84 3547 2084 Nal Nal 0.04 0.12
63. 36.
787 5410 2087/p Nal 0.01
37.
64. 532/2 516 3708/p Nal Nal 0.18 00.04
38. 2090/p
3704/p 2100 Nal Nal 0.02 0.14
39. 546
65. 439/2 3707/p Nal 0.07
40. 26 2219/p Nal 0.02
3705/p Nal 0.10
41. 521/4 2220/p Nal 0.30
3706/p Nal 0.04 0.18
42. 152/1 2228/p Nal
327/1 3700/p Nal 0.18
66. 2227/p Nal 0,04
2229/p Nal 0.13
[PART II-SEC. 3 (ii ) ]
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 18 , 2012/MAGHA 29, 1933
1420
(4)
(3)
(2)
(1)
Amtali-Contd.
West
67.
Bishalghar
68.
69.
70.
71 .
72.
73.
74.
75.
76.
77.
78.
79.
80.
81.
82.
83.
84.
(8)
(7)
(6)
(5)
0.08
Nal
3720/p
323
0,11
Nal
3721 /p
0.21
Nal
3719/p
15/1
0.04
Nal
3723/p
0.20
Nal
112
3736/p
0.03
Nal
3738/p
0.02
Nal
3737/p
0.08
Nal
314/1
3743/p
0.03
Nal
3742/p
0.04
Nal
44/2
3920/p
0.08
Nal
213
3919/p
0.01
Nal
3918/p
0.04
Nal
3913/p
184/2
0.01
Nal
3911/p
0.05
Nal
3912
183/2
0.02
Nal
239/3
3924/p
0.06
Nal
4106
306
0.09
Nal
4107
0.08
Nal
4112/p
302/3
0.04
Nal
302/4
4159/p
0.02
Nal
4158/p
302/5
0.05
Nal
4378/p
302/6
0.02
Nal
7379/p
0.01
Nal
4525/p
0.14
Nal
4528/p
0.10
Nal
4501/p
0.03
Nal
4499/p
0.32
Nal
4950/p
0.18
Nal
4109/p
210/1
0.10
Nal
4110/p
61/1
0.01
Nal
4161/p
409/2
0.01
Nal
4160/p
0.02
Nal
89/1
4157/p
0.08
Nal
4150/p
513/2
0.04
Nal
4380/p
0.05
Nal
4381/p
0.04
Nal
4382/p
0.02
Nal
4383/p
0.08
Nal
503
4377/p
0.05
Nal
4375/p
157/2
0.05
Nal
4376/ p
0.08
Nal
4149/p [ भाग II-खंड 3 ( ii ) ]
1421
भारत का राजपन : फरवरी 18 , 2012/माष 29 , 1933
(1) (2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
85. West
Amtali Contd. 324/1
Bishalghar
303
86.
241/1 87.
98 88
1130 89.
324/1
324/2
91.
53
171/3
93.
1/46
1/197
778
461/1
398 95.
302/8
96
401 9.
1498
513/1
474
100.
302/7 101.
392
103
161
299/1
104.
299/3
299/2
19
105.
50
106.
73
218
108.
(8) (6)
Nal
4152/p
0406
Nel
4870p
0,05
Nal
4974/p
0,05
Nal
46274p
Nal
002 4560 /p
Nal
0.12
45-16/p
0:05
Nal
4517/p
0.12
N
4514/p
0.13
4508/p
0:04
N
4512/p
Nal
0.09
4513 /p
0.10
4507/p
Nal
0.01
4506/p
Tilla
0.01
4476/ p
Tila
0.04
4477 /p
0.06
Nal
4502/p
0.08
Nal
4500/p
0.01
Nal
4870/p
0.11
Bastu
4498/p
0.08
Nal
4497/p
Road
0.02
4496/p
0.06
Nal
4495/p
0.01
Nal
4494/p
0.04
Nal
4874/p
0.28
Nal
4949/p
0.05
Nal
4951/p
0:06
Nal
4952/p
0.10
Nal
4946/p
0.12
Nal
4943/p
Nal
0:02
4939/p
0.06
Chara
4934/p
0.02
Chara
4933/p
0.06
4932/p
0:08
Bhiti
4928/p
0.09
Chara
4929/p
0.05
Nal
4938/p
Nal
0.02
4937/p
Nal
0.01
4936/p
0.09
Nal
4925/p
Bhiti
0.19
4920/p 1422
[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii )]
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 18 , 2012/MAGHA 29, 1933
(3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8)
(1) (2)
Amtali-Contd. 263 4924 Bhiti 0.05
109. West Bishalghar
4923 Bhiti 0.01
239/1 4919/p Nal 0.15
110.
240 5915/p Nal 0.30
111.
196/5 5147/p Nal 0.06
112.
381/1 5142/p Nal 0.13
113 .
5148/p Nal 0.18
5150/p Nal 0.10
56/2 5164/p Nal 0.10
114.
56/3 5158/p Nal 0.09
56/1 5163/p Nal 0.10
5162/p Nal 0.02
5186/p Nal 0.01
412 5165/p Nal 0.09
115.
5166/p Nal 0.11
5185/p Nal 0.18
202/1 5192/p Nal 0,13
116.
5193/p Nal 0.14
202/4 5191/p Pukur 0.02
5289/p Nal 0.05
202/3 5288/p Nal 0.09
371/2 5017/p Nal 0.16
117.
37/3 5017 Nal 0.12
5407
1/46 5016/p Nala 0.32
118.
1/214 5018/p Tila 0.04
1/52 Tila 0.08
5151/p
5160 Nala 0.11
479/1 5287/p Nal 0.08
119.
479/2 Nal 0.07
5282/p
5276/p Nal 0.02
$275/p Nal 0.06
247 5280/p Nal 0.05
120.
5279/p Nal 0.04
5278/p Nal 0.06
458 5277/p Nal 0.04
121.
5274/p Nal 0.02
17 5273/p Nal 0.01
122.
5272/p Nal 0.13
1423
भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 18, 2012/माष 29, 1933
[भाग II-खंड 3 ( ii ) ]
(8)
(6)
(7)
(5)
(1)
(4)
(3)
(2)
0.16
Nal
12
5267/p
Amtali-Contd.
123 . West
Bishalghar
0.08
Nal
5265/p
0.03
Nal
5264/p
0.08
Nal
502/1
5330/p
124.
0.01
Nal
502/2
5261/p
0.05
Nal
502/3
5262/p
0.10
Nal
5255/p
Nal
0.11
5334/p
0.01
Nal
418/1
5263/p
125.
0.11
Nal
5260/p
0.10
Nal
204
5254/p
126.
0.06
Nal
100/3
5330
127.
100/1
5504/p
0.30
Chara
451/1
5332/p
128.
0.08
97
5368/p
Lunga
129.
0.06
97
5366/p
Lunga
130.
0.25
Tilla
1/230
5348/p
131.
0.30
1/232
5361/p
Lunga
0.01
Bhiti
1/229
5364/p
0.01
Chara
5363/p
0.01
5362
Bastu
0.11
1/57
5360/p
Lunga
132.
0.45
1/58
5350/p
Lunga
0.20
Tilla
1/234
5403/p
0.22
1/231
5351/p
Lunga
Nal
0.11
345
2102/p
133 .
0.15
Nal
546
2100/p
134.
21.89
Total
Τ.Κ. -
Sub-Division-Bishalghar
Mouja: Padmanagar
Schedule of Land:
PlotNo.
District
SL No.
Mouja
Sub-Division
Classification ofLand
Area in Acre
Khatian No.
(8)
(6)
(7)
(5)
(3)
(4)
(2)
(1)
Tilla
0.03
1705/18
237
1. West
Padmanagar
Bishalghar
84
0.12
1704
Tilla
1/64
2.
0.58
Tilla
1705
1/06
3.
0.73
Total
[F. No. 0-36011/13/2010-ONG -II]
R. S. SIKDAR, Under Secy.
1424
[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii )]
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 18 , 2012/MAGHA 29, 1933
नई दिल्ली, 14 फरवरी , 2012
का. आ. 637.- भारत सरकार ने , पेट्रोलियम और खनिज पाइपलाइन ( भूमि में उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन ) अधिनियम, 1962 (1962का 50 ) ( जिसे इसके पश्चात् उक्त अधिनियम कहा गया है ) की धारा 3 की उप - धारा ( 1 ) के अधीन जारी भारत सरकार के पेट्रोलियम और प्राकृतिक गैस मंत्रालय की अधिसूचना संख्या का. आ. 2740 ( अ ) तारीख 28 नवंबर , 2011 के साथ पठित अधिसूचना संख्या का. आ. 584 तारीख 24 फरवरी , 2011 द्वारा , उस अधिसूचना से संलग्न अनुसूची में विनिर्दिष्ट भूमि में, मैसर्स रिलाएंस इन्डस्ट्रीज लिमिटेड के आन्ध्र प्रदेश में पूर्वी तट परऑनशोर टर्मिनल से देश के विभिन्न हिस्सों में उपभोक्ताओं तक प्राकृतिक गैस के परिवहन के लिए मैसर्स रिलोजिस्टिक्स इन्फ्रास्ट्रक्बर लिमिटेड द्वारा काकीनाडा वासुदेबपुर हावड़ा गैस पाइपलाइन बिछाने के प्रयोजन के लिए उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन करने के अपने आशय की घोषणा की थी;
और, उक्त राजपत्र अधिसूचना की प्रतियां जनता को तारीख 18 अक्तूबर , 2011 को अथवा उससे पूर्व उपलब्ध करा दी गई थीं ; और , पाइपलाइन बिछाने के संबंध में , जनता की ओर से कोई आक्षेप प्राप्त नहीं हुआ है;
और , सक्षम प्राधिकारी ने उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 6 की उप- धारा ( 1 ) के अधीन भारत सरकार को अपनी रिपोर्ट दे दी है ;
और, भारत सरकार ने , उक्त रिपोर्ट पर विचार करने के पश्चात् और यह संतुष्ट हो जाने पर कि उक्त भूमि पाइपलाइन बिछाने के लिए अपेक्षित है , उसमें उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन करने का विनिश्चिय किया है ;
अतः , अब, भारत सरकार, उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 6 की उप - धारा ( 1 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए , यह घोषणा करती है कि इस अधिसूचना से संलग्न अनुसूची में विनिर्दिष्ट भूमि में पाइपलाइन बिछाने के लिए उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन किया जाता है ;
और, भारत सरकार, उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 6 की उप - धारा ( 4 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए, यह निर्देश देती है कि उक्त भूमि में उपयोग का अधिकार इस घोषणा के प्रकाशन की तारीख से भारत सरकार में निहित होने के बजाए , सभी विल्लंगमों से मुक्त, मैसर्स रिलोजिस्टिक्स इन्फ्रास्ट्रक्चर लिमिटेड में निहित होगा ।
अनुसूची
जिला : भद्रक
मंडल/तहसील/तालुक: भंडारी पोखरी गाँव का नाम
सर्वे सं. /सब डिविजन सं.
(1) (2)
(1) सणीपडा 291
289
287
286
285
280
276
279
277
274
273
272
263
262
257
179
165
राज्य: ओडिसा आर.ओ.यू. अर्जित करने के लिए क्षेत्रफल
हेक्टेयर एयर सि. एयर
(3) (4) (5)
00 00 53
00 01 47
00 03 65
00 01 36
00 01 10
00 04 49
00 08 64
00 02
00 03 94
00 03 26
00 03 88
4 40
24
00 10
00 00
00 02 94
00 05
[ भाग II-खंड 3 (ii ) ]
1425
भारत का राजपत्र: फरवरी 18, 2012/माघ 29 , 1933
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5)
(1) राणीपडा-जारी 171 00 03 83
166 00 04 17
164 00 11 24
163 00 04 30
162 00 03 48
160 00 07 79
159 00 02 48
158 00 05 72
550 00 03 38
151 00 01 23
150 00 00 10
149 00 00 71
148 00 01 51
147 00 02 42
(2) वडाकंटापडा 1455 00 00 98
1453 00 12 04
1465 00 09 83
1451 00 06 64
1449 00 08 23
1450 0 02 73
1444 00 12 60
1445 00 00 82
1446 00 00 13
1439 00 01 06
1437 00 04 55
1435 00 00 35
1402 00 03 41
1400 00 08 45
1399 00 04 50
1392 00 02 98
1393 00 01 82
1394 00 01 57
1395 00 01 99
1391 00 07 08
1390 00 08 25
1389 00 04 79
1296 00 05 12
1295 00 00 22
1294 00 00 10
1292 00 00 29
1288 00 05 83
1287 00 00 78
1285 00 12 83
1426
[PART II-SEC. 3 (ii ) ] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: FEBRUARY 18, 2012/MAGHA 29 , 1933
जिला : वालेश्वर
मंडल/तहसील/तालुक : खैरा
(1) (2)
(1) सालोमधपुर 20/27
8/14
9/15
4/4
मंडल/तहसील/तालुक : बस्ता जिला: वालेश्वर
(1) हातीमरा 254
257
261
262
256
252
267
268
266
269
270
290
276
274
277
278
282
280
281
283
284
230
285
286
226
227
228
218
222
219
220
216
215
214
159
158
राज्य: ओडिसा
भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 18 , 2012/माघ 29, 1933 1427
[ भाग II-खंड 3 (ii) ]
1408 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 18 , 2012/MAGHA 29 , 1933 [PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii ) ]
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5)
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5)
(2) गिलाजोरी 400 00 00 68
277 00 (3) 00 11 (4) 02 32 (5) 60
जिलाजौरी-जारी 398
00 14 94 14
394 278 00 00 05 02 64
00 00 05 01 02 27 48 13
486 271 00
279 00 00 03 00 02 40 38 29
487 00
258 00 00 00 01 07 09 29 92 40
491
390 281 00 00 22 राज्य : ओडिसा 00 67 19
386 280 00 00 04 01 46 55
00 01 89
385 245 00 00 00 02 83 74
00 01 78
384 246 00 00 00 07 85 98
00 00 13
383 247 00 00 00 83 37
00 01 53
387 12 00 00 25 48
बामकुरुची 00 11 65
382 00 00 01 86 09
152
00 01 87
372 00 00 76 03
151 00
00 03 38
373 00 00 11 10 83
150
00 02 86
374 00 00 40
149 00 15
00 02 92
370 00 05 49 36
142 09
00 03 63
369 143 00 00 01 54 10
00 00 52
622 00 00 04 560010000000109010 55 33
185
00 02 84
623 00 00 03 16 45
00 05 58
351 00 00 09 43 80
00 00 35
352 00 00 00 10 66
00 02 68
355 40 00 00 00 66 43:
00 07 32
348 00 00 01 09
188 00 00 51
191 00 00 00 03 58
342
00 02 47
343 192 00 8 08 01 08
00 02 75
341 197 00 00 00 08 79
00 07 8003030 64
345 198 00 00 00 10
00 00 02 04 96
344 206 01
00 00 24
00 00 06 29
340 205
00 03 03
310 204 00 00 03 93
00 01 97
306 2017 00 00 01 92 98
00 00 09 10
305 203 00 00 02 98
00 08 800 70
297 341 00 00 03 68 78
00 00 66 79
304 390 00 00 01 02 28
00 06 00 39 07 90
299 313 00 00 03
00 00 85 65
298 312 00 00 04 02 33
00 00 00 08 36 37 08
301 322 00 02
00 00 02 06 03 25 64 09
274 323 00
00 00 02 02 76 26 84
275 321 00 01
00 00 00 03 00 10 78 16
276 354 00
00 00 05 01 32 34 67
273 355 00 888 03
375 00 00 00- 02 00 04 56 78
272
356 00 00 03 05 87 308 43
[ भाग II-खंड 3 ( ii ) ]
1429
भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 18 , 2012/भाघ 29 , 1933
(1) (2)
(3) आमकुरुची-जारी 357
358
364
365
366
368
369
370
444
445
363
443
450
451
453
मंडल/तहसील/तालुक : बेतनाटी जिला: मयुरभंज
(1) वाछुरिपदा 533
532
529
523
525
311
293
318
317
316
322
291
194
197
164
163
169
86
85
84
83
82
81
68
367GI/2012-17
1430 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 18 , 2012/ MAGHA 29, 1933 [PART II- SEC . 3 (ii) ]
(1) (2) (3) (3) (4) (4) (5) (5)
(2) आम्वागाडिया 1667 00 01 43
00 00 10
1668 00 18 39
00 00 63
2008 00 03 75
00 02 84
2009 00 02 87
00 01 20
2007 00 04 25
00 01 18
3594 00 18 61
3596 00 00 01 08 33 89
3228 00 00 00 02 48 20
3232 00 00 00 02 14 57
3231 00 00 10
00 00 40
3229 00 04 37
00 04 09
3230 00 21 35
00 01 74
3214 00 10 34
00 00 10
3206 00 01 19
00 00 25
3174 00 00 17
00 00 02 75 25
3088 00
3081 00 00 04 09 63 53
3051 00 03 48
राज्य: ओडिसा
3053 00 39
00 15 49
3075 00 86
00 03 07 76 76
3054 00
3071 00 00 10 01 31 03
3070 00 00 17 08 04 21
3055 00 21 36
00 00 58
3069 00 00 36
00 04 96
3059 00 01 88
00 14 16
3057 00 03 18
00 03 45
3058 00 07 11
00 04 46
2553 00 15 79
00 00 03 10 05 86
2552
00 00 01 02 54 85
2551
2550 00 00 13 01 38 96
2549 00 04 84
00 00 10
2541 00 08 29
00 02 15
2536 00 07 49
00 04 59
2532 00 00 18
00 11 76
2531 00 05 52
00 00 25
2530 00 03 01
00 16 22 22
2528 00
2527 00 00 05 07 39 37
2494 00 02 2 07
2495 12
00 05 98
376 00 ॐॐ 04 73
(3) पुरुणिया
377 00 23
00 05 98
378 00 28
00 01 43
379 00 07 75
00 07 37
406 00 00 41
1431
भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 18, 2012/माघ 29 , 1933
[ भाग II-खंड 3 ( ii) ]
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5)
405 00 09 64
(3) पुरुणिया-जारी
415 00 20 89
404 00 07 16
402 00 02 47
00 03 00
441
453 00 08 70
[फा. सं. एल-14014/14/2011 - जी.पी ]
ए. गोस्वामी , अवर सचिव
New Delhi , the 14th February, 2012
S.O. 637. Whereas by notification of the Government of India in the Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Gas number S.O. 584 dated 24th February, 2011 , read with their notification number S.O. 2740 (E) dated 28th November, 2011 , issued under sub -section ( 1 ) of Section 3 of the Petroleum and Minerals Pipelines (Acquisition of Right of User in Land) Act, 1962 (50 of 1962 ) (hereinafter referred to as the said Act) , Government of India declared its intention to acquire the Right ofUser in land, specified in the Schedule appended to that notification for the purpose of laying Kakinada -Basudebpur- Howrah gas pipeline for transportation of natrual gas from onshore terminal at East Coast of Andhra Pradesh of M/ s . Reliance Industries Limited by M/ s. Relogistics Infrastructure Limited to the consumers in various parts of the country;
And whereas, the copies of the said Gazette notification were made available to the public on or before 18th October, 2011;
Andwhereas, no objections were received from the public to the laying of the pipeline ;
Andwhereas, the Competent Authority has under sub - section ( 1 ) of Section 6 of the said Act, submitted report to the Government of India ;
And whereas , Government of India , after considering the said report and on being satisfied that the said land is required for laying the pipeline , have decided to acquire the Right of User therein;
Now, therefore , in exercise of the powers conferred by sub - section ( 1 ) of Section 6 of the said Act, Government of India hereby declare that the Right of User in the land, specified in the Schedule , appended to this notification , is hereyby acquired for laying the pipeline ;
And further, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub- section ( 4) of Section 6 of the said Act , Government of India hereby direct that the Right of User in the said land for laying the pipeline shall, instead of vesting in Government of India, vest on the date of publication of the declaration, in M/s . Relogistics Infrastructure Limited, free from all encumbrances .
SCHEDULE
Mandal/Tehsil/Taluk: Bhandari Pokhari Village
State : Orissa Area to be acquired for RoU
District: Bhadrak Survey No./Sub-Division No.
(2) (1)
291 (1) Ranipara
289
287
286
285
280
276
279
277
274
273
C-Are
Are
Нес.
(4)
(5) (3)
53
00
00
47
01
00
65
03
00
36
01
00
10 00
01
49
04
00
08
64 00
26
02
00
03
94 00
26
03
00
88
03
00
432 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 18 , 2012/MAGHA 29 , 1933 [PART II- SEC. 3 ( ii ) ]
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5)
272 04 40
(1) Ranipara-Contd.
263 00 01 24
262 00 01
257 00
179 00 02
165 00 05 82
171 00 83
166 00 17
164 00 24
163 00 04 30
162 00 03 48
160 00 79
159 00 02 48
158 00 05 72
550 00 03 38
151 00 23
00 00 10
150
149
148
147
1455
(2) Badakantapana
1453 04
1465 83
1451
GU 23
1449
06 82
1946 13
1430 03 06
1437 C
35
1435
03 41
45
1500
50
::.
05 12
भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 18 , 2012 /माघ 29 , 1933
-खंड 3 ( ii) ]
(2)
1295
adakantapada-Contd.
1294
1292
1288
1287
1285
1433
(5)
(4)
(3)
00
22 00
00
10 00
00
29 00
83
05
00
78
00
00
12
83 00
State: Orissa
District: Baleshwar
Mandal/Tehsil/Taluk : Khaira
20/27
Salomadhapur
8/14
9/15
4/4
14
14
00
48
01
00
00
38 00
92
07
00
State: Orissa
District :Baleshwar
Viandai/Tehsil/Taluk : Basta
00 01 89
254
Hatimara
00 01 78
257
00 00 13
261
00 01 53
262
00 11 65
256
00 01 87
252
00 03 38
267
00 02 86
268
00 02 92
266
00 03 63
269
00 00 52
270
00 02 84
290
00 05 58
00 00 35
00 02 68
07 32
00 51
02 47
280
00 02 75
281
07 64
283
00 02 96
284
00 00 24
230
00 03 03
285
00 01 97
286
00 00 10
226
00 08 70
227
00 00 7)
228
00 06 07
218
00 00 65
222
08 37
219
1434
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 18, 2012/MAGHA 29, 1933
(1) (2)
(1) Hatimara Contd. 220
216
215
214
159
158
(2) Gillajori 400
398
394
486
487
491
390
386
385
384
383
387
382
372
373
374
370
369
622
623
351
352
355
348
342
343
341
345
344
340
310
306
305
297
304
299
298
301
274
[PART II-SEC. 3 ( ii ) ]
भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 18 , 2012 /माघ 29 , 1933 1435
[ -खखंड 3 ( ii) ] 1436 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 18 , 2012/MAGHA 29 , 1933 [PART II- SEC. 3 ( ii ) ]
(3) (4) (5)
10 (2) (3) (4) (5)
(2) (3) 00 (4) 06 (5) 64
(1)
275 00 01 76
(2) Gallajori Contd. 00 02 26
357 00 00 00 10 10
(3) Amakuruchi-Contd. 276 00
00 03 78
358 00 03 00 32 63
273 00
00 00 02 05 84 34
364 56
272 00 02
365 00 00 01 00 20 30
277 00 02 60
366 00 00 01 03 87 18
278 00 02 64
368 00 01 33
00 02 00 13 68
271 00
369 00 00 48
279 00 00 02 11 29 32
370 00 00 14
258 00 00 09 05 40 94
444 00 00 40
281 00 00 00 05 19 27
445 00 04 09
280 00 00 01 03 55 40
363 00 01 74
245 00 02 01 74 29
00 00 10
443 00
246 00 07 98
00 00 00 22 67 25
450
247 00 01 37
451 00 00 00 04 46 75
12 00 06 43
(3) Amakuruchi 453 00 00 04 00 63 83
152 00 01 09
00 State: Orissa 00 85
Mandal/Tehsil/Taluk : Betnoti 151 District :Mayurbhanj 00 05 03
00 00 83
150 533 00 00 02 15 83 49
(1) Bachhuripada 00 25 77
532 00 00 03 15 76
149 00
00 01 86
531 00 04 10 36 31
142 00
00 00 00 17 04 76
529 00 00 10
143
00 00 00 11 58 10
523 00 02 33
185
525 00 00 00 04 40 %
186 00 04 45
311 00 00 05 14 49 16
141 00 02 80
293 00 00 03 01 54 45
187 00 04 99
318 00 04 46
00 04 42 55
140 00 01
317 00 03 05
00 03 16
188 00 07 98
316 00 01 54
00 03 09 94 43
191 00
322 00 13 38
00 00 10
192 00 01 33
291 00 00 10
00 00 66
197 00 08 53
194 00 02 15
00 01 09
198 00 05 43
197 00 04 59
00 00 58
206 00 00 10
164 00 11 76
00 08 06 08
205 00 06
163 00 00 25
00 00 79
204 00 02 28
169 00 16 22
00 00 10
207 00 01 93
86 00 05 39
00 01 04
203 00 05 93
85 00 02 07
00 05 06 72 29
311 00
84 00 05 98
00 03 93
310 00 02 28
83 00 04 73
00 01 92
313 00 00 05 90 98
82 00
00 02 09
312 00 00 02 01 33 43
81
00 03 68
322 00 00 02 07 08 37
68
00 01 66
323 1667 00 00 03 01 09 43
(2) Ambagadia 00 03 39
321 00 00 02 18 84 39
1668
00 04 85
354 00 00 03 16 75
2008 00
00 00 36
00 01 67
355 2009 00 02 87
00 02 25
375 00 00 04 04 78 25
2007
356 00 05 43
3594 00 18 61
1437
भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 18 , 2012/माघ 29 , 1933
[ भाग II-खंड 3 ( ii ) ]
(2)
(1)
3596
(2) Ambagadia-Contd.
3228
3232
3231
3229
3230
3214
3206
3174
3088
3081
3051
3053
3075
3054
3071
3070
3055
3069
3059
3057
3058
2553
2552
2551
2550
2549
2541
2536
2532
2531
2530
2528
2527
2494
2495
376
(3) Purunia
377
378
379
406
405
415
404
402
441
453
367 G1/2012-18
(5)
(4)
(3)
89
08
00
20
02
00
57
02
00
10
00
00
37
04
00
35
21
00
34
10
00
19
01
00
17
00
00
25
02
00
53
09
00
48
03
00
39
12
00
86
12
00
76
07
00
03
01
00
21
08
00
36
21
00
36
00
00
88
01
00
18
03
00
11
07
00
79
15
00
86
10
00
85
02
00
96
01
00
84
04
00
29
08
00
49
07
00
18
00
00
52
06
00
01
03
00
22
05
00
37
07
00
26
02
00
12
27
00
21
01
00
27
10
00
48
28
00
75
07
00
41
00
00
64
09
00
89
20
00
16
07
00
47
02
00
00
03
00
70
08
00
[F. No. L- 14014/14/2011 -GP]
A. GOSWAMI , Under Secy.
1438
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 18 , 2012/MAGHA 29 , 1933
[PART II-SEC. 3 (ii) ]
नई दिल्ली, 14 फरवरी , 2012
का. आ. 638.- भारत सरकार ने , पेट्रोलियम और खनिज पाइपलाइन ( भूमि में उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन ) अधिनियम , 1962 (1962का 50 ) ( जिसे इसके पश्चात् उक्त अधिनियम कहा गया है ) की धारा 3 की उप - धारा ( 1 ) के अधीन जारी भारत सरकार के पेट्रोलियम और प्राकृतिक गैस मंत्रालय की अधिसूचना संख्या का.आ. 506 तारीख 10 फरवरी , 2011 द्वारा उस अधिसूचना से संलग्न अनुसूची में विनिर्दिष्ट भूमि में, तमिलनाडु में तिरूतन्नी के पास विजयवाडा नैलुर चैन्नई पाइपलाइन के टर्मिनल प्वाइंट से देश के विभिन्न हिस्सों में उपभोक्ताओं तक प्राकृतिक गैस के परिवहन के लिए मैसर्स रिलोजिसटिक्स इन्फ्रास्ट्रक्चर लिमिटेड द्वारा चैन्नई टयूटीकोरिन पाइपलाइन बिछाने के प्रयोजन के लिए उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन करने के अपने आशय की घोषणा की थी ;
और, उक्त राजपत्र अधिसूचना की प्रतियां जनता को तारीख 28 जुलाई , 2011 को अथवा उससे पूर्व उपलब्ध करा दी गई थीं ;
और, पाइपलाइन बिछाने के संबंध में, जनता की ओर से प्राप्त आक्षेपों पर सक्षम प्राधिकारी द्वारा विचार कर लिया गया है और अननुज्ञात कर दिया गया है ;
और, सक्षम प्राधिकारी ने उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 6 की उप - धारा ( 1 ) के अधीन भारत सरकार को अपनी रिपोर्ट दे दी है ;
और, भारत सरकार ने , उक्त रिपोर्ट पर विचार करने के पश्चात् और यह संतुष्ट हो जाने पर कि उक्त भूमि पाइपलाइन बिछाने के लिए अपेक्षित है , उसमें उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन करने का विनिश्चिय किया है ;
अतः , अब, भारत सरकार, उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 6 की उप - धारा ( 1 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए, यह घोषणा करती है कि इस अधिसूचना से संलग्न अनुसूची में विनिर्दिष्ट भूमि में पाइपलाइन बिछाने के लिए उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन किया जाता है ;
और , भारत सरकार , उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 6 की उप - धारा ( 4 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए यह निर्देश देती है कि उक्त भूमि में उपयोग का अधिकार इस घोषणा के प्रकाशन की तारीख से भारत सरकार में निहित होने के बजाए , सभी विल्लंगमों से मुक्त. मैसर्स रिलोजिसटिक्स इन्फ्रास्ट्रक्चर लिमिटेड में निहित होगा ।
अनुसूची
जिला : तिरुवन्नमलाय
तालुक: चेय्यार
गाँव का नाम
सर्वे सं./सब डिविजन सं.
(1) (2)
(1) शिवाराम 45/1
45/2
20/1
20/4
20/3
20/2
21/1
19/6
19/5
19/4
19/3
3/1
4
27/1 ए
27/1बी
27/2
27/3
27/4
27/5
राज्य: तमिलनाडु
आर.ओ.यू. अर्जित करने के लिए क्षेत्रफल
हेक्टेयर एयर सि-एयर
(3) (4) (5)
00 05 97
00 01 36
00 06 39
00 00 10
00 04 23
00 03 88
00 00 40
00 09 05
(0) 11 95
00 06 21
00 00 10
00 30 36
00 02 TI
10
20
00
00 08 75
00 06 36
00 06 90
1439
भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 18 , 2012/माघ 29 , 1933
[ भाग II-खंड 3 ( ii) ]
1440
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 18 , 2012/MAGHA 29 , 1933 [PART II-SEC. 3 ( ii ) ]
(3) (4) (5)
(1) (2)
(1) (2) 00 06 (3) 84 (4)
शिवराम-जारी 27/6 (5)
00 04 25
कोतंटावडी-जारी 277 235/1 00 04
56
00 15 49
26/6 235/18
00 31 32
00 03 16
26/7 235/2 00 07 93
235/3 00 02 98
26/8 00 02 61
235/4 00 02 00 34
26/9 23 75
26/10 235/5 00 01 00 16 05 98
236/15 00 00 30 15 09
26/4 00
236/16 02 00 19 16 51
26/5 00
236/5 00 31 07 50
26/11 00 02
236/4 00 05 19
00 00 69
26/12
112/2 00 00 10
00 00 19
26/13
238/14 00 03 03
00 12 13
25/1
238/9 00 04 54
00 01 24
25/2 238/10 00 34 56
जिला : तिरुवन्नमलाय 130/1 राज्य: तमिलनाडु 00 35 49
तालुक : तिरुवन्नमलाय 247 00
(2) एरूमपुंडी 50/2 00 11 39 53 87
(1) कोतंटावडी 248/5 00 15 11 83
00 12
49/1
248/6 00 19 86
00 06 45
49/3
248/7 00 01 78
00 00 40
49/5
250/3 ए 1 00 48 80 28
00 04
49/2
251/1 00 86 03 95
00 11
47/1
252/ 1 ए 00 76 63 80
00 16
47/2
245/7 00 28 18 20
48/6 00 02
(3) वलुनडलांकुनम 33/2ए 00 15 10 33
00 15
47/5
33/2बी 00 14 00 95 05 88
43/1
33/2ई 00 16 00 94 00 89
43/3
34/6 00 20 00 35 00 51
43/9
16/1 04 00 65 01 63
43/4 00
16/2 00 70 04
00 05 73
43/8
24 00 61 79
00 15 58
41/3
28/1 00 10 75
00 03 19
39/4
26/2ए 00 57 02
00 03 07
39/5
26/2बी 06 00 31 14 97
39/6 00
23/1 35 00 63 32 70
40 00
00 12 71
00 12 36
35/1
37/1ए6 00 46 11 85
00 18
35/2
(4) गनापापुरम 54/1बी 00 15 00 71 05 57
54/4ए 00 13 (X) 51 00 27
33/4
54/4बी 00 74 00 17 02 34
131
52/3 00 01 00 15 52
129/1 02
52/6 00 24 00 59 15 95
129/2
52/8 00 36 30 09 12
129/3
52/8बी 00 17 2: 38 07
128/10 54
59/3 00 14 24
233/3 ان
00 34 52
233/8 59/1ए 00
00 29 54
126/1 59/1 बी (0) 19 57
59/2डी 00 23 59
1441
भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 18 , 2012/माघ 29 , 1933
[ भाग II-खंड 3 ( ii ) ]
1442
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 18, 2012/MAGHA 29 , 1933 [PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii ) ]
(1)
(2) (3) (4) (4) (5) (5)
(2) (3)
(1) कल्लिकुलम-जारी
123/3सी 00 00 13 00 40
29
62/3ए
गनापापुरम-जारी 120/2आई 00 00 08 11 39 23
62/3ई
120/2जे 00 00 01 08 19
62/4 03
120/2एच 00 00 07 00 96
62/3एच 10
121/1 00 00 06 12 41 28
62/5
121/2ई 00 00 06 07 60
62/6 69
121/ 2एफ 00 05 72
62/7 00 18 82
121/2जी 00 07 13
62/8ए 00 12 66
(6) कर्णमपुंडी 00 17 72
61/1 2/7ए 00 00 10
00 12 61
61/2 2/8ए 00 07 32
00 22 31
96/2 2/9ए 00
02 49 10
00 08
96/14
2/9बी 00 02 87 97
00 02
50/2
2/10 00 01 27
05 84
00
50/3
2/11सी 00 00 05 00 85 74
50/4
2/16 00 00 25
00 05 89
50/5
2/17ए 00 00 03 05 10 71
50/6
2/18बी 4 00 00 00 30
50/7 01 07
00 17 95
47/1 2/18बी 2 00 04 37
2/18बी 3 00 07 58
33/3सी 00 02 51
2/19बी 20 45
33/3बी 00 00 04 05
2/20 00 00 04 01 09
33/2डी 31
2/21 00 00 72 10
00 05
40/2बी
65/4ए 00 12 81
00 10 62
40/2सी
65/4बी 1 00 02 52
00 09 32
40/2ए 65/4बी 2
00 19 25 54
00 00
48/5
65/2बी 2 00 03 01 16 56
00
48/6
65/2ए2 00 00 00 09 10 95
48/9
64 00 00 18 00 01 29
48/7
65/2ए 3 00 03 06 19
48/8 00 74
65/2ए 6 00 08 21
37/1 ई 00 08 02
63/1 ए3 00 00 11 04 88 37
37/1बी
63/1 ए 1 00 05 09 39
37/ 1सी 00 31
63/ 1ए2 00 00 04 27 52 76
37/1डी
63/1ए4 00 14 17 98 47
37/ 1के 00
63/1ए5 00 00 20 02 64 09
37/2 ए
63/2बी 00 00 20 00 69 90
53/1
63/2डी 00 08 21
00 01 72
35/2
17 12
63/2ए 00 00 03 35
35/3ए
63/2सी 00 00 (0) 45
13 90
46/1ए
67/4 00 28 09 44
118/2 00
(5 ) कल्लिकुलम 68/3 00 06 31 47 90
00
118/3
68/2 00 12 65
00 01 26
123/ 1बी 98/8 00 00 49
22 08
98/7 00 00 05
123/ 1 ए 2 26
01 12
98/6सी 00 00 01 99
123/3ए 2
98/6बी 00 14 32
123/3 ए । 00 06 54
98/6ए 00 00 19 07 64 71
123/3बी
1443
भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 18 , 2012/माघ 29 , 1933
भान -खंड 3 ( ii ) ]
भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 18, 2012/माघ 29 , 1933 1445
[ भाग II-खंड 3 ( ii ) ] 1444 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 18, 2012/MAGHA 29 , 1933 [PART II-SEC . 3 (ii) ]
(1) (2)
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5)
43/12 (3) (4) (5)
कडंबाई-जारी (2)
(1) 361/2 00 16 91
(8) सोमसापडी 42/1 33
00 30
98/5
कर्णमपुंडी-जारी 42/4 369/3बी 00 29 42
00 00 25
98/3
42/3 369/4 00 00 13
00 01 12
42/21 98/2सी
369/3सी 00 00 28 16 43 20
42/9 98/4
369/2बी 00 00 21 33 00 81
100/2
42/20
00 47 68
101/4 370/1 00 18 84
42/14
00 31 07
101/3 369/5 00 39 78
42/15
00 06 03
101/2 369/6 00 01 15
42/22
84/2आई 00 03 25
42/13 351 00 06 38
84/2जे 00 04 67
42/12 349/2 00 49 93
00 06 66
39/1 84/3 348/7 00 17 40
00 01 06
39/2 62/1ए 348/6 00 26 78
38/5 00 01 54
8/2बी 348/5 00 02 71
89/2 346/1 00 00 03 25 90 75
8/1जे
89/3 एफ 384/3 00 00 01 31 57 63
8/1आई
89/3ई 384/5 00 00 07 19 20 37
8/3बी
86/3ए 384/1 00 00 05 14 10 76
8/7
389/3 00 00 07 07 66 69
90/10ए 8/6ए
90/11 389/2बी 00 00 01 07 76 15
8/16बी
91/2सी 00 00 02 06 56
8/11 389/2ए 17
00 00 58
91/2बी 8/12 389/4सी 00 16
00 03 04
91/204 8/1बी 00 00 65
389/4ए2
00 02 41
91/2ए 3 8/1 ई 00 12
389/4ए 1 14
00 02 07
123/1 8/1सी
389/4बी 00 15 86
122/4 00 11 16
8/1जी
389/1 00 14 02
122/5 07 43
8/6बी 00
62/15 00 36 25
(9) कडंबाई 122/6 00 09 63
8/5
123/4 62/14 00 16 01 20 87
10/1 00
121/4 62/13 00 00 04 01 97 14
10/2
123/5 62/11 00 00 06 04 06 89
10/3
123/6 61/6 00 00 03 03 50 42
10/5
63/2 00 04 13
13/4 61/5 00 15 81
63/12 00 00 06 11 17 58
14/1डी 61/9
63/3 00 12 20 72 02
14/ 1जी 61/10 00
63/4
60/13 00 00 04 01 16 72
63/9 14/1 एच
49/5 00 12 19 04 29
14/एसी 100
63/6
49/6 00 18 07 84 68
15/3 00
63/10
48/6 00 02 33 84 84
00
24/1ए 1 1/3ए
(10) काटुवेलंनंडल 7) सिरूनत्तुर 44/3 00 12 14 03
1/3बी 00 20
24/1 ए2 00 08 75
00 18 49
24/1 ए5 1/3सी 3 03 42
44/11 00
00 00 27
26/1 बी 1/ 1 बी 2 44/12 00 02 33
00 12 13
26/1ए 1/3सी 2 44/10 00 28 28
00 11 58
1/1बी 3 43/19बी 00 08 16
23/4ए
00 03 93
27/3बी 4 1/3सी 1 43/19ए 00 08 98
00 00 72
27/3सी 5 13/2ए 43/16 00 05 76
00 37 71
1/2 43/18 -00 02 98
27/3डी 00 48 80
13/1 43/17 00 04
00 00 20
15/15
367 GI /2012-19
(3) (4) (5) 00 00 82 00 06 05 00 00 66 00 05 26 00 05 55 00 06 71 00 00 10 00 02 25 00 05 80 00 03 21 00 22 62 00 00 73 00 08 85 00 07 00 38 72 00 16 07 00 05 39 00 24 60 00 07 19 00 07 48 00 05 25 00 07 07 00 10 00 00 25 05 00 00 45 00 00 30 00 17 26 00 16 67 00 16 47 00 06 21 00 13 03 00 10 26 00 10 36 00 12 27 00 06 18 00 11 01 00 00 51 00 02 06 00 01 34 00 01 62 00 43 95 00 00 10 00 16 11 00 05 27 00 03 16 00 00 00 11 90 00 13 14 00 14 08
1446
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: FEBRUARY 18 , 2012/MAGHA 29 , 1933
(1) (2)
(11) पोलकुन्नम 115/1सी
115/ 1ए
114/1
114/2
115/1बी
114/12
114/14
114/13
114/11
114/8
121/3
121/2
122/3 ए
122/3 बी
122/4
111/2ए
111/2सी
111/2बी
111/4ए
111/4बी
127/1
128/3
135/2
141/2बी
141/3ए
141/3बी
141/4बी 2
141/6बी
140/3ए
140/4
140/3बी
140/5
151/6सी
151/6डी
151/70
151/ 7बी
146/4
152/5
152/5डी
152/5ई
152/ 5एफ
156/ 1ए2
156/22
[PART II-SEC. 3 ( ii)]
1450
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 18 , 2012/MAGHA 29 , 1933 [PART II-SEC. 3 ( ii )] 1447 1449
[भाग II-खंड 3 ( ii ) ] II-खंड 3 ( ii) ] भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 18, 2012/माघ 29 , 1933 भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 18 , 2012/माघ 29 , 1933
1448 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 18 , 2012/MAGHA 29, 1933 [PART II-SEC. 3 ( ii )]
(1) (2)
(3) (4) (4) (5) (5)
( 1) (2) (2) (3) (3) (4) (5)
(1)
पेरियाकल्लपडी-जारी (1) 18/5ए2 (2) 00 00 (3) 04 00 (4) 35 10 (5)
देरियाकल्लपडी- जारी 56/8ए 00 00 (3) 12 (4) (5)
पोलकुन्नम-जारी 156/2ए 1
18/7सी 43/6 00 00 00 05 09 00 57
नेयकुप्पम-जारी 154/21 56/10डी 00 02 00 68 00 11 24 98
28/1 00 28 46
56/10सी 43/4डी 00 00 03 02 98 07
154/14बी 00 32 00 84 22 22
99/1 ए 43/5 00 00 00 13 03 10 54 64
55/10 26
154/20 00 03 00 55 01
55/11 99/1बी 43/3सी 00 00 00 05 06 00 05 38 86
154/13 00 08 00 69 32
55/9बी 99/8बी 43/7 00 00 00 05 01 00 29 69 45
154/12 00 00 00 69 12 23
55/15ए 99/8ए 43/4सी 00 00 00 03 02 00 59 06 61
38/9 00 03 00 07 16 31
(12) नेयकुप्पम 00 02 38
55/15बी 99/9ए 43/8 00 00 00 00 20 02 10 91
38/4 00 03 38 05
55/15सी 30/1ए 43/2 00 00 00 00 01 04 17 00 28 34 10
38/3 00 01 64
(13) पेरियाकल्लपडी 55/15डी 30/1बी 81/2ए2 00 00 00 00 00 00 14 02 06 15 68 94 73
37/11 00 28
55/4 30/1सी 81/2ए 1 00 02 00 00 00 76 00 07 10 43 35
38/5 00 00 08 93
81/4 00 00 00 00 12 89 32 07 60 30 04
(14) टच्चमपाटु 38/2 55/9ए 9/1ए 00 05 12 46
81/2बी 1बी 00 00 00 10 28 29 69
38/1 55/8 9/3बी 00 14 38 13 08
00 05 27
55/7 81/5 00 00 00 01 09 (X) 02 84 98
37/12 00 14 87
9/3ए 00 16 71
7/3सी4ए 81/2बी 1 ए 2 00 00 19 00 00 02 69 13 01 20 02 98
37/13 9/2बी
00 01 68
42/1 7/3सी 4बी 81/6 00 00 09 00 00 14 52 15 11 47 05 35
11/2 00 39 28
7/3सी 3 82/ 1 बी 2 बी 00 00 02 00 00 08 58 50 05 71 06
42/2
11/3 00 01 40
7/3सी 2 82/1बी 2डी 00 00 (X) 00 06 58 24 04 03 02 04
42/4ए 14/3बी 00
00 02 97
7/3सी 1 82/1बी 3 00 00 (0) 00 01 01 03 78 63 18
42/4बी 14/3ए 00 10
00 07 55
25/4बी 82/1बी 4 00 00 04 CO 00 11 03 01 25 99 90
42/3 14/2ए 00 09 45
82/1बी 5 00 02 02 50 42
25/4ए 00 00 00 06 10 83
42/5ए 14/1 00 30 85
82/1बी 1 00 00 04 10 62
35/6सी 25/5ए 14/4 00 00 00 00 00 35 59 is 95
82/1 ए 00 00 37
25/6सी 20 00 00 00 11 44 47 26
35/४बी 00 01
82/2ई 00 19 46
25/7सी 21/1 00 00 00 05 19 61 60 50
00 02 86
35/9ए 82/2सी 00 00 01 36
25/7डी 16/3 बी 3 00 00 08 09 25 30
35/9बी 82/2डी 00 04 00 14 10
16/4 00 00 03 79
00 06 78. 73
25/2ए2
35/10 00 07 00 15 10
30/1सी 1 64/1ए 1 00 00 (X) 01 00 06 83 34
25/2 ए 1 29
35/7 64/1ए2 00 12 00 11 82
25/2बी 1 30/1सी 2 00 00 11 14 05 45 51
44/1 00 01 00 35 04
64/1ए3 il
30/1सी 3 00 00 (X) 11 00 12 02 31
27/ 1 ए 00 08 21
56/1 65/2ए2 00 90 05
27/1सी 31/ 1ए 00 00 () 03 08 04 11
56/2 00 00 26 12
65/1सी 2 ई (0) 20 86
( 15) अल्लिकोण्डापटु 27/1डी 1/9 00 00 00 01 67 90
44/3बी 65/1सी 2 बी 00 18 (3) 58
00 03 68
27/1 ई 1/7ए 00 00 10 27 98 17
00 7 00 00 71 に 39
65/1सी 2 ए 00 10
1/7बी 00 00 19 01 43 92 5
44/2बी 27/1 एफ 62/1सी 1 00 19 00 58 05 02 89
27/1जो 6/1बी 00 00 00 00 29 46 in 10 22
44/5 62/2बी 1 00 11 00 00 10
6/7 00 00 (K) 03 14 34 17
44/6ए 27/1एच 62/1 ए2 00 01 00 32 105 57
5/3 00 00 05 39 11
27/1आई 62/1 ए3 00 00 10 62
45/6 00 00 80
5/5 00 19 22
27/1जे 00 06 06 35 93
527 62/1 ए4 00 07 00 73 67
5/4 00 13 80
27/1एल 62/1ए5 00 00 06 00 01 43 17 61 92
52/6 3
10/6बी 00 01 97
52/2 27/1के 61/8डी 00 00 00 09 10 00
10/6ए 00 04 54
52/3 61/88 00 00 00 (X) 06 65 12 40
19/2 ए 1 ए
10/6सी 00 12 95
52/4 2/50 00 00 01 07 90 05 94
19/2ए 1 बी
10/3ए 2 सी 00 18 84 41
52/5 00 00 02 14 12 01
19/3
10/4 00 15 13 29 02
52/9 56/2डी 00 01 167 42
19/1ए2 00
52/11 10/3बी 00 00 07 18 05 38
19/2ए 1सी । 56/3 00 02 89
51/5 10/3सी 00 00 18 06 46 91
19/12 3 ए 56/4बी 00 15 98
51/4 00 00 16 01 30 30
19/1ए3 बी 00 19 76
11/7 56/7बी 00 00 01 01 97 ون 80
51/6
18/8 00 05 62
56/8बी (X) 05 04 95 59
1451
भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 18 , 2012/माघ 29 , 1933
II-खंड 3 ( ii) ]
(2) (3) (4) (5)
(1)
11/12 00 08 59
अल्लिकोण्डापटु-जारी
11/14 00 00 10
00 01 25
12/3
12/19 00 00 30
00 03 60
11/13
00 07 16
12/20
12/18 00 03 88
12/4 00 02 82
12/21 00 00 33
12/17बी 00 00 49
12/5 00 09 50
12/6 00 02 10
00 04 09
12/13
00 07 33
12/11
00 11 53
12/9
14/1 00 00 10
14/2 00 01 13
00 08 91
17/3
00 05 23
17/4
17/5 00 07 45
00 05 61
17/6
177 00 02 72
11/8 ए 00 09 16
11/8बी 00 00 10
13/8 00 01 89
13/10 00 00 12
00 12 01
137
13/9 00 03 08
13/5 00 01 40
00 01 76
13/11
13/3 00 01 48
00 0 10
13/2
00 05 36
13/12
13/4 00 01 23
00 01 78
13/6
00 03 28
13/20
8/7नी 00 01 40
16 ) नवमबद्
7/2ए । बी 00 10 46
7/2ए3सी 00 06 84
00 00 17
10/1ए
7/2बी 4 00 25 75
6/1जी 1 00 00 50
00 23 04
6/1 एफ
6/5 ई 00 03 97
6/5डी 00 09 17
00 27 51
60/1
1452
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: FEBRUARY 18 , 2012/MAGHA 29 , 1933
(1) (2)
नवमबटु-जारी 62/6
62/8
62/7
62/9
62/3
62/2
62/10
62/12
64/2ए
64/2सी
64/1सी
64/3ए
64/4ए
68/2ए1
68/2ए2
69/1
68/2बी 2
69/2 ए 1
71/1बी/2ए
71/1बी/2बी
71/3ए
71/9
71/1बी 1
71/11
71/12
71/10
72/2बी
72/2सी
74/2बी 1सी
74/2बी 1 बी
74/2बी 1ए
[PART II-SEC. 3 ( ii) )
(3) (4) (5) 00 21 48 00 00 82 00 10 19 00 09 89 00 08 47 00 13 35 00 02 22 00 00 65 00 24 63 00 07 34 00 07 34 00 35 12 00 17 11 00 02 21 00 08 82 00 23 15 00 27 10 00 19 18 00 14 91 00 17 65 00 04 00 00 00 27 00 02 00 00 03 98 00 04 04 00 06 94 00 08 56 00 22 82 00 16 60 00 07 32 00 00 10
00
74/2बी 3 बी
12 89
74/2बी 3ए 00 14 64
74/2ए 3सी 00 01 89
77/2ए 00 13 36
77 /2बी 00 03 26
77 /3ए 00 12 52
77/3बी 00 05 29
77/4ए 00 09 72
77/4बी 00 03 22
77/5 00 10 05
85/2ए 00 12 46
9/2 00 02 64
9/1सी 2 00 02 75
9/1सी 5 00 13 10
9/1सी 4 00 02 08
9/1डी 3 00 00 98
1453
भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 18 , 2012/माघ 29, 1933
[भाग II-खंड 3 (ii) ]
(1) (2)
9/1डी 2
नवमबटु-जारी
9/1डी 1
9/4ए 1
9/3बी
9/5
9/4बी
9/3ए 1
9/3सी
7/3/डी
(17) काल्लोटु
7/3ई
7/3/ए
7/3/एच
7/3
7/1सी/16बी
7/1सी/16ए
7/1सी/ 19
7/ 1सी/21
7/ 1सी/ 15ए
7/1सी/ 15बी
7/1सी/22
8/1/ए
8/1बी/ 1
8/1/सी
8/2/ए
8/2/बी
8/2सी/1
8/2सी/2
8/2सी/3
5/2जी 1
5/2एफ 1
5/2जी 2
5/2एफ 2
9/5ए 1
9/6
9/2बी
9/2सी/1
9/2डी/ 1
9/2डी/2
9/3/1
9/30/2
9/3बी/1
24/3/1
24/3/2
24/2
24/5सी2
24/30/3
24/6बी 2
367 GI/2012-20
1454
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 18 , 2012/MAGHA 29, 1933 [PART II- SEC . 3 ( ii ) ]
(3) (4) (5)
(1) (2)
(3) (4) (5)
00 24 11
काल्लोटु-जारी 24/5ए 00 00 00 65 01 71
27/8बी 00 06 64
00 01 03
00 14 51
27/8सी 00 01 74
00 01 69
28/3ए 1 बी 00 53 05 57
00 00
28/3 ए 1 ए 00 11 00 46 12 12
00 10 43
28/3ए 1सी 00 02 51
00 01 12
28/3बी 1 बी 00 08 76
00 08 89
28/3बी 1ए 00 08 15
00 05 57
(18) वेलायमबक्काम 2/7 00 05 00 07 13 26
00 10 69
1/5ए/ 1 ए 00 17 79
00 05 25
1/6बी 00 12 25
05 30
00
1/6सी 00 11 22.
00 01 04
1/6डी 00 01 00 28 12 92
67/5बी 00 05 00 37 06 29
00 05 10
67/6 00 04 69
00 01 50
67/8 00 11 82
00 04 99
67/9 00 06 13
00 09 18
67/10 00 03 40
00 11 71
67/17बी 00 02 14
00 12 28
67/17ए 06- 00 01 04 32
00
67/17सी 12 00 40 14
00 77
00 06 56
70/1के 00 02 53
06 87
00
70/1एल 00 09 89
00 06 08
70/1एच 00 26 05 59
00 12
70/1एम 00 03 00 10 42
00 13 12
70/1 एन 00 04 96
00 01 84
77/4 00 12 24
00 00 10
78/4ए 00 24 50
39 30
00
78/4बी 00 79 03 01
00 12
78/5 00 06 00 38 19 96
78/2ई 05 00 20
00 01 09
02 14
78/3 00 00 03 37
06 86
00
78/6 00 05 10
09 47
00
78/7 00 00 10
14 17
00
82/6ए 00 09 68
00 13 28
82/8 00 10 16 64
00 00
96/ 1ए 00 00 03 44 15 55
97/11 00 00 09 01 96 14
00 01 43
97/13 00 00 36
1455
भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 18 , 2012/माघ 29 , 1933
[ भाग II-खंड 3 ( ii ) ]
(2) (3) (4) (5)
(1)
96/5 00 17 89
वेलायमबक्काम जारी
96/6 00 10 58
96/7 00 01 24
00 12 52
96/2ए
00 04 15
102/4ए 1
102/4 ए2 00 05 84
102/4 ए3 00 05 51
00 07 84
102/4 ए4
00 00 94
102/4 ए6
00 19 87
102/4 ए5
00 00 15
102/4 ए 7
00 13 05
7/1ए
7/1सी 00 03 17
7/1बी 00 03 52
00 06 81
7/1एफ
7/1जी 00 12 93
7/1आई 00 13 01
7/1जे 00 13 75
00 01 70
7/3
7/2बी 00 11 25
00 04 78
7/5ए
7/2डी 00 13 83
00 04 40
7/6ए
00 03 04
7/2ई
00 00 10
83/11
00 03 38
83/3
83/2ई 00 00 62
00 00 10
83/9
00 02 15
83/8
00 00 36
7/2ए
00 10 32
100/2बी
00 09 47
100/2ए
00 08 53
100/2सी 1
00 17 37
100/2सी 2
100/2डी 00 34 99
00 08 97
79/8
00 00 20
79/4
00 08 07
79/9
00 08 37
79/11
1456
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: FEBRUARY 18 , 2012/MAGHA 29, 1933
(1) (2)
वेलायमबक्काम जारी 79/7
79/14.
68/17बी
68/2बी
68/2ए
68/16डी
68/3ए
68/6बी
68/13बी
68/12
68/16एच
68/6ए
68/6डी
68/6सी
68/1बी
68/4ए
68/4बी
68/13ए
68/14ए
68/15ए
68/15बी
68/15सी
68/16सी
68/16बी
68/16एफ
68/16आई
68/16जे
68/3बी
68/14बी
68/14सी
79/15
99/1 ए
99/1बी
99/7ए
99/7बी
99/7डी
99/4बी2
99/6ए 1
99/6 बी 1
99/3बी
[PART II--SEC. 3( ii )]
(3) (4) (5) 00 07 06 00 10 91 00 01 56 00 04 68 00 03 64 00 00 10 00 03 19 00 08 31 00 01 26 00 04 25 00 07 78 00 07 11 00 00 81 00 08 38 00 00 10 00 02 41 00 02 39 00 02 90 00 00 29 00 00 22 00 02 30 00 01 85 00 02 80 00 01 56 00 04 59 00 02 15 00 04 62 00 01 90 00 02 23 00 ΟΙ 42 00 00 20 00 12 60 00 00 15 00 02 14 00 06 66 00 01 00 00 01 35 00 01 18 00 02 49 00 04 92
1457
भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 18 , 2012/माघ 29 , 1933
[ भाग II-खंड 3 (ii) ]
(3) (4) (5)
(1) (2)
00 04 00
वेलायमबक्काम जारी 99/4ए
00 00 29
99/4बी 1
00 04 88
99/3ए
00 00 10
99/4सी
99/6सी 00 03 62
जिला : तिरुवन्नमलाय राज्य: तमिलनाडु
तालुक: अरनी
00 00 33
266/1
(1) नचापुरम
00 25 25
266/2
00 09 03
269/3ए
00 31 65
269/6
00 01 45
268/1बी
00 24 29
271/2
00 06 63
271/4ए
00 06 74
271/7
00 03 34
271/5
00 12 17
271/6बी
00 26 46
273/2
00 07 38
272/1 ई
00 01 03
272/ 1 एच
00 12 09
272/ 1जी
00 00 60
272/ 1 एफ
00 00 85
272/3
00 15 12
272/2ए
00 00 85
272/4
00 16 03
272/2बी
00 14 29
234/1
00 01 98
275/2
00 20 42
234/3
00 00 52
235/3
00 07 89
237/9
00 05 48
237/3
00 00 44
237/8
00 22 72
219/3
00 05 67
218/3
00 28 62
218/5
00 01 51
218/1डी
00 04 03
218/1 एफ
00 02 09
218/6
00 21 26
238/5
[फा. सं. एल-14014/83/2010- जी.पी. ]
ए, गोस्वामी, अवर सचिव 1458
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 18 , 2012/MAGHA 29, 1933
[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii )]
NewDelhi , the 14th February, 2012
S.O. 638. Whereas by notification of the Government of India in the Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Gas number S.O. 506 dated 10th February, 2011 , issued under sub-section ( 1) of Section 3 of the Petroleum and Minerals Pipelines ( Acquisition ofRight of User in Land) Act, 1962 (50 of 1962) (hereinafter referred to as the said Act ) , Government ofIndia declared its intention to acquire the Right ofUser in land, specified in the Schedule appended to that notification for the purpose of laying Chennai - Tuticorin gas pipeline for transportation of natrual gas from terminal point of Vijayawada -Nellore - Chennai pipeline near Tiruttani in Tamil Nadu by M/s. Relogistics Infrastructure Limited to consumers in various parts of the country;
And whereas, the copies of the said Gazette notification were made available to the public on or before 28thJuly, 2011;
And whereas, the objections received from the public to the laying of the pipeline have been considered and disallowed by the Competent Authority ;
Andwhereas, the Competent Authority has , under sub-section ( 1 ) of Section 6 of the said Act , submitted report tothe Government of India;
Andwhereas , Government of India , after considering the said report and on being satisfied that the said land is required for laying the pipeline , has decided to acquire the Right of User therein;
Now, therefore , in exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section ( 1 ) of Section 6 of the said Act , Government of India hereby declares that the Right of User in the land, specified in the Schedule , appended to this notification , is hereby acquired for laying the pipeline;
And further, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (4) of Section 6 of the said Act , Government of India hereby directs that the Right of User in the said land for laying the pipeline shall , instead of vesting in Government of India, vest on the date ofpublication ofthe declaration, in M/s .Relogistics Infrastructure Limited, free from all encumbrances .
