dkfeZd] yksd f'kdk;r vkSj isa'ku ea=ky;
¼isa'ku vkSj isa'kuHkksxh dY;k.k foHkkx½
ubZ fnYyh] 25 flrEcj] 2012
dk-vk- 3091.—jk"Vªifr] lafo/kku ds vuqPNsn 309 ds ijarqd
}kjk iznÙk 'kfDr;ksa dk iz;ksx djrs gq, lk/kkj.k Hkfo"; fuf/k ¼dsUnzh;
lsok½ fu;e] 1960 dk vkSj la'kks/ku djus ds fy, fuEufyf[kr fu;e
cukrs gSa] vFkkZr~%&
1- ¼1½ bu fu;eksa dk laf{kIr uke lk/kkj.k Hkfo"; fuf/k ¼dsUnzh;
lsok½ la'kks/ku fu;e] 2012 gSA
¼2½ ;s jkti= esa izdk'ku dh rkjh[k dks izo`Ùk gksaxsA
2- lk/kkj.k Hkfo"; fuf/k ¼dsUnzh; lsok½ fu;e] 1960 esa] ikapoha
vuqlwph ds iSjk 2 esa] ijarqd ls iwoZ fo|eku izfof"V;ksa ds LFkku ij
fuEufyf[kr izfof"V;ka j[kh tk,axh] vFkkZr~%&
^^Hkkjrh; ouLifr foKku losZ{k.k vkSj Hkkjrh; izk.kh&foKku losZ{k.k
ds lewg ^d* vf/kdkfj;ksa ¼Lo;a Hkkjlk/kd oSKkfud ds flok;½]
lewg ^[k* vkSj lewg ^x* deZpkfjo`an dh ckcr fuEufyf[kr
vfèdkfj;ksa }kjk fu;e 12 ds mi fu;e ¼2½ ds v/khu vfxze
eatwj fd;k tk ldsxk] vFkkZr~%&
Hkkjrh; ouLifr foKku losZ{k.k%
1- Hkkjlk/kd oSKkfud ¼^?k* vkSj mlls Åij ds Lrj dk½] iwohZ
{ks=h; dsUnz] f'kykaxA
2- Hkkjlk/kd oSKkfud ¼^?k* vkSj mlls Åij ds Lrj dk½] mÙkjh
{ks=h; dsUnz] nsgjknwuA
3- Hkkjlk/kd oSKkfud ¼^?k* vkSj mlls Åij ds Lrj dk½] nf{k.kh
{ks=h; lfdZy] dks;acVwjA
4- Hkkjlk/kd oSKkfud ¼^?k* vkSj mlls Åij ds Lrj dk½] dsUnzh;
{ks=h; lfdZy] bykgkcknA
5- Hkkjlk/kd oSKkfud ¼^?k* vkSj mlls Åij ds Lrj dk½] flfDde
fgeky;h {ks=h; lfdZy xaxVksdA
6- Hkkjlk/kd oSKkfud ¼^?k* vkSj mlls Åij ds Lrj dk½] vaMeku
vkSj fudksckj {ks=h; lfdZy] iksVZ Cys;jA
7- Hkkjlk/kd oSKkfud ¼^?k* vkSj mlls Åij ds Lrj dk½] if'peh
{ks=h; lfdZy] iwukA
8- Hkkjlk/kd oSKkfud ¼^?k* vkSj mlls Åij ds Lrj dk½]'kq"d
tksu {ks=h; lfdZy] tks/kiqjA
jftLVªh la- Mh- ,y- (,u) 04@0007@2003µ05
REGD. NO. D. L. (N) 04/0007/2003—05
izkf/dkj ls izdkf'kr
PUBLISHED BY AUTHORITY
lkIrkfgd
WEEKLY
la- 41]
ubZ fnYyh, vDrwcj 7—vDrwcj 13] 2012] 'kfuokj@vkf'ou 15—vkf'ou 21] 1934
No. 41]
NEW DELHI, OCTOBER 7—OCTOBER 13, 2012, SATURDAY/ASVINA 15—ASVINA 21, 1934
Hkkx esa fHkUu i`"B la[;k nh tkrh gS ftlls fd ;g i`Fkd ladyu ds :i esa j[kk tk lds
Separate Paging is given to this Part in order that it may be filed as a separate compilation
Hkkx IIó[k.M 3ómi&[k.M (ii)
PART II—Section 3—Sub-section (ii)
Hkkjr ljdkj ds ea=kky;ksa (j{kk ea=kky; dks NksM+dj) }kjk tkjh fd, x, lkafof/d vkns'k vkSj vf/lwpuk,a
Statutory Orders and Notifications Issued by the Ministries of the Government of India
(Other than the Ministry of Defence)
3727 GI/2012
(7489)
7490
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 13, 2012/ASVINA 21, 1934
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
9- Hkkjlk/kd oSKkfud ¼^?k* vkSj mlls Åij ds Lrj dk½]
v#.kkpy izns'k {ks=h; lfdZy] bVkuxjA
10- Hkkjlk/kd oSKkfud ¼^?k* vkSj mlls Åij ds Lrj dk½] MsDdu
{ks=h; lfdZy] gSnjkcknA
11- Hkkjlk/kd oSKkfud ¼^?k* vkSj mlls Åij ds Lrj dk½]Hkkjrh;
x.kra= ouLifr m|ku] uks,MkA
12- Hkkjlk/kd oSKkfud ¼^?k* vkSj mlls Åij ds Lrj dk½] vkpk;Z
txnh'k panz cksl] Hkkjrh; ouLifr m|ku] gkoM+kA
13- Hkkjlk/kd oSKkfud ¼^?k* vkSj mlls Åij ds Lrj dk½] dsUnzh;
jk"Vªh; mfn~Hktky;] gkoM+kA
14- Hkkjlk/kd oSKkfud ¼^?k* vkSj mlls Åij ds Lrj dk½] dsUnzh;
ouLifr iz;ksx'kkyk] gkoM+kA
15- Hkkjlk/kd oSKkfud ¼^?k* vkSj mlls Åij ds Lrj dk½]
vkS|ksfxd izHkkx] Hkkjrh; laxzgky;] dksydkrkA
16- Hkkjlk/kd oSKkfud ¼^?k* vkSj mlls Åij ds Lrj dk½]
eq[;ky; dksydkrkA
Hkkjrh; izk.kh&foKkku losZ{k.k%
1- Hkkjlk/kd oSKkfud ¼^?k* vkSj mlls Åij ds Lrj dk½] mÙkjh
{ks=h; LVs'ku] nsgjknwuA
2- Hkkjlk/kd oSKkfud ¼^?k* vkSj mlls Åij ds Lrj dk½] nf{k.kh
{ks=h; LVs'ku] enzklA
3- Hkkjlk/kd oSKkfud ¼^?k* vkSj mlls Åij ds Lrj dk½]iwohZ
{ks=h; LVs'ku]f'kykaxA
4- Hkkjlk/kd oSKkfud ¼^?k* vkSj mlls Åij ds Lrj dk½] xaxHkwfe
{ks=h; LVs'ku] iVukA
5- Hkkjlk/kd oSKkfud ¼^?k* vkSj mlls Åij ds Lrj dk½]if'peh
{ks=h; LVs'ku] iwukA
6- Hkkjlk/kd oSKkfud ¼^?k* vkSj mlls Åij ds Lrj dk½] e#LFky
{ks=h; LVs'ku] tks/kiqjA
7- Hkkjlk/kd oSKkfud ¼^?k* vkSj mlls Åij ds Lrj dk½]dsUnzh;
{ks=h; LVs'ku] tcyiqjA
8- Hkkjlk/kd oSKkfud ¼^?k* vkSj mlls Åij ds Lrj dk½] leqnzh
tSo LVs'ku] enzklA
9- Hkkjlk/kd oSKkfud ¼^?k* vkSj mlls Åij ds Lrj dk½] mPp
mUurka'k {ks= LVs'ku] lksyuA
10- Hkkjlk/kd oSKkfud ¼^?k* vkSj mlls Åij ds Lrj dk½] vaMeku
vkSj fudksckj {ks=h; LVs'ku] iksVZ Cys;jA
11- Hkkjlk/kd oSKkfud ¼^?k* vkSj mlls Åij ds Lrj dk½] vleqnzh
ty tSo {ks=h; LVs'ku] gSnjkcknA
12- Hkkjlk/kd oSKkfud ¼^?k* vkSj mlls Åij ds Lrj dk½] if'peh
?kkV {ks= vuqla/kku LVs'ku] dks>hdksMA
13- Hkkjlk/kd oSKkfud ¼^?k* vkSj mlls Åij ds Lrj dk½] eqgkuk
tSo LVs'ku] csjgkeiqjA
14- Hkkjlk/kd oSKkfud ¼^?k* vkSj mlls Åij ds Lrj dk½]
v#.kkpy izns'k {ks=h; dsUnz] bVkuxjA
15- Hkkjlk/kd oSKkfud ¼^?k* vkSj mlls Åij ds Lrj dk½] leqnzh
eRL;ky;&lg&{ks=h; dsUnz] fn?kkA
16- Hkkjlk/kd oSKkfud ¼^?k* vkSj mlls Åij ds Lrj dk½] lqanjcu
{ks=h; dsUnz] dsfuaxA
[la- 13@1@2010&ih,aMihMCY;w ¼,Q½]
r`fIr ih- ?kks"k] funs'kd ¼ihih½
ikn fVIi.k%&
lk/kkj.k Hkfo"; fuf/k ¼dsUnzh; lsok½ fu;e] 1960 dk dk-vk-
la- 3000 rkjh[k 1&12&1960 }kjk izdkf'kr fd, x, FksA fu;eksa dk
prqFkZ iqu% eqnz.k ¼29&2&1988 rd lgh fd;k x;k½ rc ls f}Hkk"kk
iz:i esa izdkf'kr fd;k tk pqdk gSA rRi'pkr~ fu;e uhps mfYyf[kr
vf/klwpukvksa }kjk la'kksf/kr fd, x,%&
1- dk-vk-la- 2002
rkjh[k 2&9&1989
2- dk-vk-la- 710
rkjh[k 4&3&1990
3- dk-vk-la- 3006
rkjh[k 17&11&1990
4- dk-vk-la- 3272
rkjh[k 8&12&1990
5- dk-vk-la- 146
rkjh[k 20&3&1993
6- dk-vk-la- 377
rkjh[k 10&2&1996
7- dk-vk-la- 379
rkjh[k 10&2&1996
8- dk-vk-la- 3228
rkjh[k 23&11&1996
9- dk-vk-la- 826
rkjh[k 25&4&1998
10- dk-vk-la- 2500
rkjh[k 5&12&1998
11- dk-vk-la- 2690
rkjh[k 16&9&2003
12- dk-vk-la- 1485¼v½
rkjh[k 30&12&2003
13- dk-vk-la- 3682
rkjh[k 15&10&2005
14- dk-vk-la- 1529
rkjh[k 6&6&2009
15- dk-vk-la- 2689
rkjh[k 3&10&2010
MINISTRY OF PERSONNEL, PUBLIC GRIEVANCES
AND PENSIONS
(Department of Pension and Pensioners' Welfare)
New Delhi, the 25th September, 2012
S.O. 3091.—In exercise of the powers conferred by
the proviso to article 309 of the Constitution, the President
hereby makes the following rules further to amend the
General Provident Fund (Central Services) Rules, 1960,
namely:—
[Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)]
Hkkjr dk jkti= % vDrwcj 13] 2012@vkf'ou 21] 1934
7491
1. (1) These rules may be called the General Provident
Fund (Central Services) Amendment Rules, 2012.
(2) They shall come into force on the date of their
publication in the Official Gazette.
2. In the General Provident Fund (Central Services)
Rules, 1960, in the Fifth Schedule, in paragraph 2,
before the proviso, for the existing entries, the
following entries shall be substituted, namely:—
‘‘In respect of Group ‘A’ Officers (except Scientist-
in-charge himself or herself), Groups ‘B’ and ‘C’ staff
of the Botanical Survey of India and Zoological
Survey of India, the advance under sub-rule (2) of
rule 12 may be sanctioned by the following officers,
namely:—
Botanical Survey of India:—
1.
Scientist-in-charge (of the level of 'D' and above),
Eastern Regional Centre, Shillong.
2.
Scientist-in-charge (of the level of 'D' and above),
Northern Regional Centre, Dehradun.
3.
Scientist-in-charge (of the level of 'D' and above),
Southern Regional Circle, Coimbatore.
4.
Scientist-in-charge (of the level of 'D' and above),
Central Regional Circle, Allahabad.
5.
Scientist-in-charge (of the level of 'D' and above),
Sikkim Himalayan Regional Circle, Gangtok.
6.
Scientist-in-charge (of the level of 'D' and above),
Andaman and Nicobar Regional Circle, Port Blair.
7.
Scientist-in-charge (of the level of 'D' and above),
Western Regional Circle, Pune.
8.
Scientist-in-charge (of the level of 'D' and above),
Arid Zone Regional Circle, Jodhpur.
9.
Scientist-in-charge (of the level of 'D' and above),
Arunachal Pradesh Regional Circle, Itanagar.
10. Scientist-in-charge (of the level of 'D' and above),
Deccan Regional Circle, Hyderabad.
11. Scientist-in-charge (of the level of 'D' and above),
Botanic Garden of the Indian Republic, NOIDA.
12. Scientist-in-charge (of the level of 'D' and above),
Acharya Jagadish Chandra Bose Indian Botanic
Garden, Howrah.
13. Scientist-in-charge (of the level of 'D' and above),
Central National Herbarium, Howrah.
14. Scientist-in-charge (of the level of 'D' and above),
Central Botanical Laboratory, Howrah.
15. Scientist-in-charge (of the level of 'D' and above),
Industrial Section Indian Museum, Kolkata.
16. Scientist-in charge (of the level of 'D' and above),
Headquarter, Kolkata.
Zoological Survey of India
1.
Scientist-in-charge (of the level of 'D' and above),
Northern Regional Station, Dehradun.
2.
Scientist-in-charge (of the level of 'D' and above),
Southern Regional Station, Madras.
3.
Scientist-in-charge (of the level of 'D' and above),
Eastern Regional Station, Shillong.
4.
Scientist-in-charge (of the level of 'D' and above),
Gangetic Plains Regional Station, Patna.
5.
Scientist-in-charge (of the level of 'D' and above),
Western Regional Station, Pune.
6.
Scientist-in-charge (of the level of 'D' and above),
Desert Regional Station, Jodhpur.
7.
Scientist-in-charge (of the level of 'D' and above),
Central Regional Station, Jabalpur.
8.
Scientist-in-charge (of the level of 'D' and above),
Marine Biological Station, Madras.
9.
Scientist-in-charge (of the level of 'D' and above),
High Altitude Field Station, Solan.
10. Scientist-in-charge (of the level of 'D' and above),
Andaman and Nicobar Regional Station, Port Blair.
11. Scientist-in-charge (of the level of 'D' and above),
Fresh Water Biological Regional Station,
Hyderabad.
12. Scientist-in-charge (of the level of 'D' and above),
Western Ghats Field Research Station, Kozhikode.
13. Scientist-in-charge (of the level of 'D' and above),
Estuarine Biological Station, Berhampur.
14. Scientist-in-charge (of the level of ‘D’ and above),
Arunachal Pradesh Regional Centre, Itanagar.
15. Scientist-in-charge (of the level of ‘D’ and above),
Marine Aquarium-cum-Regional Centre, Digha.
16. Scientist-in-charge (of the level of ‘D’ and above),
Sundarban Regional Centre, Canning.’’
[No. 13/1/2010-P&PW(F)]
TRIPTI P. GHOSH, Director (PP)
7492
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 13, 2012/ASVINA 21, 1934
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
Foot note:—
The General Provident Fund (Central Services) Rules,
1960, were published vide S.O. No. 3000 dated 1-12-1960.
The Fourth re-print of the Rules (corrected up to
29-2-1988) have since been published in diglot form. The
rules were subsequently amended vide Notifications
mentioned below:—
1. S.O. No. 2002
dated 2-9-1989
2. S.O. No. 710
dated 4-3-1990
3. S.O. No. 3006
dated 17-11-1990
4. S.O. No. 3272
dated 8-12-1990
5. S.O. No. 146
dated 20-3-1993
6. S.O. No. 377
dated 10-2-1996
7. S.O. No. 379
dated 10-2-1996
8. S.O. No. 3228
dated 23-11-1996
9. S.O. No. 826
dated 25-4-1998
10. S.O. No. 2500
dated 5-12-1998
11. S.O. No. 2690
dated 16-9-2003
12. S.O. No. 1485(E)
dated 30-12-2003
13. S.O. No. 3682
dated 15-10-2005
14. S.O. No. 1529
dated 6-6-2009
15. S.O. No. 2689
dated 3-10-2010
foÙk ea=ky;
¼O;; foHkkx½
¼iz'kklu vuqHkkx½
¼egkys[kk fu;a=d dk dk;kZy;½
ubZ fnYyh] 24 flrEcj] 2012
dk-vk-3092.—egkys[kk fu;a=d us lqJh lqtkrk izlkn funs'kd]
buxSQ dks vihyh; izkf/kdkjh ds :i esa vkSj Jh vf[kys'k >k] la;qDr
funs'kd dks dsUnzh; yksd lwpuk vf/kdkjh ds :i esa 'kkldh; foÙk
,oa ys[kk laLFkku] foÙk ea=ky;] ubZ fnYyh ds laca/k esa lwpuk dk
vf/kdkj vf/kfu;e] 2005 ds iz;kstukFkZ inukfer fd;k gSA
lqJh lqtkrk izlkn] funs'kd] buxSQ vkSj Jh vf[kys'k >k] la;qDr
funs'kd] dsanzh; yksd lwpuk vf/kdkjh ds dk;kZy; rFkk vkokl dk
irk fuEuor gS%—
lqJh lqtkrk izlkn] funs'kd
Jh vf[kys'k >k] la;qDr funs'kd
dk;kZy; irk
dk;kZy; irk
'kkldh; ys[kk ,oa foÙk laLFkku]
'kkldh; ys[kk ,oa foÙk laLFkku]
foÙk ea=ky;
foÙk ea=ky;
CykWd IV, iqjkuk ts,u;w dSEil]
CykWd IV, iqjkuk ts,u;w dSEil]
ubZ fnYyh&110067
ubZ fnYyh&110067
nwjHkk"k@QSDl% 011&26184031
nwjHkk"k@QSDl% 011&26166254
bZ&esy% [email protected]
bZ&esy% [email protected]
vkoklh; irk
vkoklh; irk
irk% edku ua- ,&6]
irk% 444] lsDVj&21,] Qjhnkckn
Vkoj II, U;w eksrh ckx] ubZ fnYyh&23
gfj;k.kk
nwjHkk"k% 011&26114142
nwjHkk"k% 0129&6525439
[la- ,&28015@2007@,e,Qlhth,@vkjVhvkbZ@iz'kk-@63@1380]
lh- egs'oju] mi egkys[kk fu;a=d ¼iz'kk-½
MINISTRY OF FINANCE
(Department of Expenditure)
(Administration Section)
(OFFICE OF THE CONTROLLER GENERAL OF
ACCOUNTS)
New Delhi, the 24th September, 2012
S.O.3092.—Controller General of Accounts has
designated Ms. Sujata Prasad, Director, INGAF, as the
Appellate Authority and Shri Akhilesh Jha, Jt. Director, as
Central Public Information Officer (CPIO) for the purpose
of Right to Information Act, 2005 in respect of Institute of
Government Accounts and Finance, M/o Finance, N. Delhi.
The office and residential address of Ms. Sujata Prasad,
Director, INGAF and Shri Akhilesh Jha, Jt. Director, CPIO
are as under:—
MS. SUJATA PRASAD
SHRI AKHILESH JHA
DIRECTOR
JOINT DIRECTOR
Office Address
Office Address
INGAF,
INGAF,
Ministry of Finance
Ministry of Finance
Block IV, Old JNU Campus,
Block IV, Old JNU Campus,
New Delhi-110067
New Delhi-110067
Tele/Fax: 011-26184031
Tele/Fax: 011-26166254
Email: [email protected]
Email: [email protected]
Residential Address
Residential Address
Add: House No. A-6,
Add: 444, Sector-21 A, Faridabad,
Tower II, New
Moti Bagh, New Delhi-23
Haryana
Ph: 011-26114142
Ph: 0129-6525439
[No. A-28015/2007/MFCGA/RTI/Admn./63/1380]
C. MAHESHWARAN, Dy. Controller General of
Accounts (Admn.)
[Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)]
Hkkjr dk jkti= % vDrwcj 13] 2012@vkf'ou 21] 1934
7493
¼foÙkh; lsok,a foHkkx½
ubZ fnYyh] 27 flrEcj] 2012
dk-vk-. 3093.—dsUnzh; ljdkj] ,rn~}kjk] _.k olwyh vf/kdj.k] vgenkckn ¼xqtjkr½ ds LFkku dks uhps nh xbZ lkj.kh ds dkWye 3 esa
mfYyf[kr LFkku dh txg lkj.kh ds dkWye 4 esa mfYyf[kr LFkku esa lkj.kh ds dkWye 5 esa of.kZr rkjh[k ls uhps fn, x, fooj.k ds vuqlkj
ifjofrZr djrh gS%—
Øe
_.k olwyh
og LFkku tgka
og LFkku tgka vf/kdj.k
uhps nh xbZ
lañ
vf/kdj.k
vf/kdj.k dke
dke djsxk
rkjh[k ls
dj jgk gS
1
2
3
4
5
1-
_.k olwyh
igyh eafty] Mk;eaM
nwljh eafty] fHk[kwHkkbZ
01&09&2012
vf/kdj.k&I,
tqcyh gky] xqtjkr
pSEclZ] 18] xka/kh dqat
vgenkckn
fo|kihB] vkJe jksM]
lkslk;Vh] nhid isVªksy iai]
¼xqtjkr½
vgenkckn&380014
,fylfczt ds lkeus] vkJe jksM]
vgenkckn&380006
2-
_.k olwyh
igyh eafty] Mk;eaM
nwljh eafty] fHk[kwHkkbZ
30&09&2012
vf/kdj.k&II,
tqcyh gky] xqtjkr
pSEclZ] 18] xka/kh dqat
vgenkckn
fo|kihB] vkJe jksM]
lkslk;Vh] nhid isVªksy iai]
¼xqtjkr½
vgenkckn&380014
,fylfczt ds lkeus] vkJe jksM]
vgenkckn&380006
[Qk-la- th&26036@2@2005&MhvkjVh]
jktho 'kekZ] voj lfpo
(Department of Financial Services)
New Delhi, the 27th September, 2012
S.O. 3093.—The Central Government hereby notifies the changes in the location of Debts Recovery Tribunals, Ahmedabad
(Gujarat) from the place mentioned in column 3 to the place mentioned in column 4 in the table and with effect from the date
mentioned in Column 5 in the table as detailed below:—
S.No.
Debts
Place where the
Place at which the
With effect
Recovery
Tribunal was
Tribunal will function
from
Tribunal
functioning from
from
1
2
3
4
5
1.
Debts
1st floor, diamond
2nd floor, Bhikhubhai
01-09-2012
Recovery
Jubilee Hall,
Chambers, 18, Gandhi
Tribunal-I,
Gujarat Vidhyapith,
Kunj Society, Opp.
Ahmedabad
Ashram Road,
Dipak Petrol Pump,
(Gujarat)
Ahmedabad-380014
Ellisbridge, Ashram Road,
Ahmedabad-380006
2.
Debts
1st floor, diamond
3rd floor, Bhikhubhai
30-07-2012
Recovery
Jubilee Hall,
Chambers, 18, Gandhi
Tribunal-II,
Gujarat Vidhyapith,
Kunj Society, Opp.
Ahmedabad
Ashram Road,
Deepak Petrol Pump,
(Gujarat)
Ahmedabad-380014
Ellisbridge, Ahmedabad-380006
[F. No. G-26036/2/2005-DRT]
RAJIV SHARMA, Under Secy.
7494
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 13, 2012/ASVINA 21, 1934
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
¼dsUnzh; izR;{k dj cksMZ½
¼jktHkk"kk izHkkx½
[vk;dj funs'kky; ¼t-la-] eq-iz- ,oa jk-Hkk-½]
ubZ fnYyh] 28 flrEcj] 2012
dk-vk-3094-—dsUnzh; ljdkj] jktHkk"kk ¼la?k ds 'kkldh;
iz;kstuksa ds fy, iz;ksx½ fu;e] 1976 ds fu;e 10 ds mi fu;e ¼4½
ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnzh; izR;{k dj cksMZ ds layXu vuqlwph esa mfYyf[kr
lac)@vèhuLFk dk;kZy;ksa] ftuds 80% ls vf/kd deZpkfj;ksa us
fgUnh dk dk;Zlk/kd Kku izkIr dj fy;k gS] dks ,rn~}kjk vf/klwfpr
djrh gS%—
[Qk-la- 2300@jk-Hkk-iz-@2012&13]
vferkHk dqekj] vk;dj funs'kd ¼t-la-] eq-iz- ,oa jk-Hkk-½
vuqlwph
¼eq[; vk;dj vk;qDr] mRrj&if'pe {ks=] p.Mhx<+ ,oa
v/khuLFk dk;kZy;½
Øe la-
dk;kZy; dk uke
(1)
(2)
1-
dk;kZy; eq[; vk;dj vk;qDr] p.Mhx<+
2-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr] p.Mhx<+&1
3-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr] p.Mhx<+&2
4-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr] ifV;kyk
5-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr ¼vkWfMV½] p.Mhx<+
6-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr ¼Vh-Mh-,l-½] p.Mhx<+
7-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr ¼daI;w- ifj-½] p.Mhx<+
8-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr ¼vkbZ-Vh-,-Vh-½] p.Mhx<+
9-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr ¼vihy½] p.Mhx<+
10-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr ¼vihy½] ifV;kyk
11-
dk;kZy; vk;dj jast&1] p.Mhx<+
12-
dk;kZy; vk;dj jsat&2] p.Mhx<+
13-
dk;kZy; vk;dj jast&3] p.Mhx<+
14-
dk;kZy; vk;dj jast&4] p.Mhx<+
15-
dk;kZy; vk;dj jast&5] p.Mhx<+
16-
dk;kZy; vk;dj jast&6] p.Mhx<+
17-
dk;kZy; vk;dj jast] ifV;kyk
18-
dk;kZy; vk;dj jast] e.MhxksfcUnx<+
19-
dk;kZy; vk;dj jast] lax:j
20-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] uaxy
21-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] jksiM+
22-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] jktiqjk
23-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] ljfgan
24-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] ukHkk
25-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] cjukyk
26-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] lquke
eq[; vk;dj vk;qDr] f'keyk {ks= ,oa v/khuLFk dk;kZy;
27-
dk;kZy; eq[; vk;dj vk;qDr] f'keyk
28-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr] f'keyk
29-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr ¼vihy½] f'keyk
30-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj vk;qDr] f'keyk jSat] f'keyk
31-
dk;kZy; vk;dj la;qDr vk;qDr ¼ldZy½] f'keyk
32-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh okMZ&1] f'keyk
33-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh okMZ&2] f'keyk
34-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh okMZ&3] f'keyk
35-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] jkeiqj
36-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh ¼Vh-Mh-,l-½] f'keyk
37-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh ¼Vh-Mh-,l-½] ikyeiqj
38-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh ¼Vh-Mh-,l-½] lksyu
39-
dk;kZy; vk;dj mifuns'kd ¼vUos-½] f'keyk
40-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vij vk;qDr dk;kZy;] e.Mh
41-
dk;kZy; vk;dj mik;qDr ¼ldZy½] e.Mh
42-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] e.Mh
43-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] fcykliqj
44-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] gehjiqj
45-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] dqYyw
46-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] lqUnjuxj
47-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vij vk;qDr] ikyeiqj jsat
48-
dk;kZy; vk;dj lgk;d vk;qDr ¼ldZy½] ikyeiqj
49-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] MygkS”kh
50-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] /keZ'kkyk
51-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] uwjiqj
(1)
(2)
[Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)]
Hkkjr dk jkti= % vDrwcj 13] 2012@vkf'ou 21] 1934
7495
52-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] ikyeiqj
53-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] Åuk
54-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vij vk;qDr] lksyu jsat
55-
dk;kZy; vk;dj mik;qDr ¼ldZy½] ijok.kw
56-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] cnnh
57-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] ukgu
58-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] ijok.kw
59-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&1] lksyu
60-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&2] lksyu
eq[; vk;dj vk;qDr] gfj;k.kk {ks= ,oa v/khuLFk dk;kZy;
61-
dk;kZy; eq[; vk;dj vk;qDr] iapdwyk
62-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr] iapdwyk
63-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vij vk;qDr] iapdwyk jsat] iapdwyk
64-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr ¼vihy½] iapdwyk
65-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vij vk;qDr] ;equkuxj jsat] ;equkuxj
66-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vij vk;qDr] vEckyk jsat] vEckyk
djuky izHkkj ,oa v/khuLFk dk;kZy;
67-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr] djuky
68-
dk;kZy; vk;dj la;qDr vk;qDr] djuky jsat] djuky
69-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vij vk;qDr] ikuhir jsat] ikuhir
70-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vij vk;qDr] dq#{ks= jsat] dq#{ks=
71
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] dSFky jksgrd izHkkj ,oa
v/khuLFk dk;kZy;
72-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr] jksgrd
73-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr ¼vihy½] jksgrd
74-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vij vk;qDr] jksgrd jsat
75-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vij vk;qDr] lksuhir jsat
76-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vij vk;qDr] jsokM+h jsat
77-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh dk;kZy;] ukjukSy
fglkj izHkkj ,oa v/khuLFk dk;kZy;
78-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr] fglkj
79-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vij vk;qDr] fglkj jsat
80-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vij vk;qDr] fljlk jsat
81-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vij vk;qDr] fHkokuh jsat
82-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] dk;kZy;] thUn
83-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] dk;kZy;] Qrsgkckn
Qjhnkckn izHkkj ,oa v/khuLFk dk;kZy;
84-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr] Qjhnkckn
85-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr ¼vihy½] Qjhnkckn
86-
dk;kZy; Qjhnkckn jsat&I] Qjhnkckn
87-
dk;kZy; Qjhnkckn jsat&II] Qjhnkckn
88-
dk;kZy; xqM+xkao jsat&I] xqM+xkao
89-
dk;kZy; xqM+xkao jsat&II] xqM+xkao
eq[; vk;dj vk;qDr] yqf/k;kuk {ks= ,oa v/khuLFk dk;kZy;
90-
dk;kZy; eq[; vk;dj vk;qDr] yqf/k;kuk
91-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr] yqf/k;kuk&1
92-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr] yqf/k;kuk&2
93-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr] yqf/k;kuk&3
94-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr ¼vihy½&1] yqf/k;kuk
95-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr ¼vihy½&2] yqf/k;kuk
96-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vij vk;qDr] jsat&1] yqf/k;kuk
97-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vij vk;qDr] jsat&2] yqf/k;kuk
98-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vij vk;qDr] jsat&3] yqf/k;kuk
99-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vij vk;qDr] jsat&4] yqf/k;kuk
100-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vij vk;qDr] jsat&5] yqf/k;kuk
101-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vij vk;qDr] jsat&6] yqf/k;kuk
102-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vij vk;qDr] jsat&7] yqf/k;kuk
103-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vij vk;qDr] jsat] [kUuk
104-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vij vk;qDr] jsat] eksxk
105-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] eysjdksVyk
106-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] txjkao
tkya/kj izHkkj ,oa v/khuLFk dk;kZy;
107-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr] tkya/kj&1
108-
dk;kZy; vk;dj la;qDr vk;qDr] jsat&1] tkya/kj
109-
dk;kZy; vk;dj la;qDr vk;qDr] jsat&2] tkya/kj
110-
dk;kZy; vk;dj la;qDr vk;qDr] jsat] gksf'k;kjiqj
111-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] nlwgk
7496
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 13, 2012/ASVINA 21, 1934
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
112-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] uoka'kgj
113-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr] tkya/kj&2
114-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vij vk;qDr] jsat&3] tkya/kj
115-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vij vk;qDr] jsat&4] tkya/kj
116-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vij vk;qDr] jsat&QxokM+k
117-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] udksnj
118-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] diwjFkyk
eq[; vk;dj vk;qDr] ve`rlj {ks= ,oa v/khuLFk dk;kZy;
119-
dk;kZy; eq[; vk;dj vk;qDr] ve`rlj
120-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr&1 ve`rlj eq[;ky;] ve`rlj
121-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vij vk;qDr] jsat&1] ve`rlj
122-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] rjurkju
123-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vij vk;qDr] jsat&2] ve`rlj
124-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] cVkyk
125-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vij vk;qDr] jsat&3] ve`rlj
126-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr&2 eq[;ky;] ve`rlj
127-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vij vk;qDr] jsat&4] ve`rlj
128-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vij vk;qDr] jsat&5] ve`rlj
129-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] xqjnkliqj
130-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vij vk;qDr] jsat&6] iBkudksV
131-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr] eq[;ky;] cfBUMk
132-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vij vk;qDr] jsat&1] cfBUMk
133-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] ekulk
134-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vij vk;qDr] jsat&2] cfBUMk
135-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] vcksgj
136-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] eqDrlj
137-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vij vk;qDr] jsat&3] fQjkstiqj
138-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] QjhndksV
139-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr] eq[;ky; tEew
140-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr ¼vihy½] tEew
141-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vij vk;qDr] jsat&1] tEew
142-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vij vk;qDr] jsat&2] tEew
143-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vij vk;qDr] jsat&3] Jhuxj
144-
dk;kZy; vk;dj lgk;d funs'kd ¼vUos-½] tEew
145-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] dBqvk
146-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] m/keiqj
147-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh ¼Vh-Mh-,l-½] tEew
148-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh ¼Vh-vkj-vks-½] tEew
149-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] vuarukx
vk;dj egkfuns'kky; ¼vUos-½] mRrj&if'pe {ks=] p.Mhx<+ ,oa
v/khuLFk dk;kZy;
150-
dk;kZy; vk;dj egkfuns'kd ¼vUos-½] p.Mhx<+
151-
dk;kZy; vk;dj funs'kd ¼vUos-½] p.Mhx<+
152-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vij funs'kd ¼vUos-½] Qjhnkckn
153-
dk;kZy; vk;dj lgk;d funs'kd ¼vUos-½] fglkj
154-
dk;kZy; vk;dj lgk;d funs'kd ¼vUos-½] ikuhir
155-
dk;kZy; vk;dj lgk;d funs'kd ¼vUos-½] f'keyk
156-
dk;kZy; vk;dj lgk;d funs'kd ¼vUos-½] vackyk
157-
dk;kZy; vk;dj lgk;d funs'kd ¼vUos-½] xqM+xkao
158-
dk;kZy; vk;dj funs'kd ¼vUos-½] yqf/k;kuk
159-
dk;kZy; vk;dj la;qDr funs'kd ¼vUos-½] tkya/kj
160-
dk;kZy; vk;dj la;qDr funs'kd ¼vUos-½] ve`rlj
161-
dk;kZy; vk;dj lgk;d funs'kd ¼vUos-½] cfB.Mk
162-
dk;kZy; vk;dj lgk;d funs'kd ¼vUos-½] ifV;kyk
163-
dk;kZy; vk;dj la;qDr funs'kd ¼vUos-½] Jhuxj
164-
dk;kZy; vk;dj lgk;d funs'kd ¼vUos-½] tEew
165-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr ¼dsUæh;½] yqf/k;kuk
166-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vij vk;qDr ¼dsUæh;½] jsat yqf/k;kuk
167-
dk;kZy; vk;dj lgk;d vk;qDr ¼dsUæh;½] ifV;kyk
168-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vij vk;qDr ¼dsUæh; jsat½] tkyU/kj
169-
dk;kZy; vk;dj mik;qDr ¼dsUæh; ldZy½] ve`rlj
170-
dk;kZy; vk;dj mik;qDr ¼dsUæh; ldZy½] tEew
171-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr ¼dsUæh;½] xqM+xkao
172-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vij vk;qDr ¼dsUæh;½ jsat] p.Mhx<+
173-
dk;kZy; vk;dj lgk;d vk;qDr ¼dsUæh; ldZy½] djuky
174-
dk;kZy; vk;dj lgk;d vk;qDr ¼dsUæh; ldZy½]
Qjhnkckn
[Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)]
Hkkjr dk jkti= % vDrwcj 13] 2012@vkf'ou 21] 1934
7497
¼eq[; vk;dj vk;qDr] t;iqj {ks= ,oa v/khuLFk dk;kZy;½
Ø la-
dk;kZy; dk uke
1-
dk;kZy; eq[; vk;dj vk;qDr] t;iqj
2-
dk;kZy; vk;dj egkfuns'kd ¼vUos"k.k½] t;iqj
3-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr&izFke] t;iqj
4-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr ¼vihy&izFke½] t;iqj
5-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr & f}rh;] t;iqj
6-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr ¼vihy & f}rh;½] t;iqj
7-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr &r`rh;] t;iqj
8-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr ¼vihy&r`rh;½] t;iqj
9-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr ¼VhñMhñ,lñ½] t;iqj
10-
dk;kZy; vk;dj funs'kd ¼dsñlwñ'kkñ½] t;iqj
11-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr ¼dsUnzh;½] t;iqj
12-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr dsanzh; & ¼vihy½] t;iqj
13-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr ¼dEI;qñ izpkyu½] t;iqj
14-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr ¼vads{k.k½] t;iqj
15-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr ¼vkbZñVhñ,ñVhñ&izFke½] t;iqj
16-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr ¼vkbZñVhñ,ñVhñ&f}rh;½] t;iqj
17-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr ¼vkbZñVhñ,ñVhñ½] tks/kiqj
18-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr] vyoj
19-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr ¼vihy½] vyoj
20-
dk;kZy; vk;dj funs'kd ¼vUos"k.k½] t;iqj
21-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj vk;qDr ¼eq[;kñ iz'kkñ½] t;iqj
22-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj vk;qDr ¼leUo;½] t;iqj
23-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj vk;qDr ¼rduhdh½] t;iqj
24-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj vk;qDr ¼lrdZrk½] t;iqj
25-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj vk;qDr jsat & 1] t;iqj
26-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj vk;qDr jsat & 2] t;iqj
27-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj vk;qDr jsat & 3] t;iqj
28-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj vk;qDr jsat & 4] t;iqj
29-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj vk;qDr jsat & 5] t;iqj
30-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj vk;qDr jsat & 6] t;iqj
31-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj vk;qDr jsat & 7] t;iqj
32-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj vk;qDr jsat & lhdj
33-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj vk;qDr jsat & >qa>quw
34-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj vk;qDr jsat & Hkjriqj
35-
dk;kZy; vij@la;qDr vk;dj vk;qDr ¼dEI;wñ izpkyu½]
t;iqj@tks/kiqj
36-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj vk;qDr ¼vads{k.k½] t;iqj
37-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj vk;qDr ¼VhñMhñ,lñ½] t;iqj
38-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj vk;qDr ¼dsñlwñ'kkñ½] t;iqj@tks/kiqj
39-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj funs'kd ¼vUosñ½] t;iqj@tks/kiqj
40-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj vk;qDr ¼vUrjkZ] djk/kku½] t;iqj
41-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj vk;qDr ¼dsanzh;½] t;iqj
42-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj vk;qDr jsat & 1] vyoj
43-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj vk;qDr jsat &2] vyoj
44-
dk;kZy; vij@la;qDr vk;dj vk;qDr ¼vkbZñVhñ,ñVhñ½]
t;iqj
45-
dk;kZy; vij@la;qDr vk;dj vk;qDr ¼vkbZñVhñ,ñVhñ½]
tks/kiqj
46-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] ¼,eñ,lñVhñ;wñ½] t;iqj
¼eq[; vk;dj vk;qDr] Hkksiky {ks= ,oa v/khuLFk dk;kZy;½
Øe la
dk;kZy; dk uke
1-
dk;kZy; eq[; vk;dj vk;qDr] Hkksiky
2-
dk;kZy; eq[; vk;dj vk;qDr] NÙÙkhlx<+] vapy] jk;iqj
3-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr] Hkksiky
4-
dk;kZy; la;qDr vk;dj vk;qDr] ifj{ks=&1] Hkksiky
5-
dk;kZy; la;qDr vk;dj vk;qDr] ifj{ks= &2] Hkksiky
6-
dk;kZy; la;qDr vk;dj vk;qDr] ifj{ks= &3] Hkksiky
7-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ &1 ,oa 2] bVkjlh
8-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] cSrwy
9-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] fofn'kk
10-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] Xokfy;j
11-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] f'koiqjh
12-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] xquk
13-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] Nrjiqj
7498
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 13, 2012/ASVINA 21, 1934
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
14-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr ¼VhñMhñ,lñ½] Hkksiky
15-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr ¼ys[kk ijh{kk½] Hkksiky
16-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr ¼dEI;wVj ifjpkyu½] Hkksiky
17-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr ¼vihy&1½] Hkksiky
18-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr ¼vihy&2½] Hkksiky
19-
dk;kZy; eq[; vk;dj vk;qDr] bUnkSj
20-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr &1] bUnkSj
21-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr &2] bUnkSj
22-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr] mTtSu
23-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr ¼vihy&1½] bankSj
24-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr ¼vihy &2½] bankSj
25-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr vihy] mTtSu
26-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr ¼vk;dj vihyh; vf/kdj.k½]
bankSj
27-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj funs'kd ¼vUos"k.k½] bankSj
28-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj vk;qDr] [kaMok
29-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj vk;qDr] jryke
30-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] /kkj
31-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] eanlkSj
32-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] uhep
33-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] nsokl
34-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] 'kktkiqj
35-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] [kjxkSu
36-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] cqjgkuiqj
37-
dk;kZy; vk;dj egkfuns'kd ¼vUosñ½] Hkksiky
38-
dk;kZy; vk;dj funs'kd] ¼vUosñ½] Hkksiky
39-
dk;kZy; vk;dj funs'kd ¼vklwpuk½] Hkksiky
40-
dk;kZy; vij@la;qDr vk;dj funs'kd ¼vUos-½] Hkksiky
41-
dk;kZy; vij@la;qDr vk;dj funs'kd ¼vUos-½] bankSj
42-
dk;kZy; vij@la;qDr vk;dj funs'kd ¼vUos-½] jk;iqj
43-
dk;kZy; vij@la;qDr vk;dj funs'kd ¼vUos-½] tcyiqj
44-
dk;kZy; mi@la;qDr vk;dj funs'kd ¼vUos-½] Xokfy;j
¼eq[; vk;dj vk;qDr] y[kuÅ {ks= ,oa v/khuLFk dk;kZy;½
Øe la-
dk;kZy; dk uke
1-
dk;kZy; eq[; vk;dj vk;qDr] y[kuÅ
2-
dk;kZy; eq[; vk;dj vk;qDr &1] y[kuÅ
3-
dk;kZy; eq[; vk;dj vk;qDr&2] y[kuÅ
4-
dk;kZy; la;qDr vk;dj vk;qDr ¼Vh-Mh-,l-½] y[kuÅ
5-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr] ¼vkWfMV½] y[kuÅ
6-
dk;kZy; la;qDr vk;dj vk;qDr] ¼dEI;wVj izpkyu½]
y[kuÅ
7-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr] ¼vk;dj vihyh; vf/kdj.k½]
y[kuÅ
8-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr] QStkkckn
9-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr ¼vihy½ & 1] y[kuÅ
10-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr ¼vihy½ & 2] y[kuÅ
11-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr ¼vihy½ & 3] y[kuÅ
12-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vij vk;qDr] jsat &1] y[kuÅ
13-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vij vk;qDr] jsat &2] y[kuÅ
14-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vij vk;qDr] jsat &3] y[kuÅ
15-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vij vk;qDr] jsat &4] y[kuÅ
16-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vij vk;qDr] jsat &5] y[kuÅ
17-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vij vk;qDr] jsat &6] y[kuÅ
18-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vij vk;qDr] QStkckn
19-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vij vk;qDr] lqYrkuiqj
20-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vij vk;qDr] xks.Mk
21-
dk;kZy; vk;dj mi vk;qDr] jsat & 1] y[kuÅ
22-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh & 1¼1½] y[kuÅ
23-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh & 1¼2½] y[kuÅ
24-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh & 1¼3½] y[kuÅ
25-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh & 1¼4½] y[kuÅ
26-
dk;kZy; dj olwyh vf/kdjh] jsat &1] y[kuÅ
27-
dk;kZy; vk;dj lgk;d vk;qDr] jsat &2] y[kuÅ
28-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh &2¼1½] y[kuÅ
29-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh &2¼2½] y[kuÅ
30-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh &2¼3½] y[kuÅ
31-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh &2¼4½] mUuko
32-
dk;kZy; dj olwyh vf/kdkjh &2] y[kuÅ
33-
dk;kZy; vk;dj mi vk;qDr] jsat &3] y[kuÅ
34-
dk;kZy; vk;dj mi vk;qDr] jsat &3¼1½] y[kuÅ
[Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)]
Hkkjr dk jkti= % vDrwcj 13] 2012@vkf'ou 21] 1934
7499
35-
dk;kZy; vk;dj mi vk;qDr] jsat &3¼2½] y[kuÅ
36-
dk;kZy; vk;dj mi vk;qDr] jsat &3¼3½] y[kuÅ
37-
dk;kZy; vk;dj mi vk;qDr] jsat &3¼4½] y[kuÅ
38-
dk;kZy; dj olwyh vf/kdkjh jsat &3] y[kuÅ
39-
dk;kZy; vk;dj lgk;d vk;qDr] jsat &4] y[kuÅ
40-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh &4¼1½] y[kuÅ
41-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh &4¼2½] y[kuÅ
42-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh &4¼3½] y[kuÅ
43-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh &4¼4½] y[kuÅ
44-
dk;kZy; dj olwyh v/kdkjh &4] y[kuÅ
45-
dk;kZy; vk;dj mi vk;qDr] jsat &5] y[kuÅ
46-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh &5¼1½] y[kuÅ
47-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh &5¼2½] y[kuÅ
48-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh &5¼3½] y[kuÅ
49-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] ckjkcadh
50-
dk;kZy; dj olwyh vf/kdkjh &5] y[kuÅ
51-
dk;kZy; vk;dj lgk;d vk;qDr] jsat&6] y[kuÅ
52-
dk;kZy; vk;dj lgk;d vk;qDr] jsat&6¼1½] y[kuÅ
53-
dk;kZy; vk;dj lgk;d vk;qDr] jsat&6¼2½] y[kuÅ
54-
dk;kZy; vk;dj lgk;d vk;qDr] jsat&6¼3½] y[kuÅ
55-
dk;kZy; vk;dj lgk;d vk;qDr] jsat&6¼4½] y[kuÅ
56-
dk;kZy; dj olwyh vf/kdkjh] &6] y[kuÅ
57-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] &1] QS”kkckn
58-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] &2] QS”kkckn
59-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] &3] QS”kkckn
60-
dk;kZy; dj olwyh vf/kdkjh] QS”kkckn
61-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] tkSuiqj
62-
dk;kZy; vk;dj lgk;d vk;qDr] lqYrkuiqj
63-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] &1] lqYrkuiqj
64-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] &2] lqYrkuiqj
65-
dk;kZy; dj olwyh vf/kdkjh] lqYrkuiqj
66-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] jk;cjsyh
67-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] izrkix<+
68-
dk;kZy; vk;dj lgk;d vk;qDr] xks.Mk
69-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] xks.Mk
70-
dk;kZy; dj olwyh vf/kdkjh] xks.Mk
71-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] cLrh
72-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] &1] cgjkbZp
73-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr] leqfpr izkf/kdj.k] y[kuÅ
74-
dk;kZy; mi ewY;kadu vf/kdkjh] y[kuÅ
75-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vij vk;qDr ¼Vh-Mh-,l-½] y[kuÅ
76-
dk;kZy; vk;dj mi vk;qDr ¼Vh-Mh-,l-½] y[kuÅ
77-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] ¼Vh-Mh-,l-½ &1] y[kuÅ
78-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] ¼Vh-Mh-,l-½ &2] y[kuÅ
79-
vk;dj vf/kdkjh] ¼VhñMhñ,lñ½] QS”kkckn
vk;dj egkfuns'kd] ¼vUos"k.k½] y[kuÅ {ks= ,oa v/khuLFk
dk;kZy;
80-
dk;kZy; vk;dj egkfuns'kd] ¼vUos"k.k½] y[kuÅ
81-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr ¼vkbZ ,aM lh vkbZ½] y[kuÅ
82-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vij funs'kd ¼vUos-½] y[kuÅ
83-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vij vk;qDr ¼dsanzh; o`Ùk½] y[kuÅ
84-
dk;kZy; vk;dj mi@lgk;d funs'kd] ¼vUos"k.k½&1]
y[kuÅ
85-
dk;kZy; vk;dj mi@lgk;d funs'kd] ¼vUos"k.k½&2]
y[kuÅ
86-
dk;kZy; vk;dj mi@lgk;d funs'kd] ¼dsUnzh;½&1]
y[kuÅ
87-
dk;kZy; vk;dj mi@lgk;d funs'kd] ¼dsanzh;½ &2 y[kuÅ
88-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] ¼,vj bUVsyhtsUl ;wfuV½]
y[kuÅ
¼eq[; vk;dj vk;qDr] bykgkckn {ks= ,oa v/khuLFk dk;kZy;½
Øe la-
dk;kZy; dk uke
1-
dk;kZy; eq[; vk;dj vk;qDr] bykgkckn
2-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr] [email protected]@xksj[kiqj
3-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr ¼fo- izfrfuf/k½] vk;dj vihy
vf/kdj.k] bykgkckn
4-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr ¼vihy½] [email protected]
5-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vij funs'kd ¼tkap½] okjk.klh
7500
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 13, 2012/ASVINA 21, 1934
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
6-
dk;kZy; vk;dj la;qDr vk;qDr ¼Vh-Mh-,l-½] bykgkckn
7-
dk;kZy; vk;dj mi@lgk;d funs'kd ¼tkap½]
[email protected]
8-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vij@la;qDr] jsat&1]
[email protected]@xksj[kiqj
9-
dk;kZy; vk;dj mi@lgk;d vk;qDr] lfdZy&1]
[email protected]@xksj[kiqj
10-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] jsat&1 ¼1½]
[email protected]@xksj[kiqj
11-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] jsat&1 ¼2½]
[email protected]@xksj[kiqj
12-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] jsat&1 ¼3½]
[email protected]@xksj[kiqj
13-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] jsat&1 ¼4½]
bykgkckn@Hknksgh@xksj[kiqj
14-
dk;kZy; dj olwyh vf/kdkjh] jsat&1]
[email protected]@xksj[kiqj
15-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vij@la;qDr vk;qDr] jsat&2]
[email protected]@xksj[kiqj
16-
dk;kZy; vk;dj mi@lgk;d vk;qDr] lfdZy&2]
[email protected]@xksj[kiqj
17-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] jsat&2¼1½
[email protected]@xksj[kiqj
18-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] jsat&2¼2½
[email protected]@xksj[kiqj
19-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] jsat&2¼3½
[email protected]@xksj[kiqj
20-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] jsat&2¼4½
Qrsgiqj@cfy;k@dq'khuxj
21-
dk;kZy; dj olwyh vf/kdkjh] jsat&2]
[email protected]@xksj[kiqj
22-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vij@la;qDr vk;qDr] jsat&3]
[email protected]@vk”kex<+
23-
dk;kZy; vk;dj mi@lgk;d vk;qDr] lfdZy&3]
[email protected]@vk”kex<+
24-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] jsat&3¼1½]
[email protected]@vk”kex<+
25-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] jsat&3¼2½]
[email protected]@vk”kex<+
26-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] jsat&3¼3½]
[email protected]@nsofj;k
27-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] jsat&3¼4½]
[email protected]@eÅ
28-
dk;kZy; dj olwyh vf/kdkjh] jsat&3]
[email protected]@xksj[kiqj
29-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] ¼vkarfjd ys[kk ijh{kk½]
[email protected]@xksj[kiqj
30-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] ¼vk- ,oa vki- vUos-½]
[email protected]@xksj[kiqj
31-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] ¼Vh-Mh-,l-½
[email protected]@xksj[kiqj
32-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vij@la;qDr vk;qDr ¼dsUnzh; o`Ùk½]
okjk.klh
33-
dk;kZy; vk;dj mi@lgk;d vk;qDr ¼dsa- o`Ùk½]
[email protected]@xksj[kiqj
¼eq[; vk;dj vk;qDr] iVuk {ks= ,oa v/khuLFk dk;kZy;½
Øe la-
dk;kZy; dk uke
1-
dk;kZy; eq[; vk;dj vk;qDr] ¼l-fu-izk-½] iVuk
2-
dk;kZy; eq[; vk;dj vk;qDr&II] iVuk
3-
dk;kZy; eq[; vk;dj vk;qDr] jkaph
4-
dk;kZy; vk;dj egkfuns'kd ¼vUos"k.k½] iVuk
5-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr&I] iVuk
6-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr ¼Vh-Mh-,l-½] iVuk
7-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr] ¼ys[kk ijh{kk ,oa oaQI;wVj
izpkyu½] iVuk
8-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr ¼vihy&I½] iVuk
9-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr] Hkkxyiqj
10-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr] /kuckn
11-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr ¼vihy½] /kuckn
12-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr&II] iVuk
13-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr ¼vkbZ-Vh-,-Vh-½] iVuk
14-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr] eqt¶Qjiqj
15-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr ¼vihy½] eqt¶Qjiqj
16-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr] jkaph
17-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr ¼vihy½] jkaph
18-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr ¼vkbZ-Vh-,-Vh-½] jkaph
[Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)]
Hkkjr dk jkti= % vDrwcj 13] 2012@vkf'ou 21] 1934
7501
19-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr] te'ksniqj
20-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr] ¼vihy½] te'ksniqj
21-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr] gtkjhckx
22-
dk;kZy; vk;dj funs'kd ¼vUos-½] iVuk
23-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr ¼dsUnzh;½] iVuk
24-
dk;kZy; vij@la;qDr vk;dj vk;qDr] ifj{ks=&1] iVuk
25-
dk;kZy; vij@la;qDr vk;dj vk;qDr] ifj{ks=&2] iVuk
26-
dk;kZy; vij@la;qDr vk;dj vk;qDr] ifj{ks=&3] x;k
27-
dk;kZy; la;qDr vk;dj vk;qDr ¼Vh-Mh-,l-½] iVuk
28-
dk;kZy; vij@la;qDr vk;dj vk;qDr] ifj{ks=&4] iVuk
29-
dk;kZy; vij@la;qDr vk;dj vk;qDr ¼Vh-Mh-,l-½]
/kuckn
30-
dk;kZy; vij@la;qDr vk;dj vk;qDr ¼ys[kk ijh{kk½]
iVuk
31-
dk;kZy; vij@la;qDr vk;dj vk;qDr] ¼da-iz-½] iVuk
32-
dk;kZy; vij@la;qDr vk;dj vk;qDr] ifj{ks=&1] Hkkxyiqj
33-
dk;kZy; vij@la;qDr vk;dj vk;qDr] ifj{ks=&2] csxwljk;
34-
dk;kZy; vij@la;qDr vk;dj vk;qDr] ifj{ks=&3] iwf.kZ;k
35-
dk;kZy; vij@la;qDr vk;dj vk;qDr] ifj{ks=&1] /kuckn
36-
dk;kZy; vij@la;qDr vk;dj vk;qDr] ifj{ks=&2] /kuckn
37-
dk;kZy; vij@la;qDr vk;dj vk;qDr] ifj{ks=&4] iVuk
38-
dk;kZy; vij@la;qDr vk;dj vk;qDr] ifj{ks=&5] iVuk
39-
dk;kZy; vij@la;qDr vk;dj vk;qDr] ifj{ks=&6] iVuk
40-
dk;kZy; vij@la;qDr vk;dj vk;qDr] ¼vkbZ-Vh-,-Vh½]
iVuk
41-
dk;kZy; vij@la;qDr vk;dj vk;qDr] ifj{ks=&1]
eqt¶Qjiqj
42-
dk;kZy; vij@la;qDr vk;dj vk;qDr] ifj{ks=&2]
eqt¶Qjiqj
43-
dk;kZy; vij@la;qDr vk;dj vk;qDr] ifj{ks=&3] njHkaxk
44-
dk;kZy; vij@la;qDr vk;dj vk;qDr] ifj{ks=&1] jkaph
45-
dk;kZy; vij@la;qDr vk;dj vk;qDr] ifj{ks=&2] jkaph
46-
dk;kZy; vij@la;qDr vk;dj vk;qDr] ifj{ks=&3] jkaph
47-
dk;kZy; vij@la;qDr vk;dj vk;qDr] ifj{ks=&1]
te'ksniqj
48-
dk;kZy; vij@la;qDr vk;dj vk;qDr] ifj{ks=&2]
te'ksniqj
49-
dk;kZy; vij@la;qDr vk;dj vk;qDr] ifj{ks=&2]
gtkjhckn
50-
dk;kZy; vij@la;qDr vk;dj vk;qDr] ifj{ks=&3]
cksdkjks
51-
dk;kZy; vij@la;qDr vk;dj funs'kd ¼vUosa-½] iVuk
52-
dk;kZy; vij@la;qDr vk;dj funs'kd ¼vUosa-½] jkaph
53-
dk;kZy; vij@la;qDr vk;dj funs'kd ¼dsUnzh;
ifj{ks=½&1] iVuk
54-
dk;kZy; vij@la;qDr vk;dj funs'kd ¼dsUnzh;
ifj{ks=½&2] jkaph
55-
dk;kZy; mi@lgk;d vk;dj vk;qDr] vapy&1] iVuk
56-
dk;kZy; mi@lgk;d vk;dj vk;qDr] vapy&2] iVuk
57-
dk;kZy; mi@lgk;d vk;dj vk;qDr] vapy&3] x;k
58-
dk;kZy; mi@lgk;d vk;dj vk;qDr] ¼Vh-Mh-,l-½]
iVuk
59-
dk;kZy; mi@lgk;d vk;dj vk;qDr] ¼Vh-Mh-,l-½]
jkaph
60-
dk;kZy; mi@lgk;d vk;dj vk;qDr] ¼Vh-Mh-,l-½]
te'ksniqj
61-
dk;kZy; mi@lgk;d vk;dj vk;qDr] ¼Vh-Mh-,l-½]
cksdkjks
62-
dk;kZy; mi@lgk;d vk;dj vk;qDr] ¼ys[kk ijh{kk½]
iVuk
63-
dk;kZy; mi@lgk;d vk;dj vk;qDr] ¼i)fr½] iVuk
64-
dk;kZy; mi@lgk;d vk;dj vk;qDr] ¼da-iz-½] jkaph
65-
dk;kZy; mi@lgk;d vk;dj vk;qDr] vapy&1]
Hkkxyiqj
66-
dk;kZy; mi@lgk;d vk;dj vk;qDr] vapy&2]
csxwljk;
67-
dk;kZy; mi@lgk;d vk;dj vk;qDr] vapy&3] iwf.kZ;k
68-
dk;kZy; mi@lgk;d vk;dj vk;qDr] vapy&1] /kuckn
69-
dk;kZy; mi@lgk;d vk;dj vk;qDr] vapy&2] /kuckn
70-
dk;kZy; mi@lgk;d vk;dj vk;qDr] vapy&3] nso?kj
71-
dk;kZy; mi@lgk;d vk;dj vk;qDr] vapy&4] iVuk
72-
dk;kZy; mi@lgk;d vk;dj vk;qDr] vapy&5] iVuk
73-
dk;kZy; mi@lgk;d vk;dj vk;qDr] vapy&6] iVuk
74-
dk;kZy; mi@lgk;d vk;dj vk;qDr] vapy&1] eqt¶Qjiqj
7502
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 13, 2012/ASVINA 21, 1934
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
75-
dk;kZy; mi@lgk;d vk;dj vk;qDr] vapy&2] eqt¶Qjiqj
76-
dk;kZy; mi@lgk;d vk;dj vk;qDr] vapy&3] njHkaxk
77-
dk;kZy; mi@lgk;d vk;dj vk;qDr] vapy&1] jkaph
78-
dk;kZy; mi@lgk;d vk;dj vk;qDr] vapy&2] jkaph
79-
dk;kZy; mi@lgk;d vk;dj vk;qDr] vapy&3] jkaph
80-
dk;kZy; mi@lgk;d vk;dj vk;qDr] vapy&1] te'ksniqj
81-
dk;kZy; mi@lgk;d vk;dj vk;qDr] vapy&2] te'ksniqj
82-
dk;kZy; mi@lgk;d vk;dj vk;qDr] vapy&3] te'ksniqj
83-
dk;kZy; mi@lgk;d vk;dj vk;qDr] vapy&2] gtkjhckn
84-
dk;kZy; mi@lgk;d vk;dj vk;qDr] vapy&3] cksdkjks
85-
dk;kZy; mi@lgk;d vk;dj funs'kd ¼vUos-½&1] iVuk
86-
dk;kZy; mi@lgk;d vk;dj funs'kd ¼vUos-½&2] iVuk
87-
dk;kZy; mi@lgk;d vk;dj funs'kd ¼vUos-½] Hkkxyiqj
88-
dk;kZy; mi@lgk;d vk;dj funs'kd ¼vUos-½] eqt¶Qjiqj
89-
dk;kZy; mi@lgk;d vk;dj funs'kd ¼vUos-½&1] jkaph
90-
dk;kZy; mi@lgk;d vk;dj funs'kd ¼vUos-½&2] jkaph
91-
dk;kZy; mi@lgk;d vk;dj funs'kd ¼vUos-½] /kuckn
92-
dk;kZy; mi@lgk;d vk;dj funs'kd ¼vUos-½] te'ksniqj
93-
dk;kZy; mi@lgk;d vk;dj funs'kd] dsUnzh; vapy&1]
iVuk
94-
dk;kZy; mi@lgk;d vk;dj funs'kd] dsUnzh; vapy&2]
iVuk
95-
dk;kZy; mi@lgk;d vk;dj funs'kd] dsUnzh; vapy&3]
iVuk
96-
dk;kZy; mi@lgk;d vk;dj funs'kd] dsUnzh; vapy]
eqt¶Qjiqj
97-
dk;kZy; mi@lgk;d vk;dj funs'kd] dsUnzh; vapy&1]
jkaph
98-
dk;kZy; mi@lgk;d vk;dj funs'kd] dsUnzh; vapy&2]
jkaph
99-
dk;kZy; mi@lgk;d vk;dj funs'kd] dsUnzh; vapy&3]
jkaph
100-
dk;kZy; mi@lgk;d vk;dj funs'kd] dsUnzh; vapy]
/kuckn
101-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&1 ¼1½] iVuk
102-
dk;kZy; dj olwyh vf/kdkjh&1] iVuk
103-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&1] vkjk
104-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] gkthiqj
105-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&2¼2½] iVuk
106-
dk;kZy; dj olwyh vf/kdkjh&2] iVuk
107-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&1] fcgkj'kjhQ
108-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&2] fcgkj'kjhQ
109-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&1] x;k
110-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&2] x;k
111-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&3] x;k
112-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&1] lklkjke
113-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh&2] lklkjke
114-
dk;kZy; dj olwyh vf/kdkjh&3] x;k
115-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh ¼Vh-Mh-,l-½] /kuckn
116-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh ¼Vh-Mh-,l-½] ifj{ks= jkaph
117-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh ¼Vh-Mh-,l-½] Hkkxyiqj
118-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh ¼Vh-Mh-,l-½] csxwljk;
119-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh ¼Vh-Mh-,l-½] eqt¶Qjiqj
120-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] ¼vkbZ-,-ih-½] ;wfuV&1] iVuk
121-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] ¼vkbZ-,-ih-½] ;wfuV&2] iVuk
122-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] ¼vkbZ-,-ih-½] ;wfuV&3] iVuk
123-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] ¼vkbZ-,-ih-½] ;wfuV&
eqt¶Qjiqj
124-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] ¼vkbZ-,-ih-½] ;wfuV&Hkkxyiqj
125-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] ¼vkbZ-,-ih-½] ;wfuV& /kuckn
126-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] ¼vkbZ-,-ih-½] ;wfuV&
te'ksniqj
127-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] ¼vkbZ-,-ih-½] ;wfuV& gtkjhckx
128-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] ¼vkbZ-,-ih-½] ;wfuV& jkaph
129-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ & 1¼1½] Hkkxyiqj
130-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&1¼2½] Hkkxyiqj
131-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&1¼3½] Hkkxyiqj
132-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ& dfVgkj
133-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&1 csxwljk;
134-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&2] csxwljk;
[Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)]
Hkkjr dk jkti= % vDrwcj 13] 2012@vkf'ou 21] 1934
7503
135-
dk;kZy; dj olwyh vf/kdkjh&3 csxwljk;
136-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&1 eqaxsj
137-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&2 eaqxsj
138-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&1] iwf.kZ;k
139-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&2] iwf.kZ;k
140-
dk;kZy; dj olwyh vf/kdkjh] iwf.kZ;k
141-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&1] lgjlk
142-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&2] lgjlk
143-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&1 ¼1½] ¼/kuckn½
144-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&1 ¼2½] ¼/kuckn½
145-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&1 ¼3½] ¼/kuckn½
146-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&1 ¼4½] ¼/kuckn½
147-
dk;kZy; dj olwyh vf/kdkjh] ¼/kuckn½
148-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&2 ¼1½] ¼/kuckn½
149-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&2 ¼2½] ¼/kuckn½
150-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&2 ¼3½] ¼/kuckn½
151-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&2 ¼4½] ¼/kuckn½
152-
dk;kZy; dj olwyh vf/kdkjh] okMZ&2] ¼/kuckn½
153-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&3 ¼1½] nso/kj
154-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&3 ¼2½] nso/kj
155-
dk;kZy; dj olwyh vf/kdkjh&3] nso/kj
156-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&3 ¼3½] fxfjMhg
157-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&3 ¼4½] lkgscxat
158-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&4 ¼1½] iVuk
159-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&4 ¼2½] iVuk
160-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&4 ¼3½] iVuk
161-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&4 ¼4½] iVuk
162-
dk;kZy; dj olwyh vf/kdkjh&4] iVuk
163-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&5 ¼1½] iVuk
164-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&5 ¼2½] iVuk
165-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&5 ¼3½] iVuk
166-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&5 ¼4½] iVuk
167-
dk;kZy; dj olwyh vf/kdkjh&5] iVuk
168-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&6 ¼1½] iVuk
169-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&6 ¼2½] iVuk
170-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&6 ¼3½] iVuk
171-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&6 ¼4½] iVuk
172-
dk;kZy; dj olwyh vf/kdkjh&6] iVuk
173-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&1 ¼1½] eqtQ~Qjiqj
174-
dk;kZy; dj olwyh vf/kdkjh] eqtQ~Qjiqj
175-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&1] eksfrgkjh
176-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&2] eksfrgkjh
177-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] csfr;k
178-
dk;kZy; dj olwyh vf/kdkjh&2] eqtQ~Qjiqj
179-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&2¼1½] eqtQ~Qjiqj
180-
dk;kZy; dj olwyh vf/kdkjh] eqtQ~Qjiqj
181-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] Nijk
182-
dk;kZy; dj olwyh vf/kdkjh] floku
183-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] lhrke<+h
184-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&3 ¼1½] njHkaxk
185-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&3 ¼2½] njHkaxk
186-
dk;kZy; dj olwyh vf/kdkjh&3] njHkaxk
187-
dk;kZy; vk;dj&vf/kdkjh] e/kqcuh
188-
dk;kZy; vk;dj &vf/kdkjh] leLrhiqj
189-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&1 ¼1½] jkaph
190-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&1 ¼2½] jkaph
191-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&1 ¼3½] jkaph
192-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&1 ¼4½] jkaph
193-
dk;kZy; dj olwyh vf/kdkjh&1] jkaph
194-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&2 ¼1½] jkaph
195-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&2 ¼2½] jkaph
196-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&2 ¼3½] jkaph
197-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&2 ¼4½] jkaph
198-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&3 ¼1½] jkaph
199-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&3 ¼3½] jkaph
200-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&3 ¼4½] jkaph
7504
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 13, 2012/ASVINA 21, 1934
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
201-
dk;kZy; dj olwyh vf/kdkjh&3] jkaph
202-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&1 ¼1½] te'ksniqj
203-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&1 ¼2½] te'ksniqj
204-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&1 ¼3½] te'ksniqj
205-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&1 ¼4½] te'ksniqj
206-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&2 ¼1½] te'ksniqj
207-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&2 ¼2½] te'ksniqj
208-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&2 ¼3½] te'ksniqj
209-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&2 ¼4½] te'ksniqj
210-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&3 ¼1½] te'ksniqj
211-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&3 ¼2½] te'ksniqj
212-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&3 ¼3½] te'ksniqj
213-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&3 ¼4½] te'ksniqj
214-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&2 ¼1½] gtkjhckx
215-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&2 ¼2½] gtkjhckx
216-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&2 ¼3½] gtkjhckx
217-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&2 ¼4½] gtkjhckx
218-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&2 ¼5½] gtkjhckx
219-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&2 ¼6½] gtkjhckx
220-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&2 ¼7½] gtkjhckx
221-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&2 ¼8½] gtkjhckx
222-
dk;kZy; dj olwyh vf/kdkjh] gtkjhckx
223-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&3 ¼1½] cksdkjks
224-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&3 ¼2½] cksdkjks
225-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&3 ¼3½] cksdkjks
226-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&3 ¼4½] cksdkjks
227-
dk;kZy; dj olwyh vf/kdkjh&3] cksdkjks
228-
dk;kZy; dj olwyh vf/kdkjh] dsUnzh; ifj{ks=&1] iVuk
229-
dk;kZy; dj olwyh vf/kdkjh] dsUnzh; ifj{ks=&2] jkaph
eq[; vk;dj vk;qDr] fnYyh {ks= ,oa v/khuLFk dk;kZy;
1-
eq[; vk;dj vk;qDr] fnYyh&1 dk dk;kZy;
1-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr] fnYyh&1
2-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr] ¼vihy½&4] fnYyh
3-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr] ¼vihy½&5] fnYyh
4-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr] ¼vihy½&6] fnYyh
5-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr] ¼dEI;wVj izpkyu½] fnYyh
6-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr] ¼le>kSrk vk;ksx½&1] fnYyh
7-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr] ¼le>kSrk vk;ksx½&2] fnYyh
8-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr] ¼lgk;rk lw=½] fnYyh
9-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr] ¼ys[kk ijh{kk½&I ,oa II] fnYyh
10-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr] Mh- vkj-vkbZ- Vh- ,l- lh-&I
,oa II] fnYyh
2-
eq[; vk;dj vk;qDr] fnYyh&2 dk dk;kZy;
1-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr] fnYyh&2
2-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr] ¼vihy½&7] fnYyh
3-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr] ¼vihy½&8] fnYyh
4-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr] ¼vihy½&9] fnYyh
5-
dk;kZy; lnL;] leqfpr izkf/kdj.k] fnYyh
3-
eq[; vk;dj vk;qDr] fnYyh&3 dk dk;kZy;
1-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr] fnYyh&3
2-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr] ¼U;kf;d½] fnYyh
3-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr] ¼vkbZ- Vh- ,- Vh-½] fnYyh
4-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr] ¼vihy½&10] fnYyh
5-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr] ¼vihy½&11] fnYyh
6-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr] ¼vihy½&12] fnYyh
7-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr] ¼vihy½&30] fnYyh
4-
eq[; vk;dj vk;qDr] fnYyh&4 dk dk;kZy;
1-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr] fnYyh&4
2-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr] ¼vihy½&13] fnYyh
3-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr] ¼vihy½&15] fnYyh
5-
eq[; vk;dj vk;qDr] fnYyh&5 dk dk;kZy;
1-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr] fnYyh&5
2-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr] ¼vihy½&16] fnYyh
3-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr] ¼vihy½&17] fnYyh
4-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr] ¼vihy½&18] fnYyh
[Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)]
Hkkjr dk jkti= % vDrwcj 13] 2012@vkf'ou 21] 1934
7505
6-
eq[; vk;dj vk;qDr] fnYyh&6 dk dk;kZy;
1-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr] fnYyh&6
2-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr] fnYyh&10
3-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr] vihy&19] fnYyh
4-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr] vihy&20] fnYyh
5-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr] vihy&21] fnYyh
6-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr] vihy&25] fnYyh
7-
eq[; vk;dj vk;qDr] fnYyh&8 dk dk;kZy;
1-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr] fnYyh&7
2-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr] fnYyh&8
3-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr] vihy&22] fnYyh
4-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr] vihy&23] fnYyh
5-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr] ¼,y- Vh- ;w-½] fnYyh
8-
eq[; vk;dj vk;qDr] fnYyh&9 dk dk;kZy;
1-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr] fnYyh&9
2-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr] fnYyh&24] fnYyh
9-
eq[; vk;dj vk;qDr] fnYyh&11 dk dk;kZy;
1-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr] fnYyh&11
2-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr] ¼vihy½&26] fnYyh
10-
eq[; vk;dj vk;qDr] fnYyh&12 dk dk;kZy;
1-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr] fnYyh&12
2-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr] fnYyh&13
3-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr] ¼vihy½&27] fnYyh
4-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr] ¼vihy½&28] fnYyh
11-
eq[; vk;dj vk;qDr] fnYyh&13 dk dk;kZy;
1-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr] fnYyh&14
2-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr] fnYyh&15
3-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr] fnYyh&16
4-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr] ¼vihy½&30] fnYyh
12-
eq[; vk;dj vk;qDr] ¼,y- Vh- ;w-½ dk dk;kZy;] fnYyh
1-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr] ¼,y- Vh- ;w-½] fnYyh
13-
vk;dj egkfuns'kd ¼varjkZ"Vªh; djk/kku½ dk dk;kZy;]
fnYyh
1-
dk;kZy; vk;dj funs'kd ¼varjkZ"Vªh; djk/kku½&I ,oa II,
fnYyh
2-
dk;kZy; vk;dj funs'kd ¼ewY; varj.k½&I ,oa II, fnYyh
3-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr] ¼vihy½&29] fnYyh
14-
vk;dj egkfuns'kd ¼NwV½ dk dk;kZy;] fnYyh
1-
dk;kZy; vk;dj funs'kd ¼NwV½, fnYyh
15-
vk;dj egkfuns'kd ¼fof/k ,oa vuqla/kku½ dk dk;kZy;]
fnYyh
1-
dk;kZy; vk;dj funs'kd&I, ¼fof/k ,oa vuqla/kku½] fnYyh
2-
dk;kZy; vk;dj funs'kd&II, ¼fof/k ,oa vuqla/kku½] fnYyh
eq[; vk;dj vk;qDr ¼dsUnzh;½] fnYyh {ks= ,oa vèhuLFk dk;kZy;
1-
dk;kZy; eq[; vk;dj vk;qDr ¼dsUnzh;½] fnYyh
2-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr ¼dsUnzh;½&1] fnYyh
3-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr ¼dsUnzh;½&2] fnYyh
4-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr ¼dsUnzh;½&3] fnYyh
5-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr ¼vihy½&1] fnYyh
6-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr ¼vihy½&2] fnYyh
7-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr ¼vihy½&3] fnYyh
8-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr ¼vihy½&31] fnYyh
9-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr ¼vihy½&32] fnYyh
10-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr ¼vihy½&33] fnYyh
fnYyh {ks= ds vU; dk;kZy;
1-
vk;dj egkfuns'kky; ¼iz'kk-½] ubZ fnYyh
2-
vk;dj egkfuns'kky; ¼lrdZrk½] ubZ fnYyh
3-
vk;dj egkfuns'kky; ¼vUos"k.k½] fnYyh
4-
vk;dj egkfuns'kky; ¼i)fr½] ubZ fnYyh
5-
vk;dj egkfuns'kky; ¼vklwpuk ,oa vkijkf/kd½] fnYyh
6-
vk;dj funs'kky; ¼t- la- eq- iz- ,oa jk- Hkk-½] ubZ fnYyh
7-
vk;dj funs'kky; ¼olwyh½] ubZ fnYyh
8-
vk;dj funs'kky; ¼vk;dj ,oa ys[kk ijh{kk½] ubZ fnYyh
¼eq[; vk;dj vk;qDr] vgenkckn {ks= ,oa v/khuLFk dk;kZy;½
1
dk;kZy; eq[; vk;dj vk;qDr vgenkckn&1
2
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr vgenkckn&1
3
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj vk;qDr&1] vgenkckn
4
dk;kZy; vk;dj mik;qDr ldZy&1] vgenkckn
5-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh okMZ&1¼1½] vgenkckn
6-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh okMZ&1¼2½] vgenkckn
7-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh okMZ&1¼3½] vgenkckn
8-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh okMZ&1¼4½] vgenkckn
9-
dk;kZy; dj olwyh vf/kdkjh jsat&1] vgenkckn
7506
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 13, 2012/ASVINA 21, 1934
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
10-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj vk;qDr&2] vgenkckn
11-
dk;kZy; vk;dj mik;qDr ldZy&2] vgenkckn
12-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh okMZ&2¼1½] vgenkckn
13-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh okMZ&2¼2½] vgenkckn
14-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh okMZ&2¼3½] vgenkckn
15-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh okMZ&2¼4½] vgenkckn
16-
dk;kZy; dj olwyh vf/kdkjh jsat&2] vgenkckn
17-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj vk;qDr&3] vgenkckn
18-
dk;kZy; vk;dj mik;qDr ldZy&3] vgenkckn
19-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh okMZ&3¼1½] vgenkckn
20-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh okMZ&3¼2½] vgenkckn
21-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh okMZ&3¼3½] vgenkckn
22-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh okMZ&3¼4½] vgenkckn
23-
dk;kZy; dj olwyh vf/kdkjh jsat&3] vgenkckn
24-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr] vgenkckn&2
25-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj vk;qDr&4] vgenkckn
26-
dk;kZy; vk;dj mik;qDr loZQy&4] vgenkckn
27-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh okMZ&4¼1½] vgenkckn
28-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh okMZ&4¼2½] vgenkckn
29-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh okMZ&4¼3½] vgenkckn
30-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh okMZ&4¼4½] vgenkckn
31-
dk;kZy; dj olwyh vf/kdkjh jsat&4] vgenkckn
32-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj vk;qDr] fgEeruxj jsat
33-
dk;kZy; vk;dj mik;qDr] fgEeruxj
34-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh okMZ&1] fgEeruxj
35-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh okMZ&2] fgEeruxj
36-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh okMZ&3] fgEeruxj
37-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh okMZ&4] eksM+klk
38-
dk;kZy; dj olwyh vf/kdkjh jsat&4] fgEeruxj
39-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr] VhMh,l] vgenkckn
40-
dk;kZy; la;qDr vk;dj vk;qDr] VhMh,l] vgenkckn
41-
dk;kZy; lgk;d vk;dj vk;qDr] VhMh,l] vgenkckn
42-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] VhMh,l&1] vgenkckn
43-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] VhMh,l&2] vgenkckn
44-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] VhMh,l&3] vgenkckn
45-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] VhMh,l&4] vgenkckn
46-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] VhMh,l] xka/khuxj
47-
dk;kZy; la;qDr vk;dj vk;qDr] VhMh,l] cM+kSnk
48-
dk;kZy; lgk;d vk;dj vk;qDr] VhMh,l] cM+kSnk
49-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] VhMh,l&1] cM+kSnk
50-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] VhMh,l&2] cM+kSnk
51-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] VhMh,l] vk.kan
52-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] VhMh,l] Hk:p
53-
dk;kZy; la;qDr vk;dj vk;qDr] VhMh,l] jktdksV
54-
dk;kZy; lgk;d vk;dj vk;qDr] VhMh,l] jktdksV
55-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] VhMh,l&1] jktdksV
56-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] VhMh,l&2] jktdksV
57-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] VhMh,l] tkeuxj
58-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] VhMh,l] xka/kh/kke
59-
dk;kZy; la;qDr vk;dj vk;qDr] VhMh,l] lwjr
60-
dk;kZy; lgk;d vk;dj vk;qDr] VhMh,l] lwjr
61-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] VhMh,l&1] lwjr
62-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] VhMh,l&2] lwjr
63-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] VhMh,l&3] lwjr
64-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] VhMh,l&4] lwjr
65-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] VhMh,l] oylkM
66-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr&¼dEI;wVj vkWijs'ku½] vgenkckn
67-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj vk;qDr] i)fr] vgenkckn
68-
dk;kZy; mi vk;dj vk;qDr] i)fr&1] vgenkckn
69-
dk;kZy; lgk;d funs'kd] i)fr] vgenkckn
70-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] i)fr&1] vgenkckn
71-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] i)fr&2] vgenkckn
72-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj vk;qDr] i)fr] cM+kSnk
73-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] i)fr&1] cM+kSnk
74-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] ,e,lVh;w] cM+kSnk
75-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj vk;qDr] i)fr] jktdksV
[Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)]
Hkkjr dk jkti= % vDrwcj 13] 2012@vkf'ou 21] 1934
7507
76-
dk;kZy; lgk;d vk;dj vk;qDr] i)fr] jktdksV
77-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj vk;qDr] i)fr] lwjr
78-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] i)fr] lwjr
79-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr] vkWfMV] vgenkckn
80-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj vk;qDr] vkWfMV] vgenkckn
81-
dk;kZy; lgk;d vk;dj vk;qDr] vkWfMV] vgenkckn
82-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] vkbZ,ih&1] vgenkckn
83-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] vkbZ,ih&2] vgenkckn
84-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] vkbZ,ih&3] vgenkckn
85-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] vkbZ,ih&4] vgenkckn
86-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] vkbZ,ih&5] vgenkckn
87-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] vkbZ,ih&6] vgenkckn
88-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] vkbZ,ih&7] vgenkckn
89-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] vkbZ,ih&eq[;k] 1 varjkZ"Vªh;
djk/kku] vgenkckn
90-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] vkbZ,ih&eq[;k] 2] NwV]
vgenkckn
91-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] vkbZ,ih&dsanzh;&1] vgenkckn
92-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] vkbZ,ih&dsanzh;&2] vgenkckn
93-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] vkbZ,ih] xka/khuxj
94-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] vkbZ,ih&1] cM+kSnk
95-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] vkbZ,ih&2] cM+kSnk
96-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] vkbZ,ih&3] cM+kSnk
97-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] vkbZ,ih&4] cM+kSnk
98-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] vkbZ,ih&1] jktdksV
99-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] vkbZ,ih&2] jktdksV
100-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] vkbZ,ih&3] jktdksV
101-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] vkbZ,ih&3] tkeuxj
102-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj vf/kdkjh] vkWfMV] lwjr
103-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] vkbZ,ih&1] lwjr
104-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] vkbZ,ih&2] lwjr
105-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] vkbZ,ih&3] lwjr
106-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] vkbZ,ih] oylkM
107-
dk;kZy; eq[; vk;dj vk;qDr] vgenkckn&2] vgenkckn
108-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr] vgenkckn&3] vgenkckn
109-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj vk;qDr&5] vgenkckn
110-
dk;kZy; vk;dj mik;qDr&5] vgenkckn
111-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&5 ¼1½] vgenkckn
112-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&5 ¼2½] vgenkckn
113-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&5 ¼3½] vgenkckn
114-
dk;kZy; dj olwyh vf/kdkjh] jsat&5] vgenkckn
115-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj vk;qDr&6] vgenkckn
116-
dk;kZy; vk;dj mik;qDr] ldZy&6] vgenkckn
117-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&6 ¼1½] vgenkckn
118-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&6 ¼2½] vgenkckn
119-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&6 ¼3½] vgenkckn
120-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&6 ¼4½] vgenkckn
121-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&6 ¼5½] vgenkckn
122-
dk;kZy; dj olwyh vf/kdkjh] jsat&6] vgenkckn
123-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj vk;qDr&7] vgenkckn
124-
dk;kZy; vk;dj mik;qDr] ldZy&7] vgenkckn
125-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&7 ¼1½] vgenkckn
126-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&7 ¼2½] vgenkckn
127-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&7 ¼3½] vgenkckn
128-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&7 ¼4½] vgenkckn
129-
dk;kZy; dj olwyh vf/kdkjh] jsat&7] vgenkckn
130-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr] vgenkckn&4] vgenkckn
131-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj vk;qDr&8] vgenkckn
132-
dk;kZy; vk;dj mik;qDr] ldZy&8] vgenkckn
133-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&8 ¼1½] vgenkckn
134-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&8 ¼2½] vgenkckn
135-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&8 ¼3½] vgenkckn
136-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&8 ¼4½] vgenkckn
137-
dk;kZy; dj olwyh vf/kdkjh] jsat&8] vgenkckn
138-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj vk;qDr&9] vgenkckn
139-
dk;kZy; vk;dj mik;qDr] ldZy&9] vgenkckn
140-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&9 ¼1½] vgenkckn
7508
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 13, 2012/ASVINA 21, 1934
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
141-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&9 ¼2½] vgenkckn
142-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&9 ¼3½] vgenkckn
143-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&9 ¼4½] vgenkckn
144-
dk;kZy; dj olwyh vf/kdkjh] jsat&9] vgenkckn
145-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj vk;qDr] ikyuiqj jsat
146-
dk;kZy; vk;dj mik;qDr] ikyuiqj
147-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&1] ikyuiqj
148-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&2] ikyuiqj
149-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&3] ikyuiqj] xqtjkr
150-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&4] ikyuiqj
151-
dk;kZy; dj olwyh vf/kdkjh] ikyuiqj jsat
152-
dk;kZy; dj olwyh vf/kdkjh] ikyuiqj jsat
153-
dk;kZy; eq[; vk;dj vk;qDr] vgenkckn&3] vgenkckn
154-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr vgenkckn&5] vgenkckn
155-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj vk;qDr&10] vgenkckn
156-
dk;kZy; vk;dj mik;qDr] loZQy&10] vgenkckn
157-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&10 ¼1½] vgenkckn
158-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&10 ¼2½] vgenkckn
159-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&10 ¼3½] vgenkckn
160-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&10 ¼4½] vgenkckn
161-
dk;kZy; dj olwyh vf/kdkjh] jsat 10] vgenkckn
162-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj vk;qDr&11] vgenkckn
163-
dk;kZy; vk;dj mik;qDr] loZQy&11] vgenkckn
164-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&11 ¼1½] vgenkckn
165-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&11 ¼2½] vgenkckn
166-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&11 ¼3½] vgenkckn
167-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&11 ¼4½] vgenkckn
168-
dk;kZy; dj olwyh vf/kdkjh] jsat 11] vgenkckn
169-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj vk;qDr] lqjsUnzuxj
170-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr] loZQy] lqjsUnzuxj
171-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&1] lqjsUnzuxj
172-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&2] lqjsUnzuxj
173-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&3] lqjsUnzuxj
174-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&4] lqjsUnzuxj
175-
dk;kZy; dj olwyh vf/kdkjh] lqjsUnzuxj jsat
176-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr vgenkckn&6] vgenkckn
177-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj vk;qDr&12] vgenkckn
178-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr] loZQy&12] vgenkckn
179-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ &12¼1½] vgenkckn
180-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&12¼2½] vgenkckn
181-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&12¼3½] vgenkckn
182-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&12¼4½] vgenkckn
183-
dk;kZy; dj olwyh vf/kdkjh] jsat 12] vgenkckn
184-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj vk;qDr] Hkkouxj jsat&1
185-
dk;kZy; vk;dj ldZy&1] Hkkouxj
186-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&1¼1½] Hkkouxj
187-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&1¼2½] Hkkouxj
188-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&1¼3½] Hkkouxj
189-
dk;kZy; dj owlyh vf/kdkjh] okMZ& 1¼4½] Hkkouxj
190-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] jsat& 1] Hkkouxj
191-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj vk;qDr] Hkkouxj jsat&2
192-
dk;kZy; vkd;j mik;qDr loZQy&2] Hkkouxj
193-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&2¼1½] Hkkouxj
194-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&2¼2½] Hkkouxj
195-
dk;kZy; vk;djdj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&2¼3½] Hkkouxj
196-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ& 2¼4½] Hkkouxj
197-
dk;kZy; dj owlyh vf/kdkjh] jsat&2] Hkkouxj
198-
eq[; vk;dj vk;qDr] vgenkckn&4] vgenkckn
199-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr vgenkckn&7
200-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj vk;qDr&13] vgenkckn
201-
dk;kZy; vk;dj mik;qDr loZQy&13] vgenkckn
202-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&13¼1½] vgenkckn
203-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&13¼2½] vgenkckn
204-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&13¼3½] vgenkckn
205-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&13¼4½] vgenkckn
206-
dk;kZy; dj olwyh vf/kdkjh] jast&13] vgenkckn
[Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)]
Hkkjr dk jkti= % vDrwcj 13] 2012@vkf'ou 21] 1934
7509
207-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj vk;qDr&14] vgenkckn
208-
dk;kZy; vk;dj mik;qDr loZQy&14] vgenkckn
209-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&14¼1½] vgenkckn