SCHEDULE
District : Thiruvannamalai
Taluk : Cheyyar
Village
State : Tamil Nadu
SurveyNo./Sub-DivisionNo. Areato be acquired for RoU
Нес. Are C-Are
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5)
(1) Seevaram 45/1 00 05 97
45/2 00 01 36
20/1 00 06 39
20/4 00 00 10
20/3 00 04 23
20/2 00 03 88
21/1 00 00 40
19/6 00 09 05
19/5 00 11 95
19/4 00 06 21
19/3 00 00 10
3/1 00 30 36
4 00 02 77
27/1A 00 00 10
27/1B 00 01 20
27/12 00 01 44
27/3 00 08 75
27/4 00 06 36
27/5 00 06 90
1459
भारत का राजपत्र: फरवरी 18 , 2012/माघ 29 , 1933
[ भाग II-खंड 3 (ii) ]
1460
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 18, 2012/MAGHA 29 , 1933 [PART II-SEC. 3 ( ii ) ]
(3) (4) (5)
(1) (2)
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5)
00 06 84
(1) Kothantavadi-Contd. 27/6 235/1 00 04
Seevaram Contd . 56
00 04 25
277 235/18 00 31
32
00 15 49
26/6 235/2 00 07
93
00 03 16
26/7 235/3 00
02 61
00 02 98
26/8 235/4 00 23 75
00 02 34
26/9 235/5 00
05 98
00 01 16
26/10 236/15 00 15 09
00 00 30
26/4 236/16 00 16 51
00 02 19
26/5 236/5 00 07
50
00 02 31
26/11 236/4 00 05 19
00 00 69
26/12 112/2 00 00 10
00 00 19
26/13 238/14 00 03 03
00 12 13
25/1 238/9 00 04 54
00 01 24
25/2 238/10 00 34 56
130/1 State: Tamil Nadu 00 35 49
District: Thiruvannamalai
Taluk: Thiruvannamalai (2) Erumpundi 247 00 30
00 11 53 87
50/2
(1) Kothantavadi 248/5 00 11 15 83
00 12
49/1
248/6 00 06 19 45 86
00
49/3
248/7 00 00 01 40 78
00
49/5
250/3A1 00 04 80 48 28
49/2 00
251/1 00 11 03 86 95
00
47/1
252/ 1A 00 00 16 63 76 80
47/2
245/7 00 02 18 28 20
48/6 00
(3) Valundalankunam 33/2A 00 15 10 15 33
47/5 00
33/2B 00 14 05 95 88
00
43/1
33/2E 00 00 16 00 94 89
43/3
34/6 00 20 00 35 51
43/9 00
16/1 00 00 04 01 65 63
43/4
16/2 00 00 05 70 73 04
43/8
24 00 15 61 58 79
41/3 00
28/1 00 03 10 19 75
39/4 00
26/2A 00 03 57 07 02
00
39/5
26/2B 00 06 14 31 97
00
39/6
23/1 00 00 35 32 63 70
40
00 12 12 36 71
35/1 00
37/1A6 00 00 18 11 46 85
35/2
(4) Ganapapuram 54/1B 00 00 15 05 71 57
54/4A 00 13 00 51 27
00
33/4
54/4B 00 00 74 02 17 34
131
52/3 00 00 01 02 15 52
129/1
52/6 00 24 15 59 95
129/2 00
52/8A 00 00 36 09 30 12
129/3
52/8B 00 17 07 38 54
128/10 00
59/3 00 00 14 01 24 98
233/3
59/ 1A 00 00 34 12 52 86
233/8
59/1B 00 00 29 19 54 57
126/1
59/2D 00 23 59
[ भाग II-खंड 3 ( ii) ]
1461
भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 18 , 2012/माघ 29 , 1933
(1) (2)
(4) Ganapapuram-Contd. 62/3A
62/3E
62/4
62/3H
62/5
62/6
627
62/8A
61/1
61/2
96/2
96/14
50/2
50/3
50/4
50/5
50/6
50/7
47/1
33/3C
33/3B
33/2D
40/28
40/20
40/2A
48/5
4846
48/9
48/7
48/8
37/1E
37/1B
37/1C
37AD
37/1K
37 /2A
53/1
35/2
35/3A
46/1A
(5) Kallikulam 118/2
118/3
123/ 1B
123/1A2
123/3A2
123/3A1
123/3B
367 GI /2012-21
1464 THEGAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 18 , 2012/MAGHA 29 , 1933 भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 18, 2012/माघ 29, 1933 [PART II-SEC. 3( ii ) ] 1463
[ भाग II-खंड 3 ( ii ) ] 1466 1465
[ भाग II-खंड 3 ( ii) ] 1468 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 18 , 2012/MAGHA 29, 1933 भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 18 , 2012 /माघ 29 , 1933 [PART II-SEC . 3(ii ) ] 1467
[ भाग II-खंड 3( ii ) ] 1462 भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 18, 2012/माघ 29 , 1933
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 18 , 2012/MAGHA 29, 1933 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 18 , 2012/MAGHA 29, 1933 [PART II-SEC. 3 (ii )] [PART II-SEC. 3( ii )]
(1) (2) (3) (4) (4) (5) (5)
(1) (2) (3)
(1) (1) (2) (3) (4) (5)
(1) (1) (1) (2) (2) (3) (3) (4) (4) (5) (5)
(8) Somasapadi (2) 361/2 (2) (3) 00 (3) (4) 00 (3) 16 (5) (4) 13 91
98/5 30 (4) (5)
(6) Karanampundi-Contd. 43/12 00 00 82
(9) Kadambai-Contd. (11) Polakunam 156/2A1 369/3B 00 00 00 00 00 29 12 24 42
( 11 ) Polakunam Contd. ( 12) Neikuppam-Contd. 98/3 00 13 00 25
(5) Kallikulam-Contd. 43/6 123/3C 00 00 06 40 05
42/1 00 00 11 00 98
154/21 445/4A 369/4 00 00 00 02 22 00 68 22 13
98/2C 00 00 08 01 39 12
42/4 43/4D 120/21 00 00 00 00 11 66
02 07
154/14B 114/1 369/3C 00 00 00 00 28 32 01 16 43 84 86 20
98/4 01 19 26
42/3 43/5 120/2J 00 00 00 00 05 08
10 26
100/2 154/20 114/2 369/2B 00 00 00 00 21 03 00 33 00 55 32 81
42/21 43/3C 120/2H 00 00 07 00 05 96 55
00 00 00 86
101/4 154/13 115/1B 370/1 00 00 00 00 47 08 18 68 69 84
12 71 23
42/9 43/7 121/1 00 00 06 00 06 12
00 00 45
101/3 154/12 114/12 369/5 00 00 00 00 31 00 39 07 69 78
00 00 06 00 16 60 10 31
42/20 43/4C 121/2E 00 00 00 07
03 61
101/2 38/9 114/14 369/6 00 00 00 00 06 03 20 01 07 15
(12) Neikuppam 00 00 05 02 72 25 05
42/14 43/8 121/2F 00 00 02 18
03 25 91
84/21 38/4 114/13 351 00 00 00 03 06 38 38
42/15 00 00 07 05 17 13 80 34
43/2 121/2G 00 00 00 00 12
00 04 67 64 10
84/2J 38/3 114/11 349/2 00 00 00 03 01 49 93
( 13 ) (6) Karanampundi Periyakallapadi 42/22 00 17 02 72 21 94
81/2A2 00 00 00 06 00
84/3 00 06 66 28 73
37/11 114/8 348/7 00 00 00 17 62 40
42/13 81/2A1 2/8A 00 00 00 12 22 00 61 43
00 00 07 07
62/1A 00 01 06 35
38/5 3406 00 00 00 02 26 73 76 78
42/12 81/4 121/3 00 00 32 30
2/9A 00 00 00 22 07 02 31
00 01 54 04
8/2B 38/2 348/5 00 08 05 85 89 71
39/1 121/2 00 00 00 28 02 69
81/2B1B 2/9B 00 00 00 08 13 49 02 97
00 03 90 08
8/1J 39/2 38/1 346/1 00 00 00 07 14 25 Π 38 75
81/5 122/3A 2/10 00 00 02 00 87 84
00 00 09 01 98
8/11 00 01 57
38/5 37/12 984/3 00 00 00 38 14 72 87 63
122/3B 00 13 31 02
81/2B1A2 2/11C 00 00 00 05 01 00 27 74
8/3B 00 07 20 98
89/2 00 00 16 19 07
37/13 81/6 122/4 2/16 00 100 15 19 05 167
00 00 00 05 11 00 85 35 89
8/7 00 05 05 10 39
89/3F 42/1 38441 00 00 100 09 14 196
82/1B2B 2/17A 00 00 00 00 05 50 05 25 71
8/6A 00 00 07 24 05 66 60 06
89/3E 42/2 389/3 00 00 02 0.7 69
82/ 1B2D 111 /2A 2/18B4 00 00 00 00 03 24 ΟΙ 10 76 02 07
8/16B 00 01 04 19 04
86/3A 00 07
42/4A 389/2B 00 00 00 07 15
82/1B3 111/2C 2/18B2 00 00 00 00 00 01 04 30 06 18 37
8/11 00 00 02 07 03 48 63
90/10A 42/4B 00 00
82/1B4 111/2B 389 /2A 00 00 17 56
8/12 2/18B3 00 00 00 00 17 00 01 00 02 95 58 25 199 90 51
90/11 00 05
42/3 389/4C 00 00 04 16 4
82/1B5 111/4A 2/19B 00 00 00 00 00 07 03 02 13 04 58 04 83 05
8/ 1B 91/2C 00 07 07 42
42/5A 389/4A2 00 00 10
00 00 65
82/ 1B1 111/4B 2/20 00 00 00 00 00 20 02 10 04 08 01 45 41 00 46 31
91/2B 00 62
35/6€ 389/4A1 00 00 00 12
82/ 1A 127/1 2/21 00 ου 00 00 00 04 02 5 00 46 00 09 07 05 37 62 14 10
8/1C 91/2A4 00
35/8B 389/4B 00 00 01 15 96 86
82/2E 128/3 65/4A 00 00 00 00 00 00 05 11 00 19 61 12 72 16 45 81
8/1G 91/2A3 46 59
35/9A 389/1 00 02 14 80
82/2C 65/4B1 00 00 00 07 00 43 30 02 52
816B 123/1 135/2 00 00 00 10 01 54 02 62 36 61
(9) Kadambai 35/9B 62/15 00 00 04 14 25
82/2D 65/4B2 00 00 09 17 36 19 63 26
/5 122/4 141/2B 00 00 00 00 09 10 06 32 79 85 54
35/10 62/14 00 00 07 01 15
64/ 1A1 65/2B2 00 00 00 00 16 16 01 20 67 87 56
10/1 122/5 41/3A 00 00 00 .06 10 25 88 75
35/7 62/13 00 00 12 01 29
122/6 64/1A2 65/2A2 00 00 00 00 04 16 09 97 47 14 95
10/2 141/3B 00 00 03 11 05 16 82 40
44/1 00 01 35
64/1A3 62/11 64 00 00 00 00 00 .06 06 04 00 06 21 89
103 123/4 141/4B2 00 00 00 11 12 10 04 10 29
56/1 61/6 00 08 03 21
10/5 121/4 65/2A2 65/2A3 00 00 00 00 03 13 03 06 50 42 74
141/6B 00 00 00 06 12 05 67
56/2 00 00 26
123/5 65/1C2E 61/5 65/2A6 00 00 00 00 04 10 15 13 26 81
13/4 140/3A 00 00 03 20 00 08 86 02
41
44/3B 00 10 18 36 58
14/ 1D 123/6 65/ 1C2B 61/9 63/1A3 00 00 00 00 00 06 11 04 17 58
00 08 03 24 68 37
140/4 00 12 39
00 00 12 17 72 27
14/4G 63/2 65/ 1C2A 63/ 1A1 00 00 100 00 12 00 20 09 02 31
140/3B 00 00 11 05 88 10 56
44/2B 00 00 06 10 18 58
14/ 1H 63/12 62/ 1C1 70A3 63/1A2 00 00 100 00 04 301 27 16 72
00 05 02 39 89 76
140/5 00 10 01 48
63/3 44/5 00 00 11 11 004 46
14/1C 62/2B1 49/5 63/1A4 00 00 00 12 19 17 29 47
00 04 00 52 10
151/6C 00 00 26 73
63/4 44/6A 00 00 00 01 51 32
15/3 62/ 1A2 49/6 63/1A5 00 00 18 07 84 68
00 00 05 02 57 09
151/6D 00 00 02 00 06 10 10
63/9 45/6 00 00 02 00 84
1/3A 62/1A3 48/6 63/2B 00 00 00 00 33 00 84 90
(7) Sirunathur 00 29 08 64 62
151 /ΠΑ 00 00 01 07 34 73 57
63/6 627 00 00- 20 07 14
1/3B 62/1A4 44/3 63/2D 00 00 00 00 29 06 01 12 03 72
93
63/10 151/7B 00 00 00 01 06 23 62 43 85
1/3C3 52/6 00 18 49
62/1A5 63/2A 00 00 00 08 17 08 03 21 75 35
00 92
146/3 00 00 43 01 95 10 53
1/1B2 24/1A1 52/2 00 -00 00 00 27
(10) Kattuvelanandal 61/8D 7ML/11 63/2C 00 00 00 17 02 03 13 42 90
00 12 10 94
24/1A2 146/4 00 00 00 00 00 00 65 10
1/3C2 52/3 00 12 13
61/8E 67/4 2 00 00 00 02 09 33 44
00 00 16 12 11 67
24/1A5 152/5A 00 00 01 06 90 43
1/1B3 52/4 00 00 11 58
62/5A 44/10 68/3 00 00 00 05 28 31 28 90
00 00 28 05 27 32
26/1B 152/5B 00 00 00 03 02 05 93 84 76
1/3C1 52/5
56/1G 43/19B 68/2 00 00 00 05 02 08 12 47 52 16 65
00 00 03 16
13/2A 26/1A 52/9 152/5D 00 00 00 00 15 06 72 29 71
56/2D 43/19A 98/8 00 00 00 07 08 00 98 49
00 00 01 00 26 40 40
23/4A 152/5E 00 00 37 07 Ti 05
1/2 52/11 00 12 02
56/3 43/16 98/7 00 00 00 05 05 76 26
00 00 22 11 00 08 90 96
27/3B4 00 00 48 80 46
13/1 51/5 152/5F 00 18 07 43
56/4B 43/18 98/6C 00 00 00 02 01 99
00 00 13 12 12 14 54
27/3C5 156/1A2 00 00 00 00 16 33 20 30
15/15 51/4 56/7B 43/17 98/6B 00 19
00 00 09 04 06 08 56 54
27/3D 00 00 14 14 32
51/6 156/2A2 00 00 01 05 97 95
56/8B 98/6A 00 00 04 07 71
00 19 64 59
1469
भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 18 , 2012/माघ 29, 1933
[ भाग II- खंड 3 (ii ) ]
(1) (2)
56/8A
(13) Periyakallapadi Contd.
56/10D
56/10C
55/10
55/11
55/9B
55/ 15A
55/15B
55/15C
55/15D
55/4
55/9A
55/8
55/7
7/3C4A
7/3C4B
7/3C3
7/3C2
7/3C1
25/4B
25/4A
25/5A
25/6C
25/7C
25/7D
25/2A2
25 /2A1
25/2B1
27/ 1A
27/ 1C1
27/1D1
27/ 1E
27/ 1F
27/1G
27/ 1H
27/11
27/1J
27/ 1L
27/ 1K
19/2A1A
19/2A1B
19/3
19/1A2
19/2A1C1
19/1A3A
19/1A3B
18/8
367 GI/2012-22
(3) (4) (5) 00 04 35 00 05 00 00 03 98 00 13 54 00 05 05 00 05 29 00 03 59 00 02 38 00 01 28 00 00 15 00 00 10 00 12 60 00 10 29 00 01 02 00 02 20 00 14 47 00 08 71 00 06 03 00 01 78 00 11 25 00 02 50 00 00 10 00 11 47 00 05 60 00 08 25 00 06 78 00 01 83 00 11 45 00 11 02 00 03 04 00 00 67 00 10 98 00 19 43 00 00 10 00 03 34 00 00 39 00 06 35 00 01 61 00 09 00 00 06 40 00 07 94 00 14 01 00 01 42 00 02 89 00 15 98 00 19 76 00 05 62
1470
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: FEBRUARY 18, 2012/MAGHA 29 , 1933
(1)
(2)
( 13) Periyakallapadi-Contd.
18/5A2
18/7C
28/1
99/ 1A
99/1B
99/8B
99/8A
99/9A
30/1A
30/1B
30/1C
(14) Tachchampattu
9/1A
9/3B
9/3A
9/2B
11/2
11/3
14/3B
14/3A
14/2A
14/1
14/4
20
21/1
16/3B3
16/4
30/1C1
30/ 1C2
30/1C3
31/1A
(15) Allikondapattu
1/9
1/7A
1/7B
6/1B
6/7
5/3
5/5
5/4
10/6B
10/6A
10/6C
10/3A2C
10/4
10/3B
10/3C
11/7
[PART II-SEC. 3(ii ) ]
(3)
(4)
(5)
00
00
10
00
09
57
00
28
46
00
03
64
00
06
38
00
01
69
00
02
06
00
00
10
00
04
77
00
14
68
00
08
93
00
12
46
00
05
27
00
16
71
00
01
68
00
39
28
00
01
40
00
02
97
00
07
55
00
09
45
00
30
85
00
35
95
00
44
26
00
19
50
00
09
30
00
03
73
00
00
34
00
14
51
00
00
31
00
08
11
00
01
90
00
27
17
00
01
92
00
29
22
00
14
17
00
05
11
00
19
22
00
13
80
00
01
97
00
04
54
00
12
95
00
18
41
00
13
02
00
18
38
00
06
91
00
01
30
00
01
80 1471
भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 18 , 2012/माघ 29 , 1933
[ भाग II-खंड 3 ( ii ) ]
(2) (3) (4) (5)
(1)
00 08 59
11/12
( 15) Allikondapattu-Contd.
00 00 10
11/14
00 01 25
12/3
00 00 30
12/19
00 03 60
11/13
12/20 00 07 16
00 03 88
12/18
12/4 00 02 82
00 00 33
12/21
00 00 49
12/17B
00 09 50
12/5
00 02 10
12/6
00 04 09
12/13
00 07 33
12/11
00 11 53
12/9
00 00 10
14/1
00 01 13
14/2
00 08 91
17/3
00 05 23
17/4
00 07 45
17/5
00 05 61
17/6
00 02 72
177
00 60 16
11/8A
00 00 10
11/8B
00 01 89
13/8
00 00 12
13/10
00 12 01
13/7
00 03 08
13/9
00 01 40
13/5
13/11 00 01 76
00 01 48
13/3
00 00 10
13/2
00 05 36
13/12
00 01 23
13/4
00 01 78
13/6
00 03 28
13/20
00 01 40
8/7B
(16) Navambattu 10 46
7/2A1B 00
00 06 84
7/2A3C
00 00 17
10/1A
00 25 75
7/2B4
00 00 50
6/1G1
00 23 04
6/ 1F
00 03 97
6/5E
00 09 17
60/5D
00 27 51
60/1
00 21 48
62/6
1472
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 18, 2012/MAGHA 29, 1933
(1)
(2)
(16) Navambattu-Contd.
62/8
62/7
62/9
62/3
62/2
62/10
62/12
64/2A
64/2C
64/1C
64/3A
64/4A
68/2A1
682A2
69/1
68/2B2
69/2A1
71/ 1B/2A
71/ 1B/2B
71/3A
71/9
71/1B1
71/11
71/12
71/10
72/2B
72/2C
74/2B1C
74/2B1B
74/2B1A
74/2B3B
74/2B3A
74/2A3C
77/2A
77/2B
77/3A
77/3B
77/4A
77/4B
77/5
85/2A
9/2
9/ 1C2
9/1C5
9/1C4
9/1D3
[PART II-SEC. 3 (ii) ]
(3)
(4)
(5)
00
00
82
00
10
19
00
09
89
00
08
47
00
13
35
00
02
22
00
00
65
00
24
63
00
07
34
00
07
34
00
35
12
00
17
11
00
02
21
00
08
82
00
23
15
00
27
10
00
19
18
00
14
91
00
17
65
00
04
00
00
00
27
00
02
00
00
03
98
00
04
04
00
06
94
00
08
56
00
22
82
00
16
60
00
07
32
00
00
10
00
12
89
00
14
64
00
01
89
00
13
36
00
03
26
00
12
52
00
05
29
00
09
72
00
03
22
00
10
05
00
12
46
00
02
64
00
02
75
00
13
10
00
02
08
00
00
98
भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 18, 2012/माघ 29 , 1933 1473
[भाग II-खंड 3 (ii ) ]
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5)
9/1D2 00 24 11
(16) Navambattu-Contd.
9/1D1 00 00 65
9/4A1 00 06 64
9/3B 00 14 51
9/5 00 01 69
9/4B 00 00 53
9/3A1 00 11 46
9/3C 00 10 43
7/3/D 00 01 12
(17) Kallottu
7/3E 00 08 89
7/3/A 00 05 57
7/3/H 00 05 07
7/3M 00 10 69
7/ 1C/ 16B 00 05 25
7/ 1C/16A 00 05 30
7/1C/ 19 00 01 04
7/ 1C/21 00 01 28
7/ 1C/ 15A 00 05 37
7/ 1C/15B 00 05 10
7/1C/22 00 01 50
8/1 /A 00 04 99
8/1B/ 1 00 09 18
8/1/C 00 11 71
8/2 /A 00 12 28
8/2/B 00 06 01
8/2C/ 1 00 12 40
00 06 56
8/20/2
8/2C/3 00 06 87
00 06 08
5/2G1
00 12 26
5/2F1
00 03 77
5/2G2
00 13 12
5/2F2
00 01 84
9/5A1
9/6 00 00 10
9/2B 00 39 30
00 12 79
9/2C/ 1
00 06 38
9/2D/ 1
9/2D/2 00 05 20
9/3A/1 00 02 14
00 06 86
9/3A/2
00 09 47
9/3B/ 1
1474
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 18 , 2012/MAGHA 29 , 1933
(1)
(2)
(17) Kallottu-Contd.
24/3A/ 1
24/3A/2
24/2
24/5C2
24/3A/3
24/6B2
24/5A
27/8B
27/8C
28/3A1B
28/3A1A
28 /3AIC
28/3B1B
28/3B1A
(18) Velaiyambakkam
2/7
1 /5A/ 1A
1/6B
1/6C
1/6D
67/5B
67/6
67/8
67/9
67/10
67/17B
67/17A
67/ 17C
70/1K
70/ 1L
70/ 1H
70/ 1M
70/ 1N
77/4
78/4A
78/4B
78/5
78/2E
78/3
78/6
78/7
82/6A
[PART II-SEC. 3 ( ii ) ]
(3)
(4)
(5)
00
14
17
00
13
28
00
00
10
00
03
44
00
09
96
00
01
43
00
01
71
00
01
03
00
01
74
00
05
57
00
12
12
00
02
51
00
08
76
00
08
15
00
13
26
00
17
79
00
12
25
00
11
22
00
12
92
00
06
29
00
04
69
00
11
82
00
06
13
00
03
40
00
02
14
00
04
32
00
14
00
02
53
00
09
89
00
05
59
00
10
42
00
04
96
00
12
24
00
24
50
00
03
01
00
19
96
00
01
09
00
03
37
05
00
10
00
00
10
00
00
68 1475
भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 18 , 2012/माघ 29, 1933
[ भाग II-खंड 3 ( ii ) ]
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5)
82/8 00 16 64
(18) Velaiyambakkam Contd.
96/1A 00 15 55
97/11 00 01 14
97/13 00 00 36
96/5 00 17 89
96/6 00 10 58
96/7 00 01 24
96/2A 00 12 52
102/4A1 00 04 15
102/4A2 00 05 84
102/4A3 00 05 51
102/4A4 00 07 84
102/4A6 00 00 94
102/4A5 00 19 87
102/4A7 00 00 15
7/ 1A 00 13 05
7/1C 00 03 17
7/1B 00 03 52
70F 00 06 81
7/1G 00 12 93
7/11 00 13 01
7/15 00 13 75
7/3 00 01 70
7/2B 00 11 25
7 /5A 00 04 78
7/2D 00 13 83
7/6A 00 04 40
7/2E 00 03 04
83/A1 00 00 10
83/3 00 03 38.
83/2E 00 00 62
83/9 00 00 10
83/8 00 02 15
7/2A 00 00 36
100/2B 00 10 32
100/2A 00 09 47
100/2C1 00 08 53
100/2C2 00 17 37.
100/2D 00 34 99
79/8 00 08 97
79/4 00 00 20
1476
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: FEBRUARY 18 , 2012/MAGHA 29, 1933
(1)
(2)
(18 ) Velaiyambakkam Contd. 79/9
79/11
797
79/14
68/17B
68/2B
68/2A
68/16D
68/3A
68/68
68/13B
68/12
68/ 16H
68/6A
68/6D
68/6C
68/1B
68/4A
68/4B
68/13A
68/14A
68 58/15A
68/15B
58/15C
58/16C
68/16B
68/ 16F
68/161
68/16G
68/3B
68/ 14B
68/14C
79/15
99/ 1A
99/1B
99/7A
99/7B
99/7D
99/4B2
99/6A1
99/6B1
[PART II-SEC. 3 (ii ) ]
(3) (4) (5)
00 08 07
00 08 37
00 07 06
00 10 91
00 01 56
00 04 68
00 03
64
00 00 10
00 03 19
00 08 31
00 26
00 04 25
00 07 78
00 07
11
00 00 81
00 08 38
00 00 10
00 02
41
00 02 39
00 02 90
00 00 29
00 00 22
00 02 30
00 01 85
00 02 80
00 01 56
00 04 59
00 02 15
00 04 62
00 01 90
00 02 23
00 01 42
00 00 20
00 12 60
00 00 15
00 02 14
00 06 66
00 01 00
00 01 35
00 01 18
00 02 49
1477
भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 18 , 2012/माघ 29 , 1933
[ भाग II- खंड 3 ( ii ) ]
(1) (2)
99/3B
( 18) Velaiyambakkam Contd.
99/4A
99/4B1
99/3A
99/4C
99/6C
Taluk: Arani District: Thiruvannamalai
266/1
(1) Nachapuram
266/2
269/3A
269/6
268/1B
271/2
271/4A
271/7
271/5
271/6B
273/2
272/ 1E
272/ 1H
272/ 1G
272/ 1F
272/3
272/2A
272/4
272/2B
234/1
275/2
234/3
235/3
237/9
237/3
237/8
219/3
218/3
218/5
218/ 1D
218/ 1F
218/6
238/5
367 GI/2012-23
(3) (4) (5)
00 04 92
00 04 00
00 00 29
00 04 88
00 00 10
00 03 62
State: Tamil Nadu
00 00 33
00 25 25
00 09 03
00 31 65
00 01 45
00 24 29
00 06 63
00 06 74
00 03 34
00 12 17
00 26 46
00 07 38
00 01 03
00 12 09
00 00 60
00 00 85
00 15 12
00 85
00
00 16 03
00 14 29
00 01 98
00 20 42
00 00 52
00 07 89
00 05 48
00 00 44
00 22 72
00 05 67
28 62
00
00 01 51
00 04 03
00 02 09
00 21 26
[F. No. L- 14014/83/2010 -GP] A. GOSWAMI , Under Secy.
1478
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 18 , 2012/ MAGHA29 , 1933
[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii ) ]
STATE: West Bengal .
INDUSTRY : Civil Aviation श्रम और रोजगार मंत्रालय नई दिल्ली, 11 जनवरी , 2012
Dated: 5th January, 2012
AWARD
By order No. L- 11012/26/2007 - IR ( CM - I ) dated 12-7-2007 the Government of India , Ministry of Labour in exercise of its powers under Section 10 ( 1 ) (d ) and (2A) of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 referred the following dispute to this Tribunal for adjudication:
का.आ. 639.- औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार इण्डियन एयर लाईन्स लिमिटेड के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण एवं श्रम न्यायालय , कोलकाता के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 19/2007 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 11-01-2012 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।
[सं. एल-11012/26/2007- आई आर ( सी-I ) ] डी. एस. एस . श्रीनिवास राव , डेस्क अधिकारी
"Whether the action of the Management of Indian Airlines Ltd. , Kolkata in removing Shri Bhikari Mahato, Senior Helper ( Commercial) from the service w.e. f. 22-2-2002 is justified and legal ? If not, to what relief is the concerned workman entitled ? " MINISTRY OF LABOUR AND EMPLOYMENT
New Delhi, the 11th January, 2012
2. When the case is called out today, Mr. S. K. Majumder , Ld. Advocate on behalf of the workman has submitted that though he has tried to contact with the workman concerned several times , he failed to inake any such contact nor the workman concerned ever contacted him forgiving instruction to proceed with the present matter and for that reason he left the matter to the discretion of the Tribunal.
S.O. 639. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947 ) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 19/2007) ofthe Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum -Labour Court, Kolkata , as shown in the Annexure , in the industrial dispute between the employers in relation to the management of M/ s. Indian Airlines Limited, and their workman, which was received by the Central Government on 11-1-2012.
[No. L - 11012/26/2007- IR (C -I) ] D. S. S. SRINIVASA RAO, Desk Officer
The act of reluctancy on the part of the workman shows that he is not interested to proceed with the matter any more, perhaps due to disappearance of the dispute which he raised at the initial stage of reference . So, let a "No Dispute Award " be passed in this reference.
ANNEXURE
A" No Dispute Award" is accordingly passed.
CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL AT KOLKATA
Justice MANIK MOHAN SARKAR, Presiding Officer नई दिल्ली , 11 जनवरी , 2012 Reference No. 19 of 2007
PARTIES :
Employers in relation to the management of Indian Airlines Limited.
AND
Theirworkman.
का.आ. 640.- औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में , केन्द्रीय सरकार इण्डियन एयर लाईन्स लिमिटेड के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण एवं श्रम न्यायालय , कोलकाता के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 20/2007 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 11-01-2012 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।
PRESENT :
Mr Justice Manik Mohan Sarkar, Presiding Officer .
[सं. एल-11012/27/2007- आई आर ( सी-1 ) ] डी. एस. एस. श्रीनिवास राव , डेस्क अधिकारी APPEARANCE :
NewDelhi , the 11th January, 2012 : Mr. R.N. Majumder,
Onbehalf of the Management
Ld .Advocate.
Mr. S. Chakraborty, Ld . Advocate .
Onbehalf of the workman
: Mr. S.K. Majumder, Ld . Advocate.
S.O. 640. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 20/2007) ofthe Central Government Industrial Tribunal -cum-Labour Court , Kolkata, as shown in the Annexure , in the industrial dispute between the employers in relation to the 1479
भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 18 , 2012/माघ 29 , 1933
[ भाग II-खंड 3 (ii) ]
management of M/s . Indian Airlines Limited and their workman, which was received by the Central Government on 11-1-2012 .
The act of reluctancy on the part of the workman shows that he is not interested to proceed with the matter any more, perhaps due to disappearance of the dispute which he raised at the initial stage of reference . So, let a "No Dispute Award " be passed in this reference.
[No. L- 11012/27/2007-IR(C-I)] D. S. S. SRINIVASA RAO, Desk Officer
A"No Dispute Award" is accordingly passed.
ANNEXURE
Justice MANIK MOHAN SARKAR, Presiding Officer
नई दिल्ली , 18 जनवरी , 2012
CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL AT KOLKATA
Reference No. 20 of 2007
PARTIES :
Employers in relation to the management of Indian Airlines Limited.
AND
Their workman .
का.आ. 641. औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार मैनेजमैन्ट , डिपार्टमेन्ट ऑफ टेलीकम्यूनिकेशन के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण एवं श्रम न्यायालय , कानपुर के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 85/99 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 18-01-2012 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।
PRESENT :
[सं. एल -40012/ 101/1998- आई आर (डीयू) ] जोहन तोपनो, अवर सचिव MrJusticeManik Mohan Sarkar, Presiding Officer.
APPEARANCE :
New Delhi, the 18th January, 2012
Onbehalf of the : Mr. R. N. Majumder, Ld . Advocate .
Management
Mr. S. Chakraborty, Ld . Advocate.
Onbehalf of the workman : Mr. S. K. Majumder, Ld. Advocate .
S.O. 641. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 85/99 ) ofthe Central Government Industrial Tribunal -cum-Labour Court, Kanpur, as shown in the Annexure , in the industrial dispute between the management of Department of Telecommunication and their workman, which was received bythe Central Government on 18-1-2012 .
Dated: 5th January, 2012
INDUSTRY: Civil Aviation
STATE : West Bengal.
[No. L-40012/101/1998- IR (DU)] JOHAN TOPNO, Under Secy.
Dated, the 5th January, 2012
ANNEXURE
AWARD
BEFORE SRI RAM PARKASH, HJS, PRESIDING OFFICER, CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM - LABOUR COURT, KANPUR
Industrial Dispute No. 85/99
By order No. L- 11012/27/2007 - IR ( CM- I ) dated 12-7-2007 the Government of India , Ministry of Labour in exercise of its powers under Section 10( 1 )(d) and (2A) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 referred the following dispute to this Tribunal for adjudication:
Rakesh Kumar Dubey son of Sri Shiv Nath Dubey, C/o. Sri R. N. Shukla, 119/30, Naseemabad, Himanchal Tak, Kanpur -208001.
AND
"Whether the action of the Management of Indian Airlines Ltd. , Kolkata in removing Shri SitaramGhosh, Senior Helper (Commercial) from the service w.e.f. 24-8-2005 is justified and legal ? Ifnot, to what relief is the concerned workman entitled ? "
Door Sanchar Vibhag ,
The Chief General Manager, Lucknow.
AWARD
1. Central Government, MoL, New Delhi vide notification No. L-40012/ 101 /98 - IR(DU) dated 23-4-1999 has referred the following dispute for adjudication to this tribunal.
2. When the case is called out today, Mr. S. K. Majumder, Ld . Advocate on behalf of the workman has submitted that though he has tried to contact with the workman concerned several times , he failed to make any such contact nor the workman concerned ever contacted him for giving instruction to proceed with the present matter and for that reason he left the matter to the discretion of the Tribunal .
1480
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 18 , 2012/MAGHA 29 , 1933
[PART II-SEC. 3 (ii )]
16. Reference is disposed off accordingly in the above terms .
2. Whether the action of the Door Sanchar Vibhag in terminating the services of Shri Rakesh Kumar Dubey is legal and justified ? If not to what relief the workman is entitled ?
RAM PARKASH, Presiding Officer
3. Brief acts are .
नई दिल्ली, 18 जनवरी , 2012
4. It has been alleged by the claimant that he was appointed on the post of driver on 11-11-1986 and worked continuously up to 8-3-1988 under SDO Mainpuri and his services were terminated on 9-3-1988, without any written orderby way of refusal of work by SDO Mainpuri .
5. Opposite party has opposed the appointment as well as engagement of the claimant and has also alleged that he was never terminated.
का.आ. 642.-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 (1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार मैनेजमैन्ट ऑफ ज्वांइट डायरेक्टर , एन. आई. सी. , के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच , अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालय , कोलकाता के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 40 ऑफ 1999 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 18-01-2012 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।
[सं. एल -42012/105/1999- आई आर (डीयू) ] रमेश सिंह , डेस्क अधिकारी 6. After the conclusion of arguments the opposite party raised a preliminary and legal objection that there is no date of termination in the reference order and this tribunal cannot travel beyond the scope of reference.
New Delhi , the 18th January, 2012
7. Opposite party has also placed reliance upon a decision 2005 ( 104 ) FLR 893 Allahabad High Court in the case of Union Bank of India and Presiding Officer, CGIT Kanpur.
8. In the aforesaid case the Hon'ble High Court found that in the reference neither the date of termination was given nor there was any specific reference for adjunction oftermination of service .
S.O. 642. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 40 of 1999) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal -cum- Labour Court , Kolkata , as shown in the Annexure , in the industrial dispute between the employers in relation to the management of the Joint Director NIC and their workman, which was received by the Central Government on 18-1-2012 .
9. In the present case though there is a mention of termination of the service , but no date has been given.
[No. L-42012/105/ 1999- IR (DU) ] RAMESH SINGH, Desk Officer
ANNEXURE 10. Now a question arises whether in the given facts and circumstances of the case this tribunal can lift the veil and presume the date of termination as 9-3-1988 which is alleged by the claimant.
CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL AT KOLKATA
Reference No. 40 of 1999 11. I don't find any such circumstance from it that I canlift the veil to find the date of termination .
PARTIES :
12. Claimant has placed reliance upon a decision 1998 FLR ( 80 ) 681 SC Municipal Committee Tauru versus Harpal Singh and another.
Employers in relation to the management of the Joint Director, Govt . of India, Planning Commission .
AND
13. I have respectfully gone through the law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court and respectfully agree .
Their workman
PRESENT :
MrJusticeManik Mohan Sarkar, Presiding Officer
APPEARANCE :
: Mr. T. K. Chowdhury ,
Ld . Advocate
Onbehalf of the Management
14. Considering the facts and circumstances of the present case and the language of the reference order and the decision of the Hon'ble High Court Allahabad in the case ofUnion Bank of India (Supra ) , I am of the view that non - mention the date of termination of service in the reference order itself is very fatal and cannot be cured by assumption and presumption while adjudicating the present reference order. Therefore, I am not entering into the merits ofthe case .
Onbehalf of the workman
15. Therefore, the reference cannot be answered either this way or that way.
: Mr. S. Banerjee , Ld . Advocate with Mr. S. K. A. Nasir , Ld . Advocate .
1481
भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 18 , 2012 /माघ 29 , 1933
[ भाग II-खंड 3 ( ii ) ]
STATE: West Bengal INDUSTRY : Planning Commission
Dated: 23rd December, 2012
AWARD
ByOrder No. L-42012/ 105 /99 - IR (DU) dated 27-9-1999.
TheGovernment of India , Ministry of Labour in exercise of its powers under Section 10( 1 ) (d) and (2A) ofthe Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 referred the following dispute to this Tribunal for adjudcation:
"Whether the action of the management i.e. , Director, National Informatics Centre , West Bengal Unit in terminating the services of Shri Dipak Mondal , Messenger-cum-Helper is legal and justified ? Ifnot, to what relief is the concerned workman entitled ? "
2. The case of the workman in his written statement of claim is that he appeared for interview for the post of Messenger-cum -Helper in the National Informatics Centre, West Bengal Unit of Planning Commission after getting a letter of interview from the Employment Exchange and subsequently he joined the management's office on 9-1-1989 and worked till 15th May, 1989. Suddenly on 16-5-1989 the workman was not allowed to work and was asked to come after three months as there was no work for the time being . Though in the letter from the management to the Employment Exchange contained about the period of service of this workman as of 89 days ending on 12th May, 1989 , he was allowed to work beyond 12-5-1989 to 15-5-1989 . Subsequently, the workman again worked during theperiod from 29-5-1989 to 11-8-1989 for 75 days in which 54 days were actual working days and thereafter the workman was again engaged in the work of Messenger- cum-Helper from 14-8-1989 and thereafter the management refused to give any employment after 15-11-1989 without any notice or notice pay or retrenchment compensation . However, during the period from 9-1-1989 to 15-11-1989 with some interruption in between the workman has claimed to have worked for 296 days though actual working days were 214, the workman has claimed that his service cannot be terminated without payment of notice pay and retrenchment compensation etc. and he is entitled for regularization as regular or permanent worker having worked for 206 days in a year . The workman claimed that he was never informed that his employment from 9-1-1989 was for 89 days only and on daily wage basis and the order of his employment mentioned that his appointment was as Messenger-cum-Helper in purely temporary capacity. Refusal of emplyment to the workman concerned by the management was preceded with no reason and so the workman concerned has raised the industrial dispute claiming his retrenchment as illegal and has prayed for his reinstatement in service with full back wages since the management has resorted to unfair labour practice in retrenching him . Earlier the workman moved before the Central Administrative Tribunal on 26-4-1995 (O.Α. 516/95) though the said applicant was rejected by the said Tribunal on 26-6-1997 on the point of delay in making the application. The workman moved an application under Article, 226 of the Constitution before the Hon'bly High Court , Kolkata and subsequently the said application was rejected by the Hon'ble Court with the observation that such application could not be maintained under Article , 226 of the Constitution of India and thereafter this industrial dispute was raised before the Regional Labour Commissioner (Central), Kolkata on 27-2-1998 .
3. In its written statement , management side initially raised a point that the management organization is not an industry in view of the definition thereto in the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 and thereafter contended that the workman was engaged as Messenger -cum-Helper in the National Informatics Centre , West Bengal Unit on daily wage basis and the engagement was casual in nature and it was specifed for a period of 85 days between January to May, 1989 and he was again engaged for another specific period of 81 days during the months of August to November in the same year of 1989 , in two phases . In the second phase during the period from August to November, 1989 the workman actually worked for 66 days and thereby in two phases, the workman worked for 151 days (85 days + 66 days) . It is claimed by the management that the engagement of the workman continued till his engagement was necesitated till May, 15, 1989 and it is claimed that such engagement for specific period of the workman was within his knowledge .
4. In the rejoinder the workman has stated nothing more than the story made out in his written statement of claim and added something by way of denial of the statement made by the management in their written statement .
5. Admittedly the workman concerned was engaged asMessenger-cum-Helper with effect from 9-1-1989 and during that period he worked upto 15-5-1989 and thereafter fromAugust, 1989 to November, 1989 , though the workman claimedto have worked for another period from 29-5-1989 to 11-8-1989 . Since the period ofwork from 9-1-1989 to 15- 5-1989 and from August, 1989 to November, 1989 was admitted by the management side , the rest other period of work from end ofMay, 1989 till middle of August , 1989 as claimed by the workman is to be proved by him with cogent evidence since the management has claimed that in two phases the workman concerned worked for a total number of 151 days which did not qualify him to get protection under Section 25F of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. On the other hand, the workman concerned claimed that in three phases he worked for 214 days in accordance with the daily wages he earned, but the cotinuity of the period from January to November, 1989 was counted for 296 days since the workman worked for five working days on each ofthe week continued from date of his engagement during theperiod in three phases. In respect of the working period 1482
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 18 , 2012/MAGHA29 , 1933
[PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii ) ]
नई दिल्ली , 18 जनवरी , 2012
का.आ. 643.- औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार दि मैनेजमैन्ट, डिपार्टमेन्ट ऑफ टेलीकम्यूनीकेशन , अलवर के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच , अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालय , जयपुर के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 14/93 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 18-01-2012 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।
the attendance register of the management was produced where from it is revealed that the workman concerned actually worked from 9-1-1989 till 15-5-1989 and thereafter his work was stopped, though the other workman in the said attendance register continued to work throughout the month . The attendance register again shows that the workman concerned started second phase of work from 14-8-1989 and continued to do the work through the months till 9th day of November, 1989. The attendance register does not show that the workman concerned worked for any day during the period from 29-5-1989 to 11-8-1989.
[सं. एल-40012/76/1992- आई आर ( डीयू) ] जोहन तोपनो , अवर सचिव
New Delhi , the 18th January, 2012
S.O. 643. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 14/93 ) ofthe Central Government Industrial Tribunal -cum -Labour Court, Jaipur, as shown in the Annexure , in the industrial dispute between the management of Department of Telecommunication, Alwar and their workman, which was receivedby the Central Government on 18-1-2012.
[No. L -40012/76/ 1992 - IR (DU) ] JOHAN TOPNO , Under Secy.
अनुबंध
केन्द्रीय औद्योगिक न्यायाधिकरण , जयपुर केस नं. सी.आई.टी 14/93
रैफरेंस:
6. The work of the workman concerned was casual in nature being a daily wage earner and the principle of 'no-work - no- pay' comes on the way in respect of counting of days though the interruption in between the working days has been treated to be counted for the number of working days for the purpose of ascertaining the eligibility of the workman concerned for protection under Section 25F of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947. But the period in between disengagement from one phase to re -engagement to another phase will not give any coverage to the workman concerned since the period in between cannot be counted as the days for counting the number of days for the purpose of qualifying the workman concerned to have worked for 240 days . However, if the two phases or three phases whatever it may be in a year taken together makes the working days numbering 240 days or more , then the eligibility of the workman cannot be ignored for the purpose ofprotection under Section 25F of the Act. But the workman concerned could not prove that he worked during the period from 29-5-1989 to 11-8-1989 so that the number ofdays he would have worked during that period might have added some advantage to him for the purpose of counting the number ofdays worked by the workman during that period.
केन्द्र सरकार , श्रम मंत्रालय , नई दिल्ली का आदेश क्र. सं. एल.- 40012/76/92 - आई.आर. (डी.यू. ) दिनांक 17-9-1993
श्री ष्याम लाल शर्मा पुत्र श्री किशन लाल शर्मा , गांव कानेटी, पोस्टमऊखेड़ा वाया बिवाइ, तहसील बसवा , जिला दौसा ।
7. Since the workman concerned has failed to prove thatheworked for 240 days or more in one calendar year or within 12 calendar months before his termination, his termination cannot be claimed to be illegal not preceding with notice, pay in lieu of notoce or compensation .
प्रार्थी
बनाम
1. टेलीकॉम ड्रिस्ट्रिक्ट इंजीनियर , अलवर ।
8. The challenge of the management of its not being anindustry has not been raised by the management at the time ofhearing of the matter though in its pleading such a plea was taken it is presumed that the said plea has been ignored or waived from the side of the management .
2. उप मण्डल अधिकारी ( तार) मोती डूंगरी , अलवर ।
3. सब डिवीजनल ऑफिसर ( पी ) अलवर । .. अप्रार्थीगण
उपस्थित:
9. In view of the findings made above , I am of the opinion that the termination of the workman concernedby the management of National Informatics Centre , West Bengal Unit is legal and justified and the workman concerned is not entitled to any relief as prayed for .
श्री सतीश कुमार शर्मा, पीठासीन अधिकारी
Justice MANIK MOHAN SARKAR, Presiding Officer
प्रार्थी की ओर से : श्री जे. एल. शाह
अप्रार्थी की ओर से
: श्री तेज प्रकाश शर्मा Dated, Kolkata, the 23rd December, 2011 .
1483 भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 18, 2012/माघ 29 , 1933
[ भाग II-खंड 3 ( ii ) )
दिनांक अवार्ड : 15-9-2011
अवार्ड
गया । उससे कनिष्ठ कर्मचारी अभी भी सेवारत हैं, क्लेम स्वीकार किये जाने योग्य है । अपने समर्थन में प्रतिनिधि प्रार्थी ने न्याय दृष्टान्त एच. डी. सिंह बनाम रिजर्व बैंक ऑफ इण्डिया , 1986 1 एल.एल.जे. (एस.सी) 127 पेश किया है ।
1. केन्द्र सरकार , श्रम मंत्रालय , नई दिल्ली ने उपरोक्त आदेश के जरिये निम्न विवाद औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1948 की धारा 10 की उप - धारा ( 1 ) के अन्तर्गत इस न्यायाधिकरण को अधिनिर्णय हेतु निर्देशित किया है :
8. दूसरी ओर विपक्षीगण के विद्वान प्रतिनिधि का कहना है कि यही विवाद CAT से तय हो चुका है । विपक्षी ने कभी भी 240 दिन से अधिक काम नहीं किया है । CAT के अवार्ड की अनुपालना में प्रार्थी को काम करने का अवसर भी दिया गया है , क्लेम खारिज होने योग्य है ।
9. हमने दानों पक्षों की ददीलों पर विचार किया , प्रस्तुत न्याय दृष्टान्त का ससम्मान अवलोकन किया ।
"Whether the action of the management ofDeptt . of Telecommunication, Alwar [TDE , Alwar, SDO (P) & SDO (T) , Alwar ) in terminating the services of Shri Shyam Lal Sharma, Muster Roll employee, w.e.f. September, 1990 is legal and justified ? If not, what relief he is entitled to and from what date ? "
10. सर्वप्रथम यह उल्लेखनीय कि प्रार्थी ने इसी विवाद के संबंध में CAT के समक्ष याचिका पेश की जो CAT द्वारा दिनांक 13-1-1993 के आदेश से इन निर्देशों के साथ निस्तारित की गई है कि यदि आगे आवश्यकता हो तो प्रार्थी को दैनिक वेतन भोगी ( कैज्यूअल लेबर ) के रूप में काम दिया जावे और यदि इसे नियमित करने की योजना आये तो इसके केस पर विचार किया जावे ।
11. प्रार्थी ने सैन्ट्रल एडमिनिस्ट्रेटिव ट्रिब्यूनल में उक्त विवाद उठाने के तथ्य का स्टेटमैंट ऑफ क्लेम में उल्लेख नहीं किया है अर्थात् उसने यह तथ्य जान बूझकर छिपाया है , और वह स्वच्छ हाथों से अधिकरण के समक्ष नहीं आया है । इसके अलावा यह विवाद सैन्ट्रल एडमिनिस्ट्रेटिव ट्रिब्यूनल द्वारा तय हो चुका है जिसमें यह साफ तौर पर निर्धारित किया जा चुका है कि प्रार्थी ने 240 दिन से अधिक कभी काम नहीं किया ।
2. प्रार्थी श्रमिक की ओर से इस आशय का स्टेटमैंट ऑफ क्लेम पेश किया गया कि उसे विपक्षी उप मंडल अधिकारी ( तार ) , अलवर के यहां जनवरी 1983 से अगस्त 1983 तक दैनिक वेतन भोगी कर्मचारी के रूप में कार्य पर रखा । फिर शीघ्र नियुक्ति देने का आश्वासन देकर सेवा मुक्त किया गया । प्रार्थी अनेकों बार उनके कार्यालय में गया । दिनांक 19-5-1990 को वह फिर से काम पर लग गया लेकिन 1 अक्टूबर 1990 को बिना कारण बताये उसे सेवा से पृथक कर दिया । 10 अगस्त, 1990 से 30 सितम्बर , 1990 तक का वेतन भी नहींदिया । मस्टरोल में उसके स्थान पर उसके पिता का नाम अंकित कर दिया गया , उसके पिता के नाम पर मनीआर्डर भी भेजा गया जो उसने लेने से मना कर दिया । उसने अप्रार्थी को अनेकों पत्र लिखकर कार्य देने का अनुरोध किया लेकिन काम नहीं दिया । इस पर उसने यह औद्योगिक विवाद प्रस्तुत किया । उसकी सेवा मुक्ति अवैध व अनुचित है , उससे कनिष्ठ कर्मचारी कार्यरत है, अतः उसे सभी लाभ परिलाभ सहित सेवा में लेने व सेवा मुक्ति को अवैध व अनुचित घोषित करने की प्रार्थना की गई ।
3. विपक्षीगण ने जवाब में कहा की प्रार्थी ने इसी बिन्दु पर सेन्ट्रल एडमिनिस्ट्रेिटिव ट्रिब्यूनल ( कैट) में मुकदमा पेश किया था जो खारिज हो गया इसलिए रैस - जुडीकेटा के सिद्धांत के आधार पर ही यह विवाद खारिज होने योग्य है । कम वेतन होने के कारण प्रार्थी स्वयं ही नौकरी छोड़कर चला गया था , उसने कभी भी एक कलैण्डर वर्ष में 240 दिन काम नहीं किया । वर्ष 1990 में वह दैनिक वेतन भोगी के रूप में वापस काम पर आया है और अपना नाम किशन लाल बताकर काम किया है , अपने हस्ताक्षर भी किशन लाल के नाम से किये हैं, क्लेम खारिज होने योग्य है ।
12. यद्यपि बहस के दौरान यह कहा गया है कि सैन्ट्रल एडमिनिस्ट्रेटिव ट्रिब्यूनल के आदेश की पालना में काम देने की सूचमा के लिए पत्र जारी करने का कोई सबूत नहीं है कि ये पत्र वास्तव में जारी हुए हैं और प्रार्थी को मिले हैं । लेकिन प्रार्थी श्याम लाल अपनी जिरह में स्वीकार करता है कि विपक्षीगण द्वारा काम देने की सूचना एक दो बार उसे मिली थी, वह एक दो बार काम पर गया भी था । बीच- बीच में उसे भुगतान भी हुआ था पर यह सब 1993-94 में हुआ था अर्थात् CAT के आदेश की पालना विपक्षी द्वारा की गई है और प्रार्थी ने CAT के अनुसरण में काम भी किया है और भुगतान भी लिया है । उपरोक्त स्थिति के रहते इस अधिकरण द्वारा प्रार्थी की सेवा मुक्तिको अवैध ठहराने या उसे अलग से कोई राहत प्रदान करने का अधिकारी ठहराने का कोई विधिसम्मत आधार नहीं है । परिणामतः प्रश्नगत रैफरेंस के संबंध में निम्न अवार्ड पारित किया जाता है :
4. साक्ष्य प्रार्थी में प्रार्थी श्याम लाल ने अपने बयान कराये । विपक्षीगण की ओर से श्री बी. एल. मीणा को परीक्षित किया गया ।
6. हमने दोनों पक्षों की बहस सुनी , पत्रावली का अवलोकन
किया ।
" दूरसंचार विभाग , अलवर [ टी.डी.ई. अलवर एस.डी.ओ. ( पी ) व एस.डी.ओ. ( टी ) अलवर ) द्वारा प्रार्थी श्याम लाल , मस्टरोल कर्मचारी की सेवा सितम्बर, 1990 में समाप्त करने का आदेश अनुचित व अवैध ठहराये जाने योग्य नहीं है , प्रार्थी कोई राहत पाने का अधिकारी नहीं है । "
7. विद्वान प्रतिनिधि प्रार्थी की दलीले हैं कि प्रार्थी ने 240 दिन से अधिक काम किया है, उसे अवैध रूप से सेवा मुक्त किया गया है । बार - बार अनुरोध किये जाने पर भी उसे नौकरी में नहीं लिया 1484
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 18 , 2012/MAGHA 29, 1933
13. अवार्ड आज दिनांक 15-9-2011 को खुले न्यायालय में लिखाया जाकर सुनाया गया जो केन्द्र सरकार को प्रकाशनार्थ नियमानुसार भेजाजाये ।
सतीश कुमार शर्मा , पीठासीन अधिकारी नई दिल्ली, 18 जनवरी, 2012
का.आ. 644.-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 (1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में केन्द्रीय सरकार सीनियर सुपरिण्टेंडेन्ट आफ टेलीग्राफ ट्रैफिक के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच , अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण, जबलपुर के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या सी.जी.आई.टी. /एल.सी./आर/72/93 ) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 18-01-2012 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।
[सं. एल-40012/36/1992- आई आर ( डीयू) ]
[PART II-SEC. 3 ( ii)]
referred the following dispute for adjudication by this tribunal:
"Whether the action of the Telegraph Master Incharge, Departmental Telegraph Office , Balaghat (MP) under the control ofSr. Supdt . Telegraph Traffic, Jabalpur Division, Jabalpur in stopping from work/ duty Shri Ravindra Kumar Dumbhare , S/o Shri Atmaram Dumbhare, Ex-Chowkidar w.e.f. 3-2-90 is justified? Ifnot, what relief the workman concerned isentitled to?"
जोहन तोपनो, अवर सचिव
NewDelhi , the 18th January, 2012
S.O. 644. 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/ 72/93 ) ofthe Central Government Industrial Tribunal- cum -Labour Court , Jabalpur , as shown in the Annexure , in the industrial dispute between the Senior Superintendent ofTelegraph Traffic and their workman , which was received bythe Central Government on 18-01-2012.
[No. L -40012/36/1992 - IR(DU) ] JOHAN TOPNO, Under Secy.
ANNEXURE
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL- CUM - LABOUR COURT, JABALPUR
No. CGIT/LC /R/72/93
Shri Mohd. Shakir Hasan, Presiding Officer.
BETWEEN
Shri Ravindra Kumar Dumbhare ,
S/o Shri Atmaram Dumbhare ,
Ex. Chowkidar,
PostKattinagar, Birsola, Tehsil Gondia,
2. The case of the workman in short is that he was appointed as chowkidar on 1-5-1986 by the management aftertaking approval . He was not part time chowkidar.His working hours was from 8.00 PM to 9.00 AM every day. He was servedwith a notice on 29-1-1990 and was directed for not attending duty from 3-2-1990 . It is stated that the management withdrew the said notice by giving a letter dated 5-6-90 by registered post . The said letter also contained a cross cheque bearing No. A 334631 dated 5-6-1991 for Rs . 2919. The said registered letter was received by the workman without knowing the contents therein. The cheque was not acceptable and he did not encash the same. It does not comply the provision of Section 25 -F of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( in short ' the Act ' , 1947) . The workman met several times with the officers of the management but he was never offered alternative job . It is submitted that the workman be reinstated with back wages.
Workman
Distt.Bhandara (Maharashtra)
Versus
Senior Superintendent ofTelegraph
Traffic, Jabalpur (MP) Telegraph Master, I/Ch . Departmental Telegraph Office , Balaghat,
Management
Post& Distt. Balaghat (MP)
AWARD
(Passed on this 20th day of December, 2011)
1. The Government of India, Ministry of Labour vide its Notification No. L-40012/36/92- IR(DU) dated 22-3-93 has 3. The management also appeared and filed replyby way of Written Statement . The case of the management, inter alia, is that the workman was engaged as a part time chowkidar on daily wages from 1-5-1986 without any specific order by the management . The Telecom Department took a decision to pay the minimum pay admissible to corresponding cadre without increment w.e.f. 5-2-1986 to all casual labours in view of the order of the Hon'ble Supreme Court passed on 27-10-1987 in Petition No. 323 / 86. The casual labour includes both full time casual labour , part time labours and the workers engaged on contingency basis . The Deptt . of Telecom imposed complete ban on engagement of casual labours vide letter dated 30-3-1985 . Subsequently the department specifically issued an order directing for not engaging any casual labour vide letter dated 29-1-90 and further directed that the casual labour should be removed after giving one month's pay each in lieu of notice and retrenchment compensation @ 15 days wages for every completed year of continuous service . it is stated that the D.T.O. , Blaghat misunderstood the letter and issued the notice on 29-1-1990 to the applicant and stopped him from work w.e.f. 2-2-90 without paying month's salary. When the mistake was detected , the office of the D.T.O. , Balaghat was directed to contact the workman and to arrange payment of one month's wages in lieu of notice and retrenchment compensation accordingly but he was informed that he left the place. Subsequently the D.T.O. , 1485 भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 18 , 2012/माघ 29 , 1933
भाग II-खंड 3 ( ii ) ]
7. Issue No. II
Balaghat paid one month's wages and retrenchment
compensation to the workman through a cheque dated Considering the discussion made above , I find that
5-6-1991 and sent it by registered post AD which was the retrenchment of the workman is valid and legal and
received and acknowledged by the workman . On the above there is no violation of the provision of the Act, 1947. The
circumstances , the workman is not entitled to any relief. workman is not entitled to any relief. Accordingly, the
reference is answered.
4. On the basis ofthe pleadings of the parties, the
following issues are settled for adjudication: 8. In the result, the award is passed without any
order to costs .
(i) Whether the action of the management to stop 9. Let the copies of the award be sent to the
the workman from duty w.e.f. 3-2-90 isjustified?
Government of India, Ministry of Labour & Employment
(ii) To what relief, the workman is entitled? asper rules.