210-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&14¼2½] vgenkckn
211-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&14¼3½] vgenkckn
212-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&14¼4½] vgenkckn
213-
dk;kZy; dj olwyh vf/kdkjh] jsat&14] vgenkckn
214-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj vk;qDr&15] vgenkckn
215-
dk;kZy; vk;dj mik;qDr loZQy&15 vgenkckn
216-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&15¼1½] vgenkckn
217-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&15¼2½] vgenkckn
218-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&15¼3½] vgenkckn
219-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&15¼4½] vgenkckn
220-
dk;kZy; dj olwyh vf/kdkjh] jsat&15] vgenkckn
221-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr xka/kh uxj] vgenkckn
222-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj vk;qDr ikVu jsat
223-
dk;kZy; vk;dj mik;qDr loZQy] ikVu
224-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&1] ikVu
225-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&2 ikVu
226-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&3 ikVu] egslk.kk
227-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&4 ikVu] egslk.kk
228-
dk;kZy; dj olwyh vf/kdkjh] jsat& ikVu
229-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj vk;qDr loZQy] xka/khuxj jsat
230-
dk;kZy; vk;dj mik;qDr loZQy] xka/khuxj
231-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&1 xka/khuxj
232-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&2 xka/khuxj
233-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&3 xka/khuxj
234-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&4 xka/khuxj
235-
dk;kZy; dj olwyh vf/kdkjh] jast& xka/khuxj
236-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj vk;qDr] egslk.kk jsat
237-
dk;kZy; vk;dj mik;qDr loZQy] egslk.kk
238-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ]&1] egslk.kk
239-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ]&2] egslk.kk
240-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ]&3] egslk.kk
241-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ]&4] egslk.kk
242-
dk;kZy; dj olwyh vf/kdkjh] jast&egslk.kk
243-
dk;kZy; vk;dj egkfuns'kd ¼vUoas-½] vgenkckn
244-
dk;kZy; vk;dj funs- ¼vUos-½] vgenkckn
245-
dk;kZy; vij vk;ñ funs- ¼vUos-½ ;wfuV&1] vgenkckn
246-
dk;kZy; mi vk;dj funs'kd ¼vUosa-½] ;wfuV& 1@1]
vgenkckn
247-
dk;kZy; lgk;dj vk;dj funs'kd ¼vUos-½] ;wfuV& 1@2]
vgenkckn
248-
dk;kZy; lgk;dj vk;dj funs'kd ¼vUos-½] ;wfuV& 1@3]
vgenkckn
249-
dk;kZy; mi vk;dj funs'kd ¼vUos-½] Hkkouxj
250-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh ¼vUos-½] Hkkouxj
251-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh ¼vUos-@,vkbZ;w½] vgenkckn
252-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh ¼vUos-½] ;wfuV&1] vgenkckn
253-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj funs'kd ¼vUos-½] ;wfuV&2]
vgenkckn
254-
dk;kZy; lgk;d vk;dj funs'kd ¼vUos-½] ;wfuV& 2@1]
vgenkckn
255-
dk;kZy; lgk;d vk;dj funs'kd ¼vUos-½] egslk.kk
256-
dk;kZy; mi vk;dj funs'kd ¼vUos-½] egslk.kk
257-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh ¼vUos-½] ;wfuV&2] vgenkckn
258-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh ¼vUos-½] egslk.kk
259-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj funs'kd ¼vUos-½] cM+kSnk
260-
dk;kZy; mi vk;dj funs'kd ¼vUos-½] ;wfuV& 1] cM+kSnk
261-
dk;kZy; lgk;d vk;dj funs'kd ¼vUos-½] ;wfuV& 2]
cM+kSnk
262-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh ¼vUos-½] cM+kSnk
263-
dk;kZy; lgk;d vk;dj funs'kd ¼vUos-½] Hk:p
264-
dk;kZy; vk;dj funs'kd ¼vUos-½] lwjr
265-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj funs'kd ¼vUos-½] ;wfuV&1] lwjr
266-
dk;kZy; mi vk;dj funs'kd ¼vUos-½] ;wfuV& 1] lwjr
267-
dk;kZy; lgk;d vk;dj funs'kd ¼vUos-½] ;wfuV&3] lwjr
268-
dk;kZy; mi vk;dj funs'kd ¼vUos-½] oylkM]
7510
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 13, 2012/ASVINA 21, 1934
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
269-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh ¼vUos-½] lwjr
270-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj funs'kd ¼vUos-½] jktdksV
271-
dk;kZy; lgk;d vk;dj funs'kd ¼vUos-½] ;wfuV&1]
jktdksV
272-
dk;kZy; lgk;d vk;dj funs'kd ¼vUos-½] ;wfuV&2]
jktdksV
273-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh ¼vUos-½] ,oa MhMhvks] jktdksV
274-
dk;kZy; lgk;d vk;dj funs'kd ¼vUos-½] tkeuxj
275-
dk;kZy; lgk;d vk;dj funs'kd ¼vUos-½] xka/kh/kke
276-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr] dsUnzh;&1] vgenkckn
277-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj vk;qDr] jsat&1] vgenkckn
278-
dk;kZy; lgk;d vk;dj vk;qDr dsa- loZQy&1¼1½]
vgenkckn
279-
dk;kZy; lgk;d vk;dj vk;qDr dsa- loZQy&1¼2½]
vgenkckn
280-
dk;kZy; vk;dj mi vk;qDr dsa- loZQy&1¼3½] vgenkckn
281-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] dsUnzh; okMZ&1¼4½] vgenkckn
282-
dk;kZy; dj olwyh vf/kdkjh] dsUnzh; jsat&1] vgenkckn
283-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&1¼1½] vgenkckn
284-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj vk;qDr] dsUnzh; jsat] lwjr
285-
dk;kZy; lgk;dj vk;dj vk;qDr] dsa- loZQy&1 lwjr
286-
dk;kZy; vk;dj mi vk;qDr] dsa- loZQy&2] lwjr
287-
dk;kZy; lgk;d vk;dj vk;qDr] dsa- loZQy&3] lwjr
288-
dk;kZy; lgk;d vk;dj vk;qDr] dsa- loZQy&4] lwjr
289-
dk;kZy; dj olwyh vf/kdkjh] dsUnzh;] lwjr
290-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr] dsUnzh;&2] vgenkckn
291-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj vk;qDr] jsat&2] vgenkckn
292-
dk;kZy; lgk;d vk;dj vk;qDr] dsa- loZQy&2 ¼1½]
vgenkckn
293-
dk;kZy; lgk;d vk;dj vk;qDr] dsa- loZQy&2 ¼3½]
vgenkckn
294-
dk;kZy; lgk;d vk;dj vk;qDr] dsa- loZQy&2 ¼4½]
vgenkckn
295-
dk;kZy; dj olwyh vf/kdkjh] dsUnzh; jsat&2] vgenkckn
296-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh dsUnzh; okMZ&2 ¼1½] vgenkckn
297-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj] dsUnzh; jsat] cM+kSnk
298-
dk;kZy; lgk;d vk;dj vk;qDr dsa- loZQy&1] cM+kSnk
299-
dk;kZy; lgk;d vk;dj vk;qDr] das- loZQy&2] cM+kSnk
300-
dk;kZy; dj olwyh vf/kdkjh o vk;dj vf/kdkjh dsaUnzh;
okMZ&1] cM+kSnk
301-
dk;kZy; vk;dj mi vk;qDr] das- loZQy&2] jktdksV
302-
dk;kZy; lgk;d vk;dj vk;qDr] das- loZQy&2] jktdksV
303-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] dsUnzh; okMZ] jktdksV
304-
dk;kZy; eq[; vk;dj vk;qDr] cM+kSnk
305-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr] cM+kSnk&1
306-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj vk;qDr] jsat&1] cM+kSnk
307-
dk;kZy; vk;dj mik;qDr] loZQy&1¼1½] cM+kSnk
308-
dk;kZy; vk;dj mik;qDr] loZQy&1¼2½ cM+kSnk
309-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] loZQy&1¼1½ cM+kSnk
310-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&1¼2½ cM+kSnk
311-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&1¼3½ cM+kSnk
312-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&1¼4½ cM+kSnk
313-
dk;kZy; dj olwyh vf/kdkjh] jsat& 1] cM+kSnk
314-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj vk;qDr] jsat& 2] cM+kSnk
315-
dk;kZy; vk;dj mik;qDr] loZQy&2¼1½] cM+kSnk
316-
dk;kZy; vk;dj mik;qDr] loZQy&2¼2½] cM+kSnk
317-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&2¼1½] cM+kSnk
318-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&2¼2½] cM+kSnk
319-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&2¼3½] cM+kSnk
320-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&2¼4½] cM+kSnk
321-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&2¼5½] cM+kSnk
322-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&2¼6½] cM+kSnk
323-
dk;kZy; dj olwyh vf/kdkjh] jsat&2] cM+kSnk
324-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj vk;qDr] jsat&3] cM+kSnk
325-
dk;kZy; vk;dj mik;qDr] loZQy&3] cM+kSnk
326-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&3¼1½] cM+kSnk
327-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&3¼2½] cM+kSnk
328-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&3¼3½] isVykn
329-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&3¼4½] isVykn
330-
dk;kZy; dj olwyh vf/kdkjh] jsat&3] cM+kSnk
331-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr] cM+kSnk&2] cM+kSnk
332-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj vk;qDr] jsat&4] cM+kSnk
[Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)]
Hkkjr dk jkti= % vDrwcj 13] 2012@vkf'ou 21] 1934
7511
333-
dk;kZy; lgk;d vk;dj vk;qDr] ldZy&4] cM+kSnk
334-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&4¼1½] cM+kSnk
335-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&4¼2½ ¼vfrfjDr izHkkj½]
cM+kSnk
336-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&4¼3½ ¼vfrfjDr izHkkj½]
cM+kSnk
337-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&4¼4½] cM+kSnk
338-
dk;kZy; dj olwyh vf/kdkjh&4] cM+kSnk
339-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj vk;qDr] [ksM+k jsat
340-
dk;kZy; vk;dj mik;qDr] [ksM+k
341-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&1] [ksM+k
342-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&2] [ksM+k
343-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&3] [ksM+k
344-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&4] [ksM+k
345-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh ¼dj olwyh vf/kdkjh½] uMhvkn
¼vfrfjDr izHkkj½] [ksM+k
346-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj vk;qDr] vk.kan jsat ¼vfrfjDr
izHkkj½
347-
dk;kZy; lgk;d vk;dj vk;qDr] vk.kan ldZy
348-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&1] vk.kan
349-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&2] vk.kan
350-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&3] vk.kan
351-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&4] vk.kan
352-
dk;kZy; dj olwyh vf/kdkjh] vk.kan
353-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] ¼Vh- Mh- ,l-½] vk.kan
354-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr&cM+kSnk&3] cM+kSnk
355-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj vk;qDr] jsat&5] cM+kSnk
356-
dk;kZy; lgk;d vk;dj vk;qDr] ldZy&5] cM+kSnk
357-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&5¼1½] cM+kSnk
358-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&5¼2½] cM+kSnk
359-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&5¼3½] cM+kSnk
360-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&5¼4½] cM+kSnk
361-
dk;kZy; dj olwyh vf/kdkjh&5] cM+kSnk
362-
dk;kZy; la;qDr vk;dj vk;qDr] Hk:p jsat] Hk:p
363-
dk;kZy; vk;dj mik;qDr] Hk:p (ADDL. CHARGE)
364-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&1] Hk:p
365-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&2] Hk:p
366-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&3] Hk:p
367-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&4] Hk:p
368-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&5] Hk:p
369-
dk;kZy; dj olwyh vf/kdkjh] Hk:p
370-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] ¼VhMh,l½] Hk:p
371-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] ¼lhvkbZch½] Hk:p
372-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj vk;qDr] iapegky jsat
373-
dk;kZy; lgk;d vk;dj vk;qDr] iapegky ldZy
374-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&1 xks/kjk
375-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&2 xks/kjk
376-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&1 nkgksn
377-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&2 nkgksn
378-
dk;kZy; dj olwyh vf/kdkjh] ¼xks/kjk½
379-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr&4] cM+kSnk
380-
dk;kZy; la;qDr@vij vk;dj vk;qDr] jsat&6] cM+kSnk
381-
dk;kZy; vk;dj mik;qDr] loZQy&6] cM+kSnk
382-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&6¼1½] cM+kSnk
383-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&6¼2½] cM+kSnk
384-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&6¼3½] cM+kSnk
385-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&6¼4½] cM+kSnk
386-
dk;kZy; dj olwyh vf/kdkjh&6] cM+kSnk
387-
dk;kZy; la;qDr@vij vk;dj vk;qDr] jsat&7] cM+kSnk
388-
dk;kZy; lgk;d vk;dj vk;qDr] ldZy&7] cM+kSnk
389-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&7¼1½] cM+kSnk
390-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&7¼2½] cM+kSnk
391-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&7¼3½] cM+kSnk
392-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&7¼4½] cM+kSnk
393-
dk;kZy; dj olwyh vf/kdkjh&7] cM+kSnk
394-
dk;kZy; la;qDr@vij vk;dj vk;qDr] jsat&8] cM+kSnk
395-
dk;kZy; vk;dj mik;qDr] loZQy&8] cM+kSnk
7512
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 13, 2012/ASVINA 21, 1934
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
396-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&8¼1½] cM+kSnk
397-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&8¼2½] cM+kSnk
398-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh okMZ&8¼3½] cM+kSnk
399-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&8¼4½] cM+kSnk
400-
dk;kZy; dj olwyh vf/kdkjh&8] cM+kSnk
401-
dk;kZy; eq[; vk;dj vk;qDr] jktdksV
402-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr&1] jktdksV
403-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj vk;qDr] jsat&1] jktdksV
404-
dk;kZy; lgk;d vk;dj vk;qDr] loZQy&1] jktdksV
405-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&1¼1½] jktdksV
406-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&1¼2½] jktdksV
407-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&1¼3½] jktdksV
408-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&1¼4½] jktdksV
409-
dk;kZy; dj olwyh vf/kdkjh] jsat&1] jktdksV
410-
dk;kZy; la;qDr vk;dj vk;qDr] ¼VhMh,l½ jsat] jktdksV
411-
dk;kZy; lgk;d vk;dj vk;qDr] ¼VhMh,l½ jsat] jktdksV
412-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] ¼VhMh,l½&1] jktdksV
413-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] ¼VhMh,l½&2] jktdksV
414-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] ¼VhMh,l½&3] tkeuxj
415-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] ¼VhMh,l½&4] xka/kh/kke
416-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr&2] jktdksV
417-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj vk;qDr] jsat&2] jktdksV
418-
dk;kZy; lgk;d vk;dj vk;qDr] ldZy&2] jktdksV
419-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&2¼1½] jktdksV
420-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&2¼2½] jktdksV
421-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&2¼3½] jktdksV
422-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&2¼4½] jktdksV
423-
dk;kZy; dj olwyh vf/kdkjh] jsat&2] jktdksV
424-
dk;kZy; la;qDr vk;dj vk;qDr] jsat&3] jktdksV
425-
dk;kZy; lgk;d vk;dj vk;qDr] loZQy&3] jktdksV
426-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&3¼1½] jktdksV
427-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&3¼2½] jktdksV
428-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&3¼3½] jktdksV
429-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&3¼4½] jktdksV
430-
dk;kZy; dj olwyh vf/kdkjh] jsat&3] jktdksV
431-
dk;kZy; la;qDr vk;dj vk;qDr] jsat&4] jktdksV
432-
dk;kZy; lgk;d vk;dj vk;qDr] ldZy&4] jktdksV
433-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&4¼1½] jktdksV
434-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&4¼2½] jktdksV
435-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&4¼3½] jktdksV
436-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&4¼4½] jktdksV
437-
dk;kZy; dj olwyh vf/kdkjh&4] jktdksV
438-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr&3] jktdksV
439-
dk;kZy; la;qDr vk;dj vk;qDr] jsat&5] jktdksV
440-
dk;kZy; lgk;d vk;dj vf/dkjh] ldZy&5] jktdksV
441-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&5¼1½] jktdksV
442-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&5¼2½] jktdksV
443-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&5¼3½] eksjch
444-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&5¼4½] eksjch
445-
dk;kZy; dj olwyh vf/kdkjh&5] jktdksV
446-
dk;kZy; la;qDr vk;dj vk;qDr] jsat&1] twukx<+
447-
dk;kZy; lgk;d vk;dj vk;qDr] ldZy&1] twukx<+
448-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&1¼1½] twukx<+
449-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&1¼2½] twukx<+
450-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&1¼3½] osjkoy
451-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&1¼4½] osjkoy+
452-
dk;kZy; dj olwyh vf/kdkjh] jsat&1] twukx<+
453-
dk;kZy; la;qDr vk;dj vk;qDr] jsat&2] twukx<+
454-
dk;kZy; vk;dj mik;qDr] loZQy&2] twukx<+
455-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&2¼1½] twukx<+
456-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&2¼2½] twukx<+
457-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&2¼3½] vejsyh
458-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&2¼4½] vejsyh
459-
dk;kZy; dj olwyh vf/kdkjh] jsat&2] twukx<+
460-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr] tkeuxj
461-
dk;kZy; la;qDr vk;dj vk;qDr] jsat&1] tkeuxj
[Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)]
Hkkjr dk jkti= % vDrwcj 13] 2012@vkf'ou 21] 1934
7513
462-
dk;kZy; lgk;d vk;dj mik;qDr] ldZy&1] tkeuxj
463-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&1¼1½] tkeuxj
464-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&1¼2½] tkeuxj
465-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&1¼3½] }kjdk
466-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&1¼4½] }kjdk
467-
dk;kZy; dj olwyh vf/kdkjh] jsat&1] tkeuxj
468-
dk;kZy; la;qDr vk;dj vk;qDr] jsat&2] tkeuxj
469-
dk;kZy; lgk;d vk;dj vk;qDr] loZQy&2] tkeuxj
470-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&2¼1½] tkeuxj
471-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&2¼2½] tkeuxj
472-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&2¼3½] iksjcanj
473-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&2¼4½] iksjcanj
474-
dk;kZy; dj olwyh vf/kdkjh]&1] tkeuxj
475-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj vk;qDr] jsat&3] tkeuxj
476-
dk;kZy; lgk;d vk;dj vk;qDr] ldZy&3] tkeuxj
477-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&3¼1½] tkeuxj
478-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&3¼2½] tkeuxj
479-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&3¼3½] tkeuxj
480-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&3¼4½] tkeuxj
481-
dk;kZy; dj olwyh vf/kdkjh]&3] tkeuxj
482-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj vk;qDr] xka/kh/kke
483-
dk;kZy; lgk;d vk;dj vk;qDr] xka/kh/kke loZQy]
xka/kh/kke
484-
dk;kZy; lgk;d vk;dj funs'kd] ¼varjkZ"Vªh; djk/kku½
xka/kh/kke
485-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] ¼varjkZ"Vªh; djk/kku½]
xka/kh/kke
486-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&1] xka/kh/kke
487-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&2] xka/kh/kke
488-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] ¼dj olwyh vf/kdkjh½]
xka/kh/kke
489-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&1] Hkqt
490-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&2] Hkqt
491-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] ¼VhMh,l½] xka/kh/kke
492-
dk;kZy; eq[; vk;dj vk;qDr] lwjr
493-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr&1] lwjr
494-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj vk;qDr] jsat&1] lwjr
495-
dk;kZy; vk;dj mik;qDr] loZQy&1] lwjr
496-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&1¼1½] lwjr
497-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&1¼2½] lwjr
498-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&1¼3½] lwjr
499-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&1¼4½] lwjr
500-
dk;kZy; dj olwyh vf/kdkjh]&1] lwjr
501-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] ¼vk;dj½] lwjr
502-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] ¼vks,lMh½&I] lwjr
503-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] ¼vks,lMh½&II] lwjr
504-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj vk;qDr] jsat&2] lwjr
505-
dk;kZy; lgk;d vk;dj vk;qDr] ldZy&2] lwjr
506-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&2¼1½] lwjr
507-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&2¼2½] lwjr
508-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&2¼3½] lwjr
509-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&2¼4½] lwjr
510-
dk;kZy; dj olwyh vf/kdkjh]&2] lwjr
511-
dk;kZy; la;qDr vk;dj vk;qDr] jsat&3] lwjr
512-
dk;kZy; vk;dj mik;qDr] loZQy&3] lwjr
513-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&3¼1½] lwjr
514-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&3¼2½] lwjr
515-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&3¼3½] lwjr
516-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&3¼4½] lwjr
517-
dk;kZy; dj olwyh vf/kdkjh]&3] lwjr
518-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr&II] lwjr
519-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj vk;qDr] jsat&4] lwjr
520-
dk;kZy; lgk;d vk;dj vk;qDr] ldZy&4] lwjr
521-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&4¼1½] lwjr
522-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&4¼2½] lwjr
523-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&4¼3½] lwjr
524-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&4¼4½] lwjr
525-
dk;kZy; dj olwyh vf/kdkjh]&4] lwjr
7514
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 13, 2012/ASVINA 21, 1934
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
526-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj vk;qDr] jsat&5] lwjr
527-
dk;kZy; lgk;d vk;dj vk;qDr] ldZy&5] lwjr
528-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&5¼1½] lwjr
529-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&5¼2½] lwjr
530-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&5¼3½] lwjr
531-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&5¼4½] lwjr
532-
dk;kZy; dj olwyh vf/kdkjh&5] lwjr
533-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj vk;qDr] jsat&6] lwjr
534-
dk;kZy; lgk;d vk;dj vk;qDr] ldZy&6] lwjr
535-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&6¼1½] lwjr
536-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&6¼2½] lwjr
537-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&6¼3½] lwjr
538-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ&6¼4½] lwjr
539-
dk;kZy; dj olwyh vf/kdkjh & 6] lwjr
540-
dk;kZy; lgk;d vk;dj vk;qDr] ¼vks,lMh½] lwjr
541-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] ¼vkbZ,ih½ & II, lwjr
542-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr & III, lwjr
543-
dk;kZy; la;qDr vk;dj vk;qDr] jsat & 7] lwjr
544-
dk;kZy; lgk;d vk;dj vk;qDr] ldZy & 7] lwjr
545-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ & 7 ¼1½] lwjr
546-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ & 7 ¼2½] lwjr
547-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ & 7 ¼3½] lwjr
548-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ & 7 ¼4½] lwjr
549-
dk;kZy; dj olwyh vf/kdkjh & ] 7] lwjr
550-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj vk;qDr] jsat & 8] lwjr
551-
dk;kZy; lgk;d vk;dj vk;qDr] ldZy & 8] lwjr
552-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ & 8 ¼1½] lwjr
553-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ & 8 ¼2½] lwjr
554-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ & 8 ¼3½] lwjr
555-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ & 8 ¼4½] lwjr
556-
dk;kZy; dj olwyh vf/kdkjh & 8] lwjr
557-
dk;kZy; la;qDr@vij vk;dj vk;qDr] jsat & 9] lwjr
558-
dk;kZy; vk;dj mik;qDr] loZQy & 9] lwjr
559-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ & 9] ¼1½] lwjr
560-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ & 9 ¼2½] lwjr
561-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ & 9] ¼3½] lwjr
562-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ & 9 ¼4½] lwjr
563-
dk;kZy; dj olwyh vf/kdkjh] okMZ & 9] lwjr
564-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr] oylkM
565-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj vk;qDr] oylkM
566-
dk;kZy; lgk;d vk;dj vk;qDr] ldZy & 1] oylkM
567-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ & 1] o MhMhvks] oylkM
568-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ & 2] oylkM
569-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ & 3] oylkM
570-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ & 4] oylkM
571-
dk;kZy; dj olwyh vf/kdkjh & oylkM
572-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] ¼lhvkbZch½ oylkM
573-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ ¼vkbZ,ih½ oylkM
574-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] ¼VhMh,l½] oylkM
575-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] ¼VhMh,l½] oylkM
576-
dk;kZy; la;qDr vk;dj vk;qDr] uolkjh
577-
dk;kZy; lgk;d vk;dj] vk;qDr] ldZy & 1] uolkjh
578-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ & 1] uolkjh
579-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ & 2] uolkjh
580-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ & 3] uolkjh
581-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ & 4] uolkjh
582-
dk;kZy; dj olwyh vf/kdkjh] uolkjh
583-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] ¼lhvkbZch½] uolkjh
584-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] ¼vUos-½] ¼lhvkbZch½] uolkjh
585-
dk;kZy; la;qDr vk;dj vk;qDr] okih
586-
dk;kZy; lgk;d vk;dj vk;qDr] okih
587
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] okMZ & 1] okih
588-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh okMZ&2] okih
589-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh okMZ&3] okih
590-
dk;kZy; dj olwyh vf/kdkjh] okih
591-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh okMZ&4] ne.k] okih
592-
dk;kZy; la;qDr@vij vk;qDr ¼vkWfMV½] okih
[Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)]
Hkkjr dk jkti= % vDrwcj 13] 2012@vkf'ou 21] 1934
7515
593-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh ¼vkbZ,ih½& I, okih
594-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh ¼vkbZ,ih½& II, okih
595-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh ¼vkbZ,ih½& III, okih
596-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh ¼vkbZ,ih½] oylkM
597-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh ¼varjkZ"Vªh; djk/kku½] okih
598-
dk;kZy; vk;dj funs'kd & vklwpuk ,oa vkijkf/kd vUoas]
vgenkckn
599-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj funs'kd & vkbZ ,UM lh- vkbZ]
vgenkckn
600-
dk;kZy; lgk;d vk;dj funs'kd vkbZ- ,UM lh- vkbZ]
vgenkckn
601-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] vkbZ- ,UM lh- vkbZ-] vgenkckn
602-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] vkbZ- ,UM lh- vkbZ-—egslk.kk
603-
dk;kZy; lgk;d vk;dj vk;qDr]—vkbZ- ,UM lh- vkbZ-]
cM+kSnk
604-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] vkbZ- ,UM lh- vkbZ-&1] cM+kSnk
605-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] vkbZ- ,UM lh- vkbZ-&2] cM+kSnk
606-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] vkbZ- ,UM lh- vkbZ-&vk.kan
607-
dk;kZy; vf/kdkjh] vkbZ- ,UM lh- vkbZ-&Hk#p
608-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj funs'kd]—vkbZ- ,UM lh- vkbZ-]
jktdksV
609-
dk;kZy; lgk;d vk;dj funs'kd vkbZ- ,UM lh- vkbZ-]
jktdksV
610-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] vkbZ- ,UM lh- vkbZ- & 1]
jktdksV
611-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] vkbZ- ,UM lh- vkbZ-&tkeuxj
612-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] vkbZ- ,UM lh- vkbZ-&Hkkouxj
613-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] vkbZ- ,UM lh- vkbZ-&twukx<+
614-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] vkbZ- ,UM lh- vkbZ-&
xka/kh/kke
615-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj funs'kd]—vkbZ- ,UM lh- vkbZ-]
lwjr
616-
dk;kZy; lgk;d vk;dj funs'kd] vkbZ- ,UM lh- vkbZ-]
lwjr
617-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] vkbZ- ,UM lh- vkbZ-& 1] lwjr
618-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] vkbZ- ,UM lh- vkbZ-] & 2]
lwjr
619-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] vkbZ- ,UM- lh- vkbZ-&oylkM
620-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] vkbZ- ,UM lh- vkbZ-&uolkjh
621-
dk;kZy; vk;dj funs'kd] vkj- Vh- vkbZ-&vgenkckn
622-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj funs'kd& vkj- Vh- vkbZ -vgenkckn
623-
dk;kZy; vk;dj mi funs'kd & vkj- Vh- vkbZ-] vgenkckn
624-
dk;kZy; vk;dj mi funs'kd & vkjVhvkbZ]&vgenkckn
625-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] vkj-Vh-vkbZ-&1] vgenkckn
626-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] vkj-Vh-vkbZ-&2] vgenkckn
627-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] vkj-Vh-vkbZ- 3] vgenkcn
628-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh vkbZ-Vh-vkbZ-&vks,lMh]
vgenkckn
629-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh ,e,lVh;w] vgenckn
630-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj funs'kd&vkbZVh o Vhihvks& 1]
vgenkckn
631-
dk;kZy; vk;dj mi vk;qDr Vhihvks&2] vgenckn
632-
dk;kZy; vk;dj funs'kd] varjkZ"Vªh; djk/kku] vgenkckn
633-
dk;kZy; vk;dj lgk;d funs'kd] vUrjkZ"Vªh; djk/kku]
vgenkckn
634-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh&varjkZ"Vªh; djk/kku&1]
vgenkckn
635-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh&varjkZ"Vªh; djk/kku&2]
vgenkckn
636-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh& varjkZ"Vªh; djk/kku&3]
vgenkckn
637-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh&varjkZ"Vªh; djk/kku] cM+kSnk]
vgenkckn
638-
dk;kZy; vk;dj lgk;d funs'kd&varjkZ"Vªh; djk/kku&
xka/kh/kke
639-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh ¼varjkZ"Vªh; djk/kku½&
xka/kh/kke
640-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh ¼varjkZ"Vªh; djk/kku½&
lwjr
641-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh ¼varjkZ"Vªh; djk/kku½&
jktdksV
642-
dk;kZy; vk;dj funs'kd&NwV] vgenkckn
643-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj funs'kd&NwV] vgenkckn
644-
dk;kZy; vk;dj lgk;d funs'kd&NwV] vgenkckn
645-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh & NwV] vgenkckn
646-
dk;kZy; dj olwyh vf/kdkjh & NwV] vgenkckn
647-
dk;kZy; vk;dj lgk;d funs'kd & NwV] lqusUnzuxj]
vgenkckn
7516
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 13, 2012/ASVINA 21, 1934
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
648-
dk;kZy; vk;dj lgk;d funs'kd & NwV] fgEeruxj]
vgenkckn
649-
dk;kZy; vk;dj lgk;d funs'kd & NwV] ikyuiqj]
vgenkckn
650-
dk;kZy; vk;dj lgk;d funs'kd & NwV] Hkkoxuj]
vgenkckn
¼eq[; vk;dj vk;qDr] eaqcbZ {ks= ,oa v/khuLFk dk;kZy;½
Øe la-
dk;kZy; dk uke
1-
dk;kZy; eq[; vk;dj vk;qDr&I] eaqcbZ
2-
dk;kZy; eq[; vk;dj vk;qDr&II] eaqcbZ
3-
dk;kZy; eq[; vk;dj vk;qDr&III] eaqcbZ
4-
dk;kZy; eq[; vk;dj vk;qDr&IV] eaqcbZ
5-
dk;kZy; eq[; vk;dj vk;qDr&V] eaqcbZ
6-
dk;kZy; eq[; vk;dj vk;qDr&VI] eaqcbZ
7-
dk;kZy; eq[; vk;dj vk;qDr&VII] eaqcbZ
8-
dk;kZy; eq[; vk;dj vk;qDr&IX] eaqcbZ
9-
dk;kZy; eq[; vk;dj vk;qDr&X] eaqcbZ
10-
dk;kZy; eq[; vk;dj vk;qDr&XI, eaqcbZ
11-
dk;kZy; eq[; vk;dj vk;qDr&XII] eaqcbZ
12-
dk;kZy; eq[; vk;dj vk;qDr-XIII] eaqcbZ
13-
dk;kZy; eq[; vk;dj vk;qDr ¼dsUnzh;&I] eaqcbZ
14-
dk;kZy; eq[; vk;dj vk;qDr ¼dsUnzh;½&II] eaqcbZ
15-
dk;kZy; vk;dj egkfuns'kd ¼vUos"k.k½] eqacbZ
16-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj vk;qDr ¼eq[;ky;½ iz'kklu] eaqcbZ
17-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj vk;qDr ¼eq[;ky;½ flLVe] eaqcbZ
18-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj vk;qDr ¼eq[;ky;½ leUo;] eaqcbZ
19-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj vk;qDr ¼eq[;ky;½ dkfeZd]
eaqcbZ
20-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj vk;qDr ¼eq[;ky;½ lrdZrk ,oa
rduhdh] eaqcbZ
21-
dk;kZy; vk;dj funs'kd ¼eq[;ky;½ ¼vUos"k.k½] eaqcbZ
22-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr&1] eqacbZ
23-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr&2] eqacbZ
24-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr&3] eqacbZ
25-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr&4] eqacbZ
26-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr&5] eqacbZ
27-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr&6] eqacbZ
28-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr&7] eqacbZ
29-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr&8] eqacbZ
30-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr&9] eqacbZ
31-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr&10 eqacbZ
32-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr&11] eqacbZ
33-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr&12] eqacbZ
34-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr&13] eqacbZ
35-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr&14] eqacbZ
36-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr&15] eqacbZ
37-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr&16] eqacbZ
38-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr&17] eqacbZ
39-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr&18] eqacbZ
40-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr&19] eqacbZ
41-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr&20] eqacbZ
42-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr&21] eqacbZ
43-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr&22] eqacbZ
44-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr&23] eqacbZ
45-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr&24] eqacbZ
46-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr&25] eqacbZ
47-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr&26] eqacbZ
48-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr&28] eqacbZ
49-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr&29] eqacbZ
50-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr&Vh-Mh-,l-] eqacbZ
51-
dk;kZy; vk;dj funs'kd ¼vUos"k.k½&I] eaqcbZ
52-
dk;kZy; vk;dj funs'kd ¼vUos"k.k½&II] eaqcbZ
53-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr ¼dsUnzh;½&I] eaqcbZ
54-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr ¼dsUnzh;½&II] eaqcbZ
55-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr ¼dsUnzh;½&III] eaqcbZ
56-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr ¼dsUnzh;½&IV] eaqcbZ
57-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr ¼U;kf;d½] eaqcbZ
58-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr ¼ys[kk ijh{kk½&I] eaqcbZ
59-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr ¼ys[kk ijh{kk ½&II] eaqcbZ
[Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)]
Hkkjr dk jkti= % vDrwcj 13] 2012@vkf'ou 21] 1934
7517
60-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr ¼l{ke izkf/kdkjh½] eaqcbZ
61-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr ¼dEI;wVj izpkyu½] eaqcbZ
62-
dk;kZy; lnL; ¼vk;dj le>kSrk vk;ksx½] eaqcbZ
63-
dk;kZy; vk;dj funs'kd&¼vk;dj le>kSrk vk;ksx½]
eaqcbZ
64-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr ¼fo- iz-½&I] ¼vk;dj le>kSrk
vk;ksx½] eaqcbZ
65-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr ¼fo-iz-½&II ¼vk;dj le>kSrk
vk;ksx½] eqacbZ
66-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr ¼fo-iz-½ ¼vk;dj vihy
vf/kdj.k½&I] eqacbZ
67-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr ¼fo-iz-½ ¼vk;dj vihy
vf/kdj.k½&II] eqacbZ
68-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr ¼fo-iz½ ¼vk;dj vihy
vf/kdj.k½&III] eqacbZ
69-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr ¼fo-i-z½ ¼vk;dj vihy
vf/kdj.k½&IV] eqacbZ
70-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr ¼fo-iz-½ ¼vk;dj vihy
vf/kdj.k½&V] eqacbZ
71-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr ¼fo-iz-½ ¼vk;dj vihy
vf/kdj.k½&VI] eqacbZ
72-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr ¼fo-iz-½ ¼vk;dj vihy
vf/kdj.k½&VII] eqacbZ
73-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr ¼fo-iz-½ ¼vk;dj vihy
vf/kdj.k½&VIII] eqacbZ
74-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr ¼fo-iz-½ ¼vk;dj vihy
vf/kdj.k½&IX] eqacbZ
75-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr ¼fo-iz-½ ¼vk;dj vihy
vf/kdj.k½&X] eqacbZ
76-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr ¼fo-iz-½ ¼vk;dj vihy
vf/kdj.k½&XI] eqacbZ
77-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr ¼fo-iz-½ ¼vk;dj vihy
vf/kdj.k½&XII] eqacbZ
78-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr ¼fo-iz-½ ¼vk;dj vihy
vf/kdj.k½&XIII] eqacbZ
79-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr&¼,y-Vh-;w-½] eqacbZ
80-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr ¼vihy½&1] eqacbZ
81-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr ¼vihy½&2] eqacbZ
82-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr ¼vihy½&3] eqacbZ
83-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr ¼vihy½&4] eqacbZ
84-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr ¼vihy½&5] eqacbZ
85-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr ¼vihy½&6] eqacbZ
86-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr ¼vihy½&7] eqacbZ
87-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr ¼vihy½&8] eqacbZ
88-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr ¼vihy½&9] eqacbZ
89-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr ¼vihy½&10] eqacbZ
90-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr ¼vihy½&11] eqacbZ
91-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr ¼vihy½&12] eqacbZ
92-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr ¼vihy½&13] eqacbZ
93-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr ¼vihy½&14] eqacbZ
94-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr ¼vihy½&15] eqacbZ
95-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr ¼vihy½&16] eqacbZ
96-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr ¼vihy½&17] eqacbZ
97-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr ¼vihy½&18] eqacbZ
98-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr ¼vihy½&19] eqacbZ
99-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr ¼vihy½&20] eqacbZ
100-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr ¼vihy½&21] eqacbZ
101-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr ¼vihy½&22] eqacbZ
102-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr ¼vihy½&23] eqacbZ
103-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr ¼vihy½&24] eqacbZ
104-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr ¼vihy½&25] eqacbZ
105-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr ¼vihy½&26] eqacbZ
106-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr ¼vihy½&27] eqacbZ
107-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr ¼vihy½&28] eqacbZ
108-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr ¼vihy½&29] eqacbZ
109-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr ¼vihy½&30] eqacbZ
110-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr ¼vihy½&31] eqacbZ
111-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr ¼vihy½&32] eqacbZ
112-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr ¼vihy½&33] eqacbZ
113-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr ¼vihy½&34] eqacbZ
114-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr ¼vihy½&35] eqacbZ
7518
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 13, 2012/ASVINA 21, 1934
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
115-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr ¼vihy½&36] eqacbZ
116-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr ¼vihy½&37] eqacbZ
117-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr ¼vihy½&38] eqacbZ
118-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr ¼vihy½&39] eqacbZ
119-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr ¼vihy½&40] eqacbZ
120-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr ¼vihy½&41] eqacbZ
121-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj vk;qDr] jsat&1 ¼1½] eqacbZ
122-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj vk;qDr] jsat&1 ¼2½] eqacbZ
123-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj vk;qDr] jsat&1 ¼3½] eqacbZ
124-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj vk;qDr] jsat&2 ¼1½] eqacbZ
125-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj vk;qDr] jsat&2 ¼2½] eqacbZ
126-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj vk;qDr] jsat&1 ¼3½] eqacbZ
127-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj vk;qDr] jsat&3 ¼1½] eqacbZ
128-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj vk;qDr] jsat&3 ¼2½] eqacbZ
129-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj vk;qDr] jsat&3 ¼3½] eqacbZ
130-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj vk;qDr] jsat&4 ¼1½] eqacbZ
131-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj vk;qDr] jsat&4 ¼2½] eqacbZ
132-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj vk;qDr] jsat&4 ¼3½] eqacbZ
133-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj vk;qDr] jsat&5 ¼1½] eqacbZ
134-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj vk;qDr] jsat&5 ¼2½] eqacbZ
135-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj vk;qDr] jsat&5 ¼3½] eqacbZ
136-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj vk;qDr] jsat&6 ¼1½] eqacbZ
137-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj vk;qDr] jsat&6 ¼2½] eqacbZ
138-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj vk;qDr] jsat&6 ¼3½] eqacbZ
139-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj vk;qDr] jsat&7 ¼1½] eqacbZ
140-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj vk;qDr] jsat&7 ¼2½] eqacbZ
141-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj vk;qDr] jsat&7 ¼3½] eqacbZ
142-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj vk;qDr] jsat&8 ¼1½] eqacbZ
143-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj vk;qDr] jsat&8 ¼2½] eqacbZ
144-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj vk;qDr] jsat&8 ¼3½] eqacbZ
145-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj vk;qDr] jsat&9 ¼1½] eqacbZ
146-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj vk;qDr] jsat&9 ¼2½] eqacbZ
147-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj vk;qDr] jsat&9 ¼3½] eqacbZ
148-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj vk;qDr] jsat&10 ¼1½] eqacbZ
149-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj vk;qDr] jsat&10 ¼2½] eqacbZ
150-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj vk;qDr] jsat&10 ¼3½] eqacbZ
151-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj vk;qDr] jsat&11 ¼1½] eqacbZ
152-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj vk;qDr] jsat&11 ¼2½] eqacbZ
153-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj vk;qDr] jsat&11 ¼3½] eqacbZ
154-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj vk;qDr] jsat&12 ¼1½] eqacbZ
155-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj vk;qDr] jsat&12 ¼2½] eqacbZ
156-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj vk;qDr] jsat&12 ¼3½] eqacbZ
157-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj vk;qDr] jsat&13 ¼1½] eqacbZ
158-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj vk;qDr] jsat&13 ¼2½] eqacbZ
159-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj vk;qDr] jsat&13 ¼3½] eqacbZ
160-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj vk;qDr] jsat&14 ¼1½] eqacbZ
161-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj vk;qDr] jsat&14 ¼2½] eqacbZ
162-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj vk;qDr] jsat&14 ¼3½] eqacbZ
163-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj vk;qDr] jsat&15 ¼1½] eqacbZ
164-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj vk;qDr] jsat&15 ¼2½] eqacbZ
165-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj vk;qDr] jsat&15 ¼3½] eqacbZ
166-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj vk;qDr] jsat&16 ¼1½] eqacbZ
167-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj vk;qDr] jsat&16 ¼2½] eqacbZ
168-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj vk;qDr] jsat&16 ¼3½] eqacbZ
169-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj vk;qDr] jsat&17 ¼1½] eqacbZ
170-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj vk;qDr] jsat&17 ¼2½] eqacbZ
171-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj vk;qDr] jsat&17 ¼3½] eqacbZ
172-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj vk;qDr] jsat&18 ¼1½] eqacbZ
173-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj vk;qDr] jsat&18 ¼2½] eqacbZ
174-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj vk;qDr] jsat&18 ¼3½] eqacbZ
175-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj vk;qDr] jsat&19 ¼1½] eqacbZ
176-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj vk;qDr] jsat&19 ¼2½] eqacbZ
177-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj vk;qDr] jsat&19 ¼3½] eqacbZ
178-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj vk;qDr] jsat&20 ¼1½] eqacbZ
179-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj vk;qDr] jsat&20 ¼2½] eqacbZ
180-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj vk;qDr] jsat&20 ¼3½] eqacbZ
[Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)]
Hkkjr dk jkti= % vDrwcj 13] 2012@vkf'ou 21] 1934
7519
181-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj vk;qDr] jsat&21 ¼1½] eqacbZ
182-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj vk;qDr] jsat&21 ¼2½] eqacbZ
183-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj vk;qDr] jsat&21 ¼3½] eqacbZ
184-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj vk;qDr] jsat&22 ¼1½] eqacbZ
185-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj vk;qDr] jsat&22 ¼2½] eqacbZ
186-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj vk;qDr] jsat&22 ¼3½] eqacbZ
187-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj vk;qDr] jsat&23 ¼1½] eqacbZ
188-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj vk;qDr] jsat&23 ¼2½] eqacbZ
189-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj vk;qDr] jsat&23 ¼3½] eqacbZ
190-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj vk;qDr] jsat&24 ¼1½] eqacbZ
191-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj vk;qDr] jsat&24 ¼2½] eqacbZ
192-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj vk;qDr] jsat&24 ¼3½] eqacbZ
193-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj vk;qDr] jsat&25 ¼1½] eqacbZ
194-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj vk;qDr] jsat&25 ¼2½] eqacbZ
195-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj vk;qDr] jsat&25 ¼3½] eqacbZ
196-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj vk;qDr] jsat&26 ¼1½] eqacbZ
197-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj vk;qDr] jsat&26 ¼2½] eqacbZ
198-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj vk;qDr] jsat&28 ¼1½] eqacbZ
199-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj vk;qDr] jsat&28 ¼2½] eqacbZ
200-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj vk;qDr] jsat&29 ¼1½] eqacbZ
201-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj vk;qDr] jsat&29 ¼2½] eqacbZ
202-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj vk;qDr] TDS jsat&I] eqacbZ
203-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj vk;qDr] TDS jsat&II] eqacbZ
204-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj vk;qDr] TDS jsat&III] eqacbZ
205-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj vk;qDr] dsanzh; jsat&1] eqacbZ
206-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj vk;qDr] dsanzh; jsat&2] eqacbZ
207-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj vk;qDr] dsanzh; jsat&3] eqacbZ
208-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj vk;qDr] dsanzh; jsat&4] eqacbZ
209-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj vk;qDr] dsanzh; jsat&5] eqacbZ
210-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj vk;qDr] dsanzh; jsat&6] eqacbZ
211-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj vk;qDr] dsanzh; jsat&7] eqacbZ
212-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj vk;qDr] dsanzh; jsat&8] eqacbZ
213-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj vk;qDr] dsanzh; jsat&9] eqacbZ
214-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj vk;qDr] dsanzh; jsat&10] eqacbZ
215-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj vk;qDr] U;kf;d jsat&I] eqacbZ
216-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj vk;qDr] dsanzh; jsat&II] eqacbZ
217-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj vk;qDr] ys[kk ijh{kk jsat&I(I)] eqacbZ
218-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj vk;qDr] ys[kk ijh{kk jsat&I(II)] eqacbZ
219-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj vk;qDr] ys[kk ijh{kk jsat&II] eqacbZ
220-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj vk;qDr] ¼dñizñ½&1, eqacbZ
221-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj vk;qDr] ¼dñizñ½&2, eqacbZ
222-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj vk;qDr] ¼,yñVhñ;wñ½, eqacbZ
223-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj funs'kd ¼vUos"k.k½ ;wfuV&I] eqacbZ
224-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj funs'kd ¼vUos"k.k½ ;wfuV&II] eqacbZ
225-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj funs'kd ¼vUos"k.k½ ;wfuV&III] eqacbZ
226-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj funs'kd ¼vUos"k.k½ ;wfuV&IV] eqacbZ
227-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj funs'kd ¼vUos"k.k½ ;wfuV&V] eqacbZ
228-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj funs'kd ¼vUos"k.k½ ;wfuV&VI] eqacbZ
229-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj funs'kd ¼vUos"k.k½ ;wfuV&VII] eqacbZ
230-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj funs'kd ¼vUos"k.k½ ;wfuV&VIII]
eqacbZ
231-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj funs'kd ¼vUos"k.k½ ;wfuV&IX]
eqacbZ
232-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj funs'kd ¼vk;dj le>kSrk
vk;ksx½&1] eqacbZ
233-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj funs'kd ¼vk;dj le>kSrk
vk;ksx½&2] eqacbZ
234-
dk;kZy; ofj"B foHkkxh; izfrfuf/k ¼vk;dj vihy
vf/kdj.k½&I] eqacbZ
235-
dk;kZy; ofj"B foHkkxh; izfrfuf/k ¼vk;dj vihy
vf/kdj.k½&II] eqacbZ
236-
dk;kZy; ofj"B foHkkxh; izfrfuf/k ¼vk;dj vihy
vf/kdj.k½&III] eqacbZ
237-
dk;kZy; ofj"B foHkkxh; izfrfuf/k ¼vk;dj vihy
vf/kdj.k½&IV] eqacbZ
238-
dk;kZy; ofj"B foHkkxh; izfrfuf/k ¼vk;dj vihy
vf/kdj.k½&V] eqacbZ
239-
dk;kZy; ofj"B foHkkxh; izfrfuf/k ¼vk;dj vihy
vf/kdj.k½&VI] eqacbZ
7520
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 13, 2012/ASVINA 21, 1934
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
240-
dk;kZy; ofj"B foHkkxh; izfrfuf/k ¼vk;dj vihy
vf/kdj.k½&VII] eqacbZ
241-
dk;kZy; ofj"B foHkkxh; izfrfuf/k ¼vk;dj vihy
vf/kdj.k½&VIII] eqacbZ
242-
dk;kZy; ofj"B foHkkxh; izfrfuf/k ¼vk;dj vihy
vf/kdj.k½&IX] eqacbZ
243-
dk;kZy; ofj"B foHkkxh; izfrfuf/k ¼vk;dj vihy
vf/kdj.k½&X] eqacbZ
244-
dk;kZy; ofj"B foHkkxh; izfrfuf/k ¼vk;dj vihy
vf/kdj.k½&XI eqacbZ
245-
dk;kZy; mifuns'kd ¼jktHkk"kk½@lgk;d funs'kd
¼jktHkk"kk½] eqacbZ
¼eq[; vk;dj vk;qDr] ukxiqj {ks= ,oa v/khuLFk dk;kZy;½
Øe la- dk;kZy; dk uke
1-
dk;kZy; eq[; vk;dj vk;qDr] ukxiqj
2-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr & 1 ukxiqj
3-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj vk;qDr] jsat & 1] ukxiqj
4-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj vk;qDr] jsat & 2] ukxiqj
5-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj vk;qDr] vdksyk jsat] vdksyk
6-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] [kkexkao
7-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr & II ukxiqj
8-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj vk;qDr] jsat & 3 ukxiqj
9-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj vk;qDr] jsat & 4 ukxiqj
10-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj vk;qDr] o/kkZ jsat] o/kkZ
11-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] ;oreky
12-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr & III, ukxiqj
13-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj vk;qDr] jsat & 5 ukxiqj
14-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj vk;qDr] jsat & 6 ukxiqj
15-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj vk;qDr] vejkorh jsat] vejkorh
16-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr & IV, ukxiqj
17-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj vk;qDr] jsat & 7 ukxiqj
18-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj vk;qDr] jsat & 8 ukxiqj
19-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj vk;qDr] panziqj jsat] panziqj
20-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] HkaMkjk
21-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] xkasfn;k
22-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr ¼dsanzh;½] ukxiqj
23-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj vk;qDr ¼dsanzh;½] jsat&1] ukxiqj
24-
dk;kZy; vij vk;dj vk;qDr ¼dsanzh;½] jsat&2] ukxiqj
25-
dk;kZy; lgk;d vk;dj vk;qDr ¼dsanzh;½] ldZy] vdksyk
26-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr ¼vihy½&I, ukxiqj
27-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr ¼vihy½&II, ukxiqj
28-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr ¼Vh-Mh-,l-½, ukxiqj
29-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr ¼ys[kk ijh{kk½, ukxiqj
30-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr ¼vk;dj vihyh; vf/kdj.k½,
ukxiqj
31-
dk;kZy; vk;dj funs'kd ¼vUos"k.k½, ukxiqj
jk"Vªh; izR;{k dj vdkneh] ukxiqj ,oa v/khuLFk dk;kZy;
1-
jk"Vªh; izR;{k dj vdkneh] ukxiqj
2-
izR;{k dj {ks=h; izf'k{k.k laLFkku] y[kuÅ
3-
izR;{k dj {ks=h; izf'k{k.k laLFkku] eqacbZ
4-
izR;{k dj {ks=h; izf'k{k.k laLFkku] vgenkckn
5-
izR;{k dj {ks=h; izf'k{k.k laLFkku] p.Mhx<+
6-
izR;{k dj {ks=h; izf'k{k.k laLFkku] dksydkrk
eq[; vk;dj vk;qDr dk;kZy;] csaxywj ,oa v/khuLFk dk;kZy;½
Øe lañ dk;kZy; dk uke
eq[; vk;dj vk;qDr & I] csaxywj dk {ks=
1-
vk;dj vk;qDr&I] csaxywj dk eq[;ky;
2-
vk;dj vk;qDr&II] csaxywj dk eq[;ky;
3-
vk;dj vk;qDr ¼Vh-Mh-,l-½] csaxywj dk eq[;ky;
4-
vk;dj vk;qDr ¼vkWfMV½] csaxywj dk eq[;ky;
5-
vk;dj vk;qDr ¼lh-ih-lh-½] csaxywj dk dk;kZy;
6-
vk;dj vk;qDr ¼vihy½&II] csaxywj dk dk;kZy;
7-
vk;dj vij vk;qDr jsat 18] csaxywj dk dk;kZy;
8-
,e-,l-Vh-;w-] csaxywj
eq[; vk;dj vk;qDr & II] csaxywj dk {ks=
1-
vk;dj vk;qDr&III] csaxywj dk eq[;ky;
2-
vk;dj vk;qDr&IV] csaxywj dk eq[;ky;
3-
vk;dj vk;qDr ¼vihy½&IV] csaxywj dk dk;kZy;
4-
lnL; ¼leqfpr izkf/kdj.k½] csaxywj dk dk;kZy;
[Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)]
Hkkjr dk jkti= % vDrwcj 13] 2012@vkf'ou 21] 1934
7521
eq[; vk;dj vk;qDr&III] csaxywj dk {ks=
1-
eq[; vk;dj vk;qDr&III] csaxywj dk eq[;ky;
2-
vk;dj vk;qDr] eSlwj dk eq[;ky;
3-
vk;dj vij vk;qDr] jsat&1] eSlwj dk dk;kZy;
4-
vk;dj vij vk;qDr] jsat&2] eSlwj dk dk;kZy;
5-
vk;dj vf/kdkjh] efMdsjh dk dk;kZy;
vk;dj egkfuns'kky; ¼vUos-½ cSaxywj dk {ks=
1-
vk;dj vk;qDr ¼dsUnzh;½] csaxywj dk eq[;ky;
2-
vk;dj vij vk;qDr] dsUnzh; jsat&2] csaxywj dk dk;kZy;
3-
vk;dj vij funs'kd ¼vUos-½] ;wfuV&II] csaxywj dk
dk;kZy;
vU; dk;kZy; ¼ftuds eq[;ky; ubZ fnYYkh ,oa ukxiqj esa gSa½
1-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr] {ks=h; izR;{k dj izf'k{k.k laLFkku]
csaxywj
2-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr] ¼,y-Vh-;w-½] csaxywj
3-
vk;dj funs'kd] ¼varjkZ"Vªh; djk/kku½] csaxywj dk
eq[;ky;
4-
vk;dj ¼vksEcM~leSu½] csaxywj
5-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vij funs'kd ¼vklwpuk½ jsat] csaxywj
eq[; vk;dj vk;qDr] dsjy {ks= ,oa v/khuLFk dk;kZy;
Øe lañ dk;kZy; dk uke
eq[; vk;dj vk;qDr] dksPph {ks=
1-
dk;kZy; eq[; vk;dj vk;qDr] dksPph
vk;dj vk;qDr&1] dksPph izHkkj
2-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr&1] dksPph
3-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vij@la-vk;qDr] jsat&1] dksPph
4-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vij@la- vk;qDr] jsat&4] dksPph
vk;dj vk;qDr&2] dksPph izHkkj
5-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr&2] dksPph
6-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vij@la- vk;qDr] jsat&2] dksPph
7-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vij@la- vk;qDr] jsat&3] dksPph
8-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vij@la- vk;qDr] vkyqok jsat] vkyqok
9-
dk;kZy; vk;dj mi@lgk- vk;qDr] eV~Vkapsjh
10-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] rksMqiq"kk
vk;dj vk;qDr] r`''kwj izHkkj
11-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr] r`''kwj
12-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vij@la- vk;qDr jsat&1] r`''kwj
13-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vij@lañ vk;qDr jsat&2] r`''kwj
14-
dk;kZy; vk;ñ vij@lañ vk;qDr ikyDdkM jsat] ikyDdkM
15-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] xq#ok;wj
vk;dj vk;qDr] dksf"kDdksM izHkkj
16-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr] dksf"kDdksM
17-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vij@la- vk;qDr] jsat&1] dksf"kDdksM
18-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vij@la- vk;qDr] jsat&2] dksf"kDdksM
19-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vij@la- vk;qDr] d..kwj jsat] d..kwj
20-
dk;kZy; vk;dj mi@lgk- vk;qDr] fr:j
21-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] dkljxksM
vk;dj vk;qDr ¼Vh-Mh-,l-½] dksPph izHkkj
22-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr ¼Vh-Mh-,l-½] dksPph
23-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh ¼Vh-Mh-,l-½] r`''kwj
24-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh ¼Vh-Mh-,l-½] ikyDdkM
25-
dk;kZy; vk;dj la;qDr vk;qDr ¼Vh-Mh-,l-½] dksf"kDdksM
26-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh] ¼VhMh,l½] d..kwj
27-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vij vk;qDr ¼VhMh,l½] fr#ouariqje
28-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh ¼VhMh,l½] dksYye
29-
dk;kZy; vk;dj lgk- vk;qDr ¼VhMh,l½] dksV~V;e
30-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh ¼VhMh,l½] vkyIiq"kk
vk;dj vk;qDr ¼ys[kk ijh{kk½] dksPph izHkkj
31-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr ¼ys[kk ijh{kk½] dksPph
32-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh ¼vkarfjd ys[kk ijh{kk½] r`''kwj
33-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh ¼vkarfjd ys[kk ijh{kk½]
dksf"kDdksM
34-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh ¼vkarfjd ys[kk ijh{kk½]
fr#ouariqje
35-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh ¼vkarfjd ys[kk ijh{kk½]
dksV~V;e
vk;dj vk;qDr ¼foHkkxh; izfrfuf/k½] dksPph izHkkj
36-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr ¼foHkkxh; izfrfuf/k½] dksPph
37-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr ¼vihy½] dksPph
38-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr ¼vihy½] dksf"kDdksM
39-
vk;dj vij vk;qDr ¼var- djk-½ ,oa ¼ew- var-½] dksPph
7522
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 13, 2012/ASVINA 21, 1934
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
40-
dk;kZy; vk;dj lgk- vk;qDr ¼var- djk-½] fr#ouariqje
eq[; vk;dj vk;qDr] fr:ouariqje {ks=
41-
dk;kZy; eq[; vk;dj vk;qDr fr:ouariqje {ks=
vk;dj vk;qDr] fr#ouariqje izHkkj
42-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr fr#ouariqje izHkkj
43-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vij vk;qDr jast&1] fr#ouariqje
44-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vij vk;qDr jast&2] fr#ouariqje
45-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vij vk;qDr] dksYye jsat] dksYye
vk;dj vk;qDr] dksV~V;e izHkkj
46-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr dksV~V;e izHkkj] dksV~V;e
47-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vij@la- vk;qDr jast] dksV~V;e] dksV~V;e
48-
dk;kZy; vk;- vij@la-vk;q- vkyIiq"kk jsat] vkyIiq"kk
49-
dk;kZy; vk;- vij@la- vk;q- fr#oYyk jsat] fr#oYyk
50-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr ¼vihy½] fr#ouariqje
vk;dj egkfuns'kky; ¼vUos-½] dksPph {ks=
51-
dk;kZy; vk;dj egkfuns'kd ¼vUos-½] dksPph
52-
dk;kZy; vk;dj funs'kd ¼vUos-½] dksPph
53-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vij funs'kd ¼vUos-½] dksPph
54-
dk;kZy; vk;dj lgk- funs'kd ¼vUos-½] r`''kwj
55-
dk;kZy; vk;dj lgk- funs'kd ¼vUos-½] ikyDdkM
56-
dk;kZy; vk;dj lgk- funs'kd ¼vUos-½] dksf"kDdksM
57-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vij funs'kd ¼vUos-½] fr#ouariqje
58-
dk;kZy; vk;dj mi funs'kd ¼vUos-½] dksYye
59-
dk;kZy; vk;dj mi funs'kd ¼vUos-½] dksV~V;e
vk;dj vk;qDr ¼dsUnzh;½] dksPph {ks=
60-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vk;qDr ¼dsUnzh;½] dksPph
61-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vij@la;qDr vk;qDr] lsaVªy jsat] dksPph
62-
dk;kZy; vk;dj mik;qDr] lsaVªy l£dy] r`''kwj
63-
dk;kZy; vk;dj mik;qDr] lsaVªy l£dy] dksf"kDdksM
64-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vij@la;Dr vk;qDr] lsaVªy jsat]
fr#ouariqje
65-
dk;kZy; vk;dj mik;qDr] lsaVªy l£dy] dksYye
66-
dk;kZy; vk;dj mik;qDr] lsaVªy l£dy] dksV~V;e
vk;dj funs'kky; ¼vklwpuk½ dksPph {ks=
67-
dk;kZy; vk;dj funs'kd ¼vklwpuk½] dksPph
68-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh ¼vklwpuk½] r`''kwj
69-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh ¼vklwpuk½] dksf"kDdksM
70-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh ¼vklwpuk½] fr#ouariqje
71-
dk;kZy; vk;dj vf/kdkjh ¼vklwpuk½] vkyIiq"kk
72-
dk;kZy; vk;dj yksdiky] dksPph
CENTRAL BOARD OF DIRECT TAXES
(Official Language Division)
[DIRECTORATE OF INCOME TAX (PR, PP & OL)]
New Delhi, the 28th September, 2012
S.O. 3094.—In pursuance of Sub-rule 4 of Rule 10 of
the Official Language (Use for official purposes of the
Union) Rules, 1976, the Central Government hereby notifies
the Attached/Subordinate offices (as mentioned in the
Schedule) of the Central Board of Direct Taxes, whereof
more than 80% of the staff have acquired the working
knowledge of Hindi.
[F. No. 2300/O.L.D./2012-13]
AMITABH KUMAR, Director of Income Tax (PR, PP & OL)
SCHEDULE
Chief Commissioner of Income Tax, N.W.R.
Chandigarh Region and Subordinate Offices
S.No.
Name of the Office
1.
O/o The Chief Commissioner of Income Tax,
Chandigarh
2.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax, Chandigarh -1
3.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax, Chandigarh. 2
4.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax, Patiala
5.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax (Audit),
Chandigarh
6.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax (TDS),
Chandigarh
7.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax (Computer
Operations), Chandigarh
8.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax (ITAT),
Chandigarh
9.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals),
Chandigarh
10.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals),
Patiala
11.
O/o The Income Tax Range-1, Chandigarh
12.
O/o The Income Tax Range-2, Chandigarh
13.
O/o The Income Tax Range-3, Chandigarh
14.
O/o The Income Tax Range-4, Chandigarh
15.
O/o The Income Tax Range-5, Chandigarh
16.
O/o The Income Tax Range-6, Chandigarh
17.
O/o The Income Tax Range, Patiala
18.
O/o The Income Tax Range, Mandi Gobindgarh
[Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)]
Hkkjr dk jkti= % vDrwcj 13] 2012@vkf'ou 21] 1934
7523
19 .
O/o The Income Tax Range, Sangrur
20.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Nangal
21.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ropar
22.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Rajpura
23.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Sirhind
24.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Nabha
25.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Barnala
26.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Sunam
Chief Commissioner of Income Tax, Shimla and
Subordinate Offices
27.
O/o The Chief Commissioner of Income Tax, Shimla
28.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax, Shimla
29.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals),
Shimla
30.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax, Shimla
Range, Shimla
31.
O/o The Joint Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle
Shimla
32.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Shimla
33.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward-2, Shimla
34.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward-3, Shimla
35.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Rampur
36.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, TDS, Shimla
37.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, TDS, Palampur
38.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, TDS, Solan
39.
O/o The Dy. Director of Income Tax(Inv.), Shimla
40.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax, Mandi
41.
O/o The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax (Circle),
Mandi
42.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Mandi
43.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Bilaspur
44.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Hamirpur
45.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Kullu
46.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Sundernagar
47.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax,
Palampur Range
48.
O/o The Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax (Circle),
Palampur
49.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Dalhousie
50.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Dharamshala
51.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Noorpur
52.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Palampur
53.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Una
54.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax, Solan
Range
55.
O/o The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax (Circle),
Parwanoo
56.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Baddi
57.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Nahan
58.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Parwanoo
59.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Solan
60.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward-2, Solan
Chief Commissioner of Income Tax, Haryana Region
and Subordinate Offices
61.
O/o The Chief Commissioner of Income Tax,
Panchkula
62.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax, Panchkula
63.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax,
Panchkula Range, Panchkula
64.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals),
Panchkula
65.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax,
Yamunanagar Range, Yamunanagar
66.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax,
Ambala Range, Ambala
Karnal Charge and Subordinate Offices
67.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax, Karnal
68.
O/o The Joint Commissioner of Income Tax, Karnal
Range, Karnal
69.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax,
Panipat Range, Panipat
70.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax,
Kurukshetra Range, Kurukshetra
71.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Kaithal
Rohtak Charge and Subordinate Offices
72.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax, Rohtak
73.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax, (Appeals),
Rohtak
74.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax, Rohtak
Range
75.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax,
Sonepat Range
7524
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 13, 2012/ASVINA 21, 1934
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
76.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax, Rewari
Range
77.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Narnaul
Hissar Charge and Subordinate Offices
78.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax, Hissar
79.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax, Hissar
Range
80.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax, Sirsa Range
81.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax,
Bhiwani Range
82.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Jind
83.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Fatehabad
Faridabad Charge and Subordinate Offices
84.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax, Faridabad
85.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals),
Faridabad
86.
O/o The Faridabad Range-1, Faridabad
87.
O/o The Faridabad Range-2, Faridabad
88.
O/o The Gurgaon Range-1, Gurgaon
89.
O/o The Gurgaon Range-2, Gurgaon
Chief Commissioner of Income Tax, Ludhiana Region
and Subordinate Offices
90.
O/o The Chief Commissioner of Income Tax,
Ludhiana
91.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax, Ludhiana-1
92.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax, Ludhiana-2
93.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax, Ludhiana-3
94.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax, (Appeals)-1,
Ludhiana
95.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax, (Appeals)-2,
Ludhiana
96.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax, Range-1,
Ludhiana
97.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax, Range-2,
Ludhiana
98.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax, Range-3,
Ludhiana
99.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax, Range-4,
Ludhiana
100.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax, Range-5,
Ludhiana
101.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax,
Range-6, Ludhiana
102.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax,
Range-7, Ludhiana
103.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax,
Range-Khanna
104.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax,
Range-Moga
105.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Malerkotla
106.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Jagraon
Jalandhar Charge and Subordinate Offices
107.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax, Jalandhar -1
108.
O/o The Joint Commissioner of Income Tax, Range -1,
Jalandhar
109.
O/o The Joint Commissioner of Income Tax, Range -2,
Jalandhar
110.
O/o The Joint Commissioner of Income Tax, Range
-Hoshiarpur
111.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Dasuha
112.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Nawanshahar
113.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax, Jalandhar -2
114.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax, Range -3,
Jalandhar
115.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax, Range -4,
Jalandhar
116.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax, Range
Phagwara
117.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Nakodar
118.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Kapurthala
Chief Commissioner of Income Tax, Amritsar Region
and Subordinate Offices
119.
O/o The Chief Commissioner of Income Tax,
Amritsar
120.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax-1, Amritsar
Headquarter, Amritsar
121.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax, Range-1,
Amritsar
122.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Tarantaaran
123.
O/o The Addl.Commissioner of Income Tax, Range-2,
Amritsar
124.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Batala
125.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax, Range-3,
Amritsar
126.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax-2
Headquarter, Amritsar
[Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)]
Hkkjr dk jkti= % vDrwcj 13] 2012@vkf'ou 21] 1934
7525
127.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax, Range-
4, Amritsar
128.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax, Range-
5, Amritsar
129.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Gurdaspur
130.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax, Range-
6, Pathankot
131.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax, Headquarter
Bathinda
132.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax, Range-
1, Bathinda
133.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Mansa
134.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax, Range-
2,Bathinda
135.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Abohar
136.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Muktsar
137.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax, Range-
3, Ferozepur
138.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Faridkot
139.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax, Headquarter
Jammu
140.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax, (Appeal)
Jammu
141.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax, Range-
1, Jammu
142.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax, Range-
2, Jammu
143.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax, Range-
3,Srinagar
144.
O/o The Assistant Director of Income Tax (Inv.)
Jammu
145.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Kathua
146.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Udhampur
147.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, (TDS) Jammu
148.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, (TRO) Jammu
149.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Anantnaag
Directorate General of Income Tax (Inv.), North-West
Region, Chandigarh & Subordinate Offices
150.
O/o The Director General of Income tax (Inv.),
Chandigarh
151.
O/o The Director of Income tax (Inv.), Chandigarh
152.
O/o The Addl. Director of Income tax (Inv.),
Faridabad
153.
O/o The Assistant Director of Income tax (Inv.),
Hissar
154.
O/o The Assistant Director of Income tax (Inv.),
Panipat
155.
O/o The Assistant Director of Income tax (Inv.),
Shimla
156.
O/o The Assistant Director of Income tax (Inv.),
Ambala
157.
O/o The Assistant Director of Income tax (Inv.),
Gurgaon
158.
O/o The Director of Income tax (Inv.), Ludhiana
159.
O/o The Joint Director of Income tax (Inv.),
Jalandhar
160.
O/o The Joint Director of Income tax (Inv.), Amritsar
161.
O/o The Assistant Director of Income tax (Inv.),
Bathinda
162.
O/o The Assistant Director of Income tax (Inv.),
Patiala
163.
O/o The Joint Director of Income tax (Inv.), Srinagar
164.
O/o The Assistant Director of Income tax (Inv.),
Jammu
165.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax (Central),
Ludhiana
166.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax
(Central), Range Ludhiana
167.
O/o The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax
(Central), Patiala
168.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax
(Central Range), Jalandhar
169.
O/o The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax (Central
Circle) Amritsar
170.
O/o The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax
(Central Circle), Jammu
171.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax (Central),
Gurgaon
172.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax
(Central Range), Chandigarh
173.
O/o The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax
(Central Circle), Karnal
174.
O/o The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax
(Central Circle), Faridabad
Chief Commissioner of Income Tax, Jaipur Region and
Subordinate Offices
S.No.
Name of the Office
1.
O/o Chief Commissioner of Income Tax, Jaipur
2.
O/o Director General of Income Tax (Inv.), Jaipur
3.
O/o Commissioner of Income Tax-I, Jaipur
7526
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 13, 2012/ASVINA 21, 1934
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
4.
O/o Commissioner of Income Tax, (Appeal-I), Jaipur
5.
O/o Commissioner of Income Tax -II, Jaipur
6.
O/o Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal-II), Jaipur
7.
O/o Commissioner of Income Tax -III, Jaipur
8.
O/o Commissioner of Income Tax -(Appeals III),
Jaipur
9.
O/o Commissioner of Income Tax (TDS), Jaipur
10.
O/o Director of Income Tax (CIB), Jaipur
11.
O/o Commissioner of Income Tax (Central), Jaipur
12.
O/o Commissioner of Income Tax (Central- Appeal),
Jaipur
13.
O/o Commissioner of Income Tax (Computer
Operation), Jaipur
14.
O/o Commissioner of Income Tax (Audit), Jaipur
15.
O/o Commissioner of Income Tax (ITAT-I), Jaipur
16.
O/o Commissioner of Income Tax (ITAT-II), Jaipur
17.
O/o Commissioner of Income Tax (ITA T), Jodhpur
18.
O/o Commissioner of Income Tax, Alwar
19.
O/o Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal), Alwar
20.
O/o Director of Income Tax (Investigation), Jaipur
21.
O/o Additional Commissioner of Income Tax (Hqrs.
Admn.), Jaipur
22.
O/o Additional Commissioner of Income Tax (Co-
ordination), Jaipur
23.
O/o Additional Commissioner of Income Tax
(Technical), Jaipur
24.
O/o Additional Commissioner of Income Tax
(Vigilance), Jaipur
25.
O/o Additional Commissioner of Income Tax, Range-
1, Jaipur
26.
O/o Additional Commissioner of Income Tax, Range-
2, Jaipur
27.
O/o Additional Commissioner of Income Tax, Range-
3, Jaipur
28.
O/o Additional Commissioner of Income Tax, Range-
4, Jaipur
29.
O/o Additional Commissioner of Income Tax, Range-
5, Jaipur
30.
O/o Additional Commissioner of Income Tax, Range-
6, Jaipur
31.
O/o Additional Commissioner of Income Tax, Range-
7, Jaipur
32.
O/o Additional Commissioner of Income Tax, Range-
Sikar
33.
O/o Additional Commissioner of Income Tax, Range-
Jhunjhunu
34.
O/o Additional Commissioner of Income Tax, Range-
Bharatpur
35.
O/o Additional/Joint Commissioner of Income Tax,
(Computer Operation) Jaipur/Jodhpur
36.
O/o Additional Commissioner of Income Tax,
(Audit), Jaipur
37.
O/o Additional Commissioner of Income Tax, (TDS),
Jaipur
38.
O/o Additional Commissioner of Income Tax, CIB
Jaipur/Jodhpur
39.
O/o Additional Director of Income Tax,
(Investigation), Jaipur/Jodhpur
40.
O/o Additional Commissioner of Income Tax,
(International Taxation), Jaipur
41.
O/o Additional Commissioner of Income Tax,
(Central), Jaipur
42.
O/o Additional Commissioner of Income Tax,
Range -1, Alwar
43.
O/o Additional Commissioner of Income Tax,
Range -2, Alwar
44.
O/o Additional/Joint Commissioner of Income Tax,
(ITA T), Jaipur
45.
O/o Additional/Joint Commissioner of Income Tax,
(ITA T), Jodhpur
46.
O/o Income Tax Officer (MSTU), Jaipur
Chief Commissioner of Income Tax, Lucknow Region
and Subordinate Offices
S.No.
Name of the office
1.
O/o The Chief Commissioner of Income Tax,
Lucknow
2.
O/o The Chief Commissioner of Income Tax -1.
Lucknow
3.
O/o The Chief Commissioner of Income Tax -2,
Lucknow
4.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax (TDS),
Lucknow
5.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax (Audit),
Lucknow
6.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax (Computer
Operations), Lucknow
[Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)]
Hkkjr dk jkti= % vDrwcj 13] 2012@vkf'ou 21] 1934
7527
7.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax (Income Tax
Appellate Tribunal), Lucknow
8.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax, Faizabad
9.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) -1,
Lucknow
10.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) -2,
Lucknow
11.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) -3,
Lucknow
12.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax, Range -1,
Lucknow.
13.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax, Range -
2, Lucknow
14.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax, Range -3,
Lucknow
15.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax, Range -4,
Lucknow
16.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax, Range -5,
Lucknow
17.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax, Range -6,
Lucknow
18.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax,
Faizabad
19.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax,
Sultanpur
20.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax, Gonda
21.
O/o The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Range -1.
Lucknow
22.
O/o The Income Tax Officer -1(1), Lucknow
23.
O/o The Income Tax Officer -1 (2), Lucknow
24.
O/o The Income Tax Officer -1(3), Lucknow
25.
O/o .The Income Tax Officer -1(4), Lucknow
26.
O/o The Tax Recovery Officer, Range -1, Lucknow
27.
O/o The Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax, Range- 2,
Lucknow
28.
O/o The Income Tax Officer -2(1), Lucknow
29.
O/o The Income Tax Officer -2(2), Lucknow
30.
O/o The Income Tax Officer -2(3), Lucknow
31.
O/o The Income Tax Officer -2(4), Unnao
32.
O/o The Tax Recovery Officer -2, Lucknow
33.
O/o The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax,
Range -3, Lucknow
34.
O/o The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax,
Range -3(1) Lucknow
35.
O/o The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax,
Range -3(2) Lucknow
36.
O/o The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Range -
3(3) Lucknow
37.
O/o The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Range -
3(4) Lucknow
38.
O/o The Tax Recovery Officer -Range- 3, Lucknow
39.
O/o The Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax,
Range- 4, Lucknow
40.
O/o The Income Tax Officer -4(1), Lucknow
41.
O/o The Income Tax Officer -4(2), Lucknow
42.
O/o The Income Tax Officer -4(3), Lucknow
43.
O/o The Income Tax Officer -4(4), Lucknow
44.
O/o The Tax Recovery Officer -4, Lucknow
45.
O/o The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Range-
5, Lucknow
46.
O/o The Income Tax Officer -5(1), Lucknow
47.
O/o The Income Tax Officer -5(2), Lucknow
48.