5. Issue No. I MOHD. SHAKIR HASAN, Presiding Officer
On the pleadings and evidence of the parties, the नई दिल्ली, 19 जनवरी , 2012
following facts appear to have been admitted: का.आ. 645.-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 (1947
1. The workman Shri Ravindra Kumar was engaged का 14 ) की धारा17 के अनुसरण में केन्द्रीय सरकार कमार्डिंग
aschowkidar on casual basis on 1-5-86. आफिसर , एयर फोर्स स्टेशन , उरन , रायगढ , के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध
2. He was served with a notice on 29-1-90 and was नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक
directed for not attending duty after 2-2-90 . विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालय , मुम्बई
के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 2/4 ऑफ 2006 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो
3. The management withdrew the said notice by
giving letter dt. 5-6-90. केन्द्रीय सरकार को 19-01-2012 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।
4. Acheque bearing No. A334631 dated 5-6-91 for [सं. एल-14012/7/2005- आई आर ( डीयू) ]
Rs. 2919 was sent by registered post to the रमेश सिंह , डेस्कअधिकारी
workman in lieu ofpay ofone month's notice and New Delhi , the 19th January, 2012
retrenchment compensation @ 15 days ' wages of
each and every completed year. S.O. 645. In pursuance of Section 17 of the
Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947) , the Central
5. The cheque was received and acknowledged by Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. CGIT- 2/
theworkman. 4of2006) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-
6. Now the question is very limited as to whether cum-Labour Court, No. 2 , Mumbai as shown in the
one month pay in lieu of one month's notice and Annexure, in the industrial dispute between the employers
retrenchment compensation was paid in accordance with in relation to the Commanding Officer, Air Force Station,
Section 25F of the Act, 1947. The workman has stated in Uran, Raigarh and their workman , which was received by
his evidence that it is true that he was engaged on casual the Central Government on 19-01-2012 .
basis. He has stated at para 4 that the management sent [No. L- 14012/ 7/2005 -IR(DU]
Account Payee crossed cheque for Rs. 2919/-by Registered RAMESH SINGH, Desk Officer
Post AD and he received the same without knowing the ANNEXURE
contents but it was not encashed and not acceptable . The BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT
documents filed by the workman are marked as Exhibit W/
1 to W/10 which also corroborate that the cheque was INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL, No. 2, MUMBAI
received. There is no evidence that the said cheque was PRESENT:
returned by the workman . It appears that the said cheque Shri K. B. Katake, Presiding Officer
was received and kept by the workman and, therefore , it is Reference No. CGIT- 2/4 of2006
deemed that one month pay in lieu of one month's notice
and retrenchment compensation were paid in accordance Employers in relation to the Management of
with Section 25 -F of the Act, 1947 and there is no violation Commanding Officer, Air Force Station.
interminating the workman from service . The management The Commanding Officer,
has also examined Shri C.L. Yemle in support of the case Airforce Station,
and proved one document which is marked as ExhibitM/ 1 Ministry ofDefence,
to show that in view of the Hon'ble Supreme Court, basic Sheva, Tal . Uran,
ofthe minimum pay was being paid to casual labour . This Distt. Raigad, Maharashtra
issue is decided against the workman and in favour ofthe AND
management.
367 GI/2012-24 1486
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 18, 2012/ MAGHA 29, 1933
[PART II-SEC. 3 ( ii ) ]
Their Workman :
Shri Arvind Keshav Mhatre,
Mulekhand, Tal. Uran,
Distt. Raigad, Maharashtra -400 702.
APPEARANCES :
FortheEmployer
: Mr. H.D. Rathod, Advocate .
For the Workman
Mr. J.H. Sawant, Advocate
Mumbai , dated the 8th November, 2011 .
atleast w.e.f. 15-6-2004. The management, however, terminated the services of the workman w.e.f. 15-6-2004. Therefore , he could not resume his duties. The action of management in terminating his services is illegal and unjust. Therefore, the workman has raised industrial dispute. The management has violated the provisions made under Seasonal Anti -Malaria Lashkar. Therefore , the workman approached ALC (C) . As conciliation failed, ALC made report to Ministry and Ministry has sent the reference to this Tribunal . The workman , therefore, prays that he be reinstated in service w.e.f. 15-6-2004 by granting him temporary status with all consequential benefits.
AWARD
1. The Government of India, Minstry of Labour & Employment by its Order No. L- 14012/ 7/2005 - IR (DU ), dated 26-12-2005 in exercise of the powers conferred by clause (d) of the 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 Demand of Shri Arvind Keshav Mhatre from the management of Corrumanding Officer, Airforce Station, Sheva, Distt. Raigarh for reinstatement of service w.e.f. 27-5-2004 is justified? If so, what relief the workman is entitled to ?"
4. The first party resisted the statement of claim vide its written statement at Ex- 6 . According to them, this Tribunal has nojurisdiction to entertain and try the present dispute. They contended that the first party is neither an ' industry' nor the second party is ' workman ' as defined under Industrial Disputes Act. The first party management is 2226 Squadron Air Force under Ministry of Defence. It does not come under the purview of Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. The said Act is not at all applicable. They denied that they have employed the second party as a Seasonal Anti Malaria Lashkar. According to them he was appointed onpurelytemporary basis for the season job. His job ends oncompletion of each season. Such persons neither can be called as a workman. His appointment was seasonal . They denied all the allegations of the workman. They further contended that the preliminary issue be framed whether the first party is an industry and the second party is workman? They also contended that the preliminary issue also be framed whether this Tribunal has jurisdiction to entertain this reference . Therefore , they pray that the reference be dismissed with cost .
5. Following are the three preliminary issues framed by my Id predecessors for my determination. I record my findings thereon for the reasons to follow:
Issues
Findings
Sr. No.
No 1. Whether first party is an ' industry' ?
2. Whether the second party prove that No he is a workman and employee of the first party ?
No
3. Is he entitled for employment and relief sought with first party ?
4. What Order ?
Asper
final order 2.After receipt of the reference from the Ministry, both the parties were served with notices. In response to the notice, the second party workman has filed his statement ofclaim at Ex-5 .According to him, Airforce Station at Sheva, Distt. Raigarh, Maharashtra has employed the workman whose name was sponsored by Employment Exchange Office . He was duly selected and appointed for a period from 22-8-2002 to 15-12-2002 and again from 15-6-2003 to 15-12-2003 . He was not given any work in the intermediate period . For the above referred period, he has worked as Anti Malaria Lashkar ( Class - IV) . He was appointed as Seasonal Anti Malarai Lashkar. The Management was liable to grant temporary status to Anti Malaria Lashkar after 165 days of work and after 150 days inthe offices observing five days week for two consecutive years . The workman was entitled to the said benefit ofthe scheme . The management had obtained statement of declaration from the workman on 4-5-2004 and he was also found medically fit for the temporary status ofAnti Malaria Lashkar . He further submitted that he was not given employment as well as temporary status as per the scheme. He requested for his further employment . However, management has given employment to some others . They told verbally that he would not be reinstated and re- employed in the services .
REASONS
Issue No. 1 :
3. The workman claims that he was in continuous service ofthe management w.e.f. 22-8-2002 . His name was also on muster roll . He was entitled to the employment
6. The first party is Commanding Officer, Air Force Station, deployed at Seva for the protection of JNPT. They 1487 भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 18 , 2012/माघ 29 , 1933
[ भाग II-खंड 3 (ii) ]
विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालय , मुम्बई के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या सी.जी. आई.टी. - 2/5 का 2006 ) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 19-01-2012 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।
[सं. एल-14012/8/2005- आई आर ( डीयू) ] रनेश सिंह , डेस्क अधिकारी
NewDelhi , the 19th January, 2012
have their Airforce Station at Seva and they require services ofAnti Malaria Lashkar to protect their staff and Officers. Therefore , every year the Commanding Officer engages some seasonal workers for the purpose. Neither Airforce Station deployed at Seva is dealing with any manufacturing business nor are they doing any function like industry. In the circumstances , the Airforce unit at Seva cannot be called anindustry. Accordingly, I decide this issue No. 1 in the negative.
Issue No. 2
S.O. 646 .--In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. CGIT- 2 / 5 of 2006) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal- cum-Labour Court , No. 2, Mumbai as shown in the Annexure, in the industrial dispute between the employers in relation to the The Commanding Officer Air Force Station, Uran, Raigad and their workman, which was received by the Central Government on 19-01-2012
[No. L- 14012/8/2005 - IR(DU) ] RAMESH SINGH, Desk Officer
ANNEXURE
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL, No. 2, MUMBAI
PRESENT:
K. B. KATAKE, Presiding Officer .
Reference No. CGIT- 2/5 of 2006
Employers in relation to the Management of Commanding Officer, Air Force Station
7. In the case at hand, the workman has not led any oral evidence . The fact is not denied that the second party was given the seasonal work of Anti Malaria Lashkar. He was given the said work for about six months in the year 2002 from June to December. Again in the next year for the same period the said work was allotted to him. Fact is not disputed that, neither applications were invited nor workman had appeared for any test. He was not appointed as a full time worker after following the recruitment rules. In the circumstances engaging a person for such a seasonal work neither can be said appointed as a workman, nor it can be said an appointment or recruitment . In the circumstances, a person who has performed some seasonal work cannot claim the status of workman. The claim ofthe second party is very weak and baseless . In this backdrop conclusion can be arrived at that the second party is not workman as contemplated under Section 2 (s) of Industrial Disputes Act , 1947. Thus , I hold that the second party is not a workman. Accordingly, I decide this issue No. 2 also inthe negative.
Issue No. 3
The Coomanding Officer Airforce Station Ministry ofDefence, Sheva , Tal . Uran, Distt. Raigad, Maharashtra
AND
Their Workman.
8. Today the ld. adv. for the second party filed application for disposing of the reference as in similar reference earlier, this Tribunal has held that it has no jurisdiction to entertain this reference as neither the first party is an industry nor second party is a workman as defined in the I.D. Act, 1947. Therefore, the dispute herein cannot be called an industrial dispute as contemplated under I.D. Act . Accordingly, I decide this issue No. 3 also in the negative and proceed to pass the following order:
ORDER
Shri Ganesh Krishan Bhoir, At & Post New Sheva, Tal . Uran, Distt. Raigad, Maharashtra -400 702
The reference stands rejected .
APPEARANCES :
With no order as to costs .
Forthe Employer
: Mr. H.D. Rathod Advocate
K. B. KATAKE, Presiding Officer
For the Workman
: Mr. J.H. Sawant, Advocate
नई दिल्ली , 19 जनवरी , 2012
Mumbai, the 8th November, 2011
AWARD
1. The Government of India , Minstry of Labour & Employment by its Order No. L- 14012/8/2005- IR (DU) , dated का. आ. 646.-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में केन्द्रीय सरकार कमाडिंग आफिसर, एयर फोर्स स्टेशन , उरन , रायगढ , के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच , अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक 1488
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 18 , 2012/MAGHA29, 1933
[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii)]
26-12-2005 in exercise of the powers conferred by clause (d) of the 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 demand ofShri Ganesh Krishan Bhoir from the management of Commanding Officer, Airforce Station , Sheva , Distt . Raigad for reinstatement ofservice w.e.f. 27-5-2004 is justified? Ifso, what relief the workman is entitled to ?"
' industry' nor the second party is ' workman ' as defined underIndustrial Disputes Act . The first party management is 2226 Squadron Air Force under Ministry of Defence. It does not come under the purview of Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. The said Act is not at all applicable. They denied that they have employed the second party as a Seasonal Anti Malaria Lashkar. Accordingto them he was appointed onpurelytemporary basis for the season job. His job ends on completion of each season . Such persons neither can be called as a workman . His appointment was seasonal . They denied all the allegations of the workman. They further contended that the preliminary issue be framed whether the first party is an industry and the second party isworkman? They also contended that the preliminary issue also be framed whether this Tribunal has jurisdiction to entertain this reference . Therefore they pray that the reference be dismissed with cost .
5. Following are the three preliminary issues framed by my Ld predecessors for my determination . I record my findings thereon for the reasons to follow:
Issues
Findings
Sr. No.
1. Whether first party is an ' industry' ? No
2. Whether the second party prove that he is a workman and employee of the first party? No
3. Ishe entitled for employment and relief sought with first party ? No
4. What Order ?
Asper
final
order
REASONS
2. After receipt of the reference from the Ministry, both the parties were served with notices . In response to the notice , the second party workman has filed his statement ofclaimat Ex-5.According to him, Airforce Station at Sheva , Distt . Raigad, Maharashtra has employed the workman whose name was sponsored by Employment Exchange Office. He was duly selected and appointed for a period from 15-06-2002 to 15-12-2002 and again from 15-6-2003 to 15-12-2003 . He was not given any work in the intermediate period . For the above referred period, he has worked as Anti Malaria Lashkar (Class- IV) . He was appointed as Seasonal Anti Malaria Lashkar . The management was liable to grant temporary status to Anti Malaria Lashkar after 165 days of work and after 150 days inthe offices observing five days week for two consecutive years . The workman was entitled to the said benefit of the scheme. The management had obtained statement of declaration from the workman on 4-5-2004 and he was also found medically fit for the temporary status of Anti Malaria Lashkar. He further submitted that he was not given employment as well as temporary status as per the scheme. He requested for his further employment . However management has given employmentto some others . They told verbally that he would not be reinstated and re- employed in the services.
Issue No. 1:
6. The first party is Commanding Officer, Air Force Station, deployed at Seva for the protection of JNPT. They have their Airforce Station at Sheva and they require services of Anti Malaria Lashkar to protect their staff and Officers .Therefore, every year the Commanding Officer engages some seasonal workers for the purpose . Neither Airforce Station deployed at Sheva is dealing with any manufacturing business nor are they doing any function like industry. In the circumstances, the Airforce unit at Sheva cannot be called an industry. Accordingly I decide this issue No. 1 in the negative .
Issue No. 2
3. The workman claims that he was in continuous service ofthe management w.e.f. 15-06-2002 . His name was also on muster roll . He was entitled to the employment atleast w.e.f. 15-6-2004 . The management however terininated the services of the workman w.e.f. 15-6-2004. Therefore he could not resume his duties . The action of management in terminating his services is illegal and unjust . Therefore, the workman has raised industral dispute . The management has violated the provisions made under Seasonal Anti Malaria Lashkar. Therefore the workman approached ALC ( C) . As conciliation failed, ALC made report to Ministry and Ministry has sent the reference to this Tribunal . The workman therefore prays that he be reinstated in service w.e.f. 15-6-2004 by granting him temporary status with all consequential benefits .
4. The first party resisted the statement of claim vide its written statement at Ex-6. According to them , this Tribunal has nojurisdiction to entertain and try the present dispute. They contended that the first party is neither an
7. In the case at hand , the workman has not led any oral evidence. The fact is not denied that the second party was given the seasonal work of Anti Malaria Lashkar . He was given the said work for about six months in the year 2002 from June to December . Again in the next year for the
1 1489 भारत का राजपत्र: फरवरी 18 , 2012/माघ 29 , 1933
[ भाग II-खंड 3 (ii) ]
ANNEXURE
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM- LABOUR COURT, JABALPUR
No. CGIT/LC/R/113/2001
ShriMohd. Shakir Hasan, PresidingOfficer.
Shri P.S. Karunakaran,
Vice President , SouthEastern Railwaymen's Union , Regn . No. 3580 , C/o SE Rly. Complex,
Workman
Bilaspur(CG)
same period the said work was allotted to him. Fact is not disputed that , neither applications were invited nor workman had appeared for any test. He was not appointed as a full time worker after following the recruitment rules . Inthe circumstances engaging a person for such a seasonal work neither can be said appointed as a workman, nor it can be said an appointment or recruitment . In the circumstances, a person who has performed some seasonal work cannot claim the status of workman . The claim of the second party is very weak and baseless . In this backdrop conclusion can be arrived at that the second party is not workman as contemplated under Section 2 (s ) of Industrial Disputes Act 1947. Thus I hold that the second party is not a workman . Accordingly I decide this issue no . 2 also inthe negative.
Versus
Issue No. 3
Divisional Railway Manager,
South Eastern Railway,
.. Management
Bilaspur(CG)
AWARD
Passed on this 4th day of January, 2012 8. Today the Ld adv. for the second party filed application for disposing of the reference as in similar reference earlier, this Tribunal has held that it has no jurisdiction to entertain this reference as neither the first party is an industry nor second party is a workman as defined in the I.D. Act 1947. Therefore , the dispute herein cannot be called an industrial dispute as contemplated under I.D. Act . Accordingly, I decide this issue no. 3 also in the negative and proceed to pass the following order:
1. The Government of India, Minstry ofLabour vide itsNotification No. L- 41012/26/2001 - IR (B - I) dated 11-6- 2001 has referred the following dispute for adjudication by thistribunal :
ORDER
The reference stands rejected.
With no order as to costs .
K. B. KATAKE , Presiding Officer
Date: 8-11-2011
"Whether the action of the management of South Eastern Railway, Bilaspur in not providing the employment to the son of Shri Amrit Lal , Driver- A on compassionate grounds is justified ? If not , to what relief the workman is entitled ?"
नई दिल्ली, 19 जनवरी , 2012
2. The workman appeared on 14-6-05 through counsel but did not file statement of claim inspite of sufficient time granted to the workman . Lastly the workman became absent . The then Tribunal proceeded exparte against the workman on 12-6-08 .
का.आ. 647.-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 (1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण 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 113/2001 ) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 19-01-2012 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।
[सं. एल-41012/26/2001- आई आर ( बी-1 ) ]
रमेश सिंह, डेस्क अधिकारी
New Delhi , the 19th January, 2012
S.O. 647. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 (14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 113 / 2001) 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 and their workman, which was received bythe Central Government on 19-01-2012.
3.The management appeared and filed his Written Statement . The case of the workman , in short , is that the workman Shri Amritlal was Driver in the management organization . He committed grave misconduct and chargesheet dated 7-2-1995 was served on him on 23-3-1995 . He became sick and remained under treatment ofRailwayMedical Department . He was declared medically de-categorised by medical authorities on 7-7-95 . He was offered alternative job in Group D category which he had not accepted and filed an application dated 23-9-95 for voluntary retirement on medical ground which was accepted because departmental enquiry of graver charges was not pending against him . Subsequently he was exonerated from charges leveled against him in absence of sufficient evidence . His retirement was due on 31-1-96 and he retired normally on the said date drawing his salary as Driver. It is stated that there is no provision under any rule to provide appointment to award of retired railway [No. L-41012/26/2001 - IR(B-I] RAMESH SINGH, Desk Officer 1490
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: FEBRUARY 18, 2012/MAGHA , 1933
employee on attaining the age of superannuation . It is submitted that there is no merit in the case and the reference be answered in favour of the management.
4. The following issues are framed for adjudication:
(1) Whether the action of the management in not providing the employment to the son of Shri Amritlal , Driver -A on compassionate grounds isjustified ?
(II) To what relief the workman is entitled ?
5. Issue No. I
The management has examined one witness in the case. The management witness Shri R. Shankaran is presently working as Asstt . Personnel Officer. He has stated that Shri Amrit Lal was Driver at MDGR and retired from service on superannuation on 31-1-96 . He has stated that the workman retired normally on 31-1-96 on attaining the age ofsuperannuation and he was drawing salary ofDriver. He has further stated that there is no provision and rule to provide appointment to award of retired Railway employee who had retired after attaining the age of superannuation. His evidence is unrebutted. There is no reason to disbelieve his evidence . His evidence clearly shows that the workman is not entitled to get compassionate appointment of his son on attaining the age of superannuation . This shows that the action of the management is justified and legal . This issue is decided in favour of the management .
6. Issue No. П
Onthe basis of the discussion made above , it is clear that the workman Shri Amritlal is not entitled to any relief. Accordingly the reference is answered.
7. In the result, the award is passed without any order to costs .
8. Let the copies of the award be sent to the Government of India , Ministry of Labour & Employment asper rules.
MOHD. SHAKIR HASAN, Presiding Officer नई दिल्ली, 20 जनवरी , 2012
का.आ. 648.-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में केन्द्रीय सरकार मैनेजमैन्ट ऑफ कोलडैम हाइड्रो इलैक्ट्रिक पावर प्रोजेक्ट और अदर्स के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालय न. 1 , चंडीगढ़ के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 173/2011 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 20-1-2012 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।
[सं. एल-42012/283/2010- आई आर ( डी यू) ] रमेश सिंह , डेस्क अधिकारी
[PART II-SEC. 3 (ii ) ]
New Delhi , the 20th January, 2012
S.O. 648. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 (14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 173/2011 ) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal- cum-Labour Court No. I , Chandigarh, as shown in the Annexure, in the industrial dispute between the employers in relation to the management of Kol Dam Hydro Electric PowerProject and Others and their workmen , which was receivedby the Central Government on 20-1-2012 .
[No. L-42012/ 283/2010 - IR (DU) ] RAMESH SINGH, Desk Officer
ANNEXURE
IN THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM- LABOUR COURT- II, CHANDIGARH
PRESENT:
Sri A. K. Rastogi , Presiding Officer
1. Case I.D. No. 164/2011
Registered on 24-5-2011 Sh . Jai Pal, S/o Sh. Bengali Ram, Village-Bantrehal , PO-Baroti , Tehsil-Sunder Nagar, Mandi (HP).
2. I.D. No. 166/2011
Registered on 24-5-2011 Sh. Kamlesh Kumar, S/o Sh . Dila Ram, Village-Pangrala , PO-Dhund, Tehsil-Sunder Nagar, Mandi (HP).
3. I.D. No. 167/2011
Registered on 24-5-2011 Sh. Ramesh Kumar, S /o Sh . Sukh Ram, Village-Khaneour , PO-Dhawal, Tehsil-Sunder Nagar, Mandi (HP). Applicants
Versus
1. The General Manager, KolDam Hydro Electric Power Project , NTPC, VPO , Barmana, Bilaspur.
2. The Managing Director, M/ sAKS Engineers and Contractors, Kol Dam Hydro Electric Power Project , Sanjay Sadan, Chhota Shimla.
3. Project Manager,
Italian Thai Development Co. Ltd. , Kol Dam Hydro Electric Power Project , Village Kayan, PO Slapper , Teh . Sundernagar, Mandi . Respondents 1491 भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 18 , 2012/माघ 29 , 1933
[ भाग II-खंड 3 ( ii ) ]
New Delhi , the 23rd January, 2012
APPEARANCES :
: None
For the Workmen
For the Management : Sh. V. P. Singh for respondent No. 1 , Sh. Shamsher Singh for respondent No. 3
AWARD
Passed on December 19 , 2011
S.O. 649.-In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 (14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 4/2008) ofthe Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum- Labour Court, Jaipur as shown in the Annexure , in the industrial dispute between the employers in relation to the management of State Bank of Patiala and their workman, which was received by the Central Government on 23-1-2012 .
[No. L- 12012/59/2006 - IR(B - I) ] RAMESH SINGH, Desk Officer
ANNEXURE
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT The Central Government vide Notification No. L-42012/256/2010- IR (DU) , L-42012/254/2010- IR (DU) and L -42012/252/2004 all dated 20-4-2011 by exercising its power under Section 10 sub-section 1 Clause (d) and sub- section (2A) ofthe Industrial Disputes Act 1947 (in short Act) has referred to this Tribunal the aforesaid industrial disputes for adjudication.
INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL CUM - LABOUR COURT, JAIPUR
The common question of law and fact in all the disputes is the same , viz.:
PRESENT :
Sri N. K. Purohit, Presiding Officer L. D. No. 4/2008
Reference No. L- 12012/59/2006 - IR(B - I)
Dated: 15-11-2007 "Whether the retrenchment of services of the aforesaid workmen by the Managing Director, M/s. AKS Engineers and Contractors , Sanjay Sadan Chotta Shimla (HP) without following the principle of'Last come first go ' is legal and justified ? What relief the workmen are entitled to form the above employer ?
Shri Shish Ram, S/o Shri Bhura Ram Gurjar, R/o Gram Khurdi , Dhani Sheogramwali Kotputli , Tehsil Kotputli , Distt:Jaipur. V/ s
1. The Managing Director, StateBank ofPatiala , HeadOffice, MallRoad, Patiala, Punjab .
After receiving the references the notices were issuedto the parties . Respondent No. 1 and 3 put in their appearance but the claimant and respondent No. 2 did not turn up despite notice sent by registered post. Notices not received back undelivered . Since workman Jai Pal of ID No. 164/2011 did not turn up and file claim statement despite notice sent by registered post to him on 24-7-2011 and the other workmen Kamlesh of ID No. 166/2011 and Ramesh of ID No. 167/2011 also did not turn up and file claim statement despite notices sent by registered post on 24-6-2011 hence ' No Dispute Award' is passed in ali these cases .Original copy of the Award be placed in the record of ID No. 164/2011 and the copy of the award be placed onthe record of each of the other IDs . Two copies ofthe award be sent to Central Government for further necessary action.
2. The Branch Manager , State Bank of Patiala , N.H. No. 8, Kotputli , Distt: Jaipur (Raj . )
ASHOK KUMAR RASTOGI , Presiding Officer नई दिल्ली, 23 जनवरी , 2012
AWARD 21-12-2011
1. The Central Government in exercise ofthe powers conferredunder clause (d) of sub -section (1 ) and 2 (A) of Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 has referred the following industrial dispute to this tribunal for adjudication:
का.आ. 649.- औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 (1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में केन्द्रीय सरकार स्टेट बैंक ऑफ पटियाला के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालय , जयपुर के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 4/2008 ) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को23-1-2012 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।
[सं एल-12012/59/2006- आई आर ( बी-1 ) ]
"Whether the action of the management of the State Bank of Patiala in terminating the services of Shri Shish Ram S/o Shri Bhura Ram w.e.f. 2-3-2005 is justified ? Ifnot, what relief Shri Shish Ram is entitled to ?"
रमेश सिंह , डेस्क अधिकारी 1492
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: FEBRUARY 18 , 2012/MAGHA29 , 1933
[PART II-SEC. 3 (ii ) ]
Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 42/2009) ofthe Central Government Industrial Tribunal -cum -Labour Court- 1 , Dhanbad , now 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 wasreceived by the Central Government on 23-1-2012 .
2. The workman in his claim statement has pleaded that he was engaged as a Messenger on 24-4-2001 in the StateBank ofPatiala, Branch Kotputli and he had worked as such from 24-4-2001 to 2-3-2005. He has further pleaded thatduring said period he has worked for more than 240 days in each calendar year despite this his services have beenterminated on 2-3-2005. The workman has prayed to reinstate him with back wages and other consequential benefits.
[No. L-20012/51 /2009 -IR(CM- I ] D. S. S. SRINIVASARAO , Desk Officer
ANNEXURE
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM- LABOUR COURT, NO . I, DHANBAD
(AT LOK ADALAT)
3. In reply, the management has contended that the workman had never worked in Kotputli Branch of thebank. There is no post of Messenger in Kotputli Branch . Neither he was engaged nor his services were terminated by the management . It has been further contended that provision of Section 25 -F, G and H are not attracted in the present matter. The documents prepared by the workman are forged therefore, the claim of the workman deserves to be rejected.
In the matter of a reference u/s . 10 ( 1 ) ( d) (2A) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947.
Reference No. 42 of 2009
PARTIES:
4. On 5-10-2011 at the stage of filing documents and rejoinder, none appeared on behalf of the workman. The case was adjourned for next date i.e. 19-12-2011 but on the said date none appeared on behalf of both the parties therefore , case was reserved for award.
Employers in relation to the management of W. W.Z. (Mohuda) Area of M/ S . BCCL .
And
Their Workman
5. Since, the management has denied the claim of theworkman in its reply, initial burden was on the workman to prove that he has worked for 240 days during preceding 12 months from the date of his termination .
PRESENT:
Shri H. M. Singh, Presiding Officer
APPEARANCES :
Forthe Employers : None
For the Workmen
6. The workman has not appeared to substantiate his claim. There is no documentary and oral evidence on record . Thus , it is not possible to decide the reference under adjudication on merits . It appears that the workman is not willing to contest the case further. Therefore, "No Claim Award" is passed in this matter. The reference under adjudication is answered accordingly.
: Shri D.Mukherjee, Secretary, Bihar Colliery Kamgar Union
State : Jharkhand
7. Award as above .
Industry: Coal
N. K. PUROHIT, Presiding Officer
Dated , 11th January, 2012
AWARD
नई दिल्ली, 23 जनवरी , 2012
By Order No. L -20012/51/2009 - IR( CM - I ) dated 9-7-2009 the Central Government in the Ministry of Labour has, in exercise of the power conferred by clause ( d) of sub -section ( 1 ) and sub - section (2A) of Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, referred the followingdispute for adjudication to this Tribunal:
का.आ. 650.-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 42/2009 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 23-1-2012 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।
"Whether the action of the management of W. W.Z. , Mohuda of M/s . BCCL in not regularising the services of Shri Kameshwar Prasad Sah as Store Keeper is justified and legal ? To what relief is the workman concerned entitled ?"
[सं. एल-20012/51/2009- आई आर ( सीएम- I ) ] डी. एस. एस. श्रीनिवास राव , डेस्क अधिकारी
New Delhi , the 23rd January, 2012
S.O. 650.- In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 (14 of 1947 ) , the Central
2. This case was fixed on 1-12-2011 at Lok Adalat. Shri D. Mukherjee, Secretary, Bihar Colliery Kamgar Union, appearing on behalf of the workman , submitted by filing a petition duly signed by Shri Mukherjee and also by the 1493 भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 18 , 2012/माघ 29, 1933
[ भाग II-खंड 3 ( ii ) ]
AWARD Dated: 10-8-2011
concerned workman, that the claim of the concerned workman has been amicable settled with the management. In such circumstances , it has been prayed to pass an order allowing towithdraw the claim made by the workman/union.
This reference is made to this Court by the Desk Officer, Govt . of India/Bharat Sarkar Ministry of Labour/ Shram Mantralaya, New Delhi vide No. L - 12012/164/ 2008(IR(B -I) dt . 1-9-2009 for adjudication in respect of the matters specified in the Schedule as under :
In view of the prayer made by the concerned workman/Union, I pass a ' No Dispute ' Award in the present reference case.
SCHEDULE
H. M. SINGH, Presiding Officer
नई दिल्ली, 23 जनवरी , 2012
"Whether the action of the management of State Bank of India in recovering the amount from Smt . Geeta Sangam, Special Assistant Paud Road Branch without taking the other coincidental matter in the consideration, is correct or not ? If not, to what relief is the workman concerned entitled ?" का. आ. 651.-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 (1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में केन्द्रीय सरकार भारतीय स्टेट बैंक के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच , अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण, पुणे , महाराष्ट्र के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 210/2009 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 23-1-2012 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।
In this matter, the second party is duly served vide Ex. No. 3A but no authorised personnel is present on its behalf. It has not filed its statement of claim . In view of thisas the second party has not taken any steps to proceed with the matter and hence for want of steps the present matter is dismissed in default. Award be drawn accordingly.
M. S. BODHANKAR, Presiding Officer [सं. एल-12012/164/2008- आई आर ( बी- I ) ] रमेश सिंह, डेस्क अधिकारी
Date: 12-9-2011
New Delhi , the 23rd January, 2012
नई दिल्ली, 23 जनवरी, 2012
S.O. 651. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 210/ 2009) of the Labour Court , Pune (Maharashtra) as shown in the Annexure , in the industrial dispute between the management of State Bank of India, and their workmen, which was received by the Central Government on 23-1- 2012.
का.आ. 652,- 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 एवं श्रम न्यायालय , जबलपुर के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 163/2001 ) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 23-1-2012 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।
[No. L- 12012/ 164/2008 -IR(B -I] RAMESH SINGH, Desk Officer
[सं. एल-41012/69/2001- आई आर ( बी- I ) ] रमेश सिंह , डेस्क अधिकारी
ANNEXURE
New Delhi, the 23rd January, 2012
BEFORE M. S. BODHANKAR, PRESIDING OFFICER, FIRST LABOUR COURT, PUNE
Ref. IDA. No. 210 of 2009
S.O. 652. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947 ) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 163/2001) ofthe Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum -Labour Court, Jabalpur as shown in the Annexure , in the industrial dispute between the management of Western Railway and their workmen, which was received by the Central Government on 23-1-2012.
[No. L-41012/69/2001 -IR(B - 1) ]
IstParty
The General Manager, State Bank of India, Mumbai Local Head Office , Bandra Kurla Complex, Mumbai
RAMESH SINGH, Desk Officer
AND
ANNEXURE
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT The President ,
State Bank of India Staff Union,
INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM - LABOUR COURT, JABALPUR
No. CGIT/LC/R/ 163/01
PRESENT:
C/o U.P. Naik , 68/86 , Harkoovarbhai Bldg . Pandit Bakhale Path, Thanidwar Road,
Shri Mohd. Shakir Hasan, Presiding Officer
IInd Party
Mumbai -400002
367 GI/2012-25 1494
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 18 , 2012/MAGHA29 , 1933
[PART II-SEC. 3 (ii )]
5. Issue No. I
Shri Jitendra Singh, 43, MGG Vikram Nagar, Behind Kasmes Hotel, Ratlam(MP)
Workman
Vs.
The Divisional Railway Manager, WesternRailway, Ratlam(MP)
Management
AWARD
Passed on this 5th day of January, 2012
1. The Government of India, Ministry of Labour vide its Notification No. L -41012/69/2001 /IR (B - I ) dated 16-10-2001 has referred the following dispute for adjudication by this tribunal :
"Whether the action of the management of DRM, Western Railway, Ratlam to remove from the services to Shri K. Jitendra Singh w.e.f. 3-3-83 after making a DAR enquiry is justified ? If not, what relief the workman is entitled to ?"
2. The workman appeared in the case through his lawyer on 17-3-2005 but did not file his statement ofclaim. Lastly the then Tribunal proceeded the reference ex parte against the workman on 2-9-2008.
This issue is taken finally as the reference is proceeded ex parte against the workman. According to the management, the workman was unauthorizedly absent and a chargesheet was served on him who sought time. As such he had full information of the proceeding but on subsequent dates of the proceeding he did not appear. Therefore the ex parte proceeding was held against him. It isstated that principle of natural justice was followed and the proceeding was conducted according to the Railway rules . The management has filed photocopy of the proceeding . The management has examined one witness namely Shri G. T. Rathore who is working as Divisional Personnel Officer . He has stated that the workman was unauthorizedly absent . He had filed false medical certificate ofhis illness . He has stated that the workman was served with a chargesheet . The photocopy of the chargesheet is filed in the case . He has further stated that the Enquiry Officer had given notices on several dates . The workman informed the Enquiry Officer by letter on 12-10-1982 for extending the date of the proceeding but he did not informed nor appeared on subsequent dates . This shows that the workman had full knowledge of the proceeding but he intentionally evaded the proceeding. The witness has further stated that ultimately the workman was removed from service on 3-3-1983 who filed appeal on 28-11-86 which was also rejected . I find that full opportunity was given to the workman to defend himself but he did not participate in the proceeding. I, therefore, held that the departmental proceeding conducted by the management against the workman isjust proper and legal . This issue is accordingly decided.
6. Issue No. II
3. The management appeared and filed Written Statement in the case . The case of the management in short is that the workman Shri Jitendra Singh reported sick on 6-5-1981 on the basis of Private Medical Doctor . Thereafter he had not informed the management as per rules .He became unauthorized absent without giving any information either oral or written . A departmental proceeding was initiated after serving him chargesheet of the unauthorized absence. The workman initially sought time which was allowed . Thereafter on several dates of the departmental proceeding , the workman did not appear inspite ofproper notice . Lastly the enquiry was held ex parte and the proceeding was conducted according to the Railway rules . The Disciplinary Authority found the charges as proved and passed the order of removal from service w.e.f. 3-3-83 . The workman is said to have filed an appeal on 21-11-86 . The Appellate Authority did not find any merit and rejected the appeal . Thereafter a review petition was also rejected on 11-9-89 . It is submitted that the reference be answered in favour of the management .
The evidence of the management witness clearly shows that the workman was unauthorizedly absent and he had not properly informed the management in accordance with the Railway Rules . The evidence further supports that the false medical certificate was subsequently filed to save his neck . There is no other evidence in rebuttal of the evidence of the management . There is no reason to disbelieve the evidence . Thus it is clear that the action of the management in removing the workmanfrom services w.e.f. 3-3-83 is justified. This issue isdecided in favour of the management .
4. The following issues are framed for adjudication:
7. Issue No. III
I Whether the departmental enquiry conducted by the management against the workman is legal andjustified ?
On the basis of discussion made above , I find that the workman is not entitled to any relief. Accordingly the reference is answered.
II. Whether the action of the management in removing the workman from services w.e.f. 3-3-83 is justified ?
III. To what relief the workman is entitled ?
8. In the result, the award is passed without any order to costs.
1495 भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 18 , 2012/माघ 29, 1933
[ भाग II-खंड 3 ( ii) ]
Through General Secretary,
9. Let the copies of the award be sent to the Government of India , Ministry ofLabour and Employment asperrules.
MOHD. SHAKIR HASAN , Presiding Officer
PaschimRailway Karamchari Parishad, HavingOfficeAt- 28/B, Narain Park, Chandkheda, Ahmedabad. Second Party
नई दिल्ली, 24 जनवरी , 2012
Forthe first party : Shri L. B. Shah, Advocate
Forthe second party : Shri R/ S . Sisodiya, President, PRKP.
AWARD
का.आ. 653.-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 एवं श्रम न्यायालय , अहमदाबाद के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 33/2010 ) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 24-1-2012 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।
[सं. एल-41012/04/2008- आई आर ( बी- I ) ] रमेश सिंह , डेस्क अधिकारी
New Delhi, the 24th January, 2012
The Industrial Dispute was raised by 10 workmen through the Union PRKP regarding cancellation of the notification/panel prepared during the year 1997 with respect to those 10 workmen by the Management of Western Railway before the conciliation officer. On failure report of the conciliation officer the Appropriate Government (Central Government) considering an Industrial Dispute existing between the employers in relation to the Management of Western Railway and their workmen referred the dispute for adjudication as per order No. L-41012/4/ 2008 - IR(B -I) New Delhi , dated 21-1-2010 under clause ( d) of sub section ( 1 ) and sub section (2A) of Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 formulating aterms of reference as per the Schedule which is as follows :
SCHEDULE
S.O. 653. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 (14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 33/ 2010) ofthe Central Government Industrial Tribunal -cum- Labour Court, Ahmedabad (Gujarat) as shown in the Annexure , in the industrial dispute between the management ofWestern Railway and their workmen, which was received by the Central Government on 24-1-2012.
[No. L-41012/04/2008 -IR(B- I) ] RAMESH SINGH, Desk Officer
ANNEXURE
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM -LABOUR COURT, AHMEDABAD
PRESENT:
"Whether the action of the management of Western Railway, in cancelling the Notification/Panel prepared during the year 1997 in respect of S/Shri Suresh Kumar , Banshi Lal Chouhan , Joginder Amarnath, Tejus Hansmukhlal Gajjar, Promod Kumar, Matadin Bhaiyan, Keval Prasad Bishanlal Mahavar , Manojkumar V. Chouhan , Hemkunar, Ramnath Dharmik, Mahesh Shaaheeb Dhurani , Manishkumar Srivastav, Vinodkumar R. , is justififed ? If not, to what relief the applicants concerned are entitled to ?"
Shri Binay Kumar Sinha,
PresidingOfficer,
CGIT-cum - Labour Court, Ahmedabad, Dated 16-1-2012
Reference : ITC No. 3 of 2010 Old
Reference : CGITA No. 33 of2010
1. The General Manager,
WesternRailway,
ChurchGate , Mumbai.
2. The Chief Works Manager,
Western Railway,
Loco Shed,
..... First Party
Dahod(Gujarat).
2. Notices were sent to the parties for filing their respective pleadings - statement of claim , written statement . The second party workmen through their union PRKP filed statement of claim at Ext . 6 to the effect that the action of the management of Western Railway in cancellation of the notification/panel prepared during the year 1997 with respect to the workmen is unjustified , unwarranted and prayed for the relief as to allowing this reference and directing the first party employer to appoint the workman ofDahod workshop as per notification of the year 1997 and also for directing to first party employer to grant the difference ofwages with 12% interest thereon . First party No. 2 filed its written statement at Ext . 7 with list of documents denying as to the claim of the workman. Taking such stand that issuance of notification and cancellation ofnotification is prerogative for the Competent Authority And their workmen .
1496
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 18 , 2012/MAGHA 29 , 1933
[PART II-SEC. 3 ( ii ) ]
को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 24-1-2012 कोप्राप्त हुआ था ।
and Competent Authority have power in this regard and that cannot be interfered by other authority or tribunal , also denying the all allegations made in the statement of claim and prayed for dismissal ofthe reference case.
[सं. एल -41011/28/2008- आई आर ( बी-1 ) ] रमेश सिंह , डेस्क अधिकारी
NewDelhi, the 24th January, 2012
S.O. 654. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 2/2010) ofthe Central Government Industrial Tribunal -cum -Labour Court, Jaipur as shown in the Annexure , in the industrial dispute between the management of North West Railway and their workman , which was received by the Central Government on 24-1-2012 .
[No. L-41011 /28/2008- IR (B- I] RAMESH SINGH, Desk Officer
ANNEXURE
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM - LABOUR COURT, JAIPUR
PRESENT :
3. The case was pending for leading evidence by the second party and one of the workman namely Shri Suresh B. Chouhan also filed his affidavited examination - in-chiefat Ext. 8 and was to be cross -examined onbehalf of the first party fixing for cross -examination. Subsequently on 17-10-2011 to pursis at Ext . 11 and 12 were filed by the union President of PRKP 1st pursis for putting the case record on board since the second party intend to withdraw this reference case and the second application also containing signature of one of the workmen Suresh Kumar, Banshi Lal Chouhan for permitting to withdraw this reference case and in the proceedings orderwas passed for putting up on 18-11-2011 . On18-11- 2011 the pursis was not pressed so the date was adjourned for 13-1-2012 for further hearing on those pursis at Ext. 11 and 12. Thereafter on 13-12-2011 record was put up for moving the pursis at Ext. 11 and 12 filed on behalf of the second party but its copy since not supplied to the first party nor having endorsement of the first party representative on those pursis, so it was adjourned for 13-1-2012 for hearing on withdrawn pursis.
Sh . N. K. Purohit, Presiding Officer LD . No. 2/2010 Ref. No. L-41011/28/2008 -IR (B -I) dated: 3-9-2008 4. On 13-1-2012 the record was put up for hearing. Againa withdrawal pursis was filed at Ext. 13 upon which Shri H. B. Shah, lawyer of the first party also made endorsement as no objection . Both parties were heard also perused on record.
The General Secretary, Rajasthan Public Sector Karamchari Sangh, 80, BajrangVihar, Nr. Gopalpura Rly. Phathak, Jaipur. Vs The Divisional Railway Manager, North West Railway, Ajmer.
AWARD (Dated 14-12-2011)
5. During midst ofthe hearing of this reference case, it appears that good sense have prevailed between the parties to sort out their dispute outside the court resulting infiling ofthe pursis for withdrawal ofthis reference case and in this regard praying therein for passing necessary order. So, now in view, Ext. 11, 12, 13 the parties are not at dispute in this reference and so there is no need for answering the terms of reference . So, in view of the withdrawal pursis no dispute award in this reference case ispassed.
Let copies ofthis award be sent to the appropriate Government forpublication and needful .
1. The Central Government in exercise of the powers conferred under clause ( d) of Sub-sections ( 1 ) & 2(A) of Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 has referred the following Industrial Dispute to this tribunal for adjudication:
BINAY KUMAR SINHA , Presiding Officer नई दिल्ली, 24 जनवरी , 2012
"Whether the action of the management of North WestRailway, Ajmer through DRM, NWR Ajmer in not giving family pension to Smt . Madhubala Tak w/o deceased employee Sri Gangaram Tak, Booking Clerk, Ajmer w.e.f. 20-1-1999 is legal & justified ? If so, to what relief is the disputant entitled and from which date ? "
का.आ. 654.-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 (1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में केन्द्रीय सरकार उत्तर - पश्चिम रेलवे के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालय , जयपुर के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 2/2010 ) 1497 भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 18, 2012/माष 29 , 1933
[भाग II-खंड 3 (ii) ]
12. Rule, 75 of Railway Services (Pension) Rules , 1993pertains to family pension scheme for railway servants . Sub-clause 8( ii ) of the said rules says :
"If a deceased railway servant or pensioner leaves behind awidow or widower, the family pension shall become payable to the widow or widower, failing which to the eligible child. "
2. These facts are not in dispute that husband of Smt. MadhubalaTak was working as booking clerk under the employment of the non-applicant; that he was issued charge shect on 30-3-1987; that he retired on 20-9-1987 & he was getting provisional pension; that vide order Ex- 1 dated 15-4-1991 the entire pension admissible to Shri Gangaram was withheld permanently; that he challenged the said order ofpunishment before the CAT, Jaipur Bench, Jaipur in O.A. No. 831/92 but the samewas dismissed vide order dated 12-1-1994; that at the time of death on 20-1-1999 , the deceased employee was not getting anypension.
13. It flows from the above rule that for family pension it is essential that at the time of death the deceased employee should be a railway servant or pensioner. Indisputably, the deceased employee retired on 20-9-1987 &vide order dated 15-4-1991 his entire pension was withheld permanently & almost after 8 years he died on 20-1-1999. Thus, it is evident that at the time of death on 20-1-1999, the deceased employee was a retired employee &hewas not getting any pension .
3.The case ofthe union is that the wife of deceased Gangaram is entitled to get family pension w.e.f. 20-1-1999. Whereas the non-applicant in its reply has contended that theclaim for the family pension is time barred. It has been further contended that since the pension of the deceased employee was withheld permanently vide order dated 15-4-1991 , the wife of the deceased is not entitled to get familypension.
4.Since the facts are not in dispute, both the sides have not adduced any oral evidence .
14. In view of above since , the deceased employee was neither a railway servant nor a pensioner at the time of his death; his wife is not entitled to get any family pension . Thus, the action of the management of non - applicant North West Railway in not giving family pension to Smt. Madhubala Tak w/o deceased employee Sh . Gangaram is not illegal & unjustified. Resultantly, the disputant is not entitledto get any relief . The reference under adjudication isanswered accordingly.
15.Award as above .
5. The union has produced only two documents Ex- 1 & Ex-2 . Ex- 1 is order of the Ministry ofRailways dated 15-4-1991 whereby entire pension ofthe deceased employee waswithheld permanently & Ex-2 is the copy oforder of the CAT, Jaipur Bench dated 12-1-1994 .
N. K. PUROHIT, Presiding Officer
6.Heard both the sides & perused the record.
नई दिल्ली, 24 जनवरी , 2012
7.The learned representative on behalf of the union has contended that the family pension cannot be denied to the wife of the deceased employee on the ground that pensionwas forfeited in the domestic enquiry held against him.He has further contended that non - applicant has not pointed out any specific rule which debars family pension onthe saidground. Rule 75 ofRules, 1993 is not relevant in thepresent matter.
का.आ. 655.-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 (1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में केन्द्रीय सरकार चितरादुर्गा ग्रामीण बैंक 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 01/2005 ) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 24-1-2012 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।
[सं. एल -12012/235/2004- आईआर ( बी-1 ) ]
रमेश सिंह , डेस्क अधिकारी 8.Percontra, the learned representative for the non- applicant has submitted that at the time of death the deceasedemployee was not getting any pension & he was not an employee of the railway therefore, his wife is not entitled for family pension under the Rules, 1993 .
New Delhi , the 24th January, 2012
9.I havegivenmy thoughtful consideration on rival submissions of both the sides .
10. The question which crops up for consideration is whether the wife of the deceased employee is entitled for family pension w.e.f. 20-1-1999 ?
S.O. 655. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 (14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 01/2005) ofthe Central Government Industrial Tribunal -cum -Labour Court, Bangalore as shown in the Annexure in the industrial disputebetween the management of Chitradurga Grameena Bank, and their workman, which was received by the Central Government on 24-1-2012.
[No. L- 12012/235/2004- IR (B -I ) ] RAMESH SINGH, Desk Officer 11.Admittedly, there is no specific provision under theRules, 1993 regarding entitlement for the family pension in case of forfeiture of pension of a deceased employee. There is also no specific provision which expressly debars family pension on the said ground.
1498
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 18, 2012/MAGHA 29 , 1933
[PART II-SEC. 3 ( ii) ]
ANNEXURE
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL CUM- LABOUR COURT, BANGALORE
Dated: 11th January, 2012
PRESENT:
Shri S. N. Navalgund, Presiding Officer
C.R. No. 01/2005
with the copy ofthe findings of the enquiry officer seeking his reply in the matter and on receipt of his reply dated 5-12-2003 and not being satisfied once again issued a second show cause notice dated 19-12-1999 proposing the punishment ofdismissal and after personal hearing of the firstparty confirmed the proposed punishment of dismissal by order dated 19-1-2004. Being aggrieved by that order of punishment the first party raised a dispute before the ALC (Central) Bangalore and as it ended in failure the Central Government made this reference for adjudication.
IParty
IIParty
Shri N. H. Shashidhara, The Chairman,
S/o N. S. Hanumantharao, Sukruthi , OldMarket Road, Doddapete, Chitradurga-577501 (Karnataka State)
Chitradurga Grameena Bank, HeadOffice , P.B. No. 70 , KanakaNilaya, V.P. Extension , Main Road, Chitradurga -577501 (Karnataka State)
AWARD
1. The Central Government by exercising the powers conferred by clause ( d) of sub -section ( 1) and sub -section 2A of Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947) has referred this dispute vide order No. L- 12012/235/ 2004- IR (B - I ) dated 25-11-2004 for adjudication on the following:
3.My learned predecessor after receiving the claim statement from the first party and the counter statement from the second party while raising a preliminary issue touching the fairness of the DE after receiving the evidence ofboth sides by his detailed order dated 4th January 2007 holding the Domestic Enquiry being fair and proper and thereafter hearing the arguments addressed by the learned advocates appearing for both sides by award dated 3rd January 2008 while coming to the conclusion that the findings of the enquiry officer suffers from no perversity and that the charge of misappropriation has been proved, while relying on the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in Thomas Jose case reported in 2000 II LLJ 1599 ordered for his reinstatement withholding his increment for a period of 10 years with cumulative effect from the date of the impugned punishment order onwards and without back wages, continuity of service and all other consequential benefits.
SCHEDULE
"Whether the management of Chitradurga Grameena Bank isjustified in dismissing Shri N. H. Shashidhara, Clerk from service . If not to what relief the workman isentitled to ? "
4.Being aggrieved by the said award setting aside the order of dismissal and ordering for reinstatement the secondparty preferred Writ Petition No. 7240/2008 in the Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka , whereas, the first party inWrit Petition No. 2172/2009 called in question the legality and validity of the order of DE dated 4-1-2007 and also the awarddated 3-1-2008 in so far as it relates to withholding ofincrements for a period of 10 years with cumulative effect from the date ofpunishment without back wages, continuity of service and all other consequential benefits . The Hon'ble High Court disposed offboth the writ petitions by common order dated 6-10-2009 wherein it dismissed the writ petition filedby the first party and allowed the writ petition filed by the second party and remitted back the proceedings to this tribunal for consideration afresh over the exercise of extraordinary discretion under Section 11A of the ID Act, after extending a reasonable opportunity of hearing to the parties concerned and to pass orders thereon strictly in accordance with law or in the light of observations made therein.
2. The management of Chitradurga Grameena Bank (hereinafter referred as the second party) served charge sheet uponthe first party dated 10-1-2001 on the allegations that hemisappropriated a sum ofRs . 2000 remitted on 5-9-2000 towards credit loan Account No. SBE -DPN6 / 2000 of Shri S. R. Hanumanthappa , NWD agent while working as Clerk-cum-Cashier in its H. D. Pura branch between 30-5-1997 & 11-11-2000 . Since there was no reply to the said charge sheet by the first party the management ordered Domestic Enquiry appointing Shri Rajashekaraiah as EnquiryOfficer and Shri H. V.M. Rao as Presenting Officer. The enquiry officer after completing the enquiry submitted his enquiry findings dated 2-8-2001 holding him guilty of the charges . It appears having regard to the objections raised by the first party with regard to the conduct of the enquiry the Disciplinary Authority ordered a fresh DE and during that fresh enquiry the management examined six witnesses as MW1 to MW6 and got marked 16 documents as Ex. M1 to M16 and on the conclusion of the enquiry once again the same enquiry officer submitted his enquiry findings , holding the workman guilty of the charges . Thereafter the second party issued show cause notice along
5.In view ofthis common order passedby the Hon'ble High Court in the writ petitions filed by the first party and the second party wherein the findings of this tribunal in respect of fairness of the DE as well as the finding of the enquiry officer are upheld, the only point now remains for my consideration is whether the punishment of dismissal [ भाग II-खंड 3 ( ii ) ]
1499
भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 18 , 2012/माघ 29 , 1933
of the first party is proportionateto the misconduct of misappropriation proved against him . After the Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka remitting back the matter the learned advocates appearing for both sides filed their written arguments and learned advocate appearing the first party again relying on the same decision that he had relied upon previously in the case of Assistant Manager State Bank of India Vs. Thomas Jose reported in 2000 II LLJ 1599 urged for reinstatement with back wages and all consequential benefits . Interalia the learned advocate appearing for the second party while relying on the following decisions urged that in case ofmisappropriation by bank official there cannot be any lesser punishment than his dismissal and thus supported the punishment imposedby the Disciplinary Authority.
1.2001 (1) LLJ 1330 (SC)
2. 2000 (II) LLJ 1395 (SC)
3. 2001 AIR SCW 2330
4. 2005 ( 3) Supreme Court cases 401
5.AIR2009 SC 2528
6. ILR 2008 KAR5139
7. 2009 (4) AIRKAR 124
8.AIR 1998 ( 4) SCC 310
9. 1996 Lab . I.C. 1056 (SC)
6. On appreciation of the arguments put forward for the learned advocates appearing for both the sides and taking into account the ratio laid down in the decisions relied upon by them. I arrived at the conclusion the punishment imposed by the management dismissing the firstparty being just and proper for following reasons.
REASONS
7. The Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka while remitting back the matter with direction to reconsider the matter only with regard to punishment , observed that no doubt in Thomas Jose case, a three judge bench of the Apex Court while recording a finding that there is a vital difference between an undertaking that is Scooters India Limited and a bank which deals with public money and misappropriation by an employee of the bank is misappropriation of public monies which must be treated differently, reiterating that the misconduct of withdrawing monies from the account holder by an employee is a misconduct which cannot be treated lightly. Nevertheless in the facts of the case the delinquent was reinstated without back wages and increments for a substantial period with cumulative effect, but in subsequent decision of the Apex Court in Chairman and Managing Director , United Commercial Bank and Others Vs. P.C. Kakkar reported in (2003) 4 SCC 364 and Regional Manager U.P. SRTC . Etawah Vs. Hoti Lal and another reported in (2003 ) 3 SCC 605 having held that when a bank officer commits misconduct for his personal needs and against the interest of the bank and the depositors , he must be dealt with iron hands and not dealt with leniently and that the exercise of discretion under Section 11A of the Industrial Disputes Act introducing the punishment by this tribunal is perverse therefore, again relying on the decision in the case of Assistant Manager, StateBank of India Vs. Thomas Jose reported in 2000 II LLJ 1599 relied on by the learned advocate appearing for the first party, this tribunal cannot interfere in the punishment imposed by the Disciplinary Authority. As observed by the Hon'ble High Court the Apex Court subsequent to the three Judge Bench decision in the case of Thomas Jose , in the decision of Chairman and Managing Director United Commercial Bank and Others Vs. P.C. Kakkar reported in (2003) 4 SCC 364 held that:
"A bank officer is required to exercise higher standards ofhonesty and integrity. He dealt with the money of the depositors and the customers . Every officer/employee of the bank is required to take all possible steps to protect the interests of the bank and to discharge his duties with utmost integrity, honesty, devotion and diligence and to do nothing which is unbecoming of a bank officer. Good conduct and discipline are inseparable from the functioning of every officer/employee of the bank. As was observed by this court in Disciplinary Authority- cum-Regional Manager V. Nikunja Bihari Patnaik it is no defence available to say that there was no loss or profit resulted in case when the officer/employee acted without authority. The very discipline of an organization more particularly a bank is dependent upon each of its officers and officers acting and operatingwithin their allotted sphere . Acting beyond one'sauthority is by itself a breach of discipline and is misconduct. The charges against the employee were not casual in nature and were serious . These aspects do not appear to have been kept in view by theHigh Court" .
8. In yet another subsequent decision to decision in Thomas Jose case Regional Manager, U.P. SRTC , Etawah Vs. Hotilal & Another reported in (2003 ) 3 SCC 605 their Lordship pointed out as under:
" If the charged employee holds a position of trust where honesty and integrity are inbuilt requirements offunctioning, held the matter should be dealt with iron hands and not leniently" .
9. On reading these two decisions of the Hon'ble Apex Court subsequent to its decision in Thomas Jose case the Apex Court being of the opinion that when the bank officer commits misconduct for his personal needs and against the interest of the bank and the depositors he must be dealt with iron hands and not deal with leniently. Inthe present case as per the findings of the enquiry upheld 1500
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 18, 2012/MAGHA 29, 1933
by this tribunal and the Hon'ble High Court the first party as a cashier since retained Rs . 2000 received by him from a customer until a complaint was filed by that customer amounting to misappropriation there cannot be any another punishment other than dismissal . Under the circumstances arriving at the conclusion the second being justified in imposing the punishment of dismissal against the first party for the proved misconduct of misappropriation, I find no necessity of exercising the discretion vested in this court under Section 11A of the ID Act in favour of the first party.
10. In the result, I pass the following Award:
AWARD
The reference is rejected holding that the management of Chitradurga Grameena Bank is justified in dismissing Shri N. H. Shashidhara, Clerk from service and he is not entitle for any reliefs.
(Dictated to PA transcribed by her corrected and signed by me on 11-1-2012)
S. N. NAVALGUND , Presiding Officer
नई दिल्ली, 24 जनवरी , 2012
का.आ. 656.-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में केन्द्रीय सरकार एन. एफ. रेलवे के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालय , कोलकाता के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 31/2006 ) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 24-1-2012 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।
[सं. एल-41012/54/2006- आई आर ( बी- I ) ]
रमेश सिंह , डेस्क अधिकारी
New Delhi , the 24th January, 2012
S.O. 656. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947 ), the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 31/2006) ofthe Central Government Industrial Tribunal -cum -Labour Court, Kolkata as shown in the Annexure , in the industrial dispute between the management of N.F. Railway and their workman, which was received by the Central Government on 24-1-2012 .
[No. L-41012/54/2006 -IR(B -I) ]
RAMESH SINGH, Desk Officer
ANNEXURE
CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL
TRIBUNAL AT KOLKATA
Reference No. 31 of 2006
PARTIES:
Employers in relation to the management of N.F. Railway, Alipurduar Junction
AND
Their Workman
[PART II-SEC. 3 ( ii )]
PRESENT :
Mr. Justice Manik Mohan Sarkar, Presiding Officer
APPEARANCES :
Onbehalf of the : Mrs. Urmita Dutta,
Ld . Advocate
Management
:
Onbehalf of the Workman
Mr. Animesh Bhadury , TradeUnion Represen- tative
State: West Bengal
Industry: Railway
Dated: 16th January, 2012
AWARD
By Order No. L- 41012 / 54/2006 - IR (B - I ) dated 8-12-2006 the Government of India , Ministry of Labour in exercise of its powers under Section 10( 1 ) (d) and (2A) of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 referred the following dispute to this Tribunal for adjudication:
"Whether the action of the Divisional Railway Manager (P) , Alipurduar Junction, N.F. Railway in terminating Shri Supriya Chatterjee, Substitute Emergency Peon from service is justified ? If not , what relief the workman is entitled ? "
2.Inhis statement of claim, the workman Shri Supriya Chatterjee has stated that he was engaged as a Substitute Emergency Peon in Scale Rs . 2250-3200 by the Divisional RailwayManager (P) , N.F. Railway, Alipurduar Junction by an appointment letter dated 25-2-2005 after getting approval from the General Manager, N.F. Railway, Maligaon and before joining the service on 1-3-2005 he was found medically fit . He was granted temporary status on completion of 120 days continuous service by an office order dated 22-8-2005 and his service was extended by another order of the same date by three months . One Smt . P. Babbar the then Divisional Railway Manager, Alipurduar Junction left Alipurduar on 24-7-2005 to avail 33 days ofEx-India leave from 25-7-2005 to 26-8-2005 and at that time she advised the present workman to stay in her flat at P.K. Road, New Delhi and accordingly he stayed there .Before leaving Alipurduar Junction for New Delhi , Smt . Babbar asked the workman for his willingness to go with her and the workman accepted the same and submitted his willingness to go on transfer to Central Railway with her. Smt . Babbar told the workman that on return she would hand-over the charge of D.R.M. , Alipurduar Junction, but she actually did not come to Alipurduar Junction for handing over such charge and joined at Mumbai as F.A. & C.A.O./Con. on 29-8-2005 directly and on her instruction the workman went toMumbai from New Delhi on 3-9-2005 and there she arranged for accommodation of this workman in a Running Room. For the following two days the workman performed his work as given to him by Smt.Babbar and there was no sign of dissatisfaction from 1501
भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 18 , 2012/माघ 29 , 1933
[ भाग II-खंड 3 ( ii ) ]
issued her letter of dissatisfaction and unwillingness to allow him to work under her as his controlling officer, the workman took leave immediately without making any representation and so thereafter as per instruction ofthe GeneralManager at Maligaon dated 15-2-1999 and also as per terms and conditions of his appointment letter, the service ofthis workman was terminated after offering him 14 days wages in lieu of notice as per rule . Absorption in the Group D post of such Substitute Emergency Peon comes only when he completes 3 years of continuous service.
4. It is very much evident from the case of the respective parties that the engagement of the workman as Substitute Emergency Peon was through an appointment letter and he was placed in a scale of pay plus other allowances as admissible under the rules and he was posted against existing vacancy and was attached to the DRM/ APDJ and it was stated that his engagement was only for aperiod of 3 months and it was subjected to extension on receipt ofa certificate from the Controlling Officer that the services ofEmergency Peon was satisfactory and he could be continued further. Ext . W- 1 is his appointment letter and in the said letter a condition was imposed on him that he would be transferred with the officer for whom he was engaged as Substitute Emergency Peon and it was also a term/condition that he would be discharged in the event of the officer for whom he was engaged, expressed his unwillingness to take him on transfer along with him.
her and surprisingly on 6-9-2005 said Smt. Babbar handed- over a letter No. FA9C/Genl ./95 stating that his performance was not upto her satisfaction though after earlier satisfactory certification through office order dated 22-8-2005 , there was no interaction of this workman with her till before her arrival at Mumbai from foreign tour on 4-9-2005 . The workman claimed that if his work was not found to be upto the desired level , it was essential on her part to give instruction to him in writing for improving working and even then if the workman would fail to improve, she might be compelled to discharge him . The workman claimed that the action by order dated 6-9-2005 by Smt . Babbar was an afterthought and fabricated . The said letter dated 6-9-2005 made the workman upset and on return to Alipurduar on 9-9-2005 he became sick and undertook treatinent and in course of his such treatment, his service was terminated by an order of D.R.M. (P) , Alipurduar Junction dated 28-10-2005 . The workman submitted an application on 12-9-2005 to the General Manager, N.F. Railway, Maligaon to provide him in Group D job but no action was taken thereon and subsequently the workman submitted another dated 15-9- 2005 to D.R.M. , N.F. Railway, Alipurduar Junction with a request to continue him as his Emergency Peon and it was also ignored. Workman claimed that the post of Emergency Peon is permanent in nature and it is not the case that he was discharged on expiry of the sanction, but his discharge was in consequence of liking and disliking of an officer. The workman also clained that by office order dated 22-8-2005 his service was extended for a further period of 3 months ending on 21-11-2005 but he was terminated prematurely on 28-10-2005 . He has further claimedthat though he was granted temporary status , rights and privileges in the same status was ignored to the workman on in termination of service without any charge- sheet or any enquiry and also without giving him any opportunity to be heard and also without any fault on his part and it was in violation of the principle of natural justice and the action ofthe management was unlawful , unreasonable and not based upon any law of the land and so the workman claimed reinstatement in service with full back wages .
5. Fact remains that the workman concerned was granted ' temporary status ' with effect from 29-6-2005, though the said office order of granting temporary status aconditionwas imposed that such status would not confer any right upon the said workmar for regular appointment inthe railway services , seniority, promotion etc. All these are evident from Ext . W-2. On the same day, i.e. , 22-8-2005 another office order was issued by the management Railway in extension of his work as Emergency Peon for a further period of 3 months . Though no date of effect of such extension has been given, as the office order was issued on 22-8-2005 it may be deemed that the said period of3 months would end on 21-11-2005 . But, unfortunately, the service of the workman as Substitute Emergency Peon was terminated with a letter of termination of service dated October 28 , 2005 and in the said letter of termination it has been stated that Smt . P. Babbar was transferred to Central Railway and her successor Shri A. Rakshit joined as DRM/ APDJ on 23-8-2005 and that he brought his own Emergency Peon from his previous place of posting as he was attached tohim there.
6. Before deciding about the entitlement of the present workman of his statutory /mandatory benefits on termination of service under Section 25F of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 , a discussion is needed to be done in respect of the provisions for engagement and discharge/ 3. In its written statement , management Railways has stated that the allegation of the workman that he was not show -caused and that his service should be continued is not tenable as per the rules and service condition in view of the terms and condition in his appointment letter dated 25-2-2005 . It is also stated that since Smt . P. Babbar expressed her unwillingness to take the workman along with her at her new place of posting and also since the present D.R.M. , Alipurduar Junction on transfer of Sunt. Babbar brought his Emergency Peon from his former place of posting and also since the workman did not render continuous service for a period of one year , his service from the Railway: was terminated with effect from 28-10-2005 by a letter of termination. Though Smt . Babbar
367GI/2012-26 1502
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 18 , 2012/MAGHA29 , 1933
[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii ) ]
termination of Substitute Emergency Peon. In this regard a reference may be made to the provision made in Ext . W-15 . Though this document is in the style of a letter from the office ofthe General Manager and therein it was stated thatall the officers in N.F. Railway upto JAG under whom the post of Emergency Peon exists would be entitled to have such Emergency Peon and therein the reason for such entitlement has been explained . It has been provided that when an officer who is entitled to get Emergency Peon'sservice, normally required to utilize and continue with the Emergency Peon who was working under his predecessor and if he desired to get a cliange ofEmergency Peon feeling it necessary after newly joining the post , he can exercise such an option , but only with the approval of the General Manager on communication from the office of the ChiefVersonnel Officer and if such officer who desires a change of the Emergency Peon with his/her predecessor, he can exercise such option only once throughout the entire service period with the N.F. Railway.
controlling officer on being transferred from his/her place of posting and even it he/she takes away his Substitute Emergency Peon with him/ her to the place of transfer and subsequently ceased to take the services of such Emergency Peon on the ground of satisfactory service of such Peon , the termination of the service of such Peon automatically operates since the very existence of Substitute Emergency Peon with an officer only as has no attachment to the office of the Railway. The existence of Substitute Emergency Peon depends on the seeking of service of such Peon by the officers of the management Railway who are entitled to get such service of Substitute Emergency Peon . Though the present workman has been granted the temporary status , his substantive posting remains as Substitute Emergency Peon and it would be continued till before he gets absorption to the Group D service on completion of 3 years service and even at that stage he is required to continue to function as Emergency Peon in a regular Group D post under the same officer. So , before such regularization in Group D post , a Substitute Emergency Peon remains as not in a confirmed service with the Railway to claim that his termination should be doneby following the norms to that effect though he is engaged against existing vacancy and on regular pay scale.
8. In respect of the claim of the workman concerned that statutcy/mandatory compliance of all the conditions on the part of the management Railway is needed to be done andif it is not done , he is entitled to reinstatement in service with back wages . The provision of Section 25F of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 provides that such a claim can be maintained by a workman only when he has completed 240 days or more service under the employer concerned within a period of 12 calendar months , if we read the prosision of Section 25F alongwith Section 25B oftheAct .
7. In respect of the engagement of fresh Emergency Peon provision has been made in that Ext. W15 that such engagement of fresh Emergency Peon would be made as a substitute in the open line chargeable to the Group D post following by medical fitness and that fresh face would be engaged against the Group D vacancy in the said unit and the pay of the Emergency Peon would be charged agitist work charge post . Corizin provision has been made ficruin for regularization of such Emergency Peon in Group D post after completion of 3 years continuous and satisfactory service and for that reason a formal screening would be done which would be based on record of medical fitness , age , qualifications and service satisfaction certificate by the officer under whom he/she was posted as an Emergency Peon. About the status of an Emergency Peon it was stated in the said Ext. W15 that when an officer is transferred from one station to another within N.F. Railway or outside. Emergency Peon working under him/ her amay be shifted provided the Emergency Peons seeks such transfer in writing . Different conditions of service and few benefits have been discussed in the said Ext. W15 .It has been stated in Ext . W15 that transfer of the Emergency Peon, who is not regular Group D employee , from one Railway to another Railway is not permissible and it has been stated therein that in case ofofficers taking 15ay EmergencyPeon with him/ them or transfer, the service such Emergency Peon would automatically be deemed tohave been terminated and such Emergency Peon would have no right of absorption back on the basis of previous service rendered in the Railway. The absorption of the Emergency Peon to regular Group D post or otherwise depends on some criteria subject to satisfactory certification from the controlling officer and if such
cezificate is issued in a negative way the continuation of
with ach controlling officer coasesS
A revealed from Ext. Wis that if the
9. The service of the workman concerned is not on the basis of daily - wage or under the principle of ' no -work- no -pay' and since he was placed in a regular pay scale and he was being paid a monthly pay from the said pay scale , he is deemed to have been posted for the entire month andwill continue month after month till before he ceases in employment . Fact remains that the present workman was engaged with effect from 1-3-2005 and his service was terminated with effect from 28-10-2005 and if the work period of the workman concerned is calculated during the period from 1-3-2005 to 27-10-2005 it is found that he has completed 241 days of work and thereupon he became eligible for the mandatory compliance on the part of the employer as provided in Section 25F of the Act . It is found from the notice of termination that the management Railway has ordered for payment of 14 days ' wages in lieu of notice and in that case it is found that one part of the mandatory compliance has been made , but no order has been made in respect of payment of compensation amount to the от сеrted for such premature termination . Ifthe 1503 भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 18 , 2012/माघ 29 , 1933
[भाग II-खंड 3 ( ii) ]
unsatisfactory report , in such case , reinstatement cannot be automatically claimed .
12. In such circumstances , in view of all the discussions made above , I am of the view that a lump- sum amount as compensation if ordered in favour of the workman concerned to be paid by his terminating employer will meet the ends ofjustice not only for the workman but also for the employer on whom the workman of such status cannot be thrust upon to be reinstated.
engagement ofthe workman concerned was continued till 21-11-2005 and no further extension was given to him thereafter, the workman had nothing to claim in reference to the provisions of Section 25F of the Act as the termination would have been by afflux of time on expiry of 3 months ' extension ending on 21-11-2005 and thereby the employce concerned would not be called upon to comply with the said provision. But, here it is found that the engagement of the workman concerned was terminated prematurely with effect from 28-10-2005 and it is voluntary act on the part of the employer to cease the service of the workman concerned before the time extended in respect ofhis service as Emergency Peon , in that case, the workman concerned is entitled to compensation which has not been paid to him. In that case , the termination becomes eligible to be called as illegal as not with compliance of the mandatory provision to that effect.
13. Inview of the compensation to be calculated it is found that though the service of Substitute Emergency Peon was for 3 months and subject to periodical extension, there was prospect for posting in regular Group D posts on completion of 3 years of service as Substitute Emergency Peon. In view of such prospect in the said nature of engagement , the compensation should not be a meager amount . Further, the present workman was granted temporary status. In view of the consideration as stated above , I am of the view that an amount of Rs . 50,000 (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) as compensation will be sufficient for necessary compliance. The said amount of Rs . 50,000 is to be paid to the workman concerned by the management N.F. Railway within a period of 3 months from the date of the Award.
AnAward is passed accordingly.
10. In view ofthe discussions made in the foregoing paragraph, even though the service of the Substitute Emergency Peon to be deemed to have been terminated on his being transferred to some other Railway on his own se king, his attachment to the place of his engagement is ter minated, but such termination even needs compliance of Section 25F of the Act if the workman concerned has mpleted a period of employment with the employer for 40 days or more. It is found that he has worked for 241 days and thus become qualified to get all the mandatory benefits under Section 25F ofthe Act .
Justice MANIK MOHAN SARKAR, Presiding Officer Dated, Kolkata,
The 16th January, 2012.
नई दिल्ली, 24 जनवरी , 2012
का. आ. 657. औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में केन्द्रीय सरकार 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 , आसंसोल के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 45/1999 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 24-1-2012 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।
[सं. एल-22012/160/98- आई आर ( सी- II ) ] डी. एस. एस. श्रीनिवास राव , डेस्क अधिकारी
NewDelhi , the 24th January, 2012
S.O. 657. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 45/1999) ofthe Central Government Industrial Tribunal -cum -Labour Court, Asansol as shown in the Annexure , in the industrial dispute between the employers in relation to the management ofECL , and their workman, which was received bythe Central Government on 24-1-2012 .
[No. L-22012/ 160/98- IR(C- II ) ] D.S.S. SRINIVASA RAO , Desk Officer 11. In such circumstances , automatically a relief for reinstatement with back wages comes in favour of the workman. But, since a part of the mandatory provision has been complied with by the employer by paying 14 days wages in lieu of notice , the workman concerned becomes entitled to get the compensation as the rest part of the compliance of the mandatory provision under Section 25F. But, such compensation , again, is to be paid before the notice of termination which has not been done inthe present case. Naturally, the reinstatement becomes natural relief for the workman concerned. But, the present position of law in view of the view taken by the Hon'ble Apex Court indifferent decisions , the reinstatement with backwages is not the straight jacket formula to be applied in case of non-compliance of Section 25F, rather , the Hon'ble Apex Court viewed that compensation in lieu thereof even after notice of termination will suffice as several matters are involved in respect of consideration of the reinstatement with back wages in view of the service condition of the workman concerned . We have already discussed that the condition of service of the present workman as Substitute Emergency Peon was for a temporary period with periodical extension subject to satisfactory report from the controlling officer and his service would have faced automatic termination on completion of the time period, if not extended and also if he is abandoned by his controlling officer with the 1504
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: FEBRUARY 18 , 2012/MAGHA 29, 1933
ANNEXURE
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL CUM-LABOUR COURT, ASANSOL
PRESENT:
Sri Kishori Ram, Presiding Officer
Reference No. 45 of 1999
PARTIES:
The Industrial Dispute between the management of Dalurband Colliery of M/ s . ECL.
Vs.
Sh . Faudi Bhuiya
REPRESENTATIVES :
FortheManagement : Sri P. K. Das Advocate
For the Union ( Workman) : Sri S. K. Pandey,
[PART II-SEC. 3( ii ) ]
higher ups in the E.C.L. Authority and raised the I.D. on failure of discussion. And consequently on failure of the conciliation, the I.D. has come up in this decision on reference. The Union has urged for an award holding the action of the management in denying employment as not legal and justified.
3. The Management without disputing the factual aspects of the case of the workman maintains that Sh . Bhaga Bhuia was never dependent on the workman , Faudi Bhuiya and the Vigilance Deptt . of the Company found the claim as fake one . Though the matter was already processedbut in view of the Vigilance report employment was refused.
4. The management relied on the documentary evidence only without adducing oral evidence . Evidence of one witness namely Sachidanand Prasad has been secured by the Union. Both the sides have been heard at length.
Jt. Secy. of the CMC
State:West Bengal
Industry: Coal
Dated the : 11-6-10/5-1-12
AWARD
Inexercise ofpowers conferred by clause (d) of sub- section ( 1 ) of sub- section 2(A) of Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , Govt . of India through the Ministry ofLabour vide its letter No. L- 22012/ 160/98 - IR ( CM - II ) dated 22-4-1999 has been pleased to refer the following dispute for adjudication by this Tribunal .
SCHEDULE
"Whether the action of the management of Dalurband Colliery of M/ s . ECL in denying employment to the dependent son - in -law of Sh . Faudi Bhuiya, Ex - Trammer as per NCWA - IV is legal and justified ? If not , to what relief the workman is entitled ? "
2. Simple case of the Union is that the dependent son- in- law of the Late Faudi Bhuiya , Ex - Trammer of Dalurband Colliery, was refused employment by the management of Dalurband Colliery even if duly nominated by the workman whose service was terminated on 8-5-1991 on medical ground of fitness . Application of the workman was processed by the Area Authority for employment to Bhaga Bhuia and same was approved by the competent authority and was conveyed to the General Manager of Pandaveshwar Area. However, no appointment order was issued . The union took up the matter with the 5. On going through the pleadings, evidence both oral and documentary and upon hearing the learned counsel for the Management and the office bearer of the Union Sri S. K. Pandey, it is found that parties are not at variance on the facts of termination of service ofVauzit Bhuiya on medical ground . The nomination ci his dependent son-in -law Bhaga Bhuia for employment under Clause 9.4 ( ii ) of National Coal Wage Agreement- /V (NCWA - IV) and also on the fact that the Management in fact had already processed the proposal but for adverse vigilance report was denied , is an admitted fact. As such the evidence laid on to establish those admitted facts are of no significance . The questions that remain to be considered are as to ( i ) whether the nominee of Blaga Bhuiya is the eligible dependent of the workman Fandi Bhuiya and (ii) whether the rejection of nominee by the management solely on the basis ofadverse vigilance report isproper.
6. In NCWA - IV under Clause 9.7.3( iii ) provisions have been made for purpose of employment to ove dependent of a worker in his place who is permanentiy disabled which includes son- in - law residing with the employee and almost wholly dependent on the earnings ofthe employee. Fulfilment of all other requirements under Clause 9.7.3 stand undisputed. It is not the case of either party that there is any direct dependents of the employee to lay claim for the employment . The oral evidence of Sachidanand Prasad (W.W. - 1 ) and that of the wife of the employee namely Manu Kamin (W.W. -2) clearly establish not only the relation of Bhaga Bhuiya as the son - in -law of Faudi Bhuiya but also his dependency on the earnings of the employee Faudi Bhuiya .
In vain the Management tried to demolish the evidence to show that Bhaga Bhuia is not the son- in - law but their bid failed by clear admission of Sachidanar d 1505
भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 18 , 2012/माघ 29 , 1933
[ भाग II-खंड 3 ( ii ) ]
Limited, and their workman, which was received by the Central Government on 24-01-2012.
[No. L-22012/ 13 /2001 -IR(CM- II)] D.S.S. SRINIVASARAO, Desk Officer
ANNEXURE
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIALTRIBUNAL-CUM- LABOUR COURT, JABALPUR
No. CGIT/LC/R/83/03
Shri Mohd. Shakir Hasan, Presiding Officer
ThePresident,
Pench Kanhan Koyla Khadan
Karamchari Sangh,
PO Damua,
Workman
Distt. Chhindwara
Versus
WCL, Kanhan Area,
Management
The ChiefGeneral Manager, PODungaria, Chhindwara
AWARD
Passed on this 2nd day of January 2012 (W. W.- 1) that in good faith he signed a statement shown to him to sign. Without knowing the contents contrary to the above facts in his evidence he signed the same. It appears that procuring a starry statement ofa person and that too in such malafide manner and without making any attempt to ascertain the real facts the vigilance official has submitted such a report detrimental to the interest ofthe employee apparently to appease the authority or for any extraneous reason. At any rate the management which hadadmittedly had already duly processed the application and was at the penultimate stage to approve the said nomination reversed it finally. Simply on the basis of a fabricated evidence procured by the Vigilance Dept. The vigilance report is now also found to be inadequate and biased one. Since all other requirements under the said provisions of NCWA stand complied, the management is under statutory obligation to accept the nomination and toprovide employment to the son-in-law Bhaga Bhuiya in place of the employee Faudi Bhuiya. The action of the management ofDalurband Colliery of M/ s . ECL in denying employment to the dependent son- in- law of Sh . Faudi Bhuiya, Ex-Tranumer as per NCWA - IV is held not legal and justified. For the above reasons he be provided with employmentfrom the date of retirement of Sh. Faudi Bhuiya with adequate monetary compensation in lieu of loss of wages for the pendentilite period. Monetary benefit be disbursed within two months of notification of the award pending regularization of service papers . Hence it is ordered:
ORDER
1. The Government of India, Ministry of Labour videits Notification No. L- 22012/13 /2001 - IR (CM-II)dated 23-4-2003 has referred the following dispute for adjudication bythis tribunal:
Let an award as above be and same is passed. Send the copy of the award to the Ministry of Labour and Employment, Govt. of India, New Delhi .
KISHORI RAM, Presiding Officer
नई दिल्ली, 24 जनवरी , 2012
"Whether the action of the ChiefGeneral Manager, WCL, Kanhan Area, PO Dungaria, Distt. Chhindwara (MP) in not allowing workman Shri Jubarlal , So Sadlal to join duty is legal and justified ? If not, to what relief he is entitled to ? "
का.आ. 658.-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 (1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में केन्द्रीय सरकार डब्ल्यू.सी.एल. के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच , अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालय , जबलपुर के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 83/03 ) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 24-1-2012 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।
[सं. एल-22012/13/2001- आई आर ( सीएम- II ) ] डी. एस. एस. श्रीनिवास राव, डेस्क अधिकारी
New Delhi , the 24th January, 2012
2. The case of Union/Workman in short is that the workman Jubarlal was posted as Tub Loader at Rakhikol Colliery of WCL, Kanhan Area. He was transferred to Majari Area vide order dated 11-6-95. The said transfer order was cancelled on representation of the workman videorderdated 2-2-96 and the same was not communicated to him. On advise of the Asstt. Labour Commissioner (Central) Chhindwara , the workman decided to join his duty inMajari Area. Subsequently the workman reported onduty atMajari Area on 25-8-1998 where he was intimated by the Area Personnel Manager, Majari Area that his transfer order had been cancelled on 2-2-96 by the Headquarter, WCL, Nagpur. It is submitted that the workman and the Union Representative returned to Kanhan Area but he was not entertained inspite of several representations . It is submitted that the workman be reinstated from the date of cancellation of the transfer order i.e. w.e.f. 2-2-96 with all back wages.
S.O. 658. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 83/03 ) ofthe Central Government Industrial Tribunal -cum -Labour Court , Jabalpur , as shown in the Annexure, in the industrial dispute between the management of Western Coalfields 1506
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 18 , 2012/MAGHA29 , 1933
[PART II-SEC. 3( it )]
7. Issue No. III
Onthe discussion made above , it is clear that there was no case of the workman and he 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 & Employment asperrules.
MOHD. SHAKIR HASAN, PresidingOfficer नई दिल्ली, 24 जनवरी , 2012 3. The management appeared and filed Written Statement to contest the reference . The case of the management, interalia, is that the workman Shri Jubarlal was initially appointed as Tub loader w.e.f. 27-6-93 at Gorawari Colliery of Kanhan Area. Subsequently he was transferred to Rakhikol Colliery. It is stated that vide order dated 4-5-95 he was transferred from Rakhikol Collieryto Majari Area. On the representation of the workman, his transfer order was cancelled vide order dated 2-2-96 and he was directed to report to Chief General Manager, WCL, KanhanArea but he never reported to the Area Headquarter of WCL , Kanhan Area and remained absent from duty unauthorisedly without intimation, permission and sanctioned leave. The workman has raired the dispute with a view to escape from the gross misconduct committedby him . The management Kanhan Area never refused the workman from resuming his duty. In view of the above facts, it is submitted that the reference be answered in favour of the management .
4. On the basis of the reference of the parties, the following issues are for adjudication:
का.आ. 659.--औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में केन्द्रीय सरकार डब्ल्यू.सी.एल. के प्रबंधतंत्र को संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच , अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालय , जबलपुर के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 159/92 ) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 24-1-2012 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।
(I) Whether the action of the management of Kanhan Area in not allowing the workman to join duty is legal and justified?
(II) To what relief, the workman is entitled ?
[सं. एल-22012/370/91- आई आर ( सी- II ) ] डी. एस. एस. श्रीनिवास राव, डेस्क अधिकारी New Delhi , the 24th January, 2012 5. The Union/Workman after filing statement of claim became absent. The then Tribunal proceeded the reference exparte against the Union/workman on 18-5-05.
6. Issue No. I
S.O. 659. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947 ) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref . No. 159/92 ) 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 Western Coalfields Limited, and their workman, received by the Central Government on 24-01-2012.
[No. L- 22012/370/91 - IR(C - II ) ] D.S.S. SRINIVASARAO , Desk Officer
ANNEXURE
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL -CUM- LABOUR COURT, JABALPUR
No. CGIT/LC/R/ 159/92
Presiding Officer: SHRI MOHD . SHAKIR HASAN
The General Secretary, B.K.K.M.S. (BMS) , PO CHANDAMETTA, Distt. Chhindwara (MP)
Workman
Versus
According to the management , the workman had himself not reported on duty in Kanhan Area after cancelling his transfer order dated 4-5-95 and therefore the question for not allowing him to join duty does not arise. The management has examined one witness namely Shri Bhagwat . V. Haste who is Manager in WCL Kanhan Area. He has supported the case of the management . He has stated that the workman was transferred from Kanhan Area to Majari Area vide order dated 11-6-95 and on his representation, the said transfer order was cancelled vide order dated 2-2-96. The workman was directed to report to the Chief General Manager, WCL , Kanhan Area but he never reported to Area Head Quarter, Kanhan Area and became unauthorized absent . He has further stated that inspite ofhis unauthorized absence , the management did not initiate any disciplinary action against him till date . Hehas also stated that the management of WCL , Kanhan Area never refused the workman from resuming his duty but inspite of receiving the cancellation transfer order , he failed to report on duty. His evidence is unrebutted . There is no reason to disbelieve the evidence of the management . His evidence clearly shows that the workman was never refused from joining his duty. This issue is decided against the Union/workman and in favour of the management .
The Manager , Shivpuri U/G Mine of WCL, PO Sirgoda, Via Parasia, Distt. Chhindwara (M.P. )
Management 1307 भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 18 , 2012/माघ 29 , 1933
[ भाग II-खंड 3 ( ii ) ]
AWARD
Passed on this 9th day of January 2012
1. The Government of India, Ministry of Labour vide its Notification No. L- 22012/370/91 - IR (C-II) dated 8-7-92 has referred the following dispute for adjudication bythistribunal:
"Whether the action of the management of Manager, Shivpuri underground Mine, WCL, Pench Area, PO Shivpuri , Via Parasia, Distt. Chhindwara (MP) in not correcting the date of birth of Shri Gangaram S/o Rajbir, Mining Sirdar of Shivpuri UndergroundMine ofWCL, PenchArea from 1-1-1941 to 7-7-1952 without giving any consideration to his date ofbirth recorded as 7-7-52 in School Certificate and Sirdar Certificate etc.producedby him is justified? Ifnot to what relief the concerned workman is entitled to ? "
workman in Form B register is mentioned as 1-7-1941 . Subsequently in the year 1987, service Excerpts of every employee was circulated and they had been asked to give comments , if any. A copy of service excerpts was also given to the workman on 17-4-1987 showing his date of birth as 1-7-1941 but he returned the same after signing and without raising any objection . Service Book of the workman was also prepared which also shows that his date ofbirth is 1-7-1941 and its bears his L.T.I. It is only in the year 1987 or 1988 he raised objection for the first time for correction of his date of birth on the basis of Mining Sardar Certificate . It is stated that it is not an authentic record for determination of the date ofbirth because it was not verified by any competent authority. It is admitted that I.I. No. 76 is a remedial measure formulated by Joint Bipartite Committee for Coal Industry (in short JBCCI ) to sort out age disputes . It is submitted that under these circumstances , the action of the management is justified andthe workman is not entitled to any relief.
4. On the basis of the pleadings ofboth the parties, the following issues are formulated for adjudication:
(1) Whether the action of the management in not correcting thedate ofbirth ofthe workman from 1-1-1941 to 7-7-1952 isjustified ?
(II) Ifnot, to what relief the workman is entitled ?
5. Issue No. I
Onthe pleadings of both the parties, the following facts appear to be admitted:
(1) The workman, Shri Gangaram was Mining Sardar on the basis of Mining Sardar's Certificate at Shivpuri Underground Mine .
(2) His date ofbirth was recorded in Form B register as 1-7-1941.
(3) The date ofbirth in Mining Sardar's Certificate is recorded as 7-7-1952 .
(4) The workman was Class 7th pass at the time of initial appointment in the service.
2. The case of the Union/workman in short is that the workman Shri Gangaram was employed as Mining Sardar having Mining Sardar's Certificate in which his date ofbirth was recorded as 7-7-1952 whereas in formB Register , the age was incorrectly recorded by the management as 1-7-1941 which was required to be prepared under Mining Act , 1952 and rules . The workman was not well conversant with English language nor the management had even explained the columns ofthe register. When the workman came to know about the irregularity ofhis age , he approached the management for correction and submitted his Class Vilth pass certificate. The management failed to rectify the date of birth, then the Union intervened and requested the management to rectify it on the basis of statutory certificates . A committee is said to have been constituted but did not consider his case . The Implementation Instruction No. 76 Para B(1)(b) (in short I.I. No.76) provides that Mining Sardar Certificate shouldbe treaied as authentic for determination of date ofbirth . It is stated that he had passed from the recognised educational Institution and in terms of sub-clause- II ofclause (a) ofthe I.I. No. 76, the date of birth of recognised educational Institution is considered to be correct . It is submitted that the date of birth be corrected on the basis of statutory/ school leaving certificate.
(5) The workman raised the dispute of his age in the year 1987 or 1988 .
(6) The I.I. No. 76 is applicable to sort out age disputes but the Age Determination committee had not considered his age disputes.
6. Both the parties have adduced oral and documentary evidence . Exhibit W/1 is the failure report submitted by Asstt . Labour Commissioner (Central ) , Chhindwara to the Ministry whereby it appears that the partiesdid not settle the dispute of age . Exhibit W/ 2 is an incomplete record note of discussions held between the management and the representatives of the Union. It is not related to the workman. Moreover it is incomplete and 3. The management appeared and filed Written Statement to contest the reference . The case of the management, inter alia is that Shri Ganga Ram was initially appointed on 26-6-1972 as a Tub Loader in Newton Chickli front where he was transferred to Shivpuri Underground Mine on 16-9-1985 as Trammer. Subsequently he was promoted as Mining Sardar on 31-5-86 at the same place . It is stated that statutory registers are maintained according to the Mines Rules . The statutory Form B Register contains personal particulars of all employees and no employee can be permitted towork in the Mine without his entry of the particulars in Form B Register. The date of birth of the 1508
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 18 , 2012/MAGHA 29 , 1933
[PART II-SEC. 3 (ii )]
photocopies of these documents . The management has failed to file the original copy of Form B register of the workman which is said to have been prepared at the time of entering into the service . Form B register is statutory register and it has been with held for the reason best known to the management . The learned counsel for the workman submits that the photocopy of form B filed in Court show's alteration in the date ofbirth without any order and therefore it is intentionally withheld by the management . The original formB of the workman is not filed and no explanation is also given. It is clear that when photocopy of the Form B was filed in Court, the original is admittedly in possession ofthe management and it was intentionally witheld. As such adverse inference is to be drawn against the management' and the date of birth recorded by the management isdoubtful.
therefore it is not fit to be relied as an evidence . The other photocopies of the documents of the workman are denied andtherefore the original are filed by the Union/ workman. The workman has filed original Mining Sardar certificate. The workman is admittedly promoted on the basis of statutoryMining Sardar Certificate . This shows that it is anadmitted document . The Mining Sardar Certificate shows that itwas issued on 20-3-1985 . This certificate shows that the date ofbirth of the workman is 7th July 1952. The learned counsel for the management argued that the Mining Sardar Certificate is not an authentic record for determination of the date ofbirth of an employee . The employee can fill any date ofbirth and on the basis of entry made in the form, the Mining Sardar Certificate is issued. The workman is admittedly promoted on the basis ofhis certificate as Mining Sardar on 31-5-1986. This shows that the competent authority of the management had considered it as authentic as a whole . It is urged on behalf of the workman that in support ofhis age , the originals ofClass VII certificate and school leaving certificate are also filed which also go to show that the date of birth of the workman is 7th July, 1952. It is submitted that the statutory records maintained by the management also shows that educational qualification of the workman is recorded as Class VIIth pass . This aspect also supports that age recorded in the classVII certificate is to be considered as basis of his age. The statutory records filed by the management donot show the basis of recording his age. Thus it is clear that the correct date ofbirth of the workman is 7-7-1952 which is also in class VIIth pass certificate and School leaving certificate instead of 1-7-1941 which had no basis of recording.
9. The Service Book of the workman shows that he had passed Class 7th examination . The column No. 11 of the service Book shows that the management had to keep the attested copy of the document in proof of age . When the record shows that the workman had passed Class VIIth , obviously the certificate of class VIIth was the basis of his age and theeducational certificate supports the case of the workman . It is also not clear as to when the service book was prepared then what was the basis of recording the date of birth in the service book . The copy ofLast Pay certificate ofthe workman is filed to show that the date ofbirth of the workman is 1-7-1941 . It was prepared in the year 1985. It does not show as to on which basis the agewas recorded . The management has filed carbon copy ofService Excerpts to show that it was communicated to the workman in 1987. It is argued on behalf of the management that the workman had not done any objection and returned it after signing . I donot agree with this view because the management has himself pleaded that the workman raised dispute of age in the year 1987 or 1988 . There is cutting of age in the document of service excerpts . There is nothing to show that when it was corrected and in whose order it was corrected. It appears to be not reliable. Thus the documents filed by the management go to show thatthe educational qualification of the workman was Vilth pass at the time of appointment and Class VIIth certificate shows that his age was 7-7-1952 . Moreover the documents show that there is no basis of recording the age as 1-7-1941 by the management and the form B of the workmanwas intentionally with held which was the initial document prepared at the time of entry into the service .
7. The workman Shri Ganga Rajbhar is examined in the case. He has supported his case on the point of date of birth that his date ofbirth is 7-7-1952 . He has stated that he had copy of School leaving certificate at the time of appointment but it was not demanded at that time . Subsequently he has stated that he got the school certificate inthe year 1977. He has asserted in his evidence that hedid not know the age recorded in the records of the management and came to know for the first time in the year 1985. Admittedly the workman had raised objection in the year 1987 or 1988 as has been also pleaded by the management . The workman has stated that he submitted his school leaving certificate in the year 1988 but the same was returned back. Thus it is clear that the workman raised the dispute of his age after service excerpts given to him . Hisevidence also supports that his actual date of birth was 7-7-1952.
10. The management has examined Shri Rajesh Kumar Sinha . He is working as Senior Personnel Officer , WCL, Pench Area . He has come to support the case of the management . He has stated that Form B register is the register from which all the particulars of the employee are ascertained and no employee is permitted to work in a Mine without there being entry in the Form B Register. He has further stated that the said Form B register contained entire 8. On the other hand, the management has also adduced oral evidence . The photocopies of the documents filedby the management have been denied by the workman vide order dated 17-3-05. The management has also filed original copy of service book , copy of last pay certificate and carbon copy of service excerpts on denial of 1509 भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 18 , 2012/माघ 29 , 1933
[ भाग II-खंड 3 (ii) ]
particulars ofthe workman. The said Form B Register of the workman is not filed by the management in Court which is said to be statutory Register and is the basis of date of birth. In absence of Form B Register, the evidence ofthis witness is not reliable . He has further stated that the Service excerpts ofthe workman was also given to him on 14-7-87 but the workman by way of accepting the entries made therein put his signature and submitted to the management. This fact is contradicted by the pleading of the management itself. The pleading ofthe management shows that the workman raised dispute of age in the year 1987 or 1988. This shows that the workman raised dispute immediately thereafter.
11. Both the parties have admitted in their pleading that I.I. No. 76 provides the procedure for determining the date ofbirth . Para (B) ( i ) (a) and (b) runs as follows:
"Review/determination of date ofbirth in respect of existing employees .
which are filed were issued after entry into the service. It is true that these certificate are issued to the workman after coming into the service but the records of the management clearly show that he had educational qualification ofClass VIIth pass at the time of initial entry into the service. This fact corroborates from the Service Book of the workman filed by the management . The said Service Book further shows that educational qualification is to be recorded after keeping an attested copy of the certificate . The management has not filed the attested copy of the certificate for proving the basis of entry in the service book and to contradict the claim of the workman . The management witness Shri Rajesh Kumar Sinha has stated in his evidence that he cannot say without seeing the file that the photocopy of the School Certificate is in the file or not . In this peculiar circumstances , it appears that the School Certificate and School Leaving Certificate filed by the workman are fit to be relied for the purpose of determining his age as 7-7-1952 as the educational qualification is recorded admittedly in the Service Book of the workman which is deemed to have been written on the basis of photocopy of the certificate. Considering the discussion made above , it is clear that the action of the management in not correcting the date of birth of the workman from 1-1-1941 to 7-7-1952 is not justified. Accordingly this issue is decided in favour of the workman and against the management.
13. Issue No. II
(i)(a) In the case of the existing employees Matriculation Certificate or Higher Secondary Certificate issued by the recognised Universities or Board or Middle Pass Certificate issued by the Board of Education and/of Department of Public Instruction and admit Cards issued by the aforesaid bodies should betreated as correct provided they were issued by the said Universities /Boards/Institutions prior to the date of employment .
(i ) (b) similarly, Mining Sirdarship , Winding Engineer or similar other statutory certificates where the Manager had to certify the date of birth will be treated as authentic.
On the basis of the discussion made above , it is evident that the actual date of birth of the workman is determined as 7-7-1952 . The management is directed to passnecessary order after considering his age as 7-7-1952 with all consequential benefits and to pay accordingly. The reference is , accordingly, answered.
14. In the result, the award is passed without any order to costs .
Provided that where both documents mentioned in (i )( a) above are available , the date ofbirth recorded in (i ) (a) will be treated as authentic . "
15. Let the copies of the award be sent to the Government of India , Ministry of Labour & Employment asper rules.
MOHD. SHAKIR HASAN, Presiding Officer नई दिल्ली, 24 जनवरी , 2012
The provisions for determination of date of birth in respect of existing employees shows that Mining Sirdar Certificate is authentic for determination of age where the Manager had to certify the date of birth . In this particular case , the workman was admittedly promoted to Mining Sirdar after considering the Mining Sirdar certificate by the Competent authority. The document is always taken as a whole and therefore it is clear that the authority had considered the date of birth also as authentic as has been mentioned in the certificate . Thus the date ofbirth of the workman as in Sirdar Certificate is correct and is the basis in terms of I.I. No. 76 for determination of date ofbirth.
का.आ. 660.-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 (1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में केन्द्रीय सरकार करूर वैश्य बैंक लि. के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच , अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालय , चैन्नई के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 6/2008 ) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 24-1-2012 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।
[सं. एल-12012/09/2008- आई आर ( बी-1 ) ] रमेश सिंह , डेस्क अधिकारी 12. The learned counsel for the management argued that the educational certificate and School Leaving Certificate are only admissible in view of the I.I. No. 76 whenthe same were issued prior to the date ofemployment. It is submitted that in this particular case the certificates
367 G1/2012-27 1510
THE GAZET TROINDA FEBRUARY 18 , 2012/MAGHA29, 1933
New Delhi , the 24th January, 212
S.O. 660.-In pursuance of Sealant of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 17.7 , Government hereby publishes the award ( Ref 40 10/2008 ) ofthe Central Government Industrial Tutantalum - abou Court , Chennai as shown in the Annexure , the industrial dispute between the management of Kazur Wara Bank Ltd. and their workman , received by the Centrumianument on 24-1-2012 .
[No. L-12012- RAMESH SIT
ANNEXURE
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GUVONCENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM LOUR COURT, CHENNA
Monday, the 15th For :*;
Industrial Dispute No
PRESENT :
A. N. Janardanan , Presiding O
( In the matter of the dispute for adjudicauen under clause( d) of sub -section ( 1) and sub - soron 204jofSection 10 ofthe Industrial Disputes Act . 1947 ( 14 ja 1917 ) berwoen the Management of Karur Vysva Bank Ltd. and their workman).
Betweez
The General Secretary Karur Vysya Bank Employee C/o Karur Vysya Bank Ltd. Na Thrift and Credit Society Lid Chennai -600094
Tat Pars Trendoner
Anxi
TheAssistant General Mag KarurVysya Bank Ltd. Central ffice, Erode Road, Choolaimode: Karur-639002
APPEARANCES :
Forthe 1st Party/Petitioner
Vre.kom, Adorates
For the 2nd Party/Management MR. Lankash
AWARD
The Central Government , Ministry of Lonour weits Order No. L - 12012/ 9/ 2008 - IR ( B -T) ds: 011-2-200 % referred the following industrial dispute to 13 Tribunal tor adjudication.
[PART II-SEC. 3 ( ii) ]
The schedule mentioned in that order is:
"Whether the action of the management of Karur Vysya Bank Ltd. , H.O.: Karur in dismissing Sri S. Madeswaran, Sub- Staff as claimed by Karur Vysya Bank Employees Union is justified or not ? If not, what relief the workman is entitled to ?"
2. After the receipt of the industrial dispute , this Tribunal has numbered it as ID 6/2008 and issued notices to both sides . Both sides entered appearance through their Advocates and filed their Claim and Counter Statements as the case may be .
3 The averments in the Claim Statement briefly read asfollows:
The workman Madeswaran , a Sub - Staff in employment under the Respondent was working as one among the 5 packers at the Stationery Department, Central Office , Karur where transactions were done manually till 1997 under the Manager, Verasamy in overall charge .Manager calls for sealed quotations based on indent which is opened by him in the presence of 3 available executives who scrutinize the quotations and decide . The tenderer quoting the lowest is asked to supply stationery items such as books and forms. Supply is made through delivery challans which the Manager verifies and tally with delivery challans putting his initial in the chailan . Thereafter suppliers submit bills to the Manager who after tallying the bills with delivery Challans put "Goods Received " seal with his initial in the bill and payment seal with his signature . The bill thereafter goes to the ChiefManager or General Manager for sanction. Thereafter they come to the Clerk through the Manager for preparation of vouchers . The Clerk prepares vouchers based on the bills and sends the same to the Manager who after signing the voucher sends the same to the Chief orGeneral Manager after whose approval the same will go to the Accounts and Funds Management Department (AF and D) for preparation of banker's cheque which cheque comes to the Manager who hands over to the suppliers , as the procedure followed. Both Internal and External Audit did not point out any irregularity till the year 2001-2002 . Ona so - called inspection on 3-6-2002 Manager, Veerasamy was charged of indulging in various irregularities in the Stationery Department and defrauding the bank causing loss to the bank to the tune of Rs . 36.74 lakhs and of cheating and misappropriation. One Selvaraj was charged of colludingwith the Manager by making wrong entries by way of abetting . Despite rules to report financial irregularities above Rs . 1.00 lakh, the matter on hand 1511
भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 18 , 2012/माघ 29 , 1933
[भाग II-खंड 3 ( ii ) ]
was not reported to Police for best reasons known to 4. Counter Statement allegations are as follows:
them in order to save somebody. No charge was
issued to the workman simultaneously with them. While petitioner was working in the Stationery
But on 25-9-2002 and 1-11-2002 Show Cause Notice Section abig fraud occurred with a shortage of stock
was issued to him about his source of income with to the tune ofRs . 36.74 lakhs came to light in March,
reference to his credit in his SB Account , purchase 2002.Abeneficiary in the fraud is M/s Annai Kaveri
ofcertainproperties by him and as to a loan allegedly Enterprises, the proprietor of which is petitioner's
advanced by him to one Mani , a Sub - Staff to which classmate.Petitioner was in collusion with Veerasamy,
Manager and Selvaraj , a Clerk for e involvement in
he gave satisfactory explanation . While so , he was
the fraud. Petitioner was charged for acts prejudicial
transferredto Stationery Department in Puducherry
to the interests of the bank and for engagement in
Branch. On 2-3-2004 he was suspended alleged of
business outside the scope of his duties and
fradulent transactions and acquisition of properties
acquisition of properties disproportionate to the
beyond known sources . On 9-3-2004 by Charge
known source of income . In the enquiry he
Memo it was alleged that one M/ s Annai Kaveri
participated after filing an unsatisfactory explanation.
Enterprises was a beneficiary of the fraud, a
He was found guilty in the enquiry held fairly and
classmate ofthe workman. It was also alleged that he
properly by a proper finding not assailable on any
was associated with Veerasamy and Selvaraj . He is
counts On 17-6-2006 Show Cause Notice proposing
also alleged ofbeing involved in lending money to
dismissal was served and after considering his
bank employees which is purposeful . In his submission he was dismissed on 12-10-2006.Appeal
explanation he denied the charges. The Management was dismissed on 25-10-2006 . Petitioner handled
did not provide him investigation report or details receipt and despatch of stationery items under
asked for. A farce enquiry was held followed by a supervision of Veerasamy and Selvaraj . Petitioner
perverse finding holding workman guilty. He was was responsible for verification of receipt ofgoods .
dismissed on 12-10-2006 . Hence the ID and the
Without knowledge of petitioner the stocks cannot
reference occasioned . Action of the bank is not be dealt with. Signature of Senior Managers for
bonafide. If at all there was any fraud it can be only passing the bill is only a formality without themselves
bythe Committee which consisted of higher officers verifying the stock . Correctness of stocks is
who are responsible for the transactions aanst dependem on the integrity of the Sub- Staff Packer.
whom bank was not inclined to proceed. Charge Without petitioner's connivance the other culprits
against workman was based on the very same could not have committed such a big fraud. It is not
investigation report of S. Sampath Kumar . The mandatory to go for prosecution in every case.
workman is falsely implicated. Bank should have held Lodging complaint is a discretion of the bank . In
a common enquiry. Details of association with audits ne physical verification of stocks had been
Veerasamy or Selvaraj were not given rendering done There are thousands of items and it is not
the charge vague and prejudicing the workman in possible to count and tally each. Initial verification
giving his explanation. It vitiates the enquiry. In spite of records only indicated the prima- facie doubt on
ofrequest Veerasamy was not examined as a witness . the petitioner. it was later that his involvement came
Only an extract of the Investigation Report was into light Petitioner has not denied his relationship
produced. A further Investigation Report was with one supplier of stationery items . Petitioner was
obtained when the enquiry was in the half way given all documents and copies of charge sheet
contrary to the settled principles of enquiry. Enquiry issued Veerasamy and Selvaraj and he is not
Officer acted in a partisan manner. There is no prejudiced. There is no violation of principles of
evidence of collusion with others . Statement of natural justice. Charges for the other two persons
witness without his examination would not constitute are separate from that of the petitioner not demanding
legal evidence. It is proved in the enquiry that the joint enquiry. It is denied that the enquiry lacked
workman had sufficient income for purchase of bonafides .Veerasamy was not examined as he was
properties . It was established that it was not the not expectedto depose against the petitioner.
workman who lent money to MW3 and MW4. There Petitioner could have examined him to prove his case.
isno question ofloosing confidence on the workman. The Ingation Report is not rendered false . After
He isnot holding any fiduciary post or post of trust secona avestigation by MW2 petitioner has cross-
or confidence . Punishment is shockingly examim MW2 . Petitioner never disputed his
disproportionate as to be interfered with under connecrico with S. Mabalingam. Investigation Report
Section - 11A of the ID Act . Dismissal is to be held is proof of the fact . It is denied that petitioner had
unjustified and the workman is to be reinstated with sufficiens income to parchase properties . There is
allbenefits. no plac for generosity and misplaced sympathy
1512
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: FEBRUARY 18 , 2012/MAGHA29 , 1933
towards the petitioner. Punishment is not disproportionate to the gravity of the misconduct . Petitioner's claim is tobe dismissed.
5. It is argued on behalf of the petitioner that the enquiry held is not fair and proper and wanted the matter tobe heard as a Preliminary issue . Accordingly the point as to whether the enquiry held against the petitioner is fair and proper was heard and as per Order dated 23-3-2011 it washeld that the same is valid .
6. Afterwards when the matter stood posted for further proceedings, final arguments were advanced regarding the merits of the main issue on either side , since neitherpartyhas had any further evidence to be advanced .
7. Points for consideration are :
(1) Whether the dismissal of Sri S. Madeswaran is justified or not ?
(ii) To what relief the concerned workman is entitled ?
8. The evidence consists of Ex . Ml to Ex . M63 on the Respondent's side with no other evidence on either side.
Points( i) and( ii) :
9. Heard both sides . Perused the documents and records. The predominant arguments advanced on behalf of the petitioner inter alia include , over and above the arguments in terms of the pleadings that loss of confidence has also been taken into consideration in passing the order ofdismissal without the same having been brought to the notice ofthe workman in the Charge Sheet . The workman hasbeen clearly victimized by the order of dismissal which isnotwarranted. Charges are not proved. He being only a Sub-Staff is not in a fiduciary capacity held in trust to be found to have lost in confidence . An item of hearsay evidence tobe acceptable it has to have a bearing on rational nexus and credibility. The finding is based on mere conjectures and surmises in the absence of corroborative evidence for the investigation report and oral evidence. There is no acceptable circumstantial evidence . Copy of Investigation Report was not given to the petitioner. There isnotangibledocumentary evidence to fix up theworkman. Itis for the Respondent to prove the misconduct against theworkman. Charges, if vague the enquiry is vitiated. The connivance of the workman with other delinquents has not been proved with necessary particulars . Mere relationship or connivance with any other is not sufficient toprove the modus operandi of the offending act . There is noproof of conspiracy too . The source of the workman's income has been sufficiently explained in the enquiry by him whom the Bank Management doubted needlessly. The workman mobilized all the sources of his income for his purchases . There is nojurisdiction to issue charge against the workman. He never lent money to any other or did any
[PART II-SEC. 3 ( ii ) ]
act injurious to the interests of the Bank . It is a case ofmere victimization . No bona fides are there for the Management in the action . Non -examination of the material witnesses is prejudicial to the employee , even if it does not vitiate the enquiry.
10. Contra arguments on behalf of the Respondent are that the termination of the workman was occasioned on two grounds viz . loss of confidence on him and for doing money lending business . There are materials to show the above facts for which there should be a reasonable nexus . The Charge Sheet shows all the material allegations , which facts have not been disputed or disproved by any contra evidence . Ex . M4 shows the nexus of the workman with Selvaraj who is another fraudster. The testimony of the concerned workman as a witness is also a piece of evidence to prove his link with the other workman . Ex . M 30 - School Certificate shows that the workman and Mahalingam , the printer are classmates . The workman cannot disown knowledge of each . Selvaraj helped him in money lending . Merefailure to lodge a Police Complaint is not fatal to the Management . The learned counsel for the Respondent concluded his argument by saying that a discharge can be given to the delinquent even if not proved the charges because the Management being Bank in the fitness of things or expediency a workman seem to be delinquent in whom confidence is lost and is seem to have engaged in activities injurious and prejudicial to theBank.
11. Reliance was placed on either side to various decisions of the Apex Court and other Courts in the top hierarchy. The decisions cited by the learned counsel for thepetitioner are:
Colour-Chem Ltd. Vs. A. L. Alaspurkar and others (1998-3 -SCC- 192) wherein the Apex Court held that "B. Interpretation of Statutes - Particular statutes orprovisions - Welfare Legislation - Provisions of, if capable of two constructions , one which furthers the policy and object of the Act and which is more beneficial to the employees should be preferred - But if the provisions are capable of only one meaning plain meaning thereof should be given effect to" .
Hardwari Lal Vs. State of U P and others ( 1999- 8-SCC- 582 ) wherein the Apex Court held that "The Tribunal as well as the High Court have brushed aside the grievance made by the appellant that the non -examination of those two persons has prejudiced his case . Examination of these two witnesses would have revealed as to whether the complaint made by Virender Singh was correct or not and to establish that he was the best person to speak to its veracity. So also, Jagdish Ram, who had accompanied the appellant to the hospital for medical examination, would have been an important witness to prove the state or the 1513
भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 18 , 2012/माघ 29 , 1933
[ भाग II-खंड 3 ( ii ) ]
condition of the appellant. We do not think the abank can function properly and effectively if its
Tribunal and the High Court were justified in officers and employees do not observe the
thinking that non-examination of these two prescribed norms and discipline. Such indiscipline
persons could not be material . In these cannot be condoned on the specious ground that
circumstances, we are of the view that the High it was not actuated by ulterior motives or by
Court and the Tribunal erred in not attaching extraneous considerations . The very act of acting
importance to this contention of the appellant" . beyond authority that too a course of conduct
spread over a sufficiently long period and
Management of Northern Railway Co-operative involving innumerable instances - is by itself a
Credit Society Ltd. , Jodhpur Vs. Industrial misconduct . Such acts, if permitted , may bring in
Tribunal , Rajasthan, Jaipur and Another (AIR- profit in some cases but they may also lead to
1967- SC- 1182) wherein the Apex Court held that huge losses . Such advertures are not given to the
"As regards the remaining four charges, theywere employees ofBank which deals with public funds.
clearly very vague. The first charge, in general Ifwhat we hear about the reasons for the collapse
terms, stated that the Kanraj had instigated and ofBringsBank is true , it is attributable to the acts
conspiredto paralyse the working of the Society of one of its employees , Nick Leeson , a minor
by collectively submitting sickness certificates . officer stationed at Singapore , who was allowed
Thechargedid not mention who he had instigated by his superiors to act far beyond his authority" .
orwithwhom he had conspired, nor did it indicate
howthis conspiracy was being inferred. Similarly, Suresh Pathrella Vs. Oriental Bank of Commerce
the third charge of taking active part in the issue (2006-10 - SCC- 572) wherein the Apex Court held
and distribution of certain leaflets against the that: 13. In Disciplinary Authority -cum-Regional
management of the Society did not at all indicate Manager Vs. Manu/SC/ 1578/ 1996 : Nikunja Bihari
what those leaflets were and what part Kanraj Patnaik ( 1996)-II-LLJ - 1379 SC this Court held that
had taken in the issue and distribution of those a bank officer's acting beyond his authority
leaflets. The fourth charge of carrying vilifying constituted misconduct and no further proof of
propaganda in connection with the elections of loss is necessary. In the case of Regional Manager,
U.P. SRTC Vs. MANU / SC/0102/ 2003 : Hoti Lal
the Society at the Annual General Meeting on
28thApril, 1956 was again similarly vague as there (2003)-II -LLJ -267 -SC, this Court held in paragraph
was no specification as to the persons with whom 10at sec p . 614 as under:
this propaganda was carried on by Kanraj and Ifthe charged employee holds a position of trust
whereand when it was done. In the same way, the where honesty and integrity are inbuilt
last and fifth charge of instigating the depositors requirements of functioning, it would not be proper
towithdraw their deposits from the Society was to deal with the matter leniently. Misconduct in
again very vague as there was no mention as to such cases has to be dealt with iron hands . Where
whichdepositors had been instigated and when the person deals with public money or is engaged
they were instigated . In these circumstances, in financial transaction or acts in a fiduciary
Kanraj was fully justified in pleading that the capacity, the highest degree of integrity and trust-
charges were vague and he was unable to show worthiness is a must and unexceptionable . Judged
cause against the charges served on him" . in that background, conclusions of the Division
12. Decisions relied on behalf of the Respondent Bench of the High Court do not appear to be
proper. We set aside the same and restore order
qrethose in:
of the learned Single Judge upholding order of
Disciplinary Authority-cum-Regional Manager dismissal . 14. In the case of Chairman and
andOthers Vs. Nilkunja Bihari Patnaik ( 1996-9- Managing Director, United Commercial Bank Vs.
SCC-69) wherein the Apex Court held that " In the MANU/SC/0110/2003 : P. C. Kakkar (2003)-II-LLJ-
caseofaBank - for that matter, in the case ofany 181-SC, this Court said in paragraph 14 at SCC p .
other organization every officer/employee is 376 as under:
supposed to act within the limits of his authority.
Ifeach officer/employee is allowed to act beyond A Bank officer is required to exercise higher
his authority the discipline of the organization/ standards ofhonesty and integrity. He deals with
bankwill disappear, the functioning of the Bank the money of the depositors and the customers .
wouldbecome chaotic and unmanageable. Each Everyofficer/employee of the Bank is requiredto
officer oftheBank cannot be allowed to carve out take all possible steps to project the interests of
his own little empire where he dispenses favour theBank and to discharge his duties with utmost
and largesse. No organization, more particularly, inte rity, honesty, devotion and diligence and to
1514
THE GAZIT
FEBRUARY 18 , 2012/ MAGHA 29 , 1933
do nothing which is unboorang fanficer Good conduct and disciplinesc ime pombie from the functioning of every fempla conf the Bank" .
needs to be emphasized in the.Juking
business absolute devotion.
not observed , the conta
depositors would be impaire
committed an error while de order
of dismissal of the respondi
prejudice on account of non-farisler of the Union Bank ofIndia Vs. Visto 11908- SCC -310 ) wherein the Apelit t rank Wthis and honesty needs to be part employee and in particular bor . we are of the opinion that the te inquiry report/ findings to be ".
Francis Klein and Comparer Peir Workmen and Another ( 1977dwin the Apex Court held that employer loses confidence it wach an cmployee wan in an roperty both quired to be particularly in respect of a person who is discharging, an office of trust and contince there can be no justificaties tot cirecting his reinstatement . The post on industrial concern where valde manufactured goods and as: guarded, is such a post and wetasone of his colieagues calls on hist hum in apprehending a thief terrisal in de so is certainly an act which jastest employer in Tribunal in loosing confidence in him . Even its order recognized that the employer has lost confidence in Nayan Sit boere while directing the Company to reinstav: on , says:
If the management considers that sayan Singh should not be given guard bersase of the ' Company's loss of confidence bin , as clamed by them , he may be allotted some ether job of similar nature as found suitab-ic
Eventhis direction is not a valid divention because if once the company has lost to Gdence in its employee it is idle to ask them to craptoy such a person in another job . What job cam there be in a Company which a person can be crusted with and which does not entail reposing of confidence inthatperson. We are informed dhari Nayan Singh has been receiving half his salarsand new which works out to about Rupees 2000 , While setting aside the Award of the tribunal by allowing this appeal we maintain the order feruusuog Nayan Singh and direct the appellantto pay Rupees 5,000 within two months as compensation for termination on account of loss , of confidence
[PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii )]
which in the circumstances will meet the ends of justice. Each party will bear its own cost in this Appeal".
Madura Coats Ltd. Vs. Presiding Officer , Principal Labour Court and Another (2002-1 -LLJ-313 ) Hon'ble High Court of Madras held that " Further the Labour Court has commented that failure to give a complaint to the police with regard to the said theft is fatal to the case of the management . We are of the view that merely because the management failed to give a complaint to thepolice regarding the said theft does not disentitle them from proceeding against the workman under their Standing orders . In such a circumstance , we are unable to accept the observation of the Labour Court that failure to give a complaint to the police is fatal to the case of the management . This is another error committed by the Labour Court" .