O/o The Income Tax Officer -5(3), Lucknow
49.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Barabanki
50.
O/o The Tax Recovery Officer -5, Lucknow
51.
O/o The Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax, Range-
6, Lucknow
52.
O/o The Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax, Range-
6(1), Lucknow
53.
O/o The Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax, Range-
6(2), Lucknow
54.
O/o The Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax, Range-
6(3), Lucknow
55.
O/o The Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax, Range-
6(4), Lucknow
56.
O/o The Tax Recovery Officer -6, Lucknow
57.
O/o The Income Tax Officer -1. Faizabad
58.
O/o The Income Tax Officer -2. Faizabad
59.
O/o The Income Tax Officer -3. Faizabad
60.
O/o The Tax Recovery Officer, Faizabad
61.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Jaunpur
62.
O/o The Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax,
Sultanpur
7528
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 13, 2012/ASVINA 21, 1934
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
63.
O/o The Income Tax Officer -1. Sultanpur
64.
O/o The Income Tax Officer -2. Sultanpur
65.
O/o The Tax Recovery Officer, Sultanpur
66.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Rai Bareili
67.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Pratapgarh
68.
O/o The Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax,
Gonda
69.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Gonda
70.
O/o The Tax Recovery Officer, Gonda
71.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Basti
72.
O/o The Income Tax Officer- 1, Bahraich
73.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax, Appropriate
Authority, Lucknow
74.
O/o The Dy. Valuation Officer, Lucknow
75.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax (TDS),
Lucknow
76.
O/o The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax (TDS),
Lucknow
77.
O/o The Income Tax Officer (TDS)-1, Lucknow
78.
O/o The Income Tax Officer (TDS)-2, Lucknow
79.
O/o The Income Tax Officer (TDS), Faizabad
Director General of Income Tax (Investigation), Region
Lucknow and Subordinate Offices
80.
O/o The Director General of Income Tax
(Investigation), Lucknow
81.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax (I&C.I),
Lucknow
82.
O/o The Addl. Director of Income Tax (Inv.),
Lucknow
83.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax
(Central Circle), Lucknow
84.
O/o The Dy./Asstt. Director of Income Tax,
(Investigation)-1, Lucknow
85.
O/o The Dy./Asstt. Director of Income Tax,
(Investigation)-2, Lucknow
86.
O/o The Dy./Asstt. Director of Income Tax,
(Central)-1, Lucknow
87.
O/o The Dy./Asstt. Director of Income Tax,
(Central)-2, Lucknow
88.
O/o The Income Tax Officer (Air Intelligence Unit),
Lucknow
Chief Commissioner of Income Tax, Allahabad Region
and Subordinate Offices
S.No.
Name of the office
(1)
(2)
1.
O/o The Chief Commissioner of Income Tax,
Allahabad
2.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax, Allahabad/
Varanasi/Gorakhpur
3.
O/o Commissioner of Income Tax (Departmental
Representative) ITA T, Allahabad
4.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax(Appea1),
Allahabad/Varanasi
5.
O/o The Add1. Director of Income Tax
(Investigation), Varanasi
6.
O/o The Joint Director of Income Tax(TDS),
Allahabad
7.
O/o The Dy./Asstt. Director of Income Tax
(Investigation), Allahabad/Varanasi
8.
O/o The Addl./Jt. of Income Tax, Range-I,
Allahabad/Varanasi/Gorakhpur
9.
O/o The Dy./Assistant Commissioner of Income
Tax, Circle -1, Allahabad/Varanasi/Gorakhpur
10.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Range 1(1), Allahabad/
Varanasi/Gorakhpur
11.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Range 1(2), Allahabad/
Varanasi/Gorakhpur
12.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Range 1(3), Allahabad/
Varanasi/Gorakhpur
13.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Range 1(4), Allahabad/
Bhadohi/Gorakhpur
14.
O/o The Tax Recovery Officer, Range-I Allahabad/
Varanasi/Gorakhpur
15.
O/o The Addl./Jt. Commissioner of Income Tax,
Range -2, Allahabad/Varanasi/Gorakhpur
16.
O/o The Dy./Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax,
Circle -2, Allahabad/Varanasi/Gorakhpur
17.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Range 2(1), Allahabad/
Varanasi/Gorakhpur
18.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Range 2(2), Allahabad/
Varanasi/Gorakhpur
19.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Range 2(3), Allahabad/
Varanasi/Gorakhpur
20.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Range 2(4), Fatehpur/
Ballia/Kushi Nagar
[Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)]
Hkkjr dk jkti= % vDrwcj 13] 2012@vkf'ou 21] 1934
7529
21.
O/o The Tax Recovery Officer, Range-II, Allahabad/
Varanasi/Gorakhpur
22.
O/o The Addl./Jt. Commissioner of Income Tax,
Range-3, Mirzapur/Varanasi/Azamgarh
23.
O/o The Dy./Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax,
Circle -3, Mirzapur/Varanasi/Azamgarh
24.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Range 3(1), Mirzapur
Varanasi/ Azamgarh
25.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Range 3(2), Mirzapur
Varanasi/ Azamgarh
26.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Range 3(3), Mirzapur
Varanasi/ Deoriya
27.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Range 3(4), Fatehpur
Varanasi/ Mau
28.
O/o The Tax Recovery Officer, Range- 3, Allahabad/
Varanasi/Gorakhpur
29.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, (Internal Audit),
Allahabad/Varanasi/Gorakhpur
30.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, (lntelligence &
Criminal Investigation), Allahabad/Varanasi
Gorakhpur
31.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, (TDS), Allahabad/
Varanasi/Gorakhpur
32.
O/o The Add1./Jt. Commissioner of Income Tax,
(Central Circle), Varanasi
33.
O/o The Dy./Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax,
(Central Circle), Allahabad/Varanasi/Gorakhpur
Chief Commissioner of Income Tax, Patna Region and
Subordinate Offices
S.No.
Name of the office
1.
O/o The Chief Commissioner of Income Tax (CCA),
Patna
2.
O/o The Chief Commissioner of Income Tax -II,
Patna
3.
O/o The Chief Commissioner of Income Tax, Ranchi
4.
O/o The Directorate General of Income Tax (Inv.),
Patna
5.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax-I, Patna
6.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax (TDS), Patna
7.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax (Audit &
Comp. Op.), Patna
8.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal -I),
Patna
9.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax, Bhagalpur
10.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax, Dhanbad
11.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal ),
Dhanbad
12.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax-2, Patna
13.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax (ITA T), Patna
14.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax , Muzaffarpur
15.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal),
Muzaffarpur
16.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax, Ranchi
17.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal),
Ranchi
18.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax (ITAT),
Ranchi
19.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax, Jamshedpur
20.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal),
Jamshedpur
21.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax, Hazaribagh
22.
O/o The Directorate of Income tax (Inv.), Patna
23.
O/o The Commissioner of Income tax (Central),
Patna
24.
O/o The Addl./Jt. Commissioner of Income Tax,
Range-I, Patna
25.
O/o The Addl./Jt. Commissioner of Income Tax,
Range-2, Patna
26.
O/o The Addl./Jt. Commissioner of Income Tax,
Range-3, Gaya
27.
O/o The Joint Commissioner of Income Tax (TDS),
Patna
28.
O/o The Addl. /Joint Commissioner of Income Tax,
Range-4, Patna
29.
O/o The Addl./Jt. Commissioner of Income Tax
(TDS), Dhanbad
30.
O/o The Addl./Jt. Commissioner of Income Tax
(Audit), Patna
31.
O/o The Addl./Jt. Commissioner of Income Tax
(C.O.), Patna
32.
O/o The Addl./Jt. Commissioner of Income Tax,
Range-1, Bhagalpur
33.
O/o The Addl./Jt. Commissioner of Income Tax,
Range-2, Begusarai
34.
O/o The Addl./Jt. Commissioner of Income Tax,
Range-3, Purnea
7530
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 13, 2012/ASVINA 21, 1934
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
35.
O/o The Addl./Jt. Commissioner of Income Tax,
Range-1, Dhanbad
36.
O/o The Addl./Jt. Commissioner of Income Tax,
Range-2, Dhanbad
37.
O/o The Addl./Jt. Commissioner of Income Tax,
Range-4, Patna
38.
O/o The Addl./Jt. Commissioner of Income Tax,
Range-5, Patna
39.
O/o The Addl./Jt. Commissioner of Income Tax,
Range-6 Patna
40.
O/o The Addl./Jt. Commissioner of Income Tax,
(ITA T), Patna
41.
O/o The Addl./Jt. Commissioner of Income Tax,
Range-1, Muzaffarpur
42.
O/o The Addl./Jt. Commissioner of Income Tax,
Range-2, Muzaffarpur
43.
O/o The Addl./Jt. Commissioner of Income Tax,
Range-3, Darbhanga
44.
O/o The Addl./Jt. Commissioner of Income Tax,
Range-1, Ranchi
45.
O/o The Addl./Jt. Commissioner of Income Tax,
Range-2, Ranchi
46.
O/o The Addl./Jt. Commissioner of Income Tax,
Range-3, Ranchi
47.
O/o The Addl./Jt. Commissioner of Income Tax,
Range-1, Jamshedpur
48.
O/o The Addl./Jt. Commissioner of Income Tax,
Range-2, Jamshedpur
49.
O/o The Addl./Jt. Commissioner of Income Tax,
Range-2, Hazaribagh
50.
O/o The Addl./Jt. Commissioner of Income Tax,
Range-3, Bokaro
51.
O/o The Addl./Jt. Director of Income Tax (Inv.),
Patna
52.
O/o The Addl./Jt. Director of Income Tax (Inv.),
Ranchi
53.
O/o The Addl./Jt. Director of Income Tax (Central
Range)-1, Patna
54.
O/o The Addl./Jt. Director of Income Tax (Central
Range)-2, Ranchi
55.
O/o The Dy./Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax,
Circle-1, Patna
56.
O/o The Dy./ Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax,
Circle-2, Patna
57.
O/o The Dy./Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax,
Circle-3, Gaya
58.
O/o The Dy./ Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax,
(TDS), Patna
59.
O/o The Dy./ Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax,
(TDS), Ranchi
60.
O/o The Dy./Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax,
(TDS), Jamshedpur
61.
O/o The Dy./Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax,
(TDS), Bokaro
62.
O/o The Dy./Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax,
(Audit), Patna
63.
O/o The Dy./Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax,
(System), Patna .
64.
O/o The Dy./Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax,
(C.O.), Ranchi
65.
O/o The Dy./Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax,
Circle-1, Bhagalpur
66.
O/o The Dy./Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax,
Circle-2, Begusarai
67.
O/o The Dy./Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax,
Circle-3, Purnea
68.
O/o The Dy./Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax,
Circle-1, Dhanbad
69.
O/o The Dy./Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax,
Circle-2, Dhanbad
70.
O/o The Dy./Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax,
Circle-3, Deoghar
71.
O/o The Dy./Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax,
Circle-4, Patna
72.
O/o The Dy./Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax,
Circle-5, Patna
73.
O/o The Dy./ Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax,
Circle-6, Patna
74.
O/o The Dy./Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax,
Circle-1, Muzaffarpur
75.
O/o The Dy./ Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax,
Circle -2, Muzaffarpur
76.
O/o The Dy./Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax,
Circle -3, Darbhanga
77.
O/o The Dy./ Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax,
Circle-1, Ranchi
78.
O/o The Dy./Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax,
Circle -2, Ranchi
79.
O/o The Dy./Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax,
Circle -3, Ranchi
[Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)]
Hkkjr dk jkti= % vDrwcj 13] 2012@vkf'ou 21] 1934
7531
80.
O/o The Dy./Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax,
Circle -1, Jamshedpur
81.
O/o The Dy./Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax,
Circle -2, Jamshedpur
82.
O/o The Dy./Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax,
Circle -3, Jamshedpur
83.
O/o The Dy./ Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax,
Circle -2, Hazaribagh
84.
O/o The Dy./ Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax,
Circle -3, Bokaro
85.
O/o The Dy./Asstt. Director of Income Tax, (Inv.)-
1, Patna
86.
O/o The Dy./Asstt. Director of Income Tax, (Inv.)- 2,
Patna
87.
O/o The Dy./Asstt. Director of Income Tax, (Inv.),
Bhagalpur
88.
O/o The Dy./ Asstt. Director of Income Tax, (Inv.),
Muzaffarpur
89.
O/o The Dy./Asstt. Director of Income Tax, (Inv.)-
1, Ranchi
90.
O/o The Dy./Asstt. Director of Income Tax, (lnv.)-
2, Ranchi
91.
O/o The Dy./Asstt. Director of Income Tax, (lnv.),
Dhanbad
92.
O/o The Dy./Asstt. Director of Income Tax, (lnv.),
Jamshedpur
93.
O/o The Dy./Asstt. Director of Income Tax, Central
Circle-1, Patna
94.
O/o The Dy./Asstt. Director of Income Tax, Central
Circle-2, Patna
95.
O/o The Dy./Asstt. Director of Income Tax, Central
Circle-3, Patna
96.
O/o The Dy./Asstt. Director of Income Tax, Central
Circle, Muzaffarpur
97.
O/o The Dy./Asstt. Director of Income Tax, Central
Circle-1, Ranchi
98.
O/o The Dy./Asstt. Director of Income Tax, Central
Circle-2, Ranchi
99.
O/o The Dy./Asstt. Director of Income Tax, Central
Circle-3, Ranchi
100.
O/o The Dy./Asstt. Director of Income Tax, Central
Circle, Dhanbad
101.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(1), Patna
102.
O/o The Tax Recovery Officer-1, Patna
103.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Arrah
104.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Hajipur
105.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(2), Patna
106.
O/o The Tax Recovery Officer -2, Patna
107.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Biharsharif
108.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward-2, Biharsharif
109.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Gaya
110.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward-2, Gaya
111.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward-3, Gaya
112.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Sasaram
113.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward-2, Sasaram
114.
O/o The Tax Recovery Officer -3, Gaya
115.
O/o The Income Tax Officer (TDS), Dhanbad
116.
O/o The Income Tax Officer (TDS), Ranchi Range
117.
O/o The Income Tax Officer (TDS), Bhagalpur
118.
O/o The Income Tax Officer (TDS), Begusarai
119.
O/o The Income Tax Officer (TDS), Muzaffarpur
120.
O/o The Income Tax Officer (IAP)-Unit-1, Patna
121.
O/o The Income Tax Officer (IAP)-Unit-2, Patna
122.
O/o The Income Tax Officer (IAP)-Unit-3, Patna
123.
O/o The Income Tax Officer (IAP)-Unit-Muzaffarpur
124.
O/o The Income Tax Officer (IAP)-Unit-Bhagalpur
125.
O/o The Income Tax Officer (IAP)-Unit-Dhanbad
126.
O/o The Income Tax Officer (IAP) -Unit-Jamshedpur
127.
O/o The Income Tax Officer (IAP)-Unit-Hazaribagh
128.
O/o The Income Tax Officer (IAP)-Unit -Ranchi
129.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(1), Bhagalpur
130.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(2), Bhagalpur
131.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(3), Bhagalpur
132.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward, Katihar
133.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward -1, Begusarai
134.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward -2, Begusarai
135.
O/o The Tax Recovery Officer-3, Begusarai
136.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Munger
137.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward-2, Munger
138.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Purnea
139.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward-2, Purnea
7532
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 13, 2012/ASVINA 21, 1934
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
140.
O/o The Tax Recovery Officer, Purnea
141.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Saharasa
142.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward-2, Saharasa
143.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(1), Dhanbad
144.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(2), Dhanbad
145.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(3), Dhanbad
146.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(4), Dhanbad
147.
O/o The Tax Recovery Officer, Dhanbad
148.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(1), Dhanbad
149.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(2), Dhanbad
150.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(3), Dhanbad
151.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(4), Dhanbad
152.
O/o The Tax Recovery Officer, Ward -2, Dhanbad
153.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward-3(1), Deoghar
154.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward-3(2), Deoghar
155.
O/o The Tax Recovery Officer-3, Deoghar
156.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward-3(3), Giridih
157.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward-3(4), Sahebganj
158.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward-4(1), Patna
159.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward -4(2), Patna
160.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward -4(3), Patna
161.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward -4(4), Patna
162.
O/o The Tax Recovery Officer-4, Patna
163.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward -5(1), Patna
164.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward -5(2), Patna
165.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward -5(3), Patna
166.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward -5(4), Patna
167.
O/o The Tax Recovery Officer-5, Patna
168.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward -6(1), Patna
169.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward -6(2), Patna
170.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward -6(3), Patna
171.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, ward -6(4), Patna
172.
O/o The Tax Recovery Officer-6, Patna
173.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(1), Muzaffarpur
174.
O/o The Tax Recovery Officer, Muzaffarpur
175.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Motihari
176.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward -2, Motihari
177.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Bettiah
178.
O/o The Tax Recovery Officer-2, Muzaffarpur
179.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(1), Muzaffarpur
180.
O/o The Tax Recovery Officer, Muzaffarpur
181.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Chapra
182.
O/o The Tax Recovery Officer, Siwan
183.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Sitamarhi
184.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward-3( 1), Darbhanga
185.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward-3(2), Darbhanga
186.
O/o The Tax Recovery Officer-3, Darbhanga
187.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Madhubani
188.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Samastipur
189.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward -1(1), Ranchi
190.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward -1(2), Ranchi
191.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward -1(3), Ranchi
192.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward -1(4), Ranchi
193.
O/o The Tax Recovery Officer-1, Ranchi
194.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(1), Ranchi
195.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(2), Ranchi
196.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(3), Ranchi
197.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(4), Ranchi
198.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward-3(1), Ranchi
199.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward-3(3), Ranchi
200.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward-3(4), Ranchi
201.
O/o The Tax Recovery Officer-3, Ranchi
202.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(1), Jamshedpur
203.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(2), Jamshedpur
204.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(3), Jamshedpur
205.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(4), Jamshedpur
206.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(1), Jamshedpur
207.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(2), Jamshedpur
208.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(3), Jamshedpur
209.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(4), Jamshedpur
210.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward-3(1), Jamshedpur
211.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward-3(2), Jamshedpur
212.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward-3(3), Jamshedpur
213.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward-3(4), Jamshedpur
[Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)]
Hkkjr dk jkti= % vDrwcj 13] 2012@vkf'ou 21] 1934
7533
214.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(1), Hazaribagh
215.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(2), Hazaribagh
216.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward -2(3), Hazaribagh
217.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward -2(4), Hazaribagh
218.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward -2(5), Hazaribagh
219.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward -2(6), Hazaribagh
220.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward -2(7), Hazaribagh
221.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward -2(8), Hazaribagh
222.
O/o The Tax Recovery Officer, Hazaribagh
223.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward -3(1), Bokaro
224.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward -3(2), Bokaro
225.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward -3(3), Bokaro
226.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward -3(4), Bokaro
227.
O/o The Tax Recovery Officer-3, Bokaro
228.
O/o The Tax Recovery Officer, Central Circle-1,
Patna
229.
O/o The Tax Recovery Officer, Central Circle-2,
Ranchi
Chief Commissioner of Income Tax, Bhopal Region and
Subordinate Offices
S.No.
Name of the office
1.
O/o The Chief Commissioner of Income Tax, Bhopal
2.
O/o The Chief Commissioner of Income Tax,
Chhattisgarh Zone, Raipur
3.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax, Bhopal
4.
O/o The Joint Commissioner of Income Tax, Range -1,
Bhopal
5.
O/o The Joint Commissioner of Income Tax, Range -2,
Bhopal
6.
O/o The Joint Commissioner of Income Tax, Range -3,
Bhopal
7.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward -1and 2, Itarsi
8.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Betul
9.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Vidisha
10.
O/o The Commissioner of Income, Gwalior
11.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Shivpuri
12.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Guna
13.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Chhatarpur
14.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax (TDS),
Bhopal
15.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax (Audit),
Bhopal
16.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax (Computer
Operation), Bhopal
17.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal- 1),
Bhopal
18.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal- 2),
Bhopal
19.
O/o The Chief Commissioner of Income Tax, Indore
20.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax -1, Indore
21.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax -2, Indore
22.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax, Ujjain
23.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal- 1),
Indore
24.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal -2 ),
Indore
25.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal),
Ujjain
26.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax (ITAT),
Indore
27.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax
(Investigation), Indore
28.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax,
Khandwa
29.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax, Ratlam
30.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Dhar
31.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Mandsaur
32.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Neemuch
33.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Dewas
34.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Shajapur
35.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Khargone
36.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Burhanpur
37.
O/o The Directorate General of Income Tax (Inv.),
Bhopal
38.
O/o The Directorate of Income Tax (Inv.), Bhopal
39.
O/o The Directorate of Income Tax (Intelligence),
Bhopal
40.
O/o The Addl./Joint Director of Income Tax (Inv.),
Bhopal
41.
O/o The Addl./Joint Director of Income Tax (Inv.),
Indore
42.
O/o The Addl./Joint Director of Income Tax (Inv.),
Raipur
43.
O/o The Addl. /Joint Director of Inocome Tax (Inv.),
Jabalpur
44.
O/o The Dy./Joint Director of Inocome Tax (Inv.),
Gwalior
7534
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 13, 2012/ASVINA 21, 1934
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
O/o The Chief Commissioner of Income Tax, Delhi
Region and Subordinate Offices
1. O/o The Chief Commissioner of Income Tax, Delhi-1
1.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax, Delhi-1
2.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax, (Appeal)-4
3.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax, (Appeal)-5
4.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax, (Appeal)-6
5.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax, (Computer
Operation), Delhi
6.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax, (SC)-1, Delhi
7.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax, (SC)-2, Delhi
8.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax, (Helpline),
Delhi
9.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax, (Audit) I
and II, Delhi
10.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax, D.R.-ITSC- I
and II, Delhi
2. O/o The Chief Commissioner of Income Tax, Delhi -2
1.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax, Delhi -2
2.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax, (Appeal)-7
3.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax, (Appeal)-8
4.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax, (Appeal)-9
5.
O/o The Member, Appropriate Authority, Delhi
3. O/o The Chief Commissioner of Income Tax, Delhi -3
1.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax, Delhi -3
2.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax, (Judicial),
Delhi
3.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax, (ITAT), Delhi
4.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax, (Appeal)-
10, Delhi
5.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax, (Appeal)-
11, Delhi
6.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax, (Appeal)-
12, Delhi
7.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax, (Appeal) -
30, Delhi
4. O/o The Chief Commissioner of Income Tax, Delhi -4
1.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax, Delhi -4
2.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax, (Appeal) -
13, Delhi
3.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax, (Appeal) -
15, Delhi
5. O/o The Chief Commissioner of Income Tax, Delhi -5
1.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax, Delhi -5
2.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax, (Appeal)-
16, Delhi
3.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax, (Appeal)-
17, Delhi
4.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax, (Appeal)-
18, Delhi
6. O/o The Chief Commissioner of Income Tax, Delhi-6
1.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax, Delhi-6
2.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax, Delhi-10
3.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax, (Appeal)-
19, Delhi
4.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax, (Appeal)-
20, Delhi
5.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax, (Appeal)-
21, Delhi
6.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax, (Appeal)-
25, Delhi
7. O/o The Chief Commissioner of Income Tax, Delhi-8
1.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax, Delh-7
2.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax, Delhi-8
3.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax, (Appeal)-
22, Delhi
4.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax, (Appeal)-
23, Delhi
5.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax, (LTU), Delhi
8. O/o The Chief Commissioner of Income Tax, Delhi-9
1.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax, Delhi-9
2.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax, Delhi-24
9. O/o The Chief Commissioner of Income Tax, Delhi-11
1.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax, Delhi -11
2.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax, (Appeal) -
26, Delhi
10. O/o The Chief Commissioner of Income Tax, Delhi-12
1.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax, Delhi-12
2.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax, Delhi -13
3.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax, (Appeal) -27,
Delhi
4.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax, (Appeal) -28,
Delhi
[Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)]
Hkkjr dk jkti= % vDrwcj 13] 2012@vkf'ou 21] 1934
7535
11. O/o The Chief Commissioner of Income Tax, Delhi-13
1.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax, Delhi -14
2.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax, Delhi -15
3.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax, Delhi -16
4.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax, (Appeal) -30,
Delhi
12.
O/o The Chief Commissioner of Income Tax
(LTU), Delhi
1.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax (LTU), Delhi
13.
O/o The Director General of Income Tax
(International Taxation), Delhi
1 .
O/o The Director of Income Tax (International
Taxation)-I & II, Delhi
2.
O/o The Director of Income Tax ( Transfer Pricing )-I
and II, Delhi
3.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal)- 29,
Delhi
14.
O/o The Director General of Income Tax
(Exemption), Delhi
1.
O/o The Director of Income Tax (Exemption), Delhi
15.
O/o The Director General of Income Tax ( Legal &
Research ), Delhi
1.
O/o The Director of Income Tax -I (L & R), Delhi
2.
O/o The Director of Income Tax -II (L & R), Delhi
Chief Commissioner of Income Tax(Central), Delhi
Region and Subordinate Offices
1.
O/o The Chief Commissioner of Income Tax
(Central), Delhi
2.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax (Central) -1,
Delhi
3.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax (Central) -2,
Delhi
4.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax (Central) -3,
Delhi
5.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) -1,
Delhi
6.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) -2,
Delhi
7.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) -3,
Delhi
8.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) -31,
Delhi
9.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) -32,
Delhi
10.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) -33,
Delhi
Other Offices of Delhi Region
1.
Directorate General of Income Tax (Admn.), New
Delhi
2.
Directorate General of Income Tax (Vigilance), New
Delhi
3.
Directorate General of Income Tax (Investigation),
Delhi
4.
Directorate General of Income Tax (System), New
Delhi
5.
Directorate General of Income Tax (Intelligence &
Criminal), Delhi
6.
Directorate of Income Tax (PR,PP & OL), New Delhi
7.
Directorate of Income Tax (Recovery), New Delhi
8.
Directorate of Income Tax (IT & Audit), New Delhi
Chief Commissioner of Income Tax, Ahmedabad Region
and Subordinate Offices
1.
O/o The Chief Commissioner of Income Tax,
Ahmedabad-1
2.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax Ahmedabad-1
3.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax -1,
Ahmedabad
4.
O/o The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax Circle -1,
Ahmedabad
5.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward -1(1), Ahmedabad
6.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward -1(2), Ahmedabad
7.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward -1(3), Ahmedabad
8.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward -1(4), Ahmedabad
9.
O/o The Tax Recovery Officer, Range -1,
Ahmedabad
10.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax -2,
Ahmedabad
11.
O/o The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax Circle -2,
Ahmedabad
12.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward -2(1), Ahmedabad
13.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward -2(2), Ahmedabad
14.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward -2(3), Ahmedabad
15.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward -2(4), Ahmedabad
16.
O/o The Tax Recovery Officer, Range-2,
Ahmedabad
17.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax-3,
Ahmedabad
7536
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 13, 2012/ASVINA 21, 1934
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
18.
O/o The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax Circle -3,
Ahmedabad
19.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward -3(1), Ahmedabad
20.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward -3(2), Ahmedabad
21.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward -3(3), Ahmedabad
22.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward -3(4), Ahmedabad
23.
O/o The Tax Recovery Officer, Range -3,
Ahmedabad
24.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax, Ahmedabad-2
25.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax -4,
Ahmedabad
26.
O/o The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax Circle -4,
Ahmedabad
27.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward -4(1), Ahmedabad
28.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward -4(2), Ahmedabad
29.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward -4(3), Ahmedabad
30.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward -4(4), Ahmedabad
31.
O/o The Tax Recovery Officer, Range -4,
Ahmedabad
32.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax,
Himmatnagar Range
33.
O/o The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax,
Himmatnagar
34.
O/o The Income Tax Officer Ward -1, Himmatnagar
35.
O/o The Income Tax Officer Ward -2, Himmatnagar
36.
O/o The Income Tax Officer Ward -3, Himmatnagar
37.
O/o The Income Tax Officer Ward -4, Modasa
38.
O/o The Tax Recovery Officer Range -4,
Himmatnagar
39.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax, TDS,
Ahmedabad
40.
O/o The Joint Commissioner of Income Tax, TDS,
Ahmedabad
41.
O/o The Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax, TDS,
Ahmedabad
42.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, TDS -1, Ahmedabad
43.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, TDS -2, Ahmedabad
44.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, TDS -3, Ahmedabad
45.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, TDS -4, Ahmedabad
46.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, TDS, Gandhinagar
47.
O/o The Joint Commissioner of Income Tax -TDS,
Baroda
48.
O/o The Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax -TDS,
Baroda
49.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, TDS -I, Baroda
50.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, TDS-2, Baroda
51.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, TDS, Anand
52.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, TDS, Bharuch
53.
O/o The Joint Commissioner of Income Tax -TDS,
Rajkot
54.
O/o The Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax -TDS,
Rajkot
55.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, TDS -I, Rajkot
56.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, TDS-2, Rajkot
57.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, TDS, Jamnagar
58.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, TDS, Gandhidham
59.
O/o The Joint Commissioner of Income Tax -TDS,
Surat
60.
O/o The Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax -TDS,
Surat
61.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, TDS -I, Surat
62.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, TDS -2, Surat
63.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, TDS -3, Surat
64.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, TDS -4, Surat
65.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, TDS, Valsad
66.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax -(Comp.
Operation), Ahmedabad
67.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax
System, Ahmedabad
68.
O/o The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax System -
I, Ahmedabad
69.
O/o The Asstt. Director of Income Tax -System,
Ahmedabad
70.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, System -1, Ahmedabad
71.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, System -2, Ahmedabad
72.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax
System, Baroda
73.
O/o The Income Tax Officer System -1, Baroda
74
O/o The Income Tax Officer, MSTU, Baroda
75.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax
System, Rajkot
76.
O/o The Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax,
System, Rajkot
77.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax,
System, Surat
78.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, System, Surat
79.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax -Audit,
Ahmedabad
80.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax -Audit,
Ahmedabad
81.
O/o The Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax -Audit,
Ahmedabad
[Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)]
Hkkjr dk jkti= % vDrwcj 13] 2012@vkf'ou 21] 1934
7537
82.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, IAP -I, Ahmedabad
83.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, IAP -2, Ahmedabad
84.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, IAP -3, Ahmedabad
85.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, IAP -4, Ahmedabad
86.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, IAP -5, Ahmedabad
87.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, IAP -6, Ahmedabad
88.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, IAP -7, Ahmedabad
89.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, IAP -HQ. -I, Int.
Taxation Ahmedabad
90.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, IAP -HQ. -2, Exemption,
Ahmedabad
91.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, IAP -Central- I,
Ahmedabad
92.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, IAP -Central- 2,
Ahmedabad
93.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, IAP, Gandhinagar
94.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, IAP -1, Baroda
95.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, IAP -2, Baroda
96.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, IAP -3, Baroda
97.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, IAP -4, Baroda
98.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, IAP -1, Rajkot
99.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, IAP -2, Rajkot
100.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, IAP -3, Rajkot
101.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, IAP. Jamnagar
102.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax, Audit,
Surat
103.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, IAP -I, Surat
104.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, IAP -2, Surat
105.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, IAP -3, Surat
106.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, IAP, Valsad
107.
O/o The Chief Commissioner of Income Tax,
Ahmedabad-2, Ahmedabad
108.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax, Ahmedabad-
3, Ahmedabad
109.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax -5,
Ahmedabad
110.
O/o The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle -5,
Ahmedabad
111.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward -5(1), Ahmedabad
112.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward -5(2), Ahmedabad
113.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward -5(3), Ahmedabad
114.
O/o The Tax Recovery Officer, Range -5,
Ahmedabad
115.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax -6,
Ahmedabad
116.
O/o The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle -6,
Ahmedabad
117.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward -6(1), Ahmedabad
118.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward -6(2), Ahmedabad
119.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward -6(3), Ahmedabad
120.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward -6(4), Ahmedabad
121.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward -6(5), Ahmedabad
122.
O/o The Tax Recovery Officer, Range -6,
Ahmedabad
123.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax -7,
Ahmedabad
124.
O/o The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle -7,
Ahmedabad
125.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward -7(1), Ahmedabad
126.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward -7(2), Ahmedabad
127.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward -7(3), Ahmedabad
128.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward -7(4), Ahmedabad
129.
O/o The Tax Recovery Officer, Range -7,
Ahmedabad
130.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax, Ahmedabad - 4,
Ahmedabad
131.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax -8,
Ahmedabad
132.
O/o The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle -8,
Ahmedabad
133.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward -8(1), Ahmedabad
134.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward -8(2), Ahmedabad
135.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward -8(3), Ahmedabad
136.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward -8(4), Ahmedabad
137.
O/o The Tax Recovery Officer, Range -8,
Ahmedabad
138.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax -9,
Ahmedabad
139.
O/o The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle -9,
Ahmedabad
140.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward -9(1), Ahmedabad
141.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward -9(2), Ahmedabad
142.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward -9(3), Ahmedabad
143.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward -9(4), Ahmedabad
7538
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 13, 2012/ASVINA 21, 1934
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
144.
O/o The Tax Recovery Officer, Range -9,
Ahmedabad
145.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax,
Palanpur Range
146.
O/o The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Palanpur
147.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward -1, Palanpur
148.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward -2, Palanpur
149.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward -3, Palanpur
150.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward -4, Palanpur
151.
O/o The Tax Recovery Officer, Palanpur Range
152.
O/o The Tax Recovery Officer, Palanpur Range
153.
O/o The Chief Commissioner of Income Tax,
Ahmedabad-3, Ahmedabad
154.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax, Ahmedabad-
5, Ahmedabad
155.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax -10,
Ahmedabad
156.
O/o The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle -
10, Ahmedabad
157.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward -10(1),
Ahmedabad
158.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward -10(2),
Ahmedabad
159.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward -10(3),
Ahmedabad
160.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward -10(4),
Ahmedabad
161.
O/o The Tax Recovery Officer, Range -10,
Ahmedabad
162.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax -11,
Ahmedabad
163.
O/o The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle -
11, Ahmedabad
164.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward -11(1),
Ahmedabad
165.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward -11(2),
Ahmedabad
166.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward -11(3),
Ahmedabad
167
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward -11(4), Ahmedabad
168
O/o The Tax Recovery Officer, Range -11, Ahmedabad
169
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax ,
Surendernagar
170
O/o The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle,
Surendernagar
171
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward -1, Surendernagar
172
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward -2, Surendernagar
173
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward -3 Surendernagar
174
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward -4, Surendernagar
175
O/o The Tax Recovery Officer, Surendernagar
Range
176
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax, Ahmedabad-
6, Ahmedabad
177
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax -12,
Ahmedabad
178
O/o The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle -
12, Ahmedabad
179
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward -12(1),
Ahmedabad
180
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward -12(2),
Ahmedabad
181
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward -12(3),
Ahmedabad
182
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward -12(4),
Ahmedabad
183
O/o The Tax Recovery Officer, Range -12,
Ahmedabad
184
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax ,
Bhavnagar Range -1
185
O/o The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle -1,
Bhavnagar
186
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward -1(1), Bhavnagar
187
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward -1(2), Bhavnagar
188
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward -1(3), Bhavnagar
189
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward -1(4), Bhavnagar
190
O/o The Tax Recovery Officer, Range -1, Bhavnagar
191
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax ,
Bhavnagar Range -2
192
O/o The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle -2,
Bhavnagar
193
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward -2(1), Bhavnagar
194
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward -2(2), Bhavnagar
195
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward -2(3), Bhavnagar
196
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward -2(4), Bhavnagar
197
O/o The Tax Recovery Officer, Range -2, Bhavnagar
[Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)]
Hkkjr dk jkti= % vDrwcj 13] 2012@vkf'ou 21] 1934
7539
198.
O/o The Chief Commissioner of Income Tax,
Ahmedabad-4, Ahmedabad
199.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax -Ahmedabad-7
200.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax -13
Ahmedabad
201.
O/o The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle -13,
Ahmedabad
202.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward-13(1),
Ahmedabad
203.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward-13(2),
Ahmedabad
204.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward-13(3),
Ahmedabad
205.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward-13(4),
Ahmedabad
206.
O/o The Tax Recovery Officer, Range-13,
Ahmedabad
207.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax-14
Ahmedabad
208.
O/o The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax , Circle -
14, Ahmedabad
209.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward-14(1),
Ahmedabad
210.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward-14(2),
Ahmedabad
211.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward-14(3),
Ahmedabad
212.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward-14(4),
Ahmedabad
213.
O/o The Tax Recovery Officer, Range-14,
Ahmedabad
214.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax-15,
Ahmedabad
215.
O/o The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle -
15, Ahmedabad
216.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward-15(1),
Ahmedabad
217.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward-15(2),
Ahmedabad
218.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward-15(3),
Ahmedabad
219.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward-15(4),
Ahmedabad
220.
O/o The Tax Recovery Officer, Range-15,
Ahmedabad
221.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax, Gandhi
Nagar, Ahmedabad
222.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax , Patan
Range
223.
O/o The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax Circle,
Patan
224.
O/o The Income Tax Officer Ward -1, Patan
225.
O/o The Income Tax Officer Ward-2, Patan
226.
O/o The Income Tax Officer Ward-3, Patan,
Mehsana
227.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward-4, Patan,
Mehsana
228.
O/o The Tax Recovery Officer, Range, Patan
229.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax Gandhi
Nagar Range
230.
O/o The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax Circle,
Gandhi Nagar
231.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward -1, Gandhinagar
232.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward -2, Gandhinagar
233.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward -3, Gandhinagar
234.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward -4, Gandhinagar
235.
O/o The Tax Recovery Officer, Range Gandhinagar
236.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax
Mehsana Range
237.
O/o The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax Circle,
Mehsana
238.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward -1, Mehsana
239.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward -2, Mehsana
240.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward -3, Mehsana
241.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward -4, Mehsana
242.
O/o The Tax Recovery Officer, Range -Mahesana
243.
O/o The Directorate General of Income Tax (Inv.),
Ahmedabad
244.
O/o The Director of Income Tax (Inv.), Ahmedabad
245.
O/o The Addl. Director of Income Tax (Inv.), Unit -
1, Ahmedabad
246.
O/o The Dy. Director of Income Tax (Inv.), Unit -1 /
1, Ahmedabad
247.
O/o The Asstt. Director of Income Tax (Inv.), Unit -
1 /2, Ahmedabad
248.
O/o The Asstt. Director of Income Tax (Inv.), Unit -
1 /3, Ahmedabad
7540
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 13, 2012/ASVINA 21, 1934
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
249.
O/o The Dy. Director of Income Tax (Inv.),
Bhavnagar
250.
O/o The Income Tax Officer (Inv.), Bhavnagar
251.
O/o The Income Tax Officer (Inv. / AIU), Ahmedabad
252.
O/o The Income Tax Officer (Inv.), Unit -1,
Ahmedabad
253.
O/o The Addl. Director of Income Tax (Inv.), Unit -
2, Ahmedabad
254.
O/o The Asstt. Director of Income Tax (Inv.), Unit -
2 /1, Ahmedabad
255.
O/o The Asstt. Director of Income Tax (Inv.),
Mehsana
256.
O/o The Dy. Director of Income Tax (Inv.), Mehsana
257.
O/o The Income Tax Officer (Inv.), Unit -2,
Ahmedabad
258.
O/o The Income Tax Officer (Inv.), Mehsana
259.
O/o The Addl. Director of Income Tax (Inv.), Baroda
260.
O/o The Dy. Director of Income Tax (Inv.), Unit -1,
Baroda
261.
O/o The Asstt. Director of Income Tax (Inv.), Unit -
2, Baroda
262.
O/o The Income Tax Officer (Inv.), Baroda
263.
O/o The Asstt. Director of Income Tax (Inv.),
Bharuch
264.
O/o The Director of Income Tax (Inv.), Surat
265.
O/o The Addl. Director of Income Tax (Inv.), Unit -
1, Surat
266.
O/o The Dy. Director of Income Tax (Inv.), Unit -1,
Surat
267.
O/o The Asstt. Director of Income Tax (Inv.), Unit -
3, Surat
268.
O/o The Dy. Director of Income Tax (Inv.), Valsad
269.
O/o The Income Tax Officer (Inv.), Surat
270.
O/o The Addl. Director of Income Tax (Inv.), Rajkot
271.
O/o The Asstt. Director of Income Tax (Inv.), Unit -
I, Rajkot
272.
O/o The Asstt. Director of Income Tax (Inv.), Unit -2,
Rajkot
273.
O/o The Income Tax Officer (Inv.) & DDO, Rajkot
274.
O/o The Asstt. Director of Income Tax (Inv.),
Jamnagar
275.
O/o The Asstt. Director of Income Tax (Inv.),
Gandhidham
276.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax Central- 1,
Ahmedabad
277.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax,
Range -1, Ahmedabad
278.
O/o The Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax,
Circle -1(1), Ahmedabad
279.
O/o The Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax,
Circle -1(2), Ahmedabad
280.
O/o The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax Circle -
1(3), Ahmedabad
281.
O/o The Income Tax Officer Central, Ward -1(4),
Ahmedabad
282.
O/o Tax Recovery Officer Central, Range -1, Ahmedabad
283.
O/o The Income Tax Officer Central, Ward -1(1),
Ahmedabad
284.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax , Central
Range, Surat
285.
O/o The Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax , Central
Circle -1, Surat
286.
O/o The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central
Circle -2, Surat
287.
O/o The Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax ,
Central Circle -3, Surat
288.
O/o The Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central
Circle -4, Surat
289.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Central, Surat
290.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax, Central- 2,
Ahmedabad
291.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax,
Range -2, Ahmedabad
292.
O/o The Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central
Circle -2(1), Ahmedabad
293.
O/o The Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax ,
Central Circle -2(3), Ahmedabad
294.
O/o The Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central
Circle -2(4), Ahmedabad
295.
O/o The Tax Recovery Officer, Central Range -2,
Ahmedabad
296.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Central Ward -2(1),
Ahmedabad
297.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central
Range, Baroda
298.
O/o The Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central
Circle -1, Baroda
299.
O/o The Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax , Central
Circle -2, Baroda
[Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)]
Hkkjr dk jkti= % vDrwcj 13] 2012@vkf'ou 21] 1934
7541
300.
O/o The Tax Recovery Officer & Income Tax Officer,
Central Ward -1, Baroda
301.
O/o The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central
Circle -2, Rajkot
302.
O/o The Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax , Central
Circle -2, Rajkot
303.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Central Ward, Rajkot
304.
O/o The Chief Commissioner of Income Tax, Baroda
305.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax, Baroda-1
306.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax,
Range -1, Baroda
307.
O/o The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax
Circle -1(1), Baroda
308.
O/o The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax
Circle -1(2), Baroda
309.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward -1(1), Baroda
310.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward -1(2), Baroda
311.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward -1(3), Baroda
312.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward -1(4), Baroda
313.
O/o The Tax Recovery Officer, Range -1, Baroda
314.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax Range
-2, Baroda
315.
O/o The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax
Circle -2(1), Baroda
316.
O/o The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax
Circle -2(2), Baroda
317.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward -2(1), Baroda
318.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward -2(2), Baroda
319.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward -2(3), Baroda
320.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward -2(4), Baroda
321.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward -2(5), Baroda
322.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward -2(6), Baroda
323.
O/o The Tax Recovery Officer, Range -2, Baroda
324.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax
Range -3, Baroda
325.
O/o The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax Circle -3,
Baroda
326.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward -3(1), Baroda
327.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward -3(2), Baroda
328.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward -3(3), Petlad
329.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward -3(4), Petlad
330.
O/o The Tax Recovery Officer, Range -3, Baroda
331.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax Baroda-2,
Baroda
332.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax, Range -
4, Baroda
333.
O/o The Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax Circle -4,
Baroda
334.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward -4(1), Baroda
335.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward -4(2), (Additional
Charge), Baroda
336.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward -4(3), (Additional
Charge), Baroda
337.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward -4(4), Baroda
338.
O/o The Tax Recovery Officer -4, Baroda
339.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax, Khera
Range
340.
O/o The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Khera
341.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward -1, Khera
342.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward -2, Khera
343.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward -3, Khera
344.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward -4, Khera
345.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, (Tax Recovery Officer)
Nadiad (Additional Charge), Khera
346.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax, Anand
Range (Additional Charge),
347.
O/o The Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax, Anand
Circle
348.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward -1, Anand
349.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward -2, Anand
350.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward- 3, Anand
351.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward -4, Anand
352.
O/o The Tax Recovery Officer -Anand
353.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, (TDS), Anand
354.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax, Baroda-3,
Baroda
355.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax, Range -5,
Baroda
356.
O/o The Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax Circle -5,
Baroda
357.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward -5(1), Baroda
358.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward -5(2), Baroda
359.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward -5(3), Baroda
360.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward -5(4), Baroda
361.
O/o The Tax Recovery Officer -5, Baroda
362.
O/o The Joint Commissioner of Income Tax,
Bharuch Range, Bharuch
363.
O/o The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Bharuch
(Addl. Charge)
364.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward -1, Bharuch
365
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward -2, Bharuch
7542
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 13, 2012/ASVINA 21, 1934
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
366
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward -3, Bharuch
367
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward -4, Bharuch
368
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward -5, Bharuch
369
O/o The Tax Recovery Officer, Bharuch
370
O/o The Income Tax Officer (TDS), Bharuch
371
O/o The Income Tax Officer (CIB), Bharuch
372
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax,
Panchmahal Range
373
O/o The Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax,
Panchmahal Circle
374
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward -1, Godhra
375
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward -2, Godhra
376
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward -1, Dahod
377
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward -2, Dahod
378
O/o The Tax Recovery Officer (Godhra)
379
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax -4, Baroda
380
O/o The Joint / Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax,
Range -6, Baroda
381
O/o The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax -6, Baroda
382
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward -6(1), Baroda
383
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward -6(2), Baroda
384
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward -6(3), Baroda
385
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward -6(4), Baroda
386
O/o The Tax Recovery Officer-6 Baroda
387
O/o The Joint / Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax,
Range -7, Baroda
388
O/o The Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax Circle -7,
Baroda
389
O/o The Income Tax Officer Ward -7(1), Baroda
390
O/o The Income Tax Officer Ward -7(2), Baroda
391
O/o The Income Tax Officer Ward -7(3), Baroda
392
O/o The Income Tax Officer Ward -7(4), Baroda
393
O/o The Tax Recovery Officer -7, Baroda
394
O/o The Joint / Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax,
Range -8, Baroda
395
O/o The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax Circle -8,
Baroda
396
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward -8(1), Baroda
397
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward -8(2), Baroda
398
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward -8(3), Baroda
399
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward -8(4), Baroda
400
O/o The Tax Recovery Officer -8, Baroda
401
O/o The Chief Commissioner of Income Tax, Rajkot
402
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax -1, Rajkot
403
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax, Range -1,
Rajkot
404
O/o The Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax Circle -1,
Rajkot
405
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward -1(1), Rajkot
406
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward -1(2), Rajkot
407
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward -1(3), Rajkot
408
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward -1(4), Rajkot
409
O/o The Tax Recovery Officer Range -1, Rajkot
410
O/o The Joint Commissioner of Income Tax (TDS)
Range, Rajkot
411
O/o The Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax (TDS)
Range, Rajkot
412
O/o The Income Tax Officer (TDS) -1, Rajkot
413
O/o The Income Tax Officer (TDS) -2, Rajkot
414
O/o The Income Tax Officer (TDS) -3, Jamnagar
415
O/o The Income Tax Officer (TDS) -4, Gandhidham
416
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax -2, Rajkot
417
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax Range -2,
Rajkot
418
O/o The Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax Circle -2,
Rajkot
419
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward -2(1), Rajkot
420
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward -2(2), Rajkot
421
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward -2(3), Rajkot
422
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward -2(4), Rajkot
423
O/o The Tax Recovery Officer, Range -2, Rajkot
424
O/o The Joint Commissioner of Income Tax Range -3,
Rajkot
425
O/o The Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax Circle -3,
Rajkot
426
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward -3(1), Rajkot
427
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward -3(2), Rajkot
428
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward -3(3), Rajkot
429
O/o The Income Tax Officer Ward -3(4), Rajkot
430
O/o The Tax Recovery Officer, Range -3, Rajkot
431
O/o The Joint Commissioner of Income Tax Range -4,
Rajkot
432
O/o The Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax Circle -4,
Rajkot
433
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward -4(1), Rajkot
434
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward -4(2), Rajkot
435
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward -4(3), Rajkot
[Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)]
Hkkjr dk jkti= % vDrwcj 13] 2012@vkf'ou 21] 1934
7543
436.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward -4(4), Rajkot
437.
O/o The Tax Recovery Officer, Range -4, Rajkot
438.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax -3, Rajkot
439.
O/o The Joint Commissioner of Income Tax Range -5,
Rajkot,
440.
O/o The Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax Circle -5,
Rajkot
441.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward -5(1), Rajkot
442.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward -5(2), Rajkot
443.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward -5(3), Morbi
444.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward -5(4), Morbi
445.
O/o The Tax Recovery Officer -5, Rajkot
446.
O/o The Joint Commissioner of Income Tax Range -1,
Junagadh
447.
O/o The Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax Circle -1,
Junagadh
448.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward -1(1), Junagadh
449.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward -1(2), Junagadh
450.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward -1(3), Veraval
451.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward -1(4), Veraval
452.
O/o The Tax Recovery Officer, Range -1, Junagadh
453.
O/o The Joint Commissioner of Income Tax
Range -2, Junagadh
454.
O/o The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax Circle -2,
Junagadh
455.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward -2(1), Junagadh
456.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward -2(2), Junagadh
457.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward -2(3), Amreli
458.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward -2(4), Amreli
459.
O/o The Tax Recovery Officer Range -2, Junagadh
460.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax, Jamnagar
461.
O/o The Joint Commissioner of Income Tax, Range -1,
Jamnagar
462.
O/o The Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle -1,
Jamnagar
463.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward -1(1), Jamnagar
464.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward -1(2), Jamnagar
465.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward -1(3), Dwarka
466.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward -1(4), Dwarka
467.
O/o The Tax Recovery Officer, Range -1, Jamnagar
468.
O/o The Joint Commissioner of Income Tax, Range -2,
Jamnagar
469.
O/o The Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle -2,
Jamnagar
470.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward -2(1), Jamnagar
471.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward -2(2), Jamnagar
472.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward -2(3), Porbander
473.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward -2(4), Porbander
474.
O/o The Tax Recovery Officer -1, Jamnagar
475.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax, Range -3,
Jamnagar
476.
O/o The Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle -3,
Jamnagar
477.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward -3(1), Jamnagar
478.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward -3(2), Jamnagar
479.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward -3(3), Jamnagar
480.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward -3(4), Jamnagar
481.
O/o The Tax Recovery Officer -3, Jamnagar
482.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax,
Gandhidham
483.
O/o The Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax,
Gandhidham Circle, Gandhidham
484.
O/o The Asstt. Director of Income Tax, (Int.
Taxation), Gandhidham
485.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, (Int. Taxation),
Gandhidham
486.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward -1, Gandhidham
487.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward -2, Gandhidham
488.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, (Tax Recovery Officer),
Gandhidham
489.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward -1, Bhuj
490.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward -2, Bhuj
491.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, (TDS), Gandhidham
492.
O/o The Chief Commissioner of Income Tax, Surat
493.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax -1, Surat
494.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax Range -1,
Surat
495.
O/o The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax Circle -1,
Surat
496.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward -1(1), Surat
7544
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 13, 2012/ASVINA 21, 1934
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
497.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(2), Surat
498.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(3), Surat
499.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(4), Surat
500.
O/o The Tax Recovery Officer-1, Surat
501.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, (Income Tax), Surat
502.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, (OSD)-I, Surat
503.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, (OSD)-II, Surat
504.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax Range -2,
Surat
505.
O/o The Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax Circle -2,
Surat
506.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward -2(1), Surat
507.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward -2(2), Surat
508.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward -2(3), Surat
509.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward -2(4), Surat
510.
O/o The Tax Recovery Officer-2, Surat
511.
O/o The Joint Commissioner of Income Tax Range -3,
Surat
512.
O/o The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax Circle -3,
Surat
513.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward -3(1), Surat
514.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward -3(2), Surat
515.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward -3(3),Surat
516.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward -3(4), Surat
517.
O/o The Tax Recovery Office -3, Surat
518.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax -II, Surat
519.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax Range -4,
Surat
520.
O/o The Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax Circle -4,
Surat
521.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward -4(1), Surat
522.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward -4(2), Surat
523.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward -4(3), Surat
524.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward -4(4), Surat
525.
O/o The Tax Recovery Office -4, Surat
526
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax Range -5,
Surat
527.
O/o The Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax Circle -5,
Surat
528.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward -5(1), Surat
529.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward -5(2), Surat
530.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward -5(3), Surat
531.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward -5(4), Surat
532.
O/o The Tax Recovery Officer-5, Surat
533.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax Range -6,
Surat
534.
O/o The Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax Circle -6,
Surat
535.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward -6(1), Surat
536.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward -6(2), Surat
537.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward -6(3), Surat
538.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward -6(4), Surat
539.
O/o The Tax Recovery Officer-6, Surat
540.
O/o The Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax (OSD),
Surat
541.
O/o The Income Tax Officer (IAP) -II, Surat
542.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax -III, Surat
543.
O/o The Joint Commissioner of Income Tax Range -7,
Surat
544.
O/o The Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax Circle -7,
Surat
545.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward -7(1), Surat
546.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward -7(2), Surat
547.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward -7(3), Surat
548.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward -7(4), Surat
549.
O/o The Tax Recovery Officer -7, Surat
550.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax Range -8,
Surat
551.
O/o The Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax Circle -8,
Surat
552.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward-8(1), Surat
553.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward-8(2), Surat
554.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward-8(3), Surat
555.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward-8(4), Surat
556.
O/o The Tax Recovery Officer-8, Surat
557.
O/o The Jt./Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax
Range -9, Surat
558.
O/o The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax Circle -9,
Surat
559.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward-9(1), Surat
560.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward-9(2), Surat
561.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward-9(3), Surat
562.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Ward-9(4), Surat
563.
O/o The Tax Recovery Officer -9, Surat
564.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax, Valsad
565.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax, Valsad
566.
O/o The Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-1,
Valsad
[Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)]
Hkkjr dk jkti= % vDrwcj 13] 2012@vkf'ou 21] 1934
7545
567.
O/o The Income Tax Officer Ward -1 & DDO, Valsad
568.
O/o The Income Tax Officer Ward -2, Valsad
569.
O/o The Income Tax Officer Ward -3, Valsad
570.
O/o The Income Tax Officer Ward -4, Valsad
571.
O/o The Tax Recovery Officer -Valsad
572.
O/o The Income Tax Officer (CIB), Valsad
573.
O/o The Income Tax Officer (IAP), Valsad
574.
O/o The Income Tax Officer (TDS) Valsad
575.
O/o The Income Tax Officer (TDS) Valsad
576.
O/o The Joint Commissioner of Income Tax, Navsari
577.
O/o The Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax Circle -1,
Navsari
578.
O/o The Income Tax Officer Ward -1, Navsari
579.
O/o The Income Tax Officer Ward -2, Navsari
580.
O/o The Income Tax Officer Ward -3, Navsari
581.
O/o The Income Tax Officer Ward -4, Navsari
582.
O/o The Tax Recovery Officer -Navsari
583.
O/o The Income Tax Officer (CIB), Navsari
584.
O/o The Income Tax Officer (Inv.) (CIB), Navsari
585.
O/o The Joint Commissioner of Income Tax, Vapi
586.
O/o The Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax, Vapi
587.
O/o The Income Tax Officer Ward -1, Vapi
588.
O/o The Income Tax Officer Ward -2, Vapi
589.
O/o The Income Tax Officer Ward -3, Vapi
590.
O/o The Tax Recovery Officer -Vapi
591.
O/o The Income Tax Officer Ward -4, Daman, Vapi
592.
O/o The Jt./Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax
(Audit), Vapi
593.
O/o The Income Tax Officer ( IAP) -I, Vapi
594.
O/o The Income Tax Officer (IAP) -II, Vapi
595.
O/o The Income Tax Officer ( IAP) -III, Vapi
596.
O/o The Income Tax Officer (IAP), Valsad
597.
O/o The Income Tax Officer (Int. Taxation), Vapi
598.
O/o The Director of Income Tax -Intelligence and
Criminal Investigation, Ahmedabad
599.
O/o The Addl. Director of Income Tax-I & C.I. ,
Ahmedabad
600.
O/o The Asstt. Director of Income Tax-I & C.I. ,
Ahmedabad
601.
O/o The Income Tax Officer-I & C.I. , Ahmedabad
602.
O/o The Income Tax Officer-I & C.I. , Mehsana
603.
O/o The Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax-I &
C.I. , Baroda
604.
O/o The Income Tax Officer-I & C.I. -1, Baroda
605.
O/o The Income Tax Officer-I & C.I. -2, Baroda
606.
O/o The Income Tax Officer-I & C.I., Anand
607.
O/o The Income Tax Officer-I & C.I. , Bharuch
608.
O/o The Addl. Director of Income Tax-I & C.I. ,
Rajkot
609.
O/o The Asstt. Director of Income Tax-I & C.I. ,
Rajkot
610.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, I & C.I. -1, Rajkot
611.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, I & C.I. , Jamnagar
612.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, 1& C.I., Bhavnagar
613.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, 1& C.I., Junagadh
614.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, 1& C.I., Gandhidham
615.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, 1& C.I., Surat
616.
O/o The Asstt. Director of Income Tax, 1 & C.I.,
Surat
617.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, 1& C.I.-1, Surat
618.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, I & C.I.-2, Surat
619.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, 1& C.I.-Valsad
620.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, I & C.I.-Navsari
621.
O/o The Director of Income Tax -R.T.I, Ahmedabad
622.
O/o The Addl. Director of Income Tax-R.T.I.,
Ahmedabad
623.
O/o The Dy. Director of Income Tax-R.T.I.,
Ahmedabad
624.
O/o The Dy. Director of Income Tax-R.T.I.,
Ahmedabad
625.
O/o The Income Tax Officer -R. T.I -1, Ahmedabad
626.
O/o The Income Tax Officer -R. T.I -2, Ahmedabad
627.
O/o The Income Tax Officer -R.T.I -3, Ahmedabad
628.
O/o The Income Tax Officer -OSD, Ahmedabad
629.
O/o The Income Tax Officer -MSTU, Ahmedabad
630.
O/o The Addl. Director of Income Tax -I.T. & T.P.O.-1,
Ahmedabad
631.
O/o The Dy. Director of Income Tax, T.P.O.-2,
Ahmedabad
632.
O/o The Director of Income Tax, International
Taxation, Ahmedabad
633.
O/o The Asstt. Director of Income Tax , International
Taxation, Ahmedabad
634.
O/o The Income Tax Officer -International Taxation -1,
Ahmedabad
635.
O/o The Income Tax Officer -International Taxation -2,
Ahmedabad
7546
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 13, 2012/ASVINA 21, 1934
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
636.
O/o The Income Tax Officer -International Taxation -3,
Ahmedabad
637.
O/o The Income Tax Officer -International Taxation,
Baroda, Ahmedabad
638.
O/o The Asstt. Director of Income Tax , International
Taxation, Gandhidham
639.
O/o The Income Tax Officer (International Taxation),
Gandhidham
640.
O/o The Income Tax Officer (International Taxation),
Surat
641.
O/o The Income Tax Officer (International Taxation),
Rajkot
642.
O/o The Director of Income Tax-Exemption,
Ahmedabad
643.
O/o The Addl. Director of Income Tax-Exemption,
Ahmedabad
644.
O/o The Asstt. Director of Income Tax-Exemption,
Ahmedabad
645.
O/o The Income Tax Officer-Exemption, Ahmedabad
646.
O/o The Tax Recovery Officer-Exemption,
Ahmedabad
647.
O/o The Asstt. Director of Income Tax -Exemption,
Surendernagar, Ahmedabad
648.
O/o The Asstt. Director of Income Tax-Exemption,
Himmatnagar, Ahmedabad
649.
O/o The Asstt. Director of Income Tax-Exemption,
Palanpur, Ahmedabad
650.
O/o The Asstt. Director of Income Tax-Exemption,
Bhavnagar, Ahmedabad
Chief Commissioner of Income Tax, Mumbai Region and
Subordinate Offices
1.
O/o The Chief Commissioner of Income Tax-I,
Mumbai
2.
O/o The Chief Commissioner of Income Tax-II,
Mumbai
3.
O/o The Chief Commissioner of Income Tax-III,
Mumbai
4.
O/o The Chief Commissioner of Income Tax-IV,
Mumbai
5.
O/o The Chief Commissioner of Income Tax-V,
Mumbai
6.
O/o The Chief Commissioner of Income Tax-VI,
Mumbai
7.
O/o The Chief Commissioner of Income Tax-VII,
Mumbai
8.
O/o The Chief Commissioner of Income Tax-IX,
Mumbai
9.
O/o The Chief Commissioner of Income Tax-X,
Mumbai
10.
O/o The Chief Commissioner of Income Tax-XI,
Mumbai
11.
O/o The Chief Commissioner of Income Tax-XII,
Mumbai
12.
O/o The Chief Commissioner of Income Tax-XIII,
Mumbai
13.
O/o The Chief Commissioner of Income Tax
(Central)- 1, Mumbai
14.
O/o The Chief Commissioner of Income Tax
(Central) -2, Mumbai
15.
O/o The Director General of Income Tax (Inv.),
Mumbai
16.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax (HQ)
Admn., Mumbai
17.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax (HQ)
System, Mumbai
18.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax (HQ)
Co-ordination, Mumbai
19.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax (HQ)
Personal, Mumbai
20.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax (HQ)
Vig.&Tech., Mumbai
21.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax (HQ)
(Inv.), Mumbai
22.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax -1, Mumbai
23.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax -2, Mumbai
24.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax -3, Mumbai
25.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax -4, Mumbai
26.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax -5, Mumbai
27.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax -6, Mumbai
28.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax -7, Mumbai
29.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax -8, Mumbai
30.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax -9, Mumbai
31.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax -10, Mumbai
32.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax -11, Mumbai
33.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax -12, Mumbai
34.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax -13, Mumbai
[Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)]
Hkkjr dk jkti= % vDrwcj 13] 2012@vkf'ou 21] 1934
7547
35.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax., 14, Mumbai
36.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax -15, Mumbai
37.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax -16, Mumbai
38.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax -17, Mumbai
39.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax -18, Mumbai
40.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax -19, Mumbai
41.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax -20, Mumbai
42.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax -21, Mumbai
43.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax -22, Mumbai
44.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax -23, Mumbai
45.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax -24, Mumbai
46.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax -25, Mumbai
47.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax -26, Mumbai
48.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax -28, Mumbai
49.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax -29, Mumbai
50.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax ,(TDS),
Mumbai
51.
O/o The Director of Income Tax (Inv.) -I, Mumbai
52.
O/o The Director of Income Tax (Inv.) -II, Mumbai
53.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax (Central) -I,
Mumbai
54.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax (Central) -II,
Mumbai
55.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax (Central) -III,
Mumbai
56.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax (Central) -IV,
Mumbai
57.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax (Judiciral),
Mumbai
58.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax (Audit) -I,
Mumbai
59.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax (Audit) -II,
Mumbai
60.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax (Competent
Authority) , Mumbai
61.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax (Computer
Operation), Mumbai
62.
O/o The Member (Income Tax Settlement
Commissioner) -(ITSC), Mumbai
63.
O/o The Director of Income Tax -(ITSC), Mumbai
64.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax (D.R.) -I
(ITSC), Mumbai
65.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax (D.R.)-II
(ITSC), Mumbai
66.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax (D.R.)
(IT AT) -I, Mumbai
67.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax (D.R.)
(ITAT) -II, Mumbai
68.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax (D.R.)
(ITAT) -III, Mumbai
69.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax (D.R.)
(IT AT) -IV, Mumbai
70.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax (D.R.)
(IT AT) -V, Mumbai
71.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax (D.R.)
(IT AT) -VI, Mumbai
72.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax (D.R.) (ITAT)
-VII, Mumbai
73.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax (D.R.)
(ITAT)-VIII, Mumbai
74.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax (D.R.)
(ITAT)-IX, Mumbai
75.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax (D.R.)
(ITAT)-X, Mumbai
76.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax (D.R.)
(ITAT)-XI, Mumbai
77.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax (D.R.)
(ITAT) -XII, Mumbai
78.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax (D.R.)
(ITAT) -XIII, Mumbai
79.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax (LTU),
Mumbai
80.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) -1,
Mumbai
81.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) -2,
Mumbai
82.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) -3,
Mumbai
83.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) -4,
Mumbai
84.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) -5,
Mumbai
85.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) -6,
Mumbai
86.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) -7,
Mumbai
87.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) -8,
Mumbai
88.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) -9,
Mumbai
7548
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 13, 2012/ASVINA 21, 1934
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
89.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) -10,
Mumbai
90.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) -11,
Mumbai
91.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) -12,
Mumbai
92.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) -13,
Mumbai
93.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) -14,
Mumbai
94.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) -15,
Mumbai
95.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) -16,
Mumbai
96.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) -17,
Mumbai
97.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) -18,
Mumbai
98.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) -19,
Mumbai
99.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) -20,
Mumbai
100.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) -21,
Mumbai
101.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) -22,
Mumbai
102.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) -23,
Mumbai
103.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) -24,
Mumbai
104.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) -25,
Mumbai
105.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) -26,
Mumbai
106.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) -27,
Mumbai
107.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) -28,
Mumbai
108.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) -29,
Mumbai
109.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) -30,
Mumbai
110.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) -31,
Mumbai
111.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) -32,
Mumbai
112.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) -33,
Mumbai
113.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) -34,
Mumbai
114.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) -35,
Mumbai
115.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) -36,
Mumbai
116.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) -37,
Mumbai
117.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) -38,
Mumbai
118.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) -39,
Mumbai
119.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) -40,
Mumbai
120.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) -41,
Mumbai
121.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax,
Range -1(1), Mumbai
122.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax,
Range -1(2), Mumbai
123.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax,
Range -1(3), Mumbai
124.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax,
Range -2(1), Mumbai
125.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax,
Range -2(2), Mumbai
126.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax,
Range -2(3), Mumbai
127.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax,
Range -3(1), Mumbai
128.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax,
Range -3(2), Mumbai
129.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax,
Range -3(3), Mumbai
130.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax,
Range -4(1), Mumbai
131.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax,
Range -4(2), Mumbai
132.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax,
Range -4(3), Mumbai
133.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax,
Range -5(1), Mumbai
134.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax,
Range -5(2), Mumbai
135.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax,
Range -5(3), Mumbai
136.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax,
Range -6(1), Mumbai
[Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)]
Hkkjr dk jkti= % vDrwcj 13] 2012@vkf'ou 21] 1934
7549
137.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax,
Range -6(2), Mumbai
138.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax,
Range -6(3), Mumbai
139.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax,
Range -7(1), Mumbai
140.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax,
Range -7(2), Mumbai
141.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax,
Range -7(3), Mumbai
142.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax,
Range -8(1), Mumbai
143.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax,
Range -8(2), Mumbai
144.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax,
Range -8(3), Mumbai
145.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax,
Range -9(1), Mumbai
146.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax,
Range -9(2), Mumbai
147.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax,
Range -9(3), Mumbai
148.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax,
Range -10(1), Mumbai
149.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax,
Range -10(2), Mumbai
150.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax,
Range -10(3), Murnbai
151.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax,
Range -11(1), Mumbai
152.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax,
Range -11(2), Mumbai
153.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax,
Range -11 (3), Mumbai
154.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax,
Range -12(1), Mumbai
155.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax,
Range -12(2), Mumbai
156.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax,
Range -12(3), Mumbai
157.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax,
Range -13(1), Mumbai
158.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax,
Range -13(2), Mumbai
159.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax,
Range -13(3), Mumbai
160.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax,
Range -14(1), Mumbai
161.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax,
Range -14(2), Mumbai
162.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax,
Range -14(3), Mumbai
163.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax,
Range -15(1), Mumbai
164.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax,
Range -15(2), Mumbai
165.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax,
Range -15(3), Mumbai
166.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax,
Range -16(1), Mumbai
167.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax,
Range -16(2), Mumbai
168.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax,
Range -16(3), Mumbai
169.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax,
Range -17(1), Mumbai
170.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax,
Range -17(2), Mumbai
171.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax,
Range -17(3), Mumbai
172.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax,
Range -18(1), Mumbai
173.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax,
Range -18(2), Mumbai
174.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax,
Range -18(3), Mumbai
175.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax,
Range -19(1), Mumbai
176.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax,
Range -19(2), Mumbai
177.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax,
Range -19(3), Mumbai
178.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax,
Range -20(1), Mumbai
179.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax,
Range -20(2), Mumbai
180.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax,
Range -20(3), Mumbai
181.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax,
Range -21(1), Mumbai
182.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax,
Range -21(2), Mumbai
183.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax,
Range -21(3), Mumbai
184.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax,
Range -22(1), Mumbai
7550
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 13, 2012/ASVINA 21, 1934
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
185.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax,
Range -22(2), Mumbai
186.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax,
Range -22(3), Mumbai
187.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax,
Range -23(1), Mumbai
188.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax,
Range -23(2), Mumbai
189.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax,
Range -23(3), Mumbai
190.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax,
Range -24(1), Mumbai
191.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax,
Range -24(2), Mumbai
192.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax,
Range -24(3), Mumbai
193.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax,
Range -25(1), Mumbai
194.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax,
Range -25(2), Mumbai
195.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax,
Range -25(3), Mumbai
196.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax,
Range -26(1), Mumbai
197.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax,
Range -26(2), Mumbai
198.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax,
Range -28( 1), Mumbai
199.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax,
Range -28(2), Mumbai
200.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax,
Range -29(1), Mumbai
201.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax,
Range -29(2), Mumbai
202.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax, TDS
Range -I, Mumbai
203.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax, TDS
Range -II, Mumbai
204.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax, TDS
Range -III, Mumbai
205.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central
Range -1, Mumbai
206.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central
Range -2, Mumbai
207.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central
Range -3, Mumbai
208.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central
Range -4, Mumbai
209.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central
Range -5, Mumbai
210.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central
Range -6, Mumbai
211.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central
Range -7, Mumbai
212.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central
Range -8, Mumbai
213.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central
Range -9, Mumbai
214.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central
Range -10, Mumbai
215.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax,
Judicial Range -I, Mumbai
216.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central
Range -II, Mumbai
217.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax, Audit
Range -I(I), Mumbai
218.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax, Audit
Range -I(II), Mumbai
219.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax, Audit
Range -II, Mumbai
220.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax,
(Computer Operation) -1, Mumbai
221.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax,
(Computer Operation) -2, Mumbai
222.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax, (L TU),
Mumbai
223.
O/o The Addl. Director of Income Tax, (lnv.) Unit -
I, Mumbai
224.
O/o The Addl. Director of Income Tax, (lnv.) Unit -
II, Mumbai
225.
O/o The Addl. Director of Income Tax, (lnv.) Unit -
III, Mumbai
226.
O/o The Addl. Director of Income Tax, (lnv.) Unit -
IV, Mumbai
227.
O/o The Addl. Director of Income Tax, (lnv.) Unit -
V, Mumbai
228.
O/o The Addl. Director of Income Tax, (lnv.) Unit -
VI, Mumbai
229.
O/o The Addl. Director of Income Tax, (lnv.) Unit -
VII, Mumbai
230.
O/o The Addl. Director of Income Tax, (lnv.) Unit -
VIII, Mumbai
231.
O/o The Addl. Director of Income Tax, (lnv.) Unit -
IX, Mumbai
232.
O/o The Addl. Director of Income Tax (ITSC) -1,
Mumbai
[Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)]
Hkkjr dk jkti= % vDrwcj 13] 2012@vkf'ou 21] 1934
7551
233.
O/o The Addl. Director of Income Tax (ITSC) -2,
Mumbai
234.
O/o The Sr. Departmental Representative (ITAT) -I,
Mumbai
235.
O/o The Sr. Departmental Representative
(ITAT) -II, Mumbai
236.
O/o The Sr. Departmental Representative (IT AT)-III,
Mumbai
237.
O/o The Sr. Departmental Representative (IT AT)-IV,
Mumbai
238.
O/o The Sr. Departmental Representative (ITAT)-V,
Mumbai
239.
O/o The Sr. Departmental Representative (ITAT)-
VI, Mumbai
240.
O/o The Sr .Departmental Representative (ITAT)-VII,
Mumbai
241.
O/o The Sr. Departmental Representative (ITAT)-VIII,
Mumbai
242.
O/o The Sr. Departmental Representative (ITAT)-IX,
Mumbai
243.
O/o The Sr. Departmental Representative (ITAT)-X,
Mumbai
244.
O/o The Sr .Departmental Representative (ITAT)-XI,
Mumbai
245.
O/o The Dy. Director (OL) / Asstt. Director (OL),
Mumbai
Chief Commissioner of Income Tax, Nagpur Region and
Subordinate Offices
S.No.
Name of the office
1.
O/o The Chief Commissioner of Income Tax,
Nagpur
2.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax -1, Nagpur
3.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax, Range -1,
Nagpur
4.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax, Range -2,
Nagpur
5.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax, Akola
Range, Akola
6.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Khamgaon
7.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax -II, Nagpur
8.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax, Range -3,
Nagpur
9.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax, Range -4,
Nagpur
10.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax,
Wardha Range, Wardha
11.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Yavatmal
12.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax -III, Nagpur
13.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax, Range -5,
Nagpur
14.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax, Range -6,
Nagpur
15.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax,
Amravati Range, Amravati
16.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax -IV, Nagpur
17.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax, Range -7,
Nagpur
18.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax, Range -8,
Nagpur
19.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax,
Chandrapur Range, Chandrapur
20.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Bhandra
21.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Gondia
22.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax (Central),
Nagpur
23.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax
(Central) Range -I, Nagpur
24.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax
(Central) Range -2, Nagpur
25.
O/o The Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax
(Central) Circle, Akola
26.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) -I,
Nagpur
27.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) -II,
Nagpur
28.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax (TDS),
Nagpur
29.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax (Audit),
Nagpur
30.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax (ITAT),
Nagpur
31.
O/o The Director of Income Tax (lnv.), Nagpur
National Academy of Direct Taxes, Nagpur and
Subordinate Offices
1.
National Academy of Direct Taxes, Nagpur
2 .
Direct Taxes Regional Training Institute, Lucknow
3 .
Direct Taxes Regional Training Institute, Mumbai
4 .
Direct Taxes Regional Training Institute, Ahmedabad
5 .
Direct Taxes Regional Training Institute, Chandigarh
6 .
Direct Taxes Regional Training Institute, Kolkata
7552
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 13, 2012/ASVINA 21, 1934
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
Chief Commissioner of Income Tax, Bengaluru Region
and Subordinate Offices
S.No.
Name of the office
Chief Commissioner of Income Tax, Bengaluru -I Region
1.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax -I, Bengaluru
2.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax -II, Bengaluru
3.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax (TDS),
Bengaluru
4.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax (Audit),
Bengaluru
5.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax -(C.P.C),
Bengaluru
6.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal -II ),
Bengaluru
7.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax
Range-18, Bengaluru
8.
M.S.T.U, Bengaluru
Chief Commissioner of Income Tax -II, Bengaluru
Region
1.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax-III, Bengaluru
2.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax-IV, Bengaluru
3.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal)-IV,
Bengaluru
4.
O/o The Member (Appropriate Authority), Bengaluru
Chief Commissioner of Income Tax -III, Bengaluru
Region
1.
O/o The Chief Commissioner of Income Tax-III,
Bengaluru
2.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax , Mysore
3.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax,
Range -I, Mysore
4.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax, Range -2,
Mysore
5.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Madikeri
Directorate General of Income Tax (Inv.), Bengaluru
Region
1.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax (Central),
Bengaluru
2.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax Central,
Range -2, Bengaluru
3.
O/o The Addl. Director of Income Tax (Inv.), Unit-II,
Bengaluru
Other Offices (Whose Head Quarters are in Delhi &
Nagpur)
1.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax, DTRTI,
Bengaluru
2.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax, (LTU), Bengaluru
3.
O/o The Director of Income Tax (Int. Taxation),
Bengaluru
4.
O/o The Income Tax, Ombudsman, Bengaluru
5.
O/o The Addl. Director of Income Tax (Intelligence)
Range, Bengaluru
Chief Commissioner of Income Tax, Kerala Region and
Subordinate Offices
S.No.
Name of the office
Chief Commissioner of Income Tax, Kochi Region
1.
O/o The Chief Commissioner of Income Tax, Kochi
Commissioner of Income Tax -1, Kochi Charge
2.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax -1, Kochi
3.
O/o The Addl./Jt. Commissioner of Income Tax,
Range -1, Kochi
4.
O/o The Addl./Jt. Commissioner of Income Tax,
Range -4, Kochi
Commissioner of Income Tax -2 Kochi Charge
5.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax -2 Kochi
6.
O/o The Addl./Jt. Commissioner of Income Tax,
Range -2, Kochi
7.
O/o The Addl./Jt. Commissioner of Income Tax,
Range -3, Kochi
8.
O/o The Addl./Jt. Commissioner of Income Tax,
Aluva Range, Aluva
9.
O/o The Dy./ Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax,
Mattancherry
10.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Thodupuzha
Commissioner of Income Tax, Thisssur Charge
11.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax, Thissur
12.
O/o The Addl./Jt. Commissioner of Income Tax,
Range -1, Thissur
13.
O/o The Addl./Jt. Commissioner of Income Tax,
Range -2, Thissur
14.
O/o The Addl./Jt. Commissioner of Income Tax,
Palakkad Range, Palakkad
15.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Guruvayoor
Commissioner of Income Tax, Kozhikode Charge
16.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax, Kozhikode
17.
O/o The Addl./Jt. Commissioner of Income Tax,
Range -1, Kozhikode
18.
O/o The Addl./Jt. Commissioner of Income Tax,
Range -2, Kozhikode
19.
O/o The Addl./Jt. Commissioner of Income Tax,
Kannur Range, Kannur
[Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)]
Hkkjr dk jkti= % vDrwcj 13] 2012@vkf'ou 21] 1934
7553
20.
O/o The Dy./ Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax,
Tirur
21.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Kasaragod
Commissioner of Income Tax (TDS) Kochi Charge
22.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax (TDS) Kochi
23.
O/o The Income Tax Officer (TDS), Thissur
24.
O/o The Income Tax Officer (TDS), Palakkad
25.
O/o The Jt. Commissioner of Income Tax (TDS),
Khozhikode
26.
O/o The Income Tax Officer (TDS), Kannur
27.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax (TDS),
Triuvananthapuram
28.
O/o The Income Tax Officer (TDS), Kollam
29.
O/o The Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax (TDS),
Kottayam
30.
O/o The Income Tax Officer (TDS), Alappuzha
Commissioner of Income Tax (Audit) Kochi Charge
31.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax (Audit),
Kochi
32.
O/o The Income Tax Officer (IAP), Thissur
33.
O/o The Income Tax Officer (IAP), Khozhikode
34.
O/o The Income Tax Officer (IAP), Triuvananthapuram
35.
O/o The Income Tax Officer (IAP), Kottayam
Commissioner of Income Tax (Departmental
Representative), Kochi Charge
36.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax (Departmental
Representative), Kochi
37.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal),
Kochi
38.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal),
Khozhikode
39.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax (Intt.
Taxn.) & (T.P.), Kochi
40.
O/o The Astt. Commissioner of Income Tax (Intt.
Taxn.) Triuvananthapuram
Chief Commissioner of Income Tax, Triuvananthapuram
Region
41.
O/o The Chief Commissioner of Income Tax,
Triuvananthapuram Region
Commissioner of Income Tax, Triuvananthapuram
Charge
42.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax,
Triuvananthapuram Charge
43.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax
Range-1, Triuvananthapuram
44.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax
Range-2, Triuvananthapuram
45.
O/o The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax, Kollam
Range, Kollam
Commissioner of Income Tax, Kottayam Charge
46.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax, Kottayam
Charge, Kottayam
47.
O/o The Addl./Jt. Commissioner of Income Tax,
Range Kottayam, Kottayam
48.
O/o The Addl./Jt. Commissioner of Income Tax,
Alappuzha Range, Alapuzha
49.
O/o The Addl./Jt. Commissioner of Income Tax,
Thiruvalla Range, Thiruvalla
50.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal),
Triuvananthapuram
Directorate General of Income Tax (Inv.), Kochi Region
51.
O/o The Director General of Income Tax (Inv.), Kochi
52.
O/o The Director of Income Tax (Inv.), Kochi
53.
O/o The Addl. Director of Income Tax (Inv.), Kochi
54.
O/o The Asstt. Director of Income Tax (Inv.),
Thissur
55.
O/o The Asstt. Director of Income Tax (Inv.),
Palakkad
56.
O/o The Asstt. Director of Income Tax (Inv.),
Kozhikode
57.
O/o The Addl.Director of Income Tax (Inv.),
Thriuvananthapuram
58.