13. The enquiry held has been found to be fair and
proper. It cannot be said to be vitiated for any reasons . The challenge against the findings is that it is perverse on the basis of a farce enquiry. Though the action of the Bank is assailed as not bonafide such a finding cannot be arrived at on the appreciation of the facts and circumstances constituting the evidence for the conclusion, they being materials logically probative to a prudent mind to arrive at such a conclusion. They are enough to prove the charges in view of the fact that what is required is not adequate evidence but some legal evidence which can genuinely lead to the conclusion as to the facts of charges against the workmanbeing eminently true . Having regard to the nature of the transactions in regard to the acts of misconduct against the workman there cannot be expected any direct evidence . There can only be circumstantial evidence which when speak for themselves, reliable and conclusive, still may be not with the attribute of evidence of the nature of concrete tangible evidence . When those circumstances are so cogent as to conclude at the hypothesis by way of inferences they can safely be valid and logically probative materials to be banked upon for a conclusion to which the process is aimed at. The Investigation Report viz . Ex . M 25 and Ex. M 29 together with the linking oral evidence ofthe witnesses are worthy materials to come to the conclusion . The non -examination of the makers of the statements forming part of the Investigation Report is therefore not material enough to weakenthe above conclusion as contended and relied upon by the learned counsel Mr. V. Ajoy Khose. They indicate nexus between the workman and the other fraudsters in the mega fraud committed . When the impact of the cumulative effect of the circumstances unfolded in the Investigation Report is clearly and discernibly pinpointing the workman that he is also one involved in the huge fraud, non-examination of the makers of the statements against him is therefore not at all fatal . Though the charges are 1515 [ भाग II-खंड 3 ( ii ) ]
फरवरी 18, 2012/माथ 29, 1933
भारत का राजपत्र :
other charges , true , which alone find their expression in theCharge Sheet.
14. Now coming to the punishment there need not be said much to comment that the same has been disproportionate to the gravity of the offence. The two charges which his counterpart delinquents faced in the enquiry and that he confronted in the enquiry are not alike, true, the fact justifies absence ofjoint enquiry of him with others . The charges against others while were graver than the charges against the workman the same punishment is seen meted out to him also which interse run gravely disproponionate apart from his individual punishment , perse, being more than proportionate to the gravity of the independent charge which he faced. It has already been found that there is no reason to hold that the confidence of the management has been lost in him. Even when the inferred misconduct of his involvement in the huge fraud has to be projected towards him for punishment it is to be recollected for a virtuous assessment as to what has been his earning , say wrongful gain, in sharing with the fraud committed by them . As to whether there is any earning or no earning at all , or if at all there is some earning we are at dark on all those aspects regarding the quantum . Why not the apparent involvement of the workman with the other fraudsters unfolded through the Investigation Report based on the statements of the staff members not come to the box, thaus with no opportunity of testing their statements with the touchstone of cross- examination , still legally reckoned and reckonable as furnishing some material logically probative to conclude at the misconduct of the workman , undoubtedly the evidence falls down in its degree from the quality of adequacy ofevidence to some evidence which may be commented as legally reliable evidence . It is onlyto be said to be a weak evidence though it is capable of leading to the conclusion that he is involved in the huge fraud based on which and coupled with other evidence that he is found guilty of the charges framed against him. Sowhile it is to be seen that the delinquent not be set -off scot free, he is to be punished but the said punishment cannot assume alarming proportions like dismissal from service resulting in his economic death . It could be said that no reasonable man would have imposed such a grave punishment upon him . It is shocking a punishment and shocking to the conscience ofthe Court as well. Therefore the punishment is to be modified and reduced to some minor punishment to make sure of a guaranteed fact that the delinquent does not go unpunished .
15. In that view of the matter the dismissal of the workinan from the service is set aside. He is to be reinstated into service forthwith and thereafter seen to be punished by a warning to guard against any and any such inisconducts in future and if the Management must impose further punishment may inflict upon him stoppage of increment with cumulative effect for not more than a year.
alleged as vague it could well be seen that the workman fully comprehended what the charges are and thus gauged his participation in the enquiry which was full and plenary. The said report of investigation does not stand shaken . There is no proof of any prejudice having been caused to the workman, the burden of proving which is upon him . It is not proved that any of the links in the chain of circumstances is missing so as to disrupt the entire chain ofcircumstances viz . events in a sequence leading to the conclusionthat the workman is guilty. It is also to be noted that the proved circumstances could lead to no other hypothesis other than that the workman is involved in someway the big fraud. From the same fact it could well be held established by way of inferences that the workman had been engaged in lending of money outside his authority, and that he has had purchased properties in excess of his known sources of income. So the charges could be held proved as regards lending of money and doing business out of employment and purchasing property with money in excess of his known source of income. Regarding the loss ofconfidence on the workman by theManagement the argument on his behalf has to be accepted as true. The same does not find a place in the charge sheet . Therefore the finding rendered against him is one without taking into account his involvement or comments. Inthis context it is pertinent to ask what jobcan there be which a person can be entrusted with and which does not entail reposing of confidence in that person ? Therefore there cannot, possibly, be any punishment for which the element of loss of confidence has proportionately contributed its part and the same proportion has to be divested because there can never be any job which a person can be entrusted with and which does not entail reposing of confidence in him . In that view of the matter the concept or los of confidence ceases to be apt to be a ground for determining the punishment of a delinquent in disciplinary matters , especially in this case. It cannot be argued that the result of investigation forming evidence or part of it cannot be based for conclusion of a fact in issue or a relevant fact because the strict rules of Evidence Act as applicable in regular courts are not applicable in adjudications by Tribunals . Therefore there need not be any hesitation to hold that the workman is guilty of the charges framed against him which does not include loss of confidence whereas the punishment imposed is also inclusive of and for the loss of confidence found against the workman which is not relevant in the given facts and circumstances of the case since he is not working against any post of a fiduciary character or of fiduciary capacity and that the same is not a charge as well . Therefore finding thatthere is loss ofconfidence upon the workman rendered is not wholly true and capable of being acted upon to impose a punishment upon him based on it as well . Therefore the finding as to guilt is likely to be reduced to the extent of the exception of loss ofconfidence and it is so ordered. That is to say he is to be found only guilty ofthe 1516
[PART II-SEC. 3 (ii) ]
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 18, 2012/ MAGHA29 , 1933
He is entitled to continuity of service and all other attendant benefits with 50% back wages .
16. The reference is answered accordingly.
(Dictated to the P.A. , transcribed and typed by him, corrected and pronounced by me in the open court on this day the 16th January, 2012) .
A. N. JANARDANAN, Presiding Officer
Witnesses Examined :
: None
For the 1st Party/Petitioner
: None
For the 2nd Party/Management
Documents Marked:
On the petitioner's side :
Ex. No.
Date Description
N/A
On the Management's side:
Date
Ex. No.
Description
Ex.Ml 25-09-2002 Letter from Respondent to the Petitioner.
Ex.M2 10-10-2002 Reply from petitioner to Respondent.
01-11-2002
Ex. M3
Letter from Respondent to the Petitioner.
Ex.M4 19-11-2002 Reply from Petitioner to Respondent.
Ex.M5 02-03-2004 Order ofSuspension issued to the Petitioner .
Ex.M6 02-03-2004 Charge Sheet issued to the petitioner.
24-03-2004
Ex. M7
Reply submitted by the Petitioner to the Respondent .
Ex. M8 25-05-2004 Order issued by the Respondent for Departmental Enquiry against the Petitioner and appointing the Enquiry Officer.
25-05-2004
Ex.M9
Order of the Respondent appointing the Presenting Officer in the Departmental Enquiry against the petitioner.
Ex.M10 10-09-2004 Letter from the Petitioner to the Respondent .
Ex. M11 05-08-2004 Domestic Enquiry Proceedings .
05-08-2004
Ex.M12
Domestic Enquiry Proceedings .
Ex. No. Date
Description
05-08-2004
Ex.M13
Domestic EnquiryProceedings .
Ex.M14 05-08-2004 Domestic Enquiry Proceedings.
Ex M15 05-08-2004 Domestic Enquiry Proceedings .
Ex. M16 05-08-2004 DomesticEnquiry Proceedings .
Ex. M17 05-08-2004 DomesticEnquiry Proceedings.
Ex M18 05-08-2004 Domestic Enquiry Proceedings.
05-07-2000
Ex M19
Copy of Sale Deed in respect of the property purchased in the name of Sri S. Madheswaran (marked as MEX 01 in the Domestic Enquiry).
Ex.M20 10-12-2001 Copy of Sale Deed in respect of the property purchased in the name of Mrs. Anitha , W/ o Sri S.Madheswaran (marked as MEX 02 in the Domestic Enquiry).
ExM21 10-12-2001 Copy of the Sale Deed in respect of the property purchased in the name ofMrs. Angammal , M/ o Sri S. Madheswaran(marked as MEX 03 in the Domestic Enquiry) .
Ex. M22 01-01-2001 to
09-05-2002
Copy of the statement of account of Savings A/c No. 5271 in the name of Mr. S. Madheswaran (marked as MEX 04 in the Domestic Enquiry) .
Ex.M23 26-10-2002 Copy ofthe letter submittedby Mr. R. Mani (3157 ) , Armed Guard , Currency Chest , Madurai ( earlier at C.O. ) (Marked as MEX 05 in the Domestic Enquiry) .
11-02-2004
Ex.M24
Copy ofthe letter submittedby Mr. V. R. Manai ( 1542) Sub- Staff, IAD, Central Officer06 Annexure SB A/ c 4464 Ch . No. 851942 dated 04-07-2001 for Rs. 5,000 (copy) (Marked as MEX 06 in the Domestic Enquiry).
1517
भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 18 , 2012 /माघ 29 , 1933
[ भाग II- खंड 3 ( ii) ]
Ex. No. Date
Description
Date
Ex. No.
Description
25-09-2002
Ex M33
Ex.M25 30-05-2002
to 03-06-2002
Copy ofthe report submitted by Mr. R. Sampathkumar. Manager, IAD , Central Office (Marked as MEX 07 in the Domestic Enquiry) .
Copy ofthe letter PAD/06/2002 dated 25-09-2002 addressed to Mr. S. Madheswaran , Sub- Staff, Pondicherry Branch (Marked as DEX 02 in the Domestic Enquiry) .
03-02-2004
Ex.M26
Nil
Ex. M34
Acopy ofthe reply letter from Mr. S. Madheswaran to the above letter (Marked as DEX 03 in the Domestic Enquiry) .
Copy of the report submitted by Mr. K. Ramakrishnan , OfficerPAD, Central Office (Marked as MEX 08 in the Domestic Enquiry) .
25-03-2004
Ex. M35
09-03-2004
Ex. M27
Copy ofthe letter PAD/ 11 /2004 dated 25-03-2004 addressed to Mr. S. Madheswaran (Marked as DEX 04 in the Domestic Enquiry).
29-07-2004
Ex. M36
Copy of the Charge Sheet No. PAD/W- 10/08/2004 dated 9-3- 2004 issued against Mr. S. Madheswaran , Sub - Staff , Pondicherry Branch (Now under Suspension) (Marked as MEX 09 in the Domestic Enquiry).
Copy of Canara Bank covering letter dated 29-07-2004 (Marked as DEX 05 in the Domestic Enquiry).
29-07-2004
Ex. M37
24-03-2004
Ex.M28
Canara Bank , Nadupalayam NNND A/c 1600 statement of account(Marked as DEX 06 in theDomestic Enquiry) .
Ex.M38 29-07-2004
The copy of the reply letter from Sri S. Madheswaran to ChiefManager-PAD (Marked as MEX 10 in the Domestic Enquiry).
14-12-2004
Ex M29
Canara Bank, Nadupalayam NNND A/ c 1729 statement of account(Marked as DEX 07 in the Domestic Enquiry) .
29-07-2004
Ex. M39
Canara Bank , Nadupalayam NNND A/c 1998 statement of account(Marked as DEX 08 in theDomestic Enquiry) .
The copy of the report submitted by Mr. K. Ramakrishnan , Officer PAD, Central Office to Chief Manager-PAD ( Marked as MEX 11 in the Domestic Enquiry).
Ex.M40
13-12-2004
Ex . M30
07-08-2002 13-09-2002 18-09-2002
Charge Sheets given to Mr. Veeraswamy and Corres- ponding Final Orders (Marked as DEX 09 in the Domestic Enquiry).
The copy of the letter signed by Head Master, Government Higher Secondary School , Unjalur (Marked as MEX 11A inthe Domestic Enquiry) .
ExM41 05-09-2002 23-03-2004
13-12-2004
ExM31
Charge Sheet issued to Mr. Selvaraj and Corres- ponding Final Order (Marked asDEX 10 in the Domestic Enquiry).
Nil
Ex.M42
The copy of the letter signed by Head Master, Government Higher Secondary School , Unjalur (Marked as MEX 11B inthe Domestic Enquiry) .
M32 24-11-2004
Ex.
Copy of the pronote executed by Mr. R. Mani (Marked as DEX 11 in the Domestic Enquiry).
01-06-2002
ExM43
Letter dated 01-06-2002 given byMr. Raj Reddiar (Marked as DEX 12 in the Domestic Enquiry).
Copy of the letter PAD/ 1002/ 2004 dated 24-11-2004 addressed to the Head Master, Government High School , Unjalur (Marked as DEX 01 in the Domestic Enquiry) .
367 GI /2012-28 1518
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: FEBRUARY 18 , 2012/MAGHA29 , 1933
[PART II- SEC . 3 ( ii ) ]
Ex. No. Date
Ex. No. Date
Description
Description
Ex.M44 10-07-2001
Ex.M60 07-05-2007
Rejoinder filed by the Petitioner before the Conciliation Officer .
Ex.M61 26-07-2007
Letter dated 10-07-2001 given byMr. Mahadevan (Marked as DEX 13 in the Domestic Enquiry).
Ex.M45 16-06-2004
Reply statement filed by the Respondent before the Conciliation Officer.
Ex.M62 09-08-2007 Final rejoinder filed by the Petitioner before the Conciliation Officer.
Copy of the request letter from Mrs. Angammal to the Manager, Canara Bank , Nadupalayam (Marked as DEX 14 in the Domestic Enquiry).
Ex.M63
ExM46
30-10-2007
26-03-2005
Letter sent by the Respondent to the Conciliation Officer .
Written arguments of the Management submitted before the Enquiry Officer .
नई दिल्ली, 25 जनवरी , 2012
Ex.M47 26-03-2005 Written arguments of the Managernent submitted before theEnquiry Officer.
Ex.M48 04-06-2005 Written Submission made by the Petitioner before the EnquiryOfficer.
Ex.M49 05-05-2005 Findings of the Enquiry Officer.
Ex. M50 13-06-2006
का.आ. 661. औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में केन्द्रीय सरकार 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 , आसनसोल के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 65/2007 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 25-1-2012 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।
Proposed punishment show cause notice.
Ex. M51 13-06-2006
[सं. एल-22012/182/2007- आई आर ( सीएम- II ) ] डी. एस. एस. श्रीनिवास राव , डेस्क अधिकारी
New Delhi , the 25th January, 2012 Letter sent by the Respondent to the Petitioner offering him personal hearing with regard to the proposed punishment .
Ex. M52 20-07-2006 Proceedings in connection with the proposed punishment .
ExM53 12-10-2006 Letter from the Respondent to the Petitioner enclosing the final order.
Ex. M54 12-10-2006
S.O. 661. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 65/ 2007) ofthe Central Government Industrial Tribunal -cum- Labour Court , Asansol as shown in the Annexure , in the industrial dispute between the management ofM/s. Eastern Coalfields Limited, and their workman , received by the Central Government on 25-01-2012.
Final order issued by the Respondent to the Petitioner.
Ex.M55 25-10-2006'
[No. L-22012/ 182/2007 - IR( CM - II ) ] D.S.S. SRINIVASARAO , Desk Officer Appeal filed by the Petitioner before the Appellate Authority.
ANNEXURE
Ex.M56 27-12-2006 Letter from the Respondentto the the Petitioner enclosing the order passed in the Appeal .
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM - LABOUR COURT, ASANSOL
Ex. M57 27-12-2006
PRESENT:
Order passed by the Appellate Authority in the appeal filed by the Petitioner.
Shri KISHORI RAM, Presiding Officer .
Ex. M58 09-01-2007
Reference No. 65 of 2007
PARTIES:
Disputes raised by the Petitioner before the Conciliation Officer questioning the order of dismissal passed against him.
TheManagement of Dhemomain Group ofCollieries ofM/ s. ECL .
Ex.M59 23-03-2007 Counter filed by the Respondent before the Conciliation Officer.
Vrs. Their Workman 1519 भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 18 , 2012/माघ 29 , 1933
[भाग II-खंड 3 ( ii ) ]
REPRESENTATIVES :
: Sri P.K. Goswami , Advocate
Forthe management
: None
प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच , अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालय , आसनसोल के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 62/2007 ) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 25-1-2012 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।
Forthe Union (Workman)
State: WEST BENGAL
Industry: COAL
[सं. एल-22012/135/2007- आई आर ( सीएम- II ) ] डी. एस. एस. श्रीनिवास राव, डेस्क अधिकारी Dated the 05-01-12 08-06-10
New Delhi , the 25th January, 2012
AWARD
In exercise ofpowers conferred by clause (d) of sub- section ( 1 ) and sub- section 2 (A) of Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) , Govt . of India through the Ministry of Labour vide its letter No. L-22012/ 182/ 2007 - IR ( CM - II ) dated 07-08-07 has been pleased to refer the following dispute for adjudication by this Tribunal.
S.O. 662 .-- In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) , the Centrai Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 62/ 2007) ofthe Central Government Industrial Tribunal -cum- Labour Court , Asansol as shown in the Annexure , in the industrial dispute between the management ofM/s . Eastern Coalfields Limited , and their workman , received by the Central Government on 25-01-2012.
SCHEDULE
[No. L- 22012/ 135/2007 - IR(CM- II )] D. S. S. SRINIVASA RAO , Desk Officer
ANNEXURE
"Whether the action of the management of M/s . ECL in dismissing Shri Madan Majhi , U.G Loader w.e.f. 19-06-2004 is legal and justified ? Ifnot, to what relief is the workman entitled?"
BEFORE THE CENTRAL COVERNMENT
INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM - LABOUR COURT, ASANSOL
PRESENT:
Shri KISHORI RAM, Presiding Officer.
Reference No. 62 of 2007
PARTIES :
Having received the Order No. L-22012 / 182 /2007- IR(CM - II) dated 07-08-07 ofthe above said reference from the Govt. of India , Ministry of Labour , New Delhi for adjudication of the dispute, a reference case No. 65 of2007 was registered on 04-09-07 and accordingly an order to that effect was passed to issue notices through the registered post to the parties concerned directing them to appear in the court on the date fixed and to file their written tatements along with the relevant documents and a list of witnesses in support of their claims. In pursuance of the said order notices by the registered post were sent to the parties concerned .
The Management of Nimcha Coiliery of M/ s . ECL . Vrs . Their Workman
REPRESENTATIVES :
: Sri P.K. Goswami , Advocate
Forthe
management
: None
For the Union
(Workman)
Since the predecessor (Late Manoranjan Pattnaik , the then P.O. ) of the Tribunal as per order dated 08-06-10 had reserved for an award in this case because the Union neither responded to the notice nor filed written statement . So , it was found that they had no interest to proceed with the case and as such no dispute exists . Accordingly, it is hereby ordered.
State : WEST BENGAL
Industry: COAL
ORDER
Dated the 05-01-12 08-06-10
AWARD
Let an " Award " be and the same is passed as no dispute existing. Send the copies of the order to the Govt . ofIndia, Ministry of Labour, New Delhi for information and needful . The reference is accordingly disposed of.
KISHORI RAM, Presiding Officer
नई दिल्ली, 25 जनवरी , 2012
In exercise ofpowers conferred by clause (d ) of sub- section ( 1 ) and sub -section 2 (A) of Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) , Govt . of India through theMinistry of Labour vide its letter No. L -22012/ 135/2007 - IR ( CM - II ) dated 02-08-07 has been pleased to refer the following dispute for adjudication by this Tribunal.
का. आ. 662.- औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में केन्द्रीय सरकार ई.सी.एल. के 1520
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 18 , 2012/MAGHA 29 , 1933
[PART II-SEC. 3( il) ]
SCHEDULE
ANNEXURE
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM - LABOUR COURT, ASANSOL
"Whether the action of the management of Nimcha Colliery ofM/s . ECL in dismissing Shri Raju Bhuian, w.e.f. 15-5-2006 is legal and justified ? If not, to what relief is the workman entitled ? "
PRESENT :
Shri KISHORI RAM, Presiding Officer.
ReferenceNo. 78 of 2007
PARTIES :
The Management of Nav Kajora Colliery of M/ s. ECL. Vrs.
Their Workman
Having received the Order No. L- 22012/35 /2007- IR(CM - II ) dated 02-08-07 of the above said reference from the Govt. of India , Ministry of Labour, New Delhi for adjudication of the dispute, a reference case No. 62 of 2007 was registered on 14-8-07 and accordingly an order to that effect was passed to issue notices through the registered post to the parties concerned directing them to appear in the court on the date fixed and to file their written statements along with the relevant documents and a list of witnesses in support of their claims . In pursuance of the said order notices by the registered post were sent to the parties concerned.
REPRESENTATIVES :
: None
For the management
For the Union : None
(Workman)
State : WEST BENGAL
Industry: COAL
Since the predecessor (Late Manoranjan Pattnaik, the then P.O. ) of the Tribunal as per order dated 08-06-10 had reserved for an award in this case because the Union neither responded to the notice nor filed written statement . So, it was found that they had no interest to proceed with the case and as such no dispute exists . Accordingly, it is hereby ordered.
ORDER
Dated the 05-01-12 23-03-10
AWARD
Let an "Award" be and the same is passed as no dispute existing . Send the copies of the order to the Govt . ofIndia, Ministry of Labour, New Delhi for information and needful . The reference is accordingly disposed of.
KISHORI RAM, Presiding Officer
Inexercise of powers conferred by clause (d) of sub- section ( 1 ) and sub- section 2 (A) of Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , Govt . of India through theMinistry of Labour vide its letter No. L-22012/ 156/ 2007 - IR ( CM - II) dated 26-09-07 has been pleased to refer the following dispute for adjudication by this Tribunal .
"Whether the action of the management of Nav Kajora Colliery in not allowing Shri Lalchand Harijan tojoin on transfer on, 14-07-2004 till 17-9-2004 is legal and justified? If not , to what relief is the workman entitled ? "
नई दिल्ली, 25 जनवरी , 2012 का.आ. 663.-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 (1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में केन्द्रीय सरकार 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 , आसनसोल के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 78/2007 ) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 25-1-2012 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।
[सं. एल-22012/156/2007- आई आर ( सीएम- II ) ] डी. एस. एस. श्रीनिवास राव , डेस्क अधिकारी
New Delhi , the 25th January, 2012
Having received the Order No. L -22012/ 156/2007- IR( CM-II) dated 26-9-2007 of the above said reference from the Govt . of India, Ministry of Labour, New Delhi for adjudication of the dispute , a reference case No. 78 of 2007 was registered on 09-10-07 and accordingly an order to that effect was passed to issue notices through the registered post to the parties concerned directing them to appear in the court on the date fixed and to file their written statements along with the relevant documents and a list of witnesses in support of their claims . In pursuance of the said order notices by the registered post were sent to the parties concerned.
S.O. 663. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) , the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 78/ 2007) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal -cum- Labour Court , Asansol as shown in the Annexure, in the industrial dispute between the management ofM/s. Eastern Coalfields Limited , and their workman, received by the Central Government on 25-01-2012 .
[No. L-22012/ 156/2007- IR( CM - II) ] D.S.S. SRINIVASA RAO, Desk Officer
Since the predecessor (Late Manoranjan Pattnaik , the then P.O. ) of the Tribunal as per order dated 23-03-10 had reserved for an award in this case because neither 1521 [भाग II-खंड 3 ( ii) ]
भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 18 , 2012/ माष 29 , 1933
REPRESENTATIVES :
Forthe
: Sri P.K. Das , Advocate .
management
party submitted nor written statement nor took any step. So, it was found that they had no interest to proceed with the case and as such no dispute exists . Accordingly, it is hereby ordered:
: None
ORDER
For the Union (Workman)
State: WEST BENGAL
Industry: COAL
Dated the 05-01-12 20-05-10
Let an "Award" be and the same is passed as no dispute existing . Send the copies of the order to the Govt. of India, Ministry of Labour, New Delhi for information and needful. The reference is accordingly disposed of.
AWARD
KISHORI RAM, Presiding Officer
नई दिल्ली, 25 जनवरी , 2012
In exercise of powers conferred by clause ( d) of sub- section ( 1) and sub -section 2 (A) of Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , Govt . of India through the Ministry of Labour vide its letter No. L-22012/ 155/2007 - IR (CM - II) dated 18-09-07 has been pleased to referthe following dispute for adjudication by this Tribunal .
SCHEDULE
का.आ. 664.-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 (1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में केन्द्रीय सरकार 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 , आसनसोल के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 73/2007 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 25-1-2012 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।
"Whether the action of the management of Khas Kajora Colliery ofM/ s . ECL in retiring Shri Kedar Singh Pre-maturely is legal and justified? If not, to whatrelief is the workmen entitled?"
[सं. एल-22012/155/2007- आई आर ( सीएम- II ) ] डी. एस. एस. श्रीनिवास राव , डेस्क अधिकारी
New Delhi , the 25th January, 2012
S.O. 664. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 73/ 2007) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal -cum- Labour Court , Asansol as shown in the Annexure , in the industrial dispute between the management ofM/s . Eastern Coalfields Limited , and their workman, which was received by the Central Government on 25-01-2012.
Having received the Order No. L- 22012/ 155/2007- IR(CM- II) dated 18-09-07 of the above said reference from the Govt . of India, Ministry of Labour, New Delhi for adjudication ofthe dispute , a reference case No. 73 of 2007 was registered on 01-10-07 and accordingly an order to that effect was passed to issue notices through the registered post to the parties concerned directing them to appear in the court on the date fixed and to file their written statements along with the relevant documents and a list of witnesses in support of their claims. In pursuance of the said order notices by the registered post were sent to the parties concerned.
[No. L -22012/ 155/2007 - IR(CM- II)] D.S.S. SRINIVASARAO, Desk Officer
ANNEXURE
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM- LABOUR COURT, ASANSOL
Since the predecessor (Late Manoranjan Pattnaik , the then P.O. ) of the Tribunal as per order dated 20-05-10 had reserved for an award because the Union neither appeared nor took any step to file written statement . It was found that they had no interest to proceed with the case and as such no dispute exists . Accordingly, it is hereby ordered.
PRESENT:
ORDER
Shri KISHORI RAM, PresidingOfficer Reference No. 73 of 2007
PARTIES :
Let an "Award" be and the same is passed as no dispute existing. Send the copies of the order to the Govt . ofIndia, Ministry of Labour , New Delhi for information and needful . The reference is accordingly disposed of.
KISHORI RAM, PresidingOfficer The Management of Khas Kajora Colliery of M/ s. ECL.
नई दिल्ली, 25 जनवरी , 2012
Vrs. Their Workman
का.आ. 665.-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में केन्द्रीय सरकार ई.सी.एल. के 1522
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 18 , 2012/MAGHA 29, 1933
[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii ) ]
SCHEDULE
"Whether the action of the management of M/ s . Eastern Coalfields Limited in dismissing Sri Sudan Bhuia w.e.f. 27-12-2005 is legal and justified? To what relief is the workman entitled ?"
प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच , अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण एवं श्रम न्यायालय , आसनसोल के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 04/2009 ) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 25-1-2012 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।
[सं. एल-22012/128/2008- आई आर ( सीएम- II ) ] डी.एस.एस. श्रीनिवास राल , डेस्क अधिकारी
NewDelhi , the 25th January, 2012
Having received the Order No. L- 22012/ 128/2008- IR(CM- II ) dated 11-02-09 ofthe above said reference from the Govt . of India, Ministry of Labour, New Delhi for adjudication of the dispute, a reference case No. 04 of 2009 was registered on 19-02-09 and accordingly an order to that effect was passed to issue notices through the registered post to the parties concerned directing them to appear inthe court on the date fixed and to file their written statements along with the relevant documents and a list of witnesses in support of their claims . In pursuance of the said order notices by the registered post were sent to the parties concerned.
S.O. 665. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) , the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 04/ 2009) ofthe Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum- Labour Court, Asansol as shown in the Annexure , in the industrial dispute between the management ofM/ s . Eastern Coalfields Limited, PO. Kajoragram, Distt. Burdwan and their workman, which was received by the Central Government on 25-01-2012.
[No. L-22012/ 128/2008 - IR(CM- II) ! D.S.S. SRINIVASARAO, Desk Officer
ANNEXURE
Since the predecessor (Late Manoranjan Pattnaik, the then P.O. ) of the Tribunal as per order dated 14-10-09 had reserved for an award in this case because the Union neither appeared nor took any step to file written statement. So, it was found that they had no interest to proceed with the case as such no dispute exists . Accordingly, it is hereby ordered.
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL- CUM- LABOUR COURT, ASANSOL
ORDER
PRESENT :
Shri KISHORI RAM, Presiding Officer Reference No. 04 of2009
PARTIES :
Let an "Award" be and the same is passed as no dispute existing . Send the copies of the order to the Govt . of India, Ministry of Labour, New Delhi for information and needful. The reference is accordingly disposed of.
KISHORI RAM, Presiding Officer TheManagement of 1 & 2 Incline , Jhanjra Project of M/s. ECL.
नई दिल्ली, 25 जनवरी , 2012
Vis.
Their Workman
REPRESENTATIVES:
Forthe
: Sri P.K. Goswami , Advocate.
management
: None
का. आ. 666.-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 (1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में केन्द्रीय सरकार भारतीय खाद्य निगम के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच , अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण, आसनसोल के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 80/2007 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 25-1-2012 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।
For the Union (Workman)
State : WEST BENGAL
Industry: COAL
[सं. एल -22012/95/2007- आई आर ( सीएम- II ) ] डी.एस.एस. श्रीनिवास राव , डेस्क अधिकारी Dated the 05-01-12 14-10-09
New Delhi , the 25th January, 2012 AWARD
S.O. 666. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 80/ 2007) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal -cum- Labour Court, Asansol as shown in the Annexure, in the industrial dispute between the management of Food Inexercise ofpowers conferred by clause (d ) ofsub- section (1 ) and sub -section 2(A) of Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947) , Govt . of India through the Ministry of Labour vide its letter No. L-22012/ 128/2008- IR (CM- II) dated 11-02-09 has been pleased to refer the following dispute for adjudication by this Tribunal .
[ भाग II-खंड 3 (ii ) ]
1523
भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 18 , 2012/माघ 29 , 1933
Corporation of India, and their workman, which was receivedby the Central Government on 25-01-2012.
[No. L-22012/95/2007 -IR( CM- II)] D.S.S. SRINIVASA RAO, Desk Officer
ANNEXURE
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM - LABOUR COURT, ASANSOL
PRESENT :
Shri KISHORI RAM, Presiding Officer
Reference No. 80 of 2007
PARTIES :
TheManagement of Food Corporation of India
Vrs.
Their Workman
REPRESENTATIVES :
: None
Forthe management
: None
For the Union (Workman)
State: WEST BENGAL Industry: COAL
Dated, 05-01-12 23-03-10
AWARD
In exercise of powers conferred by clause (d) of Sub- section ( 1 ) and Sub - section 2 (A) of Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947), Govt. of India through the Ministry of Labour vide its letter No. L- 22012/ 95/2007 -IR(CM -II) dated 28-09-07 has been pleasedto refer the following dispute for adjudication by this Tribunal .
SCHEDULE
"Whether the demand of the Union for regularization of 14 casual/ labours (list enclosed) is legal and justified? If yes , to what relief are these workmen entitled?"
Having received the Order No. L -22012/95/2007- IR(CM- II) dated 28-09-07 of the above said reference from the Govt. of India, Ministry of Labour, New Delhi for adjudication of the dispute, a reference case No. 80 of2007 was registered on 09-10-07 and accordingly, an order to that effect was passed to issue notices through the registered post to the parties concerned directing them to appear in the court on the date fixed and to file their written statements along with the relevant documents and a list of witnesses in support of their claims . In pursuance of the said order notices by the registered post were sent to the parties concerned.
Since the predecessor ( Late Manoranjan Pattnaik, the then P.O. ) of the Tribunal as per order dated 23-03-10 had reserved for an award in this case because none of the parties responded to the notices or filed written statement. So , it was found that they had no interest to proceed with the case as such no dispute exists . Accordingly, it is hereby ordered:
ORDER
Let an " Award" be and the same is passed as no dispute existing. Send the copies of the order to the Govt . of India, Ministry of Labour, New Delhi for information and needful . The reference is accordingly disposed of.
KISHORI RAM, Presiding Officer
नई दिल्ली, 25 जनवरी , 2012
का.आ. 667.-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में केन्द्रीय सरकार ई.सी.एल. के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच , अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण , आसनसोल के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 77/2006 ) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 25-1-2012 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।
[सं. एल-22012/36/2006- आई आर ( सीएम- II ) ] डी.एस.एस. श्रीनिवास राव , डेस्क अधिकारी
New Delhi , the 25th January, 2012
S.O. 667.- In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 77/2006) ofthe Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum- Labour Court, Asansol as shown in the Annexure, in the industrial disputebetween the management of Kenda Area ofM/ s . ECL, and their workman, which was received by the Central Government on 25-01-2012.
[No. L-22012/36/ 2006-IR( CM - II) ] D.S.S. SRINIVASA RAO, Desk Officer
ANNEXURE
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM- LABOUR COURT, ASANSOL
PRESENT:
Shri KISHORI RAM, Presiding Officer Reference No. 77 of 2006
PARTIES :
TheManagement of Chora 10 Pits Colliery under Kenda Area of M/ s . ECL .
Vrs.
TheirWorkman 1524
THEGAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 18, 2012/MAGHA 29 , 1933
REPRESENTATIVES :
: None
For the Management
: None
For the Union (Workman)
INDUSTRY : COAL
STATE: WEST BENGAL
Dated, 05-01-12
13-10-09
AWARD
Inexercise of powers conferred by clause ( d) of Sub- section ( 1 ) and Sub - section 2 (A) of Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , Govt . of India through the Ministry of Labour vide its Letter No. L-22012/ 36/2006- IR (CM- II) dated 30-10-06 has been pleased to refer the following dispute for adjudication by this Tribunal:
SCHEDULE
" Whether the action of the management of Chora 10 Pits Colliery under Kenda Area of M/ s. Eastern Coalfields Limited in dismissing Shri Kajal Bouri from servicesw.e.f. 4-7-2005 is legal andjustified? If not , to what relief is the workman entitled ?"
Having received the Order No. L- 22012/36/ 2006- IR(CM- II ) dated 30-10-06 of the above said reference from the Govt . of India , Ministry of Labour, New Delhi for adjudication of the dispute , a reference case No. 77 of 2006 was registered on 11-12-06 and accordingly , an order to that effect was passed to issue notices through the registered post to the parties concerned directing them to appear in the court on the date fixed and to file their written statements along with the relevant documents and a list of witnesses in support of their claims . In pursuance of the said order notices by the registered post were sent to the parties concerned.
Since the predecessor (Late Manoranjan Pattnaik , the then P.O. ) of the Tribunal as per order dated 13-10-09 had reserved for an award in this case because neither party responded to the notices nor filed written statement . So, it was found that they had no interest to proceed with the case and as such no dispute exists . Accordingly, it is hereby ordered:
ORDER
Let an " Award" be and the same is passed as no dispute existing . Send the copies of the order to the Govt. of India , Ministry of Labour, New Delhi for information and needful . The reference is accordingly disposed of.
KISHORI RAM, Presiding Officer
[PART II-SEC. 3 ( ii ) ]
नई दिल्ली, 25 जनवरी , 2012
का.आ. 668.-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में केन्द्रीय सरकार बी.बी.एम.बी. के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालय II , चंडीगढ़ के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 204/2005, 205/2005 और 206/2005 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 25-1-2012 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।
[सं. एल-23012/11/96- आई आर ( सी- II ) , सं. एल-22012/476/96- आई आर ( सी- II ) , सं. एल-23012/9/96- आई आर ( सी- II ) ] डी.एस.एस. श्रीनिवास राव , डेस्क अधिकारी
New Delhi , the 25th January, 2012
S.O. 668. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award ( Ref. No. 204/ 2005, 205/2005 and 206/2005) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal -cum - Labour Court - II, Chandigarh, as shown in the Annexure in the industrial dispute between the employers in relation to the management ofBBMB and their workmen, which was received by the Central Government on 25-1-2012 .
[No. L -23012/ 11 /96 -IR(C - II), No. L- 22012/476/96- IR (C-II) , No. L-23012/9/96- IR ( C- II) ] D.S.S. SRINIVASARAO, Desk Officer
ANNEXURE
IN THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM- LABOUR COURT- IL, CHANDIGARH
PRESENT:
Shri A. K. Rastogi , Presiding Officer
1. Case ID No. 204/2005
Registered on 3-8-2005
Sh . Balwan Singh , S/o Sh . Moola Ram , R/ o Village and P.O. Kotla Power House, Distt . Ropar (Punjab )
2. ID No. 205/2005
Registered on 3-8-2005
Sh . Kamal Singh , S /o Sh . Surjit Singh , R/ o Village and P.O. Makkhan , Tehsil Anantpur Sahib , Distt. Ropar(Punjab) 1525 भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 18 , 2012 /माघ 29 , 1933
[ भाग II-खंड 3 (ii) ]
3. ID No. 206/2005
Registered on 3-8-2005
Sh . Mangal Singh, S/o Sh . Lachhman Singh, R/ o Village andP.O. Mehendli Khurd, Tehsil Anandpur- Sahib , Distt . Ropar (Punjab)
Petitioners
Vs.
The Chief Engineer (Generation) BBMB Nangal Township, District Ropar, Punjab .
Respondent
APPEARANCES :
:
For the Workmen
Sh. R. K. Singh Parmar
The workmen were employed as unskilled mazdoor on daily wages since 1986 to 1988 till 1990 under the Resident Engineer, Ganguwal and Kotla Power Houses Division, BBMB , Ganguwal District Ropar. They have alleged the termination of their services in July 1990. According to them they had put more than 240 days in 12 calendar months , but the management had put notional breaks in their services . Their services were terminated even without serving a 10 day's notice as per certified standing orders and against the policy decision ofthe Board without conducting any inquiry and without permission of the Government for their retrenchment as required under Section 25N of the Act . They have also assailed the seniority list and have alleged that workmen junior to them were retained in the service and almost all of them had beenregularized. They have claimed their reinstatement with back wages and other attendant benefits .
For the Management : Sh. Rajinder Singh, Law Officer
AWARD
Passed on January 10 , 2012
Vide Order No. L- 23012/ 11 /96 - IR (C - II ) , dated 30-12-1997 read with Corrigendum dated 18-12-2002, No. L-22012/ 476/96 - IR (C- II ) dated 30-12-1997 read with Corrigendum dated 18-12-2002 and No. L-23012/9/96-IR (C -II ) dated 30-12-1997 read with Corrigendum dated 18-12-2002 in exercise of its power under Clause (d) ofSub- section ( 1 ) and Sub- section (2A) of Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( in short Act ) has referred the followingdisputes for adjudication to this Tribunal .
The claim was contested by the management and it wascontended that the workmen attended duty as daily rated workman with the management in the alleged period against casual /seasonal , urgent work and the daily rated workmen used to attend duty as per their will and when they had some urgent work at home or harvest work they stopped coming on duty and again started coming on duty after interval of a month or so . Management had not put any notional break in the service of the workmen . No workmen had completed 240 days in any calendar year . It hasbeen repeatedly stated in the reply that the services of theworkmenwere not terminated by the management and there was no occasion to serve a 10 day's notice or taking any disciplinary action against them . The claim of the workmen has no merits .
1. ID No. 204/2005
From the pleadings of the parties it is clear that it is nobody's case that the workmen remained absent from duty for more than 10 days or they abandoned the job . The issue of retrenchment or of seniority raised by workmen in their claim statements is beyond the scope of reference.
"Whether the absence from service of Sh. Balwan Singh for more than 10 days is an abandonment and ten days notice is required to be served upon the workman ? If, yes to what relief the workman is entitled to and from which date ? "
2. ID No. 205/2005
Insupport oftheir claims the workmen have given their statements while on behalf of management in ID No. 206/2005 Er. Pawan Kumar and in other two IDs Er. Ranjit Singh gave their statement .
"Whether the absence from service of Sh . Kamal Singh for more than 10 days is an abandonment and ten days notice is required to be served upon the workman ? If, yes to what relief the workman is entitled to and from which date ? "
None appeared for workmen to argue their case . I heard the Law Officer of the management and perused the evidence on record.
3. ID No. 206/2005
The first question referred for adjudication is whether the absence from service for more than 10 days is abandonment ?
"Whether the absence from service of Sh. Mangal Singh for more than 10 days is an abandonment and ten days notice is required to be served upon the workman ? If, yes to what relief the workman is entitled to and from which date ?"
The term abandonment has neither been defined in theAct nor in the Certified Standing Orders (in short S.O. ) ofthe department a copy whereof is placed on the record of ID No. 204 and 205 of2005. But in the S.O. in clause 23 while enumerating the acts of misconduct ' leaving work without permission ' has been mentioned in Sub -clause Since in all the above references, common question of law and fact is involved , hence they are being adjudicated by this common award.
367 GI /2012-29 1526
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: FEBRUARY 18 , 2012/MAGHA29 , 1933
iv(s ) . Leaving work without permission may be construced as abandonment ofjob .Hence by necessary implication it may said that absence from service without permission for any period is abandonment for the purpose of S.O. But it has been repeatedly held that an inference of abandonment can be arrived by taking of totality of circumstances .
Though in the written statement the management has avoided in saying that the workmen had abandoned thejob but during the cross -examination the management witness admitted it . Admittedly the workmen were daily wagers for doing casual work and as per definition of casual workman given in Clause 3 (c) of certified standing orders they were the employee of the respondent . Clause 3 (c) say that a casual employee is an employee whose employment is of casual nature and is employed on daily wages .
Since the workmen were the employees of the management and if they had abandoned the job, they were liable to the disciplinary action and punishment but admittedly no disciplinary action was taken by the management and their services were not terminated hence it means that the concerned workmen are still in the employment of the management on the same terms and conditions on which they were employed. There was no occasion for the management to serve any notice of 10 days in terms of Clause 21 ( ii ) of S.O.
So the workmen viz . Balwan Singh ( ID No. 204/2005) , Kamal Singh ( ID No. 205/2005 ) and Mangal Singh (ID No. 206/2005 ) are entitled to be treated to be continuing in service and if all or any of them report for duty within one month from the publication of the award the management will take them on duty as before . The reference is accordingly answered in favour of the workmen . Original award be placed on ID No. 204/2005 and a copy of the awardbe placed on the record of ID No. 205/2005 and ID No. 206/2005 each . Two copies of the award be sent to the Central Government for further necessary action.
ASHOK KUMAR RASTOGI , Presiding Officer
नई दिल्ली, 25 जनवरी , 2012
का.आ. 669.-- औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 (1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में केन्द्रीय सरकार 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 , आसनसोल के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 33/2007 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 25-1-2012 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।
[सं. एल-22012/157/2004-आई आर (सीएम- II ) ] डी. एस. एस. श्रीनिवास राव , डेस्क अधिकारी
[PART II-SEC. 3 ( ii) ]
NewDelhi , the 25th January, 2012
S.O. 669. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 33/2007) ofthe Central Government Industrial Tribunal -cum-Labour Court, Asansol as shown in the Annexure , in the industrial dispute between the management of Jhanra Area of M/ s. ECL, and their workman , which was received by the Central Government on 25-1-2012.
[No. L-22012/ 157/2004- IR (CM- II) ] D.S.S. SRINIVASARAO , Desk Officer
ANNEXURE
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL CUM -LABOUR COURT, ASANSOL
PRESENT :
Sri Kishori Ram , Presiding Officer.
Reference No. 33 of 2007
PARTIES:
The management of 3 & 4 Incline Mine , Jhanjra Area ofM/ s . ECL .
Vs. Their Workmen
REPRESENTATIVES :
FortheManagement : Sri P. K. Das , Advocate
Forthe Union (Workman) : None
INDUSTRY : Coal
STATE : West Bengal
Dated the 06-01-12 10-06-10
AWARD
Inexercise of powers conferred by clause (d) of Sub- section ( 1 ) and Sub- section 2 (A) of Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , Govt . of India through the Ministry of Labour vide its Letter No. L -22012/ 157/2004 - IR (CM - II ) dated 6-6-07 has been pleased to refer thefollowingdispute for adjudication by this Tribunal .
SCHEDULE
"Whether the action of the management of M/ s . ECL in dismissing Shri Bijoy Bouri w.e.f. 15-3-2000 is legal and justified ? If not , to what relief is the workman entitled ? "
Having received the Order No. L - 22012/ 157/2004 - IR (CM -II) dated 6-6-07 of the above said reference from the 1527 भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 18, 2012/माघ 29 , 1933
[ भाग II-खंड 3 ( ii ) ]
ANNEXURE
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM- LABOUR COURT, ASANSOL
PRESENT:
Sri Kishori Ram, Presiding Officer Reference No. 26 of 2008
Govt . of India , Ministry of Labour, New Delhi for adjudication of the dispute , a reference case No. 33 of 2007 was registered on 3-7-07 and accordingly an order to that effect was passed to issue notices through the registered post to the parties concerned directing them to appear in the court on the date fixed and to file their written statements along with the relevant documents and a list of witnesses in support of their claims . In pursuance of the said order notices by the registered post were sent to the partiesconcerned.
PARTIES:
The management of Haripur Colliery under Kendra Area of M/s . ECL . Vrs. Their Workmen
REPRESENTATIVES :
Since the predecessor (Late Manoranjan Pattnaik, the then P.O. ) of the Tribunal as per order dated 10-6-10 had reserved for an award in this case because the Union neither appearing nor taking any step since long. It was found that they had no interest to proceed with the case and as such no dispute exists . Accordingly, it is hereby ordered.
None
Forthe management :
ORDER
: None
Forthe union
INDUSTRY: Coal STATE : West Bengal (Workman)
Dated the 05-01-12 24-06-10
Let an " Award" be and the same is passed as no dispute existing. Send the copies of the order to the Govt. of India, Ministry of Labour, New Delhi for information and needful . The reference is accordingly disposed of.
AWARD
KISHORI RAM, Presiding Officer
नई दिल्ली , 25 जनवरी , 2012
Inexercise of powers conferred by clause ( d) of Sub- section (1 ) and Sub- section 2 (A) of Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , Govt . of India through the Ministry of Labour vide its Letter No. L-22012/ 296/2007 - IR (CM- II) dated 26-5-08 has been pleased to refer the following dispute for adjudication by this Tribunal .
SCHEDULE
का.आ. 670.-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 (1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में केन्द्रीय सरकार 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 , आसनसोल के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 26/2008 ) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 25-1-2012 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।
"Whether the action of the management of M/s . ECL indeducting the stipend ofMr. Swapan Kundu & 12 others ( list enclosed) is legal and justified ? To what relief are the workmen concerned entitled ?"
[सं. एल-22012/296/2007-आई आर ( सीएम- II ) ] डी. एस. एस. श्रीनिवास राव , डेस्क अधिकारी
New Delhi , the 25th January, 2012
Having received the Order Nc. L- 22012/296/ 2007 - IR (CM- II) dated 26-5-08 of the abovesaid reference from the Govt . of India, Ministry of Labour, New Delhi for adjudication of the dispute , a reference case No. 26 of 2008 was registered on 2-6-08 and accordingly an order to that effect was passed to issue notices through the registered post to the parties concerned directing them to appear in the court on the date fixed and to file their written statements along with the relevant documents and a list of witnesses in support of their claims. In pursuance of the said order notices by the registered post were sent to the parties concerned.
S.O. 670. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 26/2008) ofthe Central Government Industrial Tribunal -cum -Labour Court, Asansol as shown in the Annexure , in the industrial dispute between the management ofM/ s . Eastern Coalfields Limited, and their workman which was received by the Central Government on 25-1-2012 .
Since the predecessor (Late Manoranjan Pattnaik, the then P.O. ) of the Tribunal as per order dated 24-6-10 had reserved for an award in this case because none of the [No. L- 22012/296/2007 - IR (CM- II) ] D.S.S. SRINIVASARAO, Desk Officer 1528
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 18 , 2012/ MAGHA29 , 1933
partiesresponded to the notice or filed written statment . So, it was found that they had no interest to proceed with the case and as such no dispute exists. Accordingly, it is hereby ordered.
ORDER
Let an " Award" be and the same is passed as no dispute existing. Send the copies of the order to the Govt . of India, Ministry of Labour, New Delhi for information and needful . The reference is accordingly disposed of.
KISHORI RAM, Presiding Officer
नई दिल्ली, 25 जनवरी , 2012
का.आ. 671 ,-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में केन्द्रीय सरकार 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 , आसनसोल के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 59/2007 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 25-1-2012 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।
[ सं. एल-22012/2/2007- आई आर ( सीएम- II ) ] डी. एस. एस. श्रीनिवास राव , डेस्क अधिकारी
NewDelhi , the 25th January, 2012
S.O. 671.- In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 59/2007) ofthe Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum- Labour Court, Asansol as shown in the Annexure, in the industrial dispute between the management of Bankola Area of M/s. ECL , and their workman which was received by the Central Government on 25-1-2012 .
[No. L- 22012/ 2/2007- IR ( CM -II) ] D.S.S. SRINIVASARAO, Desk Officer
ANNEXURE
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT
INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL CUM - LABOUR COURT, ASANSOL
PRESENT :
Sri Kishori Ram, Presiding Officer
Reference No. 59 of 2007
PARTIES:
Themanagement of Khandra Colliery, Bankola Area ofM/ s . ECL .
Vrs.
Their Workman
[PART II-SEC . 3 ( ii ) ]
REPRESENTATIVES :
Forthe management Sri P. K. Goswami , Advocate
For the union : None
(Workman)
INDUSTRY : Coal
STATE: West Bengal
Dated the 05-01-12 01-06-10
AWARD
Inexercise of powers conferred by clause (d) of Sub- section ( 1 ) and Sub - section 2(A) of Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , Govt . of India through the Ministry of Labour vide its Letter No. L-22012/ 2/2007 - IR (CM - II) dated 19-7-07 has been pleased to refer the followingdispute for adjudication by this Tribunal :
SCHEDULE
"Whether the action of the management of M/ s. ECL in denying the payment of difference of wages in respect of Sri Kailash Josowara , W/E Operator for the period from 23-12-1994 to 17-6-2001 and from 10-9-2003 to6-1-2004 is legal andjustified ? If not, to what relief is the workman entitled ?"
Having received the Order No. L - 22012 /2 /2007 - IR (CM- II ) dated 19-7-07 of the abovesaid reference from the Govt. of India , Ministry of Labour, New Delhi for adjudication of the dispute , a reference case No. 59 of 2007 was registered on 31-7-07 and accordingly an order to that effect was passed to issue notices through the registered post to the parties concerned directing them to appear in the court on the date fixed and to file their written statements along with the relevant documents and a list of witnesses in support of their claims . In pursuance of the said order notices by the registered post were sent to the parties concerned .
Since the predecessor (Late Manoranjan Pattnaik , the thenP.O. ) ofthe Tribunal as per order dated 1-6-10 had reserved for an award in this case because Union neither appeared nor took any step since long . Even written statment not filed by the Union. So , it was found that they had no interest to proceed with the case and as such no dispute exists . Accordingly, it is hereby ordered:
ORDER
Let an " Award" be and the same is passed as no dispute existing . Send the copies of the order to the Govt . of India, Ministry of Labour, New Delhi for information and needful . The reference is accordingly disposed of.
KISHORI RAM, Presiding Officer.
1529 भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 18, 2012/माब 29 , 1933
[ भाग II-खंड 3 ( ii ) ]
SCHEDULE
नई दिल्ली, 25 जनवरी, 2012
"Whether the action of the management of M/s . ECL in denying the payment of wages in respect of Smt . Keka Neogi , Medical Dresser -II for the perdiod from 13-8-1997 to 18-4-2006 is legal andjustified ? If not, to what relief is the workman entitled ? " का.आ. 672.-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में केन्द्रीय सरकार 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 , असनसोल के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 96/2007) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 25-1-2012 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।
[सं. एल-22012/164/ 2007- आई आर ( सीएम- II ) ] डी. एस. एस. श्रीनिवास राव , डेस्क अधिकारी
New Delhi , the 25th January, 2012
Having received the Order No. L-22012/ 164/2007 - IR (CM-II) dated 15-11-07 of the abovesaid reference from the Govt . of India , Ministry of Labour, New Delhi for adjudication ofthe dispute, a reference case No. 96 of 2007 was registered on 6-12-07 and accordingly an order to that effect was passed to issue notices through the registered post to the parties concerned directing them to appear in the court on the date fixed and to file their written statements along with the relevant documents and a list of witnesses in support of their claims . In pursuance of the said order notices by the registered post were sent to the parties concerned .
S.O. 672. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 (14 of 1947 ) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 96/2007) ofthe Central Government Industrial Tribunal -cum -Labour Court, Asansol as shown in the Annexure , in the industrial dispute between the management of Bankola Area , M/ s. ECL , and their workman, received by the Central Government on 25-1-2012.
[No. L- 22012/ 164/2007 - IR (CM-II) ] D.S.S. SRINIVASARAO, Desk Officer
Since the predecessor (Late Manoranjan Pattnaik, the then P.O. ) of the Tribunal as per order dated 30-6-10 had reserved for an award in this case because Union neither responded to the notice nor filed written statement . So, it was found that they had no interest to proceed with the case and as such no dispute exists . Accordingly, it is hereby ordered:
ORDER
ANNEXURE
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL- CUM- LABOUR COURT, ASANSOL
Let an " Award " be and the same is passed as no dispute existing. Send the copies of the order to the Govt. of India, Ministry of Labour, New Delhi for information and needful . The reference is accordingly disposed of.
PRESENT :
KISHORI RAM, Presiding Officer
Sri Kishori Ram , Presiding Officer.
Reference No. 96 of 2007
नई दिल्ली, 25 जनवरी , 2012 का.आ. 673.- औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 (1947
PARTIES:
The management of Kumardihi A Colliery of M/ s. ECL.
Vrs.
Their Workman
का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में केन्द्रीय सरकार 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 , असनसोल के पंचाट (संदर्भ संख्या 21/2008 ) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 25-1-2012 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।
REPRESENTATIVES :
For the management : Sri P. K. Goswami , Advocate
[सं. एल-22012/373/2007- आई आर ( सीएम- II ) ] डी. एस. एस. श्रीनिवास राव , डेस्क अधिकारी : None
New Delhi , the 25th January, 2012 Forthe union (Workman)
STATE : West Bengal
INDUSTRY: Coal
Dated : 05-01-12/30-06-10
AWARD
S.O. 673. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 21/2008 ) ofthe Central Government Industrial Tribunal -cum -Labour Court, Asansol as shown in the Annexure , in the industrial dispute between the management of Ningah Group of Mines , M/ s. ECL, and their workman, which was received by the Central Government on 25-1-2012.
[No. L-22012/373 /2007 -IR (CM - II) ] D.S.S. SRINIVASA RAO, Desk Officer In exercise ofpowers conferred by clause (d) of Sub- section ( 1 ) and Sub- section 2 (A) of Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947) , Govt . of India through the Ministry of Labour vide its letter No. L- 22012/ 164/2007 - IR ( CM - II) dated 15-11-07 has been pleased to refer the following dispute for adjudication by this Tribunal.
1530
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 18 , 2012/MAGHA 29 , 1933
ANNEXURE
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM- LABOUR COURT,
ASANSOL
PRESENT:
Sri Kishori Ram, Presiding Officer
Reference No. 21 of 2008
PARTIES:
The management of S.S.I. Colliery ofM / s . ECL .
Vrs.
Their Workman
REPRESENTATIVES :
For the management : None
: None
Forthe union (Workman)
INDUSTRY: Coal
STATE: West Bengal
Dated the 05-01-12 , 19-05-10
AWARD
In exercise of powers confered by clause (d) of sub- cection ( 1 ) and sub - section 2 (A) of Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , Govt . of India through the Ministry of Labour vide its letter No. L-22012/ 373/2007 - IR (CM- II) dated 12-5-08 has been pleased to refer the following dispute for adjudication by this Tribunal .
SCHEDULE
"Whether the action of the management of S.S.I. Colliery of M/ s . ECL by denial of employment to the dependent son of Late Indradev Ram is legal and justified ? To what relief is the dependent of the deceased workman entitled ?"
Having receivedthe Order No. L-22012/373/2007 - IR (CM - II ) dated 12-05-08 of the abovesaid reference from the Govt . of India , Ministry of Labour , New Delhi for adjudication of the dispute , a reference case No. 21 of 2008 was registered on 13-4-09 and accordingly an order to that effect was passed to issue notices through the registered post to the parties concerned directing them to appear in the court on the date fixed and to file their written statements along with the relevant documents and a list of witnesses in support of their claims . In pursuance of the said order notices by the registered post were sent to the parties concerned .
Since the predecessor (Late Manoranjan Pattnaik, the then P.O. ) of the Tribunal as per order dated 19-5-10 had reserved for an award in this case because none of the parties responded to the notice or filed written statement.
[PART II-SEC. 3 ( ii )]
So, it was found that they had no interest to proceed with the case and as such no dispute exists . Accordingly, it is hereby ordered.
ORDER
Let an " Award" be and the same is passed as no dispute existing. Send the copies of the order to the Govt . of India, Ministry of Labour, New Delhi for information and needful . The reference is accordingly disposed of.
KISHORI RAM, PresidingOfficer
नई दिल्ली , 25 जनवरी , 2012
का.आ. 674.-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में केन्द्रीय सरकार एन.एस.पी. के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच , अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालय , नागपुर के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 146/2002 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 25-1-2012 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।
[सं. एल-42012/64/2002- आई आर ( सीएम- II ) ] डी.एस.एस. श्रीनिवास राव , डेस्क अधिकारी
New Delhi , the 25th January, 2012
S.O. 674. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 146/ 2002) ofthe Central Government Industrial Tribunal -cum- Labour Court , Nagpur as shown in the Annexure , in the industrial dispute between the management of National Sericulture Project, Central Silk Board , and their workınan, received by the Central Government on 25-01-2012 .
[No. L -42012/ 64/2002 - IR(CM - II ) ] D.S.S. SRINIVASA RAO, Desk Officer
ANNEXURE
BEFORE SHRI J.P. CHAND , PRESIDING OFFICER, CGIT-CUM- LABOUR COURT, NAGPUR
Case No. CGIT/NGP/ 146/2002 Date: 12-01-2012
Party No. 1 : The Deputy Director, National Sericulture Project , Central Silk Board , P-2, Basic Seed Farm Shirala, Tah. Patur, Distt . Akola (MS) .
Versus
PartyNo. 2: Shri Subhas Atmaram Budhalkar, C/o Shri Shankar Rao Kukadkar, Shivaji Nagar, Old City, PO & Distt . Akola(MS) .
1531 [ भाग II-खंड 3 ( ) ]
भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 18 , 2012/माघ 29 , 1933
AWARD
(Dated: 12th January, 2012)
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 ( 14 of 1947) , (" the Act" in short), the Central Government has referred the industrial dispute between the employers , in relation to the management of National Sericulture Project, Central Silk Board and Shri Subhash Atmaram Budhalkar , for adjudication , as per letter No. L -42012/64/2002- IR ( CM -II) dated 09-08-2002 , with the following schedule:
"Whether the action of the Deputy Director, National SericultureProject , Central Silk Board , Government ofIndia, Basic Seed Farm Shirala, Taluka-Patur, Distt. Akola (MS) in terminating the employment of Sh . SubhashAtmaram Budhalkar w.e.f. 30-11-1996 is legal and justified ? If not, what relief the concerned workman is entitled to? "
03-12-1996, he was not allowed by party No. 1 to resume duty, so he served a notice on party No. 1 on 08-02-1997 asking to allow him to resume duty, but the party No. 1 did not give any reply. It is further pleaded by the workman that as per the circular dated 15-10-1992 of the Director, N.S.W.S.P. , Bangalore, direction was issued to convert the casual labourers , who had completed five years of services as on 15-10-1992 to time scale labourers and also to convert all other casual labourers to time scale on their completion of five years of continuous service andby circular dated 12-12-1996 , it was decided to convert the casual labourers , who had been engaged prior to 07-08-1992 and had completed two years of continuous service and the Deputy Director, N.S.P. , Shirla vide his letter dated 13-10-1996 had sent the details of his services along with other casual labourers and according to the said information , he had completed five years of continuous service on 31-03-1996 and was entitled for conversion as time scale labour w.e.f. 31-03-1996 and as such he was not liable to be terminated and services of casual labourers , Shri Abhay Tripathy and seven women fieldAssistants were not terminated and they were accommodated and transferred to other places and therefore , he was also entitled to be accommodated.
2. On receipt ofthe reference , the parties were noticed to file their respective statement of claim and written statement and accordingly, the workman Shri Subhash Atmaram Budhalkar, (" the workman" in short ) filed his statement of claim and the management of the National Sericulture Project, Central Silk Board (" Party No. 1 " in short) filed its written statement .
It isalso pleaded by the workman that the establishment of party No. 1 is an industrial establishment as defined under Section 25 -L of the Act,hence provisions of Chapter V-B of the Act are applicable to the establishment of the party No. 1 and his retrenchment is in contravention of the mandatory provision of Sections 25 -N, Section 25- F and 25 - FF of the Act and the party No. 1 did not follow the procedure of section 25 -G of the Act and as such, his retrenchment dated 30-11-1996 was illegal andby way ofvictimization and amounted to unfair labour practice and he had completed more than 240 days ofwork in every year during his tenure and the termination of his services was illegal and he is entitled for reinstatement in service with continuity and full back wages .
The case ofthe workman as depicted from the statement of claim is that " National Sericulture Project" was started by the Central Silk Board, a unit ofGovernment of India , at different places all over India including in Akola district and the said project wasimplemented by the Director, National SilkWorn Seed Project , Central Silk Board having office at Bangalore and the in -charge of the said project in Akola district and other places in Maharashtra was the Deputy Director having his office at Akola and there were seven technical centres (T.S.C. ) at Washim, Akola, Mehekar, Khamgaon , Risod, Motala and Buldhana which were under the Deputy Director and he was initially appointed as a casual labour by party No. 1 w.e.f. 01-04-1991, at T.S.C. , Akola from the list of candidates received from the concerned Employment Exchange and T.S.C. , Akola was closed by party No. 1 in 1993 and the party No. 1 handed over all the T.S.C. to the State Government of Maharashtra and the office of the Deputy Director issued the order of retrenchment of his services on 30-11-1996 and terminated his services w.e.f. 30-11-1996 on the ground of closure of the T.S.C. and N.S.P. at Akola and three days after the order of retrenchment, the party No. 1 issued another order dated 03-12-1996 and offered fresh engagement of a casual labour at Basic Seed Farm , Shirla, but when he reported for duty on the basis of the order dated
3. The party No. 1 in the written statement has pleaded inter- alia that seven Technical service centers were established in different places in Maharashtra State with the assistance of World Bank and for the said centers , required number of casual labourers were engaged purely on temporary basis on daily wages basis for the casual nature ofwork for the project period and the nature ofwork ofthe center was to provide technical service to the farmers, who were practicing sericulture and the work of the centers was seasonal and intermitting in nature and the workman was engaged as casual labourer at TSC , Akola on 01-04-1991 through local Employment Exchange and he worked intermittently and he did not work continuously 1532
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 18 , 2012/MAGHA 29 , 1933
[PART II-SEC. 3 ( ii )]
referred cannot be answered in favour of the workman and hewould not be entitled to any relief.
In this case , the workman has not adduced any evidence in support of his case. So applying the settled principles as mentioned above , the workman is not entitled to any relief.
and he was paid wages as fixed by the State Government and as per the terms and conditions of National Sericulture Project , the TSC establishment in pilot states were closed on 30-11-1996 and handed over to the State Government and the only P 2 Basic Seed Farm which was functioning at Shirla during project period was subsequently closed and handed over to the State Government and while handing over the Technical Service Centers , the concerned State Government Sericulture Departments were requested to utilize the labourers engaged in the centers , but they did not agree for the same and there was no requirement of labourers in any of Central Silk Board units functioning in Maharashtra and thus , the services of the labourers were terminatedby offering admissible notice period wages and retrenchment compensation, as per the provisions of Section 25F of the Act and the workman and other labourers refused to receive the same and later, individual demand drafts were obtained in the name of the workman and other labourers and were sent to their residential addresses by registered post but they refused to receive the same.
6. Moreover, the oral evidence adduced by the management has remained unchallenged . The documents filed by the management show that due to closure of the Technical Service Centres including the service centres at Akola, where the workman was working and handing over ofthe centres to the State Government of Maharashtra on 30-11-1996 , the services of the workman and all other casual labourers were terminated and before termination of their services , one month's wages in lieu of notice and retrenchment compensation was offered to the workman and other labourers , but they refused to receive the same. Fact regarding entitlement to receive such wages and compensation has been mentioned in the notice itself. It is also found that the wages and retrenchment compensation was also sent in shape of Bank Draft by RP with AD to the workmanbut the workman did not receive the same . There is no evidence that any casual labour was accommodated by party No. 1 at any other place and there was any discrimination in respect of the workman . There is also no evidence that provision of Chapter V-B and provisions of Sections 25 - L and 25 - N are applicable to party No. 1. As the mandatory provisions of the section 25 -F of the Act were complied with by party No. 1 before termination of the services of the workman , it cannot be said that the termination of the services of the workman is illegal or invalid . Hence, it is ordered :
ORDER
Itis further pleaded by the party No. 1 that order dated 03-12-1996 , was issued with the intention to rehabilitate the retrenched labourers by engaging them for short duration at Basic Seed Farm, Sirla, but due to scaling down of farm activities and reduction of work load in the farm , the retrenched labourers could not be accommodated and that cannot be construed that work was available at P2Basic Seed Farm , Shirla and after closure of TSC , Akola, no casual labour was accommodated at anywhere and the women field Assistants were appointed on regular basis as per recruitment rules of Central Silk Board and they were posted to work at TSC , Akola and other places in Maharashtra State and the workman cannot be equated with the regular staff and it is not an industrial establishment as defined under section 25 (L) of the Act and provision of section chapter V-B , 25 (L) and 25 (N) of the Act are not applicable to it and the workman is not entitled to any relief.
The action of the Deputy Director, National Sericulture Project, Central Silk Board, Government of India, Basic Seed Farm Shirala, Taluka -Patur , Distt . Akola (MS) in terminating the employment of Sh . Subhash Atmaram Budhalkar w.e.f. 30-11-1996 is legal and justified. The workman is not entitled to any relief.
J.P. CHAND, Presiding Officer
नई दिल्ली, 25 जनवरी , 2012 4. It is necessary to nention here that though the workman was given several opportunities to adduce evidence in support of his case, no evidence , documentary or oral was adduced by him. Neither the petitioner nor his advocate also appeared on 23-11-2011 to cross -examine the witness for the management and as such, " no cross" order was passed and after hearing argument from the side of the management, the case was closed and posted for award.
का.आ. 675.-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में केन्द्रीय सरकार 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 , आसनसोल के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 85/2007 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 25-1-2012 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।
[सं. एल -22012/242/2007-आई आर ( सीएम-11 ) ] डी.एस.एस. श्रीनिवास राव , डेस्क अधिकारी 5. It is well settled that when a workman raises a dispute challenging the validity of the ter nination of the service, it is imperative for him to file written statement before the Industrial Court setting out grounds in which the order is challenged and he must produce evidence to prove his case and if the workman fails to appear or file written statement or produce evidence , the reference 1533 भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 18 , 2012/माघ 29 , 1933
[ भाग II-खंड 3 ( ii ) ]
New Delhi , the 25th January, 2012
wasregistered on 03-12-07 and accordingly an order to that effect was passed to issue notices through the registered post to the parties concerned directing them to appear in the court on the date fixed and to file their written statements along with the relevant documents and a list of witnesses in support of their claims . In pursuance of the said order notices by the registered post were sent to the parties concerned.
S.O. 675. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) , the Central Government hereby publishes the Award Ref. No. 85/2007 ofthe Central Government Industrial Tribunal -cum-Labour Court , Asansol as shown in the Annexure, in the industrial dispute between the management of Bansra Colliery of M/s . ECL , and their workman, which was received by the Central Government on 25-01-2012 .
[No. L- 22012/242 /2007- IR(CM- II) ] D.S.S. SRINIVASA RAO, Desk Officer
ANNEXURE
Since the predecessor (Late Manoranjan Pattnaik, the then P.O. ) of the Tribunal as per order dated 23-03-10 had reserved for an award in this case because the Union neither responded to the notices nor filed written statement . So, it was found that they had no interest to proceed with the case as and such no dispute exists . Accordingly, it is hereby ordered.
ORDER
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL -CUM- LABOUR COURT, ASANSOL
PRESENT:
Shri KISHORI RAM, PresidingOfficer
Let an " Award" be and the same is passed as no dispute existing. Send the copies of the order to the Govt. of India, Ministry of Labour, New Delhi for information and needful . The reference is accordingly disposed of.
Reference No. 85 of 2007
KISHORI RAM, Presiding Officer PARTIES :
नई दिल्ली, 25 जनवरी , 2012
TheManagement of Bansra Colliery of M/ s . ECL
Vs.
Their Workman
REPRESENTATIVES :
: Sri P.K. Das , Advocate
Forthe management
का.आ. 676.- 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 , आसनसोल के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 88/2005 ) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 25-1-2012 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।
: None
Forthe Union (Workman)
[सं. एल-22012/315/2004- आई आर ( सीएम- II ) ] डी.एस.एस. श्रीनिवास राव , डेस्क अधिकारी State: WEST BENGAL
Industry: COAL
New Delhi , the 25th January, 2012
Dated the 5-1-12, 23-3-10
AWARD
S.O. 676. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 88/ 2005) ofthe Central Government Industrial Tribunal -cum- Labour Court , Asansol 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 25-01-2012 .
Inexercise of powers conferred by clause ( d) of Sub- section ( 1 ) and Sub- section 2 (A) of Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , Govt . of India through the Ministry of Labour vide its Letter No. L- 22012/ 242/2007 - IR (CM - II ) dated 25-10-07 has been pleased to refer the following dispute for adjudication by this Tribunal .
SCHEDULE
[No. L-22012/315 /2004 - IR( CM- II )] D.S.S. SRINIVASARAO , Desk Officer
ANNEXURE
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT "Whether the action of the management of Bansra Colliery ofM/ s . ECL in dismissing Shri Monoj Dome, w.e.f. 19-12-2003 is legal and justified ? If not, to what relief is the workmen entitled ?"
INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM- LABOUR COURT, ASANSOL
PRESENT:
Shri KISHORI RAM, Presiding Officer
Having received the Order No. L- 22012/ 242/2007- IR( CM- II) dated 25-10-07 of the above said reference from the Govt . of India, Ministry of Labour, New Delhi for adjudication ofthe dispute , a reference case No. 85 of2007
367GI/2012-30 1534
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 18 , 2012/ MAGHA 29 , 1933
Reference No. 88 of 2005
PARTIES :
TheManagement ofDamagoria Colliery ofM/ s . ECL
Vs.
Their Workman
REPRESENTATIVES :
: Sri P.K. Das , Advocate For the Management
: None
For the Union (Workman)
State : WEST BENGAL Industry: COAL
Dated 6-1-12, 30-3-10
AWARD
In exercise of powers conferred by clause ( d) of Sub- section ( 1 ) and Sub- section 2 (A) of Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947 ), Govt. of India through the Ministry of Labour vide its letter No. L- 22012/ 315/2004 - IR ( CM - II ) dated 27-07-05 has been pleased to refer the following dispute for adjudication by this Tribunal.
SCHEDULE
"Whether the demand of Janta Mazdoor Sangh (JMS) for regularization of Sh . Ram Narayan Singh in the post of Excavation Fitter, Damagoria Colliery of M/s. BCCL is legal andjustified? Ifyes , to what relief the concerned workman is entitled?"
Having received the Order No. L -22012/315 /2004- IR( CM - II ) dated 27-07-05 of the above said reference from the Govt . of India , Ministry of Laobur, New Delhi for adjudication ofthe dispute , a reference case No. 88 of2005 was registered on 17-08-05 and accordingly an order to that effect was passed to issue notices through the registered post to the parties concerned directing them to appear in the court on the date fixed and to file their written statements along with the relevant documents and a list of witnesses in support of their claims. In pursuance of the said order notices by the registered post were sent to the parties concerned .
On 30-03-2010 the predecessor (Late Manoranjan Pattanaik, the then P.O. ) of the Tribunal had reserved for an award in this case because the workman is dead but nothing has been filed from the other side not anybody is coming for substitution . At any rate it is found that the Union is taking any interest to substantiate the facts ofthe writtenstatement . Hence , award is reserved . Accordingly, itishereby ordered.
ORDER
Let an " Award" be and the same is passed as no dispute existing. Send the copies of the order to the Govt .
[PART II-SEC. 3 (ii ) ]
of India , Ministry of Labour, New Delhi for information and needful . The reference is accordingly disposed of.
KISHORI RAM, Presiding Officer
नई दिल्ली , 25 जनवरी , 2012
का. आ . 677.-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में केन्द्रीय सरकार एन.एस.पी. कं प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच , अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण , नागपुर के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 13/2003 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 25-1-2012 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।
[सं. एल-42012/67/2002- आई आर ( सीएम- II ) ] डी.एस.एस. श्रीनिवास राव, डेस्क अधिकारी
New Delhi , the 25th January, 2012
S.O. 677. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 13 / 2003) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal -cum- Labour Court , Nagpur as shown in the Annexure , in the industrial dispute between the management of National Sericulture Project, Central Silk Board, National Silk Board Govt . of India, and their workman , which was received by the Central Government on 25-01-2012 .
[No. L-42012/67/2002 -IR(CM- II) ] D.S.S. SRINIVASARAO, Desk Officer
ANNEXURE BEFORE SHRI J.P. CHAND , PRESIDING OFFICER, CGIT-CUM- LABOUR COURT, NAGPUR
Case No. CGIT/NGP/ 13/2003 Date: 12-1-2012
PartyNo. 1 :
The Deputy Director, National Sericulture Project , Central SilkBoard, P-2, Basic Seed Farm Shirala, Tah. Patur, Distt . AKOLA (MS) .
Versus
PartyNo. 2 :
Shri Punjabrao Gawai , C/ o Bhorsaborsi , PO : Eklara , Teh. Chikali , Distt. Buldana, (MS ) . AWARD (Dated: 12th January, 2012)
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 ( 14 of 1947) , (" the Act" in short ) , the Central Government has referred the industrial dispute between the employers , in relation to the 1535
भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 18, 2012/माघ 29 , 1933
[ भाग II-खंड 3 (ii ) ]
management of National Sericulture Project , Central Silk Board and their workman Shri Punjabrao Gawai , for adjudication , as per letter No. L-42012 /67 /2002 - IR (CM- II) dated 08-11-2002, with the following schedule:
"Whether the action of the management of Central SilkBoard through its Director, National Silk Board, Government of India, Bangalore and Deputy Director, National Silk Project, Akola in terminating the service of Shri Punjabrao Gawai as a casual labour w.e.f. 30-11-1996 is proper, legal and justified ? If not, to what relief the said workman is entitled ? "
2.On receipt ofthe reference , the parties were noticed to file their respective statement of claim and written statement and accordingly , the workman Shri Punjabrao Gawai , (" the workman " in short ) file his statement of claim and the management of the National Sericulture Project , Central Silk Board (" Party No. 1" in short ) filed its written statement .
The case of the workman as depicted from the statement of claim is that " National Sericulture Project" was started by the Central Silk Board, a unit ofGovernment of India , at different places all over India including in Akola district and the said project was implemented by the Director, National Silk Worm Seed Project, Central Silk Board having office at Bangalore and the in-charge of the said project in Akola district and other places in Maharashtra was the Deputy Director having his office at P - 2 , Basic Seed Farm , Shirla , Akola and there were seven technical centres (T.S.C.) at Washim, Akola, Mehekar, Khamgaon, Risod, Motala and Buldhana which were under the Deputy Director and he was initially appointed as a casual labour by party no . 1 w.e.f. 20-11-1990 , at T.S.C. , Mehekar from the list of candidates received from the concerned employment exchange and T.S.C. , Mehekar (wrongly mentioned as Akola in statement of claim ) was closed by party No. 1 in 1993 and the party No. 1 handed over all the T.S.C. to the State Government of Maharashtra and the office of the Deputy Director issued the order of retrenchment of his services on 30-11-1996 and terminated his services w.e.f. 30-11-1996 on the ground of closure of the T.S.C. and N.S.P. at Akola and three days after the order of retrenchment , the party no . 1 issued another order dated 03-12-1996 and offered fresh engagement of a casual labour at Basic Seed Farm , Shirla, but when he reported for duty on the basis of the order dated 03-12-1996 , he was not allowed by party no. 1 to resume duty, so he served a notice on party no . 1 on 08-02-1997 asking to allow him to resume duty, but the party no . 1 did not give any reply. It is further pleaded by the workman that as per the circular dated 15-10-1992 of the Director , N.S.W.S.I. , Bangalore , direction was issued to convert the casual labourers , who had completed five years of service as on 15-10-1992 to time scale labourers and also to convert all other casual labourers to time scale on their completion of five years of continuous service and by circular date 12-12-1996, it was decided to convert the casual labourers , who had been engaged prior to 07-08-1992 and had completed two years of continuous service and the Deputy Director , N.S.P. , Shirla vide his letter dated 13-10-1996 had sent the details of his services along with other casual labourers and according to the said information , he had completed five years of continuous service on 19-11-1995 and was entitled for conversion as time scale labour w.e.f. 19-11-1995 and as such he was not liable to be terminated and services of casual labourers , Shri Abhay Tripude and seven women field Assistants were not terminated and they were accommodated and transferred to other places and therefore , he was also entitled to be accommodated.
It is also pleaded by the workman that the establishment of party no. 1 is an industrial establishment as defined under section 25 -L of the Act, hence provisions of chapter V-B of the Act are applicable to the establishment of the party no. 1 and his retrenchment is in contravention of the mandatory provision of sections, 25 -N, Section 25 -F and 25 - FF of the Act and the party no. I did not follow the procedure of section 25 -G of the Act and as such, his retrenchment dated 30-11-1996 was illegal and byway of victimization and amounted to unfair labour practice and he had completed more than 240 days of work in every year during his tenure and the termination of his services was illegal and he is entitled for reinstatement in service with continuity and full back wages.
3. The party no. 1 in the written statement has pleaded inter- alia that seven Technical service centers were established in different places in Maharashtra State with the assistance of World Bank and for the said centers , required number of casual labourers were engaged purely on temporary basis on daily wages basis for the casual nature of work for the project period and the nature ofwork of the center was to provide technical service to the farmers , who were practicing sericulture and the work of the centers was seasonal and intermitting in nature and the workman was engaged as a casual labourer at TSC, Mehekar on 20-11-1990 through local employment exchange and he worked intermittently and he did not work continuously and he was paid wages as fixed by the State Government and as per the terms and conditions of National Sericulture Project, the TSC establishment in pilot states were closed on 30-11-1996 and handed over to the State Government and the only P2 Basic Seed Farm which was functioning at Shirla during project period was 1536
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 18 , 2012/MAGHA 29 , 1933
subsequently closed and handed over to the State Government and while handing over the Technical Service Centres , the concerned State Government Sericulture Departments were requested to utilize the labourers engaged in the centres , but they did not agree for the same and there was no requirement of labourers in any ofCentral SilkBoard units functioning in Maharashtra and thus , the services of the labourers were terminated by offering admissible notice period wages and retrenchment compensation , as per the provisions of section 25F of the Act and the workman and other labourers refused to receive the same and later, individual demand drafts were obtained inthe name of the workman and other labourers and were sent to their residential addresses by registered post but they refused to receive the same.
Itisfurther pleaded by the Party No. 1 that order dated 03-12-1996 , was issued with the intention to rehabilitate the retrenched labourers by engaging them for short duration at Basic Seed Farm, Sirla, but due to scaling down of farm activities and reduction of work load in the farm, the retrenched labourers could not be accommodated and that cannot be construed that work was available at P2 Basic Seed Farm , Shirla and after closure of TSC , Mehekar, no casual labour was accommodated at anywhere and the women filed assistants were appointed on regular basis as per recruitment rules of Central Silk Board and they were posted to work at TSC, Akola and other places in Maharashtra State and the workman cannot be equated with the regular staff and it is not an industrial establishment as defined under section 25 (L) of the Act and provision of section chapter V-B, 25 (L) and 25 (N) of the Act are not applicable to it and the workman is not entitled to any relief.
4. It is necessary to mention here that though the workman was given several opportunities to adduce evidence in support of his case , no evidence , documentary or oral was adduced by him. Neither the petitioner nor his advocate also appeared on 23-11-2011 to cross -examine the witness for the management and as such , " по cross" order was passed and after hearing argument from the side of the management, the case was closed and posted for award.
5. It is well settled that when a workman raises a disputes challenging the validity of the termination of the service, it is imperative for him to file written statement before the Industrial Court setting out grounds in which the order is challenged and he must produce evidence to prove his case and if the workman fails to appear or file written statement or produce evidence , the reference referred cannot be answered in favour of the workman and he would not be entitled to any relief.
In this case , the workman has not adduced any evidence in support of his case . So applying the settled principles as mentioned above , the workman is not entitled to any relief.
[PART II-SEC. 3 ( ii ) ]
6. Moreover, the oral evidence adduced by the management has remained unchallenged . The documents filed by the management show that due to closure of the Technical Service Centres including the service centres at Akola, where the workman was working and handing over ofthe centres to the State Government of Maharashtra on 30-11-1996 , the services of the workman and all other casual labourers were terminated and before termination oftheir services, one month's wages in lieu of notice and retrenchment compensation was offered to the workman and other labourers , but they refused to receive the same . Fact regarding entitlement to receive such wages and compensation has been mentioned in the notice itself. It is also found that the wages and retrenchment compensation was also sent in shape of Bank Draft by RP with AD to the workmanbut the workman did not receive the same . There is no evidence that any casual labour was accommodated by party no . 1 at any other place and there was any discrimination in respect of the workman. There is also no evidence that provision of Chapter V- B and provisions of Sections 25 - L and 25- N are applicable to party no. 1. As the mandatory provisions of the section 25-F of the Act were complied with by party no. 1 before termination of the services of the workman, it cannot be said that the termination of the services of the workman is illegal or invalid. Hence , it is ordered:
ORDER
The action ofthe management of Central Silk Board through its Director, National Silk Board , Government of India, Bangalore and Deputy Director, National Silk Project, Akola in terminating the service of Sh . Punjabrao Gawai as casual labourer w.e.f. 30-11-1996 is proper, legal and justified. The workman is not entitled to any relief.
J.P. CHAND, PresidingOfficer
नई दिल्ली, 25 जनवरी , 2012
का.आ. 678.-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 (1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में , केन्द्रीय सरकार डब्ल्यू. सी. एल. के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच , अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालय , नागपुर के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 07/1999 ) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 25-1-2012 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।
[सं. एल-22012/ 231/1999 - आई आर ( सीएम- II ) ] डी. एस. एस. श्रीनिवास राव , डेस्क अधिकारी
New Delhi , the 25th January, 2012
S.O. 678. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 07/1999) 1537 [ भाग II-खंड 3 (ii ) ]
भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 18 , 2012/माघ 29 , 1933
ofthe Central Government Industrial Tribunal -cum -Labour Court, Nagpur as shown in the Annexure , in the industrial dispute between the management of Saoner Sub Area of WCL, Saoner, and their workman , received by the Central Government on 25-1-2012
[No. L-22012/231 /1999 -IR(CM- II)] D. S. S. SRINIVASA RAO, DeskOfficer
ANNEXURE
BEFORE SHRI J. P. CHAND , PRESIDING OFFICER, CGIT-CUM-LABOUR COURT, NAGPUR
Date: 13-1-2012
Case No. CGIT/NGP/07/1999
PARTY No. 1 :
The Sub Area Manager, Saoner Sub Area of WCL , Saoner, Distt.Nagpur.
Versus
PARTY NO.2 :
Shri Rajendra Singh S/o . Lalsingh Chauhan , Saoner Mine No. 1 , WCL , Bajaj Colony, Qtr . No. 7/3 , Saoner , Distt. Nagpur.
AWARD
(Dated: 13th January, 2012 )
This is a reference made by the Central Government, in exercise of the powers conferred by clause (d) of sub- section ( 1) and sub- section 2(A) of Section 10 ofIndustrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947) (here -in - after referred to as "the Act") , of the industrial dispute between the employers in relation to the management of the Sub Area Manager , Saoner Sub Area and their workman , Shri Rajendra Singh (" the workman" in short ) for adjudication , as per letter No. L- 22012/231 /99 - IR(CM- II ) dated 8/9-9-1999 , with the following schedule :
"Whether the action of the management through Sub Area Manager, Saoner Sub Area of WCL. , Saoner, Distt . Nagpur in dismissing Sh . Rajendra Singh , Electrical Fitter w.e.f. 14-12-98 is legal and justified ? If not, to what relief the workman concerned is entitled ?"
2. On receipt ofthe reference from the Government , the petitioner and so also the management were directed for filing their statement of claim and written statement respectively by issuance of notice and in response to such notice, the parties filed their statement of claim and written statement respectively.
According to the claim petition filed by the workman , he was appointed in the WCL in the year 1971 and started
working as an Electrical Fitter in Saoner Mine No. 1 from the year 1989 and while he was working as such, on 28-7-1996, a charge sheet was submitted against him , on the allegation of his instigating other workers no to go on duty on 28-7-1996 and a practice was mooted in Saoner mines of calling the workers on Sunday, which is a paid holiday, by giving them double rate of wages as over time and the grievance of the workers was that the Mine management were showing favour to some particular workers of their choice in giving duties on Sunday and not to others and as such, workers demanded that work on Sunday on over time should be given to all and on 28-7-1996, which was a Sunday, he was not on duty and a list was displayed in the notice board showing the names of certain workers , who were detailed for duty on 28-7-1996, but the said list was not signed by the competent authority and was signed by one of the clerks , Shri Ramteke and noticing the fact that the list was not signed by the appropriate authority, the workers , who were detailed to perform such duty, remained absent and their such action was taken to be a planned action by the workers to remain away from duty, by the management . The further case of the workman is that charge sheet was also submitted against 71 other workers and he submitted his show cause to the charge sheet on 30-7-1996 and the management not being satisfied with his reply, initiated the departmental enquiry against him and the departmental enquiry was conducted in avery arbitrary and farcical manner, violating the principles of natural justice and his request to permit him to engage a lawyer to defend the case was refused and he was not allowed to call his witnesses , who had been specifically named by him and the Inquiry Officer failed to give opportunity to him to get the deposition of his witnesses recorded and the facts that he was not detailed for duty on 28-7-1996 was totally over looked by the authority and the Inquiry Officer submitted his report on 11-9-1996 and the copy of the same was received by him on 3-10-1998 and he also duly submitted his statement of defence on 5-10-1998 and the second show -cause notice was issued to him on 3-10-1998 and he submitted his reply on 5-10-1998 and he submitted an application for voluntary retirement on 1-12-1998 , due to poor vision, but without considering his request for voluntary retirement , the management issued the order of dismissal on 14-12-1998 . It isalso pleaded by the workman that other 71 workers, who were charge sheeted are still working in the mines and no action had been taken against them, which clearly shows a foul play on the part of the management and the revengeful attitude against him, as he was the ex - President of one of the workers associations and the impugned punishment of dismissal from service is wholly illegal, arbitrary andbad in law and the enquiry was done with undue haste and for remaining absent on a paid holiday cannot be termed as misconduct under any law and the absence of the entire workers on 28-7-1996 , a Sunday was not termed and declared as illegal by specific declaration by the 1538
[PART II- SEC . 3 ( ii ) ]
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 18 , 2012/MAGHA 29 , 1933
management and as such , it cannot be called illegal strike on the part of the workers and as such, no action should have been taken on such act and on this specific ground, the impugned action is required to be quashed and set aside and the punishment of dismissal from service on the alleged minor offence is wholly disproportionate and harsh. The workman has prayed to pass necessary order for his reinstatement in service with continuity and all other consequential benefits .
3. The management in their written statement have pleaded inter alia that certain workers were being assigned the duty on Sunday for the maintenance work and were being paid overtime wages as per law and the management were not showing favour to particular workers of their choice in giving them duties on Sunday and the workers werebeing given assignment as per requirement and there is no question of any demand on the part of the workers to give overtime job to all the workers on Sunday and on 27-7-1996, a list was displayed on the notice board showing the name of the workers , who had been assigned duties on 28-7-1996 , a Sunday and the said list was signed and displayed as per the usual practice and there was no question of its signing by any proper authority and it is false to say that the workers had decided to remain absent from duty as the list was not signed by the appropriate authority, but in the evening of 27-7-1996, the workman instigated the workers not to go on duty on 28-7-1996 , so that the maintenance work and production in the mine should get affected and due to the instigation made by the workman on 27-7-1996 , the workman did not attend duty on 28-7-1996 and on 28-7-1996 , a charge sheet was submitted against the workman on the allegation of instigating the workers not to go on duty and the workman submitted his reply to the said charge sheet on 30-7-1996 and the departmental enquiry was initiated against him and the said enquiry was not conducted in any arbitrary and farcical manner , violating the principles of natural justice and the workman was not permitted to be represented by a lawyer but he was permitted to be represented by an authorized representative as per the standing orders and ample opportunity was given to the workmantocross -examine the witnesses of the management and also to examine his witnesses and even though , at the initial stage of the enquiry, the workman did not attend the enquiry and even refused to receive the letter notifying the date ofthe proceeding to give him proper opportunity, the sitting was adjourned and was fixed on 24-8-1996 and on 24-8-1996 , the workman gave out to defend the case himself inthe enquiry and the workman also examined himself as a witness and was cross-examined by the management and witnesses Sunil Alphanso , Ganesh Bagde , V. R. Chauhan and Ambadas Godke were also examined on behalf ofthe workman and the enquiry was closed and the workman filed his notes of argument on 7-9-1996 and the Inquiry Officer submitted his report on 11-9-1996 and as regard the other 71 workers, they were charge sheeted for their absence on 28-7-1996 and after receipt of their replies , some of them were issued with warning, some had asked for pardon and some were found to have genuine difficulty in attending duty after holding due enquiry and the charges proved against the workman are severe and as the workman was aware that he had committed his misconduct and the charges leveled against him to have been proved, he submitted the letter dated 1-2-1998 seeking voluntary retirement on the aileged ground of poor sight problem and when the charges were found to have been proved against the workman, there was no question of accepting the application for voluntary retirement and the workman was not dismissed with a revengeful attitude against him , being the ex- President of an Association , but the order of dismissal was passed because of proved misconduct and it had no relationship whatsoever with the alleged holding of the post of President of an Association by the workman and the workman has tried to misread and misinterpreted the charge sheet and the charge sheet was in respect of instigating the other employees for not attending duty on 28-7-1996 and not for remaining absent by the workman on 28-7-1996 and the punishment awarded against the workman is not at all disproportionate and harsh and the departmental enquiry was conducted in accordance with the principles of natural justice and the workman was given fuli opportunity to defend him in the enquiry and the workman is not entitled for any relief.
4. As this is a case of dismissal of the workman from services , after holding of a departmental enquiry, the validity of the departmental enquiry was taken up for consideration as a preliminary issue and as per orders dated 3-12-2010, the enquiry was held to be legal , proper, and by following the principles of natural justice.
5. At the time of argument , it was submitted by the learned advocate for the workman that the notice displayed on 27-7-1996 directing the workers of electrical and mechanical department to report for duty on Sunday i.e. on 28-7-1996 for maintenance work was not signed by the competent authority of the mine and the same was signed by the clerical staff of the mine and as such , the notice could not be taken as authentic or legal and thereby, the workers whose names were mentioned did not take cognizance of the notice , by which they were called for performance of duty on Sunday could not amount to disobedience of any reasonable order of the competent authority and as such , the submission of the charge sheet against the workman was unwarranted, unlawful and improper, as there was no call to the workers to attend duty on 28-7-1996, hence , the question of committing misconduct as enumerated in clause 26.39 does not arise and the findings of the enquiry officer are perverse and the case of the management has been based on two witnesses and their evidence has not been corroborated or substantiated by any otherwitness and the statement of Shri U. K. Ganju , [ भाग II-खंड 3 ( ii ) ]
1539 भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 18 , 2012/माघ 29 , 1933
the management representative is hearsay statement and the evidence of management's witnesses is weak and based on coaching and the same is unreliable and as such, the conclusion drawn by the enquiry officer on the basis of such evidence are not based on true facts and thus perverse and thus holding that management has proved the misconduct and the workman is guilty of misconduct , is unjustified, improper and illegal . It was further submitted by the learned advocate for the workman that all other employees involved in the same incident were left unpunished, whereas , the workman was singled out, in violation of the judgment reported in 1997 ( 10) SCC- 779 and the charges under clauses 26.10 and 26.43 of the standing orders leveled against 71 other workman were serious than the charges leveled against the workman, but they were let off with warning but the workman was awarded most severe punishment and therefore, the punishment is shockingly disproportion .
Hon'ble Apex Court in number of decisions have specifically held that when the findings are not perverse , the Industrial Tribunal must be reluctant to interfere with the punishment awarded and the action of the workman instigating the workman not to attend the duty on a paid holiday as a result of which not a single workman reported for duty is a major misconduct and the practice to call for the requisite number of employees for the work of maintenance on a paid holiday on the basis of actual requirement was prevailing since long and at no point of time, the union or any of the other employees , who were not called had raised any objection and the said act of the management cannot be termed as illegal and the Tribuna ! cannot adjudicate as to whether the notice displayed on the notice board was signed by competent authority or not, as the same is not the subject matter of the reference. It was also submitted that the workman has not pleaded anything about the submission made in respect of the clauses of the definition of the misconduct and as such, the submission made in that respect cannot be taken into consideration.
The learned advocate for the workınan also submitted thatit is clear from the evidence that the alleged misconduct was committed outside the Mine and it is clear with reference to clauses 26.4 and 26.42 that the alleged misconduct under clause 26.39 and 26.40 are not coming within the definition ofmisconduct and as such, the punishment imposed against the workman is illegal and is not sustainable and the workman is entitled for reinstatement in service with continuity and back wages .
7. The first contention raised by the learned advocate for the workman is that the workman has been charged for commission of misconduct under clauses 26.39 and 26.40 and clauses 26.4 and 26.41 provide that gambling , drunkenness , fighting or riotous disorderly or indecent behavior either his place of work or at the colliery/ establishment or company's residential settlements and holding meeting within the mines/ establishment premises without previous, written intimation to the management amount to misconduct and from those clauses , it is clear that the act as mentioned in other clauses of clause 26, which defines acts of misconducts , can only be treated as misconduct if done in the mines and as according to the allegations , the workman committed the alleged misconduct in the area of the residential quarters which is not coming within the definition of mines , it cannot be said that any misconduct was committed by him and as such , the entire departmental enquiry is vitiated . In answer to the same , it was submitted by the learned advocate for the party no . 1 that there is no such pleading in the statement of claim and as such, the submissions cannot be taken into consideration and the place, where the misconduct was committed by the workman is coming within definition of mines as per section 2(j ) of Mines Act . The question raised by the learned advocate for the workman is in regard to point of law and as such , the contention can be raised without any pleading and the same is to be taken into consideration . However , I do not find any force in the contention that the place , where the misconduct was committed by the workman cannotbe held to be within the mines area . Hence , I find no force in the contention raised by the learned advocate for theworkman.
8. The second contention raised by the learned advocate for the workman was that there was no evidence 6. Per Contra, it was contended by the learned advocate for the party no . 1 that as per the terms of the reference, it is to be decided by the Tribunal as to whether the dismissal order passed against the workman is legal and justified on the basis of the enquiry papers and documents available on record and vide order dated 3-12-2010 , it has already been held that the departmental enquiry held against the workman to be legal , proper and in accordance with the principles of natural justice and now, the question of perversity of the findings and quantum ofpunishment are to be considered . It was further submitted by the learned advocate for the party no. 1 that in the statement of claim, the workman has not mentioned that the findings of the enquiry officer are perverse and the bare perusal of the enquiry report submitted by the enquiry officer, it can be found that the enquiry officer has discussed the evidence led in the enquiry in detail and has assigned reasons in support of his findings and the workman has failed to demonstrate as to how and in which manner the findings recorded are perverse and the enquiry officer has rightly relied upon the evidence of the eye witnesses and in their cross -examination, they specifically made the statement about the incident in question to be seen and heard by them and in view of the said facts , it cannot be said that the findings are perverse. It was further submitted by the learned advocate for the party no. 1 that it is the discretion of the management to impose the punishment as provided for the major misconduct and the 1540
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 18 , 2012/MAGHA 29 , 1933
[PART II-SEC. 3 ( ii )]
not beg any apology and tried to justified his action and as such, the case ofthe workman is in a quite different footing than the other employees and the same doesn't amount of discrimination. In support ofthe said contentions, reliance was placed on the decision reported in AIR 2005 SC 3510 (M/s. Obettee Private Limited Vs. Mohd. Saffiq Khan). In the said decision, the Hon'ble Apex Court have held that , "Termination of services -Descrimation-Workmantendering apology for going on illegal strike stands on different footing than workman who justifies his action -Termination of services of later and reinstatement of former -Doesn't amount to discrimination . "
on record to hold the workman guilty of the misconduct and the findings of the enquiry officer are therefore perverse. On the other hand, the learned advocate for the management submitted that it is clear from the evidence of the two eye witnesses that the workman committed the misconduct and the enquiry officer has assessed the evidence adduced during the enquiry in detailed and has assigned reasons in support of his findings and the evidence of the witnesses examined on behalf of the workmanwas inconsistent and unreliable and the plea taken by the workman in different stages of the enquiry are also quite contradictory.
In this case, it is clear from the own submission made by the workman that the charges framed against other employees and the charges framed against him were different . Hence , it cannot be said that the workman and other employees were in the same footing and there was discrimination in imposing the punishment .
10. The last contention raised by the learned advocate for the workman is that the order directing the employees for attending work on 28-7-1996 was not signed by the competent authority and the same was signed by a clerk and as such, there was no legal order directing the employees to attend duty and as such, there was no questionof commission of any misconduct on the basis of such an illegal order. However, I find no force in the said contention as because the validity of the order in question isnot for consideration . Moreover, it is not the case of the workman that as the order was invalid , he asked the other employees not to join duty on 28-7-1996.
So far the punishment is concerned, the same is not shockingly disproportionate as gross misconduct has been proved against the workman in a properly held departmental enquiry. Hence , it is ordered :
It iswell settled that judicial review is not an appeal from a decision but a review of the manner in which the decision is made. Power ofjudicial review is meant to ensure that the individual receives fair treatment and not to ensure that the conclusion which the authority reaches is necessarily correct in the eye of the court . Neither the technical rules or Evidence Act nor proof of fact ofevidence as defined there in , apply to disciplinary proceeding . Adequacy of evidence or reliability of evidence cannot be permitted to be canvassed before the Court/Tribunal . When the authority accepts the evidence and the conclusion receives support there from , the disciplinary authority is entitled to hold that the delinquent officer is guilty of the charge. The Tribunal may interfere where the authority held the proceedings against the delinquent officer in a manner inconsistent with the rules of natural justice or in violation of statutory rules prescribing the mode of enquiry or where the conclusion or finding reached by the disciplinary authority is based on no evidence or if the conclusion or finding be such as no reasonable person would have ever reached, the Court/Tribunal may interfere with the conclusion or the finding and mould the relief so as to make it appropriate to the facts of the case .
ORDER
The present case in hand is now to be considered with the touch stone of the principles as mentioned above .
The action of the management through Sub Area Manager , Saoner Sub Area of WCL, Saoner , Distt . Nagpur in dismissing Sh . Rajendra Singh, Electrical Fitter w.e.f. 14-12-98 is legal and justified. The workman is not entitled toany relief.
J. P. CHAND , Presiding Officer
नई दिल्ली, 25 जनवरी , 2012 Onperusal ofthe record, it is found that the findings ofthe enquiry officer are very much in tune with the record ofthe enquiry, oral and documentary evidence and all other relevant factors and the findings are proper and well reasoned and based on the evidence on record and are not perverse. Hence , I find no force in the contention raised by the learned advocate for the workman .
का.आ. 679.-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/ श्रम न्यायालय , नागपुर के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 104/2003 ) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 25-1-2012 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।
[सं. एल-42012/178/2002- आई आर ( सीएम- II ) ] डी. एस. एस. श्रीनिवास राव , डेस्क अधिकारी 9. The next contention raised by the learned advocate for the workman is that there was discrimination inimposition of the punishment against the workman, as because , the other 71 employees against whom charge sheets were submitted for not attending duty on 28-7-1996 were let off with warnings , whereas , the punishment of dismissal of service was imposed against the workman. In reply, the learned advocate for the party no. 1 submitted that the other workman tendered apology and some of them were absent due to valid ground and as such, they were let off with warnings , but the present workman did [ भाग II-खंड 3 ( ii ) ]
1541 भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 18 , 2012/माघ 29 , 1933
New Delhi , the 25th January, 2012
Distt .Yavatmal in paying to the workman namely Shri Raju Shankarrao Pingle, driver, wages at the rate of Rs . 35 per day w.e.f. 13-7-1994 in deviation from the Govt. of India O.M. No. S-32021 / 16/36-WC(MW) dated 23-8-1988 is legal andjustified ? If not, to what relief the workman is entitled to ?"
S.O. 679. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 104/ 2003) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal -cum- Labour Court, Nagpur as shown in the Annexure , in the industrial dispute between the management of Jawahar Navodaya Vidyalaya, and their workmen, which was received by the Central Government on 25-1-2012
2. On receipt of the reference, the parties were noticedto file their respective statement of claim and written statement and accordingly, the workman filed his statement of claim and the management of the State Bank of India ("Party No. 1" in short) filed its written statement.
[No. L -42012/ 178/2002- IR(CM- II) ] D. S. S. SRINIVASA RAO, Desk Officer
ANNEXURE
BEFORE SHRI J. P. CHAND , PRESIDING OFFICER, CGIT-CUM- LABOUR COURT, NAGPUR
Case No. CGIT/NGP/ 104/ 2003
PARTY NO.1 :
ThePrincipal , Jawahar Navodaya Vidhyalaya, Bellora, Tah . Ghatanji , Yavatmal (MS)
Vs.
PARTY NO. 2 :
Shri Raju,
S/o . Shankarrao Pingle, R/ o Bangar Nagar, Yavatmal
AWARD
(Dated: 18th January, 2012)
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 Jawahar Navodaya Vidhyalaya and their workman Shri Raju Shankarao Pingle, for adjudication, as perLetter No. L-42012/ 178 /2000 - IR (CM- II) dated 20-2-2003, with the following schedule :-
The case of the the workman as projected in the statement of claim is that he was employed in the post of driver in Jawahar Navodaya Vidhyalaya , Belora w.e.f. 13-7-1994 and from the date ofhis employment, he rendered service continuously without any interruption to the satisfaction of party No. 1 , till his illegal termination on 13-7-1995 and he was employed on payment of Rs . 35 per day, whereas , the regular pay of the driver in the management's organization was Rs . 950-1500 per month plus allowances as admissible from time to time as per the Government of India's OM dated 23-8-1988 and from time to time he had raised the disparity of payment with party No. 1 and requested to grant him the regular wages of a driver, but party No. 1 did not pay any heed to his plea in thematter and on 13-7-1995, terminated his service abruptly and illegally and though he had completed more than 240 daysof continuous service , party No. 1 neither gave one month's notice nor paid one month's pay in lieu of such notice and retrenchment compensation as provided under Section 25 -F of the Act , while effecting the termination of his service and the party No. 1 also did not maintain and publish any seniority list of the employees and some juniors tohim are still in the employment of party No. 1 and the act of party No. 1 amounted to violation of the provisions of Section 25 -F of the Act and he challenged the order of termination by filing a complaint bearing ULPA No. 110 of 1995, before the Labour Court, Yavatmal and on the point of jurisdiction he withdrew the said proceeding and approached the ALC ( C), Chandrapur for conciliation and onfailure of the conciliation , failure report wassubmitted to the Central Government and the Central Government , in itsturn, referred the dispute to the CGIT for adjudication . The workman has prayed to direct the management for his reinstatement in service with back wages and consequential benefits and also to pay arrears of regular pay in terms of Govt . of India's OM in the matter.
1. " Whether the action of the management in relation to Jawahar Navodaya Vidhyalaya , Bellora , Tah . Ghatanji , Distt . Yavatmal in terminating the service of Shri Raju Shankarrao Pingle , on 13-7-1995 without complying with the provision of Industrial Dispute Act , 1947 is legal and justified ? If not , to what relief the workman is entitled to ? "
3. The party No. 1 in the written statement has pleaded inter -alia that the workman was engaged on daily wages basis from 13-7-1994 to 13-7-1995 with intermittent breaks and his services were utilized by party No. 1 as and whennecessity arose and at no point of time, the workman was appointed as a driver and the workman was paid by the party No. 1 as and when his services were utilized and 2. Whether the action of the management in relation to Jawahar Navodaya Vidhyalaya, Bellora, Tah . Ghatanji ,
367 GI/2012-31 1542
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 18 , 2012/MAGHA 29 , 1933
[PART II-SEC. 3 ( ii ) ]
notice pay and retrenchment compensation and the certificate issued by the Principal Shri Sharma on 10-1-1995 and 13-7-1995 are at Ext. W- V and W-VI and the year wise statement is at Ext . W-VII .
5. At the time of argument , it was submitted by the learned advocate for the workman that it is established by the Ext .W-VII that the workman had rendered uninterrupted continuous service of 294 days from August 1994 to June 1995 and Exts . W-V and W- VI show that the workman had rendered his services without stigma and to the satisfaction of party No. 1 and the services of the workman were terminated on 13-7-1995, without any rhyme or reason and it is also clear from the evidence that the workman was paid Rs. 35 per day, whereas , regular pay of the driver was Rs . 950-1500 per month plus allowances as admissible from time to time, as per the OM dated 23-8-1988 and when the workman requested to grant him regular wages, his services wereterminated and at the time of termination the mandatory provisions of Section 25 -F of the Act were not complied with and there was also violation of the provisions of Section 25 -G of the Act .
the workman filed a complaint before the Labour Court, Yavatına! (wrongly mentioned as Amravati in the written statement) for his reinstatement with continuity in service and back wages and the Labour Court by order dated 13-1-1999 had allowed the complaint and directed to reinstate the workman with continuity in service and to pay him 50% of the back wages and being aggrieved by the said order, it (party No. 1 ) had preferred a revision before the Industrial Court , Amravati and the Industrial Court by order dated 3-12-1999 set aside the order passed by the labour court and remanded back the matter to decide thejurisdictional issue and the workman filed an application on 6-12-2000 for permission to withdraw the complaint, which was allowed by the Labour Court and as the workman unconditionally withdrew the proceedings from the Labour Court , he is precluded from raising the same dispute by conciliation and the present reference is hit by principles of res -judicata and estoppel. It is further pleaded by party No. 1 that at no point of time , the workman had raised about the issue of disparity of payment , as per the Government of India's OM dated 23-8-1988 and the workman had not completed more than 240 days of service with it and the provisions of the Act are not applicable to it and there was no master and servant relationship between it and the workman andjunior to the workman are not in its service and the workman was never appointed as a driver, but he was engaged on daily wages basis as and when required and the workman is not entitled for any relief.
Insupport of such contentions , reliance has been placed by the learned advocate for the workman on the decisions reported in 2010 ( 5) MH . L J. - 244 ( Anup Sharma Vs. Executive Engineer, Public Health Division No. 1 Panipath), 2004 - SCC-L.S. -46 (UP Drugs and Pharmaceuticals Co. Ltd Vs Ramanuj Yadav and others ) and 2005 III CLR- 106 (Jairaj N. Shetty Vs. Union of India) .
4. Besides relying on documentary evidence , both the parties have adduced oral evidence in support oftheir respective claims . The workman has examined himself as a witness . His examination - in-chief is on affidavit . The workman has reiterated the facts mentioned in the statement ofclaim in his examination - in - chief. However, in his cross- examination , he has stated that he cannot say if he was appointed through the employment exchange. He has further admitted he was not interviewed and no written order of appointment was given to him and he was orally appointed and terminated and he was paid Rs . 35 per day and there was no other driver engaged on daily wages basis
6. Per contra , it was submitted by the learned advocate for the party No. I that it is the admitted fact that the workman was engaged on daily wages basis from 13-7-1994 to 13-7-1995 and the workman had admitted in his cross -examination that he had not under gone any selection process or interview and no order of appointment was issued to him , which clearly shows that he was not a permanent employee of the party No. 1 , which is governed by set of recruitment rules for permanent appointment and the workman is not entitled for payment of wages as per Govt . OM dated 23-8-1988 , as such meinorandum has neither been produced nor been proved and the said OM is applicable to the Vidhyalaya, which is altogether a different organization and apart from the same , as the engagement of the workman was on daily wages basis , he cannot claim pay scale of a permanent employee of a Government Vidhyalaya and as the workman has not proved that he had been engaged for 240 days in a calendar year , which is the requirement of the provisions of Section 25 -B oftheAct, the provisions of Section 25 - F are not applicable to his case and as there is no sanction post of driver there is also no question of his reinstatement as a driver, and as there is no evidence on record to show that the workman was not gainfully employed , he is also not entitled for back wages.
One V. Jagdishwar Acharya, the Principal of party No. 1 was examined as a witness by the party No. 1. The examination- in-chief of this witness , which is on affidavit is also in the same line of the stand taken by the party No. 1 in the written statement . In his cross-examination, this witness has admitted the affidavit filed by him is on the basis of the record and the workman was working on daily wages basis from 13-7-1994 to 13-7-1995 with intermittent breaks and the year - wise statement of the number of days worked by the workman on daily wages is correctand the same is signed by the Ex -Principal , Pllai and the workman worked for 294 days in total as mentioned in the said statement . This witness has also admitted that the workmanwas terminated on 13-7-1995 and he was not paid [ भाग II-खंड 3 ( ii ) ]
1543
भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 18 , 2012/माघ 29 , 1933
7. The engagement of the workman with party No. 1 from 13-7-1994 to 13-7-1995 has been admitted by the party No. 1. It is not disputed by the parties that the engagement of the workman was on daily wages basis of Rs . 35 per day. It isalso admitted by the workman that he was not appointed on a regular basis . The workman has also not filed the Government of India's OM dated 23-8-1988 . It is not the case of the workman that the wages paid to him was not according to the Payment of Minimum Wages Act . Except the oral evidence of the workman, there is nothing on record to show that the workman had ever raised any objection regarding payment of wages of Rs . 35 per day to him . Hence , the workman is not entitled to get the pay scale of a regular driver and it cannot be said that there was any deviation onthe part ofparty No. 1 from the OM dated 23-8-1988 of Government of India .
8. According to the workman , he had worked for more than 240 days in the preceding 12 months of 13-7-1995 . Party No. 1 has denied such claim and he has pleaded that the engagement of the workman was intermittent and had not completed 240 days of work in the preceding 12 months of 13-7-1995 and as such , there was no need of compliance of Section 25 -F of the Act . However, from the oral evidence of the workman and the admission ofthe witness for the management in his cross -examination and Exts . W. -V, W-VI and W- VII, it is found that the workman had actually worked for more than 240 days in the preceding 12 months of 13-7-1995 and as such, the termination ofthe services without compliance of the provisions of Section 25-F of the Act amounts to illegal retrenchment.
9. As the complaint ULPA No. 110 of 1995 was finally not disposed offon merit by the Labour Court, Yavatmal , it cannot be said that the reference is hit by the principles of res-judicata or estoppei .
10. As in this reference the workman has neither pleaded nor proved that he was not gainfully employed after the date of his termination from services , the workman is not entitled for any back wages .
11. In the decision reported in 2010 (5 ) MH. L.J. 244 (Supra), which has been cited by the learned advocate for the workman , the Hon'ble Apex Court have held that :
"Termination of service of an employee by way of retrenchment- Non- compliance of condition precedent-Action of the employer is nullity and the employee is entitled to continue in employment. "
Atthis juncture, I think it necessary to mention that it iswell settled that the later judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court is binding than the earlier decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court ofco-ordinate bench . The decision reported in 2010 ( 5 ) MH. L.J. (Supra) was decided by the Hon'ble Apex Court 9-4-2010 consisting of two Hon'ble Judges on 9-4-2010 . However, in the judgment reported in 2010(8) Scale 583 (Incharge-officer and another Vs. Shankar Shetty ) which is also a decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court of a Bench consisting oftwo Hon'ble Judges decided on 31-8-2010 , it has been held by the Hon'ble Apex Court that:
"Labour Laws- Industrial Disputes Act . 1947- Section 25 -F ---Daily wager -Termination of service in violation of Section 25- F--Award of Monetary compensation in lieu of reinstatement -- Respondent was initially engaged as daily wager by appellants in 1978-His engagement continued for about 7 years intermittently upto 6-9-1985-Respondent raised industrial dispute relating to his retrenchment alleging violation ofprocedure prescribed in Section 25 -F of theAct--Labour Couri rejected respondent's claim holding that Section 25 -F of the Act was not attracted since theworkman failed to prove that he had worked continuously for 240 days in the calendar year preceding his termination on 6-9-1985 -On appeal , High Courtdirected reinstatement of respondent into service holding that the termination of respondent was illegal-Whether an order of reinstatement will automatically follow in a case where engagement of adaily wager has been brought to an end in violation of Section 25 -F of the Act-Allowing the appeal , Held,
The High Court erred in granting relief of reinstatement to the respondent . The respondent was engaged as daily wager in 1978 and his engagement continued for about 7 years intermittently opto September 6, 1985 i.e. about 25 years back . In a case such as the present one , it appears to us that relief of reinstatement cannot be justified and instead monetary compensation would meet the ends of justice. In our considered opinion, the compensation of Rs . 1,00,000 (Rupees One Lac ) in lieu of reinstatement shall be appropriate, just and equitable . We order accordingly. Such payment shall be made within 6 weeks from today failing which the same shall carry interest at the rate of 9 per cent per annum. "
So applying the principles enunciated by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the aforestated judgment to the present case at hand, it is found that the workman was engaged as a dailywager in 1994 and his engagement continued for about one year upto 13-7-1995. In the present case , it appears to me that relief of reinstatement cannot be justified and instead of reinstatement , monetary compensation would meet the ends ofjustice . In my considered opinion, the compensation ofRs . 10000 in lieu of reinstatement shall be appropriate , just and equitable. Hence, it is ordered:
ORDER
The action of the management in relation to Jawahar Navodaya Vidhyalaya , Bellora , Tah . Ghatanji , Distt . Yavatmal interminating the service of Shri Raju Shankarrao Pingle, on 13-7-1995 without complying with the provision 1544
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 18 , 2012/MAGHA 29 , 1933
[PART II-SEC. 3 (ii )]
INDUSTRY : Coal
STATE: West Bengal
Dated the 5-1-12 , 23-3-10
AWARD
ofIndustrial Disputes Act , 1947 is illegal and unjustified. The workman is entitled to get monetory compensation of Rs. 10000 in lieu of reinstatement. The party No. 1 is directed to comply with the award within one month from the date ofpublication of the award in the official gazette, failing which the same shall carry interest at the rate of 9% per annum .
J.P. CHAND , Presiding Officer
In exercise of powers conferred by clause (d) of sub- section ( 1 ) and sub- section 2( A) of Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , Govt . of India through the Ministry of Labour vide its letter No. L-22012/ 149/2007 - IR ( CM - II ) dated 24-9-2007 has been pleased to refer the following dispute for adjudication by this Tribunal .
नई दिल्ली, 25 जनवरी , 2012
SCHEDULE
"Whether the action of the management of Nav Kajora Colliery of M/s. ECL in not regularizing Shri Murari Singh as Clerk is legal and justified ? If not , to what relief is the workman entitled ?" का.आ. 680.-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार 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 , आसनसोल के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 77/2007) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 25-1-2012 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।
[सं. एल-22012/149/2007-आई आर ( सीएम- II ) ] डी. एस. एस. श्रीनिवास राव , डेस्क अधिकारी
New Delhi , the 25th January, 2012
Having received the Order No. L-22012 / 149/2007 - IR (CM- II) dated 24-9-07 of the above said reference from the Govt . of India , Ministry of Labour , New Delhi for adjudication of the dispute, a reference case No. 77 of 2007 was registered on 5-10-07 and accordingly an order to that effect was passed to issue notices through the registered post to the parties concerned directing them to appear in the court on the date fixed and to file their written statements along with the relevant documents and a list of witnesses in support of their claims . In pursuance of the said order notices by the registered post were sent to the parties concerned.
S.O. 680.- In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 77/2007) ofthe Central Government Industrial Tribunal -cum -Labour Court, Asansol as shown in the Annexure , in the industrial disputebetweenthe management ofM/ s . Eastern Coalfields Limited, and their workman , received by the Central Government on 25-1-2012.
[No. L-22012/149/2007 - IR (CM -II)] D.S.S. SRINIVASA RAO , Desk Officer
Since the predecessor (Late Manoranjan Pattnaik, the then P.O. ) of the Tribunal as per order dated 23-3-10 had reserved for an award in this case because the Union neither appeared nor filed written statement . So , it was found that they had no interest to proceed with the case and as such no dispute exists . Accordingly, it is hereby ordered.
ANNEXURE
ORDER
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL CUM- LABOUR COURT, ASANSOL
PRESENT:
Let an " Award " be and the same is passed as no dispute existing . Send the copies of the order to the Govt. of India, Ministry of Labour, New Delhi for information and needful . The reference is accordingly disposed of.
Sri Kishori Ram, Presiding Officer
KISHORI RAM, Presiding Officer
Reference No. 77 of 2007
नई दिल्ली, 25 जनवरी , 2012
PARTIES:
का.आ. 681.-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 ( 1947
The management of Nav Kajora Colliery ofM/ s . ECL.
Vrs.
TheirWorkman
REPRESENTATIVES :
का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में , केन्द्रीय सरकार 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 , आसनसोल के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 40/2007 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 25-1-2012 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।
For the management Sri P. K. Goswami , Advocate .
None
Forthe union
[सं. एल-22012/307/2006- आई आर ( सीएम- II ) ] डी. एस. एस. श्रीनिवास राव , डेस्क अधिकारी (Workman) 1545 भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 18, 2012/माघ 29 , 1933
[ भाग II-खंड 3 ( ii ) ]
NewDelhi , the 25th January, 2012
S.O. 681.- In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 40/2007) ofthe Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, Asansol as shown in the Annexure, in the industrial disputebetween the management of M/ s . Eastern Coalfields Limited, and their workmen , which was received by the Central Government on 25-1-2012 .
Having received the Order No. L-22012/307/2006 - IR (CM- II) dated 29-6-07 of the above said reference from the Govt . of India , Ministry of Labour , New Delhi for adjudication ofthe dispute , a reference case No. 40 of 2007 was registered on 3-5-07 and accordingly an order to that effect was passed to issue notices through the registered post to the parties concerned directing them to appear in the court on the date fixed and to file their written statements along with the relevant documents and a list of witnesses in support of their claims . In pursuance of the said order notices by the registered post were sent to the partiesconcerned.
[No.D.L- 22012/307/2006- IR ( CM-II)] D.S.S. SRINIVASARAO , Desk . Officer
ANNEXURE
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM - LABOUR COURT, ASANSOL
Since the predecessor (Late Manoranjan Pattnaik , the then P.O. ) of the Tribunal as per order dated 25-5-10 had reserved for an award in this case because none of the parties responded to the notices or filed written statement. It was found that they had no interest to proceed with the case and as such no dispute exists . Accordingly, it is hereby ordered.