O/o The Dy.Director of Income Tax (Inv.), Kollam
59.
O/o The Dy.Director of Income Tax (Inv.), Kottayam
Commissioner of Income Tax (Central), Kochi Region
60.
O/o The Commissioner of Income Tax (Central),
Kochi
61.
O/o The Addl./Jt. Commissioner of Income Tax,
Central Range, Kochi
62.
O/o The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central
Circle, Thissur
63.
O/o The Dy. Commissioner of Income TAx, Central
Circle, Kozhikode
64.
O/o The Addl./Jt. Commissioner of Income Tax,
Central Range, Triuvananthapuram
65.
O/o The Dy.Commissioner of Income Tax, Central
Circle, Kollam
66.
O/o The Dy. Commissioner of Inocme Tax, Central
Circle, Kottayam
7554
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 13, 2012/ASVINA 21, 1934
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
Directorate of Income Tax (Intelligence), Kochi Region
67.
O/o The Director of Income Tax (Intelligence), Kochi
68.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, (Intelligence), Thissur
69.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, (Intelligence),
Kozhikode
70.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, Intelligence),
Triuvananthapuram
71.
O/o The Income Tax Officer, (Intelligence), Alappuzha
72.
O/o The Income Tax Ombudsman, Kochi
¼jktLo foHkkx½
ubZ fnYyh] 28 flrEcj] 2012
dk-vk- 3095.—loZlk/kkj.k dh tkudkjh ds fy, ,rn~}kjk ;g
vf/klwfpr fd;k tkrk gS fd dsUnz ljdkj }kjk vk;dj fu;ekoyh]
1962 ¼mDr fu;ekoyh½ ds fu;e 5x vkSj 5³ ds lkFk ifBr
vk;dj vf/kfu;e] 1961 ¼mDr vf/kfu;e½ dh /kkjk 35 dh mièkjk
¼1½ ds [kaM (iii) ds iz;kstukFkZ dj fu/kkZj.k o"kZ 2011&2012 ds vkxs
ls laxBu us'kuy ykW Ldwy vkQ bafM;k ;wfuoflZVh] caxykSj dks
fuEufyf[kr 'krks± ds v/khu lkekftd foKku vuqla/kku dk;Zdykiksa
esa yxh ^fo'ofo|ky;] dkWyst ;k vU; laLFkk* dh Js.kh esa vuqeksfnr
fd;k x;k gS] vFkkZr%&
(i) vuqeksfnr laxBu dks iznÙk jkf'k dk mi;ksx lkekftd foKku
esa vuqla/kku ds fy, fd;k tk,xk(
(ii) vuqeksfnr laxBu vius ladk; lnL;ksa vFkok vius ukekafdr
Nk=ksa ds ek/;e ls lkekftd foKku esa vuqla/kku djsxk(
(iii) vuqeksfnr laxBu lkekftd foKku vuqla/kku ds fy, blds
}kjk izkIr jkf'k ds laca/k esa vyx [kkrk cgh j[ksxk ftlesa
vuqla/kku djus ds fy, iz;qDr jkf'k n'kkZbZ xbZ gks] mDr
vfèfu;e dh /kkjk 288 dh mi/kkjk ¼2½ ds Li"Vhdj.k esa
;Fkk ifjHkkf"kr fdlh ys[kkdkj ls viuh [kkrk&cgh dh ys[kk
ijh{kk djk,xk vkSj mDr vf/kfu;e dh /kkjk 139 dh mi
èkjk ¼1½ ds varxZr vk; fooj.kh izLrqr djus dh fu;r
frfFk rd ,sls ys[kkdkj }kjk fof/kor lR;kfir ,oa gLrk{kfjr
ys[kk ijh{kk fjiksVZ ekeys esa {ks=kf/kdkj j[kus okys vk;dj
vk;qDr vFkok vk;dj funs'kd dks izLrqr djsxk(
(iv) vuqeksfnr laxBu lkekftd foKku esa vuqla/kku ds fy,
izkIr nku rFkk iz;qDr jkf'k dk vyx fooj.k j[ksxk vkSj
mi;qZDr ys[kk ijh{kk fjiksVZ ds lkFk ys[kk ijh{kd }kjk fofèor
lR;kfir ,sls fooj.k dh izfr izLrqr djsxkA
2- dsUnz ljdkj ;g vuqeksnu okil ys ysxh ;fn vuqeksfnr laxBu%
¼d½ iSjkxzkQ 1 ds mi&iSjkxzkQ (iii) esa mfYyf[kr ys[kk cgh ugha
j[ksxk( vFkok
¼[k½ iSjkxzkQ 1 ds mi&iSjkxzkQ (iii) esa mfYyf[kr viuh ys[kk
ijh{kk fjiksVZ izLrqr ugha djsxk( vFkok
¼x½ iSjkxzkQ 1 ds mi&iSjkxzkQ (iv) esa mfYyf[kr lkekftd foKkku
esa vuqla/kku vFkok lkaf[;dh; vuqla/kku ds fy, izkIr ,oa
iz;qDr nku dk viuk fooj.k izLrqr ugha djsxk( vFkok
¼?k½ viuk vuqla/kku dk;Z djuk can dj nsxk vFkok blds
vuqlaèku dk;Z dks Bhd ugha ik;k tk,xk( vFkok
¼³½ mDr fu;ekoyh ds fu;e 5x vkSj 5³ ds lkFk ifBr mDr
vf/kfu;e dh /kkjk 35 dh mi&/kkjk ¼1½ ds [kaM (iii) ds
izko/kkuksa ds vuq:i ugha gksxk rFkk mudk ikyu ugha djsxkA
[vf/klwpuk la- 41@2012@Qk-la- 203@38@2011&vk-d-fu-&II]
lqjfHk 'kekZ] voj lfpo ¼vk-d-fu-&I½
(Department of Revenue)
New Delhi, the 28th September, 2012
S.O. 3095.— It is hereby notified for general information
that the organisation National Law School of India
University, Bangalore has been approved by the Central
Government for the purpose of clause (iii) of sub-section
(1) of Section 35 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (said Act),
read with Rules 5C and 5E of the Income-tax Rules, 1962
(said Rules), from Assessment year 2011-2012 onwards in
the category of "University, College or Other Institution",
engaged in research in social science research subject to
the following conditions, namely:—
(i) The sums paid to the approved organization shall
be utilized for research in social sciences;
(ii) The approved organization shall carry out research
in social science through its faculty members or its
enrolled students;
(iii) The approved organization shall maintain separate
books of accounts in respect of the sums received
by it for social sciences research, reflect therein the
amounts used for carrying out research, get such
books audited by an accountant as defined in the
explanation to sub-section (2) of Section 288 of the
said Act and furnish the report of such audit duly
signed and verified by such accountant to the
Commissioner of Income-tax or the Director of
Income-tax having jurisdiction over the case, by
the due date of furnishing the return of income
under sub-section (1) of Section 139 of the said
Act;
(iv) The approved organization shall maintain a separate
statement of donations received and amounts
applied for research in social science and a copy of
such statement duly certified by the auditor shall
accompany the report of audit referred to above.
[Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)]
Hkkjr dk jkti= % vDrwcj 13] 2012@vkf'ou 21] 1934
7555
2. The Central Government shall withdraw the approval
if the approved organization:—
(a) fails to maintain separate books of accounts referred
to in sub-paragraphs (iii) of paragraph 1; or
(b) fails to furnish its audit report referred to in sub-
paragraph (iii) of paragraph 1: or
(c) fails to furnish its statement of the donations
received and sums applied for research in social
science or statistical research referred to in sub-
paragraph (iv) of paragraph 1; or
(d) ceases to carry on its research activities or its
research activities are not found to be genuine; or
(e) ceases to conform to and comply with the
provisions of clause (iii) of sub-section (1) of
section 35 of the said Act read with rules 5C and 5E
of the said Rules.
[Notification No. 41/2012/F. No. 203/38/2011/ITA-II]
SURABHI SHARMA, Under Secy. (ITA-I)
ubZ fnYyh] 1 vDrwcj] 2012
dk-vk- 3096.—Hkkjrh; y?kq m|ksx fodkl cSad vf/kfu;e] 1989
¼1989 dk 39½ dh /kkjk 6 dh mi/kkjk ¼2½ ds lkFk ifBr /kkjk 6 dh
mi&/kkjk ¼1½ ds [kaM ¼[k½ }kjk iznÙk 'kfDr;ksa dk iz;ksx djrs gq,]
dsUnzh; ljdkj] ,rn~}kjk]vkbZMhchvkbZ cSad fy- ds dk;Zikyd
funs'kd Jh Vh-vkj- ctkfy;k ¼tUe frfFk% 25-12-1953½ dks muds
inHkkj xzg.k djus dh rkjh[k ls vkSj 31-12-2013 vFkkZr~ muds
vfèof"kZrk dh vk;q izkIr djus rd vFkok vxys vkns'k gksus rd]
tks Hkh igys gks] Hkkjrh; y?kq m|ksx fodkl cSad ¼flMch½ esa mi&izcaè
funs'kd ds :i esa fu;qDr djrh gSA
[Qk-la- 7@1@2011&chvks&I]
Js;k xqgk] funs'kd
New Delhi, the 1st October, 2012
S.O. 3096.—In exercise of the powers conferred by
clause (b) of sub-section (1) of Section 6 read with sub-
section (2) of Section 6 of the Small Industries Development
Bank of India Act, 1989 (39 of 1989), the Central Government
hereby appoints Shri T.R. Bajalia (DoB: 25-12-1953),
Executive Director, IDBI Bank Ltd. as Deputy Managing
Director (DMD), Small Industries Development Bank of
India (SIDBI) from the date of his taking over the charge of
the post and upto 31-12-2013 i.e. the date of his attaining
the age of superannuation or until further orders, whichever
is earlier.
[F. No. 7/1/2011-BO.-I]
SREYA GUHA, Director
ubZ fnYyh] 1 vDrwcj] 2012
dk-vk- 3097.—jk"Vªhd`r cSad ¼izca/k ,oa izdh.kZ mica/k½ Ldhe]
1970@1980 ds [kaM 3 ds mi[kaM ¼1½] [kaM 5] [kaM 6] [kaM 7 vkSj
[kaM 8 ds mica/k ¼1½ ds lkFk ifBr cSaddkjh daiuh ¼miØeksa dk
vtZu ,oa varj.k½ vf/kfu;e] 1970@1980 dh /kkjk 9 dh mi&/kkjk
¼3½ ds [kaM ¼d½ }kjk iznÙk 'kfDr;ksa dk iz;ksx djrs gq,] dsUnzh;
ljdkj] Hkkjrh; fjtoZ cSad ls ijke'kZ djus ds i'pkr~] ,rn~}kjk
fot;k cSad dh dk;Zikyd funs'kd Jherh ,l-,- iuls ¼tUe
frfFk% 28&01&1954½ dks muds inHkkj xzg.k djus dh rkjh[k ls
31&01&2014 rd vFkkZr~ muds vf/kof"kZrk dh vk;q izkIr djus dh
rkjh[k rd vFkok vxys vkns'kksa rd] tks Hkh igys gks] bykgkckn
cSad ds v/;{k ,oa izca/k funs'kd ds :i esa fu;qDr djrh gSA
[Qk-la- 4@4@2011&chvks&I]
Js;k xqgk] funs'kd
New Delhi, the 1st October, 2012
S.O. 3097.—In exercise of the powers conferred by
clause (a) of sub-section (3) of Section 9 of The Banking
Companies (Acquisition and Transfer of Undertakings) Act,
1970/1980 read with sub-clause (1) of clause 3, clause 5,
clause 6, clause 7 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 Smt. S.A. Panse (DoB: 28.01.1954), Executive
Director, Vijaya Bank as the Chairman and Managing
Director, Allahabad Bank, from the date of her taking over
charge of the post till 31.01.2014 i.e. the date of her attaining
the age of superannuation or until further orders, whichever
is earlier.
[F. No. 4/4/2011-BO.-I]
SREYA GUHA, Director.
ubZ fnYyh] 3 vDrwcj] 2012
dk-vk- 3098.—vkS|ksfxd ,oa foÙkh; iqufuZekZ.k vihyh;
izkf/kdj.k ¼,,vkbZ,Qvkj½ ds v/;{k U;k;ewfrZ ,- xksiky jsM~Mh ds
R;kxi= nsus ds ifj.kkeLo:i #X.k vkS|ksfxd daiuh ¼fo'ks"k micaè½
vf/kfu;e] 1985 dh /kkjk 6 dh mi&/kkjk ¼5½ }kjk iznÙk 'kfDr;ksa
dk iz;ksx djrs gq,] dsUnzh; ljdkj] ,rn~}kjk] Jh ckny ds- nkl]
vkbZ,,l ¼,eih% 72½ dks ,,vkbZ,Qvkj esa ofj"Bre lnL; gksus
ds dkj.k 03&10&2012 ¼iwokZø½ ls vxys vkns'k gksus rd]
,,vkbZ,Qvkj ds v/;{k ds :i esa dk;Z djus gsrq izkf/kd`r djrh gSA
[Qk- la- 20¼2½@2002&vkbZ,Q&II@[kaM&3]
je.k dqekj xkSM+] voj lfpoA
New Delhi, the 3rd October, 2012
S.O. 3098.—Consequent upon resignation of Justice
A. Gopal Reddy, Chairman, Appellate Authority for
7556
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 13, 2012/ASVINA 21, 1934
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
Industrial & Financial Reconstruction (AAIFR), the Central
Government, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub-
section (5) of Section 6 of the Sick Industrial Companies
(Special Provisions) Act, 1985, hereby authorizes Shri Badal
K. Das, IAS, (MP: 72) being the senior most Member in
AAIFR, to act as Chairman, AAIFR w.e.f. 3-10-2012 (FN)
and until further orders.
[F. No. 20(2)/2002-IF-II/Vol. 3]
RAMAN KUMAR GAUR, Under Secy.
¼lhek 'kqYd] dsUnzh; mRikn 'kqYd ,oa lsokdj vk;qDrky;½
i.kth] 3 vDrwcj] 2012
la- 1@2012&lhek 'kqYd ¼xSj iz'kqYd½
dk-vk- 3099-—Hkkjr ljdkj] foÙk ea=ky;] jktLo foHkkx] ubZ
fnYyh ds lhek 'kqYd vf/kfu;e] 1962 dh /kkjk 152 ds [kaM ¼,½
ds v/khu fnukad 1 tqykbZ] 1994 dh vf/klwpuk la- 33@94 lhek
'kqYd ¼xSj iz'kqYd½ }kjk v/kksgLrk{kjh dks izR;k;ksftr 'kfDr;ksa dk
iz;ksx djrs gq, lhek 'kqYd vf/kfu;e] 1962 dh /kkjk 9 ds varxZr
100% bZ-vks-;w- LFkkfir djus ds mís'; ls xksok izkar ds mÙkj xksok
ftys ds frlokMh rkyqdk esa fLFkr lkarkd`t xkao dks ,rr~ }kjk HkaMkjxkj
LVs'ku ?kksf"kr fd;k tkrk gSA ;g vf/klwpuk Hkkjr ljdkj ds jkti=
esa izdk'ku dh frfFk ls izHkkoh gksxkA
[Qk-la- III@76@ysyhlhl@2011&12@lh-,Dl- ¼rd-½]
oh-ih-lh- jko] vk;qDr
(OFFICE OF THE COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS,
CENTRAL EXCISE & SERVICE TAX)
Panaji, the 3rd October, 2012
No. 1/2012-Cus. (N.T.)
S.O. 3099.—In exercise of the powers delegated to the
undersigned vide Notification No. 33/94-Cus.(NT) dated
1st July, 1994 by the Govt. of India, Ministry of Finance,
Department of Revenue, New Delhi under clause (a) of
Section 152 of the Customs Act, 1962, Village—Santacruz,
Taluka-Tiswadi, District—North Goa in the state of Goa is
hereby declared to be a warehousing station under
Section 9 of the Customs Act, 1962 for the purpose of
setting up of 100% EOU with effect from the date of
publication of this notification in the Gazette of Government
of India.
[F. No. III/76/Lelesys/2011-12/CX(T)]
V. P. C. RAO, Commissioner
ubZ fnYyh] 4 vDrwcj] 2012
dk-vk- 3100.—Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad vf/kfu;e] 1955 ¼1955 dk
23½ dh /kkjk 20 dh mi&/kkjk ¼3½ ds lkFk ifBr /kkjk 19 ds [k.M
¼x [k½ vkSj Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad ¼deZpkjh funs'kdksa dh fu;qfDr½
fu;ekoyh] 1974 ds fu;e 4 }kjk iznÙk 'kfDr;ksa dk iz;ksx djrs gq,]
dsUæh; ljdkj] Hkkjrh; fj”koZ cSad ls ijke'kZ djus ds i'pkr~] ,rn~}kjk]
vky bafM;k LVsV cSad vkQ bafM;k vkfQllZ QsMjs'ku ds lhfu;j
okbl izslhMsaV] Jh ,l- ds- eq[kthZ ¼tUe frfFk% 27&11&1955½ dks
mudh fu;qfDr dh vf/klwpuk dh rkjh[k ls rhu o"kks± dh vof/k ds
fy, vFkok muds Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad ds ,d vf/kdkjh u jgus rd
vFkok vxys vkns'kksa rd] tks Hkh igys gks] Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad ds
dsUæh; funs'kd&eaMy esa vf/kdkjh deZpkjh funs'kd ds :i esa ukfer
djrh gSA
[Qk-la- 3@57@2012&chvks&I]
fot; eYgks=k] voj lfpo
New Delhi, the 4th October, 2012
S.O. 3100.—In exercise of the powers conferred by
clause (cb) of section (19) read with sub-section (3) of
Section 20 of the State Bank of India Act, 1955 (23 of 1955)
and rule 4 of The State Bank of India (Appointment of
Employee Directors) Rules, 1974, the Central Government,
after consultation with Reserve Bank of India, hereby
nominates Shri S.K. Mukherjee (DoB: 27-11-1955), Senior
Vice President, All India State Bank of India Officers'
Federation as Officer Employee Director on the Central
Board of State Bank of India for a period of three years
from the date of notification of his appointment or until he
ceases to be an officer of the State Bank of India or untill
further orders, whichever is the earliest.
[F.No. 3/57/2012-BO-I]
VIJAY MALHOTRA, Under Secy.
ubZ fnYyh] 5 vDrwcj] 2012
dk-vk- 3101.—jk"Vªh;d`r cSad ¼izca/k ,oa izdh.kZ mica/k½ Ldhe]
1970@1980 ds [kaM 3 ds mi[kaM ¼1½ vkSj [kaM 8 ds mi[kaM ¼1½ ds
lkFk ifBr] cSaddkjh daiuh ¼miØeksa dk vtZu ,oa varj.k½
vfèfu;e] 1970@1980 dh /kkjk 9 dh mi&/kkjk ¼3½ ds [kaM ¼d½
}kjk iznÙk 'kfDr;ksa dk iz;ksx djrs gq,] dsUæh; ljdkj] Hkkjrh; fj”koZ
cSad ls ijke'kZ djus ds i'pkr~] ,rn~}kjk] bykgkckn cSad ds
egkizcaèd Jh lrh'k dqekj dkyjk ¼tUe frfFk% 25&08&1957½ dks
01&11&2012 dks muds inHkkj xzg.k djus dh rkjh[k ls 31&08&2017
rd] vFkkZr~ muds vf/kof"kZrk dh vk;q izkIr djus dh rkjh[k rd
vFkok vxys vkns'kksa rd] tks Hkh igys gks] vka/kzk cSad ds dk;Zdkjh
funs'kd ds :i esa fu;qDr djrh gSA
[Qk-la- 4@5@2011&chvks&I]
fot; eYgks=k] voj lfpo
New Delhi, the 5th October, 2012
S.O. 3101.—In exercise of the powers conferred by
clause (a) of sub-section (3) of Section 9 of The Banking
Companies (Acquisition and Transfer of Undertakings) Act,
[Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)]
Hkkjr dk jkti= % vDrwcj 13] 2012@vkf'ou 21] 1934
7557
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 Satish
Kumar Kalra (DoB : 25-08-1957), General Manager,
Allahabad Bank as Executive Director, Andhra Bank, with
effect from the date of his taking over charge of the post till
31-08-2017, I.E. the date of his superannuation or until
further orders, whichever is earlier.
[F.No. 4/5/2011-BO-I]
VIJAY MALHOTRA, Under Secy.
ubZ fnYyh] 5 vDrwcj] 2012
dk-vk- 3102.—jk"Vªh;d`r cSad ¼izca/k ,oa izdh.kZ mica/k½ Ldhe]
1970@1980 ds [kaM 3 ds mi&[kaM ¼1½ vkSj [kaM 8 ds mi&[kaM ¼1½
ds lkFk ifBr] cSaddkjh daiuh ¼miØeksa dk vtZu ,oa varj.k½
vfèfu;e] 1970@1980 dh /kkjk 9 dh mi&/kkjk ¼3½ ds [kaM ¼d½
}kjk iznÙk 'kfDr;ksa dk iz;ksx djrs gq,] dsUæh; ljdkj] Hkkjrh; fj”koZ
cSad ls ijke'kZ djus ds i'pkr~] ,rn~}kjk] iatkc uS'kuy cSad ds
egkizca/kd Jh jatu /kou ¼tUe frfFk % 09&09&1955½ dks
01&11&2012 dks ;k blds i'pkr~ muds inHkkj xzg.k djus dh
rkjh[k ls 30&09&2015 rd] vFkkZr~ muds vf/kof"kZrk dh vk;q izkIr
djus dh rkjh[k rd vFkok vxys vkns'kksa rd] tks Hkh igys gks] cSad
vkWQ cM+kSnk ds dk;Zdkjh funs'kd ds :i esa fu;qDr djrh gSA
[Qk-la- 4@5@2011&chvks&I]
fot; eYgks=k] voj lfpo
New Delhi, the 5th October, 2012
S.O. 3102.—In exercise of the powers conferred by
clause (a) of sub-section (3) of Section 9 of the The Banking
Companies (Acquisition and Transfer of Undertakings) 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 Ranjan
Dhawan (DoB : 09-09-1955), General Manager, Punjab
National Bank as Executive Director, Bank of Baroda, with
effect from the date of his taking over charge of the post on
or after 01-11-2012 till 30-09-2015, i.e. the date of his
superannuation or until further orders, whichever is earlier.
[F. No. 4/5/2011-BO-I]
VIJAY MALHOTRA, Under Secy.
ubZ fnYyh] 5 vDrwcj] 2012
dk-vk- 3103.—jk"Vªh;d`r cSad ¼izca/k ,oa izdh.kZ mica/k½ Ldhe]
1970@1980 ds [kaM 3 ds mi&[kaM ¼1½ vkSj [kaM 8 ds mi&[kaM ¼1½
ds lkFk ifBr] cSaddkjh daiuh ¼miØeksa dk vtZu ,oa varj.k½
vfèfu;e] 1970@1980 dh /kkjk 9 dh mi&/kkjk ¼3½ ds [kaM ¼d½
}kjk iznÙk 'kfDr;ksa dk iz;ksx djrs gq,] dsUæh; ljdkj] Hkkjrh; fj”koZ
cSad ls ijke'kZ ds i'pkr~] ,rn~}kjk] cSad vkWQ bafM;k ds egkizca/kd
Jh HkwisUæ u¸;j ¼tUe frfFk % 13&06&1955½ dks muds inHkkj xzg.k
djus dh rkjh[k ls 30&06&2015 rd] vFkkZr~ muds vf/kof"kZrk dh
vk;q izkIr djus dh rkjh[k rd vFkok vxys vkns'kksa rd] tks Hkh
igys gks] vksfj;aVy cSad vkQ dkelZ ds dk;Zikyd funs'kd ds :i
esa fu;qDr djrh gSA
[Qk-la- 4@5@2011&chvks&I]
fot; eYgks=k] voj lfpo
New Delhi, the 5th October, 2012
S.O. 3103.—In exercise of the powers conferred by
clause (a) of sub-section (3) of Section 9 of the The Banking
Companies (Acquisition and Transfer of Undertakings) 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 Bhupender
Nayyar (DoB : 13-06-1955), General Manager, Bank of India
as Executive Director, Oriental Bank of Commerce, with
effect from the date of his taking over charge of the post till
30-06-2015, i.e. the date of his superannuation or until
further orders, whichever is earlier.
[F.No. 4/5/2011-BO-I]
VIJAY MALHOTRA, Under Secy.
lapkj ,oa lwpuk izkS|ksfxdh ea=ky;
¼Mkd foHkkx½
ubZ fnYyh] 26 flrEcj] 2012
dk-vk- 3104-—jk"Vªifr] dsUæh; flfoy lsok ¼oxhZdj.k] fu;a=.k vkSj vihy½ fu;ekoyh] 1965 ds fu;e 9 ds mi&fu;e ¼2½] fu;e 12
ds mi&fu;e ¼2½ ds [kaM ¼[k½ vkSj fu;e 24 ds mi& fu;e ¼1½ }kjk iznÙk 'kfDr;ksa dk iz;ksx djrs gq, rFkk fnukad 3 Qjojh] 2010 ds
funs'kky; ds vkns'k la- 13&2@2010&ihbZ- I ds tfj, Mkd lsok cksMZ }kjk Mkd foax esa iksLVekLVj laoxZ dh 'kq:vkr djus ds Øe esa] rRdkyhu
lapkj ea=ky; ¼Mkd foHkkx½ la[;k dk-vk- 2454 fnukad 27 vxLr] 1990 ds rgr Hkkjr ljdkj ds vkns'k esa fuEufyf[kr la'kks/ku djrs gSa]
uker%—
7558
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 13, 2012/ASVINA 21, 1934
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
mDr vkns'k dh vuqlwph esa] Hkkx I rFkk II ds fy, fuEufyf[kr Hkkx dks izfrLFkkfir fd;k tk,] uker~%—
^^Hkkx I lkekU; dsUæh; lsok] lewg ^[k*
in dk fooj.k
fu;qfDr izkf/kdkjh
'kkfLr ykxw djus ds fy, l{ke izkf/kdkjh
'kkfLr;ka
vihyh; izkf/kdkjh
vkSj os 'kkfLr;ka tks ykxw dh tk ldrh gSa
¼fu;e 11 esa en la[;kvksa ds lanHkZ esa½
1
2
3
4
5
¼i½ ofj- iksLVekLVj
egkfuns'kd ¼Mkd½
egkfuns'kd ¼Mkd½
lHkh
jk"Vªifr
¼lewg ^[k*
jktif=r½
l£dy izeq[k
¼i½ ls ¼iv½
egkfuns'kd ¼Mkd½
¼ii½ iksLVekLVj
funs'kd Mkd lsok,a
funs'kd Mkd lsok,a vFkok funs'kd
lHkh
l£dy izeq[k vFkok {ks=h;
xzsM III ¼lewg ^[k*
¼tujy iksLV vkWfQl)
iksLVekLVj tujy
vjktif=r½
fMohtu izeq[k vFkok mi funs'kd ¼ihvks½
¼i½ ls ¼iv½
funs'kd Mkd lsok,a
vFkok mi eq[; iksLVekLVj vFkok ofj"B
¼lacaf/kr½ vFkok funs'kd
iksLVekLVj
¼tujy iksLV vkWfQl½
vFkok eq[; iksLVekLVj
¼iii½ iksLVekLVj
funs'kd Mkd lsok,a
funs'kd Mkd lsok,a vFkok funs'kd
lHkh
lfdZy izeq[k vFkok {ks=h;
xzsM&II ¼lewg ^[k*
¼tujy iksLV vkWfQl½
iksLVekLVj tujy
vjktif=r½
fMohtu izeq[k vFkok mi funs'kd ¼ihvks½
¼i½ ls ¼iv½
funs'kd Mkd lsok,a vFkok
vFkok mi eq[; iksLVekLVj vFkok lewg
funs'kd ¼tujy iksLV
^[k* esa ofj"B iksLVekLVj
vkWfQl½ vFkok eq[;
iksLVekLVj
Hkkx II lkekU; dsUæh; lsok,a] lewg ^x*
¼i½ iksLVekLVj
funs'kd Mkd lsok,a
funs'kd Mkd lsok,a vFkok funs'kd
lHkh
l£dy izeq[k vFkok {ks=h;
xzsM&I ¼lewg ^x*
¼tujy iksLV vkWfQl½
iksLVekLVj tujy
vjktif=r½
fMohtu izeq[k vFkok mi funs'kd ¼ihvks½ ¼i½ ls ¼iv½
funs'kd Mkd lsok,a ¼lacaf/kr½
vFkok mi eq[; iksLVekLVj vFkok lewg
vFkok funs'kd ¼tujy iksLV
^[k* esa ofj"B iksLVekLVj
vkWfQl½ vFkok eq[;
iksLVekLVj
[la- lh&32016@10@2006&ohih]
,e- osadVs'ojyw] funs'kd ¼ohih ,aM MhbZ½
MINISTRY OF COMMUNICATION AND INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY
(Department of Posts)
New Delhi, the 26th September, 2012
S.O. 3104.—In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-rule (2) of rule 9, clause (b) of sub-rule (2) of rule (1) and sub-rule
(1) of rule 24 of Central Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeals) Rules, 1965 and in pursuance of introduction of
Post-Master Cadre in the Postal Wing by the Postal Service Board vide Directorate's Order No. 13/2/2010-TE-I dated the 3rd
February, 2010, the President hereby makes the following amendments in the order of Government of India in the erstwhile
Ministry of Communications (Department of Posts) number S.O. 2454 dated the 27th August, 1990, namely—
[Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)]
Hkkjr dk jkti= % vDrwcj 13] 2012@vkf'ou 21] 1934
7559
In the schedule to the said order, for part I & II, the following Part shall be substituted, namely:—
‘‘PART I GENERAL CENTRAL SERVICES, GROUP ‘‘B’’
Description of
Appointing
Authority competent to impose penalties and the
Penalties
Appellate
the Posts
Authority
penalties which it may impose, (With reference to
Authority
item numbers in rule 11)
1
2
3
4
5
(i) Sr.
Director General Director General (Posts)
All
President
Postmaster
(Posts)
(Group 'B'
Gazetted)
Head of Circle
(i) to (iv)
Director General
(Posts)
(ii)
Director Postal
Director Postal Services or Director (General Post
All
Head of Circle
Postmaster
Services
Office)
or Regional
Grade III
Postmaster
(Group 'B'
General
Non-
Gazetted)
Head of Division or Deputy Director (PO) or
(i) to (iv)
Director Postal
Deputy Chief Postmaster or Senior Postmaster
Services
(Concerned) or
Director (General
Post Office) or
Chief Postmaster
(iii)
Director Postal
Director Postal Services or Director (General Post
All
Head of Circle
Postmaster
Services
Office)
or Regional
Grade II
Postmaster
(Group 'B'
General
Non-
Head of Division or Deputy Director (PO) or
Gazetted)
Deputy Chief Postmaster or Senior Postmaster in
Group 'B'
(i) to (iv)
Director Postal
Services or
Director (General
Post Office) or
Chief Postmaster
‘‘PART II GENERAL CENTRAL SERVICES, GROUP 'C’’
(i)
Director Postal
Director Postal Services or
All
Head of Circle or
Postmaster
Services
Director (General Post Office)
Regional
Grade I
Postmaster
(Group 'C'
General
Non-
Head of Division or Deputy
Gazetted)
Director (PO) or Deputy Chief
Postmaster or Senior Postmaster
(i) to (iv)
in Group 'B'
Director Postal
Services or
Director (General
Post Office) or
Chief Postmaster
[No. C-32016/10/2006-VP]
M. VENKATESWARLU, Director (VP&DE)
7560
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 13, 2012/ASVINA 21, 1934
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
jlk;u vkSj moZjd ea=ky;
¼moZjd foHkkx½
ubZ fnYyh] 12 flrEcj] 2012
dk-vk- 3105-—lkoZtfud ifjlj ¼vukf/kd`r :i ls jgus okyksa
dh csn[kyh½ vf/kfu;e] 1971 dh /kkjk 3 }kjk iznÙk 'kfDr;ksa dk
iz;ksx djrs gq, dsUnz ljdkj ,rn~}kjk uhps rkfydk ds dkWye ¼1½
esa mfYyf[kr vf/kdkjh dh mDr vf/kfu;e ds iz;kstu gsrq laink
vfèdkjh ds :i esa ljdkj ds jktif=r vf/kdkjh ds jSad dk led{k
vf/kdkjh fu;qDr djrh gS] tks mDr rkfydk ds dkWye ¼2½ esa fofufnZ"V
lkoZtfud ifjlj ds laca/k esa mDr vf/kfu;e }kjk ;k mlds varxZr
laink vf/kdkfj;ksa dks nh xbZ 'kfDr;ksa] vkSj dk;ks± dk fuoZgu djsxk%
rkfydk
vf/kdkjh dk inuke
lkoZtfud ifjljksa dh Jsf.k;ka
¼1½
¼2½
ofj"B iz.kkyh vf/kdkjh@
fgUnqLrku QfVZykbtj dkiksZjs'ku
izHkkjh
fyfeVsM] nqxkZiqj] izHkkx ls
lacaf/kr ;k vf/kx`ghr ifjlj
ofj"B iz.kkyh vf/kdkjh@
fgUnqLrku QfVZykbtj dkiksZjs'ku
izHkkjh
fyfeVsM] gfYn;k] izHkkx ls
lacaf/kr ;k vf/kx`ghr ifjlj
la;a= bathfu;j
fgUnqLrku QfVZykbtj dkiksZjs'ku
¼bysDVª-½ izHkkjh
fyfeVsM] cjkSuh] izHkkx ls
lacaf/kr ;k vf/kx`ghr ifjlj
[Qk-la- 76@01@2012&,p vkj&I]
dqyoar jk.kk] voj lfpo ¼,p-vkj- I½
MINISTRY OF CHEMICALS AND FERTILIZERS
(Department of Fertilizers)
New Delhi, the 12th September, 2012
S.O. 3105.—In exercise of the powers conferred by
Section 3 of the Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised
Occupants) Act, 1971 the Central Government hereby
appoints the officer mentioned in column (1) of table below,
being an officer equivalent to the rank of Gazetted Officer
of Government to be the Estate Officer for the purpose of
the said Act, who shall exercise the powers conferred, and
perform the duties imposed on Estate Officers by or under
the said Act in respect of the public premises specified in
column (2) of the said Table:
TABLE
Designation of the Officer
Categories of the public
premises
(1)
(2)
Sr. System Officer/In-charge
Premises belonging to, or
taken over by Hindustan
Fertilizer Corporation
Limited, Durgapur, Unit.
Sr. System Officer/In-charge
Premises belonging to, or
taken over by Hindustan
Fertilizer Corporation
Limited, Haldia, Division.
Plant Engineer(Elect.)
Premises belonging to, or
In-charge
taken over by Hindustan
Fertilizer Corporation
Limited, Barauni, Unit.
[F.No. 76/01/2012-HR-I]
KULWANT RANA, Under Secy. (HR-I)
lwpuk vkSj izlkj.k ea=ky;
ubZ fnYyh] 10 vizSy] 2012
dk-vk- 3106.—bl ea=ky; dh fnukad 19&01&2012 dh
lela[;d vf/klwpuk ds Øe esa rFkk pyfp= ¼izek.ku½ fu;e]
1983 ds fu;e 7 o 8 ds lkFk ifBr pyfp= vf/kfu;e] 1952
¼1952 dk 37½ dh /kkjk 5 dh mi&/kkjk ¼1½ }kjk iznÙk 'kfDr;ksa dk
iz;ksx djrs gq, dsanzh; ljdkj dsanzh; fQYe izek.ku cksMZ ds fnYyh
lykgdkj iSuy esa fuEufyf[kr O;fDr;ksa dks rRdky izHkko ls nks o"kks±
dh vof/k ds fy, vFkok vxys vkns'kksa rd] tks Hkh igys gksa] lnL;ksa
ds :i esa fu;qDr djrh gS %
Øe la-
uke
1-
Jh xqjizhr flag VqVstk
2-
lqJh xhrkatfy dqekj
3-
lqJh dkSlj vgen
4-
lqJh ehrk ukFk
5-
Jh lat; fu>kou
6-
Jh jktdqekj xqIrk
[Qk-la- 809@3@2011&,Q¼lh½]
fu#iek dksr:] funs'kd ¼fQYe½
MINISTRY OF INFORMATION AND
BROADCASTING
New Delhi, the 10th April, 2012
S.O. 3106.—In continuation of Ministry's Notification
of even number dated 19-01-2012 and in exercise of the
powers conferred by sub-section (1) of Section 5 of the
Cinematograph Act, 1952 (37 of 1952) read with rules 7 and
8 of the Cinematograph (Certification) Rules, 1983, the
Central Government is pleased to appoint the following
persons as members of the Delhi Advisory Panel of Central
Board of Film Certification with immediate effect for a period
of two years or until further orders, whichever is earlier :
S.No.
Name
1.
Shri Gurpreet Singh Tuteja
2.
Ms. Geetanjali Kumar
3.
Ms. Kauser Ahmed
4.
Ms. Meeta Nath
5.
Shri Sanjay Nijhawan
6.
Shri Rajkumar Gupta
[F. No. 809/3/2011-F(C)]
NIRUPAMA KOTRU, Director (Films)
(1)
(2)
[Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)]
Hkkjr dk jkti= % vDrwcj 13] 2012@vkf'ou 21] 1934
7561
ubZ fnYyh] 26 vizSy] 2012
dk-vk- 3107.—bl ea=ky; dh fnukad 19&01&2012 dh
lela[;d vf/klwpuk ds vuqØe esa rFkk pyfp= ¼izek.ku½ fu;e]
1983 ds fu;e 7 vkSj 8 ds lkFk ifBr pyfp= vf/kfu;e] 1952
¼1952 dk 37½ dh /kkjk 5 dh mi&/kkjk ¼1½ }kjk iznÙk 'kfDr;ksa dk
iz;ksx djrs gq,] dsUnz ljdkj dsUnzh; fQYe izek.ku cksMZ ds eqacbZ
lykgdkj iSuy ds lnL; Jh tsñdsñ txSlh dks rRdky izHkko ls
,rn~}kjk fu"dkflr djrh gSA
[Qk- la- 809@2@2011&,Q¼lh½]
fu#iek dksr:] funs'kd ¼fQYe½
New Delhi, the 26th April, 2012
S.O. 3107.—In continuation of Ministry's Notification
of even number dated 19-01-2012 and in exercise of the
powers conferred by sub-section (1) of Section 5 of the
Cinematograph Act, 1952 (37 of 1952) read with rules 7 and
8 of the Cinematograph (Certification) Rules, 1983, the
Central Government hereby removes Shri J.K. Jagaisi as
member of Mumbai Avisory Panel of Central Board of Film
Certification with immediate effect.
[F. No. 809/2/2011-F(C)]
NIRUPAMA KOTRU, Director (Films)
ubZ fnYyh] 26 vizSy] 2012
dk-vk- 3108-—bl ea=ky; dh fnukad 19&01&2012 dh
lela[;d vf/klwpuk ds vuqØe esa rFkk pyfp= ¼izek.ku½ fu;e]
1983 ds fu;e 7 vkSj 8 ds lkFk ifBr pyfp= vf/kfu;e] 1952
¼1952 dk 37½ dh /kkjk 5 dh mi&/kkjk ¼1½ }kjk iznÙk 'kfDr;ksa dk
iz;ksx djrs gq,] dsUnz ljdkj dsUnzh; fQYe izek.ku cksMZ ds lykgdkj
iSuy lnL;] lhch,Qlh] caxykSj esa Øe la- 42 ls lqJh ¶yksjk lSuh
ds uke dks ,rn~}kjk gVkrh gS D;ksafd muds uke dk mYys[k lykgdkj
iSuy lnL;] lhch,Qlh] eqacbZ esa Øe la- 30 esa igys gh dj fn;k
x;k gSA
[Qk- la- 809@4@2011&,Q¼lh½]
fu#iek dksr:] funs'kd ¼fQYe½
New Delhi, the 26th April, 2012
S.O. 3108.—In continuation of Ministry's Notification
of even number dated 19th Jan. 2012 and in exercise of the
powers conferred by sub-section (1) of Section 5 of the
Cinematograph Act, 1952 (37 of 1952) read with rules 7 and
8 of the Cinematograph (Certification) Rules, 1983, the
Central Government hereby removes the name of Ms. Flora
Saini, from Advisory Panel Members, CBFC, Bangalore at
S.No. 42 as her name has already been mentioned at S.No.
30, in the Advisory Panel Members, CBFC, Mumbai.
[F. No. 809/4/2011-F(C)]
NIRUPAMA KOTRU, Director (Films)
ubZ fnYyh] 28 vxLr] 2012
dk-vk- 3109-—bl ea=ky; dh fnukad 19&01&2012 dh
lela[;d vf/klwpuk ds vuqØe esa rFkk pyfp= ¼izek.ku½ fu;e]
1983 ds fu;e 7 vkSj 8 ds lkFk ifBr pyfp= vf/kfu;e] 1952
¼1952 dk 37½ dh /kkjk 5 dh mi&/kkjk ¼1½ }kjk iznÙk 'kfDr;ksa dk
iz;ksx djrs gq,] dsUnz ljdkj dsUnzh; fQYe izek.ku cksMZ ds eqacbZ
lykgdkj iSuy ds lnL;ksa ds :i esa fuEufyf[kr O;fDr;ksa dks rRdky
izHkko ls nks o"kks± dh vof/k ds fy, vFkok vxys vkns'kksa rd] tks Hkh
igys gks] iSuy ds lnL;ksa ds :i esa fu;qDr djrh gS %
Øe lañ
uke
1-
Jh fouksn djlunkl fnospk
2-
Jh vk'kh"k lhts lkg
3-
Jh iz'kkar iokj
[Qk- la- 809@2@2011&,Q¼lh½]
fu#iek dksr:] funs'kd ¼fQYe½
New Delhi, the 28th August, 2012
S.O. 3109.—In continuation of Ministry’s Notification
of even number dated 19-01-2012 and in exercise of the
powers conferred by sub-section (1) of Section 5 of the
Cinematograph Act, 1952 (37 of 1952) read with rules 7 and
8 of the Cinematograph (Certification) Rules, 1983, the
Central Government is pleased to appoint the following
persons as members of the Mumbai Advisory panel of the
Central Board of Film Certification with immediate effect
for a period of two years or until further orders, whichever
is earlier :
Sl. No.
Name
1.
Shri Vinod Karsandas Divecha
2.
Shri Ashish CJ Shah
3.
Shri Prashant Pawar
[F.No. 809/2/2011-F(C)]
NIRUPAMA KOTRU, Director (Films)
fo|qr ea=ky;
ubZ fnYyh] 1 vDrwcj] 2012
dk-vk- 3110-—dsanz ljdkj lkoZtfud LFky ¼vizkf/kd`r vfèHkksfx;ksa dh
csn[kyh½ vf/kfu;e] 1971 ¼1971 dk 40½ dh èkjk 3 ds }kjk iznÙk 'kfDr;ksa dk
iz;ksx djrs gq, ,rn~}kjk us'kuy FkeZy ikoj dkjiksjs'ku fyfeVsM ¼,uVhihlh½ ds
vf/kdkjh Jh ft;kmj jgeku] izca/kd ¼ekuo lalk/ku½ dks Hkkjr ljdkj ds jktif=r
vfèdkjh ds lerqY; in ij laink vf/kdkjh fu;qDr djrh gS rFkk bl iz;kstu ls
fo|qr ea=ky; ds fnukad 8 twu] 1990 ds dk-vk- la[;k 1760 dh Hkkjr ljdkj
dh vf/klwpuk esa fuEufyf[kr vxyk la'kks/ku djrh gS] vFkkZr%&
mDr vf/klwpuk esa] rkfydk esa Øe la- 1 vkSj mlls lacaf/kr izfof"V;ksa dks fuEufyf[kr
esa izfrLFkkfir fd;k tk,xk] vFkkZr%
^^1
Jh ft;kmj jgeku] izca/kd ¼ekuo
us'kuy FkeZy ikoj dkjiksjs'ku fyfeVsM
lalk/ku½] dksjck lqij FkeZy ikoj
¼,uVhihlh fyfeVsM½] dksjck lqij
izkstsDV] us'kuy FkeZy ikoj
FkeZy ikoj LVs'ku] dksjck]
dkjiksjs'ku fyfeVsM ¼,uVhihlh
ftyk&fcykliqj] e/; izns'k fLFkr
fyfeVsM½] e/; izns'k
blds dk;kZy; ds iz'kklfud
fu;a=.kk/khu vFkok blds }kjk iV~Vs
ij fy, x, lHkh lacaf/kr ifjljA**
[Qk- la- 8@6@1992&FkeZy&I]
vkbZ-lh-ih- ds'kjh] la;qDr lfpo
7562
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 13, 2012/ASVINA 21, 1934
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
fVIi.kh%& izeq[k vf/klwpuk Hkkjr ds jkti= esa dk-vk- la[;k 1760]
fnukad 8 twu] 1990 ds }kjk izdkf'kr dh xbZ Fkh rFkk
foxr la'kks/ku dkñvkñ la[;k 965] fnukad 31 ekpZ] 2010
ds }kjk fd;k x;k FkkA
MINISTRY OF POWER
New Delhi, the 1st October, 2012
S.O. 3110.—In exercise of the powers conferred by
Section 3 of the Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised
Occupants) Act, 1971 (40 of 1971), the Central Government
hereby appoints Shri Ziaur Rahman, Manager (Human
Resources), an officer of the National Thermal Power
Corporation Limited (NTPC Limited), equivalent to the rank
of Gazetted Officer of the Government, to be the Estate Officer
and for that purpose makes the following further amendments
in the notification of the Government of India in the Ministry
of Power number S.O. 1760, dated the 8th June, 1990,
namely:—
2. In the said notification in the Table, for serial number 1 and
the entries relating thereto, the following shall be substituted,
namely:—
‘‘1. Shri Ziaur Rahman, Manager All premises belonging to, or
(Human Resources), Korba
taken on lease by National
Super Thermal Power
Thermal Power Corporation
Project, National Thermal
Limited (NTPC Limited) and
Power Corporation Limited
under the administrative
(NTPC Limited), Madhya
control of its Korba Super
Pradesh.
Thermal Power Station,
Korba, District Bilaspur,
Madhya Pradesh.’’.
[F.No. 8/6/1992-TH.-I]
I. C. P. KESHARI, Jt. Secy.
Note:— The principal notification was published in the Gazette
of India vide number S.O. 1760, dated the 8th June,
1990 and last amended vide number S.O. 965, dated
the 31st March, 2010.
ubZ fnYyh] 1 vDrwcj] 2012
dk-vk-3111-—dsanz ljdkj lkoZtfud LFky ¼vizkf/kd`r
vfèHkksfx;ksa dh csn[kyh½ vf/kfu;e] 1971 ¼1971 dk 40½ dh
èkkjk 3 ds }kjk iznÙk 'kfDr;ksa dk iz;ksx djrs gq, ,rn~}kjk us'kuy
FkeZy ikoj dkjiksjs'ku fyfeVsM ¼,uVhihlh½ ds vf/kdkjh Jh vfuy
dqekj frokjh] izca/kd ¼ekuo lalk/ku½ vkSj Jh 'kqHk nhi 'kkse] mi
izca/kd ¼ekuo lalk/ku½ dks Hkkjr ljdkj ds jktif=r vf/kdkjh ds
lerqY; in ij laink vf/kdkjh fu;qDr djrh gS rFkk bl iz;kstu ls
fo|qr ea=ky; ds fnukad 8 tqykbZ] 1993 ds dkñvkñ la[;k 1590 dh
Hkkjr ljdkj dh vf/klwpuk esa fuEufyf[kr vxyk la'kks/ku djrh gS]
vFkkZr%&
2- mDr vf/klwpuk esa] rkfydk esa Øe la- 5 ,oa 6 vkSj mlls
lacaf/kr izfof"V;ksa dks fuEufyf[kr esa izfrLFkkfir fd;k tk,xk] vFkkZr%
^^5
Jh vfuy dqekj frokjh] izca/kd ¼ekuo us'kuy FkeZy ikoj dkjiksjs'ku
lalk/ku½] fQjkst xka/kh Åapkgkj FkeZy
fyfeVsM ¼,uVhihlh fyfeVsM½]
ikoj izkstsDV] us'kuy FkeZy ikoj
fQjkst xka/kh Åapkgkj FkeZy ikoj
dkjiksjs'ku fyfeVsM ¼,uVhihlh fyfeVsM½izkstsDV] Mkd?kj&Åapkgkj]
Mkd?kj&Åapkgkj] ftyk&jk;cjsyh] mÙkj
ftyk&jk;cjsyh]
mÙkj
izns'k&229406A
izns'k&229406 fLFkr blds
dk;kZy; ds iz'kklfud
fu;a=.kk/khu vFkok blds }kjk iV~Vs
ij fy, x, lHkh lacaf/kr ifjljA
6
Jh 'kqHknhi 'kkse] mi izca/kd ¼ekuo
us'kuy FkeZy ikoj dkjiksjs'ku
lalk/ku½] us'kuy FkeZy ikoj dkjiksjs'ku
fyfeVsM ¼,uVhihlh fyfeVsM½]
fyfeVsM ¼,uVhihlh fyfeVsM½]
flaxjkSyh lqij FkeZy ikoj izkstsDV]
flaxjkSyh lqij FkeZy ikoj izkstsDV]
Mkd?kj&'kfDruxj] ftyk lksuHknz]
mÙkj izns'kA
mÙkj izns'k] fiu&231222 fLFkr
blds dk;kZy; ds iz'kklfud
fu;a=.kk/khu vFkok blds }kjk iV~Vs
ij fy, x, lHkh lacaf/kr
ifjljA**
[Qk- la- 8@6@1992&FkeZy&I]
vkbZ-lh-ih- ds'kjh] la;qDr lfpo
fVIi.kh%& izeq[k vf/klwpuk fnukad 8 tqykbZ] 1993 dks dk-vk-
la[;k 1590 ds rgr rFkk fnukad 7 vxLr] 2009 dks dk-
vk- 2262 ds rgr vafre la'kks/ku ¼fQjkst xka/kh Åapkgkj
FkeZy ikoj izkstsDV] Mkd?kj&Åapkgkj] ftyk&jk;cjsyh]
mÙkj izns'k&229406 ds laca/k esa½ rFkk fnukad 31 ekpZ]
2010 dks dk-vk- 964 ds rgr ¼flaxjkSyh lqij FkeZy
ikoj izkstsDV] mÙkj izns'k] fiu&231222 ds laca/k esa½
izdkf'kr gqbZA
New Delhi, the 1st October, 2012
S.O. 3111.—In exercise of the powers conferred by
Section 3 of the Public Premises (Eviction of Unathorised
Occupants) Act, 1971 (40 of 1971), the Central Government
hereby appoints Shri Anil Kumar Tiwari, Manager (Human
Resources) and Shri Shubh Deep Shome, Deputy Manager
(Human Resources) officers of the National Thermal Power
Corporation Limited (NTPC Limited), equivalent to the rank
of Gazetted Officer of the Government of India, to be the
Estate Officers and for that purpose makes the following
further amendments in the notification of the Government
of India in the Ministryof Power number S.O. 1590, dated
the 8th July, 1993, namely:—
2. In the said notification, in the Table, for serial numbers
5 and 6 and the entries relating thereto, the following shall
be substituted, namely:—
[Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)]
Hkkjr dk jkti= % vDrwcj 13] 2012@vkf'ou 21] 1934
7563
"5.
Shri Anil Kumar Tiwari, Manager
All premises belonging to,
(Human Resources), Feroz Gandhi
or taken on lease by the
Unchahar Thermal Power Project, National Thermal Power
National Thermal Power
Corporation
Limited
Corporation Limited (NTPC
(NTPC Limited) and
Limited), P.O. Unchahar, District-
under the administrative
Raebareli, Uttar Pradesh-229406.
control of its Feroz
Gandhi
Unchahar
Thermal Power Project
located at Post Officer,
Unchahar,
District
Raebareli, Uttar Pradesh-
229406.
6.
Shri Shubh Deep Shome, Deputy
All premises belonging
Manager (Human Resources),
to, or taken on lease by
National Thermal Power
the National Thermal
Corporation Limited (NTPC
Power
Corporation
Limited), Singrauli Super Thermal
Limited (NTPC Limited)
Power Project, Uttar Pradesh.
and
under
the
administrative control of
its
Singrauli
Super
Thermal Power Project,
P.O.
Shakti
Nagar,
District
Sonebhadra,
Uttar
Pradesh,
Pin:
231222.’’
[F.No. 8/6/1992-TH.-I]
I.C.P. KESHARI, Jt. Secy.
Note:— The principal notification was published vide
number S.O. 1590, dated the 8th July, 1993 and
last amended vide number S.O. 2262, dated the
7th August, 2009 (in respect of Feroz Gandhi
Unchahar Thermal Power Project, P.O. Unchahar,
District-Raebareli, Uttar Pradesh-229406) and vide
S.O. 964, dated the 31st March, 2010 (in respect
of Singrauli Super Thermal Power Project, Uttar
Pradesh, Pin: 231222).
ubZ fnYyh] 01 vDrwcj] 2012
dk-vk- 3112-—dsanz ljdkj lkoZtfud LFky ¼vizkf/kd`r
vfèHkksfx;ksa dh csn[kyh½ vf/kfu;e] 1971 ¼1971 dk 40½ dh
/kkjk 3 ds }kjk iznÙk 'kfDr;ksa dk iz;ksx djrs gq, ,rn~}kjk us'kuy
FkeZy ikoj dkjiksjs'ku fyfeVsM ¼,uVhihlh½ ds vf/kdkjh Jh v:.k
dqekj gkynkj] izca/kd ¼ekuo lalk/ku½ dks Hkkjr ljdkj ds jktif=r
vf/kdkjh ds lerqY; in ij laink vf/kdkjh fu;qDr djrh gS rFkk
bl iz;kstu ls fo|qr ea=ky; ds fnukad 27 ekpZ] 2002 ds dk-vk-
la[;k 1257 dh Hkkjr ljdkj dh vf/klwpuk esa fuEufyf[kr vxyk
la'kks/ku djrh gS] vFkkZr%&
2- mDr vf/klwpuk esa] rkfydk esa Øe lañ 2 ,oa mlls lacaf/kr
izfof"V;ksa dks fuEufyf[kr ls izfrLFkkfir fd;k tk,xk] vFkkZr%—
^^2- Jh v:.k dqekj gkynkj] izca/kd
us'kuy FkeZy ikoj dkjiksjs'ku fyfeVsM
¼ekuo lalk/ku½] bathfu;fjax
¼,uVhihlh fyfeVsM½] fo|qr izca/ku
vkWfQl dkEIysDl] us'kuy FkeZy
laLFkku] IykWV uañ 5&14] lsDVj 16,]
ikoj dkjiksjs'ku fyfeVsM
uks,Mk&201301 ftyk xkSrecq) uxj
¼,uVhihlh fyfeVsM½] uks,MkA
¼mÙkj izns'k½ fLFkr blds dk;kZy; ds
iz'kklfud fu;a=.kk/khu lHkh lacaf/kr
ifjljA
us'kuy FkeZy ikoj dkjiksjs'ku fyfeVsM
¼,uVhihlh fyfeVsM½ ds dkjiksjsV
dk;kZy;] bZvkslh] uks,Mk bathfu;fjax
vkWfQl dkWEIysDl] IykWV uañ ,&8,]
lsDVj&24] uks,Mk&201301 ftyk xkSre
cq) uxj ¼mÙkj izns'k½ fLFkr lHkh
lacaf/kr ifjljA
us'kuy FkeZy ikoj dkjiksjs'ku fyfeVsM
¼,uVhihlh fyfeVsM½ ds dkjiksjsV lsaVj
esa] ,u,Q,y fcfYaMx] IykWV uañ ,&11]
,u,Q,y ifjlj] lsDVj&24]
uks,Mk&201301 ftyk xkSre cq) uxj
¼mÙkj izns'k½ fLFkr lHkh lacaf/kr
ifjljA
us'kuy FkeZy ikoj dkjiksjs'ku fyfeVsM
¼,uVhihlh fyfeVsM½ ds ,uthZ
VsDuksykWftl] IykWV uañ 3] CykWd uañ 3
lsDVj&bdksVsd&II m|ksx fogkj] nqxkZ
Vkdht ds ihNs] xzsVj uks,Mk ¼mÙkj izns'k½
fLFkr lHkh lacaf/krA
us'kuy FkeZy ikoj dkjiksjs'ku fyfeVsM
¼,uVhihlh fyfeVsM½ ls lacaf/kr lHkh
ifjlj tks
, ,aM ch VkÅuf'ki= ,&71] lsDVj&33]
,uVhihlh VkÅuf'ki] uks,Mk ¼'kqHke½
lh ,aM Mh VkÅuf'ki =,&44]
lsDVj&33] ,uVhihlh VkÅuf'ki] uks,Mk
¼le`f)½
'kkS;Z VkÅuf'ki=lh&55] lsDVj&33]
,uVhihlh VkÅuf'ki] uks,Mk fLFkr gSaA**
[Qk- la- 8@6@1992&FkeZy&I]
vkbZ- lh- ih- ds'kjh] la;qDr lfpo
fVIi.kh%& izeq[k vf/klwpuk Hkkjr ds jkti= esa dk-vk- la[;k 1257]
fnukad 27 ekpZ] 2002 ds }kjk izdkf'kr dh xbZ Fkh rFkk
foxr la'kksèu dk-vk- la[;k 2259] fnukad 7 vxLr]
2009 ds }kjk fd;k x;k FkkA
7564
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 13, 2012/ASVINA 21, 1934
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
New Delhi, the 1st October, 2012
S.O. 3112.—In exercise of the powers conferred by
Section 3 of the Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised
Occupants) Act, 1971 (40 of 1971), the Central Government
hereby appoints Shri Arun Kumar Halder, Manager (Human
Resources), officer of the National Thermal Power
Corporation Limited (NTPC Limited) equivalent to the rank
of Gazetted Officer of the Government of India and for that
purpose makes the following further amendments in the
notification of the Government of India, to be the Estate
Officer in the Ministry of Power number S.O. 1257, dated
27th March, 2002, namely:—
2. In the said notification, in the Table, for serial
number 2 and the entries relating thereto, the following
shall be substituted, namely:—
“2 Shri Arun Kumar Halder, Manager (Human
Resources), Engineering Office Complex, National Thermal
Power Corporation Limited (NTPC Limited) NOIDA :
All premises belonging to National Thermal Power
Corporation Limited (NTPC Limited) and under the
Administrative Control of its office at Power Management
Institute, Plot No.5-14, Sector-16A, NOIDA-201301 District
Gautam Budh Nagar (Uttar Pradesh)
All premises belonging to National Thermal Power
Corporation Limited (NTPC Limited) at Corporate Centre,
EOC, NOIDA Engineering Office Comple, Plot No.A-8A,
Sector-24, NOIDA-201301, District Gautam Budh Nagar
(Uttar Pradesh).
All premises belonging to National Thermal Power
Corporation Limited (NTPC Limited) at Corporate Centre,
NFL Building, Plot No.A-11, NFL Premises, Sector-24,
NOIDA-201301, District Gautam Budh Nagar (Uttar
Pradesh).
All premises belonging to National Thermal Power
Corporation Limited (NTPC Limited) at Energy
Technologies, Plot No.3, Block No.3, Sector-ECOTECH-II,
Udyog Vihar, Behind Durga Talkies, Greater Noida (Uttar
Pradesh).
All premises belonging to National Thermal Power
Corporation Limited (NTPC Limited) at
A & B Township = A-71, Sector-33, NTPC Township,
Noida (Shubham)
C & D Township = A-44, Sector-33, NTPC Township,
Noida (Smridhi)
Shaurya Township=C-55, Sector-33, NTPC
Township, Noida.''
[F. No.8/6/1992-TH.-I)
I. C. P. KESHARI, Jt. Secy.
Note : The principal notification was published in
the Gazette of India vide number S.O. 1257, dated the
27th March, 2002 and last amended vide number S.O. 2259,
dated the 7th August, 2009.
fons'k ea=ky;
¼lhihoh izHkkx½
ubZ fnYyh] 1 vDrwcj] 2012
dk-vk- 3113-—jktuf;d vkSj dksalyh; vkWfQlj ¼'kiFk
vkSj Qhl½ ds vf/kfu;e] 1948 ¼1948 dk 41½ dh /kkjk 2 ds [kaM
¼d½ ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnz ljdkj ,rn}kjk Jh fgeka'kq 'ks[kj >k] ,sih
vkSj MCY;w vks] dks 1 vDVwcj] 2012 ls Hkkjr ds jktnwrkokl] ekLdks
esa lgk;d dksalyj vf/kdkjh ds drZO;ksa dk ikyu djus ds fy,
izkf/kd`r djrh gS A
[la-Vh- 4330@01@2006]
vkj- ds- isfjufM;k] voj lfpo ¼dksalqyj½
MINISTRY OF EXTERNAL AFFAIRS
(CPV DIVISION)
New Delhi, the 1st October, 2012
S.O. 3113.—In pursuance of the clause (a) of the
Section 2 of the Diplomatic and Consular Officers (Oaths
and fees) Act, 1948 (41 of 1948), the Central Government
hereby authorize Shri Himanshu Shekhar Jha, AP&WO,
Embassy of India Moscow to perform the duties of
Assistant Consular Officer with effect from 1st October,
2012.
[No. T. 4330/01/2006]
R.K. PERINDIA, Under Secy. (Consular)
Je vkSj jkstxkj ea=ky;
ubZ fnYyh] 4 vDrwcj] 2012
dk-vk- 3114.—dsUæ ljdkj] jktHkk"kk ¼la?k ds 'kkldh;
iz;kstuksa ds fy, iz;ksx½ fu;e] 1976 ¼;Fkkla'kksf/kr 1987½ ds
fu;e 10 ds mi&fu;e ¼4½ ds vuqlj.k esa] Je vkSj jkstxkj ea=ky;
ds iz'kkldh; fu;a=.kk/khu fuEufyf[kr dk;kZy; dks] ftlds U;wure
80 izfr'kr deZpkfj;ksa us fgUnh dk dk;Zlk/kd Kku izkIr dj fy;k gS]
,rn~}kjk vf/klwfpr djrh gS %
'kk[kk dk;kZy;] deZpkjh jkT; chek fuxe] chdkusj
[la-bZ&11017@1@2006&jk-Hkk-uh-]
pUnz izdk'k] la;qDr lfpo
MINISTRY OF LABOUR AND EMPLOYMENT
New Delhi, the 4th October, 2012
S.O. 3114.—In pursuance of Sub-Rule (4) of Rule 10
of the Official Language (Use for official purposes of the
Union) Rules, 1976 (as amended 1987) the Central
Government hereby notifies following office under the
administrative control of the Ministry of Labour &
Employment, at lest 80% Staff whereof have acquired
working knowledge of Hindi :—
Branch Office, Employee's State Insurance Corporation,
Bikaner
[No. E-11017/1/2006-RBN]
CHANDRA PRAKASH, Jt. Secy.
[Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)]
Hkkjr dk jkti= % vDrwcj 13] 2012@vkf'ou 21] 1934
7565
miHkksDrk ekeys] [kk| vkSj lkoZtfud forj.k ea=ky;
miHkksDrk ekeys foHkkx
¼Hkkjrh; ekud C;wjks½
ubZ fnYyh] 26 flrEcj] 2012
dk-vk- 3115-—Hkkjrh; ekud C;wjks fu;e 1987 ds fu;e 7 ds
mifu;e ¼1½ ds [kaM ¼[k½ ds vuqlj.k esa Hkkjrh; ekud C;wjks
,rn~}kjk vf/klwfpr djrk gS fd ftl Hkkjrh; ekud dk fooj.k uhps
vuqlwph esa fn;k x;k gS og LFkkfir gks x;k gS %&
vuqlwph
Øe LFkkfir Hkkjrh; ekud¼dksa½
u;s Hkkjrh; ekud
LFkkfir
la[;k dh la[;k o"kZ vkSj
}kjk vfrØfer
frfFk
'kh"kZd
Hkkjrh; ekud vFkok
ekudksa] ;fn dksbZ gks]
dh la[;k vkSj o"kZ
¼1½
¼2½
¼3½
¼4½
1-
vkbZ,l@vkbZbZlh 60071&1%
vkbZ,l 2165
11-09-2012
2006 Å"ekjks/ku leUo;u
¼Hkkx 1½ % 1977
Hkkx 1 ifjHkk"kk] fl)kar vkSj
fu;e
bl Hkkjrh; ekud dh ,d izfr Hkkjrh; ekud C;wjks] ekud
Hkou] 9 cgknqj 'kkg tQj ekxZ] ubZ fnYyh&110002] {ks=h; dk;kZy;ksa%
ubZ fnYyh] dksydkrk] p.Mhx<+] psUubZ] eqEcbZ rFkk 'kk[kk dk;kZy;ksa%
vgenkckn] caxykSj] Hkksiky] Hkqous'oj] dks;Ecrwj] xqokgkVh] gSnjkckn]
t;iqj] dkuiqj] ukxiqj] iVuk] iq.ks rFkk fr:ouUrkiqje esa fcØh gsrq
miyC/k gSaA
[lanHkZ% bZVh 19@Vh&24]
vkj-lh- eSF;w] oSKkfud ^,Q* ,oa izeq[k ¼fo|qr rduhdh½
MINISTRY OF CONSUMER AFFAIRS, FOOD AND
PUBLIC DISTRIBUTION
(Department of Consumer Affairs)
(BUREAU OF INDIAN STANDARDS)
New Delhi, the 26th September, 2012
S.O. 3115.—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 is given in the
Schedule hereto annexed has been issued:
SCHEDULE
Sl.
No. & year of the
No. & Year of the
Date of
No. Indian Standard
Indian Standards, if
Establis-
any, Superseded
ment
by the New Indian
Standard
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
1.
IS/IEC 60071-1 :
IS 2165 (Part 1) : 1977 11.09.2012
2006 Insulation
Insulation coordi-
coordination Part 1 nation Part 1 Phase to
Definitions,
Earth Insulation
Principles
coordination
and Rules
Principles and Rules
( Second Revision )
Copy of this Standard is available for sale with the Bureau
of Indian Standards, Manak Bhavan, 9 Bahadur Shah Zafar
Marg, New Delhi-110002 and Regional Offices: New Delhi,
Kolkata, Chandigarh, Chennai, Mumbai and also Branch
Offices; Ahmedabad, Bangalore, Bhopal, Bhubaneshwar,
Coimbatore, Guwahati, Hyderabad, Jaipur, Kanpur, Nagpur,
Patna, Pune, Thiruvananthapuram.
[ Ref. : ET 19/T-24 ]
R.C. MATHEW, Scientist 'F' & Head (Electrotechnical)
ubZ fnYyh] 1 vDrwcj] 2012
dk-vk-3116-—Hkkjrh; ekud C;wjks fu;e 1987 ds fu;e 7
ds mifu;e ¼1½ ds [kaM ¼[k½ ds vuqlj.k esa Hkkjrh; ekud C;wjks
,rn~}kjk vf/klwfpr djrk gS fd uhps vuqlwph esa fn, x;s ekud¼dksa½
esa la'kks/ku fd;k x;k@fd;s x;s gSa %&
vuqlwph
Øe
la'kksf/kr Hkkjrh;
la'kks/kuksa dh
la'kks/ku ykxw
la[;k
ekud ¼dksa½ dh la[;k
la[;k vkSj
gksus dh frfFk
o"kZ vkSj 'kh"kZd
frfFk
¼1½
¼2½
¼3½
¼4½
1-vkbZ,l 2418 ¼Hkkx 1½ % 1977 8 flrEcj] 2012 30 flrEcj]
2012
bl Hkkjrh; la'kks/ku dh izfr;ka Hkkjrh; ekud C;wjks] ekud
Hkou] 9 cgknqj 'kkg tQj ekxZ] ubZ fnYyh&110002] {ks=h; dk;kZy;ksa%
dksydkrk] p.Mhx<+] psUubZ] eqEcbZ rFkk 'kk[kk dk;kZy;ksa% vgenkckn]
caxykSj] Hkksiky] Hkqous'oj] dks;Ecrwj] xqokgkVh] gSnjkckn] t;iqj]
dkuiqj]ukxiqj]iVuk] iq.ks rFkk fr:ouUrkiqje esa fcØh gsrq
miyC/k gSa A
[lanHkZ% bZVh 23@Vh&20]
vkj-lh- eSF;w] oSKkfud ^,Q* ,oa izeq[k ¼fo|qr rduhdh½
New Delhi, the 1st October, 2012
S.O. 3116. —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
amendment to the Indian Standards, particulars of which
are given in the Schedule hereto annexed has been
issued :
SCHEDULE
Sl.
No. & year of
No. & year of the
Date from
No. the Indain
Amendment
which the
Standards
Amendment
shall have
effect
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
1.
IS 2418 (Part 1) :
8 September, 2012
30 Sept.,
1977 Tubular Fluo-
2012
rescent Lamps for
General Lighting
Service Part 1
Requirements
and Tests (First
Revision)
7566
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 13, 2012/ASVINA 21, 1934
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
Copies of this Amendment are available with the Bureau
of Indian Standards, Manak Bhavan, 9 Bahadur Shah Zafar
Marg, New Delhi-110002 and Regional Offices: 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-20]
R.C. MATHEW, Scientist 'F' & Head (Electrotechnical)
ubZ fnYyh] 1 vDrwcj] 2012
dk-vk-3117-—Hkkjrh; ekud C;wjks fu;e] 1987 ds fu;e 7
ds mifu;e ¼1½ ds [kaM ¼[k½ ds vuqlj.k esa Hkkjrh; ekud C;wjks
,rn~}kjk vf/klwfpr djrk gS fd uhps vuqlwph esa fn, x, ekud
¼dksa½ esa la'kks/ku fd;k x;k@fd;s x;s gSa %&
vuqlwph
Øe
la'kksf/kr Hkkjrh; ekudksa la'kks/kuksa dh la[;k la'kks/ku ykxw
la[;k
dh la[;k o"kZ vkSj
vkSj frfFk
gksus dh frfFk
'kh"kZd
¼1½
¼2½
¼3½
¼4½
1-
vkbZ,l 14665 ¼Hkkx 2@
3 flrEcj] 2012
30 flrEcj]
vuqHkkx 1½% 2000
2012
2-
vkbZ,l 14665 ¼Hkkx 3@
2 flrEcj] 2012
30 flrEcj]
vuqHkkx 1½% 2000
2012
3-
vkbZ,l 15259 % 2002
1 flrEcj] 2012
30 flrEcj]
2012
bl Hkkjrh; la'kks/ku dh izfr;ka Hkkjrh; ekud C;wjks] ekud Hkou]
9 cgknqj 'kkg tQj ekxZ] ubZ fnYyh&110002] {ks=h; dk;kZy;ksa%
dksydkrk] p.Mhx<+] psUubZ] eqEcbZ rFkk 'kk[kk dk;kZy;ksa% vgenkckn]
caxykSj] Hkksiky] Hkqous'oj] dks;Ecrwj] xqokgkVh] gSnjkckn] t;iqj]
dkuiqj] ukxiqj] iVuk] iq.ks rFkk fr:ouUrkiqje esa fcØh gsrq
miyC/k gSa A
[ lanHkZ% bZVh 25@Vh&20] Vh&21] Vh&22]
vkj-lh- eSF;w] oSKkfud ^,Q* ,oa izeq[k ¼fo|qr rduhdh½
New Delhi, the 1st October, 2012
S.O. 3117.—In pursuance of clause (b) of sub-rule (1)
of Rule 7 of the Bureau of Indian Standards Rules, 1987,
the Bureau of Indian Standards hereby notifies that the
amendment to the Indian Standards, particulars of which
are given in the Schedule hereto annexed has been issued:
SCHEDULE
Sl.
No. & Year of
No & year of the
Date from
No.
the Indain Standards
Amendment
which the
Amendment
shall have effect
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
1.
IS 14665 (Part 2/Sec 1) : 3 September, 2012 30 September,
2000 Electric Transaction
2012
Lifts Part 2 Code of
Practice for Installation,
Operation and Maintenance
Section 1 Passenger and
Goods Lifts
2.
IS 14665 (Part 3/Sec 1) : 2 September, 2012 30 September,
2000 Electric Transaction
2012
Lifts Part 3 Safety Rules
Section 1 Passenger
and Goods Lifts
3.
IS 15259 : 2002
1 September, 2012 30 September,
Installation and main-
2012
tenance of Hom Lifts-
Code of Practice
Copies of this Amendment are available with the
Bureau of Indian Standards, Manak Bhavan, 9 Bahadur
Shah Zafar Marg, New Delhi-110002 and Regional Offices:
Kolkata, Chandigarh, Chennai, Mumbai and also Branch
Offices; Ahmedabad, Bangalore, Bhopal, Bhubaneshwar,
Coimbatore, Guwahati, Hyderabad, Jaipur, Kanpur, Nagpur,
Patna, Pune, Thiruvananthapuram.
[Ref.: ET 25/T-20, T-21, T-22]
R.C. MATHEW, Scientist 'F' & Head (Electrotechnical)
ubZ fnYyh] 4 vDrwcj] 2012
dk-vk- 3118-—Hkkjrh; ekud C;wjks fu;e] 1987 ds fu;e
7 ds mifu;e ¼1½ ds [kaM ¼[k½ ds vuqlj.k esa Hkkjrh; ekud C;wjks
,rn~}kjk vf/klwfpr djrk gS fd ftl Hkkjrh; ekud dk fooj.k uhps
vuqlwph esa fn;k x;k gS og@os LFkkfir gks x, gSa %&
vuqlwph
Øe LFkkfir Hkkjrh; ekud ¼dkas½ dh
u;s Hkkjrh; ekud }kjk
LFkkfir frfFk
la[;k
la[;k o"kZ vkSj 'kh"kZd
vfrØfer Hkkjrh; ekud
vFkok ekudksa] ;fn dksbZ gks]
dh la[;k vkSj o"kZ
¼1½
¼2½
¼3½
¼4½
1-
vkbZ,l@vkbZbZlh 62271&207 %
&
19-07-2012
2007 mPp&oksYVrk ds fLopfx;j
vkSj fu;a=.kfx;j Hkkx 207] 52 fdok
ls vf/kd dh jsfVr oksYVst ds fy,
xSl jksf/kr fLopfx;j ,lsEcyh dh
HkwdEih; ;ksX;rk
bl Hkkjrh; ekud dh ,d izfr Hkkjrh; ekud C;wjks] ekud
Hkou] 9 cgknqj 'kkg tQj ekxZ] ubZ fnYyh&110002] {ks=h; dk;kZy;ksa%
ubZ fnYyh] dksydkrk] p.Mhx<+] psUubZ] eqEcbZ rFkk 'kk[kk dk;kZy;ksa%
vgenkckn] caxykSj] Hkksiky] Hkqous'oj] dks;Ecrwj] xqokgkVh] gSnjkckn]
t;iqj] dkuiqj] ukxiqj] iVuk] iq.ks rFkk fr:ouUrkiqje esa fcØh gsrq
miyC/k gSa A
[lanHkZ% bZVh 08@Vh&40]
vkj-lh- eSF;w] oSKkfud ^,Q* ,oa izeq[k ¼fo|qr rduhdh½
New Delhi, the 4th October, 2012
S.O. 3118.—In pursuance of clause (b) of sub-rule (1)
of Rule (1) of Rule 7 of the Bureau of Indian Standards Rules,
1987, the Bureau of Indian Standards hereby notifies the
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
[Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)]
Hkkjr dk jkti= % vDrwcj 13] 2012@vkf'ou 21] 1934
7567
Indian Standards, particulars of which is given in the
Schedule hereto annexed has been issued:
SCHEDULE
Sl.
No. & year of the
No. & year of the
Date of
No. Indian Standard
Indian Standards, if
Establis-
any, superseded by
ment
the New Indian Standard
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
1.
IS/IEC 62271-207 :
—
19.07.2012
2007 High Voltage
Switchgear and
Controlgear Part 207
Seismic Qualification
for Gas-Insulated
Switchgear Assemblies
for Rated Voltages
above 52 KV
Copy of this Standard is available for sale with the
Bureau of Indian Standards, Manak Bhavan, 9 Bahadur
Shah Zafar Marg, New Delhi-110002 and Regional Offices:
New Delhi, Kolkata, Chandigarh, Chennai, Mumbai and
also Branch Offices; Ahmedabad, Bangalore, Bhopal,
Bhubaneshwar, Coimbatore, Guwahati, Hyderabad, Jaipur,
Kanpur, Nagpur, Patna, Pune, Thiruvananthapuram.
[Ref.: ET 08/T-40]
R.C. MATHEW, Scientist 'F' & Head (Electrotechnical)
dks;yk ea=ky;
ubZ fnYyh] 8 vDrwcj] 2012
dk-vk-3119-—dsUnzh; ljdkj us dks;yk /kkjd {ks= ¼vtZu
vkSj fodkl½ vf/kfu;e] 1957 ¼1957 dk 20½ ¼ftls blesa blds
i'pkr~ mDr vf/kfu;e dgk x;k gS½ dh /kkjk 4 dh mi/kkjk ¼1½ ds
v/khu tkjh vkSj Hkkjr ljdkj ds dks;yk ea=ky; dh vf/klwpuk
la[;kad dk-vk- 2350] rkjh[k 29 vxLr] 2011] tks Hkkjr ds jkti=]
Hkkx II] [k.M&3] mi[k.M ¼ii½] dh rkjh[k 28 vxLr & 3 flrEcj]
2011 esa izdkf'kr dh xbZ Fkh] ml vf/klwpuk ls layXu vuqlwph esa
fofufnZ"V ifj{ks= dh Hkwfe esa] ftldk eki 89-766 gsDVs;j ¼yxHkx½
;k 221-811 ,dM+ ¼yxHkx½ gS] dks;ys dk iwosZ{k.k djus ds vius
vk'k; dh lwpuk nh Fkh(
vkSj dsUnzh; ljdkj dk ;g lek/kku gks x;k gS] fd bl
vf/klwpuk ls layXu vuqlwph esa fofgr mDr Hkwfe ds Hkkx esa dks;yk
vfHkizkIr gS(
vr%] vc dsUnzh; ljdkj] dks;yk /kkjd {ks= ¼vtZu vkSj
fodkl½ vf/kfu;e] 1957 dh /kkjk 7 dh mi/kkjk ¼1½ }kjk iznÙk
'kfDr;ksa dk iz;ksx djrs gq,] blls layXu vuqlwph esa ;Fkkof.kZr
82-116 gsDVs;j ¼yxHkx½ ;k 202-908 ,dM+ ¼yxHkx½ eki okyh
Hkwfe esa ;k ml ij ds [kuu vf/kdkj dk vtZu djus dh] vius
vk'k; dh lwpuk nsrh gS A
fVIi.k 1% bl vf/klwpuk ds v/khu vkus okys {ks= ds js[kkad
la[;k lh&1¼bZ½III@,Q,Qvkj@879&0612] rkjh[k 19 twu] 2012
dk fujh{k.k ftyk vf/kdkjh] cSrwy ¼e/; izns'k½ ds dk;kZy; esa ;k
dks;yk fu;a=d] 1] dkmafly gkml LVªhV] dksydkrk&700001 ds
dk;kZy; esa ;k egkizca/kd] osLVuZ dksyQhYM~l fyfeVsM] ¼jktLo
foHkkx½] dksy ,LVsV] flfoy ykbZUl] ukxiqj&440001 ¼egkjk"Vª½
ds dk;kZy; esa fd;k tk ldrk gSA
fVIi.k 2% mDr vf/kfu;e dh /kkjk 8 ds mica/kksa dh vksj /;ku
vkd`"V fd;k tkrk gs] ftlesa fuEufyf[kr mica/k gS%&
vtZu dh ckcr~ vkifÙk;ka %&
8¼1½ dksbZ O;fDr] tks fdlh Hkwfe esa] ftldh ckcr /kkjk 7
dh mi/kkjk ¼1½ ds v/khu vf/klwpuk tkjh dh xbZ gS] fgrc) gS]
vf/klwpuk ds tkjh fd, tkus ds rhl fnuksa ds Hkhrj lEiw.kZ Hkwfe ;k
mlds fdlh Hkkx ;k ,slh Hkwfe esa ;k ml ij ds fdUgha vf/kdkjksa dk
vtZu fd, tkus ds ckjs esa vkifÙk dj ldsxk A
Li"Vhdj.k %
¼1½ fdlh O;fDr dk ;g dFku] bl /kkjk ds vFkkZUrxZr ;g
vk{ksi ugha gksxk] og Hkwfe esa dks;yk mRiknu ds fy, Lo;a [kuu
lafØ;k,a djuk pkgrk gS vkSj ,slh lafØ;k,a dsUnzh; ljdkj ;k fdlh
vU; O;fDr dks ugha djuh pkfg,(
¼2½ /kkjk 8 dh mi/kkjk ¼1½ ds v/khu izR;sd vk{ksi l{ke
vf/kdkjh dks fyf[kr :i esa dh tk,xh vkSj l{ke izkf/kdkjh
vk{ksidÙkkZ dks Lo;a pqus tkus dk ;k fof/k O;olk;h }kjk lquokbZ dk
volj nsxk vkSj ,sls lHkh vk{ksiksa dks lquus ds i'pkr~ vkSj ,slh
vfrfjDr tkap] ;fn dksbZ gks] djus ds i'pkr~ tks og vko';d
le>rk gS] og ;k rks /kkjk 7 dh mi/kkjk ¼1½ ds v/khu vf/klwfpr
Hkwfe ds ;k ,slh Hkwfe esa ;k ml ij ds vf/kdkjksa ds laca/k esa ,d fjiksVZ
;k ,slh Hkwfe ds fofHkUu VqdM+ksa ;k ,slh Hkwfe esa ;k ml ij ds vf/kdkjksa
ds laca/k esa vk{ksiksa ij viuh flQkfj'kksa vkSj mlds }kjk dh xbZ
dk;Zokgh ds vfHkys[k lfgr fofHkUu fjiksVZ dsUnzh; ljdkj dks mlds
fofu'p; ds fy, nsxk(
¼3½ bl /kkjk ds iz;kstuksa ds fy, og O;fDr fdlh Hkwfe esa
fgrc) le>k tk,xk tks izfrdj esa fgr dk nkok djus dk gdnkj
gksrk] ;fn Hkwfe ;k ,slh Hkwfe esa ;k ml ij ds vf/kdkj bl vf/kfu;e
ds v/khu vftZr dj fy, tkrs gSaA
fVIi.k 3% dsUnzh; ljdkj }kjk dks;yk fu;a=d] 1 dkmafly
gkml LVªhV] dksydkrk&700001 dks mDr vf/kfu;e dh /kkjk 3 ds
v/khu Hkkjr ljdkj ds jkti= Hkkx&II] [kaM&3] mi[kaM (ii)] rkjh[k
11 twu] 1983 esa izdkf'kr vf/klwpuk la[;k dk- vk- 2519] rkjh[k
27 ebZ] 1983 }kjk l{ke izkf/kdkjh }kjk fu;qDr fd;k gS A
7568
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 13, 2012/ASVINA 21, 1934
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
xzke HkksxbZ [kkik esa vftZr fd, tkus okys IykWV la[;kad %
217 ¼Hkkx½] ljdkjh] 218 ¼Hkkx½] 219 ¼Hkkx½] 220@1
¼Hkkx½] 221 ¼Hkkx½] 225 ¼Hkkx½] 226] 227] 228] 229@1 ¼Hkkx½]
229@2] 229@3] 229@4] 230@1 ¼Hkkx½] 230@2] 230@3 ¼Hkkx½]
230@4] 230@5] 232 ¼Hkkx½] 233 ¼Hkkx½] ljdkjh] 234 HkkxA
xzke xka/khxzke esa vftZr fd, tkus okys IykWV la[;kad%
11¼Hkkx½ ou] 12 ljdkjh] 13 ¼Hkkx½] 15] 17¼Hkkx½] 19¼Hkkx½]
169 ¼Hkkx½] 170 ljdkjh] 171] 172] 173 ljdkjh] 174@1 ljdkjh]
174@2 ¼Hkkx½ ouA
lhek o.kZu%
d&[k&x %
js[kk xzke HkkxbZ [kkik ,oa xzke xka/khxzke dh lfEefyr
xzke lhek ij fcUnq ^d* ls vkjaHk gksrh gS fQj xzke
xka/khxzke esa ou {ks= ls gksdj fo|eku rkok&III dh
lhek ls yxdj [kljk la[;k 11 ¼ou½ ls gksdj
xqtjrh gS fQj fcUnq ^[k* ls yxdj xqtjrh gS vkSj
IykV la[;kad 19] 17 ls gksdj xqtjrh gS fQj IykV
la[;k 15 dh ckg~; lhek ls yxdj xqtjrh gS fQj
[kljk la[;k 11 ¼ou½ ls gksdj xqtjrh gS vkSj
fcUnq ^x* ij feyrh gSA
x&?k %
js[kk xzke xka/khxzke esa ou {ks= ds [kljk la[;k 11
¼ou½ ls gksdj xqtjrh gS fQj IykV la[;k 13 ls
gksdj xqtjrh gS fQj ou {ks= ds [kljk la[;k 11 ls
gksdj xqtjrh gS fQj IykV la[;k 169 ls gksdj
xqtjrh gS fQj ou {ks= esa [kljk la[;k 174@2 ls
gksdj xqtjrh gS fQj js[kk [kljk la[;k 170
¼ljdkjh½ ls gksdj xqtjrh gS fQj ou {ks= ds [kljk
la[;k 174@2 ls gksdj xqtjrh gS vkSj xzke xka/khxzke
,oa xzke HkksxbZ [kkik dh lfEefyr xzke lhek ij
fcUnq ^?k* ij feyrh gSA
?k&³ %
js[kk xzke xka/khxzke ,oa HkksxbZ [kkik dh lfEefyr
xzke lhek ls yxdj xqtjrh gS vkSj fcUnq ^³* ij
feyrh gSA
³&p&N&d %
js[kk xzke HkksxbZ [kkik esa IykWV la[;kad 229@1] 232]
230@3] 230@1] 217 ¼ljdkjh½] 218 ls gksdj
xqtjrh gS fQj fcUnq ^p* ds ikl ls yxdj xqtjrh
gS fQj IykV la[;kad 219] 220@1] 221 ls gksdj
xqtjrh gS fQj fcUnq ^N* ds ikl ls yxdj xqtjrh
gS fQj IykV la[;k 225 ls gksdj xqtjrh gS vkSj
vkjafHkd fcUnq ^d* ij feyrh gSA
[Qk-la- 43015@4@2011&ihvkjvkbZMCY;w&I]
,- ds- nkl] voj lfpo
MINISTRY OF COAL
New Delhi, the 8th October, 2012
S.O. 3119.—Whereas by the notification of the
Government of India in the Ministry of Coal vide number
S.O. 2350, dated the 29th August, 2011, issued under sub-
section (1) of Section 4 of the Coal Bearing Areas
(Acquisition and Development) Act, 1957 (20 of 1957)
(hereinafter referred to as the said Act) and published in
the Gazette of India, Part II, Section 3, sub-section (ii) dated
the August 28th to 3rd September, 2011, the Central
Government gave notice of its intention to prospect for
coal in 89.766 hectares (approximately) or 221.811 acres
(approximately) of the lands in the locality specified in the
Schedule annexed to that notification;
And whereas the Central Government is satisfied
that coal is obtainable in a part of said lands prescribed in
the Schedule appended to this notification;
Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred
by sub-section (1) of section 7 of the Coal Bearing Areas
(Acquisition and Development) Act, 1957, the Central
Government hereby gives notice of its intention to acquire
mining rights in or over the land measuring 82.116 hectares
(approximately) or 202.908 acres (approximately) as
described in the Schedule appended hereto.