PRESENT:
ORDER
Sri Kishori Ram, PresidingOfficer
Reference No. 40 of 2007
PARTIES:
The management of Bhanora Colliery ofM/ s. ECL .
Let an " Award" be and the same is passed as no dispute existing. Send the copies of the order to the Govt . of India, Ministry of Labour, New Delhi for information and needful . The reference is accordingly disposed of.
Vs.
KISHORI RAM, Presiding Officer
Their Workman
नई दिल्ली , 25 जनवरी , 2012
REPRESENTATIVES :
None
For the Management :
None
: For the Union (Workman)
INDUSTRY : Coal
STATE: West Bengal
का.आ. 682.-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार 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 , आसनसोल के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 79/2005 ) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 25-1-2012 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।
Dated 5-1-12/25-5-10
AWARD
[सं. एल-22012/245/ 2004- आई आर ( सीएम- II ) ] डी. एस. एस. श्रीनिवास राव , डेस्क अधिकारी
New Delhi , the 25th January, 2012 In exercise of powers conferred by clause (d) of sub- section ( 1 ) and sub -section 2 (A) of Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) , Govt . of India through the Ministry of Labour vide its letter No. L-22012/ 307/2006 -IR ( CM - II) dated 29-6-2007 has been pleased to refer the following dispute for adjudication by this Tribunal .
SCHEDULE
S.O. 682. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 79/2005 ) ofthe Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum -Labour Court, Asansol as shown in the Annexure , in the industrial dispute between the management of M/ s . Eastern Coalfields Limited, and their workmen, which was received by the Central Government on 25-1-2012 .
[No. L -22012/245/2004- IR (CM - II) ] D.S.S. SRINIVASA RAO, Desk Officer "Whether the action of the management of Sripur Area of M/ s. ECL in not providing employment to the dependent of Late Amulal ' Turi is legal and justified ? If not, to what relief is the dependent of the workman entitled ? " 1546
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 18 , 2012/MAGHA 29 , 1933
ANNEXURE
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL CUM - LABOUR COURT, ASANSOL
PRESENT :
Sri Kishori Ram, Presiding Officer
Reference No. 79 of 2005
PARTIES:
The management of Amritnagar Colliery ofM/ s . ECL .
Vs.
TheirWorkman
REPRESENTATIVES :
For the Management : Sri P. K. Das , Advocate .
For the Union
: None
(Workman)
INDUSTRY : Coal
STATE:West Bengal
Dated 5-1-12 , 15-4-10
AWARD
Inexercise ofpowers conferred by clause ( d) of sub- section ( 1 ) and sub-section 2 (A) of Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947 ) , Govt . of India through the Ministry of Labour vide its letter No. L-22012/ 245/2004 - IR (CM- II ) dated 6-7-2005 has been pleased to refer the following dispute for adjudication by this Tribunal.
SCHEDULE
"Whether the action of the management of Amritnagar Colliery under Kunustoria Area ofM/ s. ECL in dismissing Shri Deolal Singh , Tyndal w.e.f. 25-11-1991 from services is legal and justified ? If not, to what relief the workman is entitled ? "
Having received the Order No. L- 22012 / 245/2004- IR (CM - II) dated 6-7-2005 of the abovesaid reference from the Govt . of India , Ministry of Labour, New Delhi for adjudication ofthe dispute , a reference case No. 79 of 2005 was registered on 17-8-2005 and accordingly an order to that effect was passed to issue notices through the registered post to the parties concerned directing them to appear inthe court on the date fixed and to file their written statements along with the relevant documents and a list of witnesses in support of their claims. In pursuance of the said order notices by the registered post were sent to the parties concerned .
Since the predecessor (Late Manoranjan Pattnaik, the then P.O. ) of the Tribunal as per order dated 15-4-2010 had reserved for an award in this case because the Union neither appeared nor took any step to file written statement .
[PART II-SEC. 3 (ii ) ]
So it was found that they had no interest to proceed with the case and as such no dispute exists. Accordingly, it is hereby ordered.
ORDER
Let an " Award" be and the same is passed as no dispute existing . Send the copies of the order to the Govt . of India, Ministry of Labour, New- Delhi for information and reedful . The reference is accordingly disposed of
KISHORI RAM, Presiding Officer
नई दिल्ली, 25 जनवरी , 2012
का.आ. 683.-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 (1947 का 14 की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में , केन्द्रीय सरकार ई.सी.एल. के प्रबंधतंत्र वः संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच , अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालय , आसनसोल के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 117/2005; को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 25-1-2012 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।
[सं. एल-22012/412/2004- आई आर ( सीएम- II ) ] डी. एस. एस. श्रीनिवास राव , डेस्क अधिकारी
New Delhi , the 25th January, 2012
S.O. 683.-In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 117/ 2005) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal -cum- Labour Court , Asansol as shown in the Annexure, in the industrial dispute between the management of M/s . Eastern Coalfields Limited, and their workmen, which was received bythe Central Government on 25-1-2012 .
[No. L -22012/412 /2004- IR ( CM- II) ] D.S.S. SRINIVASARAO , Desk Officer ANNEXURE
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL CUM- LABOUR COURT, ASANSOL
PRESENT :
SriKishori Ram, Presiding Officer Reference No. 117 of 2005
PARTIES:
The Agent , Nimcha Colliery of M/ s . ECL . , Bidhanbagh , Burdwan .
Vs.
General Secretary, KMC, Gorai Mansions , G T. Road, Asansol , Burdwan .
1547
भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 18 , 2012/माघ 29, 1933
[ भाग II-खंड 3 ( ii ) ]
REPRESENTATIVES :
For theManagement: Sri P. K. Goswami , Advocate
: Shri S. K. Pandey, General Secy, KMC, Gorai Mansions , Asansol For the Union (Workman)
INDUSTRY: Coal
STATE: West Bengal Dated 6-1-2012
AWARD
In exercise ofpowers conferred by clause (d) of sub- section ( 1 ) and sub - section 2 (A) of Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) , Govt . of India through the Ministry of Labour vide its letter No. L-22012/ 412/2004 - IR ( CM - II) dated 18-8-2005 has been pleased to refer the following dispute for adjudication by this Tribunal .
SCHEDULE
"Whether the action of the management of Nimcha Colliery of M/ s . ECL in dismissing Sri Hero Bhuiya from service w.e.f. 30-11-2003 is legal and justified ? If not, to what relief the workman is entitled ? "
Having received the Order No. L- 22012/412/2004 - IR (CM - II ) dated 18-8-2005 of the above said reference from the Govt . of India, Ministry of Labour , New Delhi for adjudication of the dispute , a reference case No. 117 of 2005 was registered on 9-9-2005 and accordingly an order to that effect was passed to issue notices through the registered post to the parties concerned directing them to appear in the court on the date fixed.
अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालय , आसनसोल के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 07/2010) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 25-1-2012 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।
[सं. एल-22012/52/2009- आई आर ( सीएम- II ) ] डी. एस. एस. श्रीनिवास राव , डेस्क अधिकारी
New Delhi , the 25th January, 2012
S.O. 684.- In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 07/2010 ) ofthe Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum -Labour Court, Asansol as shown in the Annexure , in the industrial disputebetween the management of Satgram Project , E.C. Ltd. , and their workman , received by the Central Government on 25-1-2012.
[No. L- 22012/52 /2009 - IR ( CM - II) ] D.S.S. SRINIVASA RAO , Desk Officer
ANNEXURE
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL CUM- LABOUR COURT, ASANSOL
PRESENT :
Sri Kishori Ram, Presiding Officer.
Reference No. 07 of 2010
PARTIES:
The management of Satgram Project ofM/s . ECL.
Vs.
Their Workman
REPRESENTATIVES :
For the management Sri P. K. Goswami , Advocate
Forthe union : None
(Workman)
In response to the notice issued from this Tribunal boththe parties made their apapearance through Advocate Sri P. K. Goswami and Sri S. K. Pandey, General Secretary of the union . From ' H ' has also been filed by the workman , Sri Hero Bhuiya , showing the amicable settlement of the Industrial dispute. Hence, no dispute exits any more . Accordingly, an award needs be passed to that effect. Hence, it is ordered.
INDUSTRY : Coal
ORDER
Let an " Award" be and same is passed as per above. Form 'H' containing terms and conditions do form part of the Award. Send the copies of the award to the Govt . of India, Ministry of Labour, New Delhi for information and needful . The reference is accordingly disposed of.
KISHORI RAM, Presiding Officer
नई दिल्ली, 25 जनवरी , 2012
का.आ. 684.-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में केन्द्रीय सरकार ई.सी.एल. के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच , अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक
STATE: West Bengal
Dated 05-01-12 06-07-10
AWARD
Inexercise of powers conferred by clause (d) of sub- section ( 1 ) and sub -section 2 (A) of Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ), Govt . of India through the Ministry of Labour vide its letter No. L- 22012/ 52/2009 - IR ( CM - II ) dated 21-1-2010 has been pleased to refer the following dispute for adjudication by this Tribunal .
SCHEDULE
"Whether the demand of Colliery Mazdoor Union for payment of remaining wages for the period of 1548
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 18 , 2012/MAGHA 29, 1933
[PART II- SEC. 3 ( ii )]
ANNEXURE
suspension of the deceased workman & other service benefits to his widow is legal andjustified ? If not to what relief the claimant entitled for ? "
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM- LABOUR COURT, ASANSOL
PRESENT :
Sri Kishori Ram, Presiding Officer. Reference No. 17 of 2005
PARTIES:
The management of Lacchipur Colliery ofM/ s. ECL. Vs.
Their Workman
Having received the Order No. L-22012/ 52/ 2009 - IR (CM-II ) dated 21-1-10 ofthe abovesaid reference from the Govt . of India , Ministry of Labour, New Delhi for adjudication of the dispute , a reference case No. 07 of 2010 was registered on 11-2-10 and accordingly an order to that effect was passed to issue notices through the registered postto the parties concerned directing them to appear in the court on the date fixed and to file their written statements along with the relevant documents and a list of witnesses in support of their claims . In pursuance of the said order notices by the registered post were sent to the parties concerned.
REPRESENTATIVES :
For the management : Sri P. K. Das , Advocate
Forthe union : None
(Workman)
INDUSTRY: Coal
Since the predecessor (Late Manoranjan Pattnaik, the then P.O. ) of the Tribunal as per order dated 6-7-10 had reserved for an award in this case because the Union neither appeared nor filed written statement. So, it was found that they had no interest to proceed with the case and as such no dispute exists . Accordingly, it is hereby ordered.
STATE : West Bengal
ORDER
Dated 05-01-12 18-11-09
AWARD
Let an " Award" be and the same is passed as no dispute existing. Send the copies of the order to the Govt. of India, Ministry of Labour, New Delhi for information and needful . The reference is accordingly disposed af.
KISHORI RAM, PresidingOfficer
नई दिल्ली, 25 जनवरी , 2012
In exercise ofpowers confered by clause ( d) of sub- section ( 1 ) and sub -section 2 (A) of Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , Govt . of India through the Ministry of Labour vide its letter No. L-22012/ 186/2004 - IR (CM- II) dated 30-3-05 has been pleasedto refer the following dispute for adjudication by this Tribunal .
SCHEDULE
"Whether the action ofthe management of Lacchipur Colliery of M/ s. Eastern Coalfields Limited in not providing employment to the dependent of LateGantai Khatai , Surface Trammer, U.M. No. 057967 is legal and justified ? If not, to what relief the dependent of the deceased workman is entitled ? " का.आ. 685.-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में केन्द्रीय सरकार 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 , आसनसोल के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 17/2005) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 25-1-2012 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।
[सं. एल-22012/186/ 2004- आई आर ( सीएम-II ) ] डी. एस. एस. श्रीनिवास राव, डेस्क अधिकारी
New Delhi , the 25th January, 2012
Having received the Order No. L-22012/ 186/2004- IR (CM- II) dated 30-3-05 of the abovesaid reference from the Govt . of India , Ministry of Labour, New Delhi for adjudication of the dispute, a reference case No. 17 of 2005 was registered on 12-4-05 and accordingly an order to that effect was passed to issue notices through the registered post to the parties concerned directing them to appear in the court on the date fixed and to file their written statements along with the relevant documents and a list of witnesses in support of their claims . In pursuance of the said order notices by the registered post were sent to the partiesconcerned.
S.O. 685. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 17/2005) ofthe Central Government Industrial Tribunal -cum -Labour Court, Asansol as shown in the Annexure , in the industrial disputebetween the management of Lacchipur Colliery, of M/s. Eastern Coalfields Ltd. , and their workman , received by the Central Government on 25-1-2012 .
[No. L -22012/ 186/2004- IR (CM- II) ] D.S.S. SRINIVASARAO, Desk Officer
Since the predecessor (Late Manoranjan Pattnaik, the then P.O. ) of the Tribunal as per order dated 18-11-09 had reserved for an award in this case because the Union 1549 भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 18 , 2012/माघ 29 , 1933
[ भाग II-खंड 3 (ii) ]
REPRESENTATIVES :
Forthe management : None
neither appeared nor took any step to file written statement. So, it was found that they had no interest to proceed with the case and as such no dispute exists . Accordingly, it is hereby ordered.
: None
For the Union
ORDER
(Workman)
INDUSTRY: Coal
STATE: West Bengal
Dated 05-01-12 22-06-10
Let an " Award" be and the same is passed as no dispute existing. Send the copies ofthe order to the Govt. of India, Ministry of Labour , New Delhi for information and needful . The reference is accordingly disposed of.
KISHORI RAM, Presiding Officer
AWARD
नई दिल्ली , 25 जनवरी, 2012
Inexercise ofpowers confered by clause (d) of Sub- section ( 1 ) and Sub -section 2 (A) of Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 (14 of 1947) , Govt . of India through the Ministry of Labour vide its Letter No. L-22012/ 246/2002-IR( CM - II ) dated 21-6-2006 has been pleasedto refer the following dispute for adjudication by this Tribunal .
SCHEDULE
का.आ. 686. औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 (1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में केन्द्रीय सरकार ईसको के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण / श्रम न्यायालय , आसनसोल के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 16/2006 ) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 25-1-2012 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।
[सं. एल-22012/246/2002- आई आर ( सी- II ) ] डी. एस. एस. श्रीनिवास राव , डेस्क अधिकारी
"Whether the action of the management of Ramnagore Colliery of M/s . IISCO Ltd. In not correcting the date of birth of Shri Fakir Chand is legal and justified ? If not , to what relief the workman concerned entitled to ? "
New Delhi , the 25th January, 2012
S.O. 686. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 16/2006) ofthe Central Government Industrial Tribunal -cum -Labour Court, Asansol as shown in the Annexure , in the industrial dispute between the employers in relation to the management of IISCO Ltd. , and their workman, whichwas received by the Central Government on 25-1-2012.
[No. L-22012/246/2002-IR (C- II)] D.S.S. SRINIVASARAO, Desk Officer
Having received the Order of letter No. L- 22012/246/ 2002- IR (CM- II) dated 21-6-2006 of the abovesaid reference from theGovt . of India, Ministry of Labour , New Delhi for adjudication of the dispute, a reference case No. 16 of 2006 was registered on 11-7-2006 and accordingly an order to that effect was passed to issue notices through the registered post to the parties concerned directing them to appear in the court on the date fixed and to file their written statements along with the relevant documents and a list of witnesses in support of their claims . In pursuance of the said order notices by the registered post were sent to the partiesconcerned .
ANNEXURE
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM- LABOUR COURT, ASANSOL
PRESENT:
Sri Kishori Ram, Presiding Officer.
Since the predecessor (Late Manoranjan Pattnaik , the then P.O. ) of the Tribunal as per order dated 12-6-10 had reserved for an award in this case , because none of the parties responded to the notice or filed written statement . So, it was found that they had no interest to proceed with the case and as such no dispute exists. Accordingly, it is hereby ordered.
Reference No. 16 of 2006
ORDER
PARTIES:
The management of Ramnagore Colliery of M/s. IISCO Ltd.
Vs.
Let an " Award" be and the same is passed as no dispute existing . Send the copies of the order to the Govt . of India, Ministry of Labour, New Delhi for information and needful . The reference is accordingly disposed of.
TheirWorkman
KISHORI RAM, Presiding Officer
367 GI /2012-32 1550
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: FEBRUARY 18, 2012/MAGHA 29, 1933
[PART II-SEC. 3 (ii)]
नई दिल्ली , 25 जनवरी , 2012
Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , Govt . of India through the Ministry of Labour vide its letter No. L -22012/ 149/2006- IR (CM- II) dated 1-11-06 has been pleased to refer the following dispute for adjudication by this Tribunal .
SCHEDULE
का.आ. 687. औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 (1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में केन्द्रीय सरकार 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 , आसनसोल के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 90/2006 ) को प्रकशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 25-1-2012 को प्राप्त हुआग
"Whether the action of the management of Kunustoria Colliery ofM/ s . ECL in dismissing Shri Ajoy Singh from services w.e.f. 27-12-2003 is legal andjustified ? If not, to what relief is the workman is entitled ? "
[सं. एल-22012/149/2006- आई आर ( सीएम-II ) ] डी. एस. एस. श्रीनिवास राव , डेस्क अधिकारी New Delhi , the 25th January, 2012
S.O. 687. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 90/2006) ofthe Central Government Industrial Tribunal -cum -Labour Court, Asansol as shown in the Annexure , in the industrial dispute between the management of Kunustoria Colliery ofM/s . ECL, and their workman , which was received by the Central Government on 25-1-2012 .
Having received the Order No. L-22012/ 149/2006 - IR (CM- II) dated 1-11-06 of the abovesaid reference from the Govt. of India , Ministry of Labour, New Delhi for adjudication of the dispute , a reference case No. 90 of 2006 was registered on 26-9-07 and accordingly an order to that effect was passed to issue notices through the registered post to the parties concerned directing them to appear in the court on the date fixed and to file their written statements along with the relevant documents and a list of witnesses in support of their claims . In pursuance of the said order notices by the registered post were sent to the parties concerned.
[No. L-22012/ 149/2006 -IR (CM -II) ] D.S.S. SRINIVASARAO, Desk Officer
Since the predecessor (Late Manoranjan Pattnaik , the then P.O. ) ofthe Tribunal had reserved for an award in this case, because the Union neither appeared nor filed written statement . So, it was found that they had no interest to proceed with the case and as such no dispute exists . Accordingly, it is hereby ordered.
ANNEXURE BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM- LABOUR COURT , ASANSOL
ORDER
PRESENT :
Sri Kishori Ram, Presiding Officer Reference No. 90 of 2006
PARTIES:
Let an " Award" be and the same is passed as no dispute existing. Send the copies of the order to the Govt. of India, Ministry of Labour, New Delhi for information and needful . The reference is accordingly disposed of.
The management of Kunustoria Colliery of M/ s. ECL .
KISHORI RAM , Presiding Officer नई दिल्ली, 25 जनवरी , 2012
Vs. Their Workmen
REPRESENTATIVES :
For the Management : Sri P. K. Das , Advocate
None
Forthe Union (Workman) :
का.आ. 688.-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में केन्द्रीय सरकार 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 , आसनसोल के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 17/2009 ) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 25-1-2012 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।
INDUSTRY: Coal
STATE : West Bengal
[ सं. एल-22012/8/2009- आई आर ( सीएम- II ) ] डी. एस. एस. श्रीनिवास राव , डेस्क अधिकारी Dated 05-01-12 09-06-10
New Delhi , the 25th January, 2012 AWARD
In exercise of powers confered by clause (d) of Sub- section ( 1 ) and Sub- section 2 (A) of Section 10 of the
S.O. 688.-In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 17/2009) [ भाग II-खंड 3 ( ii ) ]
1551
भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 18 , 2012/माघ 29 , 1933
ofthe Central Government Industrial Tribunal -cum - labour Court, Asansol as shown in the Annexure , in the industrial dispute between the management of M/ s . Eastern Coalfields Limited, and their workman, which was received by the Central Government on 25-1-2012 .
[No. L-22012/8/2009 - IR (CM-II)] D.S.S. SRINIVASARAO , Desk Officer
ANNEXURE
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM - LABOUR COURT, ASANSOL
PRESENT :
Sri Kishori Ram, Presiding Officer.
Reference No. 17 of 2009
PARTIES:
The management of Dhemomain Group ofMines of M/ s. ECL .
Vs. Their Workman
REPRESENTATIVES :
For the Management : Sri P. K. Goswami , Advocate
: None
For the Union (Workman)
INDUSTRY : Coal
STATE: West Bengal
Dated 05-01-12 03-12-09
AWARD
In exercise ofpowers confered by clause ( d) of Sub- section ( 1 ) and Sub- section 2 (A) of Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ), Govt . of India through the Ministry of Labour vide its Letter No. L-22012/ 8/2009 - IR (CM- II) dated 13-4-2009 has been pleased to refer the following dispute for adjudication by this Tribunal .
SCHEDULE
" Whether the action of the management of Dhemomain Group ofMine of M/ s . ECL in dismissing the service of Shri Manik Bouri w.e.f. 22-12-2005 is legal andjustified ? To what relief is the workman concerned entitled for ? "
Having received the Order No. L -22012/ 8 /2009 -IR (CM- II ) dated 13-4-2009 of the abovesaid reference from the Govt . of India , Ministry of Labour, New Delhi for adjudication of the dispute, a reference case No. 17 of 2009 was registered on 28-4-09 and accordingly an order to that effect was passed to issue notices through the registered post to the parties concerned directing them to appear in the court on the date fixed and to file their written statements along with the relevant documents and a list of witnesses in support of their claims . In pursuance of the said order notices by the registered post were sent to the parties concerned.
Since the predecessor (Late Manoranjan Pattnaik, the then P.O. ) of the Tribunal as per order dated 3-12-09 had reserved for an award in this case because the Union neither appeared nor filed written statement . So , it was found that they had no interest to proceed with the case as such no dispute exists. Accordingly, it is hereby ordered:
ORDER
Let an " Award" be and the same is passed as no dispute existing . Send the copies of the order to the Govt . of India, Ministry of Labour, New Delhi for information and needful . The reference is accordingly disposed of.
KISHORI RAM, PresidingOfficer
नई दिल्ली, 25 जनवरी , 2012
का.आ. 689. औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 (1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में केन्द्रीय सरकार 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 , असनसोल के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 54/2007 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 25-1-2012 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।
[सं. एल -22012/133/2007- आई आर ( सीएम -11 ) ] डी. एस. एस. श्रीनिवास राव , डेस्क अधिकारी
New Delhi , the 25th January , 2012
S.O. 689. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 54/2007) ofthe Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court,Asansol as shown in the Annexure , in the industrial dispute between the management of M/ s. Eastern Coalfields Limited, and their workman, which was received by the Central Government on 25-1-2012 .
[No. L-22012/ 133/2007- IR (CM -II) ] D.S.S. SRINIVASARAO, Desk Officer
ANNEXURE
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM - LABOUR COURT, ASANSOL
PRESENT :
Sri Kishori Ram, Presiding Officer 1552
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 18 , 2012/MAGHA 29 , 1933
[PART II-SEC . 3 ( iu )]
Reference No. 54 of 2007
of India, Ministry of Labour, New Delhi for information and needful . The reference is accordingly disposed of.
PARTIES :
KISHORI RAM, Presiding Officer The management of J. K. Nagar (R) Colliery of M/s. ECL .
नई दिल्ली, 25 जनवरी , 2012
Vrs.
TheirWorkman
REPRESENTATIVES :
For the management : Sri P. K. Goswami , Advocate
: None
Forthe union (Workman)
का.आ. 690.-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में केन्द्रीय सरकार डब्ल्यू.सी. एल. के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच , अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालय , नागपुर के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 11/2008) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को25-1-2012 को प्राप्त हुआ था !
INDUSTRY: Coal
STATE : West Bengal
[सं. एल-22012/283/2007- आई आर ( सीएम- II ) ] डी.एस.एस. श्रीनिवास राव, डेस्क अधिकारी Dated 05-01-12 01-06-10
New Delhi , the 25th January, 2012 AWARD
In exercise of powers confered by clause ( d) of Sub- section ( 1 ) and Sub - section 2 (A) of Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) , Govt. of India through the Ministry of Labour vide its letter No. L-22012/ 133/2007 - IR (CM - II ) dated 9-7-07 has been pleased to refer the following dispute for adjudication by this Tribunal.
SCHEDULE
S.O. 690.- In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 11 / 2008) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal -cum- Labour Court , Nagpur as shown in the Annexure , in the industrial dispute between the management of Western Coalfields Limited, and their workman , received by the Central Government on 25-01-2012 .
[No. L-22012/283/2007 -IR( CM- II ) ] D.S.S. SRINIVASA RAO, Desk Officer
ANNEXURE
"Whether the action of the management ofM/ s . ECL in terminating the services of Shri Mongla Majhi w.e.f. 9-2-2004 is legal andjustified ? If not , to what relief is the workman entitled ? "
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL, NAGPUR
Case No. CGIT /NGP /11/2008 Date: 15-12-2011
Party No. 1: The Sub Area Manager , Western Coalfields Limited, Kamptee Sub Area , Nagpur
Having received the Order No. L. - 22012 / 133/2007 - IR (CM - II) dated 9-7-07 of the abovesaid reference from the Govt . of India , Ministry of Labour, New Delhi for adjudication of the dispute , a reference case No. 54 of 2007 was registered on 24-7-07 and accordingly an order to that effect was passed to issue notices through the registered postto the parties concerned directing themto appear in the court on the date fixed and to file their written statements along with the relevant documents and a list of witnesses in support of their claims In pursuance of the said order notices by the regis !. dat were sent to the parties concerned .
PartyNo. 2 : Shri ShakirAli ,
S/ o Subedar ( Stowing Fitter ) R/ o Kamptee Colliery, Nagpur.
ORDER
Since the predecessor (Late ribu rajan Pattnaik, the then P.O. ) of the Tribunal as per order 1-6-10 had reserved for an award in this case, because the Union neither responded to the notice nor filed written statement . So. it was found that they had no interest to proceed with the case as such no dispute exists . Accordingly, it is hereby ordered.
ORDER
This order arises out of the petition filed by the Management of WCL for dismissal of the reference on the ground that the same is not maintainable .
Let an " Award" be and the same is passed as no dispute existing. Send the copies of the order to the Govt.
2. The case of the management of WCL is that Shri Shakir Ali , the workman had challenged the age dispute, [ भाग II-खंड 3 ( ii ) ]
1553
भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 18 , 2012/माघ 29 , 1933
which is the subject matter of the present reference before the Hon'ble High Court of Judicature of Bombay, Nagpur Bench , Nagpur, in writ petition No. 3894 of 2006 and the Hon'ble High Court , after considering all the contentions of the workman as contended in the said writ petition dismissed the writ petition and after the dismissal of the said writ petition on merit , the present proceeding was initiated by the workman , which is gross abuse of process of law and the present proceeding is also hit by the principles of res -judicata and as such, the reference is liable to be dismissed summarily in the interest ofjustice.
3. The workman has resisted the applicationby filing his say and mentioning therein that the application filedby the WCL for dismissal of the reference is not maintainable andthe workman in his rejoinder has already replied to the pleadings of the management of WCL in the written statement regarding the filing of the writ petition No. 3894 of 2006, before the Hon'ble High Court of Judicature of Bombay, Nagpur Bench , Nagpur, for correction ofdate of birth and disposal of said writ petition on 28-09-2006 in favour of the management and as such , the present application again raising the same issue for dismissal of the reference is not maintainable . It is further mentionedby the workman that he had filed writ petition No. 3894 of 2006 before the Hon'ble High Court of Judicature of Bombay, Nagpur Bench , Nagpur for the dispute regarding non-correction of his date of birth as per the school certificateand for reinstatement in service with back wages and consequential benefits and the said writ petition came to be decided on 28-09-2006 by the Hon'ble High Court, and theHon'ble High Court dismissed the petition on the ground that the petition suffers from " delay and latches " and cannot be entertained at such a belated stage and as the writ petition has not been dismissed by the Hon'ble High Court on merit, but only on the ground of delay and latches , it cannot be said that the subject matter ofpresent reference had already adjudicated by the Hon'ble High Court and the reference is to be dismissed and for that the present proceeding is not hit by the principles of res- judicata and the workman raised an industrial dispute on the issue of illegal termination of service , before the RLC (C) Nagpur and as the issue could not be settled amicably, failure report was submitted to the Government of India on 30-8-2007 and the matter was referred by the Government to the Tribunal for adjudication and the management of WCL cannot raise the issue in the middle of the proceeding and as such , the petition is liable to be rejected.
4. Perused the judgment of the Hon'ble High Court dated 28-09-2006 in writ petition No. 3894 of 2006. It is found from order passed by the Hon'ble High Court that the workman had filed the writ petition for correction of his date ofbirth and the Hon'ble Court dismissed the writ petition on the ground that, " the petition suffers from delay and latches and cannot be entertained at such a belated stage. The same is , therefore , dismissed. "
5. The present reference has been made by the Central Government with the following schedule "Whether the action of the management of Western Coalfields Limited indenying the correction of date of birth as 21-04-55 in service excerpts, form ' B ' register and service book in respect of Shri Shakir Ali and the action of the premature superannuating the concerned workman is legal and justified." Vide reference No. L- 22012/283/ 2007 - IR(CM - II) dated 03-04-2008 . The workman has also made prayer in his statement of claim for correction of his date of birth and also for reinstatment in service with continuity and full backwages.
6. It is necessary to mention here that the workman did not mention a single word about his filing writ petition No. 3894 of2006 for correction of his date of birth , before the Hon'bleHigh Court and about rejection of the same on 28-09-2006. When the management of WCL mentioned about the same in their written statement, the workman in nis rejoinder admitted the filing of the writ petition before the Hon'ble High Court .
It isclear from the pleadings of the parties and the orders ofthe Hon'ble High Court in writ petition No. 3894 of2006, that the Hon'ble High Court considered the delay and latches of filing the writ petition and held that the cause of action in the writ petition arose way back in the year 1988. The Hon'ble High Court have also pleased to mention in the order that , " It is not in dispute that the age determination committee had taken decision on 23-09-1988 on the representation of the petitioner and declared that the date of birth of the petitioner is 01-07-1945 . The committee had again reiterated the same decision vide order dated 21-04-1993 . It is, therefore , evident that the decision of the committee, declaring the date of birth of the petitioner as 01-07-1945 is dated 23-09-1988 and merely because the petitioner kept on making representation after representation, that doesn't bring the issue within the concept of reasonable time . "
Theworkman in the statement of claim has taken the same plea as mentioned in the writ petition . From the orders of the Hon'ble High Court, it can be said that the writ petition was disposed of on merit and the same was rejected on the ground ofdelay and latches . It also appears that the dispute was raised by the workman before the RLC( C) , Nagpur after disposed of the writ petition , as a result ofwhich , the reference was made by the Government. It is not known if the workman had mentioned anything before about the filing and rejection of the writ petition while raising the industrial dispute before the RLC, as nothing has been mentioned about the same in the claim petition or rejoinder. From the facts and circumstances of the case , it is found that the present reference is hit by the principles of res -judicata and the same is not maintainable. Hence , it is ordered:
1554
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: FEBRUARY 18 , 2012/ MAGHA 29, 1933
[PART II-SEC. 3 ( ii ) ]
ORDER
Date ofAward: 12-01-2012
AWARD
The application filed by the management is allowed. The reference is dismissed being not maintainable on the ground that the same is hit by the principles of res -judicata.
J. P. CHAND , PresidingOfficer
नई दिल्ली , 25 जनवरी , 2012
1. The present reference is arising out of the Government Notification vide Memo No. L-42011 /25/88 -D- II.B.D.IV. E IR ( C.II); Dated 09-10-1989 , in exercise of the powers conferred by clause ( d) of sub - section ( 1 ) and sub- section (2A) of Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , for adjudication of the dispute as described inthe Schedule below:
SCHEDULE
का.आ. 691.- 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, गुवाहाटी के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 04/2011 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 25-1-2012 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।
"Whether the action of the Management of Food Corporation of India in stopping S/ Sri Ramdeo Rai and 59 others as indicated in the Annexure -A of Diphu Food Depot from their work and not regularizing them is justified? If not, to what relief theworkmen concerned are entitled ? " [सं. एल-42011 /25/88-डी. II. बी.डी. IV. ई - आई आर ( सी- II ) ] डी. एस. एस. श्रीनिवास राव , डेस्क अधिकारी
1. Learned Advocate Mr. S. K. Chakrabarty for the Management is present . None appears on behalf of the Workmen Union.
NewDelhi , the 25th January, 2012
S.O. 691. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 04/ 2011) ofthe Central Government Industrial Tribunal -cum- Labour Court, Guwahati as shown in the Annexure , in the industrial dispute between the employers in relation to the management of FCI , and their workmen , which was receivedby the Central Government on 25-01-2012.
[No. L-42011 /25/88-D . II.B.D - IV.E- IR(C - II)] D.S.S. SRINIVASA RAO, Desk Officer
ANNEXURE
IN THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM -LABOUR COURT, GUWAHATI, ASSAM
PRESENT :
2. It is revealed from the record that this matter was previously pending before the State Industrial Tribunal , Guwahati and the said Tribunal passed an order on 19-02-2011 transferring this Reference to the present CCIT, Guwahati and after receiving the record an order was passed bythis Court on 04-03-2011 for issue of notice to both the parties.Accordingly notices were sent to both the parties and on that occasions notice to the Union found to be served with the endorsement of their receipt . It is evident after the A.D. card received back, non appeared for the Union . No A.D. card was received back for notice to the Management F.C.I. Accordingly fresh notices to both the parties were again issued on 1st July, 2011 and in response to that appearance made on behalf of the Management and though the notice was again served upon the Workman Union as per endorsement of receipt on A.D. card received back , none appeared on behalf of Workmen Union . Thereafter, at least four dates were passed in this reference.
Justice Shri M.M. Sarkar, Presiding Officer/Link Officer, CGIT-cum-Labour Court, Guwahati .
Ref. Case No. 04 of 2011
In the matter of an industrial dispute between the Management of Food Corporation of India .
Vrs.
Their Workman Sri Ramdeo Rai & 59 others
3. This is the reference of the year 1989 and being sufficient old, I do not find any reason to continue the present matter any more since the workmen Union side showed reluctancy in reference to the present matter though an Industrial Dispute was raised from the side of the Workmen Union initially. It is also revealed from the record, the workmen side lastly took step on 02-03-1994 when the matter was pending before the State Industrial Tribunal on which date the said Tribunal passed an order to keep the matter in abeyance awaiting order for transfer of the matter before this Tribunal .
APPEARANCES :
For the Workman : None appeared
Sri P.K. Roy, Advocate
For theManagement :
Sri S.K. Chakraborty, Advocate
4. So, it is revealed that though Industrial Dispute was subsisting in the initial stage and till 1994, thereafter no step has been taken by the Workmen Union even after repeated notices were issued to the said Workmen Union [ भाग II-खंड 3 (ii) ]
1555
भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 18 , 2012/माघ 29 , 1933
followed by service of the same. So at present it is presumed that no Industrial Dispute is subsisting and for that reason the present reference is disposed off with an award of' no dispute' . Award may be passed accordingly.
5.Given under my hand and seal of this Court on this 12th day of January, 2012 at Guwahati.
M. M. SARKAR, Presiding Officer
नई दिल्ली, 25 जनवरी , 2012
का.आ. 692.-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में केन्द्रीय सरकार 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, असनसोल के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 84/2007) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 25-1-2012 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।
[सं. एल-22012/243/2007- आई आर (सीएम- II ) ] डी. एस. एस. श्रीनिवास राव , डेस्क अधिकारी
New Delhi , the 25th January, 2012
S.O. 692. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 84/ 2007) ofthe Central Government Industrial Tribunal -cum- Labour Court , Asansol as shown in the Annexure , in the industrial dispute between the management of M/s . ECL , PO: Methani , and their workman, received by the Central Government on 25-01-2012 .
[No. L-22012/243/2007 - IR( CM- II)] D.S.S. SRINIVASARAO, Desk Officer
ANNEXURE
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM- LABOUR COURT, ASANSOL
PRESENT :
SHRI KISHORI RAM, Presiding Officer/LinkOfficer.
Reference No. 84 of 2007
PARTIES :
The Management of B.M.P. Group of Collieries of M/s. ECL.
Vrs.
Their Workman
REPRESENTATIVES :
Forthe
: Sri P.K. Goswami , Advocate
management
: None
For the Union (Workman)
INDUSTRY: Coal
STATE: West Bengal
Dated the 05-01-12 , 23-03-10
AWARD
Inexercise ofpowers conferred by clause (d) ofSub- section ( 1 ) and Sub - section 2 (A) of Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947) , Govt. of India through the Ministry of Labour vide its letter No. L- 22012/ 243/2007 - IR (CM- II) dated 25-10-07 has been pleased to refer the following dispute for adjudication by this Tribunal.
SCHEDULE
"Whether the action of the management of M/s . ECL in dismissing Shri Anath Dome, U.G Loader, w.e.f. 05-06-2003 is legal and justified? If not, to what relief is the workmen entitled?"
Having received the Order No. L - 22012 /243 /2007- IR(CM - II) dated 25-10-07 of the above said reference from the Govt . of India, Ministry of Labour, New Delhi for adjudication of the dispute , a reference case No. 84 of 2007 was registered on 03-12-07 and accordingly an order to that effect was passed to issue notices through the registered post to the parties concerned directing them to appear in the court on the date fixed and to file their written statements along with the relevant documents and a list of witnesses in support of their claims . In pursuance of the said order notices by the registered post were sent to the partiesconcerned.
Since the predecessor (Late Manoranjan Pattnaik, the then P.O. ) of the Tribunal as per order dated 23-03-10 had reserved for an award in this case because the Union neither appeared nor took any step. Even written statement not filed by either party. So , it was found that they had no interest to proceed with the case and as such no dispute exists.Accordingly, it is hereby ordered.
ORDER
Let an " Award" be and the same is passed as no dispute existing. Send the copies of the order to the Govt . of India, Ministry of Labour , New Delhi for information and needful . The reference is accordingly disposed of.
KISHORI RAM, Presiding Officer/Link Officer
नई दिल्ली, 25 जनवरी , 2012
का.आ.693.-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में केन्द्रीय सरकार डब्ल्यू.सी.एल. के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच , अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालय , नागपुर के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 160/2000 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 25-1-2012 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।
[सं. एल-22012/ 258/ 95- आई आर (सी- II ) ] डी. एस. एस. श्रीनिवास राव , डेस्क अधिकारी 1556
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: FEBRUARY 18, 2012/MAGHA29 , 1933
New Delhi , the 25th January, 2012
S.O. 693. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 160/ 2000) 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 M/ s . WCL , and their workman which was receivedby the Central Government on 25-01-2012 .
[No. L- 22012/258/ 95 - IR( C -II ) ] D. S. S. SRINIVASARAO , Desk Officer
ANNEXURE
BEFORE SHRI J.P. CHAND, PRESIDING OFFICER, CGIT-CUM- LABOUR COURT, NAGPUR
Case No. CGIT/NGP/ 160/ 2000
Date: 16-01-2012
Party No. 1 : The Sub Area Manager ,
WCL KampteeOpen CastMine ,
PO: Parseoni , Distt. Nagpur
Versus
Party No. 2 : Shri Morris William,
S/o .Arohi William, General Mazdoor,
Kamptee OpenCast Mine ,
Machhi Pul , Kamptee,
Distt.Nagpur.
AWARD
(Dated: 16th January, 2012)
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 (14 of 1947 ) , ( " the Act " in short) , the Central Government had referred the industrial dispute between the employers , in relation to the management of Kamptee Open Cast Mine of WCL and their workman Shri Morris William, for adjudication , to the Central Government Industrial Tribunal , Jabalpur as per letter No. L- 22012/258 /95- IR ( C- II) dated 13-03-96, with the following schedule:
"Whether the action of the Sub Area Manager Kamptee Open Cast Mine, WCL Tah. Parseoni , Distt . Nagpur in dismissing the services of Shri Morris William, a General Mazdoor on 26-06-1986 is legal and justified? If not, what relief the workman is entitled to ?"
Subsequently, the reference was transferred to this Tribunal for disposal in accordance with law.
2. On receipt ofthe reference , the parties were noticed to file their respective statement of claim and written
[PART II- SEC. 3 (ii )]
statement and accordingly, the workman Shri Morris William, (" the workman " in short) filed his statement of claim and the management of the Kamptee Open Cast Mine of WCL ("Party No. 1 " in short) filed its written statement .
The case of the workman as projected in the statement of claim is that while he was working as a Mazdoor in Kamptee Open Cast Mines , charge sheet dated 16-12-1985 was served on him, on the allegation that on 15-12-1985 , he was deputed in the second shift to work and at about 10.50 PM, he unauthorisedly entered into the cabin of the operator ofEadar machine and unauthorisedly operated the saidmachine , whereby, injury was caused to another employee , Ram Shankar Yadav, who later on succumbed to the injuries and the charge sheet was submitted under clause 17 of the Standing Orders , for commission of serious misconduct and without giving any reasonable opportunity to him to explain about the vague charges and in breach of the provisions of natural justice, the enquiry was concluded and by order dated 26-06-1986, the order ofdismissal from services was passed against him and the appeal preferred by him against the order dated 26-06-1986 was not decided and the order of dismissal is liable to be quashed and set aside , on the grounds that he was not served with any show cause notice , after completion of the departmental enquiry and the departmental enquiry report was not provided to him even after repeated demands and the evidence of the witnesses was insufficient to substantiate the charges and therefore , the conclusions arrived at by the Enquiry Officer on such evidence are improper and there was discrimination in imposing the punishment against him, as the same punishment was not imposed against another employee for similar nature of charge and as he was a member of an union and was fighting against corruption, he had become an eyesore in the eyes of the management and as such, he was victimized and the charges were vague and the enquiry officer without considering the reply submitted by him , concluded the enquiry and he was not supplied with the copies of the list of witnesses and documents and there was breach ofthe provisions ofnaturaljustice and no fair opportunity was given to him to lead evidence in his defence and it is clear from the evidence on record that the headlight of the Eader Machine was facing on the conveyer belt and there was no adequate light in the cabin and thus it was quite natural that the said accident must haveoccurred inadvertently and for that the charges as alleged should not have levelled against him and the management was predetermined to oust him from the employment by way of victimization . The 1557 भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 18, 2012/माघ 29, 1933
[ भाग II-खंड 3 ( ii ) ]
workman has prayed to quash and set aside the order dated 26-06-1986 and for his reinstatement in service with all backwages .
theworkman and the accident did not occur inadvertently andwithout operation of the Eider machine , the bucket of the machine cannot be moved upside or downside or moved to other direction and as such, it is clear that the accident did not occur inadvertently, but was caused by unauthorized operating of the machine by the workman and there is no merit in the case of the workman and the workman is not entitled for any relief.
4. As this is a case ofdismissal from services of the workman, after holding a departmental enquiry, the validity of the departmental enquiry was taken as a preliminary issue for consideration. The departmental enquiry was held to be invalid and the enquiry to be vitiated, as per orders dated 07-07-2009 , which was passed by my predecessor in office.
It is necessary to mention here that on 18-09-2008; the Party No. 1 filed an application for permission to lead secondary evidence regarding the validity of the departmental enquiry, on the ground that the original documents in regard to departmental enquiry could not be found, even after due deligent and hectic search and after hearing the parties , the application was allowed on 11-02-2009 . However, on 07-07-2009 , order was passed by mypredecessor in office on the pursis filed by the workman that, "Heard the counsel for the workman . No document or even secondary evidence is adduced for last four dates . The enquiry stands as vitiated . It is not valid . The management is at liberty to prove the charges before Court. "
5. Inview ofthe direction dated 07-07-2009, the Party No. 1 examinedVijay Kumar Shah, Jagannath B. Sharma and Baburam Bira Yadav as MWs - 1 to 3 respectively. In rebuttal , the workman examined himself as a witness . Perused the record including the evidence adduced by the parties , the available documents of the departmental enquiry and written argument .
Beforemaking assessment of the evidence adduced by the Party No. 1 to find out as to whether the charges levelled against the workman have been proved or not , I think it necessary to mention about the charges levelled against the workman in the charge sheet in detail . The charges levelled against the workman are as follows:
Clause 17 ( i) (3 ) : Insubordination or disobedience ,
whether alone or conjuction with another or others ; of any lawful or reasonable orders cf a superiors.
17(i )(7):
Habitual indiscipline or indiscipline.
17(i )(9):
Causing damage to work in progress or to property of the employer .
17 ( i) ( 16) : Leaving work without permission or sufficient reasons .
3. The partyNo. 1 in its written statement has pleaded inter- alia that the workman was served with the charge sheet dated 16-12-1985 , under clauses 17 (i ), (3 ), (7), (9), (16) and(17) of the Standing Orders , on the allegations that on 15-12-1985 at about 10.15 PM (wrongly mentioned as AM in the written statement ) he unauthorisedly enter into the cabin of Eader Machine (Excavator ) and unauthorisedly operated the machine causing injuries to Ram Shankar Yadav, by lifting the bucket of the machine and subsequently Ram Shankar succumbed to the injuries at Government Medical College Hospital , Nagpur and the said action of the workman amounted to serious misconduct and basing on the charge sheet, the domestic enquiry was conducted and he was dismissed vide letter dated 28-06-1986 and the workman preferred an appeal to the Chief General Manager, Nagpur Area and the appeal was dismissed and the said fact was intimated to the workman vide letter dated 01-11-1986 and the copy of the enquiry report was handed over to the workman, after completion of the enquiry and the workman also applied for copy of the proceedings on 01-10-1994, but as the case came through conciliation on 20-10-1994 , the copy could notbe supplied to him and the witnesses fully substantiated the charges in the enquiry and they were cross-examined by the co -worker of the workman and the enquiry officer concluded the enquiry in a proper manner and the finding of the enquiry officer is justified and the punishment awarded against the workman is according to the gravity ofthe charges and also on merit and the workman had no business to enter into machine , which was allotted to one Shri Ajit Francis and Shri Francis was operating the machine and when he was not in the cabin , the workman unauthorisedly entered into the cabin and operated the machine, resulting the death of Ram Shankar Yadav and the workman and Shri Ajit Francis were charge sheeted and proper enquiry was conducted and after receipt of the the enquiry report of the Enquiry Officer, services ofboth of them were terminated and as such , there is no force in the contention that there was discrimination or victimization against the workman and after issuance of charge sheet, the enquiry was held and sufficient opportunity was given to the workman in the enquiry and the workman participated in the enquiry and the enquiry was conducted by following the principles of natural justice and after consideration of the appeal filed by Shri Ajit Francis , he was allowed tojoin his duty at Inder Colliery, after imposing punishment , but asAjit Francis did not join his duty, his services were terminated vide office order dated 07-1-1988 and the charges levelled against the workman were not vague and the charges were specific and the proceedings of the enquiry was duly signed by the workman and his co- worker and the charges were proved in the enquiry against
367 GI/2012-33 1558
THE GAZETIE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 18 , 2012/MAGHA 29 , 1933
17(1)(17) : Any breach ofMines Act , 1952 , or any other act or of any rules regulations or bye-laws there under or of any Standing Orders or any standing instructions of theManager.
6. However, on persual of the evidence adduced by Party No. 1 , it is found that it has tried to prove that on 15-12-1985 at about 10.15 p.m. , the workman entered into the cabin of the operator of Eadar (Excavator) Machine and unauthorizedły operated the machine causing injury to Ramshankar Yadav, by lifting the machine bucket and that Ramshankar Yadav later on succumbed to the injuries. The same allegations were also made against the workman in the charge sheet . For the sake of argument , even if, the allegations made against the workman are taken to be truc, still then, the same do not constitute commission of misconduct under Clauses 17 ( i ) (3 ), 17 ( i) (7 ) , 17 (i ) (9) and 17 ( i ) ( 16) . There is also nothing in the charge sheet as to which particular provision of the Mines Act , 1952 or any other Act or of any rules regulations or by - laws there under or of any Standing Order any Standing instructions of the Manager was breached by the workman.
7. So far the evidence adduced by the Party No. 1 is concerned , MW No. 1 , Vijay Kumar has stated that on 13-12-1985 at about 10.30/ 11 P.M. , while he was on dutyat sump ofKamptee Coal Kmine, Punit Singh, the Mechanical Fitter raised shout that there was an accident and one man was badly injured, so he rushed to the spot and found Ramshankar was lying in R.K. Office in an injured condition and Ramshankar was then taken to the hospital in a jeep andbymaking inquiry from Baburam Yadav and Jagannath Sharma, he came to know that the workman, Morris William unathorizedly operated the Eader Machine , as a result of which , its bucket swung and hit Ramshankar and Ramshankar sustained severe injuries and Ajit Francis , the Operator of the machine rushed towards the cabin of the machine andMorris William got down from the machine and Ramshankar succumbed to the injuries in the same night at the hospital . In his cross -examination, this witness has stated that he is unable to speak and write in English and he does not know the contents of the affidavit filed by him and he did not see the accident personally and he reached the spot after about half an hour and he did not see Morris William , when he reached the spot.
It isclear from the evidence of MW- 1 that he is not an eye witness to the incident . According to him, he was informed by Baburam Yadav and Jagannath Sharma that the workman, Morris William operated the Eader Machine unauthorizedly and for that the incident took place . However, Jagannath Sharma and Baburam Yadav, who have been examined as MW-2 and MW- 3 respectively, have not whispered a single word about their informing Vijay Kumar that as the workman operated the Eader Machine unauthorizedly, the incident took place. Hence the evidence
[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii) ]
of MW- 1 can be said to be here - say evidence and the same cannot be taken into consideration .
8.MW-2, Jagannath B. Sharına in his examination - in- chief, which is on affidavit , has stated that on 15-12-1985 , hewas working at the sump of Kamptee Open Cast Mine, in the second shift and he was ordered by the Foremanto work as Tyndal on Eader Machine , as the belt operation work was closed on that day and he told Ajit Francis , the operator ofEader Machine that as the Foreman had ordered to continue the work , he should turn the Eader Machine and accordingly Ajit Turned the Eader Machine and brought the same near them and thereafter, Ajit got down from the machine and came to him to ask what work was to bedone and he told Ajit to pull the belt till the tail end and when they were talking, they heard a scream and turned around and saw Ramshankar Yadav to have been trapped under the bucket to the Eader Machine and was shouting for help and trying to get out from under the bucket and they saw towards the cabin of the Eader Machine, and found the workman standing next to the machine and Ajit Francis rushed to the machine and lifted the bucket by operating the lever standing outside the cabin and they took Ramshankar to R.K. Office and from there , he was sent to the hospital and the accident took place at about 10.30/ 11 p.m. and he came to know that Ramshankar succumbed to the injuries in the same night . In his cross- examination , MW-2 has stated that he was at a distance of about 100 meters from the spot of incident and he went to the spot on hearing about and found Morris William , Sheetal Prasad and Prabhunath were present and standing by the side of the Eader Machine . He has also admitted that he was not present at the time of the incident and he is unable to say whether Morris William was responsible for the incident .
It is clear from the evidence of the MW-2 that he was not present at the spot of the incident. There is nothing in his evidence to show that the workman was responsible for the incident .
9. MW-3 , Baburam Bira Yadav has stated that on 15-12-1985, he was working as a Tyndal at Kamptee Open CastMine and while he was sitting near the belt with some others , Ajit Francis was standing near them and at that time, MorrisWilliam entered the cabin of Eader and started the machine, as a result of which , the boom got lifted and turned and because of that Ramshankar was severely injured and Ajit Francis went and stopped the machine and they all took Ramshankar to R. V. Office and from there, Ramshankar was taken to the hospital , where he succumbed to the injuries. In his cross -examination , this witness has stated that the incident took place in 1985 but he does not remember the date and month of the incident and the date of incident, 15-12-1985 as mentioned in his affidavit is according to the information of the WCL authorities and the affidavit was prepared as per the instructions of the [ भाग II-खंड 3 ( ii ) ]
1559
भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 18 , 2012/माघ 29 , 1933
WCL authorities. He has further stated that Francis started the Eader and the light of the Eader was on and at that time, he himself, Morris, Francis , Vikiya Foreman, Ramesh Fitter and others were present at the spot and the incident occurred near the place , where he himself, Francis , William and others were present . The evidence of MW - 3 is quite inconsistent and shaky and as such, no reliance can be placed on the same .
Onperusal of the evidence adduced by the Party No. 1 , it is found that there is no conclusive evidence on record to show that the workman operated the Eader Machine unauthorizedly and for that the incident took place and Ramshankar sustained injuries .
10. In his evidence , the workman has denied the incident.
11.At the time of argument, it was submitted by the learned advocate for the Party No. 1 that in view of the pleadings of the workman in his statement of claim, in paragraph ' n' and ' o' that at the time of incident, there was no sufficient light and as such, the accident caused during the course of employment cannot be said to be negligent or otherwise and that the headlight of the Eader Machine were facing on the conveyer belt and there was no adequate light in the cabin, it is quite natural that the said accident must have occurred inadvertently and in view of the contents of paragraph 3 of his affidavit dated 15-07-1996 that, "There was no light in the cabin of Eader Machine and as such , if at all during the course of entry into the said cabin, by mistake the accident had happened due to coming in contact with the boom , it cannot be said to be done by him" , it can be held that the workman has admitted of causing the accident, in which Ramshankar Yadav sustained injuries and subsequently succumbed to the injuries and from such admission , it can be held that the charges have been proved against the workman. However, I find no force in the said contentions. From the pleadings mentioned above and the contents of the affidavit as referred, it cannot be said the workman has admitted to have committed the accident by unauthorizedly operating the Eader Machine .
From the materials on record and the evidence adducedby the Party No. 1 , it is found that Party No. 1 has failed to prove the charges against the workman . Hence , the dismissal of the workman from services by the Party No. 1 on 26-06-1986 is illegal and unjustified .
12. Now the question remains for consideration is regarding the entitlement of the workman to the reliefs .As itis held that the dismissal of the workman from services is illegal and unjustified, the workman is entitled for re- instatement in service with continuity and consequential benefits including promotion . So far the back wages is concerned; the workman has pleaded and also stated in hisaffidavit that he was not gainfully employed from the date of his dismissal. The evidence of the workman has not been challenged in the cross -examination . However, taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case in its entirety, I think that payment of 50 % of the back wages to the workman will meet the ends ofjustice in this case . Hence, it is ordered:
ORDER
The action of the Sub Area Manager, Kamptee Open Cast Mine, WCL Tah . Parseoni , Distt . Nagpur in dismissing the services of Shri Morris William, a General Mazdoor on 26-06-1986 is illegal and unjustified. The order of dismissal ofthe workman from services dated 26-06-1986 is set aside. The workman is entitled for re- instatement in service with continuityand consequential benefits including promotion . Theworkman is entitled for 50% of the back wages . The Party No. 1 is directed to give effect to the award, within one month fromthe date of publication ofthe award inthe Official Gazette.
J.P. CHAND , Presiding Officer
नई दिल्ली, 25 जनवरी, 2012
का.आ. 694. औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में केन्द्रीय सरकार 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 , असनसोल के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 48/2005 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 25-1-2012 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।
[सं. एल -22012/328/2004- आई आर ( सीएम -11 ) ] डी. एस. एस. श्रीनिवारा रराव , डेस्क अधिकारी
New Delhi , the 25th January, 2012
S.O. 694. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 48/2005) ofthe Central Government Industria ! Tribunal-cum -Labour Court, Asansol as shown in the Annexure , in the industrial disputebetween the management of M/s . Eastern Coalfields Limited, and their workman, received by the Central Government on 25-1-2012 .
[No. L-22012/328 /2004- IR ( CM- II) ] D.S.S. SRINIVASA RAO , Desk Officer
ANNEXURE
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL CUM - LABOUR COURT, ASANSOL
PRESENT :
Sri Kishori Ram, Presiding Officer/Link Officer.
1560
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 18, 2012/MAGHA 29, 1933
Reference No. 48 of 2005
PARTIES:
The Agent , Satgram Project of M/ s . ECL , Burdwan
Vrs.
General Secretary, KMC, Gorai Mansions, G T. Road, Asansol , Burdwan
REPRESENTATIVES :
For the management : Sri P. K. Goswami , Advocate
: Rakesh Kumar, General Secy. , KMC , Gorai Mansions , Asansol Forthe union (Workman)
INDUSTRY:Coal
STATE: West Bengal
Dated 06-01-2012
AWARD
In exercise ofpowers confered by clause (d) of Sub- section ( 1 ) and Sub- section 2(A) of Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ) , Govt. of India through the Ministry of Labour vide its letter No. L- 22012 / 328/2004 - IR (CM- II) dated 20-7-2005 has been pleased to refer the following dispute for adjudication by this Tribunal .
SCHEDULE
"Whether the action of the management of Satgram Project in not regularizing Sh. Kanan Bouri as Cap Lamp Room Clerk is legal and justified ? Ir not, to what relief is the workman entitled to and from which date ?"
Having receivedthe Order No. L- 22012/ 328/2004 - IR (CM - II ) dated 20-7-2005 of the above said reference from the Govt . of India , Ministry of Labour, New Delhi for adjudication of the dispute , a reference case No. 48 of 2005 was registered on 17-8-2005 and accordingly an order to that effect was passed to issue notices through the registered post to the parties concerned directing them to appear in the court on the date fixed.
In response to the notice issued from this Tribunal both the parties made their apperance through Advocates Sri P. K. Goswami and Sri Rakesh Kumar, General Secretary ofthe union. Form ' H' has also been filed by the workman, Sri Kanan Bouri , showing the amicable settlement of the Industrial dispute. Hence , no dispute exists any more . Accordingly, an award needs be passed to that effect. Hence, it is ordered .
ORDER
Let an " Award " be and the same is passed as per above . Form ' H ' containing terms and conditions do form part of the Award. Send the copies of the award to the Govt . of India , Ministry of Labour, New Delhi for information and needful . The reference is accordingly disposed of.
KISHORI RAM, Presiding Officer
[PART II- SEC. 3 (ii )]
नई दिल्ली, 25 जनवरी , 2012
का.आ. 695.-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 (1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में केन्द्रीय सरकार 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 , असनसोल के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 47/2007) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 25-1-2012 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।
[सं. एल -22012/51 /2007- आई आर ( सीएम- II ) ] डी. एस. एस . श्रीनिवास राव , डेस्क अधिकारी
NewDelhi , the 25th January, 2012
S.O. 695. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 47/2007) ofthe Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, Asansol as shown in the Annexure , in the industrial disputebetween the management of M/s . Eastern Coalfields Limited, and their workman, received by the Central Government on 25-1-2012.
[No. L-22012/ 51 /2007- IR ( CM - II) ] D.S.S. SRINIVASA RAO, Desk Officer
ANNEXURE
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM - LABOUR COURT, ASANSOL
PRESENT :
Sri Kishori Ram , Presiding Officer/Link Officer
Reference No. 47 of 2007
PARTIES :
TheAgent , Chapuikhas Colliery of M/ s . ECL, P.Ο.- Kalipahari , Burdwan
Vrs.
Their Wokman
REPRESENTATIVES :
For the management Sri P. K. Goswami , Advocate
Forthe union (Workman) : None
INDUSTRY : Coal
STATE : West Bengal
Dated 08-06-2010 05-01-2012
AWARD
In exercise of powers confered by clause (d) of Sub- section ( 1 ) and Sub - section 2 (A) of Section 10 of the [ भाग II-खंड 3 (ii ) ]
1561
भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 18 , 2012 /माघ 29 , 1933
Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , Govt . of India through the Ministry of Labour vide its letter No. L- 22012/ 51/2007 - IR ( CM- II) dated 5-7-07 has been pleased to refer the following dispute for adjudication by this Tribunal.
SCHEDULE
"Whether the action of the management of Chapuikhas Colliery ofM/s. ECL in dismissing the services of Shri Chasa Majhi w.e.f. 25-4-2005 is legal andjustified ? If not, to what relief is the workman entitled ?"