Note 1: The plan bearing number C-1(E) III/FFR/879-
0612, dated the 19th June, 2012 of the area covered by this
notification may be inspected at the office of the Collector,
Betul (Madhya Pradesh) or at the office of the Coal
Controller, 1, Council House Street, Kolkata (Pin-700001)
or at the office of the General Manager, Western Coalfields
Limited (Revenue Departement), Coal Estate, Civil Lines,
Nagpur-440001 (Maharashtra).
Note 2 : Attention is hereby invited to the provisions
of Section 8 of the said Act which provides as follows:—
vuqlwph
rkok&III vaMjxzkmaM ekbZu
ikFkk[ksM+k {ks=
ftyk&cSrwy ¼e/; izns'k½
[js[kkad la[;k lhñ&1¼bZ½III@,Q,Qvkj@879&0612] rkjh[k 19 twu] 2012]
[kuu vf/kdkj %
Øe
xzke dk
iVokjh
dEikVZesaV
rglhy
ftyk
{ks=Qy gsDVs;j esa
fVIi.kh
lañ
uke
lfdZy
la[;k
futh
'kkldh;
ou
dqy
la[;k
1-
HkksxbZ [kkik
22
11
?kksM+kMksaxjh
cSrwy
40-820
0-190
0-000
41-010
Hkkx
2-
xka/khxzke
78
&
?kksM+kMksaxjh
cSrwy
11-601
3-639
0-000
15-240
Hkkx
3-
xka/khxzke
78
174@2 vkSj 11 ?kksM+kMksaxjh
cSrwy
0-000
0-000
25-866
25-866
Hkkx
dqy%& 82-116 gsDVs;j ¼yxHkx½
;k 202-908 ,dM+ ¼yxHkx½
[Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)]
Hkkjr dk jkti= % vDrwcj 13] 2012@vkf'ou 21] 1934
7569
Objections to Acquisition:
8(1) Any person interested in any land in respect of
which a notification under sub-section (1) of Section 7 has
been issued, may, within thirty days of the issue of the
notification, object to the acquisition of the whole or any
part of the land or of any rights in or over such land.
Explanation :
(1) It shall not be an objection within the meaning of this
section for any person to say that he himself desires to
undertake mining operations in the land for the production
of coal and that such operations should not be undertaken
by the Central Government or by any other person.
(2) Every objection under sub-section (1) of Section 8
shall be made to the Competent Authority in writing, and the
Competent Authority shall give the objector an opportunity
of being heard either in person or by a legal practitioner and
shall, after hearing all such objections and after making such
further inquiry, if any, as he thinks necessary, either make a
report in respect of the land which has been notified under
sub-section (1) of section 7 or of rights in or over such
land, or make different reports in respect of different parcels
of such land or of rights in or over such land, to the Central
Government, containing his recommendations on the
objections, together with the record of proceedings held
by him, for the decision of that Government.
(3) For the purpose of this section, a person shall be
deemed to be interested in land who would be entitled to
claim an interest in compensation if the land or any rights
in or over such land were acquired under this Act.
Note 3 : The Coal Controller, 1, Council House Street,
Kolkata-700001 has been appointed by the Central
Government as the Competent Authority under section 3
of the said Act, vide notification number S.O. 2519, dated
the 27th May, 1983, published in the Gazette of India, Part-
II, section 3, sub-section (ii), dated the 11th June, 1983.
Plot numbers to be acquired in village Bhogai Khapa :
217(P) Govt., 218(P), 219(P), 220/1(P), 221(P), 225(P),
226, 227, 228, 229/1(P), 229/2, 229/3, 229/4, 230/1(P), 230/2,
230/3(P), 230/4, 230/5, 232(P), 233(P) Govt., 234(P).
Plot numbers to be acquired in village Gandhigram :
11(P) Forest, 12 Govt., 13(P), 15, 17(P), 19(P), 169(P), 170
Govt., 171, 172, 173 Govt., 174/1 Govt., 174/2(P) Forest.
Boundary description :
A-B-C :
Line starts from Point “A” on common village
boundary of villages Bhogai Khapa and
Gandhigram, then passes in village Gandhigram
along the Existing Tawa-III Mine boundary
through forest area's Khasra No. 11 (Forest),
then passes nearby Point “B” and passes
through plot numbers 19, 17 then passes along
the outer boundary of plot number 15 then
passes through Khasra number 11 (Forest) and
meets at Point 'C'.
C-D :
Line passes in Gandhigram through Khasra No.
11 of forest area then passes through plot
number 13, then passes through Khasra number
11 of forest area, then passes through plot
number 169, then passes through Khasra
number 174/2 of forest area, then passes
through Khasra number 170(Govt.), then passes
through Khasra No. 174/2 of forest area and
meets at Point 'D' on common village boundary
of villages Gandhigram and Bhogai Khapa.
D-E :
Line passes along with the common village
boundary of villages Gandhigram and Bhogai
Khapa and meets at Point 'E'.
E-F-G-A :
Line passes in village Bhogai Khapa through
plot number 229/1, 232, 230/3, 230/1, 217 (Govt.),
218, then passes nearby Point 'F', then passes
SCHEDULE
TAWA-III UNDERGROUND MINE
PATHAKHERA AREA
DISTRICT-BETUL (MADHYA PRADESH)
(Plan bearing number C-1(E)III/FFR/879-0612, dated the 19th June, 2012)
MINING RIGHTS:
Sl.
Name of
Patwari
Compartment
Tahsil
District
Area in Hectares
Remarks
No.
village
Circle
number
Ten.
Government Forest
Total
number
1
Bhogai
22
—
Ghoradongri Betul
40.820
0.190
0.000
41.010
Part
Khapa
2.
Gandhigram
78
—
Ghoradongri Betul
11.601
3.639
0.000
15.240
Part
3
Gandhigram
78
174/2
Ghoradongri Betul
0.000
0.000
25.866
25.866
Part
and 11
Total : 82.116 hectares (approximately)
or 202.908 acres (approximately)
7570
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 13, 2012/ASVINA 21, 1934
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
through plot numbers 219, 220/1, 221, then
passes nearby Point “G”, then passes through
plot number 225 and meets at starting Point 'A'.
[F. No. 43015/4/2011-PRIW-I]
A.K. DAS, Under Secy.
Je vkSj jkstxkj ea=ky;
ubZ fnYyh] 13 flrEcj] 2012
dk-vk-3120-—vkS|ksfxd fookn vf/kfu;e 1947 ¼1947
dk 14½ dh /kkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa] dsUnzh; ljdkj lsØsVªh] fnYyh
MoySieSUV vFkkWfjVh] ds izca/kra= ds lac) fu;kstdksa vkSj muds
deZdkjksa ds chp] vuqca/k esa fufnZ"V vkS|ksfxd fookn esa dsUnzh;
ljdkj vkS|ksfxd vf/kdj.k@Je U;k;ky;&1 ubZ fnYyh ds iapkV
¼lanHkZ la[;k 147@2011½ dks izdkf'kr djrh gS] tks dsUnzh; ljdkj
dks 13&09&2012 dks izkIr gqvk FkkA
[lañ ,y&42011@32@2007&vkbZ-vkj- ¼Mh-;w-½]
lqjsUnz dqekj] vuqHkkx vf/kdkjh
MINISTRY OF LABOUR AND EMPLOYMENT
New Delhi, the 13th September, 2012
S.O. 3120.—in pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial
Dispute Act, 1947 (14 of 1947) the Central Government hereby
publishes the Award (Ref. No. 147/2011) of the
Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court
No-1, New Delhi as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial
dispute between the Secretary, Delhi Development
Authority, and their workman, which was received by the
Central Government on 13-09-2012.
[No. L-42011/32/2007-IR(DU)]
SURENDRA KUMAR, Section Officer
ANNEXURE
BEFORE DR. R.K. YADAV, PRESIDING
OFFICER, CENTRAL GOVERNMENT
INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL NO.1, KARKARDOOMA
COURTS COMPLEX, DELHI
I.D. NO. 147/2011
Shri Ramesh Chand,
S/o Sh. Jagan Ram through
Delhi Labour Union,
Aggarwal Bhawan,
G.T. Karnal Road, Tis Hazari
Delhi-110054
. . .Workman
Versus
The Secretary,
Delhi Development Authority,
Vikas Sadan, I.N.A. Market,
Delhi
. . .Management
AWARD
A Gardner was appointed by Delhi Development
Authority “in short the Authority” on 01-10-1975 as muster
roll worker. From 18-10-1976, he was taken as work charge
employee. Since 1978, work of Lower Divisional Clerk is
taken from the said gardner. He claims that wages of a clerk
may be paid to him. When his request was declined by the
Authority, he raised an industrial dispute before the
Conciliation Officer. His claim was resisted by the Authority,
hence conciliation proceedings ended in failure. On
consideration of his failure report, submitted by the
Conciliation Officer, appropriate Government referred the
dispute to Central Government Industrial Tribunal
No. 2, New Delhi, for adjudication, vide order No. L-42011/
32/2007-IR(DU), New Delhi dated 28-06-2007, with the
following terms :—
“Whether the demand of Delhi Labour Union for grant
of. pay scale of Lower Divisional Clerk to Shri Ramesh
Chand is legal and justified? If so, to what relief the
workman is entitled to and from which date?”
2. Claim statement was filed by the Gardner, namely
Shri Ramesh Chand pleading therein that he joined services
of the Authority on 01-10-1975 as muster roll employee.
From 18-10-1976, he was taken as work charge employee.
In 1978, job of Lower Divisional Clerk was assigned to him,
since there, was shortage of employees in that category.
He was eligible and qualified for the job of a Clerk. Since
then, he is continuously performing job of a Clerk
efficiently. However, the Authority is paying him wages as
that a gardner. He is discharging duties of a Clerk, which
are of permanent in nature. Payment of wages of the post
of gardner is violative of the provisions of Articles 14, 16
and 39(d) of the Constitution. Acts of the Authority
amounts to exploitation and unfair labour practice. He claims
that the Authority may be directed to regularize his services
on the post of Lower Divisional Clerk and to pay him wages
of that post with retrospective effect. He also claims that
post of litigation may also be awarded in his favour.
3. Claim was demurred by the Authority pleading
that he was appointed as a gardner with effect from
01-10-1975 on muster roll and was taken as work charge
employee with effect from 18-10-1976. It has been disputed
that the claimant is performing the job of a Lower Divisional
Clerk. The Authority asserts the he never worked as a Clerk.
There is no provision to promote a gardner to the post of a
Clerk, since there are distinct provisions for selection to
the post of a Clerk. It has been prayed that his claim may be
discarded, being devoid of merits.
4. In rejoinder, the claimant reiterates facts pleaded
by him in his claim statement.
5. None appeared on behalf of the Authority since
16-12-2008. Considering those facts, the Authority was
proceeded ex-parte, vide order dated 06-01-2011.
6. Vide order No.Z-22019/6-IR(C-II) New Delhi dated
30-3-2011, the appropriate Government transferred the case
to this Tribunal for adjudication.
[Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)]
Hkkjr dk jkti= % vDrwcj 13] 2012@vkf'ou 21] 1934
7571
7. The claimant tendered his affidavit as evidence.
No other witness was brought forward on his behalf to
testify facts.
8. Arguments were heard at the bar. Shri Surender
Bhardwaj, authorized representative, advanced arguments
on behalf of the claimant. As the Authority was proceeded
ex-parte, none came forward to raise submissions on its
behalf. I have given my careful considerations to the
arguments advanced at the bar and cautiously perused the
record. My findings on the issues involved in the
controversy are as follows:
9. Claimant swears in his affidavit dated 16-06-2011,
tendered as evidence, that he joined services of the
Authority as “mali” with effect from 01-10-1975 on muster
roll. He was taken as work charge employee with effect
from 18-10-1976. In 1978, he was assigned the job of Lower
Divisional Clerk, since there was shortage of Clerks with
the Authority. He was eligible and qualified for that job. He
is continuously performing duties of Lower Divisional Clerk
efficiently and punctually. Though he is discharging duties
of Lower Divisional Clerk, yet he is being paid wages as
that of a “mali” only. The Authority should have regularized
his services but no steps are taken in that regard. Non-
regularisation of his services as Lower Divisional Clerk
with retrospective effect is illegal, unjust and mala fide. He
is working against a vacant post of Lower Divisional Clerk.
The Authority is bound to give him status of Clerk, since
he is working on that post. He served notice of demand
dated 14-05-2005 on the Authority. Copies of office orders
dated 16-12-1981, 17-06-1987, 28-04-2003 and 08-12-2004
espouse his claim. Written statement submitted by the
Authority before the Conciliation Officer also gives
reaffirmation to above facts.
10. Out of facts detailed by the claimant in his
affidavit, it came to light that he joined as “mali” with the
Authority on 01-10-1975 on muster roll. On 18-10-1976, he
was taken as work charge employee. Office orders dated
16-12-1981, 28-04-2003 and 08-12-2004 bring it to the light
of the day that the claimant is working on the post of Lower
Divisional Clerk with the Authority since 1978. In its written
statement filed before the Conciliation Officer, the Authority
projects that the claimant made a request to be permitted to
work in the office in clerical job instead of sending him to
field to work as “mali”. On humanitarian grounds, his,
request was allowed. He was permitted to perform clerical
jobs instead of doing duties as “mali” in the field. However,
it has been asserted by the Authority that clerical posts are
filled by way of selection. Claimant had not passed any
selection process for his appointment on clerical post. It
would be a back door entry on clerical post in case his
claim is allowed, asserted the Authority.
11. Equality before law and equal protection of laws
are fundamental rights of every person, ordains Article 14
of the Constitution. The guiding principles laid in Article
14 are that persons, who are similarly situated, shall be
treated alike both in privileges conferred and liability
imposed, which means that amongst equals. The law should
be equal and should be equally administered and that like
should be treated alike. Article 16 of the Constitution
guarantees equality of opportunities for all citizens in
matters relating to employment or appointment to any office
under the State. What is guaranteed is the equality of
opportunity. Like all other employers, government is also
entitled to pick and choose from amongst a large number
of candidates offering themselves for employment. But the
selection process must not be arbitrary. The guarantee
given by clause (a) of Article 16 of the Constitution will
cover (a) initial appointments, (b) promotions(c), termination
of employment, (d) and matters relating to salary, periodical
increments, leaves, gratuity, pension, age of
superannuation etc. Matters relating to employment or
appointments include all mattes in relations to employment
both prior and subsequent to the employment which are
incidental to the employment and form part of the terms
and conditions of such employment.
12. Fundamental rights guaranteed by Article 14
forbids class legislation, but does not forbid classification
or differentiation which rests upon reasonable ground of
discretion. Classification is the recognition of the relations,
and in making it the Government must be allowed a wide
latitude of discretion and judgment. In a way, the
consequences of such classification would undoubtedly
be to differentiate persons belonging to that class from
others. The classification must be founded on an intelligible
differentia which distinguishes persons or things that are
grouped together from others left out of the group and the
differentia must have a rational relation to the object sought
to be achieved. Classification may be made according to
the nature of persons, nature of business, and may be
based with reference to time.
13. Concept of equality guaranteed by Article 16 of
the Constitution is something more than formal equality
and enables the under privileged groups to have a fair
share by having more than equal chance and enables the
State to give favoured treatment to those groups by
achieving real equality with reference to social needs.
7572
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 13, 2012/ASVINA 21, 1934
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
'Protection discrimination' enabled the State to adopt new
strategy to bring under privileged at par with the rest of
the society, by providing all possible opportunities and
incentives to them. Therefore a class may be allowed to
have preferential treatment in the matter relating to
employment or appointment. There cannot be rule of
equality between members of separate and independent
group of persons. Persons can be classified in different
groups, based on in terms of nature of persons, nature of
business and with reference to time.
14. Now it would be considered as to whether the
claimant is entitled for wages for the post of Lower
Divisional Clerk, on which he is working since 1978. Doctrine
of "equal pay for equal work" has been enshrined under
Article 39(d) of the Constitution as one of the directive
principles of the State policy, requiring the State to secure
"equal pay for equal work" for both, men and women. This
constitutional goal is capable of attainment through
constitutional remedies by way of enforcement of
constitutional rights, declares the Supreme Court in Randhir
Singh [1982 (1) LLJ 344]. In G. Sreenivasa Rao [1989(2) LLJ
149], the Apex Court announced that right to "equal pay
for equal work" is an accompaniment of the equality clause
enshrined in Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of
India. Nevertheless, abstract doctrine of "equal pay for
equal work" cannot be read in Article 14. Reasonable
classification, based on intelligible criteria having nexus
with the object sought to be achieved, is permissible.
15. In Grih Kalyan Kendra Workers Union [1991 (1)
LLJ 349] Apex Court had gone to the extent of saying that
"equal pay, for equal work" has assumed the status of
fundamental right in service jurisprudence having regard
to the constitutional mandate of equality in Articles 14 and
16 of the Constitution. It was pronounced therein that it
has ceased to be a judge made law as it is the part of the
constitutional philosophy which ensures a welfare
socialistic pattern of State providing equal opportunity to
all and equal pay for equal work for similarly placed
employees of the State. The Principles does not apply to
the State only but also applies to the State instrumentalities.
16. In 1976, Equal Remuneration Act, 1976 was
enacted to implement provisions of Article 39(d) of the
Constitution. Construing provisions of that Act, Supreme
Court in Audrey D'Costa [1987(1) LLJ 536] pronounced
that the Act does not permit the management to pay to a
section of its employees, doing the same work or work
similar in nature, lower pay contrary to the provisions of
Section 4(1) of the Act only because it is not able to pay
equal remuneration to the all.
The Court further observed that the applicability of
the Act does not depend upon the financial ability of the
management to pay equal remuneration as provided by it.
17. In deciding whether the work is the same or is
broadly the same, the Authority should take a broad view
and also adopt a broad approach in ascertaining whether
any differences are of practical importance because from
the subject of 'similar work' implies difference in detail.
Actual duties performed should be looked into and not
those that are theoretically possible. Elaborating the
concept of "equal pay for equal work" and its application,
the Apex Court in Randhir Singh (Supra) observes as
follows:—
“Where all things are equal that is, where all relevant
considerations are the same, persons holding identical
posts may not be treated differentially in the matter of their
pay merely because they belong to different departments.
Of course, if officers of the same rank perform dissimilar
functions and the powers, duties and responsibilities of
the posts held by them vary, such officers may not be
heard to complain of dissimilar pay merely because the
posts are of the same rank and the nomenclature is the
same *** and there are different grades in a service, with
varying qualifications for entry into a particular grade, the
higher grade often being a promotional avenue for officers
of the lower grade. The higher qualification for higher grade,
which may be either academic qualification or experience
based on length of service, reasonably sustain the
classification of the officers into two grades with different
scales of pay. The principle of "equal pay for equal work"
would be an abstract doctrine not attracting Article 14 if
sought to be applied to them".
18. In Delhi Veterinary Association (AIR 1984 SC
1221), the Supreme Court ruled that apart from the nature
of work, the pay structure should reflect many other values
and observed that the employer should follow certain basic
principles in fixing the pay scales of various posts and
cadres in the Government service. The degree of skill, strain
of work, experience involved, training required,
responsibility undertaken, mental and physical
requirements, disagreeableness of the task, hazard attendant
on work and fatigue involved are, according to the Third
Pay Commission, some of the relevant factors which should
be taken into consideration in fixing pay scales. The method
of recruitment, the level at which the initial recruitment is
made in the hierarchy of service or cadre, minimum
educational and technical qualifications prescribed for the
post, the nature of dealings with the public, avenues of
promotion available and horizontal and vertical relativity
with other jobs in the same service or outside are also
relevant factors, announced the Court.
19. In J.P. Chaurasia [1989 (1) LLJ 309], the Apex Court,
elaborating the same theme, ruled that apart from the nature
of work or volume of the work done the other relevant
factors to be taken into account, are ‘evaluation of duties
and responsibilities of the respective posts’. In Hari Narain
Bhowal [1995 (II) LLJ 328], the Apex Court pronounced
[Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)]
Hkkjr dk jkti= % vDrwcj 13] 2012@vkf'ou 21] 1934
7573
that the principle of “equal pay for equal work” can be
enforced when claiming persons satisfy the Court that not
only the nature of work is identical but in all other respects
they belong to the same class and there is no apparent
reason to treat “equals as unequals”.
20. In Ram Ashray Yadav [1996 (II) LLJ 92], the Apex
Court observed that principle of “equal pay for equal work”
will not apply where qualification prescribed, mode of
recruitment and the nature of duties are different for regular
employees and a temporary employee. The claim of
temporary Investigator-cum-Computer for payment of
salary at par with the regular Investigator-cum-Computer
was discarded by the Court in the said case. However
classification of officers into two groups, namely,
deputation’s and non-deputation’s, for paying different
rates of special pay was held to be not permissible under
Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution, as it did not bear
any rational relation to the objects of the classification.
See M.P. Singh (A.I.R. 1987 S.C. 485).
21. In Surjit Singh [2009(123) FLR 38] Apex Court
was confronted with the proposition as to whether the
persons employed as daily wagers in different capacities
by Public Health Department of State of Punjab were
entitled for “equal pay for equal work” to that of the
employees who were appointed against regular posts, by
following process of recruitment. It was ruled therein that
grant of benefit of doctrine of “equal pay for equal work”
depends upon a large number of factors, including equal
work, equal value, source and manner of appointment, equal
identify of group and whole sale or complete identity with
the employee with whom equality is claimed. The same
threads of thoughts were there in Ramesh Chandra Bajpai
[2009(123) FLR 525] wherein the Apex Court ruled that
similarity in the designation or nature or quantum of work
is not determinative of equality in the matter of pay scales.
It was emphasized that the Court has to consider the factors
like the source and mode of recruitment/appointment,
qualifications, the nature of work, the value thereof,
responsibilities, reliability, experience, confidentiality,
functional need, etc. In other words, the equality clause
can be invoked in the matter of pay scales only when there
is whole sale identity between the holders of two posts.
22. Relying on above law, it would be considered as
to whether there is complete and whole sale identify
between the claimant and a Lower Divisional Clerk, recruited
by the Authority following recruitment process. Answer
lies in the negative. Claimant was engaged as a “mali” on
muster roll. Subsequently, he was taken as work charge
employee. In 1978 the Authority started taking job of clerk
from him. In case he makes a lapse in performance of that
job, the authorities cannot hold him accountable, since he
is not a holder of that post. The claimant is immune from
rigours of disciplinary action and responsibility. On the
other hand, his engagement is on the post of “mali”. Thus,
it is evident that the claimant does not have any identity
not to talk of wholesale identity with a clerk, who has been
engaged following recruitment process. Responsibility
assigned to the claimant cannot be said to be of equal
value with that of holder of post of clerk on permanent
basis. Mere factor that the work of the clerk was taken
would not put him at par with a clerk appointed, following
proper recruitment process. Educational qualification,
experience, method of recruitment and promotion to different
categories of posts of clerk nowhere tallies with the factors
applicable to the claimant. Hence, it cannot be said that the
claimant is in complete and wholesale identity with a clerk
regularly appointed by the Authority. In such a situation
the claimant cannot invoke the doctrine of “equal pay for
equal work”. The Authority has not committed any illegality
when wages of a clerk, appointed by following recruitment
rules, are not paid to him.
23. For consideration of aspects of social justice, the
Tribunal has to keep in mind that the Act is a beneficiary
legislation calculated to ensure social justice to both
employers and employees and advance progress of
industry by brining harmony and cordial relationship
between the parties. The Act empowers adjudicating
authorities to abrogate conditions in contract of
employment, in the interest of social justice. Social and
economic justice is ultimate ideal of industrial adjudication.
Social and economic justice has been given place of pride
in our Constitution and doctrine of absolute freedom of
contract has thus to yield to the higher claims for social
justice. See Raibahadur Deewan Badri Das [1962 (II)
LLJ 366].
24. Social justice is not based on contractual relations
and is not to be enforced on principles of contract of
service. It is something outside these principles and
invoked to do justice without a contract to back out.
Reference can be made to precedent in Rashtriya Mill
Mazdoor Sangh [1960 (II) LLJ 263]. In J.K. Cotton Spinning
& Weaving Mills Company Ltd. [1963 (II) LLJ 435] the
Apex Court ruled that industrial disputes are to be
adjudicated laced with the concept of social justice. It would
be expedient to reproduce the observations made by the
Apex Court which are extracted thus:
"In our opinion the argument that the considerations
of social justice are irrelevant and untenable in dealing
with industrial disputes, has to be rejected without any
hesitation. The development of industrial law during the
last decade and several decisions of this court in dealing
with industrial matters have emphasized the relevance,
validity and significance of doctrine of social justice....
Indeed the concept of social justice has now become such
an integral part of industrial law that it would be idle for
any party to suggest that industrial adjudication can or
should ignore the claim of social justice in dealing with
industrial disputes. The concept of social justice is not
7574
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 13, 2012/ASVINA 21, 1934
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
narrow or one sided, or pedantic, and is not confined to
industrial adjudication alone. Its sweep is comprehensive.
It is founded on the basic idea of socio economic equality
and its aim is to assist the removal of socio economic
disparities and inequalities".
25. In Ahmedabad Manufacturing and Calico Printing
Company Ltd. [1972 (II) LLJ 165] the above principles were
reiterated by the Apex Court. Therefore, the law laid down
by Apex Court makes it clear that the industrial adjudication
cannot and should not ignore the claims of social justice.
Same views were expressed in Basti Sagar Mills Company
Ltd. [1978 (II) LLJ 412]. Therefore this Tribunal has to
consider the case on the touch stone of social justice also.
26. Claimant nowhere presents that work of a clerk
was taken from him, by way of command from the side of
the Authority. He had not shown any document to this
effect that he has not offered himself to render clerical job
with the Authority. On the other hand, "mali" had to perform
menial jobs in field. Clerk has to sit in the office and thus
evades rigors of weather and climate, while being in field. It
is apparent that the claimant opted to perform the work of
clerk voluntarily. Office order dated 08-12-2004 projects
that honorarium was being sanctioned by the Authority
for sitting late in office, in exigency. In such a situation, I
do not find it to be a case of commanding the Authority to
grant him wages of a clerk, even on social justice
considerations. In view of these reasons, it is clear that the
claimant failed to project that the doctrine of equal pay for
equal work is applicable to him. His claim has no merits.
The same is, accordingly, dismissed. An award is passed in
favour of the Authority and against the claimant. It be sent
to the appropriate Government for publication.
Dr. R.K. YADAV, Presiding Officer
Dated : 6-8-2012
ubZ fnYyh] 13 flrEcj] 2012
dk-vk-3121-—vkS|ksfxd fookn vf/kfu;e 1947 ¼1947
dk 14½ dh /kkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa] dsUnzh; ljdkj esMhdy
lqifjuVsUMsUV] lQnjtax gkfLVy ds izca/ku ds lac) fu;kstdksa vkSj
muds deZdkjksa ds chp] vuqca/k esa fufnZ"V vkS|ksfxd fookn esa dsUnzh;
ljdkj vkS|ksfxd vf/kdj.k] ubZ fnYyh ds iapkV ¼lanHkZ la[;k
212@2011½ dks izdkf'kr djrh gS] tks dsUnzh; ljdkj dks 13&09&2012
dks izkIr gqvk FkkA
[la- ,y&42012@170@1996&vkbZ-vkj- ¼Mh-;w-½]
lqjsUnz dqekj] vuqHkkx vf/kdkjh
New Delhi, the 13th September, 2012
S.O. 3121.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the
Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central
Government hereby published the Award (Ref. No.
212/2011) of the Central Government Industrial
Tribunal-cum-Labour Court No-1, New Delhi as
shown in the Annexure in the Industrial dispute
between the Medical Superintendent, Safdarjung
Hospital and their workman, which was received by the
Central Government on 13-09-2012.
[No. L-42012/170/1996-IR(DU)]
SURENDRA KUMAR, Section Officer
ANNEXURE
BEFORE DR. R.K. YADAV, PRESIDING OFFICER,
CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL
NO. 1, KARKARDOOMA COURTS COMPLEX, DELHI
I.D. No. 212/2011
Shri Daljeet Singh
S/o Sh.Swaroop Singh Bhandari,
R/o H.No.28, Aliganj,
Kotla Mubarakpur,
New Delhi.
. . .Workman
Versus
The Medical Superintendent,
Safdarjung Hospital,
New Delhi.
. . .Management
AWARD
Shri Sarup Singh, Chowkidar, working with Safdarjang
Hospital, New Delhi, (in short the Hospital) died in harness.
His son, namely, Daljeet Singh was appointed to the post
of Stretcher Bearer on compassionate grounds. He joined
his services on 31-8-1990. He served the Hospital till
31-1-1995, the date when his series were dispensed with
under Rule 5 of the Central Civil Services (Temporary
Services) Rules, 1965 (hereinafter referred to as the Rules).
He raised a demand with the Hospital for reinstatement of
his services, which demand was not conceded to.
Thereafter he raised an industrial dispute before the
Conciliation Officer. As the Hospital was not ready to take
him back on job, conciliation proceedings failed. On
consideration of the failure report, submitted by the
Conciliation Officer, the appropriate Government referred
the dispute to this Tribunal for adjudication, vide order
No. L-42012/170/96-IR (DU), New Delhi, dated 8-10-1997,
with following terms:—
"Whether action of the Management of Safdarjang
Hospital in terminating the services of Shri Daljeet Singh,
Stretcher Bearer w.e.f. 18-2-1995 is just, fair and legal? If
not, to what relief the concerned workman is entitled
and from what date".
2. Claim statement was filed by Shri Daljeet Singh
pleading therein that he was employed as a Stretcher Bearer
with the Hospital on 28-8-1990. He rendered continuous
service till 31-1-1995. His services were terminated under
rule 5 of the Rules by giving one month's notice to him.
Action of the Hospital tantamounts to retrenchment within
the meaning of Section 2(oo) of the Industrial Disputes
Act, 1947 (hereinafter referred to as the Act). The Hospital
[Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)]
Hkkjr dk jkti= % vDrwcj 13] 2012@vkf'ou 21] 1934
7575
had not complied with the mandatory provisions of Section
25F of the Act, hence its action of terminating services of
the claimant is illegal and non est, the Hospital is an
industry within the meaning of Section 2(j) of the Act and
the Hospital could not terminate services of the claimant
without following the provisions of the Act. He raised a
demand vide letter dated 1-3-1995 seeking reinstatement of
his services, which demand was not conceded to. Legal
notice dated 3-4-1995 was also sent but to no avail. He
claims that the impugned order of termination of his services
may be held to be illegal and he may be reinstated in services
of the Hospital with continuity and full back wages.
3. Claim was demurred by the Hospital pleading that
the claimant was offered a temporary post of Stretcher
Bearer vide letter dated 28-8-1990. The claimant accepted
terms and conditions contained in that letter and joined his
duties on 31-8-1990. His services were terminated by the
Disciplinary Authority, vide office order dated 31-1-1995
after complying with the prescribed procedure laid down
in the Rules. One month's notice was given to the claimant
and thereafter his services were dispensed with. Since
claimant was covered under the Rules he cannot avail
benefit of the Act. His services were dispensed with for
gross misconduct of unauthorized absence. Thereafter his
applications dated 17-2-1995 and 1-3-1995 asking for
reinstatement of his services were carefully considered but
were not found to be acceptable. The Hospital claims that
relief of reinstatement is not available to the claimant and
his claim may be dismissed.
4. In rejoinder the claimant reiterates facts pleaded in
the claim statement.
5. It would not be out of place to mention that an
award dated 4-7-2000 was passed by the Tribunal,
concluding therein that the claimant was entitled for
reinstatement with continuity of service and full back
wages. The award, so passed, was assailed by the Hospital
before High Court of Delhi. Vide judgement dated
12-4-2005, the award was set aside and the matter was
remanded back to this Tribunal for adjudication afresh,
after affording an opportunity of being heard to the
Hospital.
6. Claimant has examined himself in support of his
claim. Dr. Sudhir Chandra entered the witness box and
testified facts on behalf of the Hospital.
7. Vide order No. Z-22019/6/2007/IR (C-II) New Delhi,
dated 11-2-2008 the appropriate Government transferred
the case to Central Government Industrial Tribunal II, New
Delhi, for adjudication. It was retransferred to this Tribunal
by the appropriate Government, vide order No. Z-22019/6/
2007/IR (C-II) dated 30-3-2001, for adjudication.
8. Arguments were heard at the bar, Shri L.S. Gautam,
authorized representative, advanced arguments on behalf
of the claimant. Shri Neeraj Tiwari, authorized
representative, presented facts on behalf of the Hospital.
Written submissions were also filed by the parties. I have
given my careful considerations to the arguments advanced
at the bar and cautiously perused the record. My findings
on issues involved in the controversy are as follows:—
9. At the outset a legal issue was raised by Shri Tiwari
pleading that the Hospital is not an industry within the
meaning of Section 2(j) of the Act. It has been claimed that
such an issue was addressed to by the Apex Court in Kuldip
Singh Sethi [1970 (1) SCC 735] wherein it was concluded
that the Hospital was not an Industry. Contra to it
Shri Gautam agitates that law has gone sea change and it
does not lie in the mouth of the Hospital to claim that it is
not an industry. Consequently it became expedient to know
as to whether the Hospital is an industry or not. For an
answer, the definition of “industry” as enacted by clause
(j) of Section 2 of the Act is to be considered. Definition of
the word “industry” enacted in the aforesaid clause is
reproduced thus :
“Industry” means any business, trade, undertaking,
manufacture or calling of employers and includes any
calling, services, employment, handicraft, or industrial
occupation or avocation of workmen.
10. The definition of “industry” is both exhaustive
and inclusive. It is in two parts. The first part says that it
“means any business, trade, undertaking, manufacture or
calling of employers” and then goes to say that it “includes
any calling, service, employment, handicraft or industrial
occupation or avocation of workmen.” Thus one part
defined it from the stand point of the employer, and the
other part from the stand point of the employees. The first
part of the definition gives the statutory meaning of the
industry, whereas the second part deliberately refers to
several other items of industry and bring them in the
definition in an inclusive way. The first part of the definition
determines any industry by reference to occupation of
employers in respect of certain activities viz., business,
trade, undertaking, manufacture or calling. The second part
views the matter from the angle of employees and is
designed to include something more in what the term
primarily denotes. By this part of the definition any calling,
employment, handicraft, industrial occupation or avocation
of workmen is included in the concept of industry. This
part gives extended connotation.
11. Gloss was put on the definition of word “industry” by
the High Courts and the Apex Court time and again. The question
as to what is “industry” has continuously baffled and perplexed
the courts. A graph of the cases decided by the Apex Court, if
plotted on the background of the expression used in two parts of
the definition of “industry”, would represent rather a zig zag
curve. There have been various judicial ventures in this rather
volatile area of law. The decided cases show that the efforts were
made to evolve test by reference to characteristics regarded as
essential for constituting an activity as an “industry”,
7576
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 13, 2012/ASVINA 21, 1934
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
Various cases would show that the Apex Court have been
guided more by empirical rather than a strictly analytical
approach. Most of the decision have centered around the
expression “undertaking” used in the definition. In
Bangalore Water Supply and Sewerage Board (1978
Lab. I.C. 778) the Apex Court reviewed the earlier decisions
on interpretation of the wide words encompassed in the
definition and formulated positive and negative principles
for identifying “industry”, as enacted by clause (j) of
Section 2 of the Act. It would be expedient to reproduce
the authoritative pronouncement of the Court, in the very
words set out in the majority decision, handed down by
Justice Krishna Iyer, which are extracted thus :
I.
“industry” as defined in S. 2(j)- and explained in
Banerji (AIR 1953 S.C. 58) has a wide import.
(a)
Where (i) systematic activity, (ii) organized by
co-operation between employer and employee
(the direct and substantial element is chimerical),
(iii) for the production and/or distribution of goods
and services calculated to satisfy human wants
and wishes (not spiritual or religious but inclusive
of material things or services geared to celestial
bliss i.e. making, on a large scale prasad or foods)
prima facie, there is an “industry” in that
enterprise.
(b)
Absence of profit motive or gainful objective is
irrelevant, be the venture in the public, joint,
private or other sector.
(c)
The true focus is functional and the decisive test
is the nature of the activity with special emphasis
on the employer-employee relations.
(d)
If the organization is a trade or business it does
not cease to be one because of philanthropy
animating the undertaking.
II.
Although Section 2 (j) uses words of the widest
amplitude in its two limbs, the re-meaning cannot
be magnified to overreach itself.
(a)
“Undertaking” must suffer a contextual and
associational shrinkage as explained in Banerjee
and in this judgment, so also, service, calling and
the like. This yields the inference that all organized
activity possessing the triple elements in I (supra),
although not trade or business, may still be
“industry” provided the nature of activity, viz.,
the employer-employee basis, bears resemblance
to what we find in trade or business. This takes
into the fold “industry” undertaking, calling and
services, adventures, “analogous to the carrying
on the trade or business”. All features, other than
the methodology of carrying on the activity viz.
in organizing the co-operation between employer
and employee, may be dissimilar. It does not matter,
if on the employment terms there is analogy.
III.
Application of these guidelines should not short
of their logical reach by invocation of creeds, cults
or inner sense of incongruity or outer sense of
motivation for or resultant of the economic
operations. The ideology of the Act being
industrial peace, regulation and resolution of
industrial disputes between employer and
workmen, the range of their statutory ideology
must inform the reach of the statutory definition.
Nothing less, nothing more.
(a)
The consequences are (i) professions, (ii) clubs,
(iii) education institutions, (iv) co-operatives, (v)
research institutes, (vi) charitable projects and
(vii) other kindered adventures, if they fulfil the
triple tests listed in 1 (supra), cannot be exempted
from the scope of Section 2(j).
(b)
A restricted category of professions, clubs, co-
operatives and even durukulas and little research
labs may qualify for exemption if in simple
ventures, substantially, and going by the dominant
nature criterion, substantively no employees are
entertained but in menial matters, marginal
employees are hired without destroying the
non-employee character of the unit.
(c)
If, in a pious or altruistic mission many employ
themselves, free or for small honoraria or like
return, mainly drawn by sharing in the purpose or
cause, such as lawyers volunteering to run a free
legal services clinic or doctors serving in their
spare hours in a free medical centre or ashramites
working at the bidding of the holiness, divinity or
like central personality, and the services are
supplied free or at nominal cost and those who
serve are not engaged for remuneration or on the
basis of master and servant relationship, then,
the institution is not an industry even if stray
servants, manual or technical, are hired. Such
eleemosynary or like undertakings alone are
exempt not other generosity, compassion,
developmental passion or project.
IV.
The dominant nature test:
(a)
Where a complex of activities, some of which
qualify for exemption, other not, involves
employees on the total undertaking, some of
whom are not “workmen” as in the University of
Delhi case (AIR 1963 S.C. 1873) or some
departments are not productive of goods and
services if isolated, even then, the predominant
nature of the services and the integrated nature
of the departments as explained in the Corporation
of Nagpur (AIR 1960 SC 675) will be the true test.
The whole undertaking will be industry although
those who are not “workmen” by definition may
not benefit by the status.
[Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)]
Hkkjr dk jkti= % vDrwcj 13] 2012@vkf'ou 21] 1934
7577
(b)
Notwithstanding the previous clauses, sovereign
functions, strictly understood (alone) qualify for
exemption, not the welfare activities or economic
adventures undertaking by Government or
statutory bodies.
(c)
Even in department discharging sovereign
functions, if there are units which are industries
and they are substantially severable, then they
can be considered to come within S. 2(j).
(d)
Constitutional and competently enacted
legislative provisions may remove from the scope
of the Act categories which otherwise may be
covered thereby.
V.
We overrule Safdarjung (AIR 1970 SC 1407),
Solicitors’ case (AIR 1962 SC 1080), Gymkhana
(AIR 1968 SC 554), Delhi University (AIR 1963 SC
1873), Dhanrajgirji Hospital (AIR 1975 SC 2032)
and other rulings whose ratio runs counter to the
principles enunciated above, and the Hospital
Mazdoor Sabha (AIR 1960 SC 610) is hereby
rehabilitated.”
12. The Hospital attempts to place reliance on a
precedent which has been overruled by the Apex Court.
Commenting on observations made in Safdarjung Hospital
case (supra), the Apex Court in Bangalore Water Supply
and Sewerage Board (supra) ruled that it could not possibly
agree that running a hospital which is a welfare activity
and not a sovereign function, cannot be “industry”.
Hospital facilities, research products and training services
are “service”, hence “industry” and absence of profit or
functions of training and research would not take the
institution, out of the scope of “industry”. Accordingly
the Apex Court ruled that its decision in Safdarjung Hospital
case was wrong and activity of running a hospital was not
regal activity of the State, hence would fall within the
definition of "industry" in as much as the activity would
be industry if run by private citizens. Thus it is crystal clear
that the Hospital took a wrong stand and the same is
discarded.
13. Now factual matrix would be considered. Claimant
swears in his affidavit Ex.WW1/A that he was employed as
a Stretcher Bearer by the Hospital w.e.f. 28-8-1990. He
rendered continuous and uninterrupted service till
31-1-1995. His services were illegally terminated by the Chief
Administrative Officer of the Hospital vide order dated 31-1-
1995, by giving one month's notice to him. Termination of
his services amounts to retrenchment within the meaning of
Section 2(oo) of the Act. Mandatory provisions of Section
25F of the Act were not complied with. During course of his
cross examination he conceded that he was absent from
service since 1-3-1994. He further admitted that various
letters were sent by the Hospital calling upon him to join his
duties but those letters were returned back by
his mother as he was not present at his house at that time.
He made a candid admission that those letters were received
at his house. He feigned ignorance that any notice was
published by the Hospital in a newspaper.
14. Dr. Sudhir Chandra swears in his affidavit,
tendered as evidence, that the claimant joined his duties
on 31-8-1990 and not on 20-8-1990. His services were
terminated vide office order dated 31-1-1995, complying
laid down procedure in that regard. Notice of one month
was given to the claimant and thereafter his services were
terminated. As per his service record claimant was absent
for 78 days w.e.f. 3-4-1992 to 19-6-1992, one day on
18-9-1993 and 23-1-1994 respectively and 368 days w.e.f.
16-2-1994 to 18-2-1995. His unauthorized absence for the
period referred above rendered him unsuitable for the post.
Necessary action was initiated against him under the Rules.
No question of seeking relief under the provisions of the
Act would arise in the matter. During course of his cross
examination he projects that there was no question of
paying retrenchment compensation to the claimant.
15. Office order No.428/ESTD-3/90 dated 25-9-1990
was filed by the Hospital before this Tribunal. However
this document was not referred to by Dr. Sudhir Chandra
in his affidavit. On the other hand office order No.
A-12012/5/90-MH, New Delhi dated 17-8-1990 has been
relied upon by the claimant. When these two documents
are perused it emerged that the claimant was appointed in
the Hospital as Stretcher Bearer on compassionate grounds
w.e.f. 30-8-1990. Director Health Services, Government of
India, New Delhi, had accorded sanction to appoint the
claimant on the post of Stretcher Bearer on compassionate
grounds without reference to the employment exchange.
His appointment was subject to Medical Examination and
on being found fit. He was to remain on probation for a
period of 2 years. In its written statement or in the affidavit
of Dr. Sudhir Chandra the Hospital nowhere project a
different case. Consequently it emerged over the record
that the claimant was appointed as a Stretcher Bearer by
the Hospital on compassionate grounds.
16. Whether such an appointment can be on
temporary basis? For an answer to this proposition scheme
for compassionate appointment, formulated by the
Government of India, New Delhi, is to be looked into. The
scheme was formulated by the Government of India, vide
G.I., Department of Personnel & Training, No. 14014/6/94-
Estt. (D), dated the 9th October, 1998. Salient features of
the scheme are :
Scheme of compassionate appointment applies to
dependent family member—
(A)
of a Government servant who—
(a)
dies while in service (including death by suicide),
or
7578
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 13, 2012/ASVINA 21, 1934
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
(b)
is retired on medical grounds under Rule 2 of the
CCS (Medical Examination) Rules, 1957, or
(c)
is retired on medical grounds under Rule 38 of the
CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972, or
(B)
of a member of the Armed Forces who—
(i)
dies during service; or
(ii) is killed in action; or
(iii) is medically boarded out and is unfit for civil
employment
Government servant for the purpose of the scheme
means, a Government servant appointed on regular basis
and not one working on daily wage or casual or apprentice
or ad hoc or contract or re-employment basis.
17. Dependent family members has been advised to
mean :
(a) spouse; or
(b) son (including adopted son); or
(c) daughter ( including adopted daughter); or
(d) brother or sister in the case of unmarried
Government servant or member of the Armed Forces
referred above, who was wholly dependent on the
Government servant/member of the Armed Forces
at the time of his death in harness or retirement on
medical grounds, as the case may be”.
18. Compassionate appointment can be made to
Group 'C' or Group 'D' posts against direct recruitment
quota. For consideration of application for compassionate
appointment family of the Government servant who died in
harness or retired on medical grounds should be indigent
and deserves immediate assistance for relief from financial
destitution and applicant for compassionate appointment
should be eligible and suitable for the post in all respects.
Compassionate appointments are exempted from
observance of:
(a)
Recruitment procedure
(b)
Clearance from the Surplus Cell of the Department
of Personnel and Training/Directorate of
Employment and Training
(c)
The ban orders on filling of posts issued by the
Ministry of Finance (Department of Expenditure)
19. As projected above compassionate appointments
are to be made against substantive posts. Claimant was
appointed on compassionate grounds as Stretcher Bearer
and was to remain on probation for a period of 2 years. The
claimant could not be subjected to applicability of the Rules.
His service conditions would be governed by the Central
Civil Service (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules
1965. As projected by Dr. Sudhir Chandra, the claimant
remained absent for a period of 78 days w.e.f. 3-4-1992 to
19-6-1992, one day each on 18-9-1993 and 23-1-1994
respectively and 368 days w.e.f. 16-2-94 to 18-2-95. Absence
without permission and overstaying leave is gross
misconduct under Central Civil Service (Conduct) Rules
1964. For gross misconduct the employer may award
penalties as detailed in Rule 11 of CCS (CCA) Rules 1965,
which are extracted thus :—
"Minor Penalties —
(i)
censure;
(ii)
withholding of his promotion;
(iii)
recovery from his pay of the whole or part of any
pecuniary loss caused by him to the Government
by negligence or breach of orders;
(iii)
(a) reduction to a lower stage in the time-scale of
pay by one stage for a period not exceeding three
years, without cumulative effect and not adversely
affecting his pension.
(iv)
withholding of increments of pay;
Major Penalties—
(v)
save as provided for in clause (iii) (a), reduction
to a lower stage in the time-scale of pay for a
specified period, with further directions as to
whether or not the Government servant will earn
increments of pay during the period of such
reduction and whether on the expiry of such
period, the reduction will or will not have the effect
of postponing the future increments of his pay;
(vi)
reduction to lower time-scale of pay, grade, post
or Service which shall ordinarily be a bar to the
promotion of the Government servant to the time-
scale of pay, grade, post or Service from which he
was reduced, with or without further directions
regarding conditions of restoration to the grade,
or post or Service from which the Government
servant was reduced and his seniority and pay
on such restoration to that grade, post or Service;
(vii)
compulsory retirement;
(viii) removal from service which shall not be a
disqualification for future employment under the
Government;
(ix)
dismissal from service which shall ordinarily be a
disqualification for future employment under the
Government”.
20. Procedure for award of major penalties is laid
down in Rule 14 of CCS (CCA) Rules 1965. Herein the
present controversy procedure provided in Rule 14 for
award of major penalty was not followed by the Hospital.
On the other hand Hospital belabored under a
misconception that it can deal the claimant under the Rules.
This misconception completely lead the Hospital authorities
astray. There is other facet of the coin. As projected by Dr.
Sudhir Chandra in his affidavit Ex.MW1/A the claimant
[Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)]
Hkkjr dk jkti= % vDrwcj 13] 2012@vkf'ou 21] 1934
7579
remained on extra ordinary leave for 78 days w.e.f. 3-4-1992
to 19-6-1992, one day each on 18.9.1993 and 23-1-1994 and
for 368 days w.e.f. 16-2-1994 to 18-2-1995. When period of
absence was converted to extra ordinary leaves by the
Hospital authorities, it does not lie in their mouth to claim
that the claimant remained absent for the above period, in
an unauthorized manner. Sanction of extra ordinary leaves
condones his misconduct. Furthermore extra ordinary
leaves were sanctioned to the claimant up to 18-2-1995. As
per case of the Hospital, services of the claimant were done
away vide order dated 31-1-1995. Thus, it emerges over the
record that the Hospital authorities passed an order on
31-1-1995 in anticipation that the claimant would not join
his duties till 18-2-1995. Evidently the order nowhere
satisfies even standards of the Rules which require the
authorities to serve one month's notice to a temporary
Government servant for terminating his service. Services
of the claimant were dispensed with vide order No.
70-ADMIN (IV) (D) 1995 dated 31-1-1995. This document
highlights that one month notice pertaining to order of
termination of service in respect of Shri Daljeet Singh was
published in Indian Express/Punjab Kesari, New Delhi on
18-1-1995. Therefore even for compliance of the provisions
of rule 5 of the Rules Hospital ought to have waited up to
18-2-1995. No such patience was shown by the Hospital
authorities and order terminating service of the claimant
was passed on 31-1-1995, detailing therein that his services
are terminated w.e.f. 18-2-1995 after expiry of one month
notice. Thus it is evident that even provisions of the Rules
were not complied with. The order passed by the Hospital
cannot withstand standards detailed in rule 5 of the Rules
or rule 14 of CCS (CCA) Rules, 1965. All these factors make
it clear that action of the Hospital cannot stand scrutiny of
Rules applicable to him.
21. Much hue and cry has been raised by the
Hospital projecting that when Rules were applicable to the
Claimant he cannot invoke jurisdiction of this Tribunal.
For invoking jurisdiction of this Tribunal it is incumbent
upon the claimant to project that he is a workman, as defined
in Section 2 (s) of the Act. It is not in dispute that the
claimant was working as a Stretcher Bearer with the
Hospital. A Stretcher Bearer has to perform manual jobs.
Such manual jobs would clothe him with a status of
workman as defined by the Act. When the claimant answers
the definition of a workman, he can invoke jurisdiction of
this Tribunal. Applicability of the Rules or CCS (CCA) Rules
1965 would not debar the claimant from knocking the door
of this Tribunal, when he happens to be a workman.
Therefore, claim projected by the Hospital is unfounded in
that regard.
22. Admittedly the claimant rendered continuous
service of more than 240 days, as required by Section 25B
of the Act. There is no dispute on this issue that the claimant
had rendered a continuous service for about four years
and six months. Question for consideration comes as to
whether order, on the strength of which services of the
claimant were dispensed with, amounts to retrenchment.
Retrenchment means discharge of surplus labour. However
definition of the term given in Section 2(oo) of the Act
make it clear that it would include every kind of termination.
In fact the exclusion of cases falling within the purview of
sub-clauses (b), (bb) and (c) in the definition would suggest
that surplusage of labour is not the test of retrenchment. If
the case of termination does not fall under any of the
exemptions in Section 2(oo) of the Act, it would be
retrenchment. Definition of the terms enacted by the Act,
is reproduced thus:
"(oo) "retrenchment" means the termination by the
employer of the services of a workman for any reason
whatsoever, otherwise than as a punishment inflicted by
way of disciplinary action, but does not include—
(a)
voluntary retirement of the workman; or
(b)
retirement of the workman on reaching the age of
superannuation if the contract of employment
between the employer and the workman
concerned contains a stipulation in that behalf;
or
(bb) termination of the services of the workman as a
result of the non-renewal of the contract of
employment between the employer and the
workman concerned on its expiry or of such
contract being terminated under a stipulation in
that behalf contained therein; or
(c)
termination of the services of a workman on the
ground of continued ill-health".
23. Definition of retrenchment is very wide and in two
parts. The first part is exhaustive, which lays down that
retrenchment means the termination of the service of a
workman by the employer "for any reason whatsoever"
otherwise then as a punishment inflicted by way of
disciplinary action. Thus main part of the definition itself
excludes the termination of service, as a measure of
punishment inflicted by way of disciplinary action from
the ambit of retrenchment. The second part further excludes
(i) voluntary retirement of the workman, or (ii) retirement of
workman on reaching the age of superannuation of (iii)
termination of the service of a workman as a result of non-
renewal of contract of employment, or (iv) termination of
contract of employment in terms of a stipulation contained
in the contract of employment in that behalf, or (v)
termination of service on the ground of continued ill health
of the workman. Reference can be made to the precedents
in Avon Services (Production Agencies) (Pvt.) Ltd. [1979
(I) LLJ 1] and Mahabir [1979 (II) LLJ 363].
24. Whether order dated 31-1-95, on the strength of which
services of the claimant were dispensed with, falls within the
ambit of exemptions provided by Section 2(oo) of the
7580
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 13, 2012/ASVINA 21, 1934
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
Act? It is not the case of the Hospital that after conduct of
a domestic enquiry, the claimant was dismissed from
service. Efforts were made to project that services of the
claimant were done away in accordance with the Rules,
governing his conditions of service. At the cost repetition
it is said that neither the provisions of the Rules nor the
provisions of CCS (CCA) Rules 1965 were complied with.
Therefore this case does not fall within the ambit of sub-
clause (bb) of clause (oo) of Section 2 of the Act. Action of
the Hospital sequarely falls within the ambit of
retrenchment, as defined by Section 2(oo) of the Act.
25. Section 25F of the Act lays down conditions pre-
requisite to retrenchment of workmen. Those conditions
are:
(i)
There should be one month's notice in writing to
the workmen concerned,
(ii)
The notice should specify the reasons for
retrenchment,
(iii)
The period of one month's notice should have
expired before retrenchment is enforced, or the
workman has been paid in lieu of such notice the
wages for the period,
(iv)
The workman has been paid retrenchment
compensation which should be equivalent to 15
days' average pay for every one year's service or
any part thereof in excess of six months,
(v)
The notice is given to the appropriate
Government.
26. Non-compliance of the mandatory provisions of
Section 25F of the Act would make retrenchment invalid
and inoperative as held by the Apex Court in Hospital
Mazdoor Sabha (supra). Similar view was taken in National
Iron and Steel Co. Ltd. [1967 (II) LLJ 23], wherein it was
ruled, "where the retrenchment is invalid in law, it cannot
be said to have determined the relationship of employer
and employee and the workman will be entitled to
reinstatement with continuity of service and back wages".
But in Surendra Kumar Verma [1981 (I) LLJ 386] the Apex
Court ruled that in appropriate cases relief of full back wages
can be denied.
27. Here in the case one month's notice, as
contemplated by Section 25F of the Act was not given to
the claimant. As pointed above notice dated 17-1-95 was in
currency when order dated 31-1-95 was passed against the
claimant. No retrenchment compensation was paid to the
claimant. Hence his retrenchment comes in conflict with
the provisions of section 25F of the Act. When
retrenchment of the claimant was not justified, action of
the Hospital cannot over-ride the statutory provisions.
Considering all these facts, I find it to be a case to command
the Hospital to reinstate the claimant in service with
continuity.
28. It is not a matter of dispute that the claimant
remained absent for a considerably long period. This
Tribunal cannot remain oblivious to the proposition that
for that period the claimant had not rendered any service
to the Hospital. On the principle of "no work no pay", no
wages are to be awarded in his favour, for the period of
absence. Another aspect which emerges over the record is
that the claimant had not brought any evidence to establish
that he remained unemployed from the date of termination
of his services till date through out. It was obligatory on
his part to establish that he remained unemployed for that
period, in order to seek relief of back wages. Since there is
a complete vacuum of evidence, I do not find it to be a case
where back wages should be awarded to the claimant. In
view of the reasons detailed above it is announced that the
Hospital shall reinstate the claimant in service with
continuity but without back wages. However, he will get,
all consequential benefits of continuity of service. An
award is, accordingly, passed. It be sent to the appropriate
Government for publication.
Dr. R. K. YADAV, Presiding Officer
Dated : 27-07-2012
ubZ fnYyh] 13 flrEcj] 2012
dk-vk-3122-—vkS|ksfxd fookn vf/kfu;e 1947 ¼1947 dk
14½ dh /kkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa] dsUnzh; ljdkj Mk;jsDVj] ih-Mh-;w-
ds izca/kra= ds lac) fu;kstdksa vkSj muds deZdkjksa ds chp]
vuqca/k esa fufnZ"V vkS|ksfxd fookn esa dsUnzh; ljdkj vkS|ksfxd
vf/kdj.k] ubZ fnYyh ds iapkV ¼lanHkZ la[;k 332@2011½ dks izdkf'kr
djrh gS] tks dsUnzh; ljdkj dks 13&09&2012 dks izkIr gqvk FkkA
lqjsUnz dqekj] vuqHkkx vf/kdkjh
[la- ,y&42012@96@2011&vkbZvkj ¼Mh;w½]
New Delhi, the 13th September, 2012
S.O. 3122. —In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial
Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government
hereby published the Award (Ref. No. 332/2011) of the
Central Government Industrial Tribunal No-1, New Delhi
as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial dispute between
the Director, PDU and their workman, which was received
by the Central Government on 13-09-2012.
[No. L-42012/96/2011-IR(DU)]
SURENDAR KUMAR, Section Officer
ANNEXURE
BEFORE DR. R.K. YADAV PRESIDING OFFICER,
CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL
TRIBUNAL NO. 1, KARARDOOMA COURTS
COMPLEX, DELHI
I.D. No. 332/2011
Shri, Devender S/o Shri Jaipal,
R/o E-628, Gali No. 18 B,
East Gokul Puri,
Amar Colony,
Delhi-110094.
. . .Workman
[Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)]
Hkkjr dk jkti= % vDrwcj 13] 2012@vkf'ou 21] 1934
7581
Versus
The Director PDU,
Institute for the Physically Handicapped,
4, Vishnu Digamber Marg,
New Delhi-110002.
. . .Management
AWARD
A contractual employee was engaged by the Institute
for the Physically Handicapped (hereinafter referred to as
the Institute) located at Vishnu Digambar Marg, New Delhi
on 20-05-1994 for a period of 89 days. His services were
extended for a period of 29 days, which came to an end on
15,09,1994. In the year 1995, he was again engaged for a
period of 30 days on 18-01-1995. His term of employment
was renewed from time to time and it came to an end on
06-03-1996. The Institute opted not to renew his contract
of employment any further. It led the contractual employee
to raise an industrial dispute before the Conciliation Officer.
Since conciliation proceedings failed, appropriate
Government referred the dispute to this Tribunal for
adjudication vide order No. L-42012/96/2011-IR(DU), New
Delhi dated 14-10-2011 with the following terms:
“Whether the action of the management of Institute for
Physically Handicapped, New Delhi in terminating the
services of Shri Devender, Daily Wager (S/o Shri Jaipal)
with effect from 07-03-1996 is legal and justified? What
relief the workman is entitled to and from which date ?”
2. The contractual employee, namely, Shri Devender
filed his claim statement pleading that he was engaged as a
daily wager/casual labour by the Institute on 20-05-1994,
after completion of all required formalities in accordance
with the relevant rules. His name was sponsored by
Employment Exchange. He worked to the entire satisfaction
of his superiors and had unblemished record of service. He
was transferred from the office of the Institute to the office
of Director(NI), Ministry of Welfare, Government of India,
New Delhi on 08-08-1995. He completed 240 days of
continuous service and became entitled for grant on
temporary status. When he completed continuous service
of 240 days in consecutive two years, he became eligible
for being considered for regularisation as Group D
employee. Instead of granting temporary status or
regularizing his service, the Institute dispensed with his
services on 07-03-96, in violation of the rules. Shri Harish
Kumar Sharma, who was engaged on 30-08-1994, was
retained in service and regularised as Group ‘D’ employee
subsequently. Feeling aggrieved by the said act of the
Institute, (he filed a writ petition (being WP (C)
No. 3700/96) before the High Court of Delhi seeking his
reinstatement in service. His writ petition was dismissed
on 01-07-2010, which order was assailed before the Division
Bench. However, his latter patent appeal was dismissed on
09-08-2010, with an option to approach the proper forum.
Termination of his services by the Institute is arbitrary,
discriminatory and in violation of the provisions of the
Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (in short the Act). He claims
reinstatement in service with continuity and full back
wages.
3. Claim was demurred by the Institute pleading that
engagement of the claimant was contractual in nature and
termination of his services would not amount to
retrenchment within the meaning of section 2(oo) of the
Act. His services came to an end as a result of non renewal
of contract of employment and as such it falls within the
ambit of sub clause (bb) of clause (oo) of section 2 of the
Act. Institute does not dispute that the claimant was
engaged as a short term contractual employee from
20-05-1994 till 06-03-1996 in different capacities. He was
initially engaged as seasonal waterman on 20-05-1994 for a
period of 89 days. His services came to an end on
16-08-1994. After a spell of four months, he was again
engaged on daily wage basis with effect from 18-01-1995.
He was again appointed as daily wager at different spells
till 03-10-1995. On 04-10-1995, he was engaged as OPD
Attendant for a period of 88 days. His contractual
appointment was extended for a period of 30 days as OPD
Attendant from 06-02-1996 to 06-03-1996. Thereafter, the
claimant did not seek any further appointment with the
Institute. He has not rendered continuous service of 240
days from the date of termination of his services. Since
termination of services of the claimant does not amount to
retrenchment, he is neither entitled for grant of one months
notice or pay in lieu thereof nor retrenchment
compensation. Claimant was not entitled for grant of
temporary status or regularisation of his services, as
claimed. Shri Harish Kumar Sharma was appointed by the
Institute on adhoc basis with effect from 28-10-1998 when
his name was sponsored by Employment Exchange. He
was a matriculate at the time when he was absorbed in the
service of the Institute on 18-09-2000. Claimant does not
fall at par with Shri Harish Kumar Sharma and hence he
cannot agitate that he was discriminated. Filing of writ
petition and its dismissal by High Court of Delhi is not
disputed. Institute projects that the claim put forward by
Shri Devender may be dismissed, being devoid of merits.
4. On pleading of the parties, following issues were
settled:
(i)
Whether engagement of the claimant was
contractual, for a specific period? If so, its effects?
(ii)
Whether claimant has rendered continuous
service of 240 days in the preceding12 months
from the date of his termination?
(iii)
As in terms of reference.
5. Claimant entered the witness box to substantiate
facts pleaded in the claim statement, Shri R.K. Sharma,
Administration Officer, was examined by the Institute to
establish its case. No other witness was examined by either
of the parties.
7582
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 13, 2012/ASVINA 21, 1934
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
6. Arguments were heard at the bar. Shri K.C. Dubey,
authorized representative, advanced arguments on behalf
of the claimant.Ms.Surbhi Mehta, authorized
representative, presented facts on behalf of the Institute. I
have given my careful consideration to the arguments
advanced at the bar and cautiously perused the record.
My findings on the issues involved in the controversy are
as follows :
Issue No.1
7. Claimant deposed that on 20-05-1994, he joined as
casual labour with the Institute. His name was sponsored
by Employment Exchange. He was appointed for a period
of 89 days vide order Ex.WW1/1. Further extension was
granted to him vide order dated 05-09-1994, copy of which
is Ex.WW1/2. Vide order dated 23-01-1995, his services
were again extended, copy of which order is Ex.WW1/4.
On the strength of order dated 21-04-1995, his services
were extended, copy of which order is Ex.WW1/5. His
services were extended again vide order dated 10-07-1995,
copy of which is Ex.WW1/6. Lastly, his services were
extended vide order dated 26-02-1996, copy of which order
is Ex. WW1/7. During the course of cross examination, he
concedes that he was periodically appointed by the
Institute.
8. Shri R.K.Sharma details that the claimant was
engaged as seasonal waterman on 20-05-1994. He worked
upto 16-08-1994. Thereafter he took break of 23 days and
returned for his job on 18-01-1995. He worked for one month
in that spell. He was engaged again on 21-02-1995 for a
period of 59 days. He was again engaged on 25-07-1995
and served upto 03-10-1995. On 04-10-1995, he was
engaged on fixed salary of Rs.1500. His services were
utilised upto 30-12-2005. On 06-02-1996, he was engaged
again for a period of 30 days. Thereafter, he never turned
up. During the course of cross examination, he presents
that no daily wager is working with the institute. When
claimant was engaged as waterman for the first time, at that
time 5-6 watermen were engaged.
9. When facts unfolded by the claimant and those
projected by Shri Sharma are appreciated, it came to light
that the claimant was engaged as waterman on 30-05-1994
for a period of 89 days. He was paid wages @ Rs.49 per
day, as emerged out of order Ex.WW1/1. The above order
was issued by the Institute to engage watermen since such
seasonal requirements arise in hot weather. He was again
engaged for a period of 29 days from 18-08-1994 till
15-09-1994, as is evident out of order Ex.WW1/2. Thus, in
1994, the claimant was engaged by the Institute in two
spells for 89 days and 29 days respectively. His services
came to an end on 15-09-1994. Claimant was engaged again
by the Institute on 18.01.1995 for a period of 30 days, vide
order Ex. WW1/3. The order makes it apparent that the
claimant was to be paid @ Rs.62.80 per day. His services
came to an end on 17.02.1995. Vide order dated 06-03-1995,
which is Ex.WW1/4, claimant was again engaged as daily
wager for a period of two months with effect from
21-02-1995 to 20-04-1995. Further extension was given to
the claimant vide order EXWW1/5 from 24-04-1995 to
20-07-1995. He was again given extension of 88 days from
25-07-1995 to 20-10-1995, vide order Ex.WW1/6. The above
appointment/ extensions were granted to the claimant, who
worked as daily wager with the Institute in the year 1995.
10. On 06-02-1996, the claimant was engaged as OPD
Attendant for a period of 30 days vide order Ex.WW1/7. In
that order, it was specifically mentioned that duties of
transportation of patients from main gate into OPD and
back on wheel chair shall be performed. He was to be paid
consolidated amount of Rs.1500.00 per month. It was also
clarified therein that his contract was for a period of 30
days, which was liable to be terminated at any time without
assigning any reasons. One of the terms of the order
Ex.WW1/17 puts an embargo on the claimant not to seek
regularization of his service and such claim would not be
entertained. It is an admitted case of the parties that no
further extension of service was granted by the Institute to
the claimant. Thus, it emerges over record that in 1994, the
claimant was engaged as seasonal waterman by the
Institute. In 1995, he was engaged as daily wager employee
for different spells, while in 1996 he was engaged as an
OPD Attendant.
11. From the scheme of the Act, it is apparent that
following expressions are used therein, which are to be
taken into account during adjudication process: (1) industry,
(2) industrial concern within the industry, (3) industrial
establishment which may itself be part of the industrial
concern or which may be part of a larger industrial concern,
(4) section of industrial establishment, and (5) categories
of workmen in industrial establishments or any section
thereof. Employees working In any of the above situation
may fall within the ambit of workman. If he works in different
categories in industrial establishments or its section thereof,
can it be said that his work in different capacities would
constitute continuous service. For an answer to this
proposition, continuous service, as defined by Section 25B
of the Act, is to be taken into account. As emerges from
above provisions, a workman had to render uninterrupted
service under a particular category of work. If his service in
a particular discipline of work comes to an end and he is
engaged again in another discipline of work which changes
category of his employment, in that situation, services
rendered in two different categories would not fall within
the ambit of continuous service.
12. The Tribunal had to ascertain as to whether
services rendered by the claimant in the capacity of
seasonal waterman, daily wager employee and OPD
Attendant can be considered to ascertain continuity of his
service. Answer has been provided by orders issued by
the Institute. As is evident therefore the claimant was
[Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)]
Hkkjr dk jkti= % vDrwcj 13] 2012@vkf'ou 21] 1934
7583
engaged as waterman, daily wager and lastly OPD
Attendant. Ex.WW1/1 makes it clear that the claimant was
appointed as waterman for 89 days and his services were
extended as waterman for another spell of 29 days, as emerge
out of order Ex.WW1/2. His services as waterman was for
a total period of 89 plus 29 days which comes to 118 days.
There was no ambiguity in these two orders as to the
specification of the period for which the claimant was
engaged as waterman. In January 95, claimant was engaged
as daily wager employee for a period of 30 days, which
engagement lasted upto 17-02-1995. His engagement as
daily wager was extended for a period of two months, vide
order dated 06-03-1995. He was given another extension
from 24-04-1995 to 21-07-1995. Last extension was given to
him in that capacity on 25-07-1995 to 20-10-1995. Orders
Ex.WW1/3, Ex.WW1/4, Ex.WW1/5 and Ex.WW1/6 were
passed by the Institute in that regard. All these orders
specify the periods for which the claimant was engaged as
daily wager. Firstly he was appointed for a period of 30
days, which period was extended for two months, again
his engagement was extended for 89 days and lastly it was
extended for 88 days only. Consequently, as daily wager,
claimant worked at different spells for a total period of
30+60+89+88 days, which comes to 267 days. But orders,
referred above, highlight specific periods for which claimant
was appointed or given extension to work as daily wager.
Lastly, he was appointed on 06-02-1996 to work as OPD
Attendant and order Ex.WW1/7 was issued in that regard.
As OPD Attendant, he was appointed for a period of 30
days, which appointment was never extended. Thus, it is
evident that the claimant was engaged for different
categories of work by the Institute. Orders Ex.WW1/1 to
Ex.WW1/7 make it clear that he was engaged for specific
periods to work as waterman, daily wager or OPD Attendant.
None of the above order speak of his engagement on regular
basis. The issue is, therefore, answered accordingly.
Issue No.2
13. Out of facts unfolded by the claiment, it came over
the record that further extension in his service was not
granted by the Institute with effect from 07-03-1996. Orders
Ex.WW1/1 to Ex.WW1/7 are not disputed by the Institute.
Out of facts proved by the parties, the Tribunal has to
ascertain as to whether claimant rendered continuous
service of 240 days in preceding 12 months from the date
of his alleged termination. At the cost of repetition, it is
pointed out that the contract of employment of the claimant
was not extended, when he was working as OPD Attendant.
He worked in that capacity only for a period of 30 days. It
is crystal clear that as OPD Attendant, claimant had not
rendered continuous service of 240 days in preceding 12
months. For the purpose of continuous service, as
contemplated by the provisions of Section 25B of the Act,
the claimant must establish that he worked under the
Institute for a period of one year. He shall be deemed to
have been in continuous service for a period of one year if
he has actually worked under the employer for 240 days in
the preceding period of twelve months. Section 25B of the
Act uses the words “under the employer” for ascertainment
of continuous service for a period of one year. Considering
the fact that he was employed in different categories, his
engagement as OPD Attendant would not constitute as
continuous service to his engagement as a daily wager.
However the Act is a beneficial legislation and Section 25B
of the Act nowhere discards actual works in two different
categories, rendered by a workman, for ascertainment of
his continuous service. When facts are gauzed on these
lines, it would come to light that the claimant had rendered
continuous service of 240 days in preceding 12 months
from the date of his alleged termination. Records tell that
from 06-03-1996 to 06-02-1996 he worked for 30 days, from
20-10-1995 to 25-07-1995 he worked for 88 days, from
21-07-1995 to 24-04-1995 he worked for 89 days and from
21-04-1995 to 07-03-1995 he worked for 43 days. Thus as
emerging from the records of service, it can be said that the
claimant had rendered continuous service with the Institute
for a period 240 days in preceding 12 months from the date
of his alleged termination. Issue is, accordingly, answered.
Issue No. 3
14. For an answer to the issue referred for adjudication,
it would be expedient to ascertain whether termination of
services of claimant amounts to retrenchment? For an
answer, definition of the term is to be construed. Clause
(oo) of Section 2 of the Act defines retrenchment. For the
same of convenience, the said definition is extracted thus:
“(oo) “retrenchment” means the termination by the
employer of the services of a workman for any reason
whatsoever, otherwise than as a punishment inflicted by
way of disciplinary action, but does not include—
(a)
voluntary retirement of the workman; or
(b)
retirement of the workman on reaching the age of
superannuation if the contract of employment
between the employer and the workman
concerned contains a stipulation in that behalf;
or
(bb) termination of the services of the workman as a
result of the non- renewal of the contract of
employment between the employer and the
workman concerned on its expiry or of such
contract being terminated under a stipulation in
that behalf contained therein; or
(c)
termination of the services of a workman on the
ground of continued ill-health”.
15. Definition of retrenchment is very wide and in
two parts. The first part is exhaustive, which lays down
that retrenchment means the termination of the service of a
workman by the employer “for any reason whatsoever”
otherwise then as a punishment inflicted by way of
7584
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 13, 2012/ASVINA 21, 1934
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
disciplinary action. Thus main part of the definition itself
excludes the termination of service, as a measure of
punishment inflicted by way of disciplinary action from
the ambit of retrenchment. The second part further excludes
(i) voluntary retirement of the workman, or (ii) retirement of
workman on reaching the age of superannuation, or (iii)
termination of the service of a workman as a result of non-
renewal of contract of employment, or (iv) termination of
contract of employment in terms of a stipulation contained
in the contract of employment in that behalf, or (v)
termination of service on the ground of continued ill health
of the workman. Reference can be made to the precedents
in Avon Services (Production Agencies) (Pvt.) Ltd. (1979
(I) LLJ 1) and Mahabir (1979 (II) LLJ 363).
16. Sub Clause (bb) purports to exclude from the
ambit of the definition of retrenchment (i) termination of
the service of a workman as a result of non-renewal of the
contract of employment between the employer and the
workman concerned, on its expiry, or (ii) termination of the
contract of employment in terms of a stipulation contained
in the contract of employment in that behalf. The first part
relates to termination of service of a workman as a result of
non-renewal of the contract of employment between the
employer and the workman concerned on its expiry. Thus
“non-renewal of contract of employment” pre-supposes
an existing contract of employment, which is not renewed.
When services of an employee is terminated on account of
non-renewal of contract of employment, between the
employer and the workman, it does not amount to
retrenchment. The second part refers to “such contract”
being terminated under a stipulation in that behalf contained
therein. The cases contemplated, under this part too, would
not amount to retrenchment. However this sub-clause,
being in the nature of an exception to clause (oo) of Section
2 of the Act, is ruled to be construed strictly when
contractual agreement is used as modus operandi to
frustrate claim of the employee to become regular or
permanent against a job. The adjudicator has to address
himself to the question whether the period of employment
was stipulated in the contract of employment as a device
to escape the applicability of the definition of retrenchment.
See Shailendra Nath Shukla (1987 Lab. I.C. 1607), Dilip
Hanumantrao Shrike (1990 Lab. I.C. 100) and Balbir Singh
(1990 (1) LLJ. 443). On review of law laid by the Apex Court
and various High Courts, a single Judge of the Madhya
Pradesh High Court, in Madhya Pradesh Bank Karamchari
Sangh (1996 Lab. I.C. 1161) has laid following principles of
interpretation and application of sub-clause (bb) of clause
(oo) of section 2 of the Act:
“(i) that the provisions of section 2(oo)(bb) are to be
construed benevolently in favour of the workman,
(ii) that if the workman is allowed to continue in service
by making periodic appointments from time to time,
then it can be said that the case would not fall under
section 2(oo)(bb),
(iii) that the provisions of Section 2 (oo)(bb) are not to
be interpreted in the manner which may stifle the
main provision,
(iv) that if the workman continues in service, the non-
renewal of the contract can be deemed as mala fide
and it may amount to be a fraud on statute;
(v) that there would be wrong presumption of non-
applicability of Section-2(oo)(bb) where the work is
of continuous nature and there is nothing on record
that the work for which a workman has been appointed
had come to an end”.
17. Whether provisions of retrenchment, enacted in
the Act, provide for any security of tenure? Answer lies in
negative. Provisions of retrenchment provide for certain
benefits to a workman in case of termination of his service,
falling within the ambit of definition of retrenchment. On
compliance of the requirements of section 25F or 25N and
25G of the Act, it is open to the employer to retrench a
workman.
18. Termination of service of an employee during the
period of probation was held to be covered by the exception
contained in sub-clause (bb) of Section 2(oo) of the Act, in
C.M. Venugopal [1994 (1) LLJ 597]. As per fact of the case,
Regulation 14 of the Life Insurance Corporation of India
(Staff) Regulation, 1962 empowered the Corporation to
terminate the service of an employee within the period of
probation. The employee was put on probation for a period
of one year, which was extended by another year. Since he
could not achieve the target to earn confirmation, his service
was terminated in terms of Regulation 14 as well as order of
appointment. The Apex Court ruled that the case was
covered by the exception contained in sub-clause (bb),
hence it was not retrenchment.
19. In Morinda Co-operative Sugar Mills Ltd. (1996
Lab. I.C. 221) a sugar factory used to employ certain number
of workmen during crushing season and at the end to the
crushing season their employment used to cease. The
Supreme Court held that despite the fact that the workmen
worked for more than 240 days in a year, cessation of their
employment at the end of crushing season would not amount
to retrenchment in view of the provisions of sub-clause
(bb) of Section 2(oo) of the Act. It was observed as follows:
“4. It would thus be clear that the respondents were
not working throughout the season. They worked during
crushing seasons only. The respondents were taken into
work for the season and consequent to closure of the
season, they ceased to work.
5. The question is whether such a cessation would
amount to retrenchment. Since it is only a seasonal work,
the respondents cannot be said to have been retrenched in
view of what is stated in sub-clause (bb) of Section 2(oo)
of the Act. Under these circumstances, we are of the opinion
[Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)]
Hkkjr dk jkti= % vDrwcj 13] 2012@vkf'ou 21] 1934
7585
that the view taken by the Labour Court and the High
Court is illegal. However, the appellant is directed to maintain
a register for all workmen engaged during the seasons
enumerated herein before and when the new season starts
the appellant should make a publication in neighbouring
places in which the respondents normally live and if they
would report for duty, the appellant would engage them in
accordance with seniority and exigency of work”.
20. Above legal position was reiterated by the Apex
Court in Anil Bapurao Kanase [1997 [10) S.C.C. 599] wherein
it was noted as follows:
“3.The learned counsel for the appellant contends that
the judgment of the High Court of Bombay relied on in
the impugned order dated 28-3-1995 in Writ Petition
No. 488 of 1994 is perhaps not applicable. Since the
appellant has worked for more than 180 days, he is to be
treated as retrenched employee and if the procedure
contemplated under Section 25-F of the Industrial
Disputes Act, 1947 is applied, his retrenchment is illegal.
We find no force in this contention. In Morinda Coop.
Sugar Mills Ltd. v. Ram Kishan in para 3, this Court has
dealt with engagement of the seasonal workman in
sugarcane crushing, in para 4, it is stated that it was not
a case of retrenchment of the workman, but of closure
of the factory after the crushing season was over.
Accordingly, in para 5, it was held that it is not
‘retrenchment’ within the meaning of Section 2(oo) of
the Act. As a consequence the appellant is not entitled
to retrenchment as per sub-clause (bb) of Section 2(oo)
of the Act. Since the present work is seasonal business,
the principles of the Act have no application. However,
this Court has directed that the respondent management
should maintain a register and engage the workmen when
the season starts in the succeeding years in the order of
seniority. Until all the employees whose names appear
in the list are engaged in addition to the employees who
are already working, the management should not go in
for fresh engagement of new workmen. It would be
incumbent upon the respondent management to adopt
such procedure as is enumerated above”.
21. In Harmohinder Singh [2001 (5) S.C.C. 540] an
employee was appointed as a salesman by Kharga canteen
on 1-6-74 and subsequently as a cashier on 9-8-75. The
letter of appointment and Standing Orders, inter alia,
provided that his service could be terminated by one
month’s notice by either party. He was served with a notice
to the effect that his service would be relinquished with
effect from 30-6-1989. Relying precedent In Uptron India
Ltd. [1998 (6) S.C.C. 538] the Apex Court ruled that contract
of service for a fixed term are excluded from the ambit of
retrenchment. Decision in Balbir Singh (supra) was held to
be erroneous. It was also ruled that principles of natural
justice are not applicable where termination takes place on
expiry of contract of service.
22. In Batala Coop. Sugar Mills Ltd. [2005 (8) S.C.C.
481] an employee was engaged on casual basis on daily
wages for specific work and for a specific period. He was
engaged on 1-4-1986 and worked upto 12-2-94. The Labour
Court concluded that termination of his services was
violative of provisions of Section 25-F of the Act, hence
ordered for his reinstatement with 50% back wages. Relying
precedents in Morinda Coop. Sugar Mills (supra) and Anil
Bapurao Kanase (supra) the Apex Court ruled that since
his engagement was for a specific period and specific work,
relief granted to him by the Labour Court can not be
maintained.
23. The Apex Court dealt with such a situation again
in Darbara Singh (2006 LLR 68) wherein an employee was
appointed by the Punjab State Electricity Board as peon
on daily wage basis from 8-1-88 to 29-2-88. His services
were extend from time to time and finally dispensed with in
June, 1989. The Supreme Court ruled that engagement of
Darbara Singh was for a specific period and conditional.
His termination did not amount to retrenchment. His case
was found to be covered under exception contained in
sub-clause (bb) of Section 2(oo) of the Act. In Kishore
Chand Samal (2006 LLR 65), same view was maintained by
the Apex Court. It was ruled therein that the precedent in
S.M. Nilajkar [2003 (II) LLJ 359] has no application to the
controversy since it was ruled therein that mere mention
about the engagement being temporary without indication
of any period attracts section 25 F of the Act if it is proved
that the concerned workman had worked continuously for
more than 240 days. Case of Darbara Singh and Kishan
Chand Samal were found to be relating to fixed term of
appointment.
24. In BSES Yamuna Power Ltd. (2006 LLR 1144)
Rakesh Kumar was appointed as Copyist on 29-9-89,
initially for a period of three months as a daily wager. His
term of appointment was extended up to 20-9-90. No further
extension was given and his services were dispensed with
on 20-9-90. On consideration of facts and law High Court
of Delhi has observed thus :
“...In the present case, the respondent was appointed
as a copyist for totalling the accounts of ledger for the year
1986-87 and then for 1987-88. His initial appointment was
for the period of three months. It was extended from time to
time and no extension was given after 20th September, 1990.
He was appointed without any regular process of
appointment, purely casual and on temporary basis for
specific work of totalling of ledger. When this work was
over, no extension was given. I consider that appointment
as that of the respondent is squarely covered under section
2(oo)(bb) of the Act. Giving of non extension did not
amount to termination of service, it was not a case of
retrenchment”.
25. Precedents, handed down by Allahabad High
Court in Shailendra Nath Shukla (supra), Bombay High
7586
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 13, 2012/ASVINA 21, 1934
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
Court in Dilip Hanumantrao Shirke (supra), Punjab &
Haryana High Court in Balbir Singh (supra) and Madhya
Pradesh High Court in Madhya Pradesh Bank Karamchari
Sangh (supra) castrate sub-clause (bb) of section 2(oo) of
the Act. Ratio decidendi in these precedents abrogates
statutory provisions of sub-clause (bb) of section 2 (oo) of
the Act without even discussing the legality or
constitutional validity of the clause. On the other hand the
Apex Court in C.M.Venugopal (supra), Morinda Co-
operative Sugar Mills Ltd. (supra), Anil Bapurao Kanase
(supra), Harmohinder Singh (supra), Batala Co-op. Sugar
Mills Ltd. (supra), Darbara Singh (supra) and Kishore Chand
Samal (supra) and High Court of Delhi in BSES Yamuna
Power Ltd. (supra) spoke that case of an employee,
appointed for a specific period which was extended from
time to time, would be covered by the exception contained
in sub-clause (bb) of section 2(oo) of the Act, in case his
services are dispensed with as a result of non-renewal of
the contract of employment between him and his employer,
on its expiry or termination of the contract of employment
in terms of a stipulation contained in the contract of
employment in that behalf. The law, so laid, holds the water
and would be applied to the case of the claimant.
26. As projected above, claimant was appointed by
the Institute in different capacities, first as waterman; then
as daily wager employee and lastly as OPD Attendant for
specific periods. His appointment as OPD Attendant was
not extended. However, his appointment as daily wager
employee got extension from time to time. His services
came to an end when the Institute had not renewed his
contract of employment. His case squarely fell within the
ambit of exemption available under sub-clause (bb) of clause
(oo) of section 2 of the Act. It cannot be said that by non-
renewal of the contract of employment, the Institute
retrenched the employee. Thus, it is evident that termination
of services of the claimant does not amount to
retrenchment. Provisions of section 25F of the Act does
not come into play.
27. Claimant places relies on the precedent in
Devender Singh [2011 (6) SSC 584] in which case appellant
was engaged as clerk for a period of 6 months on contract
basis. On expiry of 6 months, his services were extended
for another term of 6 months from 01-11-1995 to 20-04-1996.
This exercise was again repeated and his term of
employment was extended for another period upto
01-05-1996. However, his engagement was discontinued
with effect from 30-09-1996 without giving any notice or
pay in lieu thereof and retrenchment compensation. In the
light of the facts referred above, Apex Court ruled that plea
taken by the management that its case was covered by
Section 2(oo) (bb) of the Act was squarely misconceived.
It was further emphasized that no material was produced
by the management to show that engagement of the
appellant was discontinued relying upon the terms and
conditions of his employment. Precedent relied by the
claimant is based on distinct and different facts. Services
of the appellant in the precedent were done away with
during currency of extension period. Since extension period
was in currency, that case was beyond the ambit of section
2(oo)(bb) of the Act. Here in the case, services of the
claimant came to an end on account of non-renewal of
contract of employment after 06-03-1996. Under these
circumstances, the said precedent cannot espouse cause
of the claimant.
28. Whether the claimant can project that by engaging
Shri Harish Kumar Sharma as an adhoc employee and
thereafter regularising his services, the Institute has
discriminated him? As testified by the claimant, Shri Harish
Kumar Sharma initially joined the Institute on 16-12-1997.
Thereafter, an order was passed in his favour on
29-10-1998. Subsequently, his services were regularized
vide order dated 03-10-2000. Claimant nowhere disputes
that Shri Harish Kumar Sharma is a matriculate, while he is
middle pass. It is also not disputed that the name of Shri
Harish Kumar Sharma was sponsored by Employment
Exchange and he was appointed as attendant on adhoc
basis on 29-10-1998. When Shri Sharma was appointed as
adhoc attendant, at that time claimant was not working
with the Institute. Can the claimant project that the job of
attendant was to be offered to him by the Institute, in view
of the provisions of section 25H of the Act? As detailed
above, claimant was lastly working as OPD Attendant.
Shri Harish Kumar Sharma was appointed as Attendant
and not as OPD Attendant. On the post of Attendant,
claimant was never employed. Consequently, it is apparent
that the post, which was manned by the claimant at a point
of time, was not given to Shri Harish Kumar Sharma. Even
otherwise, Shri Harish Kumar Sharma was better qualified
than the claimant.
29. Equality before law and equal protection of laws
are fundamental rights of every person, ordains Article 14
of the Constitution. The guiding principles laid in Article
14 are that persons, who are similarly situated, shall be
treated alike both in privileges conferred and liability
imposed, which means that amongst equals the law should
be equal and should be equally administered and that like
should be treated alike. Article 16 of the Constitution
guarantees equality of opportunities for all citizens in
matters relating to employment or appointment to any office
under the State. What is guaranteed is the equality of
opportunity. Like all other employers, government is also
entitled to pick and choose from amongst a large number
of candidates offering themselves for employment. But the
selection process must not be arbitrary. The guarantee
given by clause (a) of Article 16 of the Constitution will
cover (a) initial appointments (b) promotions (c) termination
of employment (d) and matters relating to salary, periodical
increments, leaves, gratuity, pension, age of
superannuation etc. Matters relating to employment or
appointments include all matters in relations to employment
[Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)]
Hkkjr dk jkti= % vDrwcj 13] 2012@vkf'ou 21] 1934
7587
both prior and subsequent to the employment which are
incidental to the employment and form part of the terms
and conditions of such employment.
30. Fundamental rights guaranteed by Article 14
forbids class legislation, but does not forbid classification
or differentiation which rests upon reasonable ground of
discretion. Classification is the recognition of the relations,
and in making it the Government must be allowed a wide
latitude of discretion and judgment. In a way, the
consequences of such classification would undoubtedly
be to differentiate persons belonging to that class from
others. The classification must be founded on an intelligible
differentia which distinguishes persons or things that are
grouped together from others left out of the group and the
differentia must have a rational relation to the object sought
to be achieved. Classification may be made according to
the nature of persons, nature of business, and may be
based with reference to time.
31. Concept of equality guaranteed by Article 16 of
the Constitution is something more than formal equality
and enables the underprivileged groups to have a fair share
by having more than equal chance and enables the State to
give favoured treatment to those groups by achieving real
equality with reference to social needs. ‘Protection
discrimination’ enabled the State to adopt new strategy to
bring underprivileged at par with the rest of the society, by
providing all possible opportunities and incentives to them.
Therefore a class may be allowed to have preferential
treatment in the matter relating to employment or
appointment. There cannot be rule of equality between
members of separate and independent group of persons.
Persons can be classified in different groups, based on in
terms of nature of persons, nature of business and with
reference to time.
32. The Institute engaged Shri Harish Kumar Sharma
as Attendant, who was better qualified than the claimant.
His engagement as Attendant was made through
Employment Exchange. Name of the claimant as OPD
Attendant was not sponsored by the Employment
Exchange. Therefore, it is evident that the claimant and
Shri Harish Kumar Sharma were on different pedestals. It
does not lie in the mouth of the claimant to assert that he
has not been equally treated with Shri Harish Kumar
Sharma. Unequals cannot be treated as equals. Hence, it
cannot be said that by appointing Shri Harish Kumar
Sharma as Attendant, the Institute has discriminated the
claimant. On this aspect too, I do not find any case of
indulgence in favour the claimant.
33. In view of the foregoing reasons, it is apparent
that there is no case in favour of the claimant. Non-renewal
of his contract of employment does not amount to
retrenchment. In such a situation, he cannot get protection
of section 25F of the Act. He has no claim for reinstatement
in the service of the Institute as OPD assistant. Resultantly,
his claim is brushed aside. An award is, accordingly, passed
in favour of the Institute and against the claimant. It be
sent to the appropriate Government for publication
Dated 16-08-2012.
Dr. R. K. YADAV, Presiding Officer
ubZ fnYyh] 14 flrEcj] 2012
dk-vk- 3123-—vkS|ksfxd fookn vf/kfu;e] 1947 ¼1947
dk 14½ dh /kkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa] dsUnzh; ljdkj tsV ykbZV
¼bf.M;k½ fyfeVsM ds izca/kra= ds lac) fu;kstdksa vkSj muds deZdkjksa
ds chp] vuqca/k esa fufnZ"V vkS|ksfxd fookn esa dsUnzh; ljdkj
vkS|ksfxd vf/kdj.k@Je U;k;ky; ua- 2] ubZ fnYyh ds iapkV ¼lanHkZ
la[;k 24@2000½ dks izdkf'kr djrh gS] tks dsUnzh; ljdkj dks
14&09&2012 dks izkIr gqvk FkkA
[la- ,y&11012@119@1999&vkbZ vkj ¼lh&I½]
vthr dqekj] vuqHkkx vf/kdkjh
New Delhi, the 14th September, 2012
S.O. 3123.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial
Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government
hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 24/2000) of the
Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court
No-II, Delhi as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial
Dispute between the employers in relation to the
management of JET LITE (INDIA) LIMITED and their
workman, which was received by the Central Government
on 14-09-2012.
[No. L-11012/119/1999-IR (C-I)]
AJEET KUMAR, Section Officer
ANNEXURE
IN THE COURT OF SHRI SATNAM SINGH,
PRESIDING OFFICER, CENTRAL GOVERNMENT
INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT-II,
KARKARDOOMA, DELHI-110032
ID No. 24/2000
In the matter between :
Capt. R. Khosla S/o Shri R.K. Khosla,
A-160, Sector 21, Noida,
UP-201301.
. . .Applicant/claimant.
Versus
JET LITE (INDIA) LIMITED
6, Park Road, Lucknow,
Lucknow-226001 (UP)
. . .Management
7588
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 13, 2012/ASVINA 21, 1934
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
A W A R D
The Central Government, Ministry of Labour vide
Order No. L-11012/119/99-IR(C-l) dated 27-01-2002 has
referred the following industrial dispute to this Tribunal
for adjudication :
"Whether the action of the Chief Controller, Sahara
Airlines Ltd., 7th floor, Ambadeep Building, 14 Kasturba
Gandhi Marg, Connaught Place, New Delhi-110001 in
terminating the services of Capt. R. Khosla, Ex-Pilot,
resident of A-160, Jalvayu Vihar, Sector-21, Noida UP-
201301 with effect from 16.07.1998 is justified, valid and
legal? If not, to what relief and benefits is he entitled?"
1. In his statement of claim the applicant has submitted
that he was appointed as pilot by Sahara Airlines Ltd. with
effect from 1.11.1994. As an Ex-Air Force Officer, he was
having nearly 2700 hours flying and Master Green category
and also holding civil flying license (ALTP). Due to his
hard work and accident free flying, he was given
commendation letter besides higher salary and perks vide
letter No. SIAL/HQ/PERS/95/1054 dated 13.11.1995. After
more than three and half years of continuous service the
applicant Capt. R Khosla received letter No. SIAL/HQ/PERS/
98/468 dated 16.07.1998 terminating his services with
immediate effect.
2. Capt. R. Khosla raised industrial dispute under Section
2A of the Industrial Disputes Act. However, the conciliation
proceedings resulted in failure and the Central Govt. has
made the above mentioned reference to this Tribunal. It is
further submitted by the applicant that there are two
categories of pilots working with the opposite party vis.
like Capt. R. Khosla with an Air Force background and
others like Capt. GPS Grewal who were civilian pilots
throughout their career. Since Capt. R. Khosla was excellent
in his professional skill as determined by an impartial foreign
expert like Capt. Landowsksy, he became the victim of petty
jealousy by a group of civilian pilots. Deliberately, he was
not considered for the position of Commander. The
negative feeling with two groups can be seen from the
applicant letter dated 10.03.1998 to the opposite party. That
applicant Capt. R. Khosla was served a memorandum of
charges on 05.06.1998 and he was placed under suspension
with immediate effect. The charges were completely vague
and lacking in particulars regarding date, time, place, exact
language used and against whom and who had reported
the matter to the authorities. As such Capt. R Khosla asked
for necessary particulars vide his letter dated 06.06.1998.
That after a lapse of about two weeks he received letter
dated 20.06.1998 which may be described as second
memorandum of charges. That the opposite party had
conducted a preliminary enquiry and increased the ambit
of his alleged misconduct to four separate charges of using
derogatory and abusive language against the company
and his seniors. However, copy of the preliminary report
was not given to Capt. R. Khosla though nature of charges
had been considerably enlarged from the memorandum
dated 05.06.1998. Capt. R. Khosla submitted his explanation
to the second show cause notice vide letter dated 25.06.1998.
Subsequently, an enquiry committee was formed to enquire
into the charges of misconduct on 02.07.1998.
3. That Capt. GPS Grewal, GM Operations (N) who issued
both the letters dated 05.06.1998 and 20.06.1998 and had
placed Capt. R. Khosla under suspension was a member of
the enquiry committee. Capt. R. Khosla was naturally
apprehensive about the biased attitude of Capt. Grewal
and specifically objected to his being a member of the
enquiry committee but the objection was brushed aside
and the said officer had signed the findings and conclusions
of the enquiry committee causing grave prejudice to the
workman.
4. It is further the case of the applicant that memorandum
of charges before the enquiry committee consisted of two
charges for using unparliamentary language against Capt.
SPS Sandhu and one charge of using abusive language
against 'senior management'. These charges were vague,
nebulous, non-specific and lacking in particulars about
the precise language used, dates and places of occurrence
and the names of the senior management. This is also not
enumerated as misconduct in the standing order of the
company.
5. That surprisingly, during the proceedings of the
enquiry committee which met only on 06.07.1998, the case
of the management was presented by Mr. AK Trehan
Advocate whereas Capt. R. Khosla was forced to defend
himself personally and he was not allowed representation
by legal counsel or any other qualified officer. That the
enquiry committee only recorded the statement of one
witness Mr. Sanjay Kumar and all the remaining witnesses
did not record the statements personally but only their
letters/complaints submitted earlier were taken on record
and they did not affirm before the enquiry the statements
made by them earlier in those letters/complaints. That there
were no proceedings of the enquiry committee after
06.07.1998 in the presence of Capt. R. Khosla and
subsequent portions of the proceedings have been
fabricated later including the findings and conclusions of
the enquiry committee. That Capt. Nilesh Guha and Capt.
Atul Mehta have made patently false statements. Both
these witnesses as well as Shri Jaskirat were never made
available to him for cross-examination. That there is obvious
contradiction in paras 6 and 7 of the enquiry proceedings
as the enquiry committee stated that complainant
specifically asked for these witnesses to be cross-examined
but immediately thereafter stated that the complainant did
not ask for appearance of any witness.
6.
That Capt. R Khosla was not given any
opportunity to make a statement or to examine witnesses
in his defence. That the witnesses except Mr. Sanjay Kumar
[Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)]
Hkkjr dk jkti= % vDrwcj 13] 2012@vkf'ou 21] 1934
7589
did not affirm their statements personally and the
proceedings had been completed with undue haste behind
the back of the complainant with the preconceived idea of
toeing the line of the management and to find Capt.
R. Khosla guilty of the charge levelled against him. That
the enquiry committee has not conducted itself impartially
and they have acted in violation of the principles of natural
justice. They even have expressed their opinion that the
charges have not been disproved by Capt. R. Khosla
thereby ignoring the basic norms that he is presumed to be
innocent and the burden of proving the charges rests
entirely with the management.
7. Further the enquiry committee proceedings were
not given to the complainant for showing cause against
the findings and conclusions of the enquiry and the
evidence on which it was based. That the proceedings
were produced for the first time during the conciliation
proceedings only. That the findings of the committee are
completely perverse and based on no evidence or
insufficient evidence. That the charges contained in the
memorandum of charges are lacking in particulars,
witnesses have not been examined directly by the
committee and they were also not made available for being
cross-examined. That Capt. R. Khosla was not properly
represented and he was not asked to make a statement or
produce defence witnesses. That Capt. GPS Grewal was in
charge of Operations Division and was not competent
under the rules and regulations of the company to issue a
memorandum of charges or place Capt. R. Khosla under
suspension. That by making Capt. Grewal as member, the
enquiry was reduced to mockery and idle ceremony. That
the proceedings of the enquiry were conducted in the
presence of Capt. R. Khosla only on 06.07.1998 and he was
under the bona fide impression that the enquiry had
aborted. That the witnesses sought by him were not
produced for cross-examination. That surprisingly after
receiving the report of the enquiry committee the opposite
party did not proceed to the logical conclusion by issuing
second show cause notice against the proposed
punishment. That in fact he was not given any disciplinary
punishment and his services were terminated vide letter
dated 16.07.1998.
8.
It is also the case of the applicant that his
termination of services is not a discharge simpliciter but as
a cloak for awarding the punishment of dismissal which
could not have been awarded for the extremely trivial
charges. The termination of services of the applicant is
violative of Section 25-F of the Industrial Disputes Act.
According to the applicant he has remained continuously
unemployed since his services were terminated by the
opposite party.
9.
According to the applicant he is also entitled to
various dues totalling Rs.4,59,348.80 which have been
wrongfully withheld by the opposite party. The applicant,
therefore has prayed that this Tribunal may be pleased to
answer the reference of the Central Govt. by making the
award as follows:
(a) That the termination of service of Capt. R. Khosla
by the Sahara Airlines Ltd. with effect form
16.07.1998 is illegal, void and inoperative.
(b) Declaration that Capt. R. Khosla is entitled to be
reinstated in service with full back wages w.e.f.
16.07.1998.
(c) That Capt. R. Khosla is entitled to have his flying
license updated with Boeing Endorsement by the
DGCA, at the expense of the Sahara Airlines.
(d) That suspension of service of Capt. R. Khosla vide
letter dated 05.06.1998 is illegal and void.
(e) That Capt. R. Khosla is entitled to be paid
Rs. 4,59,348.80 with interest @ 18% P.A till the date
of actual payment, by M/s. Sahara Airlines Ltd. for
payment of dues by the employer prior to 16.07.1998.
(f)
Any other order or direction which the Hon'ble
Tribunal may deem fit and proper and in the interest
of justice.
10. The management has contested the claim of the
applicant and has filed its written statement in which it is
submitted that the applicant is guilty of suppressing
suppressio-veri and falsio suggestion. He has not come to
the Tribunal with true and correct facts and is guilty of
misrepresentation and concealment of material facts. That
the applicant prior to the filing of the present claim had
been indulging in pressure tactics with sham and bogus
allegations and when the respondent did not succumb to
the pressure tactics, he has filed the present claim on false
and frivolous grounds. That this Tribunal does not have
the jurisdiction to adjudicate upon the present matter as
the applicant does not fall in the category of workman as
laid under Section 2(S) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947.
That services of the applicant have been terminated after
holding an enquiry into the charges of misconduct
communicated to him and the enquiry has been conducted
by following the procedure and there is no lacking in the
procedure followed for holding the enquiry including the
ultimate punishment.
11.
While replying on merits, the management has
disputed the submission of the applicant that due to hard
work and accident free flying he was given commendation
letter besides higher salary and perks and it is submitted
that the applicant was in fact given a warning by Director
General, Civil Aviation vide his letter No. 1-750/92-L(2) dated
04.09.1995 and he was warned to be more careful in future.
The management has denied that the applicant was a victim
of petty jealousy by a group of civilian pilots. In fact, Capt.
R. Khosla in his letter dated 23.04.1996 had clearly stated
"with respect to SIA I am not in a position to set any crew
7590
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 13, 2012/ASVINA 21, 1934
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
allocation or recommend "promotion". Thus, in fact he was
not recommended for promotion, by Capt. R. Landowski in
his letter. It is asserted by the management that the charges
were specific and there was no enlargement made of such
charges. That applicant never objected to Capt. GPS Grewal
being a member of the enquiry committee. His objection
now that he had specifically objected to Capt. GPS Grewal
being a member is an after thought without any truth/solid
base. It is also asserted by the management that there was
no Advocate namely A.K. Trehan with the opposite party
at the time of holding of enquiry. In fact, Mr. S.K. Trehan is
legal advisor and he never participated in the proceedings
of the enquiry committee. Anything stated contrary to that
by applicant Capt. R. Khosla has been denied. It is
submitted that perusal of Annexures G and H attached
with the application clearly show that the applicant himself
had cross-examined Capt. Romi Sharma and Shri Seth during
the enquiry. That while on one end the applicant has
attached verbatim record of questions/answers of the
witnesses as Annexures G and H and at the same time he is
stating that the statement of one witness was recorded.
That at the instance of applicant, Capt. Nilesh Guha and
Capt. Atul Mehta were required to appear for cross-
examination by the applicant but he refused to cross-
examine them. The statements of Capt. Nilesh Guha and
Capt. Atul Mehta have been attached as Annexures I and
J and at the same time, he is misleading the Tribunal that
they were not available for cross-examination. That the
enquiry proceedings were completed by following the
prescribed procedure including giving ample opportunity
to the applicant to answer the charges levelled against him
as also cross-examining the witnesses. The allegations that
the proceedings have been concluded with undue haste is
totally devoid of any reasoning. The applicant refused to
cross-examine Capt. Guha and Capt. Mehta. That the
enquiry conducted is impartial and independent and the
applicant was given ample opportunity to defend himself.
That the order of dismissal is neither unfair nor victimization.
That the management had written two letters dated
28-09-1998 and 05-07-1999 advising the applicant to collect
his dues from the management but instead of doing the
same he has mischievously come to this Tribunal. The
management, therefore, has prayed for dismissal of the
claim of the applicant.
12.
The applicant has filed replication whereby he
has denied the allegations of the management and has
reiterated his own avertments made in the statement of
claim.
13.
Evidence of both the parties has been taken. I
have head arguments from both parties and have also
perused the record.
14.
According to the applicant he falls in the category
of "workman" and as such he has rightfully come to this
Tribunal for redressal of his grievances. The management
on the other hand strongly disputes the same and claims
that the applicant is not a "workman" as defined under
Section 2(S) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947.This aspect
is crucial in this case and the onus to prove the same lies
on the applicant.
15.
As per the case of the applicant he was appointed
as pilot by Sahara Airlines Limited with effect from
1-11-1994 and pilot falls in the category of "workman" within
the meaning of Section 2(S) of the Industrial Disputes Act
1947. In support of his contention he relies upon Mathur
Aviation Vs. Lt. Governor, Delhi 1978 (36) FLR 7 wherein a
Single Judge of the Delhi High Court has held that pilot is
a workman within the meaning of Section 2(S) of the
I.D.Act,1947. The argument put forth from the side of the
applicant is referred to in the order dated February 23, 2012
passed by the Division Bench of the Hon'ble High Court of
Delhi. However, the Hon'ble Division Bench has further
observed in the same order as under :
"This argument, however, ignores that the issue of
workman has to be decided and determined on the basis
of evidence produced [see Sonepat Cooperative Sugar
Mills Ltd. Vs. Ajit Singh (2005) 3 SCC (232]".
Taking a cue from the above observations by the Hon'ble
Division Bench of the Delhi High Court it is evident that
the matter is not so simple and the issue whether pilot is a
workman or not has to be decided and determined on the
basis of the evidence produced in the case.
16.
In support of the stand of the management that
Capt. R. Khosla is not a workman, the management in the
evidence of their witness, Shri Gaurav, Asstt. Manager has
asserted that applicant Capt. R. Khosla is not a workman
as defined in Section 2(S) of the I.D. Act, 1947. Shri Gaurav
Kumar, Asstt. Manager has testified that the applicant is
highly educated and professionally trained and competent
to take decisions independently and his last drawn salary
was more than Rupees one lakh. The nature of duties
performed by him involve taking of independent decisions,
control and supervision over the crew members of the
aircraft. All crew members in the flight used to function on
instructions and under guidance and control of the
applicant. He was overall responsible for all the decisions
to be taken while flying. Shri Gaurav Kumar has asserted
that the nature of his employment in discharging the duties
is managerial and supervisory in nature. Further, the
applicant is responsible for overall safety and security of
the passengers including crew members. Thus, the
relationship of Capt. R. Khosla with the passengers and
crew members was that of a trust while flying and their
safety, security and their lives rested in the hands of the
applicant.
17.
The above evidence of the management has
hardly been challenged from the side of the applicant and
it is almost unrebutted. Further, before joining the Sahara
Airlines Limited on 1-11-1994, the applicant Capt. R. Khosla
[Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)]
Hkkjr dk jkti= % vDrwcj 13] 2012@vkf'ou 21] 1934
7591
of his own admission was an Ex. Air Force Officer and he
was having nearly 2700 hours of flying to his credit and he
was Master Green category and also holding civil flying
license (ALTP) and due to his hard work and accident free
flying he was given commendation letter besides higher
salary and perks. In this situation and in view of the evidence
on record it is difficult to hold that Capt. R. Khosla falls in
the category of "workman". It may be useful to point out
here that teachers as well as doctors who have done their
MD/MS have also not been held to be workmen. In AIR
1988 SC 1700, the teachers have not been held to be
"workmen" as their main function was not considered as
skilled manual work or technical work as education was in
the nature of a mission or a noble vocation. In 1997(75)
FLR 814, it was contended that the doctor is a workman as
the duties performed by a doctor are based on technical
skill. Refuting this argument, The Hon'ble Apex Court has
held that every work of technical nature which involves
technical skill does not give rise to relationship of employer
and employee. In the case of doctors, the concept of
fiduciary relationship between doctors and patients will be
obliterated if doctors are treated as "workmen". It was thus
held that "doctor" cannot claim the status of "workman"
as defined in Section 2(S) of the I.D. Act, 1947. The
reasoning of the Hon 'ble Apex Court given in these two
rulings apply with full force in the case at hand also where
the pilot apart from other duties performed by him as
mentioned above enjoys the relationship trust vis-a-vis
the passengers in the aircraft and the crew members. In
view of the totality of evidence brought on record in this
case, it is difficult to hold Capt. R. Khosla as "workman" as
defined under Section 2(S) of the I.D. Act, 1947.
18.
As Capt. R Khosla has been held to be not a
"workman" in this case, this Tribunal consequently does
not have the jurisdiction to try and adjudicate upon the
present reference.
19.
In any case, the services of Capt. R Khosla have
been terminated in this case by holding a domestic enquiry.
Despite my above mentioned findings I propose to deal
with this aspect as well in this judgment. According to the
management, the services of Capt. R. Khosla were
dispensed with though not required under the law after
holding a domestic enquiry on charges communicated to
him. Mr. Gaurav Kumar, Asstt. Manager of the management
in his evidence on affidavit has asserted that the enquiry
has been conducted in a fair, impartial and proper manner
by following the prescribed procedure and in accordance
with the principles of natural justice. The applicant was
given ample opportunities to participate and defend himself
in the enquiry. He participated in the enquiry and also cross-
examined the witnesses of the management produced
during the course of the enquiry. Thereafter, the enquiry
committee submitted its report wherein the charges were
found to be fully established against the applicant and
accordingly the services of Capt. R. Khosla were dispensed
with vide letter dated 16-07-1998 Ex. RW1/3.
Capt. R. Khosla on the other hand, finds various faults
in the conduct of the domestic enquiry and has contended
that impartial, fair and proper enquiry has not been held in
this case and he was not given opportunity to defend
himself and the enquiry had concluded in haste. According
to him, he was served with a memorandum of charges on
05-06-1998 and the charges were completely vague and
lacking in particulars regarding date, time, place, exact
language used and against whom and who had reported
the matter to the authorities. As such he asked for necessary
particulars vide his letter dated 6-06-1998. After the lapse
of two weeks he received letter dated 20-06-1998 which
according to him was second memorandum of charges.
Capt. R. Khosla alleges that the nature of charges had
been considerably enlarged from the memorandum dated
05-06-1998 though he had submitted his explanation to the
second show cause notice vide his letter dated 25-06-1998.
20.
The management has refuted this charge of the
applicant and has submitted that there was no enlargement
of the charges and the charges levelled were simply clarified.
Capt. R. Khosla has failed to satisfactorily show that there
was enlargement of charges. Capt. R. Khosla has further
alleged that vague charges were levelled against him of
using derogatory and abusive language against the
company and its seniors. A look at the charges framed in
this case would show that instead of telling the exact
offensive words used by Capt. R. Khosla he was conveyed
that he had used unparliamentarly language as mentioned
in the charge sheet. It can only be imagined that decency
would have prompted not to write the exact offensive words
used by Capt. R. Khosla against the company and its senior
officers. Capt. R. Khosla's complaint in this regard cannot
be attached much weight.
Another complaint of Capt. R. Khosla is that the case of
the management was presented by Mr. A.K. Trehan
Advocate whereas he was forced to defend himself
personally and he was not allowed representation by legal
counsel or any other qualified officer. Refuting this charge,
the management has contended that there was no
Advocate by the name of Mr. A.K. Trehan with the
management at the time of holding of the enquiry. The
legal officer of the management at that time was Mr. S.K.
Trehan and he never participated in the proceedings of the
enquiry committee. There is absolutely no acceptable
evidence on record to accept this charge of Capt. R. Khosla
that the management was represented by Mr. A.K. Trehan
Advocate.
Capt. R. Khosla has further alleged that Capt. GPS Grewal,
GM Operation (N) was made a member of the enquiry
committee even though he was extremely biased against
him and was personally responsible for issuing the letters
dated 05-06-1998 and 20-06-1998 containing the
memorandum of charges and also placed Capt. R. Khosla
under suspension and this has caused great prejudice to
him. In rebuttal to the same, the management witness has
7592
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 13, 2012/ASVINA 21, 1934
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
stated on oath that Capt. R. Khosla never objected to Capt.
GPS Grewal becoming a member of the enquiry committee
and so his allegations are after thought and concocted. It
is further asserted by the management that Capt. GPS Grewal
was not at all instrumental or consulted in arriving at the
final conclusion/decision. There is nothing on record to
show that the stand taken by the management is wrong
and as such the complaint of Capt. R. Khosla in this regard
cannot be attached weight.
Capt. R. Khosla has also alleged that statement of
only one witness was recorded and he was not allowed
opportunity to cross-examine the witness nor any
opportunity was given to him to produce his defence.
Refuting these charges, the management witness Mr.
Gaurav Kumar has stated on oath that the applicant had
himself cross-examined Capt. Romi Sharma and Mr. Sethi
during the enquiry. He has denied that the statement of
only one witness was recorded. It was further pointed out
that at the instance of Capt. R Khosla, Capt. Nilesh Guha
and Capt. Atul Mehta were required to appear for cross-
examination but for the reasons best known to Captn.
R. Khosla, he refused to cross-examine them. The statement
of the witnesses and their cross-examination have been
exhibit marked as part of Ex.R. W.1/4. It is asserted that the
enquiry committee never refused or declined any request
made by the applicant for making a statement or to examine
the witnesses in defence. The above levelled charges of
Capt. R. Khosla thus are also not borne out from the record.
21.
Capt. R. Khosla has also alleged that the findings
of the committee are perverse. This charge too cannot be
accepted as the findings of the committee are clearly based
on evidence lead in the domestic enquiry. Capt. R Khosla
has alleged that on a trival charge, punishment of dismissal
has been given to him. Capt. R Khosla was expected to
conduct in a responsible and dignified manner and a person
of his standing could not be expected to behave so loosely
and irresponsibly. His plea that for a trivial charge he was
given the punishment of dismissal is also not acceptable.
The punishment awarded to Capt. R. Khosla cannot be
said to be shockingly disproportionate to the charges
levelled and proved against him.
22.
In view of my above findings, Capt. R Khosla has
failed to prove his case. The claim filed by him in this case,
therefore, is dismissed as he is not entitled to any relief in
this case. The award is passed accordingly and the reference
sent by the Govt. of India is answered as such.
Dated : 07-09-2012
SATNAM SINGH, Presiding Officer
ubZ fnYyh] 14 flrEcj] 2012
dk-vk- 3124-—vkS|ksfxd fookn vf/kfu;e 1947 ¼1947
dk 14½ dh /kkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa] dsUnzh; ljdkj iatkc us'kuy
cSad ds izca/kra= ds lac) fu;kstdksa vkSj muds deZdkjksa
ds chp vuqca/k esa fufnZ"V vkS|ksfxd fookn esa dsUnzh; ljdkj vkS|ksfxd
vf/kdj.k@Je U;k;ky;] Ukkxiqj ds iapkV ¼lanHkZ la[;k
lhthvkbZVh@,uthih@179@2002½ dks izdkf'kr djrh gS] tks
dsUnzh;ljdkj dks 03&09&2012 dks izkIr gqvk FkkA
[la- ,y&12012@93@1998&vkbZ vkj ¼ch&II½]
'kh'k jke] vuqHkkx vf/kdkjh
New Delhi, the 14th September, 2012
S.O. 3124.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the
Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, the Central Government
hereby published the Award (Ref. No. CGIT/NGP/179/2002)
of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal/Labour
Court, Nagpur now as shown in the Annexure in the
Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the
management Punjab National Bank and their workman,
which was received by the Central Government on
03-09-2012.
[ No. L-12012/93/1998-IR(B-II)]
SHEESH RAM, Section Officer
ANNEXURE
BEFORE SHRI J.P.CHAND, PRESIDING OFFICER,
CGIT-CUM-LABOUR COURT, NAGPUR
Case No. CGIT/NGP/179/2002
Date : 28-08-2012.
Party No. 1
:
The Regional Manager,
Punjab National Bank,
Kingsway, Nagpur
Versus
Party No. 2
:
Shri Yashwant Natthuji Meshram
Rio. Hiwri Lay out, 478-Bagadganj,
Nagpur-440 008.
AWARD
(Dated: 28th August, 2012)
In exercise of the powers conferred by clause (d) of
sub-section (1) and sub-section 2(A) of Section 10 of
Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947) (“the Act” in
short), the Central Government had referred the industrial
dispute between the employers, in relation to the
management of Punjab National Bank and their workman,
Shri Yashwant Meshram, to the Central Government
Industrial Tribunal- Cum-Labour Court, Jabalpur for
adjudication, as per letter No.L-12012/93/98-IR (B-II) dated
20-10-1998, with the following schedule:—
“Whether the action of the management of Punjab
National Bank in dismissing the services of Shri Y.N.
Meshram vide their order dated 24-04-1997 is legal &
justified? If not, to what relief the workman is entitled?”
Subsequently, the case was transferred to this Tribunal
for adjudication, in accordance with law.
[Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)]
Hkkjr dk jkti= % vDrwcj 13] 2012@vkf'ou 21] 1934
7593
2. On receipt of the reference, the parties were noticed
to file their respective statement of claim and written
statement and accordingly, the workman, Shri Y .N.
Meshram, (‘the workman” in short), filed the statement of
claim and the management of Punjab National Bank, (“Party
No. 1” in short) filed its written statement.
The case of the workman as projected in the
statement of claim is that he belongs to schedule caste
community and he came to be appointed as a clerk-
cum-cashier, after his due selection by the Banking
Service Recruitment Board, in Punjab National Bank,
Nagpur on 01-12-1984 and after completion of his
probation period, he was confirmed in the services in
the month of June, 1985 and in 1994, he was transferred
to Hanuman Nagar Branch, Nagpur. It is further pleaded
by the workman that the service conditions of the
employees of the Bank are governed by the Bi-partite
settlements and prior to 1997, there was no prohibition
for the bank employees for participating in politics in
any shape or form and also for contesting elections to
legislative or other bodies and therefore, he contested
the election for the post of corporator to the local body
of City Municipal Corporation, Nagpur from Vardhaman
Nagar ward and was elected as a corporator and after
he was being elected as a corporator, the party no. 1
served a charge sheet on him on 03-03-1992 for
commission of the misconduct, under clauses 19.7 and
19.7 (e) of the Bipartite settlement, on the allegation of
his participating and contesting the election to the local
bodies and a departmental enquiry was conducted
against him for the said charges and on the basis of the
enquiry report submitted by the enquiry officer, he was
punished with stoppage of four increments with
cumulative effect, vide order dated 13-07-1994 of party
no. 1 and on 22-09-1994, he sent a representation to
party no. 1 informing that he is a sitting corporator of
city Municipal Corporation, Nagpur and want to
contest the forthcoming election for Legislative
Assembly, either independently or with cooperation of
any political party and asked for permission for
contesting the election to the Legislative Assembly to
be held in 1994 and in response to his letter seeking
permission to contest the election for legislative
Assembly, party no. 1 vide letter dated 05-12-1994
informed him that in view of the staff department
circulars No. 788 dated 03-04-1970, Personnel Division
Circular No. 308 dated 21-12-1977 and 1376, dated
26-04-1993, he cannot be permitted to contest the
election for Legislative Assembly and violation of the
said guidelines, instructions would carry disciplinary
action in terms of the Bank’s rules and due to refusal of
permission by the party no. 1, neither he contested the
election nor took part in political activities, but, on 07-
12-1994, he was served with a charge sheet alleging
that he was indulging in politics without permission of
the Bank and letter dated 22-09-1994 submitted by him
for permission to contest the State Legislative
Assembly election indicates that he is still interested
in active political activities, which amounts to gross
misconduct under clause 19.5 (e) of the Bipartite
settlement for willful insubordination and disobedience of
any lawful and reasonable orders of the management and
he was directed to submit his explanation within seven
days showing cause as to why suitable disciplinary action
would not be initiated against him and he submitted his
reply to the charges vide letter dated 22-12-1994, starting
that simply seeking permission to contest the election to
Legislative Assembly does not constitute any misconduct
nor he has committed any misconduct, but without taking
into consideration of the said reply, the party no- 1 decided
to hold a departmental enquiry against him and intimated
him about the same vide order dated 04-04-1996 and
appointed Shri K.R. Palsodkar as the enquiry officer and
the departmental enquiry was posted to 31-05-1996, but
the same was adjourned from 31-05-1996 to 10-06-1996 and
10-06-1996 to 18-06-1996 on his request, but as he was not
intimated about the date of hearing of 18-06-1996, he could
not able to attend the enquiry on 18-06-1996 and it appears
that the enquiry was adjourned from 18-06-1996 to
27-06-1996, without giving him any information or notice
about the same and since, he did not receive any
information about the date of hearing of 27-06-1996, he
could not attend the enquiry and from the proceedings, it
appears that on 27-06-1996, the presenting officer presented
the prosecution case, in his absence and the next date of
hearing was fixed to 08-07-1996 and the enquiry was
adjourned from 08-07-1996 to 22-07-1996 and from
22-07-1996 to 03-08-1996 and due to want of information,
he did not attend the enquiry on 08-07-1996 and
22-07-1996, but he attended the enquiry on 03-08-1996 and
he was informed that management had already closed their
case on 22-07-1996 and he was directed to submit his
defence and on his prayer, the case was adjourned to
26-08-1996 and on 26-08-1996, he submitted his defence
stating that simply seeking permission for contesting the
election to Legislative Assembly does not constitute
“misconduct” and therefore, the charges levelled against
him are vague, improper and illegal and therefore, he should
be exonerated from the charges and he also submitted his
written argument on 26-08-1996 and the enquiry officer
submitted the enquiry report to the disciplinary authority
with the finding of the charge to have been proved against
him.
It is further pleaded by the workman that for contesting
the election in 1992 for the post of corporator, penalty of
stoppage of four increments with cumulative effect had
been imposed against him, vide order dated 13-07-1994
and vide his letter dated 22-09- 1994, he had requested for
permission to contest the election to State Legislative
Assembly and simply seeking permission to contest the
election does not constitute misconduct, under clause 19.05
(e) of the Bipartite settlement and therefore, the charge
was vague and the findings of the enquiry officer were not
only contrary to the provisions contained in clause 19.05
(e) of the Bipartite settlement, but also, perverse and the
same was not based on any material evidence and the
7594
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 13, 2012/ASVINA 21, 1934
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
disciplinary authority without going through the charge
sheet and provision of clause 19.05 (e) of the Bipartite
settlement and with predetermination to dismiss him from
services, on 19-04-1997 sent a letter intimating him that as
per the Bipartite settlement, there is no provision for taking
assistance of lawyer for attending personal hearing and he
was given a final chance for personal hearing in the matter
and for submission of his explanation on 22-04-1997 and
on 22-04-1997, he submitted his show cause before the
disciplinary authority in response to the show cause notice
issued by the bank, but the disciplinary authority without
going through the documents of the enquiry proceedings
and provisions contained in the Bipartite settlement,
imposed the punishment of “dismissal without notice” on
24-04-1997 and the appeal preferred by him was also
dismissed by the appellate authority vide order dated
29-09-1998 and the order dated 24-04-1997 dismissing him
without notice is bad and illegal and liable to be set aside
and for contesting the post of corporator in Municipal
Corporation, Nagpur, he had been punished with stoppage
of four increments with cumulative effect and therefore,
imposing a punishment for the same charges constitute a
case of double jeopardize and on that ground also, the
order of dismissal is liable to be set aside and the
management did not produce any witness to prove the
charges and failed to establish the charges and the
procedure adopted by the enquiry officer in permitting the
presenting officer to become a witness on behalf of the
management is unprocedural and was an act of biasness
and he was not given any chance to produce his defence
evidence and the enquiry was conducted by violating the
principles of natural justice and the enquiry was vitiated
and the documents, basing on which the charges were
framed were not supplied to him and the punishment
imposed is malafide and illegal. The workman has prayed
to set aside the order of dismissal dated 24-04- 1997 and to
reinstate him in service with full back wages.
3. The party no- 1 in their written statement have pleaded
inter-alia that the workman came to be appointed through
banking service recruitment board in the capacity of clerk-
cum-cashier w.e.f. 01-12-1984 and there was general
prohibition in the matter of contesting election and taking
an active part in politics by the Bank employees apart from
Bank’s specific circulars. Personnel Division circular no-
308 dated 21-12-77 and Staff Department circular no- 788
dated 03-07-1970 and the workman contested the election
for the post of corporator and continued as such for a
period of five years from 1992 and the workman was issued
with the charge sheet on 03-03-1992 alleging that he
participated in politics and contested the election of the
Local bodies constituting misconduct under clauses 19.7
and 19.5 (e) of the Bipartite Settlement and for the said
charges the departmental enquiry was initiated and on the
basis of the enquiry report submitted by the enquiry officer,
punishment of stoppage of four increments with cumulative
effect was passed against the workman vide order dated
13-07-1994 and on 22-09-1994, the workman informed the
management that he is a sitting corporator of Nagpur
Municipal corporation and he also sought permission to
contest the Legislative Assembly Election either
independently or with cooperation of political party and
the submission of the representation dated 22-09-1994 itself
was sufficient to establish that the workman was in active
politics, as he was a sitting corporator on the day of
representation dated 22-09-1994 and since the workman
was a sitting corporator, he was actively involved in political
activities and the workman was issued with charge sheet
dated 07-12-1994 on the allegation that he was indulging in
politics without permission of the management and the
application submitted by the workman for permission to
contest the election to Legislative Assembly election
indicated that he was still interested in active political
activities amounting to gross misconducts under clause
19-5 (e) of the Bipartite Settlement and the workman
submitted his reply on 22-12-1994 and after considering
his reply, the departmental enquiry was ordered and the
enquiry was fixed to 31-05-1996 and on that date, the
workman remained absent not for the reason that he was
out of station, but on the ground that the documents of the
enquiry were in English language and he is unable to
understand English language and such facts were intimated
by him by his letter dated 30-05-1996 and the workman also
remained absent on 10-06-1996 to which date the enquiry
was adjourned, on the ground of the marriage of his brother
and the workman by his letter dated 08-06-1996, had
requested for adjournment of the enquiry proceedings, so
the enquiry was adjourned to 18-06-1996 and a copy of the
proceeding was sent to the workman for his record, but on
18-06-1996 also, the workman remained absent in the enquiry
and telephonically requested the enquiry officer to adjourn
the enquiry on the ground of non-receipt of the copies of
the enquiry proceedings dated 10-06-1996 and due to such
request, the enquiry officer adjourned the enquiry to
27-06-1996 and the workman consented to that date on the
telephone itself and the proceedings of the enquiry were
sent to the workman and as on 27-06-1996 also, the workman
remained absent, the enquiry officer decided to go ahead
with the departmental enquiry against the workman and
the presenting officer on 27-06-1996 presented his case in
absence of the workman and the date of hearing was fixed
to 08-07-1996 and on 08-07-1996 also, the workman did not
attend the enquiry and made a written request to adjourn
the enquiry on the ground of his attending the general
meeting of Nagpur Municipal corporation, which was to
be held on 08-07-1996 itself and over phone, the workman
requested to fix the next date of the enquiry to 22-07-1996
and as per the request made by the workman, the enquiry
proceedings were adjourned to 22-07-1996 and on
22-07-1996, the workman attended the enquiry and
requested for time to collect documents to be submitted in
[Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)]
Hkkjr dk jkti= % vDrwcj 13] 2012@vkf'ou 21] 1934
7595
his defence, so the enquiry officer adjourned the enquiry
to 03-08-1996 for submission of documents in defence and
on 03-08-1996, the workman presented a list of documents
and the enquiry was then adjourned to 19-08-1996 and
19-08-1996, the workman did not submit his defence as
agreed, so the enquiry was adjourned to 26-08-1996 and on
26-08-1996, the workman attended the enquiry and
submitted his statement in his defence and the enquiry
was completed on 26-08-1996 and with the consent of both
the parties, the enquiry was closed and vide disciplinary
authority’s order dated 13-07-1994, the workman was
advised to refrain from taking part in politics and political
activities with immediate effect and he committed breach
of the direction given by the competent authority and
therefore, he was issued with the charge sheet dated
07-12-1994 and the misconduct alleged against the workman
was not that he sought permission to contest the election,
but the charge was that the workman remained in active
politics by keeping the post of corporator and therefore,
the charge sheet was issued and the charge sheet was not
at all vague and the enquiry was conducted in accordance
with the principles of natural justice and as per the Bipartite
settlement, there is no provision to allow the workman to
be assisted by a lawyer, while giving personal hearing on
the issue of punishment and the punishment order was
passed against the workman after considering the service
record, extenuating the aggravating circumstances of the
enquiry proceedings and the punishment of dismissal as
per order dated 24-04-1997 does not amount to double
jeopardy and the earlier charge against the workman was
about contesting the election of Nagpur Municipal
Corporation, Nagpur and the charge dated 07.12. 1994 was
that the workman remained in active politics inspite of
instructions given to him by higher authorities and the
charges levelled against the workman were very much clear
and differ from each other and no fault can be found with
the enquiry proceedings, if no witness was examined in
support of the case and the documentary evidence was
sufficient to establish the charges against the workman
and the presenting officer was not examined as a witness
and he merely apprised the enquiry officer about the
documentary evidence on record and closed the case of
the management and the enquiry proceedings were sent to
the workman from time to time, where in, the next dates of
the enquiry were mentioned specifically and the final
outcome of the enquiry was after the participation of the
workman and the charges against the workman have been
established on the basis of the documentary evidence and
the workman never applied for or made a request to the
enquiry officer to allow him to bring his witness and he
was supplied with the relevant documents and he did not
demand any document during the course of the enquiry
and full opportunity was given to him to defend himself
and the workman is not entitled to any relief.
4. As this is a case of dismissal of the workman from
services, after holding a departmental enquiry, the validity
of the departmental enquiry was taken as a preliminary
issue for consideration and by order dated 07-09-2011, the
departmental enquiry was held to be legal, proper and in
accordance with the principles of natural justice.
5. At the time of argument, it was submitted by the
learned advocate for the workman that after the appointment
of the workman as a clerk-cum-cashier on 01-12-1984, he
was working sincerely and honestly without any stigma in
his service record and his services were appreciated by the
authorities of the Bank and in 1992, the workman contested
the election of Nagpur Municipal Corporation and was
elected as a corporator and the Bank issued a charge sheet
against him for the same and after enquiry, punishment of
stoppage of four increments with cumulative effect was
imposed against him by order dated 13-07-1994 and on
22-09-1994, the workman submitted an application seeking
permission to contest the Legislative Assembly election,
but such permission was not given by the Bank and Bank
intimated the workman about such refusal vide letter dated
05-12-1994 and as permission was not accorded, the
workman did not contest the election, but to the surprise
of the workman, a charge sheet was issued against him on
07-12-1994, on the allegation of taking part in active politics
without permission of the Bank and disobedience of any
lawful and reasonable orders of the management amounting
to gross misconduct under clause 19.5 (e) of the Bipartite
settlement and the workman submitted his reply on
22-12-1994 stating that simply seeking permission to contest
the election does not constitute any misconduct and the
workman did not commit any misconduct by expressing
his desire to do an act, which was not forbidden by any law
and he was already warned by the Bank that in case of
contesting the Assembly Election, disciplinary action would
be taken against him and since, he was warned, he did not
contest the election, so there was no question of
commission of the misconduct, for which punishment of
dismissal from service was imposed against him and the
punishment of dismissal from services is too harsh and
disproportionate to the gravity of the misconduct and he
had already been given the punishment of warning of
initiation of disciplinary action, in case of contesting the
election and imposition of punishment of dismissal from
services again is double jeopardy and the punishment is
illegal and the workman is entitled to reinstatement in
service with continuity and full back wages.
6. Per contra, it was submitted by the learned advocate for
the management that there was general prohibition in the
matter of contesting election and taking active part in politics
by the Bank employee apart from Bank’s specific circulars,
Staff Department Circular No. 788 dated 03-04-1970 and
Personnel Division Circular No. 308 dated 21-12-1977 and
inspite of such prohibition, the workman contested the
election for the post of corporator of Nagpur Municipal
7596
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 13, 2012/ASVINA 21, 1934
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
Corporation and was elected as a corporator and for that a
charge sheet dated 03.03.1992 under clause 19.7 and 19.5
(e) of the Bipartite settlement was submitted against him
on the allegation of his participation in politics and
contesting the election of the local bodies and for the said
charges, a departmental enquiry was initiated and on the
basis of the enquiry report, punishment of stoppage of
four increments with cumulative effect was imposed against
him and he was directed by the competent authority to
restrain himself to take part in political activities with
immediate effect, as per order dated 13-07-1994 and inspite
of such direction, the workman submitted an application
on 22-09-1994 seeking permission to contest the election
to the Legislative Assembly intimating that he was still
continuing as a corporator of Nagpur Municipal
Corporation and the Bank refused such permission and
intimated the workman about such refusal vide letter dated
05-12-1994 with further instruction that in case of contesting
the election, disciplinary action would be taken against
him and the charge sheet dated 07-12-1994 submitted
against the workman was not for seeking permission to
contest the election to the Legislative Assembly, but for
the reason that he was actively involved in politics by
remaining as a corporator of Nagpur Municipal Corporation
in disobedience of the direction issued by the competent
authority to restrain himself from active politics and the
charge was well proved against him in the departmental
enquiry by production of documentary evidence and the
fairness of the departmental enquiry has already been
answered in favour of the Bank and the findings of the
enquiry officer are based on the evidence produced in the
enquiry and the same are not perverse and there is no
question of any double jeopardy and the punishment
imposed against the workman is not shockingly
disproportionate and there is no ground to interfere with the
punishment and the workman is not entitled to any relief.
7. On perusal of the materials on record including the
charge sheet dated 07-12-1994, it is found that the charge
sheet submitted against the workman was not for seeking
permission for contesting the Legislative Assembly
Election, but for willful in subordination and disobedience
of lawful and reasonable order of the management, on the
allegation that though by order dated 13-07-1994, he was
advised to refrain from taking part from political activities
with immediate effect, he did not desist from taking part in
political activities. The charge levelled against the workman
were not vague and the same was very specific.
It is also found that the representing officer appointed
by the Bank in the departmental enquiry was not examined
as a witness in the enquiry, but he presented the case of
the management and explained as to how the documents
produced prove the misconduct against the workman. It is
also found that the findings of the enquiry officer are based
on the evidence produced in the enquiry and he has
assigned reasons in support of his findings. In his show
cause, the workman has admitted about his continuance
as a corporator of Nagpur Municipal Corporation, inspite
of the order of punishment imposed against him by order
dated 13.07.1994 and the instruction of the Bank to refrain
from active political activities. Hence, the findings of the
enquiry officer cannot be said to be perverse. Intimation as
given by the Bank to the workman about facing of
disciplinary action in case of contesting the election for
Legislative Assembly cannot be said to be a punishment
for any misconduct, so there is no question of any double
jeopardy against the workman. The punishment of
dismissal from services has been imposed against the
workman for commission of grave misconduct, which
has been proved against him in a properly conducted
departmental enquiry. The punishment imposed
against the workman cannot be said to be shockingly
disproportionate, calling for any interference. From the facts
and circumstances of the case and the discussions made
above, it is found that there is no force in the contentions
raised by the learned advocate for the workman. Hence, it
is ordered :—
ORDER
The action of the management of Punjab National Bank
in dismissing the services of Shri Y. N. Meshram vide their
order dated 24.04.1997 is legal and justified. The workman
is not entitled to any relief.
J. P. CHAND, Presiding Officer
ubZ fnYyh] 14 flrEcj] 2012
dk-vk-3125-—vkS|ksfxd fookn vf/kfu;e] 1947 ¼1947 dk
14½ dh /kkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnzh; ljdkj ;wdks cSad ds izca/kra=
ds lac) fu;kstdksa vkSj muds deZdkjksa ds chp vuqca/k esa fufnZ"V
vkS|ksfxd fookn esa dsUnzh; ljdkj vkS|ksfxd vf/kdj.k@Je U;k;ky;]
ukxiqj ds iapkV ¼lanHkZ la[;k lhthvkbZVh@,uthih@87@2003½ dks
izdkf'kr djrh gS tks dsUnzh; ljdkj dks 03-09-2012 dks izkIr gqvk
FkkA
[la- ,y&12012@40@1994&vkbZvkj ¼ch&II½]
'kh'k jke] vuqHkkx vf/kdkjh
New Delhi, the 14th September, 2012
S.O. 3125 .—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial
Disputes Act, 1947, the Central Government hereby
publishes the Award (Ref. No. CGIT/NGP/87/2003) of the
Central Government Industrial Tribunal/Labour Court,
Nagpur now as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial
Dispute between the employers in relation to the
management of UCO Bank and their workman, which was
received by the Central Government on 03.09.2012.
[No. L-12012/40/1994-IR(B-II)]
SHEESH RAM, Section Officer
[Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)]
Hkkjr dk jkti= % vDrwcj 13] 2012@vkf'ou 21] 1934
7597
ANNEXURE
BEFORE SHRI J.P. CHAND. PRESIDING
OFFICER, CGIT -CUM-LABOUR COURT,
NAGPUR
CASE No. CGIT/NGP/87/2003 DATE : 30.08.2012
Party No. 1:
The Divisional Manager,
UCO Bank, Divisional Office, 108,
Sushil Bhavan,
Balraj Marg, Dhantoli,
Nagpur-4400 12.
Versus
Party No. 2
Shri Sudesh Damari Saha,
C/o. Shri D.K. Badola, New Majri
Colliery, PO : Shivajinagar,
Distt. Chandrapur (MS)
AWARD
(Dated: 30th August, 2012)
In exercise of the powers conferred by clause (d) of
sub- section (1) and sub-section 2 (A) of Section 10 of
Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947) ("the Act" in
short), the Central Government had referred the industrial
dispute between the employers, in relation to the
management of UCO Bank and their workman, Shri Sudesh
Damari Saha, for adjudication to CGIT-Cum-Labour Court,
Jabalpur as per letter No. L-12012/40/94-IR (B-II) dated
28-04-1994, with the following schedule :—
"Whether the action of the management of UCO Bank,
New Majri Branch in terminating the service of Shri
Sudesh Damari Saha, temporary sub-staff w.e.f.
21-11-91 is justified? If not, what relief is the said
workman entitled to?"
Subsequently, the case was transferred to this Tribunal
for adjudication, in accordance with law.
2. On receipt of the reference, the parties were noticed
to file their respective statement of claim and written
statement and accordingly, the workman, shri Sudesh Saha,
('the workman" in short), filed the statement of claim and
the management of UCO Bank, ("Party No.1" in short) filed
its written statement.
The case of the workman as projected in the statement
of claim is that the party no. 1 is a nationalized bank and the
service conditions of the employees are governed by the
provisions of Bipartite Settlements and the circulars issued
from the Head office to regulate the provisions of service
conditions, which could not be covered in the Bipartite
settlement and vide circular no. CHO/PAS/4/90 dated
31-03-1990, Head office of the Bank made it clear that
persons who are engaged on daily wage basis in the
branches would be absorbed in permanent employment of
the Bank depending upon the workload of the Branch and
he was initially appointed on 26-07-1989 @ Rs. 15/- per day
at New Majri Branch and worked as such till 20-11-1991,
the date on which he was illegally terminated by party
no. 1 and he was not paid wages for Sundays and Holidays
and was put to hard labour beyond office hours and he
was removed from employment without assigning any
reason and after his removal, another daily wager came to
be appointed and as he was unauthorisedly and illegally
terminated from services, he raised an industrial dispute
before the ALC (C), Chandrapur and before the ALC, the
party no.1 took the plea that though there is an agreement
under Section 2 (p) of the Act between the union and the
management to absorb all the persons, who are working on
daily wages, the workman could not be absorbed, as he
had not applied for the same and he did not know about
the said settlement and the Manager of New Majri Branch
had also not intimated him about such settlement and he
had submitted number of applications for permanent
appointment and as such, party no.1 is precluded from
taking such a plea and as he worked continuously with
party no. 1 for 28 months from 26-07-1989 to 20-11-1991,
which has been admitted by party no. 1, he is entitled to be
absorbed in the Bank permanently as a peon.
The further case of the workman is that the party no.1
did not enter his name in the muster roll, although
admittedly he worked for the period from 26-07-1989 to
20-11-1991 and the said Act is in violation of Section 25-D
of the Act and even if, it is presumed that there is a
procedure for appointment, it was the duty of party no. 1 to
inform him about the said procedure and to get the
formalities completed, but by not doing so, the party no. 1
adopted an illegal procedure of terminating him from
services, hence the impugned termination is liable to be
quashed and set aside.
The workman has prayed to quash and set aside the
order dated 20.11.1991 and to reinstate him in service with
continuity and full back wages.
3. The party no. 1 in their written statement have pleaded
inter-alia that the circular dated 31-03-1990 was in relation
to the absorption of the persons working on daily wages
basis in permanent employment of UCO Bank, but the
workman was never appointed as an employee by them at
any point of time, so there was no question of issuing any
order of termination and there was no relation of employer
and employee between them and the workman. The further
case of the party no. 1 is that the workman was doing the
work of cleaning, sweeping and dusting etc. in the branch,
for about two to three hours per day and not more than
that and he was being paid for the work done by him and
the payment was not on account of salary as contended
and as the workman was not an employee of the Bank,
there was no question of paying wages for Sundays and
Holidays and the workman does not fall within the scope
and ambit of the entitlement fIxed by the settlements dated
31-03-1990 and the present proceeding is not maintainable
and the workman is not entitled for any relief.
7598
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 13, 2012/ASVINA 21, 1934
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
4. Besides placing reliance on documentary evidence,
both the parties led oral evidence in support of their
respective claims.
The workman has examined himself as a witness in
support of his claim. The examination-in-chief of the
workman is on affidavit. In his examination-in-chief, the
workman has reiterated the facts mentioned in the statement
of claim.
In the cross-examination, though several questions
have been put to the workman regarding the hours for
which he was working in the bank and about the wages
paid to him, no challenge was made regarding his evidence
that he worked continuously in New Majri Branch of the
Bank from 26-07-1989 to 20-11-1991. It is necessary to
mention here that in the written statement also, party no. 1
have not denied the claim of the workman that he worked
continuously from 26-07-1989 to 20-11-1991.
One Deepak Gangaram Hadekar has been examined as a
witness on behalf of party no. l. In his examination-in-chief,
which is on affidavit, this witness has reiterated the facts
mentioned in the written statement. However, in the cross-
examination, this witness has admitted that when the
workman was engaged in the New Majri Branch, he was
not working in the said branch and he was also not working
in the said branch, when the services of the workman was
terminated.
5. At the time of argument, it was submitted by the
learned advocate for the workman that it is clear from the
evidence on record and the pleadings of the parties that
the workman worked continuously from 26-07-1989 till
20-11-1991 at New Majri Branch of the Bank on daily wages
and though the Bank formulated a policy to regularize all
the daily wagers in permanent employment, the workman
was not regularized and there are vacancies of the post of
peons in the Bank and without compliance of the mandatory
provisions of the Act, the workman was terminated from
services on 20-11-1991 and as such, the termination is illegal
and the workman is entitled for reinstatement in service
with continuity and full back wages.
6. Per contra, it was submitted by the learned advocate
for the party no. 1 that the workman was never appointed
as an employee of the Bank and as such, there is no
question of termination of the workman and there was no
relationship of employer and employee between the Bank
and the workman and the workman was engaged for doing
the working cleaning, sweeping and dusting etc. in the
branch for about 2 to 3 hours daily and he was paid for the
work done by him and as the workman was never an
employee of the Bank, there was no question of his illegal
termination from services and the engagement of the
workman was not in accordance with the norms and
procedure prescribed by the Bank for appointment in the
Bank and such engagement was done by the Branch
Manager, who had no authority to do so and as such, the
workman has no right to seek regularisation in service and
the workman is not entitled to any relief.
In support of such contentions, the learned advocate
for the party no. 1 has relied on the decision reported in
AIR 2006 SC-1806 (Secretary, State of Karnataka & Others
Vs. Umadevi & Others).
7. The workman has claimed that as per circular No.
CHO/PAS/4/90 dated 31-03-1990, he is entitled for
absorption in permanent employment in the Bank. The party
no.1 has pleaded that the said circular has no application
to the case of the workman. In view of such denial, the
burden was upon the workman to show that he was entitled
for absorption permanently as per the circular mentioned
above. However, the workman neither produced nor proved
the said circular to show that he was entitled for absorption
in permanent employment in the Bank. Hence, it is held
that the workman has failed to prove that he is entitled for
absorption in permanent employment of the Bank, on the
basis of circular dated 31-03-1990.
8. The further case of the workman is that though he
worked from 26-07-1989 to 20-11-1991 continuously at New
Majri Branch of the Bank at the rate of Rs. 15 per day, he
was removed from employment by the Manager without
assigning any reason and as such, the termination of his
services was illegal. Party no.1 has denied the claim of the
workman. According to party no.1, the workman was
engaged by the Manager of the Branch for two to three
hours per day to do the work of cleaning, sweeping and
dusting etc. and the workman was never an employee of
the Bank and there was no relationship of employer and
employee between them and the workman, so there was no
question of termination of the services of the workman.
9. At this juncture, I think it apposite to mention that
the decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court as reported in AIR
2006 SC-1806 (Supra) is in regard to public employment
and the Hon’ble Apex Court have held that, "Appointment
dehers due process of selection envisaged by constitutional
scheme confers no right on appointee." However, the issue
of termination of the services of an employee in violation
of the mandatory provisions of section 25-F of the Act was
not for consideration before the Hon’ble Apex Court in the
said decision. Hence, with respect, I am of the view that the
decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court as reported in AIR
2006 SC-1806 (Supra) has no application to the present
case in hand.
10. Section 2 (s) of the Act defines the term "Workman".
It is well settled by a number of decisions of the Hon’ble
Apex Court that Section 2 (s) of the Act contains an
exhaustive definition of the term "workman" and the source
of employment, the method of recruitment, the terms and
conditions of employment/contract of service, the quantum
of wages/pay and the mode of payment are not at all
relevant for deciding whether or not a person is a workman
[Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)]
Hkkjr dk jkti= % vDrwcj 13] 2012@vkf'ou 21] 1934
7599
within the meaning of section 2 (s) of the Act and the
definition of workman also does not make any distinction
between full time and part time employee or a person
appointed on contract basis and there is nothing in the
plain language of section 2 (s) from which it can be inferred
that only a person employed on a regular basis or a person
employed for doing whole time job is a workman and the
one employed on temporary, part time or contract basis on
fixed wages or as a casual employee or for doing duty for
fixed hours is not a workman.
It is also well settled by the Hon'ble Apex Court that
even daily rated worker is entitled to the protection of
section 25-F of the Act, if he had worked continuously for
a period of one year or more.
11. In the case in hand, it is not disputed by the party
no. 1 that the workman worked on daily wages from
26-07-1989 to 20-11-1991. It is clear from the materials on
record that the workman worked for more than 240 days in
the preceding 12 calendar months of the date of termination
of his services i.e. 20-11-1991. So, the workman was entitled
for the protection of the provision of section 25-F of the
Act and he was entitled for one month's notice or one
month's pay in lieu of notice and retrenchment
compensation, before termination of his services.
Admittedly, the mandatory provisions of section 25-F of
the Act were not complied with by party no. 1, before
termination of the services of the workman and as such,
the termination of the services of the workman amounts
retrenchment. As the termination of the services of the
workman was done without compliance of the mandatory
provisions of section 25- F of the Act, the termination is
hold to be illegal.
12. Now, the only question remains for consideration is
as to what relief or reliefs the workman is entitled.
From the materials on record, it is clear that the
engagement of the workman by party no. 1 was purely on
daily wages basis and such engagement was not in
accordance with the norms. and prescribed procedure of
appointment in the Bank of party no.l. The engagement of
the workman as daily wager by party no. 1 was on
26-07-1989. His engagement continued for about two years
and four months i.e. up to 20-11-1991.
Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances
of the present case in hand, I think it apropos to mention
about the decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court reported in
2010(8) SCALE-583 (Incharge Officer and Another Vs.
Shankar Shetty), which is squarely applicable to this case.
In the said decision, the Hon’ble Apex Court have held
that,
"Industrial Disputes Act 1947/Section 25F /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 up to 06-09-85/ Respondent raised
industrial dispute relating to his retrenchment alleging
violation of procedure prescribed in sec. 25(F) of the
Act/Labour Court rejected respondents claim: holding
that section 25(F) of the Act was not attracted since the
workman failed to prove that he had worked
continuously for 40 days in the calendar year preceding
his termination 06-09-85. On appeal, High Court directed
reinstatement of Respondent into service holding that
termination of respondent was illegal-Whether an order
of reinstatement will automatically follow in a case where
engagement of a daily 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 year intermittently up to 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 rupees one lakh (Rs. 1,00,000) in lieu
of reinstatement shall be appropriate, just and
equitable".
The principles enunciated by the Hon’ble Apex Court
as mentioned above are squarely applicable to the present
case at hand. Applying the said principles, it appears to me
that a relief of reinstatement is not justified in this case and
instead monetary compensation would meet the ends of
justice. In my considered opinion compensation of
Rs. 30,000/- (Rupees thirty thousand) in lieu of
reinstatement shall be appropriate, just an equitable. Hence
it is ordered.
ORDER
The action of the management of UCO Bank, New Majri
Branch in terminating the service of Shri Sudesh Damari
Saha, temporary sub-staff w.e.f. 21-11-91 is unjustified. The
workman is entitled for monetary compensation of
Rs. 30,000 in lieu of reinstatement. He is not entitled for any
other relief.
The party no.1 is directed to pay the compensation of
Rs. 30,000 to the workman within one month from the date
of Publication of the award in the official gazette.
J. P. CHAND, Presiding Officer
ubZ fnYyh] 14 flrEcj] 2012
dk-vk-3126-—vkS|ksfxd fookn vf/kfu;e] 1947 ¼1947 dk
14½ dh /kkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUæh; ljdkj Hkkjrh; thou chek
fuxe ds izca/kr= ds lac) fu;kstdksa vkSj muds deZdkjksa ds chp
vuqca/k esa fufnZ"V vkS|ksfxd fookn esa dsUæh; ljdkj
vkS|ksfxd vf/kdj.k@Je U;k;ky;] ukxiqj ds iapkV ¼lanHkZ la[;k
lhthvkbZVh@,uthih@324@2000½ dks izdkf'kr djrh gS] tks dsUæh;
ljdkj dks 03&09&2012 dks izkIr gqvk FkkA
[la- ,y&17012@28@1995&vkbZ vkj ¼ch&II)]
'kh'k jke] vuqHkkx vf/kdkjh
7600
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 13, 2012/ASVINA 21, 1934
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
New Delhi, the 14th September, 2012
S.O. 3126.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial
Disputes Act, 1947, (14 of 1947), the Central Government
hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. CGIT/NGP/324/2000)
of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal/Labour
Court, NAGPUR now as shown in the Annexure in the
Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the
management of LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION OF
INDIA and their workman, which was received by the
Central Government on 03-09-2012.
[No. L-17012/28/1995-IR(B-II)]
SHEESH RAM, Section Officer
ANNEXURE
BEFORE SHRI J.P. CHAND. PRESIDING OFFICER,
CGIT -CUM-LABOUR COURT. NAGPUR
CASE No. CGIT/NGP/324/2000
Date: 17-08-2012.
Party No. 1 :
The Divisional Officer,
Life Insurance Corporation of India,
Division Office, National Insurance
Bldg. S.V. Patel Road, P.B. No. 63,
Nagpur-440001.
Versus
Applicant :
Shri Valmik S/o. Shri Shivaji Bansod,
R/o. Chandre (Malipar), Tahsil and Distt.
Bhandara (Mahrashtra).
AWARD
(Dated: 17th August, 2012)
In exercise of the powers conferred by clause (d) of
sub- section (1) and sub-section 2 (A) of Section 10 of
Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947) ("the Act" in
short), the Central Goverment had referred the industrial
dispute to Central Govt. Industrial Tribunal cum Labour
Court, Jabalpur for adjudication, between the employers,
in relation to the management of Life Insurance Corporation
of India and their workman, Shri Valmik Bansod, as per
letter No. L-17012/28/95-IR (B-II) dated 04-03-1997, with
the following schedule :-
"Whether the action of the management of Life
Insurance Corporation, of India, Divisional Office,
Nagpur in terminating the services of Shri Valmik,
Development Officer, is proper, legal & justified? If not,
to what relief is the workman entitled?"
Subsequently, the case was transferred to this Tribunal
for adjudication in accordance with law.
2. On receipt of the reference, the parties were noticed
to file their respective statement of claim and written
statement and accordingly, the applicant, Shri Valmik
Bansod, ('the workman" in short), filed the statement of
claim and the management of Life Insurance Corporation
of India, ("Party No. 1" in short) filed their written statement.
The case of the applicant as presented in the statement
of claim is that he was appointed as a development officer
on 28-03-1988 as per the terms and conditions of
appointment of the Life Insurance Corporation of India
("LIC" in short) and initially, he was paid the stipend of
Rs. 1200 per month and during the period from 23-03-1988
to 25-05-1988 and 28-05-1988 to 28-06-1988, he completed
all the required trainings and on 28-06-1988, he was deputed
to look after the field work and Arjuni (Morgaon) was fixed
as his headquarters and Arjuni (Morgaon) was under the
jurisdiction of Lakhandur and Sakoli and he worked as a
probationary officer for a period of one year and he
achieved the business target given by party no. 1 during
the said period and he gave the best possible result to
party no. 1 and the original records of the business done
by him are in the custody and possession of party no. l and
the period from 01-10-1988 to 30-09-1989 was considered
as his probation period and even after completion of his
probation period, his performance was very satisfactory
and was as per the target/ estimates given by party no. 1
and he also achieved 100% business as per the estimate
given by party no. 1 and the Branch Manager of Sakoli
Branch made false representation and submitted false report
about his performance to party no. 1, as a result of which,
party no. 1 terminated his services w.e.f. 28-05-1990 and
during the period from 28-03-1988 to 28-05-1990, he had
competed more than 180 days of work, as required under
law and no show cause notice was issued before the
termination of his services and without giving him any
chance of hearing and without observing the principles of
natural justice, his services were terminated by party no. 1
and though he filed an appeal before the Zonal Manager,
his appeal was rejected by the Zonal Manager without
granting him any opportunity of being heard and the appeal
preferred by him on 29-08-1992 before the Chairman of LIC
was also rejected on 20-08-1994, without giving him any
chance of hearing and being aggrieved by such order, he
approached the Central Industrial Labour Commissioner,
Nagpur and at that time, he came to know that as per the
judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of S.K.Verma
Vs. Mahesh Chandra reported in AIR 1984 SC-1462,
Development Officers of LIC are coming under the definition
of "workmen", but in a full bench judgment of the Hon'ble
Apex Court reported in AIR 1994-2608, it was held that the
earlier judgment was a judgment of per incuriam and the
development officer does not come under the perview of
"workman" and he filed the writ petition bearing no. 2302/
96 before the Hon'ble Apex Court, Nagpur Bench for setting
aside the order passed on 19-09-1990 and he became a
victim of colourable exercise of power by party no.l.
The applicant has prayed for his reinstatement in service
with continuity and full back wages.
[Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)]
Hkkjr dk jkti= % vDrwcj 13] 2012@vkf'ou 21] 1934
7601
The party no. 1 in the written statement have pleaded
inter-alia that Life Insurance Corporation (Staff) Regulations
1960 (“the Regulations” in short) which govern the terms
and conditions of service of their employees are statutory
in nature and prevail over the provisions of the Act, in case
of any conflict relating to the terms and conditions of
employment and Regulation 14 of the Regulations provides
the procedure for appointment on probation and discharge
of the probationer from service without any notice, during
the period of probation and such termination based on
Regulation 14(4) has been upheld by the Hon'ble Apex
Court in the case of M. Venugopal, Divisional Manager
Vs. LIC reported in AIR 1994 SC 1343 and LIC & Anr.
Vs. Raghavendra Sheshagirirao Kulkarni, AIR 1998 SC-327
and the workman was appointed as a Development Officer
on probation w.e.f. 01-10-1988 vide letter dated 06-12-1988
and the appointment order shows that the probation period
of the applicant was initially for a period of 12 months,
which could be extended for a further period of 12 months
at the discretion of the corporation and the appointment of
the applicant as a probationary Development Officer was
governed by the Regulations and therefore, his termination
was excluded by Section 2 (oo) (bb) of the Act. The further
case of the party no. 1 is that the workman has filed writ
petition no. 2302/96 before the Hon'ble High Court, Nagpur
Bench, challenging the action of the corporation in
terminating his services by its order dated 19-09-1990 and
prayed for setting aside the said order and the petition was
admitted on 03-12-1997 and the writ petition is pending for
final disposal and in order to avoid any conflicting order
between the Hon'ble High Court and the Tribunal, the
reference was required to be rejected.
The further case of the party no. 1 is that the applicant
was initially appointed as an apprentice Development
Officer for a period of one year commencing from
28-03-1988 on a stipend of Rs. 1250 per month and after
completion of the apperenticeship, the applicant came to
be appointed as a probationary Development Officer w.e.f.
01-10-1988 vide letter dated 06-12-1988 and the performance
of the applicant was not satisfactory and he did not fulfill
the minimum performance norms set out for confirmation
as laid down in his appointment letter and as such, the
probation period was extended as a special case for a
further period of 12 months commencing from 01-10-1989
to 30-09-1990 and the statements as regard to the
achievement of the business target set out for the period
from 01-10-1989 to 30-09-1990 as mentioned in the statement
of claim are incorrect and the actual performance of the
applicant fell much short to the standard norms prescribed
and he was also given a notice informing him about his
poor performance and since the applicant failed to improve
his performance, in spite of the notice, his services came to
be terminated by order dated 19-09-1990, before the period
of the extended probationary period which was to be
expired on 30-09-1990 and such termination does not amount
to any punishment nor it does cast any stigma on the
probationer and as such, there was no requirement of giving
any opportunity to the applicant of being heard and the
appellate authority correctly declined to interfere with the
order of termination and they were justified in terminating
the services of the applicant in accordance with clause 14
(4) of the Regulations and the applicant is not entitled to
any relief.
4. Before delving into the merit of the matter, I think it
necessary to mention here that from the copy of the order
dated 05-02-2009, passed by the Hon'ble Court in writ
petition no. 2303/1996, it is found that the applicant was
allowed to withdraw the writ petition and the writ petition
was disposed of accordingly.
5. Besides placing reliance on documentary evidence,
both the parties adduced oral evidence in support of their
respective claims. The applicant has examined himself as a
witness in support of his case. One Jiban Gopal Maity was
examined as a witness on behalf of party no. 1.
6. In his examination-in-chief, which is on affidavit, the
applicant has reiterated the facts mentioned in the statement
of claim. However, in the cross-examination, the applicant
has admitted that he was appointed as a probationary
Development Officer, class-II and an appointment letter
Ext. M -I was issued by the LIC and he accepted the terms
and conditions mentioned in the appointment letter and
joined his duty and in paragraph 2 of his appointment letter,
it was mentioned that he shall be on probation for a period
of 12 months from the date of his joining duties as a
probationer and his probationary period can be extended
for not exceeding 24 months and he shall be liable to be
discharged from service of the corporation without any
notice and without any cause being assigned. The applicant
has further admitted that in paragraph 5 of his appointment
letter, his duties and obligations were mentioned and
according to paragraph 10 of his appointment letter, he
was to do minimum 50 Lacs competed Life Insurance
Business, 250 Life Insurance policies through the agents
recruited by him and the Senior Divisional Manager issued
the letter dated 05-01-1989, Ext. M-II regarding his
performance for the first year and he had received the said
letter and he did not give any reply to the said letter and as
he was not able to reach the minmum performance norms
set out by the corporation in the first year of his probation,
his probation period was extended as a special case for
another one year, as per letter dated, 21-11-1989 of the Sr.