Having received the Order No. L -22012/51/2007 - IR (CM- II) dated 5-7-07 of the above said reference from the Govt . of India , Ministry of Labour, New Delhi for adjudication ofthe dispute, a reference case No. 47 of 2007 was registered on 17-9-2007 and accordingly an order to that effect was passed to issue notices through the registered post to the parties concerned directing them to appear in the court on the date fixed.
In response to the notice issued from this Tribunal both the parties made their apperance through their representatives . Form ' H' has been filed by the workman, Shri Chasa Majhi , showing the amicable settlement ofthe Industrial dispute . Hence , no dispute exists any more . Accordingly, an award needs be passed to that effect. Hence , it is ordered.
ORDER
Let an " Award" be and the same is passed as per above. Form ' H ' containing terms and conditions to form part of the Award . Send the copies of the award to the Govt. of India , Ministry of Labour , New Delhi for information and needful. The reference is accordingly disposedof.
KISHORI RAM, Presiding Officer
नई दिल्ली, 25 जनवरी , 2012
का.आ. 696.-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 (1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में केन्द्रीय सरकार ओ.एन.जी.सी. के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालय , कोलकाता के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 29/1996 ) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 25-1-2012 कोप्राप्त हुआ था ।
[सं. एल-20040/34/1995 - आई आर ( सी-1 ) ] डी. एस. एस. श्रीनिवास राव , डेस्क अधिकारी
New Delhi, the 25th January, 2012
S.O. 696. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ), the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 29/1996) ofthe CentralGovernment Industrial Tribunal -cum-Labour Court, Kolkata as shown in the Annexure, in the industrial dispute between the management of M/ s . O.N.GC. , and their workman , which was received by the Central Government on 25-1-2012 .
[No. L -20040/34/1995 -IR(C-I)] D.S.S. SRINIVASARAO, Desk Officer
ANNEXURE
CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL AT KOLKATA
Reference No. 29 of 1996
PARTIES :
Employers in relation to the management ofO.N.GC. AND
Their Workman
PRESENT :
Mr. JusticeManik Mohan Sarkar, Presiding Officer
APPEARANCES :
Onbehalf of the Management
: Mr. D. K. Ghosh, Ld. Advocatewith Mr. R. De , Ld. Advocate
:
Onbehalf of the Workman
Mr. A. Bhadury, Trade Union Representative
State: West Bengal
Industry: Petroleum& Natural Gas
Dated: 17th January, 2012
AWARD
By Order No. L-20040/34/95 - IR ( Coal -I) dated 11-10-1996 the Government of India, Ministry ofLabour in exercise of its powers under Section 10( 1 )( d) and ( 2A) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 referred the following dispute to this Tribunal for adjudication:
"Whether the demand by Shri Ashok Chand that he hadbeen illegally removed from the employment by themanagement ofONGC, Calcutta w.e.f. 16-1-1994 islegal andjustified ? If so, to what relief is the said workman entitled ? "
2. In his written statement the workman has claimed that he was appointed as contingent labour in the Domjur Drilling Site by the management on 13-1-1986 and continued to work there till 25-5-1986 and he was getting the daily wages @Rs . 19.70 . It is further claimed that after that job , he was transferred by the management to their AliporeGuest House at Kolkata and deployed there for doing the job in the guest house as Attendant. Though the wages 1562
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 18 , 2012/MAGHA 29 , 1933
of the workman was at the daily rate basis, all along he wasbeing paid with the wages month by month but itwas less than the rate fixed by the Government of West Bengal for contingent workers . In this way the workman claimed to have worked from 13-1-1986 to 15-1-1994 without any interruption of service . At the Alipore Guest House on being deployed after transfer from Domjur Drilling Site, this workman was engaged in the work of cooking, serving food materials to the guests and cleaning of the room of guest house and also doing the job of Peon . The workman used to stay in a space in the Company's quarter at the Company's guest house alonghwith others and his job was for 24 hours under the supervision and control of one Sk . Ali Mohammad, Senior Cook -cum -Attendant in the said guest house of the management Company. At Domjur Drilling Site, the workman used to receive Rs . 570 per month though accounted on the basis of the daily wages and after he came on deployment to the Alipore Guest House, that amount was reduced by Rs . 70 and the workman made appealed to a Senior Officer of the O.N.GC. in Alipore Guest House during his visit , for regularization of his employment and the said Senior Officer directed for placing his filebefore the Dy . General Manager (P & A) , Kolkata . The Deputy General Manager ( P& A) disiiked such direction and immediately after departure of the said senior officer, the workman was not allowed to attend the duty in the guest house during the night and also not allowed to sign the attendance register and forcibly removed himfrom the guest house with the instruction not to come there in future. On his such illegal termination from service , the workman was forced to vacate the Company's quarter where he used to stay and after terminating his service , one Sudhir Kumar Paul was brought from Dhakuria establishment of the Company for doing the job of the concerned workman . Subsequently, dispute was raised before the Conciliation Officer and on its failure , the matter was referred to the Central Government which in return referred this matter to this Tribunal for decision .
3. In theirwritten statement, management of O.N.GC. submitted initially by challenging the maintainability of the reference claiming non -existence of employer employee relationship in between the workman and the management O.N.GC. on 16-1-1994 . The management has admitted that the workman was working at Domjur in the months of March to May , 1986 totaling 84 days and has denied of any deployment of the workman concerned to do any job in its guest house in Alipore since there was no scope of deploying the concerned person for attending the guest house for cooking or serving food materials to the guest or cleaning the guest house or to do the job of a Peon and that he was never provided with any space in the Company's quarter in the said guest house. The management side denied the claim of the workman concerned that he used to put signatures in the attendance register in the guest house . The management has further
[PART II-SEC. 3 ( ii ) ]
claimed that since there was no deployment or engagement of the workman concerned at the Alipore Guest House, the question of termination of the workman from service becomes baseless . Thus the management has claimed that theworkman is not entitled to any relief as prayed for.
4. A rejoinder, as usual , has been filed by the workman concerned denying the statement made by the management intheir written statement para-wise.
5.Admittedly the workman concerned was initially engaged as a contingent labour on daily wages basis at the Domjur Drilling Site of the management O.N.GC. for a temporary period upto the month of May, 1986 and according to the management , that period of engagement wasfor a total period of 84 days. This part being admitted fact, was not subjected to any dispute from the side of the workman and according to him , the dispute related to the subsequent chapter of his working zone as he claimed that he was transferred by the O.N.GC. authority to Alipore Guest House at Kolkata on deployment after completion ofthe drilling site work of O.N.GC. at Domjur. The tug of warbetween the O.N.GC. and the present workman started at this stage when the workman concerned has claimed afterjoining Alipore Guest House that he continued to work there uninterruptedly upto the year 1994 and that he used to sign on the attendance register and used to get wages month by month though on daily wage rate basis . On this issue the management has claimed that the workmanconcerned was never transferred or deployed to the said guest house and it was a fabricated and imaginary story made by the workman concerned.
6. Mr. Animesh Bhadury , the authorized representative of the workman submitted that he strongly relied upon the cross - examination of Shri Prabhat Sengupta a witness of the management ( MW 01 ) who was the Deputy Manager (Personnal & Administration) of the O.N.G.C. But on going through the statement in cross- examination of the said witness, Ido not find any statement the claim of the workman concerned . This witness has stated that from the office record he found that the workman Ashok Chand was deputed at Domjur in the Chemistry Section and he worked there for 84 days and denied about his transfer to the guest house at Alipore from Domjur at any point of time and also denied about his employment at any point of time there or that he was paid with any wages from the guest house . This statement does not support the claim of the workman concerned .
7. The workman himself has deposed here as WW 01 and in course of his cross -examination he has admitted that no transfer letter was issued in his favour for his transfer from Dompur Alipore . As alone document he has produced one certificate issued by a Cook of the guest house and admitted that besides that he has no paper to show that he worked in the guest house from 1986 to 1994 nor he had any paper to show that he ever [ भाग II-खंड 3 ( ii ) ]
1563
भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 18 , 2012/माघ 29 , 1933
16-1-1994 has not been proved by the workman, Shri Ashok Chand, the question of illegality and justifiability of the said order does not arise . So , the workman concerned is found not be entitled to any relief in the present reference.
AnAward is passed accordingly.
Justice MANIK MOHAN SARKAR, Presiding Officer
Dated , Kolkata ,
The 17th Januarу, 2012
stayed in any portion of the quarter of the guest house at any point of time. Mr. Bhadury referred to the said document which is Ext . W 02 in this reference and he tried to submit that in the said document the granter of the same has stated that the workman concerned worked in theAlipore transit accommodation of O.N.GC. for washing and cleaning from 1-8-1986 to 16-1-1994 at Rs. 500 per month . On going through the said document it isfound that it is in the form of a letter to the D.D. (P&A) and it referred to a letter from the said authority. But , the writer ofthe said letter-cum -certificate , Sk. Ali Mohammad was never produced by the workman concerned as a witness to prove the said document or endorse the genuinity of the same. The referred letter of the D.D. (P&A) in Ext. W 02 has also not been produced to show whether such D.D. (P& A) actually in that letter wanted to ascertain about the employment of the workman concerned.
8. So, no supporting document is forthcoming to prove the claim of the workman concerned that he was evertransferred from Domjur Drilling Site to the Alipore Guest House at any point of time or that he was employed or engaged by the management of O.N.GC. there at any point of time . The workman concerned was a contingent labour engaged for temporary period and it is not expected that such a person may be transferred from one establishment to another establishment for doing different nature of job . It is also very much doubtful situation as to how the authority remaining incharge ofthe Alipore Guest House accepted service of the workman concerned as being on transfer, without any written order to that effect because accepting the service of the workman concerned would place an obligation on the part of the authority of the guest house to pay him wages in lieu of his service . Besides a written order it is not expected that anybody will take any financial liability of payment of wages to the workman concerned and it sounds peculiar here how the workman concerned claimed to have done suchjob and received payment towards his wages . Further, it is an admitted position from the side of the workman thathe failed to produce anything like attendance register or pay sheet for his doing job in the guest house to establish that he was actually working there during that period. So , unless it is established that he was ever transferred or employed in the Alipore Guest House at any point of time , question of his termination on any particular day, specifically 16-1-1994 as claimed by him, can never arise . So , it is not clear whether the workman concerned was at all terminated either on 16-1-1994 or any other day from the Alipore Guest House and when the termination has not been proved, the question of compliance ofthe provisions of Section 25F of Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 does not arise.
9. So , since the removal of the workman concerned by the management of O.N.GC. , Kolkata with effect from नई दिल्ली , 25 जनवरी , 2012
का. आ. 697.- औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 (1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में केन्द्रीय सरकार बी.सी.सी.एल. के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच , अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालय , धनबाद नं. -2 के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 244/99 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 25-1-2012 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।
[सं. एल-20012/33/1999- आई आर ( सी-1 ) ] डी.एस.एस. श्रीनिवास राव , डेस्क अधिकारी New Delhi , the 25th January , 2012
S.O. 697. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947 ), the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 244/ 1999) ofthe Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum- Labour Court - 2, Dhanbad, now as shown in the Annexure in the industrial dispute between the employers in relation to the management of M/s . BCCL and their workman, which was received by the Central Government on 25-1-2012.
[No. L -20012/33/ 1999 - IR (C-I ) ] D. S. S. SRINIVASA RAO , Desk Officer
ANNEXURE
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL (NO.2) AT DHANBAD
PRESENT:
Shri Kishori Ram, Presiding Officer In the matter of an Industrial Dispute under Section 10(1) (d) of the I.D. Act, 1947
Reference No. 244 of 1999
PARTIES:
Employers in relation to the management ofGondudih Colliery of Kusunda Area of M/ s . BCCL and their workman.
[PART II- SEC . 3 (ii )] 1564
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 18 , 2012/ MAGHA29 , 1933
APPEARANCES :
65/2006 ) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 25-1-2012 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।
: Mr. S. K. Verma, the Ld . Adv.
Onbehalf of the Workmen
[सं. एल -20012/56/2006- आई आर ( सी-1 ) ] डी.एस.एस. श्रीनिवास राव , डेस्क अधिकारी : Mr. S. N. Ghosh , the Ld. Adv.
Onbehalf of the Management
New Delhi , the 25th January , 2012
INDUSTRY: Coal
STATE : Jharkhand
Dated, Dhanbad, the 3rd January, 2012
AWARD
S.O. 698. In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 65/2006) ofthe Central Government Industrial Tribunal -cum-Labour Court -2, Dhanbad, now as shown in the Annexure in the industrial dispute between the employers in relation to the management of M/ s . Mines Rescue Station, and their workman, which was received by the Central Government on 25-1-2012.
The Government of India , Ministry of Labour, in exercise of the powers conferred on them under Section 10 ( 1 ) ( d) of the I.D. Act, 1947 has referred the following dispute to this Tribunal for adjudication vide their Order No. L -20012/33/99 - IR (C-I) , dt. 4-6-1999 .
SCHEDULE
[No. L-20012/56/2006- IR (C -I )] D. S. S. SRINIVASA RAO , Desk Officer
ANNEXURE
"Whether the action of the Management of Gondudih Colliery ofM/ s. BCCL in dismissing Sri Arjun Bhuiya from service w.e.f. 5-8-1991 is legallyjustified. Ifnot, to what relief is the concerned workman is entitled to ?"
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL (NO.2) AT DHANBAD
PRESENT:
Shri KISHORI RAM, Presiding Officer 2. Shri S. N. Ghosh ,Ld . Advocate for the Management appeared but Mr. S. K. Verma, the Ld . Advocate for the Union/Workman did not appear, nor any WW produced for the evidence for the workman, despite threeRegd. notices latestdt . 23-11-2010, 29-3-2011 and 2-11-2011 ( Second one Show cause) .
In the matter of an Industrial Dispute under Section 10(1)(d) ofthe I.D. Act, 1947 Reference No. 65 of 2006
PARTIES:
Employers in relation to the management of Mines Rescue Station , Dhansar and their workman
APPEARANCES :
Onbehalf of the Workman : Mr. R. R. Ram , Ld . Advocate
: Mr. U. N. Lal , Ld. Advocate
Onbehalf of the Management
Perused the case record, I find that Mr. S. K. Verma, the Ld . Advocate for the Union/Workman has not appeared to represent the case of the union since 6-7-2006 and the case has been pending for the evidence of the workman from 16-3-2005, for which the aforesaid several time Regd . notices were issued to the name and address of the union as noted in the Reference Case . The conduct of the union as well as the workman shows their disinterestedness to persue or contest the case which is related to an issue of the dismissal of the workman Arjun Bhuiya of Gondudih Colliery w.e.f. 5-8-1991 by the BCCLManagement.
STATE : Jharkhand
INDUSTRY: Coal
Delhi , Dhanbad, the 4th January, 2012
AWARD
Under these circumstances , proceeding with the case for uncertainty is mere wastage of time and energy of the Tribunal; therefore , the case is closed and accordingly order is passed, as no dispute award , existing.
KISHORI RAM , Presiding Officer
नई दिल्ली, 25 जनवरी , 2012
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 theirOrder No. L -20012/56/2006 - IR ( C-I), dt . 29-9-2006.
SCHEDULE
का.आ. 698.- औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में केन्द्रीय सरकार माईन्स रेस्क्यू स्टेशन के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच , अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालय , धनबाद नं. 2 के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या
"Whether the action of the Management of M/s . BCCL in not including the Rescue Station allowance in basic pay for the purpose of calculating [ भाग-II-खंड 3 (ii ) ]
1565 भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 18 , 2012/माघ 29, 1933
the earned leave and for the purpose of calculating the gratuity amount in respect of the workmen working at Mines Rescue Station , Dhanbad is justified ? If not, to what relief are the concerned workmen entitled ? "
Allowance/637 dt . 17-9-1989. They have demanded for inclusion of calculating Earned Leave/Annual Leave wages and Gratuity, Post Retiral Benefit Scheme in their BasicPay as they have suffered a lot of monetary loss . The Rescue StationAllowance does not come under the Wages Act .
2. The case of the workmen (Union) represented in the written statement is that all Mining Supervisory Personnel working as Sr. Overman, Overman, Mining Sardar inMines were and are still being paid their Underground Allowances as per the NCWA - III . But the Captain, Vice Captain and Brigade Members who were working as aforesaid Supervisoring Personnel and getting their underground allowance in mines , were inducted from the working mines to their roll of Mines Rescue Station and were deprived of underground allowance , thereby considerably reduction in their pay package .
4.Whereas the contra plead case of the Management with categorical denials is that the payment of Rescue StationAllowance to permanent Brigade Members posted at Mines Rescue Station , Dhansar in respect of underground allowance , was introduced as per the Office Memo dt . 19-7-1989 w.e.f. 1-7-1989 . TheAllowance is not related or linked with underground work. The Rescue Station Allowance is not related or linked with underground work, TheRescue Station Allowance is being paid for the specified work done by the Brigade Members posted in Mines Rescue Station . It can be taken as a part of pay for the purpose of payment of Gratuity under the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972, or for encashment benefit of due Earned Leave.Whereas the UndergroundAllowance is beingtaken intoaccount as wages for calculation of payment ofgratuity and E.L. encashment etc. as per provision ofNCWA . The term" wages " under the Payment ofGratuityAct, 1972 means all emoluments earned by the employee on duty or on leave as per the terms and conditions of his employment which are paid or payable to him in cash and includes Dearness Allowances, but does not include any bonus commission , house rent allowances , overtime wages and any other allowances . The Rescue Station Allowance introduced in order to have the best person to come to Rescue Station with the above incentive . So the action ofthe Management in not taking the Rescue Station Allowance as basic pay is just, fair and quite reasonable as per its policy. But the demand of the Union for it is unjust.
On taking the matter by their association, the Coal India Ltd. as per its Letter (Office Memorandum dt. 19-1-1989-Ext . W- 1 ( with objection) decided to pay the Rescue Station Allowance equivalent to the Underground allowance even at its enhancement as enhanced in the Underground allowance from time to time , but the Management of Mines Rescue Station (M.R.S. ) Dhansar, did not consider the Rescue Station Allowance as the part ofthebasic for all purposes in accordance with clause 2.4 ofthe Implementation Institution No. 3 dt . 5-1-2001 ofthe NCWA - VI under clause 4.4.0 related to the Underground Allowance. It resulted in depriving of their legitimate payment of leave wages , sick wages and post- retirement benefits. Though the Management of the Mines Rescue, Ramgarh ( CCL) included the aforesaid Rescue Station Allowance for payment of gratuity and its payment to Sri Birendra Kumar, Vice Captain , CCL, Ramgarh Rescue Station as per the order of the Controlling Authority/the ALC ( C) , Hazaribagh in his Appeal No. 05/2004/as also accordingly upheld by the Appellate Authority/the RLC ( C) , Dhanbad under the payment of Gratuity Act , 1977.
5. TheManagement in its rejoinder has pleaded that the C.I.L. as per aforesaid Memo had decided to pay the Rescue Station Allowance and also enhanced the 'Pit' practice allowance per practice to Executives and other members . There is no such circular/guidelines issued by JBCCI . The citation ofa single payment ofGratuity case is unreferrable, as it was not decided by the Hon'ble Apex Court after proper adjudication . As such the claim as represented is unjustified.
FindingwithReasonings
Further it is alleged by the Union that the payment of Rescue Station Allowance as contrasted with that of underground allowance has not been exempted from the Income-taxetc. For the aforesaid facts , the I.D. was raised by the Association before the A.L.C. (C) , Dhanbad. The action of theManagement of M/s . BCCL in not including the Rescue Station Allowance in basic pay for calculating the earned leave and the gratuity concerning the workers working at Mines Rescue Station, Dhanbad is quite illegal. They are liable to pay it with retrospective effect since the date the Mines Station were brought on the roll of the Coal IndiaLtd.
3. The Union Representative for the workmen in its rejoinder with specific denials has pleaded that Rescue Station Allowance is equivalent to underground allowance as per circular /Office Memo No. CIL/CSA (iii) Rescue Station
6. In this case, WWI Md.Hassim, as Sr. Overman/ Captain for the Union and MWI Bhabon Bandopadhaya, theDy.Manager, Personnel . Mines Rescue Station as Addl. Charge for the Management have been examined. The averment ofWWI Md. Hassim as Sr. Overman/ Captain in theMines Rescue Station at Dhansar reveals his admission that the present schedule (to the Reference) relates to only Earned Leave and Gratuity and that the Company pays the RescueStationAllowance to Sr. Brigade Members, Captain and Vice Captain posted at the Rescue Station and the Rescue Station allowance is equivalent to under ground
367175-2012-34 1566
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 18 , 2012/ MAGHA29 , 1933
allowance as per the office Memodt . 19-7-1989 (Ext . W- 1) and it is payable at the same rate whenever there was revision.
Whereas the statement of Bhabani Bandopadhyaya the Dy. Manager Personnel, Mines Rescue Station asAddl. Incharge, is that as per NCWA provision the underground allowance which is paid to the workman working as Mining Sardar and others inside the Mines is taken for calculating theirEarned Leave , Annual leave, Sick Leave , contribution to C.M.P.F. , post retiral benefits , injury and duty only, in addition to their basic pay etc. but the Rescue Station Allowance is paid to the workman working temporarily posted at the Rescue Station ofthe Management in addition to theirbasic salary , D.A. , H.R.A. and Attandance Bonus only, and the Rescue Station Allowance is only the incentive which is incalculatable for the purpose of the EL, Gratuity etc.
7. According to Bhabani Bandopadhyaya (MW I) , the Rescue Station Allowance is guite different from the underground, allowance . The payment of Rescue Station Workers and that of Mining workers are governed by the JBCCI . The category of Captain and other is different from that of Mining Sardar and others working in the Mines . The Rescue Services are governed by the Rescue Rules which includes the services of the Captain and others as well as the services of Mining Sirdar and others. But the Rescue Station Allowance is excluded from calculation of E.L. andGratuity as per circular.
8. Mr. R. R. Ram, Ld. Advocate for the Union submits that the Mines Rescue Rules , 1985 are applicable to all the workmen as per NCWAIII w.e.f. 1-1-1983 the Underground Allowance is included as part of the wages for calculating the gratuity of an employee , and that as per the office Memo dt . 19-7-1989 , the payment of rescue is equivalent to the underground allowance is applicable to the executive and non -executives , captain, vice-captain and Brigade members , so it should be included in the basic wages for calculation of gratuity, EL as well as for income Tax computation exemption as the ALC ( C) and the RLC ( C) as the Controlling Authority and the Appellate Authority under the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 has held in the case ofSri B. K. Singh, Ex-employee ofMines Rescue Station ofM/ s . BCCL, Ramgarh Cant . Hazaribagh.
Inresponseto the aforesaid argument, Mr. U. N. Lal , Ld. Advocate for the Management has contended that the aforesaid Mines Rescue Rules applies to only the workmen posted at the Rescue State in entire colliery including the BCCL and they are paid the Rescue Station Allowance irrespective of their visit or non visit to the underground, so it cannot be treated at par with the underground allowance because as per the NCWA VII Chapter IV under clause4.4.0 , the underground allowance is treated as wages forthe purpose of calculating EL Gratuity ctc ., for which the Rescue Station Allowance is not be taken as the basic
[PART II-SEC . 3 (ii ) ]
wages as defined u/s 2 (s) of Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972.
In view of the aforesaid facts and submissions of bothLd. Counsels for the parties concerned, I find that the said provision of the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 does not include any other allowance as the underground Allowance as the part of the Wages under the NCWA VII , Chapter IV, clause 4.4.0. The Management's OfficerMemo dt. 19-7-1989 (Ext. W1 ) isjust an administrative order for treating Rescue Station Allowance equivalent to under- groundAllowance as incentive to the workmen working at the Mines Rescue Station in view of harmony relationship betweenthe employer and employee . Both the Allowances aredifferent under the aforesaid specified law. Any order of the ALC (C) or the R.L.C. ( C) concerned about the inclusion of the Rescue Station Allowance in Gratuity payment cannot be binding upon the Tribunal .
In result, it is awarded that the action of the Management of BCCL in not including the Rescue Station Allowance inbasic pay for calculation of EL and Gratuity inrespect ofthe workmen working at Mines Rescue Station, Dhanbad is quite legally justified. The concerned workmen are not entitled for any relief.
KISHORI RAM, Presiding Officer
नई दिल्ली, 25 जनवरी , 2012
का.आ. 699.-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 नं. - 2 , धनबाद के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 11/2005 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 25-1-2012 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।
[सं. एल-20012/182/2004- आई आर (सी-1 ) ] डी. एस. एस . श्रीनिवास राव , डेस्क अधिकारी
New Delhi, the 25th January, 2012
S.O. 699.-In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 11/2005) ofthe Central Government Industrial Tribunal -cum-Labour Court - 2, Dhanbad, as shown in the Annexure in the industrial dispute between the employers in relation to the management ofM/s . BCCL, and their workman, which was received by the Central Government on 25-1-2012.
[No. L-20012/ 182/2004- IR(C-I)] D. S. S. SRINIVASA RAO , Desk Officer [ भाग II-खंड 3 ( ii ) ]
1567 भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 18 , 2012/माघ 29 , 1933
ANNEXURE
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT
INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL CUM - LABOUR COURT
(NO. 2) AT DHANBAD
PRESENT :
Shri Kishori Ram, Presiding Officer
In the matter of an industrial dispute under Section 10(1)(d) of the I.D. Act , 1947.
Reference No. 11 of2005
PARTIES:
Employer in relation to the management of Pootki Colliery under P. B. Area of M/s B.C.C.L. and their workman.
APPEARANCES:
provide him an alternative job/ duty in view of his physical condition in place of Miner Loader . Even at subsequent times the Medical Board constituted by the Management arbitrarily agnotically declared him fit to perform his original duty.Hewas compelled to do his duty despite his repeated requests . The management forced him to remain absent and accordingly issued a chargesheet as per its letter dt . 24-2-2001 against him for his absence on 20-2-2001 , though he had replied to it, yet the management again issued a chargesheet on 11-7-2001 threatening him of his dismissal from the Company's service . He again replied to it on 19-7-2001 , giving full facts and circumstances . But without cognizance, the Management arbitrarily and mala fide failed to provide him an alternative job even on sympathetic ground . At last, the workman was illegally dismissed from his service w.e.f. 19-9-2002 . The action of theManagement was illegal , unfair, mala fide and against the principle of natural justice but the claim of the workman for alternative job was quite genuine.
Onbehalf of the Workman : Mr. M. M. Khan, Ld . Advocate
Mr. D. K. Verma,
Ld. Advocate
Onbehalf of the Employer :
State: Jharkhand
Industry: Coal
The Union in its rejoinder specifically denied the alleged facts of the management as baseless . The workman never committed any misconduct . Neither the enquiry conducted fairly and properly nor the dismissal order of the Management against the workman was legal and justified.
Dhanbad, the 9th January, 2012
ORDER
The Government of India, Ministry of Labour in exercise of the powers conferred on them under Section 10(1) ( d) of the I.D. Act , 1947 has referred the following dispute to this Tribunal for adjudication vide their Order No. L -20012/182/04 - IR (C -I) dated 17-12-2004.
SCHEDULE
"Whether the action of the management of Pootki Colliery ofM/ s . BCCL in dismissing Sri Akhtar Alam, M/Loader from the services of the company vide order dated 11-7-2001 is fair and justified. If not, to what relief is the concerned workman entitled ? "
3. The contra pleaded case of the Management with categorical denials is that the Management issued the workman the chargesheetdt . 20-2-2001 for his unauthorised absence from duty since 22-9-2000 . On finding his reply unsatisfactory , the management as per its letter dt . 17-3-2001 appointed Sri C. Pd. , Personnel Manager as the Enquiry Officer to hold the domestic enquiry according tothe principle of natural justice . After the due enquiry the Enquiry Officer submitted his Enquiry Report as to the charges as proved against the workman. The Disciplinary Authority after giving the second show -cause and ample opportunity to him and considering his explanation unsatisfactory dismissed him from the services of the Company for his proved guilt. So the dismissal of the workman is legal andjustified.
4. The Management in its rejoinder has pleaded categorically that the workman was medically declared fit for light duty w.e.f. 8-6-1996. The Apex Medical Board on his examination declared him medically fit for his original job . Consequently with direction of the Management to the workman to given his duty, he submitted an application for review of the Apex Medical Board's decision, deliberately did not join his duty and demanded for an alternative job .
FINDING WITH REASONING
2. The case of the sponsoring union concerned is that workman Akhtar Alam , on his appointment as Miner / Loader by the Management joined on 19-7-1986 under Personal No. 02385698 and was posted at Pootki Colliery under P.B. Area of M/ s BCCL . The workman in course of his duty on 3-9-1994 had actually sustained an injury, for which he remained under treatment and I.O.D. leave till 5-6-1994. He was given light duty till 26-3-1997 in view of his physical status and capability. Meanwhile the Apex Medical Board constituted for assessing his physical ability and condition assessed him for original job with 7% ioss ofearning capacity which was premotivated and mala fide and against the principle of natural justice as his condition due to the steel plate still installed in his leg was not so good to perform his duty. After observing it , the workman protested it and requested the Management to
5. In this case, Mr. M. H. Khan, the Ld . Advocate for the Union/Workman as per petition on 7-7-2011 accepted thedomestic Enquiry as fair. On this admission the Tribunal also held the Enquiry in accordance with the principle of
367 GI/2012-35 1568
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: FEBRUARY 18 , 2012/ MAGHA 29 , 1933
natural justice. Accordingly the relevant documents of the Domestic Enquiry--the appointment letter of the E.O. , the copy of chargesheet, the reply of the workman to it, enquiry proceeding , Enquiry Report, Second Show-cause , the workman's reply to it , and dismissal order were marked as Ext . M to M -8 respectively.
Thus, the case directly came up for hearing argument onmerits.
Mr. M. H. Khan, the Ld. Advocate for the Union/ workman submits that this is the first case of absentism , so he be reinstated in a surface duty, as he had got absent for sustaining bodily injury on 3-9-1994 in course of his employment, of which it was informed to the management. and it was to the knowledge of the management ; moreover , the workman has already suffered a lot since 11-7-2001 . On the other hand , Mr. D. K. Verma, the Ld . Counsel for the Management contends that the workman, who was a Miner/ Loader, was declared medically fit for duty after his treatment, but refused to attend his duty as per the Enquiry Report, so his claim for back wages is unjustifiable.
6. On appreciation of the materials of the domestic Enquiry and the dismisssal order available on the case, I find the facts as under :
(1) Workman Akhtar Alam, the Miner Loader was initially appointed on 29-7-1986 . He was charge sheeted under clause 26.1.1 of the Certified Standing Order of the Company for unauthorised absentism from 22-9-2000 after getting his sick leave entered at the Colliery Hospital from 31st Augustto 21st Sept. , 2000 , and after long absence, he presented himself witha Fitness Certificate of a outsider Doctor forjoining on 16-2-2001 (Ext. M.2).
(ii) He had all along represented in his show cause reply dt . 24-2-2001 (Ext . M3 ) as well as in his statement in the Enquiry Proceeding (Ext . M.4) that he had got treated from 31-8-2000 to 21-9-2000 at the Colliery Hospital for swelling ofhis leg in which steel rod was set ; when he did not recover, he got treated by Dr. Banerjee, aPrivate Doctor, from 22-9-2000 to 15-2-2001, though he applogically accepted his guilt of not informing of it to the Management.
( iii) His past record of last 3 years was poor due to leg (wound) problem , and after operation , steel rod was fixed due to which he could not performhisduty from 1998 to 2000 and he was medically declared fit by the Medical Board for his original job, and he joined on 6-1-2000.
(iv) The representation of the workman as stated inhis reply (Ext . M- 7) to the Second Show Causedt. 11-7-2001 (Ext . M -6) was that owing
PART II- SEC . 3 (ii) ]
to the steel rod/ plate fixed in his leg, he was too unable to perform his duty as Miner/Loader in the mine, as he had to take the aid of a club (lathi staff) , for that reason, he had to absent helpless though a Miner /Loader at cutting of his half finger was absorbed in a job on the surface, yet he (workman) was not done , and theMedical Board repeated , but mala fide kept him declaring medically fit for it.
7. Prima facie there is no record of any such chargesheet earlier in the long service career of the workman, who rendered helpless in performing his original duty due to his leg problem/ wound he had got in course of his employment but his outright dismissal by the Disciplinary Authority from his service is quite shockingly disproportionate to the nature of his reasonable absentism. Hence it is liable to be set aside .
Under the circumstances , it is held that the action of the management of Pootki Colliery of M/ s BCCL in dismissing Sri Akhtar Alam, Miner/Loader from the services ofthe Company vide order dt . 11-7-2001 is quite unfair and unjustified. The workman is entitled to reinstatement in a substituted job on the surface but with 50% back wages and consequential reliefs , as he financially suffered a lot due to the insensitiveness of the management towards his real cause of his inability to work as a Miner/Loader. The Management is directed to implement the Award within a month from the receipt of its publication in the Gazette of India.
KISHORI RAM, Presiding Officer नई दिल्ली, 25 जनवरी , 2012
का.आ. 700.-औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम , 1947 ( 1947 का 14 ) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण में , केन्द्रीय सरकार सी . सी . एल. के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच , अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण/ श्रम न्यायालय, धनबाद नं. -2 के पंचाट ( संदर्भ संख्या 46/1997 ) को प्रकाशित करती है , जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 25-1-2012 को प्राप्त हुआ था ।
[सं. एल-20012/498/1994- आई आर ( सी-1 ) ] डी. एस. एस. श्रीनिवास राव, डेस्क अधिकारी New Delhi , the 25th January , 2012
S.O. 700.- In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act , 1947 ( 14 of 1947) , the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 46/1997 ) ofthe Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court- 2 , Dhanbad, as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of M/ s . CCL , and their workmen, which was receivedby the Central Government on 25-1-2012 .
[No. L -20012/498/ 1994- IR(C-I )] D. S. S. SRINIVASA RAO , Desk Officer [ भाग II-खंड 3 ( ii ) ]
भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 18 , 2012/माघ 29 , 1933
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) of the I.D. Act, 1947 .
Reference No. 46 of 1997
PARTIES :
Employer in relation to the management of Swang Colliery of M/ s C.C.L. and their workmen.
APPEARANCES :
Onbehalf of the Workmen
: Mr. D. Mukherji , Ld. Advocate
Onbehalf of the : Mr. D. K. Verma, Ld. Advocate
Employer
State: Jharkhand
1569
of their alleged intermediaries which is a legal sham camouflage . Despite several representations to the Management for their regularisation and due wages , it was of no effect , lastly the conciliation proceeding in the Industrial Dispute raised by the Union before the A.L.C. (C), Hazaribagh on its failure for the adamant and the plea ofthe Management that there is no relationship of employer and employees between them resulted in reference for adjudication as the direction ofHon'ble High Court, Patna, Ranchi Bench in C. W. J. C. No. 3732/95 (R) as it was earlier rejected by the Central Government .
Further case of the union is that neither the alleged contractor has any licence nor the Management has any Registration Certificate for engaging the alleged intermediaries . The action ofthe Management is vindictive, anti labour policy and illegal .
Industry: Coal
Dhanbad, the 12th January, 2012
ORDER
The Government of India , Ministry of Labour in exercise of the powers conferred on them under Section 10(1)( d) of the I.D. Act, 1947 has referred the following dispute to this Tribunal for adjudication vide their Order No. L-20012/498/94 - I.R. (C- I) dated 12-3-1997.
SCHEDULE
"Whether the claim of the union that Shri Bhola Ravidas and 111 others (as per list enclosed ) have worked regularly in the underground mines of Swang Colliery of M/s . C. C. L. and are therefore eligible for regularisation with retrospective effect is legal and justified. If so , to what relief are these workmen entitled and from which date ? "
2. The case of the sponsoring union for the workmen is that Shri Bhola Ravidas and 111 other workmen concerned have been regularly performing the job of permanent and perennial nature in the underground mines of Swang Colliery of M/ s CCL for the last 8-10 years directly under the control and supervision of the Management . Theirjob included drilling, blasting , isolation stopping , loading coal into tub and at times packing. They have put in more than 190/240 days attendance in each calender year. All the tools are supplied by the Management for execution of the job. The Management has implemented the Wage Board Recommendations and N.C.W.A. having statutory force. Their services produce goods for the benefit of the Management, but the Management pays their wages lesser than those contrary to the aforesaid statutes in the name 3. The union concerned in its rejoinder with specific denial has pleaded that the industrial dispute has been raised after the failure of ameciable settlement . The Management mala fide unmaintained perfect paper with a viewto camouflage the real issue. A lot ofthe workmen had been appointed in Central Coalfields Ltd. , in violation of the alleged constitutional provisions . Track laying is a continuousjob of permanent nature in a running mine .
4. Whereas the contra pleading of the Management full of categorical denials, is that no employer employee relationship ever existed between the management and the concerned persons . The Management on verification of records found none of their names in the Form-B Register, identity card Register any other record of the Company. The Union's representation for recruitment of some contractor workers with many job seekers through intermediaries contractor to employment of Company through litigation was challenged by the Management as it failed to name a contractor or intermediary through when theyhad worked. The mine has no stone seam, rather it has onlythe coal seams wherefrom coal is available by drilling and blasting. The Central Government observed that contractors are temporarily engaged only on civil contract jobs time to time . Hence Central Government as per its notification No. L-20012/498/94 I.R. (C-I) dt. 15-11-1995 had refused to refer the dispute for adjudication but as per direction of the Hon'ble High Court , it was referred to it so as to give opportunity to establish its case. In a Public Sector Undertaking, each workman is posted in a colliery after his selection and recruitment on the basis of appointinent letter, is issued identity card and his name is entered in Form-B Register of the colliery, and he issued everymonth the pay - slip to enable to draw his wages from the Coal Company. No person can be unconstitutionally engaged contrary to the provisions of employment of workman. The contract workers are issued employment cards as identity cards by the contractor duly signed by theManagement/Agent of the colliery so as to allow them 1570
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 18 , 2012/ MAGHA 29 , 1933
enterwith proper cap lamp into the underground mine. At times, the management engages a contractor on the civil jobs underground mainly for construction of ventilation and isolation stopping and Line packing subject to permission of the D.GM.S. under the Coal Mines Regulation 1957 for the area as planned by the Management for extracting coal from it . The engagement of a contractor for such civil construction workers carried on one time purely on temporary basis has not been prohibited by any Notification u/s 10 of the Contract labour regulation and Abolition Act 1970. The construction of isolation stopping ora ventilator stopping can be carried on by engaging two mansons with five to six labours only within two days, but engagement of 112 workmen for aforesaid civil jobs in the mine is absurd .
5. The Management in its rejoinder full of categorical denials has pleaded that it is an absurdity to imagine of Sri Bhola Ravidas and 111 others working in the colliery for 8 to 10 years without any record of employment on aforesaid non-existent and imaginary jobs . The jobs of brick lining and its proper plastering to prevent leakage of air are given to the contractors expert in civil works but no ordinary workmen can work the job of isolation stopping. Line packing is done by department workers in course of repair and maintenance of tram lines , though in case of opening of a new area in a colliery, a contractor is occasionally deployed to complete it . The alleged working of these persons by attendance for 190-240 days under the direct control and supervision of the management is false , baseless and imaginary. The workmen of the Company and the contractor workers perform their respective workers under the suspervision of the overman and Mining Sardar of the Company, and the contractor, his Munshis or Supervising staff ofthe contractor concerned respectively fortheirrespective safety, for which the principal employer is responsible , providing safe working place is different from supervising of the work . The contractors have got their licence under the provisions of Contract Labour (Regulation and Abolition ) Act and the Management has also got the registration certificate . Thus these concerned persons are not entitled to any reliefs .
FINDING WITH REASONING
6. In this case , WWI Bhola Rabidas , one of the concerned workmen as their representative in behalf the Union concerned , and MWI Ram Ugra Singh, the Sr. Manager, Mining, Swang Coiliery, for the Management have been examined.
7. Accordingto WWI Bhola Rabidas , they are still working as underground workmen since their engagement by the Management in 1988 , though the Management did not issue any letter of their appointment . After noting their attendance before the Attendance Clerk and collecting cap lamps and other implements for work, they are allowed to enter the mines , where they used to perform hand drilling,
[PART II- SEC . 3 ( ii)]
loading of coal and khainger cutting ,blasting, roof packing, looding of coal and stone and lime packing under the suspervision of the Mining Sirdar, Manager etc. and they put their attendance for more than 240 days in each year . But admittedly, they have not submitted any papers of their I.D. Cards and Pay Slip etc. except photo copies of some papers as Ext . 1 series bearing the names of contractors Anil Kumar and others . Though they have the originals of these papers , yet they have not filed it.
8. On the other hand, the overment of MWI Ram Ugra Singh, the Senior Manager of Mining, Swang Colliery is that these works drilling , blasting , Seam, dressing of roof, Khaja cutting, Loading of coal into tubs come under the Mining Operation , and are performed by the Departmental workers . They ( the workers) have never worked nor been employed through intermediaries in the said colliery, as they ( the management ) have alreading guidlines for recruitment of workmen . The names of the workers working in the mines and the name of any worker going inside the mines for work are maintained and entered in the Form -B and Form ' C ' Registers, but the letter is kept only for three years as per the Mines Rules , so the Form ' C' Register of the year 1993 till now can not be produced. The records of destruction and availability of the Registers maintained by the Management can be produced, ifcalled forby the Tribunal .
9. In supportofthe Union's claim, Mr. K. Mukherjee , Ld .Advocate-cum-Secretary of the Union concerned, by filing the photo copies of four rulings and on award ( to be cited in brackets) has emphatically submitted:
(i) That ' the presence of intermediate contractors with when alone the workers have immediate or direct relationship ex - contract is of consequence when, on lifting the veil or looking at the conspectus of factors governing employments disern the naked truth , though draped ondifferent perfect paper arrangement, that the real employer is the Management, not the immediate contractor. The Court must be astute to avoid the mischief and the purpose of the law and not be misled by the maya of legal appearance ( 1978 SCW ( 15) 112 (CB) HussanBhai Vs. Alaat Factory, though Union) .
(ii) That ' the engagement and employment of labourers through a contractor is a mere comouflage and a smoke screen is a question of fact to be established by the contract labourers on the basis of requisite materials undecidable by the writ jurisdiction on basis ofaffidavits, at what point of time a direct link established between the contact labourers and the principal employer eliminating the contractor from the scene , is a matter to be established on material produced before the [ भाग II-खंड 3 ( ii) ]
1571
भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 18 , 2012/माघ 29 , 1933
Court's[ 1994 LLR 634 (CB) , R. K. Panda and Others Vs. Steel Authority of India and Others];
(iii) In relation to contract labour (Regulation and Abolition) Act, 1970, Sec. 10 Retrenchment that 'Whenther appellant had claimed workmen to be contract workers the nature of employment had necessarily to be decided .' [2002 ( 2) LLN 368 (PB), Indian Farmer Fertilizer Corp. Ltd. , Vs. Industrial Tribunal , All and Ors -Para 5 ] , and
(iv) That ' though working of reference showing that dispute as to regularisation of service of contractual workers and pleading however showing that case issue before the Tribunal was with regard to status of workers as employees of Principal employer, award of Tribunal holding workers to be employees of principal employer and granting relief of regularisation was not outside to jurisdiction [2008 AIR SCW 3996 (DB) , GM. , O.N.GC. , Shikhar Vs. O.N.GC. Contractual Workers Union-(C) (Para 16 , 18] .
10. Further plea of Mr. Mukherjee , Ld . Advocate- cum-Union Secretary is that the case of similar nature was decided by an Award in Ref. No. 58/92 by C.GI.T. No. 1 , Dhanbad, which remained upheld by the Hon'ble Supreme Court(Constitutional Bench) reported in (2001 ) LLR 961; that the plea of the management about never engagement of the persons by it in face of non - production of the Form C Register related to their attendance from 1990 till date as called for as per the petitionsdt.6-10-98 and 26-7-2001 is unsustainable , rather the Ext . 1 series (the photo-copies of their engagement) corroborate their case as the work: man of the managernent, so it is alleged their entitlement to regularisation . In response to the aforesaid arguments of Mr. Mukherjee, Ld . Advocate, Mr. D. K. Verma Ld . Aclv. for Mag. contends that Bhola Ravidas ( WWI) has proved their alleged engagement as aforesaid Ext . 1 series through contractor Anil Kumar and Others , but the original papers thereofare lying with them ( workers ) , and he did not prove any authority of the Management issued any of them to work. He submits that in the Uma Devi (3 ) Case 2006 SCC ( Land S) 753 , Secretary, State of Karnataka and Others (LargerBench of 5 Hon'ble Supreme Court Judges ) , it has been held regularisation , contractual , casual , or adhoc employees ' appointed/ recruited dehors the constitutional scheme of public employment is not permissibler .
11. The present reference needs the consideration of the solitary point :
Whether the status of these persons are the employees of the Management , and are they ciigible for regularisation as claimed.
Onthe consideration of the materials oral and documentary as adduced in behalf of both the parties , I find the following facts:
(1) The oral evidence ofWWI Bhola Ravidas , one ofthe alleged workmen, is that they have been working as theunderground workers since their engagement by the management in 1988 ( as contracted with the Union's pleading- working for 8-10 years) as drilling to lime packing under the supervision of the Mining Sardar, Manager others by putting their attendance for more than240 days in each year, after collecting cap lamps and other implements for work.
(ii) The claim of the union is based on the Ext . WI Series which are the six sheets ) each having the photocopies of 4 to 6 Requisitions of contractors Raju Pd. and others including Anil Kumar for the issuance of 3 to 6 cap lamps and for the work as of 4 to 6 and once for 8 person for 2 to 4 days in the year 1993 , 1994, 1995 and 1997, Ext . W1/ 1-4 ( except requisitiondt . 13-5- 1997 related for four heads person) refer to the requisition for the issuance of Cap Lamps whereas rest Ext . W relates to the Contractors requisitions for said number of persons .
(iii) The rest Ext. W 1/2, 1/4 (Last Requisitiondt . 13-5-1997 ) and 1/5 refer to total 48 persons ' names out of only 25 vaguely named persons (1) Rameshwar , (2) B. Yadav (3 ) Hira (4) Gopal (5) Dhaneshwar ofsix titles (6) Mahesh Kumar ( 7) Vijay ( 8 ) Ashok (9 ) Narayan ( 10) Ramchandra and ( 11 ) Kameshwar each of Hon'ble or triple six similar names, and rest persons, namely (12) Hem Lal ( 13 ) Mukesh ( 14) Jawahar ( 15) Raju ( 16) Rajdeo ( 17) Dahana ( 18) Dinesh Manjhi (19) Naresh Rawand (20) Jugal (21)Bola(Perhaps Bhola Ravidas) (22) Ramdeo (23) Rajendra (24 ) Ramesh and (25) Sukara under their own Serial No.s 35, 102, 30, 20, 31 , 106, 13, 37, 1 , 36, 40, 45 and 29 respectively out ofthe Scheduled List oftotal 112 workmen.
(iv) There is no proof on the part of the Union to show any continued service of any of aforesaid 25 persons through any of the contractors concerned for 240 days in any of the year 1993 , 1994, 1995 and 1997 under the Management .
So the Union has utterly failed to prove at what point oftime a direct link was established between the aforesaid alleged 25 contract labourers and the Principle employer by eliminating the contractor from the scene as held in case ofR. K. Pandey (Supra). Therefore, in the present case under adjudication the status of these persons are not as 1572
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 18 , 2012/ MAGHA29, 1933
[PART II-SEC. 3 ( ii )]
the employees of the management, so they are not eligible for regularisation as claimed. It is quite baseless , hence meritless.
not less favourable to employees therein than those specified in Section 6 of the said Act and the employees are also in enjoyment of other provident fund benefits provided under the said Act or under the Employees ' Provident Funds Scheme, 1952 (hereinafter referredto as the Scheme) in relation to the employees in any other establishment of similar character.
In result, it is accordingly held and awarded that the claim of the Union that Shri Bhola Ravidas and 111 workers (as per the list enclosed) have worked regularly in the underground mines of Swang Colliery of M/ s. CCL and are therefore eligible for regularisation with retrospective effect is quite illegal and unjustified . These workmen are not entitled to any reliefwhatsoever.
KISHORI RAM, Presiding Officer
नई दिल्ली, 31 जनवरी , 2012
3.Now, therefore , in exercise of the powers conferred by clause ( a) of sub- section ( 1 ) of Section 17 of the said Act and subject to the conditions specified in this regard from time to time, the Central Government , hereby exempts the said establishment from the operation of all the provisions of the said Scheme with effect from 1-4-1996 until further notification .
[No. S- 35015/ 10/2011 -SS-II ) NARESH JAISWAL, Under Secy.
नई दिल्ली , 1 फरवरी , 2012
का. आ. 701.-जबकि मैसर्स मेहर सीमेंट इकाई सं. 2 और मेहर सीमेंट , सतना ( मध्य प्रदेश क्षेत्र में कोड संख्या एमपी/8524 और एमपी/4767 के अंतर्गत ) ( एतदुपरांत प्रतिष्ठान के रूप में संदर्भित ) ने कर्मचारी भविष्य निधि और प्रकीर्ण उपबंध अधिनियम , 1952 ( 1952 का 19 ) ( एतदुपरांत अधिनियम के रूप में संदर्भित) की धारा 17 की उप धारा ( 1 ) के खण्ड ( क ) के अंतर्गत छूट के लिए आवेदन किया है ।
का.आ. 702,-कर्मचारी राज्य बीमा अधिनियम , 1948 ( 1948 का 34 ) की धारा-1 की उप धारा ( 3 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए , केन्द्रीय सरकार एतद्वारा 1 मार्च, 2012 को उस तारीख के रूप में नियत करती है , जिसको उक्त अधिनियम के अध्याय -4 (44 व 45 धारा के सिवाय जो पहले से प्रवृत्त हो चुकी हैं ) अध्याय -5 और 6 ( धारा 76 की उप धारा ( 1 ) और धारा-77 , 78, 79और 81 के सिवाय जो पहले ही प्रवृत्त की जा चुकी है ) के उपबंध आन्ध्र प्रदेश राज्य के निम्नलिखित क्षेत्रों में प्रवृत्त होंगे , अर्थात्:
2. और जबकि केन्द्रीय सरकार के विचार में , अंशदान की दरों के संबंध में उक्त प्रतिष्ठान के भविष्य निधि नियम उक्त अधिनियन की धारा 6 में विनिर्दिष्ट नियमों की तुलना में कर्मचारियों के लिए कन उपयुक्त नहीं हैं और कर्मचारी उक्त अधिनियम अथवा कर्मचारी भविष्य निधि योजना , 1952 ( एतदुपरांत योजना के रूप में संदर्भित ) के अंतर्गत सदृश स्वरूप के किसी अन्य प्रतिष्ठान में कर्मचारियों के संबंध में दी जाने वाली अन्य भविष्य निधि प्रसुविधाओं का भी लाभ उठा रहें हैं ।
" आंध्र प्रदेश राज्य में रंगारेड्डी जिले के मोइनाबाद मंडल में मोइनाबाद, कनकमामिडी, ऐंकापल्ली , चिकूर एवं हिमायतनगर राजस्व गॉव की सीमा में आने वाले सभी क्षेत्र । "
[सं. एस-38013/04/2012 - एस एस-1 ] नरेश जायसवाल , अवर सचिव
New Delhi , the 1st February, 2012 3. अतः अब उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 17 की उप धारा ( 1 ) के खण्ड ( क ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए इस संबंध में समय-समय पर विनिर्दिष्ट शर्तों के अध्यधीन , केन्द्रीय सरकार उक्त प्रतिष्ठान को अगली अधिसूचना तक 1.4.1996 से उक्त योजना के सभी उपबंधों के प्रभाव से छूट प्रदान करती है ।
[सं. एस-35015/10/2011 - एस एस- II ] नरेश जायसवाल , अवर सचिव
New Delhi , the 31st January, 2012
3.0. 702. In exercise of the powers conferred by sub- section (3 ) of Section 1 of the Employees ' State Insurance Act , 1948 (34 of 1948 ) the Central Government hereby appoints the 1st March, 2012, as the date on which the provisions of Chapter IV ( except Sections 44 and 45 which have already been brought into force ) and Chapter- Vand VI ( except sub-section ( 1 ) of Section 76 and Sections 77, 78 , 79 and 81 which have already been brought into force) of the said Act shall come into force in the following areas in the State of Andhra Pradesh namely:-
S.O. 701. Whereas M/ s Maihar Cement Unit No. 2 and Maihar Cement , Satna [under Code No. MP/8524 and MP/4767 in Madhya Pradesh Region ] (hereinafter referred to as the establishment) has applied for exemption under clause(a) of sub -section ( 1) of Section 17 of the Employees' Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act , 1952 (19 of 1952) (hereinafter referred to as theAct) .
"All the areas falling within the limits of revenue villages ofMoinabad, Kanakamamidi , Yenkapally, Chikur, Himayatnagar of Moinabad Mandal in Ranga Reddy district of Andhra Pradesh . "
[No. S - 38013/04/2012 - SS - I ] NARESH JAISWAL, Under Secy.
2. And whereas in the opinion of the Central Government , the rules of the provident fund of the said establishment with respect to the rates of contribution are [ भाग II-खंड 3 ( ii ) ]
भारत का राजपत्र : फरवरी 18 , 2012/माघ 29 , 1933
1573
नई दिल्ली, 1 फरवरी , 2012
which have already been brought into force ) and Chapter- V and VI ( except sub -section ( 1) ofSection 76 and Sections 77 , 78 , 79 and 81 which have already been brought into for ce) of the said Act shall come into force in the following areas in the State of West Bengal namely :-
Sl . Name of Mouza No./ Name of Nameof
Revenue Gram
No. Revenue district का.आ. 703.-कर्मचारी राज्य बीमा अधिनियम , 1948 (1948 का 34 ) की धारा-1 की उप धारा ( 3 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए, केन्द्रीय सरकार एतद्वारा 1 मार्च , 2012 को उस तारीख के रूप में नियत करती है , जिसको उक्त अधिनियम के अध्याय -4 (44 व 45 धारा के सिवाय जो पहले से प्रवृत्त हो चुकी है ) अध्याय -5 और 6 ( धारा 76 की उप धारा ( 1 ) और धारा -77 , 78 , 79 और 81 के सिवाय जो पहले ही प्रवृत्त की जा चुकी है ) के उपबंध पश्चिम बंगाल राज्य के निम्नलिखित क्षेत्रों में प्रवृत्त होंगे :
Area/Mouza Number Panchayat/ Municipality
राजस्वसंख्या मौजा संख्या!
जिलों के नाम
1. Ningha J. LL . No. 28
Burdwan मौजा के नाम क्र.सं. राजस्व क्षेत्रों
ग्राम प्रचायतों के नाम नगर पालिका
Jamuria Municipality
2. Chanda
1. निघा
J.
बर्दवान
जे.एल. संख्या-28
L. No. 29 Jamuria Burdwan Municipality जामुरिया नगर पालिका
3.Mithapur J. L. No. 32 Jamuria
2. चंदा
बर्दवान
जे.एल. संख्या-29
Burdwan Municipality जामुरिया नगर पालिका
4. Balanpur J. L. No. 36 Jamuria
3. मीठापुर
बर्दवान
जे. एल. संख्या-32
Burdwan Municipality जामुरिया नगर पालिका
5. Mondalpur J. L. No. 37 Jamuria
बर्दवान
4. बालानपुर जे.एल. संख्या -36
Burdwan Municipality जामुरिया नगर पालिका
5. Ikrah
J.
बर्दवान
5. मंडलपुर जे.एल. संख्या-37
L. No. 38 Jamuria Burdwan Municipality जामुरिया नगर पालिका
J. L.
7. Hijalgara
6. इकराह
बर्दवान
जे.एल. संख्या -38
No. 40 Jamuria Burdwan Panchayat Samity
जामुरिया नगर पालिका
8. Topsi
J. L. No. 53 Jamuria Burdwan
7. हिजालगारा
बर्दवान
जे.एल. संख्या-40 जामुरिया पंचायत समिति
Panchayat Samity
8. तोप्सी
9. Dhasna
बर्दवान
जे.एल. संख्या-53 जामुरिया पंचायत समिति
J. L. No. 50 Bhadurpur Burdwan Gram Panchayat
9. धासना
बर्दवान
जे.एल. संख्या -50 भदुरपुर ग्राम पंचायत
[No. S- 38013/06/2012 -SS- I ] NARESH JAISWAL, Under Secy.
[सं. एस-38013/06/2012- एस एस-1 ]
नई दिल्ली, 1 फरवरी , 2012
नरेश जायसवाल , अवर सचिव
New Delhi , the 1st February, 2012
का.आ. 704. कर्मचारी राज्य बीमा अधिनियम , 1948 ( 1948
S.O. 703. In exercise of the powers conferred by sub- section ( 3 ) of Section 1 of the Employees ' State Insurance Act, 1948 (34 of 1948 ) the Central Government hereby appoints the 1st March, 2012 as the date on which the provisions of Chapter IV (except Sections 44 and 45
का 34 ) की धारा-1 की उप धारा ( 3 ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए , केन्द्रीय सरकार एतद्वारा 1 मार्च , 2012 को उस तारीख के रूप में नियत करती है, जिसको उक्त अधिनियम के अध्याय-4 (44 व 45 धारा के सिवाय जो पहले से प्रवृत्त हो चुकी हैं ) अध्याय -5 और 6 ( धारा -76 की उप धारा ( 1 ) और धारा-77, 78 , 79 और 81 के [PART II-SEC. 3 (ii ) ]
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : FEBRUARY 18 , 2012/MAGHA29 , 1933
1574
सिवाय जो पहले ही प्रवृत्त की जा चुकी है ) के उपबंध पश्चिम बंगाला राज्य के निम्नलिखित क्षेत्रों में प्रवृत्त होंगे :
जिलों के
नाम
मौजा संख्या/ राजस्व संख्या
ग्राम प्रचायतों के नाम/नगर पालिका
क्र.सं. राजस्व क्षेत्रों मौजा के नाम
Insurance Act , 1948 (34 of 1948 ) the Central Government hereby appoints the 1st March , 2012 as the date on which the provisions of Chapter IV (except Sections 44 and 45 which have already been brought into force ) and Chapter- Vand VI (except sub- section ( 1 ) of Section 76 and Sections 77 , 78 , 79 and 81 which have already been brought into force) ofthe said Act shall come into force in the following areas in the State of West Bengal namely:
बीरभूम
जे.एल. संख्या -58 खरून ग्राम
1. अताला
Name of पंचायत
Mouza No./ Name of
Sl . Name of
district
Gram
बीरभूम
Revenue
No. Revenue
जे.एल. संख्या-62
2. चांदीपुर
साहापुर ग्राम पंचायत
Number
Area/Mouza
Panchayat/ Municipality
बीरभूम
जे.एल. संख्या -19 खरबोना ग्राम
3. वतीना
पंचायत
1. Atala
J. L. No. 58 Kharun Gram Birbhum Panchayat
बीरभूम
जे. एल. संख्या -15 कुसुम्बा ग्राम
4. चकैउर
पंचायत
J. L. No. 62
2. Chandipur
Sahapur Gram Birbhum Panchayat
बीरभूम
5. नलहाटी
3. Vatina
जे.एल. संख्या-53 नलहाटी नगर पालिका
J. L. No. 19 Kharbona Gram Birbhum Panchayat
4. Chakaiur
[सं. एस-38013/05/2012- एस एस-1 ] नरेश जायसवाल , अवर सचिव
J. L. No. 15 Kusumba Gram Birbhum Panchayat
New Delhi , the 1st February, 2012
5. Nalhati
J. L. No. 53 Nalhati Birbhuin Municipality
S.O. 704. In exercise of the powers conferred by sub - section (3 ) of Section 1 of the Employees ' State
[No. S-38013/05/2012 - SS -I ] NARESH JAISWAL, Under Secy.
Printed by the Manager , Govt . of India Press , Ring Road, Maya Puri , New Delhi - 110064
and Published by the Controller of Publications , Delhi - 110054, 2012