Divisional Manager, Ext. M -III and in the said letter, revised
target for the period from 01-10-1989 to 30-09-1990 was
prescribed.
7. The evidence of the witness examined on behalf of
the party no. 1 is also on affidavit. In his examination-in-
chief, this witness has reiterated the facts mentioned in the
written statement. This witness has also proved the letter
addressed by the Branch Manager on 14-02-1990 to the
7602
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 13, 2012/ASVINA 21, 1934
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
applicant regarding his business activities, the copy of the
letter addressed to the applicant by the Manager (Sales)
dated 28-08-1990 regarding his business performance and
copy of letter dated 19-09-1990 issued by the sub Divisional
Manager to the applicant regarding his performance during
the probationary period from 01-10-1989 to 31-08-1990 as
Exts. M-VII, M-VIII and M-IX respectively. In his cross-
examination, this witness has denied the suggestion that
the applicant had achieved the business of Rs. 50,00,000
as fixed by the company in the first year of his service as
probationary Development Officer. Though this witness
has been cross- examined at length, nothing of substance has
been brought out in the cross-examination to disbelieve him.
8. At the time of argument, it was submitted by the learned
advocate for the applicant that the applicant was appointed
as a Development Officer for a period of one year on
27-03-1988 as per the standing rules and regulations and
he completed the two month's training period from
28-03-1988 to 28-05-1988 on a monthly stipend of Rs. 1200
per months and on 28-06-1988, he was deputed to look
after the field work of Arjuni (Morgaon) and the applicant
achieved more than 100% business and the Branch Office
gave a false report stating 'that the applicant was able to
achieve only 84.75% of target and such facts have been
clearly established from the evidence on record including
the evidence of the applicant and 'the applicant was
terminated from services by the party no. 1 on 28-09-1990,
without giving any opportunity of hearing and in violation
of the principles of natural justice and the appeal preferred
by the applicant was also rejected without giving him any
opportunity of being heard and the termination of the
applicant was purely on vindictiveness and based on false
report and due to such illegal termination, the applicant is
entitled for reinstatement in service with full back wages.
9. Per contra, it was submitted by the learned advocate
for the party no. 1 that the reference is ab-initio invalid and
is not maintainable, as the applicant is not a workman and
the applicant himself has pleaded in the statement of claim
that the Hon’ble Apex Court have held that “Development
Officer” of LIC is not a workman and as such, the reference
is to be answered against the workman.
It was further submitted by the learned advocate for the
Party No.1 that the applicant was appointed as an
apprentice Development Officer for one year commencing
from 28-03-1988 on a stipend of Rs. 1250 per month and
after completion of the apprenticeship, he came to be
appointed as a probationary Development Officer w.e.f.
01-10-1988 and the performance of the applicant was not
satisfactory and he could not able to fulfill the minimum
performance norms set out for confirmation as laid down in
his appointment letter and as such, his probation period
was extended as a special case for a further period of
12 months commencing from 0 1-10-1989 and the applicant
failed to improve his performance in spite of issuance of
notice to him and as his actual performance fell much short
to the standard norms prescribed, his services came to be
terminated on 19-09-1990 and such termination did not
amount to any punishment or cast any stigma on the
applicant and the termination of the applicant was in
accordance with clause 14(4) of the Staff Regulations and
as such, the applicant is not entitled to any relief.
In support of such contentions, the learned advocate
for the Party No.1 placed reliance on the decisions reported
in AIR 1994 S.C. 1343 (M. Venugopal Vs. The Divisional
Manager, LIC), AIR 1998 SC-327 (LIC Vs. Raghavendra
Seshagiri) and AIR 1994 SC-2608 (HR. Adyanthaya Vs.
Sandoz Ltd).
10. First of all, the issue as to whether the applicant is a
workman as per the definition of Section 2(S) of the Act is
required to be considered. In this connection, it is
necessary to mention here that the applicant in the
statement of claim itself has mentioned that though in the
decision reported in AIR 1984 SC -1462 (Supra), it was held
by the Hon’ble Apex Court that Development Officers of
LIC are workmen within the meaning of the Act, the
Hon ’ble Apex Court in the decision reported in AIR 1994
SC-2608 (Supra) directed to treat the decision reported in
AIR 1984 -1462 as “as per incuriam”.
From the above pleadings of the applicant, it is ,clear
that the applicant knew that Development Officer of LIC is
not a workman within the meaning of the Act.
Moreover, in the decision reported in AIR 1994 SC -.
2608 (Supra), the Hon’ble Apex Court after referring to the
earlier decision reported in AIR 1984 SC-1462 have held
that, “Development Officer of LIC is not a workman as per
the definition of the Act and the decision reported in AIR
1984 SC-1462 (Supra) be treated as a decision of “as per
incuriam”.
So applying the principles enunciated by the Hon’ble
Apex Court in the decision reported in AIR 1994 SC-2608
(Supra), to the present case in hand, it is held that the
applicant, who was admittedly appointed as a Development
Officer on probation was not a workman and as such, the
reference is not maintainable.
11. On perusal of the evidence on record, both
documentary and oral, it is found that as per the document,
Ext. M-I, the applicant was appointed as Probationary
Development Officer w.e.f. 01-10-1988 with the conditions
that he shall be on probation initially for a period of 12
months from the date of his joining duties and the
corporation may, in its sole discretion, extend his
probationary period, which shall not exceed 24 months
counted from the commencement of the probationary
appointment and during the probationary period (which
includes extended probationary period if applicable) he
shall be liable to be discharged from service of the
corporation without any notice and without any cause
[Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)]
Hkkjr dk jkti= % vDrwcj 13] 2012@vkf'ou 21] 1934
7603
being assigned. It is also found from record that the
applicant accepting the terms and conditions given in the
appointment letter, Ext. M-I joined in service. It is found
from Ext. M-III that as the applicant was not able to achieve
the minimum target fixed in regard to his performance and
for that his probationary period was extended for another
12 months commencing from 01-10-1989 as a special case,
with the same service conditions as mentioned in Ext. M-I
and he was also given revised target of performance during
the extended period of probation. It is also clear from the
evidence on record that as the applicant was not able to reach
the target fixed by the Party No.1, the applicant was dismissed
from services as per orders dated 19-09-1990, i.e. before the
expiry of the extended period of probationary period.
12. At this juncture, I think it necessary to mention about
the principles enunciated by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the
decisions reported in AIR 1994 SC-1343 (Supra) and AIR
1998 SC-327 (Supra).
In the decision reported in AIR 1994 SC-1343 (Supra),
the Hon'ble Apex Court have held that :—
“(A) Life Insurance Corporation Act (31 of 1956),
S.48(2)(cc), sub section 2(c) -Life Insurance Corporation
of India (Staff) Regulations (1960), Regn. 14 -Probationer
- Termination of services -Non-compliance of S. 25F of
Industrial Disputes Act-Validity-Contract of employment
entitling Corporation not to confirm probationer in case
he fails to achieve target fixed in regard to his
performance - Termination effected thereof without any
notice -Cannot be assailed on ground of non-compliance
of S.25F -Such termination being effected under
stipulation contained in contract read with Regn. 14 is
not 'retrenchment' within S. 2 (oo) of Industrial Disputes
Act -Even otherwise regulations framed u/s. 48(2)(cc)
have overriding effect over provisions of Industrial
Disputes Act.”
13. In the decision reported in AIR 1998 SC-327 (Supra),
the Hon'ble Apex Court have held that :—
“Life Insurance Corporation Act (31 of 1956), S. 48 (2-A)
(as amended by 1981 Act) -Life Insurance Corporation
of India (Staff) Regulations (1960), Regn. 14(4) -
Termination of service -Appointment on probation -
Letter of appointment stipulating discharge from service
without notice or reasons - Termination cannot be held
to be bad on ground of failure of Corporation to give
opportunity of hearing -Termination also would not
amount to retrenchment within S. 2(oo) of Industrial
Disputes Act.
14. The principles as enunciated in the two decisions
mentioned above squarely applicable to the present case
in hand. So, applying the said principles to the present
case in hand, it is found that the applicant was a probationer
and he failed to achieve the target fixed in regard to his
performance and as such, he was dismissed from services.
Such termination was effected under stipulation contained
in the contract read with regulation 14 of the Regulations
and as such, the same is not retrenchment within Section
2(oo) of the Act and the dismissal of the workman from
services was for failure to achieve necessary target
stipulated ill contract of employment. Hence, it is ordered :—
ORDER
The action of the management of Life Insurance
Corporation of India, Divisional Office, Nagpur in
terminating the services of Shri Valmik, Development Officer,
is proper, legal and justified. The workman is not entitled to
any relief.
J. P. CHAND, Presiding Officer
ubZ fnYyh] 14 flrEcj] 2012
dk-vk- 3127-—vkS|ksfxd fookn vf/kfu;e] 1947 ¼1947 dk
14½ dh /kkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnzh; ljdkj lsUVªy cSad vkWQ
bafM;k ds izca/kr= ds lac) fu;kstdksa vkSj muds deZdkjksa ds chp
vuqca/k esa fufnZ"V vkS|ksfxd fookn esa dsUnzh; ljdkj vkS|ksfxd vf/
kdj.k@Je U;k;ky;] dkuiqj ds iapkV ¼lanHkZ la[;k 13@2009½ dks
izdkf'kr djrh gS tks dsUnzh; ljdkj dks 06&9&2012 dks izkIr gqvk
Fkk A
[la- ,y&12012@70@2008&vkbZ- vkj- ¼ch&II½]
'kh'k jke] vuqHkkx vf/kdkjh
New Delhi, the 14th September, 2012
S.O. 3127.— In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial
Disputes Act, 1947, the Central Government hereby
publishes the Award (Ref. No. 13/2009) of the Central
Government Industrial tribunal/Labour Court, Kanpur now
as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between
the employers in relation to the management of Central
Bank of India and their workman, which was received by
the Central Government on 06-9-2012.
[No. L-12012/70/2008-IR(B-II)]
SHEESH RAM, Section Officer
ANNEXURE
BEFORE SRI RAM PARKASH, HJS,
PRESIDING OFFICER, CENTRAL GOVERNMENT
INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT,
KANPUR
Industrial Dispute No. 13 of 2009
Between—
Sri Bramhanand Aggrwal,
L-21, Barra 6,
Kanpur.
And
The Regional Manager,
Central Bank of India,
372/18-B,
Civil Lines,
Gwalior Road, Jhansi.
7604
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 13, 2012/ASVINA 21, 1934
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
AWARD
1. Central Goverment Mol New Delhi vide notification
no. L-12012/70/2008-IR(B-II) dated 04-02-09 has referred
the following dispute for adjudication to this tribunal—
2. Whether the action of the management of Central
Bank of India, Regional Offfice Jhansi dismissing Sri
Bramhanand Aggrawal, sub accountant of Central Bank of
India, Bara Bazar Branch, Jhansi from the bank services
vide order dated 16-07-87 of disciplinary authority is legal
and justified? What relief the workman concerned is entitled
to?
3. Brief facts are—
4. After charge of pleadings in this case, the opposite
party moved an application along with the copy of the
order of the Hon’ble High Court dated 16-05-12 passed in
Special Appeal No. 2087 of 2011 between the same parties.
5. It is contended by the opposite party that the
reference cannot be proceeded with further in the light of
the order of the Hon'ble High Court as of aforesaid.
6. Heard and perused the order of the Hon’ble High
Court. It has been found that the claimant has contested
his case before the Civil Court on the same point and that
matter has ultimately gone up to the Hon’ble High Court
On the basis of that the Hon'ble High Court has found and
ordered in Para 29 of its order as follows—
Our conclusions are as follows—
(a)The question regarding legality and justifiability
regarding the dismissal order has been decided by the Civil
Court. It cannot be reopened by means of reference before
the Industrial Tribunal. In the end the special appeal filed
by the management has been allowed and held the entire
proceedings before the CGIT Kanpur, in the aforsaid
reference dated 04-02-09 be dropped.
7. Therefore in the light of the order of the Hon'ble
High Court, the present proceedings pending before this
tribunal is being dropped as the reference order made to
this tribunal has become redundant and that could not be
answered either in affirmative or in negative between the
parties.
8. Accordingly reference is answered in negative
against workman and in favour of the management.
RAM PARKASH, Presiding Officer
ubZ fnYyh] 17 flrEcj] 2012
dk-vk-3128-—vkS|ksfxd fookn vf/kfu;e 1947]
¼1947 dk 14½ dh /kkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnzh; ljdkj
eSllZ ch- ds- bUVjizkbtst lruk ds izca/kr= ds laca) fu;kstdksa
vkSj muds deZdkjksa ds chp vuqca/k esa fufnZ"V vkS|ksfxd fookn
esa dsUæzh; ljdkj vkS|ksfxd vf/kdj.k@Je U;k;ky;]
tcyiqj ds iapkV ¼lanHkZ la[;k 154@2003½ izdkf'kr djrh gS tks
dsUnzh; ljdkj dks 13&9&2012 dks izkIr gqvk FkkA
[la- ,y&29011@29@2003&vkbZ-vkj- ¼,e½]
tksgu rksiuks] voj lfpo
New Delhi, the 17th Septemebr, 2012
S.O. 3128.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the
Industrial Dispute Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central
Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 154/
2003) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal/Labour
Court, Jabalpur now as shown in the Annexure, in the
Industrial dispute between the employers in relation to the
management of M/s. B.K. Enterprises Ltd. (Satna) and their
workman, which was received by the Central Government
on 13-9-2012.
[No. L-29011/29/2003-IR(M)]
JOHAN TOPNO, Under Secy.
ANNEXURE
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT
INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM -LABOUR COURT,
JABALPUR
No. CGIT/LC/R/154/2003
PRESIDING OFFICER: SHRI MOHD. SHAKIR HASAN
Shri Jamir Khan,
United Mines Lime Workers Union,
New Colony,
Sagmania, Satna (MP)
. . .Workman
Versus
M/S. B.K. Enterpries Ltd.,
C-1, flat, Sagmania Lime Stone Mines,
Satna Cement Works,
PO Birla Vikas,
Satna (MP)
. . .Management
AWARD
Passed on this 14th day of August, 2012
1.
The Government of India Ministry of Labour vide
its Notification No. L-29011/29/2003-IR(M) dated 29-8-2003
has referred the following dispute for adjudication by this
tribunal :—
"Whether the action of mgt. of B.K. Enterprises Ltd.,
Sagmania Lime Stone Mines, Satna Cement works, Distt.
Satna (MP) in terminating the services of Shri Munnu
Kol, Raghvendra Singh, Ram Prasad, Dhaniram, Jagdish
Kol, Chedilal, Surendra Patel and Ramkumar Gautam,
Ex. Drivers and Shri Sarkar, Bahadur Singh, Gangaprasad
Tiwari, Ex. Supervisors w.e.f. 6-6-2000 is legal and proper?
If not to what relief the concerned workers are entitled
for?"
[Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)]
Hkkjr dk jkti= % vDrwcj 13] 2012@vkf'ou 21] 1934
7605
2. The Union/workmen did not appear inspite of proper
notices. Lastly the then Tribunal proceeded the reference
exparte against the Union/workmen on 21-9-07.
3. The management appeared in the case through his
counsel on 15-3-2004 but did not file Written Statement in
the case. It seems that the parties are not interested in the
case or there is no dispute in existence. Thus this is a case
of no dispute. Accordingly the reference is answered.
4. In the result, no dispute award is passed without any
order to costs.
MOHD. SHAKIR HASAN, Presiding Officer
ubZ fnYyh] 17 flrEcj] 2012
dk-vk-3129-—vkS|ksfxd fookn vf/kfu;e] 1947 ¼1947 dk
14½ dh /kkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa] dsUnzh; ljdkj LVs'ku MkbjsDVj]
U;wfdfy;j ikoj dkjiksjs'ku vkWQ bafM;k dkjokj ds izca/kra= ds
lacð fu;kstdksa vkSj muds deZdkjksa ds chp] vuqca/k esa fufnZ"V
vkS|ksfxd fookn esa dsUnzh; ljdkj vkS|ksfxd vf/kdj.k caxykSj ds
iapkV ¼lanHkZ lh- vkj- u- 66@2007½ dks izdkf'kr djrh gS] tks
dsUnzh; ljdkj dks 17&09&2012 dks izkIr gqvk FkkA
[la- ,y&42012@88@2006&vkbZ-vkj-¼Mh-;w-½]
lqjsUnz dqekj] vuqHkkx vf/kdkjh
New Delhi, the 17th September, 2012
S.O. 3129.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial
Dispute Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government
hereby publishes the Award (Ref. C.R. No. 66/2007) of the
Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court
Bangalore as shown in the Annexure, in the Industrial
dispute between the employers in relation to the Station
Director, Nuclear Power Corporation of India Ltd. Karwar
and their workman, which was received by the Central
Government on 17-09-2012.
[No. L-42012/88/2006-IR(DU)]
SURENDRA KUMAR, Section Officer
ANNEXURE
BEFORE THE
CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL
TRUBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT,
BANGALORE
DATED 9-08-2012
PRESENT
SHRI S.N. NAVALGUND, Presiding Officer
C. R. No. 66/2007
I PARTY
II PARTY
Shri Ganapathi Bhikaro Naik,
The Station Director,
R/o Kadiya Village,
Nuclear Power Corporation of
Karwar Taluk,
India Ltd.,
Uttara Kannada District
Kaiga Generating Station,
Kaiga Village,
Karwar -581400
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 Industiral Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of
1947) has referred this dispute vide order No. L-42012/88/
2006-IR(DU) dated 06-06-2007 for adjudication on the
following Schedule :
SCHEDULE
“Whether the action of the management of Nuclear
Power Corporation India Ltd, Kaiga in imposing the
penalty of removal from service on Shri Ganapathi B
Naik w.e.f. 19-04-2002 is legal and justified? If not, to
what relief the workman is entitled to?”
2.
The brief facts leading to this reference and award
may be stated as under :—
Shri Ganapati B Naik (hereinafter referred as first party)
who was appointed in the Nuclear Power Corporation of
India Ltd., Kaiga, Karwar (hereafter referred as Second
Party) as Helper ‘A’ on 17-10-1992 in operations and
maintenance section on compassionate ground as son -
in- law of land looser Shri Bellanna Venkanna Gowda for
the second party in the land acquisition and was regularized
on 31-05-1993, on 10-01-2000 served with the charge sheet
as under:—
Charge Sheet.
“That Shri Ganapati B Naik presenting working as a
Helper in O&M section in Kaiga Project had stated in his
application dated 12-09-90 submitted in the prescribed
format that he is son in law of Shri Bellanna Venkanna
Gowda of Devkar Village whose lands were acquired for
Kaiga Project so as to claim employment in Kaiga Project
as a member of land affected family.
Shri Ganapati B Naik has also declared that he is married
and his wife’s name is Smt. Ganga in the relevant columns
of the attestation form dated 29-05-1993. On verification of
the details furnished by him in the prescribed format, it is
reported that Shri Ganapati B Naik has furnished wrong
information about his marriage and that the existence of
the girl declared to be his wife could not be ascertained.
When asked to explain on the information furnished by
him he has submitted the following additional documents
in support of his declaration.
1. Certificate issued by Pradhan, Devalmukki Mandal
Panchayat certifying his marriage with Smt. Ganga.
2. Affidavit sworn and signed before Notary, UK,
Dist.Karwar on 27-07-1991 certifying the marriage of Shri
Ganapati B Naik with Smt. Ganga.
7606
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 13, 2012/ASVINA 21, 1934
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
On verification based on the above certificate submitted
by Shri Ganapati B Naik, it has been reported that Shri
Ganapati B Naik son of late Shri Bhikaro Naik has not married
Smt. Ganga daughter of Shri Bellanna Venkanna Gowda as
claimed by him. Smt. Ganga the only daughter of Shri
Bellanna Venkanna Gowda is married with one Shri
Timmanna alias Appaji son of Shri Seeta Ram Gowda
resident of village Shivpur Hemlet Hebbal, Karwar Taluk
and as per the traditions her name was changed to Smt.
Laxmi after the marriage. Since then Smt. Ganga alias
Smt.Laxmi has been living with her husband Shri Timmanna
in village Shivapur Hebba and has children from Shri
Timmanna.
In this connection an enquiry was conducted by District
administration at our instances and the District
Administration in the report No.RB/LAQ/MISC/SR/53/99-
2000 dated 17-11-1999 along with a statement given by Shri
Bellanna Venkanna Gowda has stated that the claim made
by Shri Ganapti B Naik is false.
Shri Ganapti B Naik has suppressed factual information
on his marital status and has produced false certificates.
By these acts Shri Ganapati B. Naik has committed a grave
misconduct and has acted in a manner of unbecoming of
an Corporation Employee under Model Standing Orders.”
3. On his reply to the charge sheet that he did marry
Ganga, daughter of Shri Bellanna Venkanna Gowda, land
looser on 2-05-1990 and as she had deserted him, after
causing notice in the month of October 1995 he filed a
divorce petition on the file of Civil Judge (Sr.Division),
Karwar in matrimonial case No. 11/1998 wherein his wife
Ganga did apply for maintenance and the same is pending
and due to such strained relationship his father-in-law might
have made some allegations and that his daughter Smt.
Ganga is legally wedded wife and at his instance only he
was given job on compassionate ground. Management
being not satisfied with the said reply ordered for domestic
enquiry appointing Shri R. S. Prakash as Inquiring Authority
and Shri R. Vasudevan, Asstt. Manager (P&IR) as
Presenting Officer. The said enquiry officer after observing
the formalitities of preliminary hearing on presenting officer
producing the application given by the first party for his
appointment dated 12-09-1990; marriage invitation card
produced along with the application; certificate issued by
Spl. Land Acquisition Officer dated 21-08-1990 the land
looser Shri B.V. Gowda having requested to provide the
job to his son-in -law Shri Ganapati Bhikaro Naik of Kadia;
the attestation form given by the first party while taking
the employment; affidavit sworn to by the first party before
the notary dated 27-07-1991 he being the son-in-law of
land looser Shri Bellanna Venkanna Gowda; certificate
issued by Pradhan, Devalmakki, Mandal Panchayat, Karwar
dated 28-12-1991 the first party marrying Ganga the
daughter of land looser Shri Bellanna Venkanna Gowda;
letter addressed to Sr. Manager(P&IR), N.P.C, Kaiga from
office of Dy.Commissioner, U. K. Karwar dated 17-11-1999.
accompanying the report given by the Assistant
commissioner of Karwar and the statement of Shri B.V.
Gowda purported to have been taken by the Assistant
Commissioner of Devalmakki on 29-09-1999, marking them
as P1 to P7 while recording the statement of first party and
the evidence of Shri Dinesh Gaokar, JRA.II Admn., who was
associated with the investigation of confirming first party
being the son in law of the land looser; Shri Pradeep Shetty,
Sr.Clerk in the second party who was also associated with
investigation in confirming the relationship of first party
with the daughter of land looser; Shri Suresh Shet,
Pradhan, Mandal Panchayat had issued certificate
regarding marriage of first party with the daughter of land
looser B.V. Gowda; Shri Narayan Karnat, neighbour of the
first party and Shri N.S. Bhat, allegedly acted as marriage
Priest as DW1 to DW5 and exhibiting statement given by
Shri Bellanna Venkanna Gowda dated 24-05-1997 and xerox
copy of the application submitted by Smt. Ganga Naik in the
court of the Civil Judge, Karwar as Ex. D1 & D2, after receiving
written brief from the Presenting Officer and the Defence
Representative by his repot dated 1-02-2001 held the charge
being proved. The Disciplinary Authority after giving
opportunity of hearing to the first party passed the impugned
order dated 19-04-2002 and on appeal by the first party the
Appellate Authority after affording opportunity of hearing
confirmed the order of the Disciplinary Authority. Thereafter
the first party raised the dispute before the Asstt.Labour
Commissioner (Central) Mangalore and on its failure it
resulted in the present reference. After receipt of the reference
pursuant to the notices issued by this tribunal the first party
and the second party entered their appearance through their
respective advocates and filed their claim statement and
counter statement respectively. After completion of the
pleadings having regard to certain allegations made in the
claim statement while raising a preliminary issue as to
“Whether the Domestic Enquiry conducted against the first
party by the second party is fair and proper” while receiving
the evidence of the Presenting Officer for the second party
as MW1 and exhibiting copy of the order of the Disciplinary
Authority dated 1-03-2000 appointing Shri R.S. Prakash as
Enquiry Officer; copy of the order of disciplinary authority
appointing Shri R. Vasudevan as Presenting Officer; copy of
the notice of enquiry issued to the first party dated
11-04-2000; letter given by the Defence Representative dated
25-04-2000; proceedings of the enquiry; written arguments
filed by the first party and management representative
before the enquiry officer; copy of the finding of the enquiry
officer dated 1-02-2001; seven documents marked before
the enquiry officer for the management; copy of the covering
letter of enquiry report sent to the charge sheeted employee/
first party dated 3-02-2001; reply given by the first party
dated 27-02-2001; copy of the order of Disciplinary Authority
dated 19-04-2002; appeal memo of the first party dated 31-
05-2002; copy of the order of appellate authority dated 4-10-
2002; copy of the review petition dated 1-01-2003 and the
copy of the order of review petition as Ex. M1 to M 18 and
interalia the evidence of first party as WW1 and
[Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)]
Hkkjr dk jkti= % vDrwcj 13] 2012@vkf'ou 21] 1934
7607
exhibiting notarized copies, of the statement of land looser
Shri Bellanna Venkanna Gowda dated 24-05-1997; his
wedding card dated 7-05-1990; certificate issued by the
Mandal Pradhan Devalamakki, Karwar dated 28-12-1991,
Sworn affidavit of himself dated 27-07-1991; copy of
nomination form dated 5-07-1997; certificate issued by
Special land Acquisition Officer, Dandeli dated 21-08-1990;
letter of Assistant Commissioner dated 14-10-1999;
statement said to have been given by Shri Bellanna
Venkanna Gowda dated 29-09-1999; representation
submitted by him to the Disciplinary Authority dated
27-02-2001; entire matrimonial proceedings in MC No.11/
1998; copy of the petition in MC 11/1998; certified copy of
the order passed in MC No.11/1998 as Ex. W1 to W11
respectively and after hearing the arguments addressed
by the learned advocates appearing for both sides by order
dated 12-10-2010 the preliminary issue is answered in the
affirmative holding that the domestic enquiry is fair and
proper, arguments addressed by the learned advocates
appearing for both sides on merits, have been heard.
4.
There being no dispute that the first party was
appointed as Helper ‘A’ in the second party on
compassionate ground as the son-in-law of the land looser
Shri Bellanna Venkanna Gowda and his service was
regularized on 31-05-1993 and he has been charged that on
verification of the details furnished by him it is found that
he had furnished wrong information about his marriage
with Smt. Ganga, daughter of land looser Shri Bellanna
Venkanna Gowda and that Smt. Ganga the only daughter
of land looser Shri Bellanna Venkanna Gowda being found
to have been married with Shri Timmanna alias Appaji, son
of Shri Seeta Ram Gowda resident of Village Shivpur Hemlet,
Hebbal, Karwar Taluk charge was served on him and on
enquiry he has been dismissed from service, now the points
that arises for my consideration are—
(i)
Whether the management established before the
enquiry officer the information given by the first
party that he had married Smt. Ganga, daughter of
land looser Shri Bellanna Venkanna was found false?
(ii) Whether
the
punishment
imposed
is
disproportionate to the misconduct proved against
him?
(iii) What Award?
5.
On appreciation of article of charge, the pleadings
of both the sides, the evidence brought on, record by the
management and the charge sheeted employee in the
Domestic Enquiry, in the light of the arguments addressed
by the learned advocates appearing for both sides as well
as the citations referred to by them my finding on point
No.(i) is in the Negative, Point No.(ii) as does not survive
for consideration and No.(iii) as per final award for the
following reasons :
Reasons.
6.
It is borne out from the proceedings of the enquiry
and the report of the enquiry officer that the management
while producing application given by the first party for his
appointment dated 12-09-1990; the marriage invitation card
annexed to his application; the certificate issued by the
Special Land Acquisition Officer dated 21-08-1990 to the
effect that he is the son-in-law of land looser Shri Bellanna
Venkanna Gowda; the attestation form given by the first
party while taking the employment; the affidavit sworn by
the first party before the notary dated 27-07-1991; the
certificate issued by the Mandal Pradhan Devalamakki,
Karwar dated 28-12-1991 on the basis of which the first
party was given an appointment and the letter No. RB/
LAQ/MISC/SR/53/99-2000 dated 17-11-1999 received from
the office of the Deputy Commissioner, Karwar along with
the report submitted to the Dy.Commissioner by the
Assistant Commissioner dated 14-10-1999 and the
statement of Shri Bellanna Venkanna Gowda purported to
have been recorded by the Assistant Commissioner dated
29-09-1999 through presenting officer and getting them
exhibited as Ex. P1 to P7 respectively, did not lead any oral
evidence. Then the Enquiry Officer after recording the
statement of the CSE/first party wherein he has claimed
that he had married Smt. Ganga, daughter of land looser
Shri Bellanna Venkanna Gowda, their relations being
strained he filed a matrimonial case on the file of Civil Judge
(Sr. Division), Karwar and examined 5 witnesses as DW1 to
5 , on the basis of whose recommendations his claim that
he was the son-in-law of land looser was accepted by the
management, the enquiry officer only relying upon
Ex. P7 held the charge being proved. The management
before the enquiry officer neither examined the
Dy. Commissioner nor the Assistant Commissioner to whom
the Dy. Commissioner allegedly entrusted the job of
enquiring into the relationship of first party with the
daughter of land looser Shri B.V. Gowda, nor the land looser
and thereby deprived the charge sheeted employee/first
party from challenging the report of the Assistant
Commissioner on the basis of which the charge is held to
be proved. On the other hand the evidence of DW1 to
DW5 do suggest that the first party had married Ganga the
daughter of land losser Shri B.V. Gowda and their
relationship being strained the first party had initiated
divorce proceedings before the Civil Court and there
Smt. Ganga did apply for maintenance claiming to be his
wife. This evidence pertaining to the matrimonial case itself
is sufficient to accept the case of the first party that he had
married Ganga the daughter of land looser Shri B.V. Gowda
and at the instance of the said land looser he was given an
appointment on compassionate ground. Even assuming
that the land looser Shri B.V. Gowda gave a statement before
the Assistant Commissioner which is annexed to his alleged
report under Ex.P7 with all certainty it can be said that due
to the strained relation ship of the first party with his
daughter he might have given such a statement. Either in
7608
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 13, 2012/ASVINA 21, 1934
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
the letter written for Dy. Commissioner or in the
accompanying report of the Assistant Commissioner
addressed to the Dy. Commissioner it is indicated that a
regular enquiry was conducted in the presence of the first
party. Therefore, on the basis of such alleged exparte report
given by the Assistant Commisioner to the
Dy. Commisisoner and the statement allegedly given by
the land looser Shri B.V.Gowda before the Assistant
Commissioner the enquiry officer ought not to have held
charge being proved. Under the circumstances I have
arrived at the conclusion that the finding of the enquiry
officer the charge being proved is baseless and perverse.
7. In view of my finding that the finding of the enquiry
officer charge being proved is baseless and perverse the
second point does not survive for consideration.
8. Since the second party without any proper evidence
passed the impugned order of dismissal and the first party
suffered such an order without any fault on his part, he is
entitle for reinstatement with full back wages, continuity of
service and all other consequential benefits that he could
have received in the absence of the impugned order of
removal from service. In the result I pass the following
Award:
AWARD
The reference is allowed holding that the action of the
management of Nuclear Power Corporation Ltd, Kaiga in
imposing the penalty of removal from service on
Shri Ganapthi B. Naik w.e.f 19.04.2002 is illegal and not
justified and that he is entitle for reinstatement with full
back wages, continuity of service and all other
consequential benefits that he could have received in the
absence of the impugned order of removal from service.
(Dictated to PA transcribed by her corrected and signed
by me on 9-08-2012)
S.N. NAVALGUND, Presiding Officer
ubZ fnYYkh] 17 flrEcj] 2012
dk-vk-3130-—vkS|ksfxd fookn vf/kfu;e] 1947 ¼1947 dk
14½ dh /kkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnzh; ljdkj flafMdsV cSad ds izca/
kra= ds lac) fu;kstdksa vkSj muds deZdkjksa ds chp vuqca/k esa fufnZ"V
vkS|ksfxd fookn esa dsUnzh; ljdkj vkS|ksfxd vf/kdj.k@Je U;k;ky;]
ukxiqj ds iapkV ¼lanHkZ la[;k lhthvkbZVh@,uthih@57@2001 dks
izdkf'kr djrh gSA tks dsUnzh; ljdkj dks 10&09&2012 dks izkIr gqvk
FkkA
[la- ,y&12012@77@2001&vkbZ vkj ¼ch&II½]
'kh'k jke] vuqHkkx vf/kdkjh
New Delhi, the 17th September, 2012
S.O. 3130.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial
Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947) the Central Government
hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. CGIT/NGP/57/2001)
of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal/Labour Court,
Nagpur now as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial
Dispute between the employers in relation to the
management Syndicate Bank and their workman, which
was received by the Central Government on 10-09-2012.
[ No. L-12012/77/2001-IR (B-II)]
SHEESH RAM, Section Officer
ANNEXURE
BEFORE SHRI J.P. CHAND. PRESIDING OFFICER,
CGIT -CUM-LABOUR COURT, NAGPUR
Case No. CGIT/NGP/57/2001
Date: 05-09-2012.
Party No.1:
The Managing Director,
Syndicate Bank,
SB.I.R. Division Head Office,
Manipal (Karnataka)-576 119.
Versus
Party No. 2 :
Shri Pravin Ganpathrao Khode,
R/ o. Shivaji Ward, Ramtek,
Tal: Ramtek,
Nagpur.
AWARD
(Dated : 5th September, 2012)
In exercise of the powers conferred by clause (d) of
sub-section (1) and sub-section 2 (A) of Section 10 of
Industrial ‘Disputes Act, 1947 ( 14 of 1947) (“the Act” in
short), the Central Government has referred the industrial
dispute between the employers, in relation to the
management of and their workman, Shri for adjudication,
as per letter No. L- 12012/77/2001-IR (B-II) dated
13-08-2001, with the following schedule :—
“Whether the action of the management of Syndicate
Bank through its Chief Manager, Syndicate Bank, Indl.
Relations Division, Head Office, Manipal in terminating
the services of Shri Pravin Ganapathrao Khode, w.e.f.
30-05-2000 is legal, proper and justified? If not, what relief
the workman is entitled to?”
2. On receipt of the reference, the parties were noticed
to file their respective statement of claim and written
statement and accordingly, the workman, Shri Pravin
Khode, ('the workman" in short), filed the statement of
claim and the management of Syndicate Bank, (“Party No.1”
in short) filed its written statement.
The case of the workman as presented in the statement
of claim is that he joined the services of party no. 1 on
17-07-1981 as a probationary clerk and he was confirmed in
service of the Bank w.e.f. 25.01.1982 and he was working as
a clerk at Mansar branch of the Bank from 03-02-1983 to
21-05-1998 and he was transferred from Mansar Branch to
Wadi branch, Nagpur and worked there from 23-05-1998 to
[Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)]
Hkkjr dk jkti= % vDrwcj 13] 2012@vkf'ou 21] 1934
7609
30.05.2000, the date of his illegal dismissal from services
and during his entire service period, neither any warning
letter nor any charge sheet was issued against him and on
19.05.1999, a charge sheet was issued against him, on false
and fabricated grounds. The further case of the workman
is that on 17.03.1997, Smt. Rekha Daulat Sontakke, a
customer /borrower of Mansar Branch alongwith one
Shri Shamrao Sahare visited the Bank and wanted to know
about the loan amount due against loan account No.. OSL
A/c. 46/89 and approached him for the same and since OSL
A/c. 46/89 was closed from proceeds of DICGC claim amount
in 1992 itself and calculation of loan amount was not readily
available on record, he asked Smt. Rekha Sontakke to
deposit a tentative amount of Rs. 8000/- in cash section
and to give the same to Shri Meshram, who was on duty as
cashier on that date and after half an hour or so, the Branch
Manager, Shri M.P. Gokhale called him and asked to prepare
a "No dues certificate" in favour of Smt. Rekha Sontakke,
saying that she had already deposited her loan dues with
the cashier and as per the instructions of the Branch
Manager, he prepared a “No dues Certificate” in plain paper,
as printed form was not available and put the same on the
table of the Branch Manager alongwith the loan register for
verification and he went to his section and the “No dues
Certificate” was issued by the Branch Manager after his seal
and signature and the issuance of “No dues Certificate”
dated 17.03. 1997 came to light in December, 1998, when Shri
Meshram, clerk of Mansar Branch visited the village of Smt.
Rekha Sontakke in connection of loan recovery and on that
day, Smt. Rekha came to know that the “No dues Certificate”
was a false one and her loan amount was still outstanding
and the said certificate was issued only by deceiving the
Branch Manager, Shri Gokhale, by giving false statement of
repayment of loan amount on 17.03.1997 and as Smt Sontakke
did not go to the Bank to file any complaint regarding
misappropriation of the amount deposited by her, it was
clear that she did not deposit any amount on 17.03.1997 and
had any amount been deposited by her in the bank on
17.03.1997, then she should have gone to the Bank to lodge
a complaint and on 10.01.1999, Shri Gokhale, approached
Smt. Sontakke at her residence and forced and threatened
her to give a complaint and in her complaint, Smt. Sontakke
mentioned that she had paid the entire loan amount to the
cashier at the cash counter on 17.03.1997 and the cashier did
not give her the counter foil of the deposit slip and when she
asked the cashier for the counter foil, the cashier gave her
the “No dues Certificate” signed and sealed by the Branch
Manager and in her complaint dated 10.01.1999,
Smt. Sontakke did not mention his name or that she had paid
the amount of Rs. 8000 to him (the workman) and Shri
Gokhale, the Ex-Branch Manager in his letter dated 13.01.1999
had written that, from the party's letter, it is clear that the
cashier, who had performed duty on 17.03.1997 had played
mischief and obtained his (Mr. Gokhale's) signature on the
"No dues Certificate" and the Ex-Branch Manager also did
not mention his name in the letter and the management of
the Bank did not take any action on the complaint of
Smt. Sontakke dated 10.01.1999 and on 25.03.1999,
Shri Garge, the then Branch Manager of Mansar Branch,
Shri G.M. Narayan, the Deputy Chief Manager and
Shri S. Pasupati, Deputy Chief Officer (ID) went to the
village of Smt. Sontakke and forced, threatened and instigated
her to write a complaint as per their direction or otherwise to
cancel the “No dues certificate” and that she would be sent
to jail for committing fraud with the bank and under such
threat, Smt. Sontakke gave another complaint dated
25.03.1999 mentioning therein that she gave Rs. 8000 to him
(the workman), as per the dictation of the Branch Officer to
falsely implicate him and to save the neck of Shri Gokhale
and Shri R.B. Meshram, who was on duty as cashier on
17.03.1997 and who had issue the “no dues certificate” to
Smt. Sontakke and Smt. Sontakke realized the gravity of
her false complaint dated 10.01.1999 and 25.03.1999 and
arranged the loan amount and repaid the entire loan amount
of Rs. 11,503/- on 31.03.1999 to the Bank and she also
submitted a letter dated 31.03. 1999 to the Bank Manager,
Mansar Branch stating that as she did not pay anything to
anybody on 17.03.1997 and for that she paid the entire loan
amount on 31.03.1999 and on 31.05.1999, Smt. Sontakke
wrote another letter to the Manager, Syndicate Bank,
Mansar Branch stating that she had obtained the "No dues
Certificate" on 17.03.1997 from the Branch Manager, Shri
Gokhale, without depositing any amount in the Bank and
on 31.03.1999, she paid Rs. 11,503/- as full and final payment
and that she be excused for submitting false complaints on
10.01.1999 and 25.03.1999.
It is further pleaded by the workman that inspite of the
fact that Smt. Sontakke deposited the entire loan amount
on 31.03.1999 and in spite of her giving in writing that she
had not paid any amount on 17.03.1997 to anybody, a
charge sheet dated 19.05.1999 was issued against him and
he submitted his reply to the said charge sheet, but party
no. 1 did not find his explanation to be satisfactory and
constituted a departmental enquiry committee and
appointed shri M. J. Sadhakaran as the enquiry officer and
Shri D.B. Setty as the presenting officer and on 03.09.1999,
Smt. Sontakke wrote a letter to the Deputy General Manager,
Syndicate Bank, Mumbai informing him about her inability
to attend the enquiry proceeding due to her advance, stage
of pregnancy and her complaint dated 10.01.1999 and
25.03.1999 were written under pressure of the Bank Officers
and as desired by them and the same were false complaints
and a similar letter was also given by her to the Manager of
Mansar Branch alongwith the copy of the letter dated
31.05.1999, to be produced before the enquiry officer as
her statement and the enquiry officer did not consider this
letter during the enquiry proceedings and on 03.09.1999,
04.09.1999 and 06.09.1999, Smt. Sontakke could not able to
attend the enquiry proceedings due to advance stage of
her pregnancy and she submitted a written statement vide
her letter dated 03.09.1999 stating that her complaints dated
10.01.1999 and 25.03.1999 were false and her letters dated
7610
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 13, 2012/ASVINA 21, 1934
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
31-3-1999, 31-05-1999 and 03-09-1999 were true and the
same be taken as her statement in the enquiry proceedings
and further during enquiry, on 10-03-2000 at Bombay
Smt. Sontakke submitted before the enquiry officer that
she had not paid any loan amount on 17-03-1997 and she
had paid her loan amount of Rs. 11,503 on 31-03-1999
towards the full and final settlement and without any
evidence against him, his services were terminated w.e.f.
30-05-2000 illegally and he was victimized.
The workman has prayed to set aside the order of
dismissal dated 30-05-2000 and to reinstate him in service
with continuity and full backwages and other consequential
benefits.
3. The case of the party no.1 is that the workman was
working as a clerk at its Mansar Branch from 03-02-1983 to
21-05-1998 and on 17-03-1997, one Smt. Rekha Daulat
Sontakke, a customer/ borrower of Mansar Branch of the
Bank having OSL A/c. 46/89 came to the Branch alongwith
Shri M.B. Kule and Shri Shamrao Sahare to repay her loan
amount and the workman, who was working in the advance
section and sitting at, the counter near the cash cabin called
Smt. Sontakke and her companions and enquired the
purpose of their visit and when Smt. Sontakke informed
him of her coming to the Bank to close her loan account,
the workman asked her to wait for some time and after
some time, he called her again and informed her that a total
sum of Rs. 8000 is required to be paid by her and
Mrs. Sontakke paid the amount of Rs. 8000 to the workman
across the counter, expecting the cash receipt counter foil
from him for depositing the amount and after waiting from
some time, when she asked the workman for the money
receipt, the workman handed over a “no dues certificate”
to her which was written by him in his own handwriting on
a plain paper and duly signed by Mr. M.P. Gokhale, the
Manager of the Branch and when she asked the workman
about the money receipt, the workman told her that the "no
dues certificate" would be sufficient proof of payment and
money receipt would not be necessary and Mr. Meshram,
clerk, who was entrusted with temporary cashier's duties
on 17-03-1997 was not aware of the cash deposited with
the workman by Mrs. Sontakke and the matter of
Mrs. Sontakke depositing a sum of Rs. 8000 with the
workman on 17-03-1997 came to light, when Shri Meshram
alongwith another staff member visited Patgauri, the village
of Mrs. Sontakke for recovery of dues from the borrowers
and visited the house of Mrs. Sontakke for recovery of the
outstanding dues against her loan account and
Mrs. Sontakke informed that she had repaid the entire loan
amount in cash on 17-03-1997 and showed the "no dues
certificate" issued by the workman and as there was no
such entry in the records of the Bank, after his return to the
Bank, Shri Meshram reported the matter immediately to the
branch Manager and a thorough verification of the Branch's
books of records were made, but the records did not reveal
any credit of Rs. 8000 in the loan account of Mrs. Sontakke
on 17-03-1997, which established that the workman
accepted cash of Rs. 8000 from the borrower meant to be
appropriated towards her loan account, OSL A/c. 46/89
and as the said loan account was written-off by means of
credit received from DICGC, instead of depositing the
money received by him from Mrs. Sontakke, with the cashier,
the workman gave a "no dues certificate" written by himself
on a plain paper to her and misappropriated the amount of
Rs. 8000 deposited by the customer, which was prejudicial
to the interest of the Bank and the said acts constituted
acts of gross misconduct as per the relevant provisions of
the Bipartite settlement and therefore, charge sheet-cum-
suspension order No. MZO/IRC/CGT(W) 16/99 dated
19-05-1999 was served against him and pending enquiry,
he was placed under suspension and the workman was
given the opportunity to submit his explanation to the
charges levelled against him and as his explanation dated
11-06-1999 was found not to be satisfactory, the Disciplinary
Authority decided to conduct an enquiry into the charges
and accordingly, appointed the enquiry officer and the
departmental enquiry was conducted by the enquiry officer
by giving all opportunities to the workman to defend himself
and the enquiry officer after analyzing the evidence placed
before him during the enquiry, held the charge of the gross
misconduct levelled against the workman as proved and
the Disciplinary Authority taking into consideration all the
aspects of the case including the evidence placed in the
enquiry and the report dated 18-10-1999 submitted by the
enquiry officer and the gravity of the misconduct, proposed
the punishment of "dismissal" from the services of the
Bank and the workman was asked to show cause as to why
the proposed punishment should not be imposed on him
and the workman appeared before the Disciplinary authority
on 11-01-2000 and taking into consideration of the request
of the workman to allow him to produce his witnesses in
his defence, the disciplinary authority directed for a denovo
enquiry for the specific purpose of recording the evidence
of the defence witness/witnesses and their cross-
examination and the enquiry officer was also directed to
submit a fresh report on the evidence already recorded and
on the fresh evidence of the defence and the enquiry officer
after giving due opportunity to the workman to adduce
defence evidence, on 10-04-2000 submitted a fresh report,
holding the charges as proved and taking into
consideration the report dated 10-04-2000, all aspect of the
case, evidence placed before the enquiry officer and the
gravity of misconduct, the disciplinary authority called
upon the workman, by proposing the punishment of
dismissal from services of the Bank, to appear before him
in person and to show cause as to why the proposed
punishment should not be imposed on him and on
26-05-2000, the workman appeared before the disciplinary
authority and made his submissions and as he failed to
bring out any extenuating factors, looking into all aspects
of the case, the Disciplinary authority imposed the
punishment of dismissal from the services of the Bank with
[Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)]
Hkkjr dk jkti= % vDrwcj 13] 2012@vkf'ou 21] 1934
7611
immediate effect vide order dated 30-05-2000 and the
workman filed an appeal against the order of punishment,
before the Appellate Authority and the Appellate Authority
after hearing the representative of the workman and
analyzing all the aspects of the case, confirmed the
punishment imposed by the Disciplinary Authority and
dismissed the appeal.
It is also pleaded by the party No. 1 that the charge
sheet dated 19-05-1999 was not based on false and
fabricated grounds and the same was issued on the basis
of the findings of an investigation and the workman was
dismissed from services of the Bank after due process of
departmental action as stipulated in the Bipartite settlement
and the Bank lost confidence in the workman and the
workman is not entitled to any relief.
4. In the rejoinder, the workman after denying the facts
mentioned in the written statement has reiterated the facts
mentioned in the statement of claim.
5. As this is a case of termination of the workman from
services, as a punishment in the domestic enquiry held
against him, the validity and fairness of the enquiry was
taken up for consideration as a preliminary issue and by
order dated 03-10-2006, the enquiry conducted against the
workman was held to be proper and legal and so also in
accordance with the principles of natural justice.
6. At the time of argument, it was submitted by the learned
advocate for the workman that it is clear from the evidence
on record that though on 17-03-1997, no amount was paid
by Smt. Sontakke towards her loan amount, she managed
to obtain a "no dues certificate" Ext. W-V from the Branch
Manager and the fact of issuance of such a certificate came
to light, when in December, 1998, a recovery team went to
the village of Smt. Sontakke and asked her to repay her
loan amount and when she produced the "no dues
certificate" after claiming to have paid the whole loan amount
on 17-03-1997 and the recovery team reported the matter to
the Branch Manager and Shri Gokhale, the then Branch
Manager went to the village of Smt. Sontakke on
10-01-1999 and obtained a complaint from her regarding
payment of Rs. 8000 to the cashier and obtaining of the
"no dues certificate" and the complaint was written as per
the dictation of Shri Gokhale and on the basis of such
complaint, Shri Gokhale on 13-01-1999 submitted a report
to the Regional Manager stating that the cashier on duty
on 17-03-1997 deceived him (Shri Gokhale) and got the "no
dues certificate" signed from him, without depositing the
loan amount and on 25-03-1999, a team of Bank Officers
went to the residence of Smt. Sontakke in her village and
forced her to write a complaint as per their dictation and
Smt. Sontakke was forced to mention the name of the
workman in that complaint, to be the person who had
received the amount of Rs. 8000 paid by her on 17-03-1997
and to have issued the “no dues certificate”, but
subsequently on 31-03-1999, Smt. Sontakke informed the
manager of Mansar Branch in writing that on 17-03-1997,
she did not deposit any amount, but obtained the "no
dues certificate" by falsely representing to have paid the
loan amount and actually on 31-03-1999, she repaid the
entire loan amount and on 31-05-1999, she also wrote
another letter to the Branch Manager intimating the same
thing and also stating that the Bank officers, who had
visited her house forced her to make the false complaint
implicating the workman and in her letter dated 03-09-1999,
Smt. Sontakke also informed such facts to the General
Manager, Syndicate Bank, Zonal Office, Mumbai and to
treat her letter dated 31-05-1999 to be her statement before
the enquiry officer and on 10-03-2000, Mrs. Sontakke
appeared as a defence witness before the enquiry officer
and stated that she had not paid any loan amount on
17-03-1999 and she repaid the entire loan amount of
Rs. 11,503 on 31-03-1999 and earlier, she had not been able
to attend the enquiry due to her advance stage of
pregnancy and as her child was very small and Shri
Shyamrao Sahare, who was examined as a witness for the
management also did not support the case of the
management and the letter given by her on 25-03-1999 was
written by him as per the instruction of the Bank officers
and the contents of the said letter not to be true and
Mrs. Sontakke also swore an affidavit stating about
withdrawing her complaint dated 25-03-1999 against the
workman and the contents of her complaint dated 25-03-
1999 not to be true and she was forced to write the false
complaint against the workman by the Bank Officers and
from the materials on record and the facts as mentioned
above, it is clear that there was no complaint or evidence
against the workman and the findings of the enquiry officer
are perverse and the punishment of termination of the
workman from services is shockingly disproportionate and
as such, the workman is entitled to be reinstated in service
with continuity and full back wages with other
consequential benefits.
7. Per contra, it was submitted by the learned advocate for the
Party No. 1 that by order dated 03-10-2006, it has already been
held by this Tribunal that the domestic enquiry conducted against
the workman to be legal, proper and in accordance with the
principles of natural justice and as the workman committed serious
misconduct of doing an act prejudicial to the interest of the Bank
or likely to involve the Bank in serious loss, in terms of clause
19.5( j) of Bipartite Settlement, by accepting cash of Rs. 8000 from
Mrs. Sontakke meant to be appropriated towards her OSL
A/c. 46/89 and issuing a "no dues certificate" and misappropriating
the said amount without depositing the same in the account of
Mrs. Sontakke and in the disciplinary proceedings, he was found
guilty of the charges by the enquiry officer and the findings of
the enquiry officer are based on the evidence adduced in the
disciplinary proceedings and the enquiry officer has given his
findings by analyzing the evidence in a rational manner and
assigning cogent reasons for arriving at the findings and the
findings of the enquiry officer are not at all perverse. It
7612
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 13, 2012/ASVINA 21, 1934
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
was submitted further by the learned advocate for the Party
No.1 that unless and until the punishment is found wholly
disproportionate to the misconduct proved, there is no
scope for the Tribunal normally to interfere with the
punishment and serious misconduct of misappropriation
of money has been proved against the workman, who was
working as a cashier in the bank and the bank has lost
confidence in the workman and as such, the termination of
the workman from service is just and proper and in a case
of misappropriation, there is need to consider the past
record of the employee while imposing the sentence.
8. At this juncture, I think it necessary to mention that it
is consistently held and accepted by the Hon 'ble Apex
Court that strict rules of evidence are not applicable to the
proceedings, before the Labour Court/Tribunal. It is also
well settled that the jurisdiction of the Tribunal to interfere
with the disciplinary matters or punishment cannot be
equated with an appellate jurisdiction and the Tribunal
cannot interfere with the findings of the enquiry officer or
competent authority where they are not arbitrary or utterly
perverse. The power to impose penalty on a delinquent
officer is conferred on the competent authority either by
an act of legislature or rules made under the provision of
Art. 309 of the Constitution. If there has been an enquiry
consistent, with the rules and in accordance with principles
of natural justice what punishment would meet the ends of
justice is a matter exclusively within the jurisdiction of the
competent authority. If the penalty can lawfully be imposed
and is imposed on the proved misconduct, the Tribunal
has no power to substitute its own discretion for that of
the authority. The adequacy of penalty unless it is malafide
is certainly not a matter for the Tribunal to concern itself
with. The Tribunal also cannot interfere with the penalty if
the conclusion of the enquiry officer or the competent
authority is based on evidence. It is also well settled that a
disciplinary proceeding is not a criminal trial and the
standard or proof required is that of preponderance of
probability and not proof beyond reasonable doubt.
9. So, keeping in view the settled principles regarding
the power of the Tribunal to interfere with the findings
and punishment imposed by the authorities in a
departmental enquiry, now, the present case in hand is to
be considered.
10. In this case, after going through the materials on
record including the documents relating to the domestic enquiry
held against the workman, it is found that management has
examined six witnesses and produced 15 documents to prove
the charge levelled against the workman. The workman produced
Mrs. Sontakke as a defence witness. Mrs. Sontakke gave her
evidence on 10-03-2000 in the enquiry and was cross-examined
in part by the management representative. On the request of
Mrs. Sontakke, the enquiry was adjourned to 11-03-2000 for
her further cross-examination. On 11-03-2000, Mrs. Sontakke
did not appear for her cross-examination. The workman
filed an application for adjournment of the enquiry on the
ground that due to illness of her child, Mrs. Sontakke was
not able to attend the enquiry, so the enquiry was adjourned
to 21-03-2000 for further cross-examination of
Mrs. Sontakke. On 21-03-2000, neither Mrs. Sontakke nor
the workman attended the enquiry. So, the enquiry officer
was compelled to close the enquiry. As Mrs. Sontakke
neither appeared herself nor produce by the workman, for
complete cross-examination, her evidence cannot be taken
into consideration.
11. So for the submission made on behalf of the workman
that Mrs. Sontakke was forced by the Bank officers to give
false complaints against him and about the issuance of the
"No dues Certificates" are concerned, from the materials
on record, it is found that the same are afterthought by the
workman, only to save his own skin. In this regard, I think
it necessary to refer to the showcause filed by the workman
to the charge sheet submitted against him. In his show
cause, the workman has nowhere mentioned that the Bank
officer forced Mrs. Sontakke to write false complaints
against him. In his show cause, the workman has mentioned
categorically about Mrs. Sontakke coming to the branch
alongwith Shri Shamrao Sahare and contacting him to know
the position of her loan account and about his asking her
to deposit Rs. 8000 in the account. It is pertinent to mention
here that the workman in his show cause has mentioned
that, "As Mrs. Rekha Sontakke was accompanied with a
reputed person, Shri Shamrao Sahare, the Sarpanch/Village
head of Mrs. Rekha Sontakke's village Patgowari, I had no
reason to take doubt that the said amount of Rs. 8000 is
actually paid deposited with the cahier and went (wrongly
mentioned as "want" in the show cause) on writing no
dues certificate and handed over the same to Mrs. Rekha
Sontakke for "obtaining signature of the Manager in good
faith only." However, giving a total go bye to such a stand,
in his statement of claim, the workman has mentioned that
on 17-03-1997, Smt. Sontakke visited the Bank and enquired
from him about her loan account OSL A/c 46/89 and as the
said loan account was closed from proceeds of DICGC
claim amount in 1992 itself and calculation of loan amount
was not readily available on record, he asked Mrs. Sontakke
to deposit a tentative amount of Rs. 8000 in cash section
and after half an hour or so, the Branch Manager, Shri M.P.
Gokhale called him to prepare a "no dues certificate" of
Smt. Sontakke, as she had deposited her loan dues with
cashier and as per the instruction of the Branch Manager,
he prepared the "no dues certificate" on plain paper, as
printed form was not available and put the same on the
table of Branch Manager alongwith loan register for
verification and he went to his section. The stands taken
by the workman in his show cause and in the statement of
claim are very contradictory to each other and therefore
cannot be believed.
Further more, in his show cause, the workman has
mentioned that, "I was very much surprised to know, that
[Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)]
Hkkjr dk jkti= % vDrwcj 13] 2012@vkf'ou 21] 1934
7613
Mrs. Rekha Daulat Sontakke told with Shri R. S. Meshram
Clerk of our Mansar Branch during his routine recovery
visit to the village, that the amount of Rs. 8000 was paid to
me on 17-03- 1997 at the Branch Counter on the day of her
visit to the Branch alongwith two others.” The said
statement shows that Mrs. Sontakke had made complaint
against the workman about payment of the amount of
Rs. 8000 to him, without any pressure from anybody.
Moreover, during the cross-examination of the
management’s witnesses, MW1 Mr. Roshan Balkrishna
Meshram, Clerk, MW-2, Shri Chandra Sekhar Narayan Rao
Garge, the Branch Manager, MW-4 Shri Mohan Prakash
Gokhale, the Ex-Branch Manager and MW-6 Shri G. M.
Naik, the Chief Manager, Regional Office, Nagpur, even no
suggestion was given to them about their forcing
Mrs. Sontakke to give false complaints against the workman.
Hence, I find no force in the contentions raised by the
learned advocate for the workman.
It is found from the materials on record that the enquiry
officer has dealt with the allegations made against the
workman systematically and he has assigned cogent
reasons in support of his findings after analyzing the
evidence. The findings of the enquiry officer are based on
the evidence adduced in the enquiry. From the materials on
record, it also cannot be said that this is a case of no
evidence and the findings given by the enquiry officer
cannot be arrived at by a prudent man on the evidence
available on record. Hence, the findings of the enquiry
officer cannot be said to be perverse.
12. In the instant case, the workman was found guilty of
misappropriating the customers fund, so, there was nothing
wrong in the Bank losing confidence or faith in such an
employee and awarding punishment of dismissal. In such
cases, there is no place for generosity or misplaced
sympathy and to interfere with the quantum of punishment.
From the materials on record and the discussions made
above, it is found that there is no ground to interfere with
the punishment imposed against the workman. Hence, it is
ordered:—
ORDER
The action of the management of Syndicate Bank
through its Chief Manager, Syndicate Bank, Indl. Relations
Division, Head Office, Manipal in terminating the services
of Shri Pravin Ganapathrao Khode, w.e.f. 30-05-2000 is
legal, proper and justified. The workman is not entitled to
any relief.
J. P. CHAND, Presiding Officer
ubZ fnYyh] 17 flrEcj] 2012
dk-vk-3131-—vkS|ksfxd fookn vf/kfu;e] 1947 ¼1947 dk
14½ dh /kkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUæzh; ljdkj] cSad vkWQ egkjk"Vª
ds izca/kra= ds lacð fu;kstdksa vkSj muds deZdkjksa ds chp vuqca/k
esa fufnZ"V vkS|ksfxd fookn esa dsUnzh; ljdkj vkS|ksfxd vf/kdj.k@Je
U;k;ky;] t;iqj ds iapkV ¼lanHkZ la[;k 71@2006½ dks izdkf'kr
djrh gS tks dsUnzh; ljdkj dks 12&09&2012 dks izkIr gqvk FkkA
[la-,y-&12011@49@2006&vkbZ vkj ¼ch&II)]
'kh'k jke] vuqHkkx vf/kdkjh
New Delhi, the 17th September, 2012
S.O. 3131.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial
Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government
hereby publishes the Award (Ref.No. 71/2006) of the Central
Government Industrial Tribunal/Labour Court, Jaipur now
as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between
the employers in relation to the management of Bank of
Maharashtra and their workman, which was received by
the Central Government on 12-09-2012.
[No. L-12011/49/2006-IR(B-II)]
SHEESH RAM, Section Officer
ANNEXURE
CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-
CUM-LABOUR COURT, JAIPUR
PRESENT
N.K. PUROHIT, Presiding Officer
I.D. No.71/2006
Reference No. L-12011/49/2006-IR(B-II) dated : 13-09-2006
The General Secretary
Rajasthan Pradesh Bank Workers’,
Organisation, C-13, Ojhaji Ka Bagh,
Gandhi Nagar Mod, Jaipur
V/s
The Dy. General Manager
Bank of Maharashtra
Regional Office, 6/30-31,
West Extension Field,
Ajmal Khan Marg, Karol Bagh,
New Delhi.
PRESENT
For the Applicant Union
:
Sh. R.C. Jain
For the Non-applicant
:
Sh. Rajesh Jain
AWARD
3.8.2012
1. The Central Government in exercise of the powers
conferred under 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 :—
“Whether the action of the management of Bank of
Maharashtra through Dy. General Manager, New Delhi
in awarding punishment vide order No. AX-1/ST/DM/
568/2002/246 dated 28-1-2002 to Shri Purnesh Kumar
Sharma is legal and justified? If not, what relief the
workman is entitled to and from which date?”
7614
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 13, 2012/ASVINA 21, 1934
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
2. These facts are not is dispute that while workman
was working as clerk in the branch of the non-applicant
bank at Sriganganagar, he was served upon a charge sheet
dated 1-6-93. The enquiry officer was appointed who
submitted his report on 26-10-99. Copy of enquiry report
was sent to the workman for submitting his report and after
affording opportunity for personal hearing the disciplinary
authority imposed punishment vide order dated 8-6-01. In
appeal preferred against the said order, the appellate
authority vide order dated 5-7-01 reviewed the punishment
awarded by the disciplinary authority and imposed penalties
of reduction by two stages in time scale and censure.
3. The union in its claim statement has assailed the
impugned orders of the disciplinary authority dated 8-6-01
as well as order of the appellate authority dated 21-12-01
on the ground of violation of principle of natural justice.
4. The management has failed to produce the entire
enquiry record of the domestic enquiry conducted against
the workman. Therefore, as regards fairness of the enquiry
following order was passed on 19-4-2012.
“In absence of entire enquiry revord it is deemed that
enquiry conducted against the workman was not fair
and proper and enquiry stands vitiated.”
5. Heard both the parties on the merits of the case.
6. Since, the management has failed to produce complete
enquiry record of the domestic enquiry, it has been deemed
that enquiry was not fair and proper and it stands vitiated.
Consequently, the punishment orders passed by the
disciplinary authority and appellate authority on 8-6-01
and 21-12-01 respectively and administrative order issued
on 28-2-02 are not legal and justified and the same are
liable to be set aside.
7. For the foregoing reasons, the action of the
management of the bank in awarding punishment to the
workman vide order dated 28-1-02 is not legal and justified.
The impugned punishment order is set aside. Resultantly,
the workman is entitled to get all consequential benefits.
The reference is answered accordingly.
8. Award as above.
N. K. PUROHIT, Presiding Officer
ubZ fnYyh] 17 flrEcj] 2012
dk-vk- 3132-—vkS|ksfxd fookn vf/kfu;e] 1947 ¼1947
dk 14½ dh /kkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnzh; ljdkj] ;wdks cSad ds
izca/kra= ds lac) fu;kstdksa vkSj muds deZdkjksa ds chp vuqca/k esa
fufnZ"V vkS|ksfxd fookn esa dsUnzh; ljdkj vkS|ksfxd vf/kdj.k@Je
U;k;ky;] tcyiqj ds iapkV ¼lanHkZ la[;k lhthvkbZVh@,ylh@
vkj@6@97½ dks izdkf'kr djrh gS tks dsUnzh; ljdkj dks 11&09&2012
dks izkIr gqvk FkkA
[la- ,y&12012@331@95&vkbZ vkj ¼ch&II½]
'kh'k jke] vuqHkkx vf/kdkjh
New Delhi, the 17th September, 2012
S.O. 3132.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the
Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, the Central Government
hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. CGIT/LC/R/6/97) of
the Central Government Industrial Tribunal/Labour Court,
Jabalpur now as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial
Dispute between the employers in relation to the
management of UCO Bank and their workman, which was
received by the Central Government on 11-09-2012.
[No. L-12012/331/95-IR(B-II)]
SHEESH RAM, Section Officer
ANNEXURE
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT
INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT,
JABALPUR
NO. CGIT/LC/R/6/97
Presiding Officer: SHRI MOHD. SHAKIR HASAN
General Secretary,
Indian National Bank Employees Federation,
9, Sanwer Road,
Ujjain (MP)
. . .Workman
Versus
Divisional Manager,
UCO Bank,
11, Purana Palasiya,
Indore (MP)
. . .Management
AWARD
Passed on this 29th day of August, 2012
1. The Government of India, Ministry of Labour vide its
Notification No. L-12012/331/95-IR(B-2) dated 30-12-96 has
referred the following dispute for adjudication by this
tribunal:—
“Whether the action of the management of UCO Bank,
Divisional Office, Indore in terminating the services of
Shri H.S. Muvel, Clerk, Ghonsala Branch, Distt. Ujjain
w.e.f. 10-8-94 is legal and justified? If not, to what relief
the workman is entitled?”
2. The case of the Union/workman, in short is that the
workman Shri Hari Singh Movel is member of Indian
National Bank Karmchari Federation, Ujjain. It is stated
that a criminal case was lodged against the workman at
Kharakha Ujjain police station and he was suspended w.e.f.
21-9-1992 by the management. He was served with a
chargesheet dated 24-4-1993 on 29-4-93 in English. The
workman gave reply to serve chargesheet in Hindi version.
He had also represented in view of settlement that the
departmental proceeding be stayed till the disposal of
criminal case as on the same issues a criminal case is
pending in the Court of Judicial Magistrate, Ujjain but the
[Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)]
Hkkjr dk jkti= % vDrwcj 13] 2012@vkf'ou 21] 1934
7615
management gave no reply and the departmental proceeding
was proceeded exparte in English against the workman.
Thereafter the Disciplinary Authority passed the order of
dismissal from service w.e.f. 10-8-94. It is stated that the
workman was acquitted in the criminal case by the learned
Judicial Magistrate, Ujjain on 17-9-97. It is stated that the
workman did not get opportunity to defend himself in the
departmental proceeding. It is submitted that the impugned
order of dismissal dated 10-8-94 is illegal and unjustified
and be set aside with back wages.
3. The management appeared and filed Written Statement
in the case. The case of the management, interalia, is that
the workman Shri Hari Singh Movel was working as a clerk
in Ghonsala Branch of UCO Bank. He was suspended by
the Divisional Manager, Indore vide order dated 21-9-92
with immediate effect. He was served with a chargesheet
dated 24-3-93 for committing serious misconduct. The
Enquiry Officer conducted the enquiry and submitted his
report holding him guilty of the charges. The workman was
showcaused for the proposed punishment of termination
from service. The workman was personally heard and also
filed Written reply before the Disciplinary Authority. The
Disciplinary Authority passed the order of dismissal from
service vide order dated 10-8-94. Thereafter the workman
raised the industrial dispute before the Labour enforcement
Officer (Central), Indore (in short LEO Indore), on 13-8-94.
It is stated that in the meantime the Head Office, Calcutta
directed the Divisional Manager, Indore vide order
dt. 6-2-96, who was Disciplinary Authority, to conduct a
fresh enquiry against the workman and to pass order
accordingly. It is stated that the order of re-enquiry
superseded the order of dismissal dated 10-8-94 and it is
now non-est, without any existence and infructuous. The
workman had not brought this fact before the LEO (Central)
Indore and as a result of this reference. It is stated that the
workman was very much in service and the order of
dismissal dated 10-8-94 was automatically cancelled on the
order of fresh enquiry of the alleged charges in Hindi. This
fact is accepted by the workman on receiving subsistence
allowance till 8-9-1997 and he was treated under suspension
from 21-9-92 to 8-9-97. Thereafter on due enquiry he was
again terminated from service from 8-9-1997. It is submitted
that the present reference is infructuous and the reference
be answered accordingly.
4. On the basis of the pleadings of the parties, the
following issues are settled for adjudication—
I.
Whether the action of the management in
terminating the workman w.e.f. 10-8-94 is legal and
justified?
II.
To what relief the workman is entitled?
5. According to the workman, he was terminated on
10-8-94 illegally without giving opportunity to defend
himself. Moreover a criminal case was pending and therefore
the departmental enquiry cannot be proceeded without
disposal of the criminal proceeding in terms of settlement
whereas the management has contended that now the
termination order dated 10-8-94 was not in existence after
initiation of fresh enquiry on the charges and it is
automatically deemed to be terminated.
6. This reference is only with respect to the termination
dated 10-8-94 and is not with respect to the termination
dated 8-9- 1997. The dismissal dated 10-8-94 is said by the
management that it was cancelled automatically after
initiation of fresh enquiry on the same charges against the
workman. Now let us examine the evidence of the parties
as to whether the termination order dated 10-8-94 was
cancelled or not. If it was not cancelled then management
was not entitled to conduct enquiry against the workman
afresh because the relationship of employer and employee
was ended. The workman Shri Hari Singh Movel is examined
in the case. He has supported his case that he was
terminated vide order dated 10-8-94 with immediate effect.
In para 15 he has stated that the workman was informed
vide order dated 6-2-1996 of Divisional Manager, UCO Bank,
Indore that the departmental enquiry is to be held afresh in
Hindi and accordingly Shri S.M. Dabkara was appointed
as Enquiry Officer. This clearly shows that the termination
order dated 10-8-94 was deemed to be cancelled, otherwise
the management was not in a position to conduct the
enquiry afresh. He has admitted at para 43 that he got
subsistence allowance from 10-8-94 to 31-1-96 and on
9-7-96, he got full pay. This itself shows that termination
order dated 10-8- 94 was cancelled and he was treated under
suspension. The workman appears to have acknowledged
by accepting subsistence allowance. The evidence of the
workman corroborates the fact that the order dated 10-8-94
of termination was already deemed to be cancelled on the
order of fresh enquiry.
7. The workman has filed certain documents which are
admitted by the management. Exhibit W/1 is the failure
report dt. 21-8-95 of LEO(C) Indore to the Ministry. This is
filed to show that conciliation was failed between the parties
and therefore this reference. Exhibit W/2 is this reference
order. Exhibit W/3 is a letter dated 30-5-96 to Divisional
Manager, UCO Bank, Indore by Shri Ram Nagwanshi with
respect to stay the departmental proceeding in view of
criminal proceeding pending in Court. This letter itself
shows that the workman had knowledge and had
participated in the fresh departmental enquiry on the
charges. This shows that the dismissal order dated 10-8-94
was deemed to have been cancelled and thereafter the fresh
enquiry was initiated on the same charges. Exhibit W/4 is
the order dated 31-10-96 of the Hon’ble High Court passed
in Writ Petition No. 1075/98 whereby the notice was issued
to the respondent/management. This is filed to show that
the workman challenged that the criminal proceeding and
departmental enquiry cannot be started simultaneously.
7616
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 13, 2012/ASVINA 21, 1934
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
This is not relating to the dismissal order dated 10-8-94.
Exhibit W/5 is the order dated 8-9-97 whereby the workman
was again terminated after fresh enquiry. This order is not
under consideration. Thus the documentary evidence
adduced by the union clearly shows that after termination
dated 10-8-94, the fresh proceeding was again started
against the workman. This itself shows that the order dated
10-8-94 is not in existence and therefore the question to
consider legality and justification of the order dated
10-8-94 does not arise.
8. On the other hand, the management has adduced
evidence in the case. The management witness Shri P.S.
Pathak is working as Manager, UCO Bank, Ghonsala
Branch. He has also supported the fact that a fresh enquiry
was initiated on the same charges after the alleged order
dated 10-8-94 and the workman was paid subsistence
allowance during fresh enquiry. He has stated that dismissal
order dated 10-8-94 is non-est, without any existence and
infructuous. It is clear that a formal order was not passed
by the management before directing the competent authority
to conduct fresh enquiry. However it appears to be an
implied meaning on giving direction for conducting the
departmental enquiry afresh that the order of dismissal
dated 10-8-94 was set-aside by the Authority .
9. The management has also adduced documentary
evidence. Exhibit M/1 is a letter dated 4-11-1995 by Asstt.
General Manager (Adm.), Calcutta to the Union whereby it
was informed that a fresh enquiry is to be conducted on
the chargesheet dated 24-4-93. This is filed to show that
the punishment order dated 10-8-94 was impliedly cancelled
and a fresh enquiry was being conducted. Exhibit M/2 is
the letter dated 18-11-1995 issued by Asstt. General
Manager (Adm.) lndore to Branch Manager informing him
that a fresh enquiry in Hindi is to be conducted on the said
charge sheet dated 24-4-93 and the workman be paid
subsistence allowance. This is filed to show that the period
of fresh enquiry was also considered under suspension.
Exhibit M/3 is letter to the workman whereby he was
informed that he is entitled to subsistence allowance during
fresh enquiry. Exhibit M/4 is the letter dated 9-3-96 whereby
it was informed to the workman that the amounts of
subsistence allowance was deposited in his accounts of
the Bank. Exhibit M/5 is the letter dated 9-7-96 by the
Manager to the workman whereby a Bankers cheque of
amount of subsistence allowance and other allowance was
given to the workman. Thus the documentary evidence
also shows that a formal cancellation order of dismissal
dated 10-8-94 was not passed by the management before
conducting a fresh enquiry on the same charges. However
it is clear that the workman had participated in the fresh
enquiry and also received subsistence allowance which
shows that the dismissal order 10-8-94 was deemed to have
been cancelled. Thus it is clear that there is no dispute in
existence between the parties with respect to the dismissal
order dated 10-8-94. This issue is decided accordingly.
10. Issue No. II
On the basis of the discussion made above, it is clear
that the dismissal order dated 10-8-94 was not in existence
after initiation of fresh enquiry against the workman on the
same charges. Thus the workman is not entitled to any
relief. The reference is accordingly answered.
11. In the result, the award is passed without any costs.
MOHD. SHAKIR HASAN, Presiding Officer
ubZ fnYyh] 17 flrEcj] 2012
dk-vk- 3133-—vkS|ksfxd fookn vf/kfu;e] 1947 ¼1947 dk
14½ dh /kkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnzh; ljdkj cSad vkWQ bafM;k ds
izca/kra= ds lac) fu;kstdksa vkSj muds deZdkjks ds chp vuqca/k esa
fufnZ"V vkS|ksfxd fookn esa dsUnzh; ljdkj vkS|ksfxd vf/kdj.k@Je
U;k;ky;] ukxiqj ds iapkV ¼lanHkZ la[;k lhthvkbZVh@,uthih@
42@2007½ dks izdkf'kr djrh gS tks dsUnzh; ljdkj dks 10&09&2012
dks izkIr gqvk FkkA
[la- ,y&12012@11@2007&vkbZ vkj ¼ch&II½]
'kh'k jke] vuqHkkx vf/kdkjh
New Delhi, the 17th September, 2012
S.O. 3133.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial
Disputes Act, 1947, (14 of 1947) the Central Government
hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. CGIT/NGP/42/2007)
of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal/Labour
Court, Nagpur now as shown in the Annexure in the
Industrial Disputes between the employers in relation to
the management BANK OF INDIA and their workman,
which was received by the Central Government on
10-09-2012.
[ No. L-12012/11/2007-IR(B-II)]
SHEESH RAM, Section Officer
ANNEXURE
BEFORE SHRI J. P. CHAND, PRESIDING OFFICER.
CGIT-CUM-LABOUR COURT, NAGPUR
Case No. CGIT/NGP/42/2007 date : 05-09-2012
Party No. 1 :
The Chief Manager, (SS&P)
Bank of India, Zonal Office,
S. V. Patel Marg, Post Box -4, Nagpur-1
Versus
Party No. 2 :
Shri Parmanand Dubey,
R/o. Manas Bhawan,
Khandelwal Nagar,
Behind S.T.V. Colony, Akola (MS)
[Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)]
Hkkjr dk jkti= % vDrwcj 13] 2012@vkf'ou 21] 1934
7617
AWARD
(Dated: 5th September, 2012)
In exercise of the powers conferred by clause (d) of
sub-section (1) and sub-section 2 (A) of section 10 of
Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947) ("the Act" in
short), the Central Government has referred the industrial
dispute between the employers, in relation to the
management of Bank of India and their workman,
Shri Parmanand Dubey, for adjudication, as per letter No.
L-12012/11/2007-IR (B-II) dated 06-07-2007, with the
following schedule :—
"Whether the action of the management of Bank of India
through its Chief Manager (CS&P), Zonal Office,
S.V.Patel Road, Nagpur in awarding the punishment of
dismissal of Shri Parmanand M. Dubey from Bank's
service without notice vide order dated 14-02-2002 is
legal and justified and whether the workman is entitled
to be reinstated in the service of the Bank with full back
wages and all consequential benefits? If not, what relief
is the workman is entitled to?"
2. On receipt of the reference, parties were noticed to
file their respective statement of claim and written statement,
in response to which, the workman Shri Parmanand Dubey,
("the workman" in short) filed the statement of claim and
the management of Bank of India (“party no. 1” in short)
filed the written statement.
The case of the workman as projected in the statement
of claim is that he came to be appointed in the services of
Bank of India, as a clerk w.e.f. 17-04-1980 and was posted
to Akola Branch and subsequently, he was transferred to
Bhide branch in Wardha District and in the year 2001, he
was transferred to Dewrankar Nagar Branch at Amravati,
and while working in the said branch, charge sheet dated
05-09-2001. containing one charge was served on him, on
the allegation that he abused his official position and on
09-02-2001 prevailed upon M/s. Shakambari Industries, an
account holder of the said branch to issue a cheque for
Rs. 50,000 in favour of M/s. Hotel Surbhi and credited the
said amount to the cash credit account of M/s. Hotel Surbhi
on 09-02-2001 and on 31-03-2001, he prevailed upon
M/s. Ajinkya Marketing for issuing SDR for 15 days for
Rs. 50,000 in favour of M/s. Ajinkya Marketing and instead
of SDR, he unauthorisedly prepared a pay order for
Rs. 50,000 in the name of M/s. Shakambari Industry and
also managed to get the said amount deposited in the
account of M/s. Shakambari Industries and the said Acts
were done by him to settle personal liabilities with
M/s. Shakambari Industries and Shri Agrekar was appointed
as the enquiry officer to conduct the enquiry against him
and the enquiry was not fair and the same was conducted
by the enquiry officer without giving him proper and
adequate opportunity of defence and though on
23-10-2001, he had prayed for adjournment of the enquiry
by sending a telegram, due to his illness and the said
telegram was received by the enquiry officer before
proceeding with the enquiry, the enquiry officer proceeded
with the case ex-parte and recorded the evidence of five
witnesses and majority of the questions put to the
witnesses were leading questions and the enquiry officer
allowed such questions in his absence and the enquiry
officer instead of acting as the enquiry officer, practically
played the role of the prosecutor and asked questions to
majority of the witnesses to fill-in the gaps in the evidence
produced by the presenting officer and the witnesses were
not subjected to cross-examination on subsequent dates
and the said facts demonstrate that conduction of enquiry
was not fair and recording of evidence in his absence was
clear denial of reasonable opportunity of defence and the
same is total breach of natural justice. The further case of
the workman is that the findings given by the enquiry
officer are perverse and the enquiry officer lost sight of the
principles that burden of proving the charges, on the basis
of evidence is on the management and there is no evidence
on record to establish his guilt or negligence or that his act
or acts were prejudicial to the interest of the bank and in
absence of such evidence, the finding of the enquiry officer
that the charges had been proved is nothing but an empty
formality and the conclusions drawn by the enquiry officer
are most casual and prejudicial and are not based on the
evidence on record and the findings are based on
conjunctures and surmises and the enquiry officer did not
appreciate and consider the evidence led on his behalf and
the Disciplinary Authority as well as the Appellate
Authority committed serious error accepting the perverse
findings of the enquiry officer and unjustifiedly awarded
shockingly disproportionate punishment of dismissal from
services upon him and his past service records were not
considered before imposing of the punishment and
therefore, the punishment is unjustified. The workman has
further mentioned that in the terms of reference, the date of
his dismissal from services has been mentioned as
14-02-2002, but actually, the date of his dismissal is
11-02-2002. The workman has prayed to declare the order
of his dismissal from service dated 11-02-2002 to be illegal
and unjustified and to set aside the same and to reinstate
him in service with full back wages and other consequential
benefits.
3. The party no. 1 in their written statement has pleaded
inter-alia that charge sheet came to be issued against the
workman on 05-09-2001and Shri M.R. Agrekar was
appointed as the enquiry officer to conduct the enquiry
and the enquiry officer submitted the enquiry report to the
disciplinary authority on 14-12-2001 and the disciplinary
authority vide his order dated 11-02-2002 imposed the
punishment of dismissal from services without notice,
against the workman, in terms of clause 21 (iv) (a) of the Bi-
partite Settlement and the workman filed an appeal
challenging the order of dismissal dated 11-02-2002, before
7618
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 13, 2012/ASVINA 21, 1934
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
the appellate authority and the appellate authority after
granting an opportunity of hearing to the workman,
dismissed the appeal vide its order dated 08-04-2002 and
the misconduct was mentioned in detail in the chargesheet
dated 05-09-2001 and the enquiry conducted against the
workman was fair and he was given proper and adequate
opportunity to defend himself. The further case of the party
no.1 is that the enquiry officer fixed the enquiry proceedings
on 12-10-2001 and the workman and the management
representative appeared before the enquiry officer and the
presenting officer tendered documents along with list of
witnesses and the same was taken on record in presence of
and with due consent of the workman and thereafter, the
enquiry was adjourned to 19-10-2001, at the request of the
workman and on 19-10-2001, the workman requested for
adjournment to engage defence representative and the
enquiry officer granted time with a condition that no further
adjournment would be granted in any case and the enquiry
was posted to 23-10-2001 and on 23-10-2001, management
witnesses were present before the enquiry officer and the
workman with the intention to delay the proceedings issued
a telegram addressed to the enquiry officer to adjourn the
enquiry, on the ground of his not keeping well and the
enquiry officer considered the fact that the witnesses were
outsiders and were summoned and they were present and
as such, the enquiry officer proceeded with the enquiry
and permitted the management representative to examine
the witnesses and the principles of evidence Act are not
applicable in such a case and the allegation that the enquiry
officer permitted the management representative to ask
leading questions to the witnesses and that the enquiry
officer played the role of prosecutor are false and denied. It
is also pleaded by party no.1 that the enquiry officer
adjourned the case to 02-11-2001, after recording. the
evidence of the witnesses on 23-10-2001 and on
02-11-2001, the workman appeared in the enquiry with his
defence representative, Shri S.R. Bobhate and each and
every request made by the defence representative was
granted by the enquiry officer and the copy of the enquiry
proceedings and copies of depositions recorded on
23-10-2001 were supplied to the workman and the enquiry
officer asked the defence representative to verify the
documents and the defence representative was allowed to
verify the documents and being asked by the enquiry officer,
the defence representative expressed to make cross-
examination of the witnesses no. 2, 3 and 4 of the
management and accordingly, the defence representative
was permitted to cross-examine the said three witnesses
and the departmental enquiry was conducted fairly and in
accordance with the principles of natural justice and the
workman was given every opportunity to defend himself
and the findings of the enquiry officer are not perverse and
the findings are based on evidence on record and not based
on conjuncture and surmises and the charge mentioned in
the charge sheet dated 05-09-2001 was specific enough to
demonstrate the involvement of the workman and the same
was duly proved in the departmental enquiry and the
findings of the enquiry officer are perfectly legal, justified
and inconsonance with the materials placed on record
during the enquiry and the disciplinary authority and the
appellate authority did not commit any error by accepting
the findings of the enquiry officer and the punishment is
not shockingly disproportionate to the misconduct and
the workman is not entitled for any relief.
4. As this is a case of dismissal of the workman from
services, after holding a departmental enquiry, the validity
of the departmental enquiry was taken as a preliminary
issue for consideration and by order dated 22-03-2012, the
departmental enquiry conducted against the workman was
held to be legal, proper and in accordance with the principles
of natural justice.
5. During the course of argument, it was submitted by
the learned advocate for the workman that the Branch
Manager, Akola Bank sanctioned loan of Rs. 1.65 lakhs
illegally to M/s. Kabra Udyog and M/s. Kabra Dal and Oil
Mill and the workman, who was working in loan sanction
made complaint about the same to the CBI and as such, he
was made a scapegoat and he was transferred from Akola
to Amravati and a fraudulent charge sheet was submitted
against him and no legal evidence was adduced by the
management to prove the charge against the workman there
was no evaluation of the evidence by the enquiry officer
and no reason has been assigned by the enquiry officer in
support of the findings and the defence evidence was not
taken by him into consideration and as such, the findings
are perverse and the past record of the workman was not
considered at the time of imposition of the punishment and
the punishment imposed against the workman is shockingly
disproportionate and the workman is entitled to
reinstatement in service with all consequential benefits.
6. Per contra, it was submitted by the learned advocate
for the party no.1 that the workman abused his official
position and to the detrimental of the interest of the Bank,
on 09-02-2001, prevailed upon, M/s. Shakambari Industries,
a customer of the Bank and managed to get issued a chque
for Rs. 50,000 in favour of M/s. Hotel Surabhi and credited
the said amount to cash credit account of M/s. Hotel
Surabhi on the same day and on 31-03-2001, the workman
prevailed upon M/s. Ajinkya Marketing, a sister concerned
of M/s. Hotel Surabhi and managed to get issued a cheque
for Rs. 50,000 purportedly for issuing SDR for 15 days in
their favour and instead of preparing the SDR in favour of
M/s. Ajinkya Marketing, he unauthorisedly prepared a pay
order for Rs. 50,000 in favour of M/s. Shakambari Industries
and managed to get the amount deposited in the said
account and fraudulently misappropriated the said amount
to settle his liabilities with M/s. Shakambari Industries and
the workman committed a grave misconduct within the
meaning of para 19.5 (j) of the Bipartite Settlement and for
that he was charge sheeted and in the disciplinary
[Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)]
Hkkjr dk jkti= % vDrwcj 13] 2012@vkf'ou 21] 1934
7619
proceedings, he was found guilty of the charges by the
enquiry officer and the findings of the enquiry officer are
based on the evidence adduced in the disciplinary
proceedings and the enquiry officer has given his findings
by analyzing the evidence in a rational manner and
assigning cogent reasons for arriving at the findings and
the findings of the enquiry officer are not at all perverse. It
was submitted further by the learned advocate for the party
no. 1 that unless and until the punishment is found wholly
disproportionate to the misconduct proved, there is no
scope for the Tribunal normally to interfere with the
punishment and serious misconduct of misappropriation
of money has been proved against the workman, who was
working as a clerk in the bank and the bank has lost
confidence in the workman and as such, the dismissal of
the workman from services is just and proper and in a case
of misappropriation, there is need to consider the past
record of the employee while imposing the sentence.
In support of such contentions, the learned advocate
for party no. 1 placed reliance on the decisions reported on
AIR 2000 SC 3219 (Janatha Bazar Vs. Secretary, Sahakari
Nonarana Sangh), AIR 2004 SC-4828 (Regional Manager,
Rajasthan S.R.T.C Vs. Sohanlal), 2012 (2) Bom. C.R. 47
(Asarm Dagduji Pawar Vs. Divisional Controller,
M.S.R.T.C.), AIR 2006 SC 2730 (Divisional Controller,
NEKRTC Vs. H. Amresh), 2008 (1) SCC-115 (UPSRTC Vs.
Vinod Kumar) and 2010 (4) Supreme 498 (UPSRTC Vs.
Suresh Chand Sharma).
7. Before delving into the merit of the case, I think it
apropos to mention about the principles enunciated by the
Hon'ble Courts in the decisions cited by the learned
advocate for the party no. l.
In the decision reported in AIR 2000 SC-3219 (Supra),
the Hon'ble Apex Court have held that:
“Industrial Disputes Act (14 of 1947), Sch. 2, Items 3, S.
11-A-Reinstatement-Charges of breach of trust and
misappropriation of goods established-Reinstating the
employee in service, unjustified-Fact that misappropriation
is for small or large amounts, or that past record of employee
is unblemished, irrelevant.”
8. In the judgment reported in AIR 2004 SC- 4828 (Supra),
the Hon’ble Apex Court have held that :
“(B) Constitution of India, Art. 311- Road Transport
Corporations Act (64 of 1950), S. 45-Interference with
quantum of sentence awarded-Termination of service on
ground of misconduct-Unless sentence is wholly
disproportionate to misconduct proved-Superior Courts
should not normally interfere.
(C) Constitution of India, Art. 311—Dismissal from
service—Loss of confidence—Misconduct by delinquent
conductor of not issuing tickets to passengers—Since
misconduct proved is one of dishonesty—quantum of
monetary loss is immaterial and it is loss of confidence in
workman that matters—Dismissal proper.
9. In the judgment reported in 2012 (2) Bom.C.R.-47
(Supra), the Hon’ble High Court have held that :
Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, Sec 11-A- Reissue of bus
ticket-Petitioner was served with charge sheet alleging
he has reissued ticket-Further alleged tickets were found
in bag of petitioner- Enquiry conducted-Spot statement
and statement of enquiry recorded-Petitioner submits
after two years of incident enquiry started there was
violation of rules and principles of natural justice-
Petitioner dismissed from services—Petitioner filed
dispute before Labour Court and reference made under
provision of Act—Learned Labour Court rejected same
hence this petition—Petitioner submits Labour Court
failed to give benefit of provision of section 11-A of
Act—Held, Court found, nothing has demonstrated to
hold findings recorded by Labour Court are perverse in
any manner. Absence of petitioner before Labour Court
during crucial period i.e. at time of recording of evidence
and filing of pursis before Labour Court shows he had
no case and conveniently remained absent. Petitioner
not availed opportunity to participate either in enquiry
or before Labour Court at crucial stage. Misconduct of
petitioner proved. Hon'ble Supreme Court held in 2000
DGLS (Soft.) 1452, amount small or large is not question
of showing uncalled for sympathy. Petitioner admitted
Rs. 14.50 was found less in spot statement. No case is
made out for interference. ”
10. In the judgment reported in AIR 2006 SC-2730
(Supra), the Hon ’ble Apex Court have held that:
“Service Law. Dismissal. Reinstatement. Misconduct by
conductor on duty in drunken state Misappropriation
of funds. Charges of pilferage was established against
the respondent. Workman such misconduct is grave
and has the effect of disrupting the services of a public
transport system—Loss of confidence as the primary
factor and not the amount of money mis-appropriated
and that the sympathy or generosity cannot be a factor
which is impermissible in law. When an employee is
found guilty of pilferage or of misappropriating a
Corporation’s funds, there is nothing wrong in the
Corporation losing confidence or faith in such an
employee and awarding punishment of dismissal-
Direction to appellant Corporation to immediately
discharge the respondent from service. Appeal allowed.
Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. Article 311 of the
Constitution of India.”
11. In the judgment reported in 2008(1) SCC -115 (Supra),
the Hon’ble Apex Court have held that :
“Labour Law—Departmental Proceedings Misappro-
priation —Conclusions of Enquiry Officer and quantum
of Punishment—Challenge without there being any
7620
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 13, 2012/ASVINA 21, 1934
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
challenge to legality or fairness of the enquiry report-
Labour Court, on the findings that the charges of
misappropriation not being proved, the punishment of
removal was harsh accordingly, reduced the punishment
to stoppage of one increment without any cumulative
effect and directed reinstatement with full bank wages-
In absence of challenge to the enquiry report, the Labour
Court should be reluctant to interfere with the findings
of the Punishment Authority or the quantum of
punishment. Where the employer has lost confidence,
there is no scope for misplaced sympathy to interfere
with the quantum of punishment. Appeal allowed-
Impugned order set aside."
12. In the judgment reported in 2010 (4) Supreme- 498
(Supra), the Hon’ble Apex Court have held that:
“Service & Labour Laws-Termination-Reinstatement
ordered by High Court-Non-issuance of tickets by bus
conductor on payment by passengers. No fault could
be found with the Award of the Labour Court and it was
not necessary for the checking authority to record the
evidence of the passengers who were found travelling
without tickets nor it was necessary to check the cash
at the hand of the employee. The High Court misdirected
itself while setting aside the well-reasoned Award of the
Labour Court without giving any reason whatsoever-
Enquiry officer has rightly appreciated the evidence and
found the charges proved in respect of both the
incidents. The Disciplinary Authority has taken a right
decision accepting the enquiry report and punishment
order was passed after serving second show cause to
the employee. There was an intention to misappropriate
the fare recovered from the passengers who were found
travelling without tickets at both the times- No reason
awarded by High Court while reversing the decision of
Labour Court-Impugned judgment and order set aside-
In a case of corruption/misappropriation the only
punishment is dismissal—Appeal of corporation
allowed.”
13. At this juncture, I think it necessary to mention that
it is consistently held and accepted by the Hon’ble Apex
court that strict rules of evidence are not applicable to the
proceedings, before the Labour Court/Tribunal. It is also
well settled that the jurisdiction of the Tribunal to interfere
with the disciplinary matters or punishment cannot be
equated with an appellate jurisdiction and the Tribunal
cannot interfere with the findings of the enquiry officer or
competent authority where they are not arbitrary or utterly
perverse. The power to impose penalty on a delinquent
officer is conferred on the competent authority either by
an act of legislature or rules made under the provision of
Art. 309 of the Constitution. If there has been an enquiry
consistent with the rules and in accordance with principles
of natural justice what punishment would meet the ends of
justice is a matter exclusively within the jurisdiction of the
competent authority. It the penalty can lawfully be imposed
and is imposed on the proved misconduct, the Tribunal
has no power to substitute its own discretion for that of
the authority. The adequacy of penalty unless it is malafide
is certainly not a matter for the Tribunal to concern itself
with. The Tribunal also cannot interfere with the penalty if
the conclusion of the enquiry officer or the competent
authority is based on evidence. It is also well settled that a
disciplinary proceeding is not a criminal trial and the
standard or proof required is that of preponderance of
probability and not proof beyond reasonable doubt.
14. So, keeping in view the principles settled by the
Hon'ble Courts in the decisions mentioned above and the
settled principles regarding the power of the Tribunal to
interfere with the findings and punishment imposed by the
authorities in a departmental enquiry, now, the present case
in hand is to be considered.
15. So far the contention raised by the learned advocate
for the workman regarding submission of a fraudulent
charge sheet against the workman and making him a
scapegoat due to his lodging a complaint to the CBI against
in the Branch Manager for illegal sanction of loan is
concerned, on perusal of the documents, it is found that
there is no force at all in such contentions. The copy of the
complaint filed by the workman with the CBI has been
marked as Ext. W-XI. On perusal of Ext. W-XI, it is found
that the said complaint was filed by the workman on
03-03-2006, about four years after his dismissal from service.
There is no evidence on record to show that the workman
had lodged any complaint against the Branch Manager
prior to the submission of the charge sheet and that the
workman was made a scapegoat. Hence, the contention of
the learned advocate for the workman on that score fails.
16. In this case, after going through the materials on
record including the documents relating to the domestic
enquiry held against the workman, it is found that to prove
the charge against the workman, management has examined
six witnesses and also produced twelve documents
including the documents regarding the transactions made
by the workman as mentioned in the charge sheet. It is also
found that the enquiry officer has dealt with the allegations
made against the workman systematically and he has
assigned cogent reasons in support of his findings after
analyzing the evidence. The findings of the enquiry officer
are based on the evidence adduced in the enquiry. From
the materials on record, it also cannot be said that this is a
case of no evidence and the findings given by the enquiry
officer cannot be arrived at by a prudent man on the
evidence available on record. Hence, the findings of the
enquiry officer cannot be said to be perverse.
17. In the instant case, the workman was found guilty of
misappropriating the customers fund, so, there was nothing
wrong in the Bank losing confidence or faith in such an
employee and awarding punishment of dismissal. In such
cases, there is no place for generosity or misplaced
sympathy and to interfere with the quantum of punishment.
[Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)]
Hkkjr dk jkti= % vDrwcj 13] 2012@vkf'ou 21] 1934
7621
18. Applying the principles enunciated by the Hon’ble
Courts as mentioned in the decisions cited by the learned
advocate for the party no. 1 to the case in hand, it is found
that there was no necessity for the disciplinary authority
to consider the past record of the workman, while imposing
the punishment. The punishment of dismissal of the
workman from services cannot be said to be not
commensurate with the misconduct, proved against him in
a properly conducted departmental enquiry.
From the materials on record and the discussions made
above, it is found that there is no ground to interfere with
the punishment imposed against the workman. Hence, it is
ordered:—
ORDER
The action of the management of Bank of India through
its Chief Manager (CS & P), Zonal Office, S. V. Patel Road,
Nagpur in awarding the punishment of dismissal of Shri
Parmanand M. Dubey from Bank's service without notice
vide order dated 11-02-2002 (wrongly mentioned as
14-02-2002 on schedule of reference) is legal and justified.
The workman is not entitled to any relief.
J.P. CHAND, Presiding Officer
ubZ fnYyh] 17 flrEcj] 2012
dk-vk-3134-—vkS|ksfxd fookn vf/kfu;e] 1947 ¼1947
dk 14½ dh /kkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnzh; ljdkj eSllZ lruk LVksu
,aM ykbZe daiuh fyfeVsM] dksydkrk ds izca/kra= ds lac) fu;kstdkas
vkSj muds deZdkjksa ds chp vuqca/k esa fufnZ"V vkS|ksfxd fookn esa
dsUnzh; ljdkj vkS|ksfxd vf/kdj.k@Je U;k;ky; ]tcyiqj ds iapkV
¼lanHkZ la[;k 75] 76] 77] 78] 79@2008½ dks izdkf'kr djrh gS tks
dsUnzh; ljdkj dks 13&9&2012 dks izkIr gqvk FkkA
[la- ,y&29012@50] 51] 52] 53] 54@2008&vkbZ vkj ¼,e½]
tksgu rksiuks] voj lfpo
New Delhi, the 17th September, 2012
S.O. 3134.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the
Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central
Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No.
75,76,77,78 and 79/2008) of the Central Government
Industrial Tribunal/Labour Court, Jabalpur now as shown
in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the
employers in relation to the management of M/s Satna Stone
Lime Co. Ltd. (Kolkata) and their workman, which was
received by the Central Government on 13-9-2012.
[No. L-29012/50,51,52,53,54/2008-IR (M)]
JOHAN TOPNO, Under Secy.
ANNEXURE
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT
INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT,
JABALPUR
Presiding Officer : SHRI MOHD. SHAKIR HASAN
Case No. CGIT/LC/R/75/08, 76/08, 77/08, 78/08 and 79/08
Shri Ram Saroj Kushwaha,
General Secretary,
AITUC Distt. Parishad,
AITUC Office, Sidharth Nagar,
Post Birla Vikas,
Distt. Satna (MP)
. . .Workman/Union
Versus
The Managing Director,
Satna Stone Lime Co. Ltd.,
6, Middle Road, Hasting,
Kolkata
. . .Management
AWARD
Passed on this 7th day of August, 2012
1. (a) The Government of India, Ministry of Labour vide
its Notification No. L-29012(50)/2008-IR(M) dated
10-6-2008 has referred the following dispute for adjudication
by this tribunal :—
"Whether the lock-out of Satna Stone and Lime
Company Ltd., Siding, Madhya Pradesh w.e.f. 17-8-2000
was legal or not?"
“Whether the action of Satna Stone and Lime Company
Ltd., Siding, Satna MP in not paying wages w.e.f.
1-5-2000 to 17- 8-2000 to Smt.Chhoti Kolin W/o Shri
Ramnath Kaul and bonus and retrenchment
compensation for the period 1999 to 2001 is just and
legal? If not, to what relief the workman is entitled to?”
(b)The Government of India, Ministry of Labour vide
its Notification No.L-290 12(51 )/2008-IR(M) dated
10-6-2008 has referred the following dispute for adjudication
by this tribunal :—
“ Whether the lock-out of Satna Stone and Lime
Company Ltd., Siding, Madhya Pradesh w.e.f. 17-8-2000
was legal or not?"
“ Whether the action of Satna Stone and Lime Company
Ltd., Siding, Satna MP in not paying wages w.e.f.
1-5-2000 to 17- 8-2000 to Smt. Ramkali Kolin W/o Shri
Ramnath Kaul and bonus and retrenchment
compensation for the period 1999 to 2001 is just and
legal? If not, to what relief the workman is entitled to?"
(c)The Government of India, Ministry of Labour vide
its Notification No.L-29012(52)/2008-IR(M) dated 10-6-2008
has referred the following dispute for adjudication by this
tribunal :—
“ Whether the lock-out of Satna Stone and Lime
Company Ltd., Siding, Madhya Pradesh w.e.f. 17-8-2000
was legal or not?”
7622
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 13, 2012/ASVINA 21, 1934
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
“ Whether the action of Satna Stone & Lime Company
Ltd., Siding, Satna MP in not paying wages w.e.f.
1-5-2000 to 17- 8-2000 to Smt.Nihlua Kolin W/o.
Shri Ramdass Kaul and bonus and retrenchment
compensation for the period 1999 to 200I is just and
legal? If not, to what relief the workman is entitled to?”
(d) The Government of India, Ministry of Labour vide
its Notification No.L-29012(53)/2008-IR(M) dated
10-6-2008 has referred the following dispute for
adjudication by this tribunal:-
" Whether the lock-out of Satna Stone & Lime Company
Ltd., Siding, Madhya Pradesh w.e.f. 17-8-2000 was legal
or not?"
" Whether the action of Satna Stone & Lime Company
Ltd., Siding, Satna MP in not paying wages w.e.f.
1-5-2000 to 17- 8-2000 to Shri Ramdas Kaul S/o Shri
Guljari Kaul and bonus and retrenchment compensation
for the period 1999 to 2001 is just and legal? If not, to
what relief the workman is entitled to?"
(e) The Government of India, Ministry of Labour vide
its Notification No.L-29012(54)/2008-IR(M) dated
10-6-2008 has referred the following dispute for
adjudication by this tribunal:-
“ Whether the lock-out of Satna Stone & Lime Company
Ltd., Siding, Madhya Pradesh w.e.f. 17-8-2000 was legal
or not?”
“ Whether the action of Satna Stone & Lime Company
Ltd., Siding, Satna, MP in not paying wages w.e.f.
1-5-2000 to 17- 8-2000 to Shri Ganga Kaul S/o Shri
Ramdayal Kaul and bonus and retrenchment
compensation for the period 1999 to 2001 is just and
legal? If not, to what relief the workman is entitled to?”
2. All the five reference cases are taken up together as
all are on a common subject-matter and are interconnected
with each other.
3. The Union/workmen do not appear inspite of notice
by registered post. It appears that sufficient time was
granted to file statement of claim and the document in the
case but neither the statement of claim nor any document
is filed in the case. This shows that now there is no industrial
dispute in existence between the parties. As such the Union/
workmen are not appearing in the case.
4. The management has also been noticed by registered
post but the management has also not responded in the
case. This aspect also shows that there is now no dispute
left between the parties. Thus this is a case of no dispute.
It appears that there is no use to keep the references pending
when proper notices are sent by registered post and they
are not appearing to contest the references. I find that this
is a case of no dispute. Accordingly the references are
answered.
5. In the result, a common no dispute award is passed in
all the references without any order to costs.
MOHD. SHAKIR HASAN, Presiding Officer
ubZ fnYyh] 17 flrEcj] 2012
dk-vk-3135-—vkS|ksfxd fookn vf/kfu;e] 1947 ¼1947 dk
14½ dh /kkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa] dsUnzh; ljdkj eSllZ lruk LVksu
,aM ykbZe daiuh fyfeVsM] dksydkrk ds izca/kra= ds lac) fu;kstdksa
vkSj muds deZdkjksa ds chp] vuqca/k esa fufnZ"V vkS|ksfxd fookn esa
dsUnzh; ljdkj vkS|ksfxd vf/kdj.k@Je U;k;ky;] tcyiqj ds iapkV
¼lanHkZ la[;k 21]22 ,oe 41@2008½ dks izdkf'kr djrh gS] tks
dsUnzh; ljdkj dks 13&09&2012 dks izkIr gqvk FkkA
[la- ,y&29012@16]17@2008&vkbZ-vkj- ¼,e½
la- ,y 29012@69@2007&vkbZvkj ¼,e½]
tksgu rksiuks] voj lfpo
New Delhi, the 17th September, 2012
S.O. 3135.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the
Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947) the Central
Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 21,22 &
41/2008) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal/
Labour Court, Jabalpur now as shown in the Annexure in
the Industrial dispute between the employers in relation to
the management of M/s. Satna Stone Lime Co. Ltd. (Kolkata)
and their workman, which was received by the Central
Government on 13-09-2012.
[No. L-29012/16,17/2008-IR (M) &
No. L-29012/69/2007-IR (M)]
JOHAN TOPNO, Under Secy.
ANNEXURE
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT
INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT,
JABALPUR
Presiding Officer: SHRI MOHD.SHAKIR HASAN
Case No. CGIT/LC/R/21/08, 22/08 & 41/08
Shri Ram Saroj Kushwaha,
General Secretary,
AITUC Distt. Parishad,
AITUC Office, Sidharth Nagar, Post Birla Vikas,
Distt. Satna (MP)
. . .Workman/Union
Versus
The Managing Director,
Satna Stone Lime Co. Ltd., 6, Middle Road, Hasting,
Kolkata
. . .Management
AWARD
Passed on this 13th day of August, 2012
1. (a) The Government of India, Ministry of Labour vide
its Notification No.L-29012(16)/2007-IR(M) dated 4-3-2008
has referred the following dispute for adjudication by this
tribunal :—
[Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)]
Hkkjr dk jkti= % vDrwcj 13] 2012@vkf'ou 21] 1934
7623
" Whether the lock-out of Satna Stone & Lime Company
Ltd., Siding, Madhya Pradesh w.e.f. 17-8-2000 was legal
or not?"
" Whether the action of Satna Stone & Lime Company
Ltd., Siding, Satna MP in not paying wages w.e.f.
1-5-2000 to 17-8-2000 to Shri Guljhari Kaul and bonus
and retrenchment compensation for the period 1999 to
2001 is just and legal? If not, to what relief the workman
is entitled to?"
(b) The Government of India, Ministry of Labour vide
its Notification No.L-29012(17)/2008-IR(M) dated
4-3-2008 has referred the following dispute for
adjudication by this tribunal:—
" Whether the lock-out of Satna Stone & Lime Company
Ltd., Siding, Madhya Pradesh w.e.f. 17-8-2000 was legal
or not?"
" Whether the action of Satna Stone & Lime Company
Ltd., Siding, Satna MP in not paying wages w.e.f.
1-5-2000 to 17-8-2000 to Shri Sidhha Kori S/o Shri
Matadin Kori and bonus and retrenchment
compensation for the period 1999 to 2001 is just and
legal? If not, to what relief the workman is entitled to?"
(c) The Government of India, Ministry of Labour vide
its Notification No.L-29012(69)/2007-IR(M) dated
25-2-2008 has referred the following dispute for
adjudication by this tribunal:-
" Whether the lock-out of Satna Stone & Lime Company
Ltd., Siding, Madhya Pradesh w.e.f. 17-8-2000 was legal
or not?"
" Whether the action of Satna Stone & Lime
Company Ltd., Siding, Satna MP in not paying wages
w.e.f. 1-5-2000 to 17-8-2000 to Shri Saukhilal
Kushwaha S/o Shri Sadhu Kushwaha and bonus
and retrenchment compensation for the period 1999
to 2001 is just and legal? If not, to what relief the
workman is entitled to?"
2. All the three reference cases are taken up together as
all are on a common subject matter and are interconnected
with each other.
3. In these cases, the Union/workmen did not appear
inspite of proper notices by registered post. It appears that
sufficient times are granted to appear and to raise the
dispute. This shows that now there is no dispute of these
workmen with the management and therefore they have
chosen for not appearing in court. Thus this is a case of no
dispute.
4. On the other hand, the management has also not
appeared in the case inspite of notice. This aspect also
supports the fact that now there is no dispute between the
parties and therefore they are not appearing inspite of four
years pendency of the case. I do not find any reason to
keep these cases pending. Accordingly the references are
answered.
5. In the result, a common no dispute award is passed in
all the references without any order to costs.
MOHD. SHAKIR HASAN, Presiding Officer
ubZ fnYyh] 17 flrEcj] 2012
dk-vk-3136-—vkS|ksfxd fookn vf/kfu;e] 1947 ¼1947
dk 14½ dh /kkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnzh; ljdkj Hkkjrh; fjtoZ
cSad ds izca/kra= ds lac) fu;kstdksa vkSj muds deZdkjksa ds chp
vuqca/k esa fufnZ"V vkS|ksfxd fookn esa dsUnzh; ljdkj vkS|ksfxd
vf/kdj.k] tcyiqj ds iapkV ¼lanHkZ la[;k 22@2011½ dks izdkf'kr
djrh gS] tks dsUnzh; ljdkj dks 17&09&2012 dks izkIr gqvk FkkA
la- ,y&12011@35@2010&vkbZ-vkj-¼ch&I½
jes'k flag] MsLd vf/kdkjh
New Delhi, the 17th September, 2012
S.O. 3136.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the
Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central
Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref.22/2011)
of the Central Govt. Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour
Court, Jabalpur as shown in the Annexure, in the
industrial dispute between the management of Reserve
Bank of India and their workmen, received by the
Central Government on 17-09-2012.
[No. L-12011/35/2010-IR(B-I)]
RAMESH SINGH, Desk Officer
ANNEXURE
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT
INDUSTRIAL -TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT,
JABALPUR
NO. CGIT/LC/R/22/2011
Presiding Officer : SHRI MOHD.SHAKIR HASAN
The Secretary,
Reserve Bank of India Employees Association,
C/o RBI , P .B.No.32, Hoshangabad Road,
Bhopal (MP)
. . .Workman/Union
7624
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 13, 2012/ASVINA 21, 1934
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
Versus
The General Manager, Reserve Bank of India,
Hoshangabad Road, Bhopal (MP)
Regional Director,
Reserve Bank of India, DAPM Department,
P .B.No. 32, Hoshangabad Road,
Bhopal (MP)
. . .Management
AWARD
Passed on this 31st day of August, 2012
1. The Government of India, Ministry of Labour vide its
Notification No.L-12011/35/2010-IR(B-I) dated 1-4-2011 has
referred the following dispute for adjudication by this
tribunal :—
“Whether the action of the management of Reserve Bank
of India, Bhopal in deputing Grade-A Officers i.e. non-
Class-III employees remittance duty vide their order
dated 11-11-2009 without consulting the Union is
violation of Section 9A of Industrial Dispute Act, 1947
and, is legal and justified? To what relief the Union is
entitled?”
2. The case of the Union in short is that the Union has
challenged the unilateral and arbitrary order of the
management dated 11-11-2009 whereby the Assistant
Manager/Assistant Treasurers were deputing for
accompanying remittance of treasure to various currency
chests without consulting the Union as well as without
issuance of notice as required under Section 9A of the
Industrial Dispute Act, 1947 ( in short the Act, 1947). The
currency management is one of the functions of the Reserve
Bank of India as laid down in the Reserve Bank of India
Act, 1934. It is stated that each category of Bank staff has
specific job profile. The issuance of fresh notes to currency
chests from the vault of the Bank is carried out by means of
remittance, accompanied by the representative of the cash
department who should be a Coin/Note Examiner/Assistant
Grade- I or Grade II belonging to class III Cadre deputed
for remittance duty since the inception of the Bank. The
management issued a letter dated 26-9-07 that whenever
Class III employee is not available, Assistant Treasurer
(Grade A) may be deputed for remittance. It is stated that it
is an attempt of changing the classification grades or
change in usage which comes under schedule-IVth of the
Act, 1947. It is submitted that the management be directed
to restore the status-quo for remittance duty.
3. The management appeared and filed Written statement.
The case of the management, interalia, is that the
deputation of Assistant Treasures Grade A officers in case
of non- availability of class III employees do not involve
change of service conditions of class III employees as
such duty doesnot fall under any of the service conditions
specified in fourth schedule of the Act, 1947 and therefore
the question of issue of notice under Section 9A of the
Act, 1947 doesnot arise. The term Banks Representatives
accompanying the remittance has been used without
specifying any grade/class to which representative should
belong in the departmental manual. Whenever remittances
are arranged by offices generally preference is given to
class III employees for remittance duty. However offices
have been advised vide letter DCM(RMMT) 2243/
11-04-09/2007-08 dated 26-9-2007 to depute Assistant
treasurers (grade A) only if class III employees are not
available for accompanying the remittance. There are 272
currency chests under the jurisdiction of Bhopal Office. It
is stated that when all the available Class III employees are
already on remittance duty, sometimes it may not be possible
to send Class III employees as Bank's representative for
remittance. It is submitted that in view of the above
submission, the claim of the Union be rejected with costs.
4. During the pendency of the reference, the Union
filed an application dated 3-8-2012 with affidavit praying
therein to dispose off the case as not pressed any more.
The management has no objection if no dispute award is
passed.
5. Perused the application. Heard both the parties. The
Union representative has submitted that after submission
of the statement of claim, the parties have discussed the
matter with regard to the dispute in reference and some
positive and constructive results have emerged out. As a
result an advertisement for recruitment of class III staff is
published and class III employees are being deputed for
remittance duty again. It is stated that the discussions are
still in the process. As such the case be disposed off as not
pressed without prejudice to the contents of the statement
of claim.
6. Considering the above circumstances in the case, it is
clear that the Union doesnot want to proceed with the case
and it appears in the interest of justice the case be disposed
off without prejudice to the contents of statement of claim.
Accordingly the reference is answered.
7. In the result, no dispute 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 and Employment as per rules.
MOHD. SHAKIR HASAN, Presiding Officer
[Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)]
Hkkjr dk jkti= % vDrwcj 13] 2012@vkf'ou 21] 1934
7625
ubZ fnYyh] 18 flrEcj] 2012
dk-vk-3137-—vkS|ksfxd fookn vf/kfu;e] 1947 ¼1947
dk 14½ dh /kkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa] dsUnzh; ljdkj MCY;w-lh-,y-
ds izca/kra= ds lac) fu;kstdksa vkSj muds deZdkjksa ds chp]
vuqca/k esa fufnZ"V vkS|ksfxd fookn esa dsUnzh; ljdkj vkS|ksfxd
vf/kdj.k@Je U;k;ky;] tcyiqj ds iapkV lanHkZ la[;k 90@2007
dks izdkf'kr djrh gS] tks dsUnzh; ljdkj dks 18-09-2012 dks
izkIr gqvk FkkA
[la- ,y&22012@129@2007&vkbZvkj ¼lh,e&II½]
ch- ,e- iVuk;d] vuqHkkx vf/kdkjh
New Delhi, the 18th September, 2012
S.O.3137.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the
Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central
Government hereby publishes the Award Ref. 90/2007 of
the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour
Court, Jabalpur as shown in the Annexure, in the industrial
dispute between the management of WCL, and their
workmen, received by the Central Government on
18.09.2012.
[No. L-22012/129/2007-IR(CM-II)]
B.M. PATNAIK, Section Officer
ANNEXURE
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT
INDUSTRIAL -TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT,
JABALPUR
No. CGIT/LC/R/90/2007
PRESIDING OFFICER: SHRI MOHD.SHAKIR HASAN
The General Secretary,
Samyukta Koyla Mazdoor Sangh (AITUC),
Central Office Iklehra,
Chhindwara
. . . Workman
Versus
The Chief General Manager,
WCL, Pench Area,
PO. Parasia,
Chhindwara
. . .Management
AWARD
Passed on this 27th day of August, 2012
1. The Government of India, Ministry of Labour vide
its Notification No.L-22012/129/2007-IR(CM-II) dated
10.9.2007 has referred the following dispute for adjudication
by this tribunal :—
“Whether the action of the management of WCL in
refusing to convert Shri Jitai from Piece rated job to
chowkidar or other surface job is legal and justified? If
not, to what relief is the workman entitled?”
2. The Union/workman did not appear inspite of
proper notice through registered post. Lastly the reference
proceeded exparte against the Union/workman on
21.7.2011.
3. The management appeared and filed Written
Statement. The case of the management, in short, is that
the workman Shri Jitai was employed as Tub loader and
posted at Thesgora Mine of WCL, Pench Area. He met
with an accident on 19.2.1996 and was treated at Colliery
Hospital. After treatment he was declared fit for
employment by the Medical Board. However the
management provided him alternative job in time rated
alongwith several other employees. The management
sent a list to headquarter of those workers for conversion
from loader to time rated. The Headquarter granted
approval vide office order 633 dated 13-6-2002 but
inadvertently the designation of the workman was shown
as chowkidar instead of General Mazdoor. The Area
management noticed the error of designation of the
workman and the same was pointed out to the
Headquarter vide letter dated 14-9-2002. Thereafter
necessary order was passed correcting the mistake by
showing the workman as General Mazdoor vide letter
1651 dated 16-10-2002. Accordingly an office order was
passed by the Area Personnel Manager. It is stated that
the workman had never worked as chowkidar. The
workman did not possess the requisite qualification for
the post of chowkidar. It is submitted that there is no
merit in the demand of the workman.
4. On the basis of pleading of the management and
reference order, the following issues are framed for
adjudication:—
I.
Whether the action of the management in refusing
to convert the workman from piece rated to
chowkidar or other surface job is legal and
justified?
II.
To what relief the workman is entitled?
5. Issue No. I
To prove the case, the management has adduced oral
7626
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 13, 2012/ASVINA 21, 1934
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
and documentary evidence. The management witness
Shri Sukadev Seth is working as Personnel Manager in
Naheriya Underground Mine of Pench Area of WCL. He
has supported the case of the management that the
workman was tub loader and met with an accident on
19.2.96. He was treated at Barkui Hospital and after
fitness, the management provided him alternative job in
the underground mine in time rated. He was not working
as chowkidar. He was General Mazdoor at Underground
Mine. His evidence clearly shows that he was piece rated
as Tub Loader in the Underground and after accident,
he was treated and when he became fit for duty he was
given alternative job of time rated in the Underground
mine. This shows that he was never posted as chowkidar
in time rated. His evidence is unrebutted. There is no
reason to disbelieve his evidence. He appears to be trust
worthy.
6. The management has also adduced documentary
evidence. Annexure M/l is the accident slip. This is filed
to show that the workman met with an accident on
19.2.1996 and he reported as back ache. Annexure M/2
is the letter dated 6.1.2006 of Dy.Chief Medical Officer
to the Area Personnel Manager, Pench Area whereby he
had informed that the workman was treated in 1998 and
1999 for back ache which was non-serious injury at Barkui
Hospital. Annexure M/3 is the list forwarded by the
Personnel Manager on 13.6.2002 to the Headquarter for
conversion the workers from piece rated to time rated.
The name of the workman stands at Sl.No.45. This is
filed to show that by typing mistake it was indicated
that the workman was working as Chowkidar. Annexure
M/4 is the list sent by the Sr.Personnel officer to the
Headquarter informing about the error committed in the
earlier list sent for conversion from piece rated to time
rated. The name of the workman is at Sl.No.10. This
shows that it was rectified that he was General Mazdoor
and was not a chowkidar. Annexure M/5 is the letter
dated 14/16.10.2002 whereby the workman was
converted from piece rated to time rated as General
Mazdoor. Annexure M/7 is the Office order whereby the
workman was converted from piece rated to time rated
as General Mazdoor. There is no document to show that
the workman was ever engaged as chowkidar or he was
converted from piece rated to time rated as chowkidar. It
appears that there was only error in recommending the
name of the workman showing him as chowkidar but no
office order was passed accordingly rather the
management rectified the mistake and accordingly
office order was passed as General Mazdoor. The
documentary evidence also shows that the
management is justified in not converting the workman
from piece rated to chowkidar or other surface job. This
issue is decided in favour of the management and
against the workman.
7. Issue No. II
On the basis of the discussion made above, it is clear
that the action of the management is legal and justified.
The workman is not entitled to any relief. The reference is
accordingly answered.
8. In the result, the award is passed without any order to
costs.
9. Let the copies of the award be sent to the
Government of India, Ministry of Labour & Employment
as per rules.
MOHD. SHAKIR HASAN, Presiding Officer
ubZ fnYyh] 18 flrEcj] 2012
dk-vk-3138-—vkS|ksfxd fookn vf/kfu;e] 1947 ¼1947 dk
14½ dh /kkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa] dsUnzh; ljdkj mÙkj jsyos ds
izca/kra= ds lac) fu;kstdksa vkSj muds deZdkjksa ds chp] vuqca/k esa
fufnZ"V vkS|ksfxd fookn esa dsUnzh; ljdkj vkS|ksfxd vf/kdj.k@Je
U;k;ky;] y[kuÅ ds iapkV lanHkZ la[;k 38@2008 dks izdkf'kr djrh
gS] tks dsUnzh; ljdkj dks 18-09-2012 dks izkIr gqvk FkkA
[la- ,y&41011@10@2008&vkbZ vkj ¼ch&I½]
jes'k flag ] MsLd vf/kdkjh
New Delhi, the 18th September, 2012
S.O. 3138.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial
Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government
hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 38/2008) of the
Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court,
Lucknow as shown in the Annexure, in the industrial
dispute between the management of Northern Railway, and
their workmen, received by the Central Government on
18.09.2012.
[No. L-41011/10/2008-IR(B-I)]
RAMESH SINGH, Desk Officer
[Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)]
Hkkjr dk jkti= % vDrwcj 13] 2012@vkf'ou 21] 1934
7627
ANNEXURE
CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-
CUM-LABOUR COURT, LUCKNOW
PRESENT
Dr. MANJU NIGAM
PRESIDING OFFICER
I.D. No. 38/2008
Ref. No. L-41011/10/2008-IR (B-I) dated: 23.06.2008
BETWEEN
The Divisional Secretary
Uttar Railway Karmachari Union
C/o Sri D.P. Awasthi
49, Tilak Nagar, Aishbagh Road
Lucknow.
(Espousing the cause of Shri B.P. Asthana)
AND
The Sr. Divisional Personnel Officer
Northern Railway
DRM Office
Moradabad (U.P.)
AWARD
1. By order No. L-41011/10/2008-IR (B-I) dated: 23.06.2008
the Central Government in the Ministry of Labour, New
Delhi in exercise of powers conferred by clause (d) of sub-
section (1) and sub-section (2A) of Section 10 of the
Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947) referred this
industrial dispute between the Divisional Secretary, Uttar
Railway Karmachari Union, C/o Sri D.P. Awasthi, 49, Tilak
Nagar, Aishbagh Road, Lucknow and the Sr. Divisional
Personnel Office, Northern Railway, DRM Office,
Moradabad for adjudication.
2. The reference under adjudication is:
"WHETHER
THE
ACTION
OF
THE
MANAGEMENT OF NORTHERN RAILWAY IN NOT
GRANTING LEAVE ENCASHMENT OF 119 DAYS
TO SRI B.P. ASTHANA, WAS LEGAL AND
JUSTIFIED? IF NOT, WHAT RELIEF THE
WORKMAN CONCERNED IS ENTITLED?"
3. The case of the worman's union, in brief, is that the
workman, B.P. Asthana, was appointed in the Central
Railway on 16.5.1966 and was promoted to the post of
Assistant Station Master in 1974, then to the post of Station
Master in the grade of Rs. 425-700 w.e.f. 1983 and
subsequently to the next higher grade of Rs. 1600-2660 in
the year 1993. It has been submitted by the workman's
union that the workman became medically unfit and was
medically decategorised and absorbed on the post of
booking supervisor vide letter dated 13.06.2001. On
decategorisation the workman was given posting in the
grade of Rs. 5500-9000 vide letter dated 3.12.2002 and he
retired on 31.03.2003 at the basic pay of Rs. 7600/- per
month. It has been alleged by the workman's union that
under Rules the workman was entitled for leave encashment
for 300 days but he was paid leave encashment for only
181 days, thus, he was deprived of leave encashment for
119 days. The workman's union has submitted that the
workman fell ill and remained under treatment in Railway
Hospitals at various stations from 04.05.1998 to 20.07.1998
for 78 days, from 29.07.1998 to 08.09.1998 for 42 days and
from 01.01.2000 to 22.02.2000 for 53 days and on fitness he
requested the management for commutation of his sick
leave into HLAP account of the workman; but the
management of the railway failed to commute his sick leave
from HLAP and rather debited the entire sick leave from
the accumulated balance of LAP, which adversely affected
the out standing balance of LAP at the time of his retirement
and consequently, he was given leave encashment for 181
days only. It has also been submitted by the workman's
union that the workman submitted applications dated
10.10.1998 for commutation of sick leave for the period
from 04.05.1998 to 20.07.1998 for 78 days and from 29.07.1998
to 08.09.1998 for 42 days; whereas he submitted applications
dated 02.02.2003 and 27.02.2003 for commutation of entire
sick leave. It has been alleged by the workman's union that
the workman had 405 days sick leave at his credit and was
entitled for having his 173 days medical leave commuted
against LHAP as per directions contained in Railway
Board's letter No. F(E) III/87, LE/1/2/ dated 08.03.88; but
the management failed to comply with the directions of
Railway Board, which caused him loss in leave encashment
for 119 days; and accordingly, it has prayed that the
workman may be held entitled for payment of 119 days
leave encashment.
4. The management of the railways has denied the
allegation leveled by the workman's union by filing its
written statement; wherein it was submitted that the
workman on being medically decategorised was found fit
for the post of booking/parcel supervisor in the grade of
Rs. 5500-9000 and further that the workman was working
and was absorbed in the supervisory capacity and he draw
wages exceeding to Rs. 1600/- per mensem. He was
exercising his powers in the nature of supervisory duties
attached to his office of booking/parcel supervisor. Since
the duties and functions discharged by workman was mainly
of a managerial nature hence the claimant is barred from
raising the present industrial dispute in view of the
provisions contained in the act. Beside the applicant is not
a 'workman' as defined in the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947.
Denying the allegations of the workman's union regarding
non-encashment of 119 days leave encashment, the
management has specifically submitted that the workman
as not under the sick list during the alleged periods as per
available records with the management, accordingly, the
7628
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 13, 2012/ASVINA 21, 1934
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
leave encashment amount has been paid to the claimant. It
has further stated that the claimant was not entitled to the
leave encashment for the alleged period of 119 days as
there had been no request to any authorities or the authority
designated in that behalf by the management, within a period
of 30 days of his joining his duty on the expiry of the
relevant spell of leave availed by the claimant, if any. Beside
that the claimant did not submit any sickness certificate as
stated in his alleged application dated 10-10-98 and the
same had never been submitted to the appropriate and
competent authority. It was also contended by the
management that the station superintendent, Roza Jn., N.
Railway vide his letter dated 02-12-2006 has mentioned
that the claimant joined on 10-09-98 at Roza on his transfer
from Sandila Railway Station, who had not been under the
sick list up to 22-02-2000 and as per available records and
he was not under treatment of any Railway Doctor as the
certificate to the effect were not produced by the claimant
Likewise, he never made any application for commutation
before Competent Authority in as much as his claim is not
maintainable in accordance to the P. S. No. 11546, issued
by the Railway Board, which has been added in rule 505 of
Indian Railway Establishment Code aft sub rule (1) w.e.f.
04-03-1998; and accordingly, it has been prayed that the
claim of the workman's union for encashment of 119 days'
leave may be rejected being devoid of merit and no relief be
extended to the claimant concerned.
5. The workman's union has filed its rejoinder; wherein
it has not brought any new fact apart from reiterating the
averments already made by it in its statement of claim.
6. The workman's union has filed photocopy of following
documents, in support of their claim:
(i) Order dated 10-02-94, promotion him to the post of
Asstt. Station Master, paper No. 9/6 to 9/11.
(ii) Order dated: -/12/02 regarding transfer of the claimant,
paper No. 9/12.
(iii) Paper relating to OPD treatment, paper No. 9/13 to 9/
15.
(iv) Letter dated 11-08-98 referred B.P. Asthana, paper
No. 9/16.
(v) Requisition form for x-ray, paper No. 9/17.
(vi) OPD slip dated 12-8-98, paper No. 9/18.
(vii) Relieving letter dated 13-9-98, paper No. 9/19.
(viii) Applications dated 10-10-98, 02-02-2003 and
27-02-2003 for adjustment and commutation of HLAP,
paper No. 9/20 to 9/22.
(ix) Typed copy of Railway Board's letter dated 08-03-88,
paper No. 9/23.
The union also filed original leave record book in respect
of B.P. Asthana, paper No. 10/2.
7. In rebuttal, the management filed photocopy of
following document in support of their contention:
(i) Letter dated 02-12-2006 of Station superintendent,
Roza J., NR, paper No. M-14.
(ii) Certificate dated 11-12-2006 of Station
Superintendent, Sandila, NR, paper No. M-15.
(iii) Order dated 16-09-2005 of Hon'ble CAT, in O.A. No.
78/2005, paper No. M-16.
8. The workman's union has examined the claimant in
support of its case; whereas the management of railways
has examined Shri Mangal Singh, Office Superintendent,
Moradabad in support of their contentions. The parties
cross-examined each other's witnesses. The management
concluded its evidence on 30-03-2011 and since then the
case is being listed for arguments; but the opposite party
failed to forward any argument at one pretext or the other.
However, the workman's union made their oral
submissions in support of its pleadings. The case was
reserved for award keeping in view the reluctance of the
opposite party to argue their case and long pendency of
the case since 2008.
9. Heard argument of the authorized representative of
the workman's union and persued entire evidence on record.
10. The authorized representative of the union argued
that B.P. Asthana on decategorisation was given posting
in the grade of Rs. 5500-9000 on the post of booking/
parcel supervisor at Northern Railway Station Sandila. He
has argued that the workman in capacity of booking
supervisor had to perform his duties on parcel counter and
to prepare concession vouchers and maintain all routine
record with his own hand. The workman was not authorized
to give appointment. charge sheet or sanction leave to any
one; accordingly, the nature of duties born by the workman
were not of managerial or supervisory, though the
nomenclature of the post included the word supervisor.
Further, the representative of the workman's union has
argued that the workman remained under sick leave and
undergone treatment in the Railway hospitals for the period
from 04-04-1998 to 20-07-1998 for 78 days and 29-07-1998
to 08-09-1998 for 42 days, for which he requested the
management vide his application dated 10-10-98 to commute
his sick leave into LHAP and further that the workman
remained sick for the 01-01-2000 to 22-02-2000 for 53 days
and he again submitted application vide dated 02-02-2003
and 27-02-2003 for commutation of sick leave into LHAP;
but the management did not put any heed to it and derived
the workman for facility provided under Rules for
commutation of one kind of leave into other, which resulted
into loss of leave encashment to the workman for 119 days.
11. Contrary to the submission of the workman's union
the authorized representative has argued that the present
industrial dispute is not maintainable for the reasons that
the claimant does not fall within the purview of the definition
of 'workman' as defined under Section 2 's' of the I.D. Act,
1947. Further, it has submitted that the claimant was not
under the sick list during the alleged periods as per available
[Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)]
Hkkjr dk jkti= % vDrwcj 13] 2012@vkf'ou 21] 1934
7629
records with the management; accordingly, the leave
encashment amount has been paid to the claimant as per
available leave balance at his leave account. It has further
urged that the claimant was not entitled to the leave
encashment for the alleged period of 119 days as he never
made any request to any authorities or the authority
designated in that behalf by the management, within a period
of 30 days of his joining his duty on the expiry of the
relevant spell of leave availed by the claimant, if any. The
representative further argued that the claimant did not
submit any sickness certificate or application for
commutation of sick leave. The management has contended
that the claim of the claimant is not maintainable in
accordance to the P .S. No. 11546, issued by the Railway
Board, which has been added in rule 505 of Indian Railway
Establishment Code aft sub rule (1) w.e.f. 04-03-1998.
12. I have given thoughtful consideration to the rival
contentions of the parties and scanned entire evidence on
record.
13. The management of the Railways has come out with
the preliminary objection that the case, before this Tribunal,
is not maintainable as the workman who was in supervisory
capacity does not fall within the ambit of definition of
Section 2 ‘s’ of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. The union
has opposed the submissions of the management and has
submitted that though the nomenclature of the post
included the word supervisor but the nature of duties were
not at par with that of a supervisor or a manager. It has
stated that while working on the post of booking/parcel
supervisor at Northern Railway Station, Sandila, he had to
perform duties on parcel counter and to prepare concession
vouchers and maintain all routine record with his own hand.
He was not authorized to give appointment, charge sheet
or sanction leave to any one; accordingly, the nature of
duties born by the workman were not of managerial or
supervisory, though the nomenclature of the post included
the word supervisor.
The management has not produced any documentary
evidence in support of their objection that the nature of
the duties of the workman were supervisory or managerial
in nature. In its oral evidence, he has stated in his
examination-in-chief that pay scale of the parcel supervisor
is of Rs. 5500-9000. On enquiring about the nature of duties
of B.P Asthana the management witness stated in cross-
examination that when posted at small stations, the Book
Supervisors work as in-charge and when there is shortage
of staff they have to distribute ticket also. It was further
stated that workman had no power to issue charge sheet;
but from the evidence of the management it is not
established that the nature of duties performed by the
workman were managerial or supervisory in nature.
Thus, from the evidence forwarded by the parties, it is
not established that the nature of duties performed by the
claimant were of supervisory or managerial in nature and
as such I come to the conclusion that the claimant B.P.
Asthana was ‘workman’ as defined in Section 2 ‘s’ of the
I.D. Act, 1947.
14. It is the case of the workman that he fell ill in three
spells, totaling for 173 days and he requested the
management for commutation of his sick leave into LHAP
for which he was entitled under Rules; but the management
failed to commute his sick leave into LHAP and
consequently, at the time of his superannuation he was
encashed leave for 181 days. Had the management had
commuted said leave he might have encashed 300 days
leave, thus, he is seeking a direction to the management to
encash 119 days leave. In his evidence the workman has
stated that he remained sick from 4-05-98 to 20-07-98 for 78
days and from 29-07-98 to 08-09-98 for 42 days and resumed
his during at Northern Railway Station Rosa where he
submitted an application dated 10-10-98 for commutation
of sick leave. He further state that he again fell ill from
01-01-2000 to 12-02-2000 for 53 days and on fitness he
submitted application for commutation of this sick leave
and furthermore that he submitted reminders dated
02-02-2003 and 27-02-2003 for the same. He has also stated
that as per directions contained in Railway Board’s letter
dated 08-03-88 his one kind of leave (sick leave) could
have been converted into other type of leave (LHAP). In
cross-examination, the workman stated that he moved
application, paper No. 9/21 on 02-02-2003 and paper No.
9/22 on 27-02-2003. In rebuttal, the management witness
stated that the workman was not on the sick list at Sandila
and Rosa stations nor he moved any application for
conversion of leave for the periods from 4-05-98 to 20-07-
98 and from 29-07-98 to 08-09-98. In cross-examination the
management witness stated that a workman can commute
his leave, within a month, on making an application with
fitness certificate of the doctor; and further he stated that
it is necessary that application for commutation should be
preferred within one month. He submitted documents in
support of his statement before this Tribunal.
15. Having gone through the evidence on record and
submissions of the rival parties, it comes out that the
workman, B.P. Asthana fell ill for three span of time, during
period May 1998 to February, 2000 and he undergone
treatment at different Railway Hospitals and after recovery
he requested the management for commutation of his sick
leave into HALP, which was available to him under Rules
vide Railway Board's letter No. F (E) III/87, LE/1/2 dated 08-
03-88; but the workman failed to file admission and
discharge slip or medical certificate to the effect to prove
his contention that he had been admitted to Railway
hospital at different spells and also undergone surgical
operation. The typed copy of Railway Board's letter dated
7630
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 13, 2012/ASVINA 21, 1934
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
08-03-88, relied on by the workman, paper No. 9/23 is on
the record; the contents of said letter are given hereunder:
^^;fn izkf/kd`r jsyos MkWDVj ls fld o fiQV izek.k i= izLrqr
fd;s tk,a rks ,d izdkj dh NqV~Vh nwljs izdkj dh NqV~Vh esa fiNys
izHkko ls lEifjokfjfrr dh tk ldrh gSA**
On the contrary the management has relied on the paper
No. M-14, report of Station Superintendent, Rosa Jn.;
wherein it has been mentioned that the workman taken
charge from Sandila Station to Rosa Station on the post of
SM-II on 10-09-98 and as per official documents he was
not in the sick list during his tenure up to 22-02-2000. Further,
the management has contended that the workman made no
request for commutation of leave before the authority
designated in that behalf by the management, within a period
of 30 days of his joining his duty on the expiry of the
relevant spell of leave availed by the claimant, if any. It was
also submitted that the claimant did not submit any sickness
or fitness certificate as required under Rules; and the same
had never been submitted to the appropriate and competent
authority. It has relied on P.S. No. 11546, issued by the
Railway Board, added in rule 505 of Indian Railway
Establishment Code aft sub rule (1) w.e.f. 04-03-1998, which
is as follows:
‘‘Provided that no such request shall be considered
unless received by such authority on any other
authority designated in the behalf, within a period of
30 days of the concerned Railway Servant joining
his duty on the expiry of the relevant spell of leave
availed by him. ’’
There is no evidence from the workman that he has
submitted the application(s) for commutation of leave
within a period of 30 days on joining his duty on the expiry
of the relevant spell of leave availed by him; along with
sickness and fitness certificate to enable the management
to consider his application for commuting his leave.
Moreover, he was not on the sick list of the management
during period 10-09-1988 to 22-02-2000.
16. Thus, it becomes apparent that as contended by the
workman himself under Rules, vide letter dated 08-03-88 of
the railway board, for commutation of one kind of leave
into other, the workman was required to move application
for the same duly supported by ‘‘Sick and Fitness
Certificate’’; but the workman failed to prove that he made
an application with required certificates. A bare perusal of
the applications for commutation dated 10-10-98,
02-02-2003 and 27-02-2003, relied on by the workman, are
not supported by any sick and fitness certificate, therefore,
not maintainable. Moreover, it is also not proved that the
workman preferred those applications for commutation of
his leave with stipulated time of thirty days before the
Competent Authority.
17. Therefore, in view of the discussions made above, I
am of the considered opinion that the action of the
management of railway in not commuting leave of the
workman was neither unjustified nor illegal.
18. Accordingly, the reference is adjudicated against
the workman’s union; and as such, I come to the conclusion
that the workman, B.P. Asthana is not entitled to any of the
relief(s) claimed.
19. Award as above.
LUCKNOW.
Dr. MANJU NIGAM, Presiding Officer
28-08-2012
ubZ fnYyh] 18 flrEcj] 2012
dk-vk- 3139-—vkS|ksfxd fookn vf/fu;e] 1947 (1947
dk 14) dh /kjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa] dsUnzh; ljdkj ,l-lh-,y- ds
izcaèkra=k ds lac¼ fu;kstdksa vkSj muds deZdkjksa ds chp] vuqca/
esa fu£n"V vkS|ksfxd fookn esa dsUnzh; ljdkj vkS|ksfxd vf/dj.k]
tcyiqj ds iapkV (lanHkZ la[;k 66@2005) dks izdkf'kr djrh gS]
tks dsUnzh; ljdkj dks 18&9&2012 dks izkIr gqvk Fkk A
¹la- ,y&22012@316@2004&vkbZ vkj (lh,e&II)º
ch- ,e- iVuk;d] vuqHkkx vf/dkjh
—New Delhi, the 18th September, 2012
S.O. 3139.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the
Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947) the Central
Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 66/
2005) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-
Labour Court , Jabalpur as shown in the Annexure, in the
Industrial Dispute between the management of M/s. South
Eastern coalfields Limited and their workmen, received by
the Central Government on 18-9-2012.
[ No. L-22012/316/2004-IR (CM-II)]
B. M. PATNAIK, Section Officer
ANNEXURE
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT
INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT,
JABALPUR
No. CGIT/LC/R/66/2005
PRESIDING OFFICER: SHRI MOHD. SHAKIR HASAN
The President,
Koyla Shramik Sabha (UTUC),
Old Colliery Guest House,
Birsinghpur Pali,
Umaria (MP)
. . .Workman
Versus
The Sub Area Manager,
Pali Group, Johilla Area,
South Eastern Coalfields Limited,
PO Nowrozabad, Distt. Umaria,
Umaria (MP)
. . .Management
[Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)]
Hkkjr dk jkti= % vDrwcj 13] 2012@vkf'ou 21] 1934
7631
AWARD
Passed on this 28th day of August, 2012
1. The Government of India, Ministry of Labour vide its
Notification No. L-22012/316/2004/IR(CM-II) dated
14-7-2008 has referred the following dispute for adjudication
by this tribunal:—
^^D;k mi {ks=h; izca/kd] ikyh lewg] tksfgyk {ks=] ,l-bZ-lh-
,y- }kjk Jh jkeukjk;.k ik.Ms;] Lohij esV] Vksdu ua- 13974]
ikyh ifj;kstuk dks muds ewy in ls mPp in LoPNrk
lqijokbZtj dk dk;Z ysuk ,oa mDr in ij mudk fu;fefrdj.k
vFkok inksUufr u djuk U;k;ksfpr gS\ ;fn ugha] rks deZdkj
fdl vuqrks"k dks ikus dk vf/kdkjh gS\**
2. The case of the Union/workman in short is that the
workman Shri Ram Narayan Pandey was appointed as
Mazdoor on 23-3-1984 in SECL and is presently on the
post of Sweeper Mate Cat-II but he is working as Sanitary
Supervisor from 1992 continuously. He passed "Parthama"
Examination in second division from Sahitya Samelan,
Paryag which is a recoginsed institution. He also got trade
certificate from ITI Shahdol in 1973. It is stated that the
post of sanitary supervisor is vacant since long but the
management is not promoting him on the said post. It is
submitted that the management be directed to promote the
workman on the post of Sanitary Supervisor.
3. The management appeared and filed Written Statement
to contest the reference. The case of the management,
interalia, is that the service conditions of the employees
working in Coal India are governed by various settlement
known as National Coal Wage Agreement (in short NCWA).
Cadre scheme have been formulated for each category of
employees. Admittedly the workman was initially appointed
as General Mazdoor on 23-3-84. Consequently he was
promoted to the post of Sweeper mat Cat-III w.e.f. 13-1-92
and he is working on the said post since then. The cadre
Scheme applicable to the Safai Karamchari is given in
Annexure XXVII-8 to the NCWA. Whereas the Cadre
Scheme for Para Medical Staff/Sanitary Personnel is given
in Annexure VI-6(A). It is stated that the workman had
never worked as Sanitary Supervisor. The workman cannot
change the cadre according to his own choice. Cadre
scheme for Para Medical Staff is not applicable to the
workman. It is submitted that there is no merit in the dispute
of the Union.
4. On the basis of the pleadings of the parties, the
following issues are framed for adjudication—
I. Whether the action of the management in not
promoting and regularizing on the post of Sanitary
Supervisor after taking its working is legal and
justified?
II. To what relief the workman is entitled?
5. Issue No. I : The workman Shri Narayan Pandey is
examined in the case. He has stated that he was promoted
to Sanitary Jamdar on 12-2-92 vide letter 234 dated
12-2-92. The Union has not filed the said letter to
corroborate that he was promoted on the post of sanitary
Jamedar. In absence of the document, his evidence is not
reliable. Moreover there is no such pleading of the Union.
He has stated in his cross- examination that he was
appointed as General mazdoor. He has stated that he got
written order to work as Sanitary Supervisor but no such
order is filed by the Union. This fact shows that he had
never worked as Sanitary Supervisor as has been pleaded
by the management. He has further stated that presently
he is Sanitary mate and is getting the pay of sanitary mate.
He has further stated that he had never worked as Sanitary
Supervisor. This shows that the claim of the Union that
the workman was working as Sanitary Supervisor from
1992 is not substantiated.
6. On the other hand, the management has also
examined one witness. The management witness Shri Tilak
Kumar is presently working as Manager Personnel at Pali
Sub Area, Johilla Area, SECL. He has stated that the
workman was initially appointed as General Mazdoor on
23-3-84 and subsequently he was promoted to the post of
sweeper mate Cat-III w.e.f. 13-1-92. The Cadre Scheme
applicable to him is Safai Karamchari as given in Annexure
XXVII-8 to the NCWA. He has stated that the cadre scheme
for Para Medical Staff/ Sanitary Personnel is given in
Annexure VI-6A. The management has filed both the cadre
schemes which are annexure M/l and M/2. His evidence
clearly shows that the workman doesnot belong to the
cadre scheme of which he is demanding to be promoted.
This witness has further stated that the workman had not
worked as Sanitary Supervisor at any time. This fact is
also admitted by the workman in his evidence. Thus it is
clear that the claim of the Union that the workman was
continuously working as Sanitary Supervisor from 1992 is
not established. This shows that the claim of the Union is
not justified. This issue is decided against the Union/
workman and in favour of the management.
7. Issue No. II : On the basis of the discussion made
above, it is clear that the action of the management is
justified and legal in not promoting to the workman as
Sanitary Supervisor in the Cadre Scheme of Para Medical
Staff/Sanitary Personnel. It is evident that the workman is
not entitled to any relief. The reference is accordingly
answered.
8. In the result, the award is passed without any order
to costs.
MOHD. SHAKIR HASAN, Presiding Officer
7632
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 13, 2012/ASVINA 21, 1934
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
ubZ fnYyh] 18 flrEcj] 2012
dk-vk-3140.—vkS|ksfxd fookn vf/kfu;e] 1947 ¼1947 dk
14½ dh /kkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa]dsUnzh; ljdkj tokgj uoksn;
fo|ky; ds izca/kra= ds lac) fu;kstdksa vkSj muds deZdkjksa ds
chp] vuqcaèk esa fufnZ"V vkS|ksfxd fookn esa dsUnzh; ljdkj
vkS|ksfxd vf/kdj.k@Je U;k;ky; ] t;iqj ds iapkV ¼vkbZMh la[;k
6@2006½ dks izdkf'kr djrh gS tks dsUnzh; ljdkj dks 18&09&2012
dks izkIr gqvk FkkA
[la- ,y&42012@83@2005&vkbZvkj ¼lh,e&II½]
ch- ,e- iVuk;d] vuqHkkx vf/kdkjh
New Delhi, the 18th September, 2012
S.O. 3140.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial
Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government
hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 6/2006) of the Central
Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, Jaipur
as shown in the Annexure, in the Industrial Dispute between
the management of Jawahar Navodaya Vidyalaya, and their
workman, received by the Central Government
on 18-09-2012.
[No. L-42012/38/2005-IR(CM-II)]
B. M. PATNAIK, Section Officer
ANNEXURE
CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-
CUM-LABOUR COURT, JAIPUR
Presiding Officer
Sh. N.K.Purohit
I.D. 6/2006
Reference No. L-42012/38/2005-IR(CM-II)]
dated : 6-12-2005
Shri Om Prakash
S/o Mangi Lal
Through Joint Secretary, H.M.S.
Bangali Colony, Chhawani Kota,
Rajasthan.
V/s
The Principal
Jawahar Navodaya Vidyalaya
Atru, Distt. Baran,
Rajasthan- 325218.
Present:
For the applicant Union:
Sh. Kapil Sharma
For the Non-applicant:
Sh. V. S. Gurjar
AWARD
14-8-2012
1. The Central Government in exercise of the powers
conferred under clause (d) of sub-section 1 & 2(A) of
Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 has referred
the following Industrial dispute to this tribunal for
adjudication:—
"Whether the action of the Principal, Jawahar
Navodaya Vidyalaya, Atru, Dist. Baran- 325218 (Raj.)
in terminating the services of Sh. Om Prakash S/o Sh.
Mangli Lal w.e.f. 29-5-04 is legal & justified? If not, to
what relief the workman is entitled to?"
2. The workman in his claim statement has pleaded that
he was engaged by the non-applicant as daily wager class
IV employee on 30-8-95. The workman has further pleaded
that while he was at his village during summer vacation, he
was intimated by a registered letter dated 29-5-04 that his
services had been terminated w.e.f. 29-5-04 and a cheque
of Rs. 9660 was being enclosed. But no such cheque was
found enclosed with the said letter. The workman has also
pleaded that he had worked under the employment of the
non-applicant during period 30-8-95 to 29-5-04 and, had
worked for more than 240 days during said period in spite
of this his services have been terminated without any notice
and compensation in lieu of notice, therefore, his
termination is in violation of section 25-F of the I.D.Act. It
has been alleged that no seniority list was prepared and
while terminating his services the persons junior to him
have been retained. Thus, his termination is also in violation
of the Section 25-G of the I.D. Act.
3. In reply, the management has averred that the workman
was not engaged on 30-8-95 as daily wager class IV
employee. No post of class IV was lying vacant at that
time. It has been averred that a cheque of Rs. 9660 along
with the retrenchment order was sent to the workman but
when he informed that he did not receive the cheque,
another cheque bearing no.570384 dated 26-8-04 of
Rs. 9660 was given to him vide letter no. 1588-89 dated 28-
8-04 before the RLC (Kota) and receipt of the same was
obtained on 27-8-04 on the letter dated 26-8-04. Thus, the
provisions of Section 25-F of the I.D. Act has been strictly
complied with. It has been denied that termination of the
workman was in violation of section 25-G of the I.D. Act.
4. The management has also contended that non-
applicant is not an ‘industry’ therefore; the claim of the
workman is not maintainable.
5. In evidence, the workman has filed his affidavit
whereas the non-applicant has filed counter affidavit of
Shri Pepsingh Rajawat, Principal, Jawahar Navodaya
Vidyalaya, Atru.
[Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)]
Hkkjr dk jkti= % vDrwcj 13] 2012@vkf'ou 21] 1934
7633
6. The workman has filed documents Ex.W-1 to W -3
and the non-applicant has filed documents Ex. M-1 to Ex-
M-3 in support of their respective case.
7. Heard the learned representatives on behalf of both
the parties and perused the relevant record.
8. In view of the pleadings of both the sides the following
questions crop-up for consideration:—
(i) Whether at the time of terminating services of the
workman w.e.f. 29-5-04, the provisions of Section 25-F
has been complied with?
(ii) Whether at the time of terminating services of the
workman juniors to him were retained in the job in
violation of Section 25-G of the I.D. Act?
(iii) Whether non-applicant management is an
‘‘industry’’?
(iv) To what relief the workman is entitled to?
Point No.1
9. The learned -representative for the workman contends
that the workman did not receive notice pay and
compensation at the time of his termination on 29-5-04.
The reason assigned for the termination is also not correct.
10. Per contra, learned representative for the
management submits that from the documents Ex. M-1 to
Ex-M-3 and oral evidence of the management witness, it
has been established that notice pay & compensation
required to be paid u/s 25-F of the I.D.Act have been
received by the workman.
11. The workman has deposed that he had worked under
the employment of the non-applicant during period
30-8-95 to 29-5-04 and, had worked for more than 240 days.
It is an admitted case of the non-applicant that in
compliance of the Section 25-F notice pay & amount of
Rs.9660 was paid to the workman. Thus, it has been
impliedly admitted by the management that the workman
had worked continuously for one year as envisage u/s
25-F of the I.D.Act.
12. The workman has admitted in his statement that he
had received letter no. JNP-AIRU/2004-05/867 dated
29-5-04 at his village by registered post but he has stated
that he did not receive the cheque of Rs.9660 said to be
enclosed with the said letter.
13. The management has produced the copy of the
termination order dated 29-5-04 (Ex. M-1) and letters
addressed to the workman dated 7-8-04(Ex. M-2) and
26-8-04(Ex.M-3). As per statement of the management
witness a cheque of Rs. 9660 was sent to the workman
along with order dated 29-5-04(Ex. M-1). The relevant para
of the impugned order dated 29-5-04 (Ex. M-1) is reproduced
below :—
‘‘Since Mr. Om Prakash S/o Sh. Mangi Lal Berwan,
was engaged purely on temporary and daily wage
basis in view of availability of temporary nature of
work in the Navodaya Vidyalaya Atru District Baran.
The temporary nature work is no more available and
his services are no more required now and are hereby
terminated with effect from 29-5-04. he is entitled to
compensation and one month’s pay in lieu of notice
hence, an amount of Rs.8100 (Rs. Eight Thousand
One Hundred only) on account of compensation and
a sum of Rs.1560 (One Thousand Five Hundred
Sixty only) being one month's pay in lieu of notice,
total Rs.9660 (Rs.Nine Thousand Six Hundred Sixty
only) is being paid to him with this office order by
enclosed cheque bearing No.641579 dated 29-5-04
drawn on bank of S.B.B.J. branch Atru.
He is relieved of his duty on 29-5-2004 in the A/N.’’
14. Upon perusal of the retrenchment order dated
29-5-04 (Ex. M-1), letter dated 7-8-04(Ex. M-2) and 26-8-04
(Ex. M-3), it reveals that impugned order dated 29-5-04
(Ex. M-I) was sent by registered post & a cheque bearing
no. 641579 dated 29-5-04 drawn on Bank of SBBJ) branch,
Atru was shown as its encloser. It further reveals that when
the workman vide his letter dated 14-6-04 informed that he
did not receive the said cheque along with the order dated
29-5-04, he was asked to collect the cheque from the
vidyalaya on any working days vide letter dated 7-8-04
(Ex. M-2). Thereafter, another cheque bearing no. 570384
dated 26-8-04 of Rs. 9660 was given to the workman before
RLC (C ), Kota on 27-8-04 vide letter dated 26.8.04(Ex. M-3).
15. Thus, it is evident from the said documents that the
retrenchment order as well as the cheque of Rs.9660 were
not given to the workman on the date of termination i.e.
29-5-04. Admittedly, the payment of the notice pay and
compensation have been made to the workman on 27-8-04
by cheque dated 26-8-04. Thus, the amount of notice pay
and compensation was paid to the workman after the date
of termination i.e. 29-5-04. Apart that the retrenchment order
was not served upon the workman on 29-5-04.
16. It is well settled that retrenchment compensation is
to be paid to the workman before he is asked to go. Section
25-F postulates two mandatory conditions to be fulfilled
by an employer for effecting a valid retrenchment namely :
(i) one months notice in writing indicating the reasons for
retrenchment or wages in lieu of such notice; (ii) Payment
of compensation equivalent to 15 day’s average pay for
every completed year of continuous service or any part
thereof in excess of six months. It is also well settled that
the Section imposes a mandatory duty on the employer
which is a condition precedent to valid retrenchment of a
workman and contravention of the mandatory requirements
of the Section would invalidate the retrenchment and render
it void as intitio. A condition precedent is required to be
fulfilled before the effect of the retrenchment order can
follow.
7634
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 13, 2012/ASVINA 21, 1934
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
17. In present case, the termination order as well as
cheque of compensation were not actually tendered to the
workman on the date of termination i.e. 29-5-04. Sending
termination order along with cheque of retrenchment
compensation and notice pay was not a genuine offer on
the date of termination. It is evident from the documents of
the management itself that amount of retrenchment
compensation and notice pay by cheque was not paid
simultaneously on the date of retrenchment. The workman
was relieved on 29-5-04 whereas the retrenchment order
was served upon him later on and the cheque was delivered
to the workman on 27-8-04 after a period of about three
months.
18. For the above reasons, the payment or tender of
compensation and notice pay to the workman after
retrenchment has taken effect on 29-5-04 has vitiated the
retrenchment and non-compliance with the mandatory
provisions has nullified the retrenchment.
19. In view of above discussions, it is concluded that
vide terminating the services of the workman clause (a)
and (b) of 25-F of the I.D. Act have not been complied with
strictly, therefore, this point is decided in favour of the
workman.
Point No. II
20. The workman in his statement has deposed that at
the time of terminating his services juniors to him namely
Bharosibai, Bhuribai, Mahavir Meena, Ramsingh, Girraj etc.
were in the job. In cross-examination he was unable to say
whether the above persons were in the job or not and what
job they were performing. He has not produced any
documents in this regard. He has further stated that when
he was in the job the above persons were doing work but
they were removed from service in the year 2003. Thus, it is
evident from the statement of the workman himself that at
the time of his termination on 29-5-04, the above named
persons were not in the job. Therefore, workman has failed
to established that his termination was in violation of
provisions of Section 25-G of the I.D. Act. This point is
decided against the workman and in favour of the
non-applicant.
Point No. III
21. The learned representative for the non-applicant
school contends that the JNV does not fall within the
definition of section 2(J) of the Act and the vidyalay being
an educational institute, it is not commercial establishment.
Controverting it, the learned representative on behalf of
the workman submits that as per legal proposition laid down
in Banglore Water Supply case, the vidyalay is also an
‘industry’ within the meaning of 2(J) of the Act. In Banglore
Water Supply case reported in 1978 LLJ 349 (SC) the Hon’ble
Apex Court has observed and concluded that an
educational institution is an industry in accordance with
the parameters laid down by the Court. The relevant
observation is usefully quoted as below :—
‘‘The final ground accepted by the Court is that
education is a mission and vocation, rather than a
profession or trade or business. The most that one
can say is that this is an assertion which does not
prove itself. Indeed, all life is a mission and a man
without a mission is spiritually still-born. The high
mission of life is the manifestation of the divinity
already in man. To christen education as a mission
even if true is not to negate its being an industry. We
have to look at educational activity from the angle of
the Act, and so viewed the ingredients of education
are fulfilled. Education is, therefore, an industry and
nothing can stand in the way of that conclusion.”
22. The observation made by the Hon’ble Apex lends
support submission advanced on behalf of the workman
and it is held that the non-applicant institution is an
‘industry’ as defined under Section 2-J of the Act. This
point, therefore, is decided in favour of the workman.
Point No. IV
23. On account of the decision of Point no. I and III in
favour of the workman, it is concluded that the action of
the non-applicant in terminating the services of the
workman from 29-5-04 is not justified and legal.
24. This legal position is not in dispute that in case of
non-compliance of Section 25-F the workman can be
reinstated with other consequential reliefs.
25. Earlier in cases of termination in violation of Section
25-F reinstatement of the workman with full back wages
used to be automatically granted, but keeping in view several
other factors, a change in the said trend is now found in
the recent decisions of the Hon’ble Supreme Court. In a
large number of decisions in the matter of grant of relief of
the kind, Hon’ble Apex Court has distinguished between a
daily wager who does not hold a post and a permanent
employee.
26. In decision reported in (2010) 1 SCC (L & S) 545
Jagbir Singh V/s Haryana State Agriculture Mktg. Board
after considering the earlier decisions referred to therein
on the point should an order of reinstatement automatically
follows in a case of violation of Section 25-F' of the I.D.Act
Hon’ble Apex Court has observed that :—
‘‘It would be, thus seen that by a catena of decisions
in recent time, this Court has clearly laid down that
an order of retrenchment passed in violation of
Section 25-F although may be set aside but an award
of reinstatement should not, however, be
automatically passed. The award of reinstatement
with full back wages in a case where the workman
has completed 240 days of work in a year preceding
the date of termination, particularly, daily wagers has
not been found to be proper by this Court and
[Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)]
Hkkjr dk jkti= % vDrwcj 13] 2012@vkf'ou 21] 1934
7635
instead compensation has been awarded. This court
has distinguished between a daily wager who does
not hold a post and a permanent employee.’’
27. Continuing this line of approach in decision (2010) 2
SCC (L & S) 376 Hon'ble Apex Court has observed as under:—
‘‘While the earlier view of the Court was that if an
order of termination was found to be illegal, normally
the relief to be granted would be reinstatement with
full back wages. However, with the passage of time it
came to be realized that an industry should not be
compelled to pay to the workman for the period
during which he apparently contributed little or
nothing at all. The relief to be granted is discretionary
and not automatic. A person is not entitled to get
something only because it would be lawful to do so.
The changes brought out by the subsequent
decisions of the Supreme Court probably having
regard to the changes in the policy decisions of the
Government in the wake of prevailing market
economy, globalization, privatization and
outsourcing was evident. Hence now there is no such
principle that for an illegal termination of service the
normal rule is reinstatement with back wages, and
instead the Labour Court can award compensation.’’
‘‘There has been a shift in the legal position laid
down by the Supreme Court and now there is no
hard-and-fast principle that on the termination of
service being found to be illegal reinstatement with
back wages is to be awarded. Compensation can be
awarded instead, at the discretion of the Labour
Court, depending on the facts and circumstances of
the case.’’
28. In present matter, the workman was working as daily
wager. He was not holding any regular post. Keeping in
view the nature of job, nature and duration of employment,
amount already paid as retrenchment compensation, the
laps of time after termination of the services and having
regard the entire facts and circumstances of the case, instead
of reinstating him the interest of justice will be sub served
by paying Rs.35000 as compensation to the workman
instead and in lieu of relief of reinstatement in service.
29. Accordingly, the reference is answered in affirmative
in favour of the workman and, it is held that the action of
the management in termination of the services of the
workman being in violation of clauses (a) and (b) of the
Section 25-F of the Act is illegal and unjustified. Therefore,
the non-applicant is directed to pay compensation to the
workman worth Rs. 35000 (Thirty Five Thousand Only)
instead and in lieu of his reinstatement of service. The
payment shall be made within eight weeks from the
publication of the award failing which it shall carry interest
@ 9% per annum.
30. Award as above.
N.K. PUROHIT, Presiding Officer
ubZ fnYyh] 18 flrEcj] 2012
dk-vk- 3141.—vkS|ksfxd fookn vf/fu;e] 1947 ¼1947
dk 14½ dh /kkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa]dsUnzh; ljdkj tokgj uoksn;
fo|ky; ds izca/kra= ds lac) fu;kstdksa vkSj muds deZdkjksa ds
chp] vuqcaè esa fufnZ"V vkS|ksfxd fookn esa dsUnzh; ljdkj
vkS|ksfxd vf/kdj.k] Je U;k;ky;] t;iqj ds iapkV ¼vkbZMh
la[;k 9@2006½ dks izdkf'kr djrh gS] tks dsUæzh; ljdkj dks
18&09&2012 dks izkIr gqvk FkkA
[la- ,y&42012@37@2005&vkbZvkj ¼lh,e&II½]
ch- ,e- iVuk;d] vuqHkkx vf/kdkjh
New Delhi, the 18th September, 2012
S.O. 3141.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial
Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government
hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 9/2006) of the Central
Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, Jaipur
as shown in the Annexure, in the Industrial Dispute between
the management of Jawahar Navodaya Vidyalaya, and their
workmen, received by the Central Government
on 18-09-2012.
[No. L-42012/37/2005-IR(CM-II)]
B. M. PATNAIK, Section Officer
ANNEXURE
CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-
CUM-LABOUR COURT, JAIPUR
Shri N.K.Purohit, Presiding Officer
I.D. 9/2006
Reference No. L-420 12/37/2005-IR(CM-II) dated : 21-12-2005
Shri Ram Karan Meena S/o Shanker Lal
Through Joint Secretary, H.M.S.,
Bangali Colony, Kota (Raj.)
V/s
The Principal Jawahar Navodaya Vidyalaya, Atru,
Distt. Baran, Rajasthan- 325218.
Present:
For the applicant Union : Sh. Kapil Sharma
For the Non-applicant : Sh. V.S. Gurjar
7636
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 13, 2012/ASVINA 21, 1934
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
AWARD
14-8-2012
1. The Central Government in exercise of the powers
conferred under clause (d) of Sub-section 1 and 2(A) of
Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 has referred
the follwing Industrial dispute to this tribunal for
adjudication:—
‘‘Whether the action of the Principal, Jawahar
Navodaya Vidyalaya, Atru, Dist. Baran- 325218 (Raj.)
in terminating the services of Sh. Ram Karan Meena
S/o Sh. Shankar Lal w.e.f. 29-5-2004 is legal and
justified? If not, to what relief is the workman
entitled?’’
2. The workman in his claim statement has pleaded that
he was engaged by the non-applicant as daily wager class
IV employee on 2-8-96. His services were terminated by the
non- applicant on 18-10-99 without assigning any reason.
The industrial dispute in this regard pending before the
Industrial Tribunal (Central), Kota was disposed of on the
basis of settlement dated 20-11-02 and he was reinstated
by the non-applicant. Thereafter, the non-applicant again
terminated his services vide order dated 29-5-04 without
assigning any reason. While he was at his village during
summer vacation, the said letter terminating his services
w.e.f. 29-5-04 was received by him on 1-6-04. The workman
has contended that he has been paid Rs.1560 as notice pay
for 26 days only, whereas as per law Rs.1 800 as notice pay
should have been paid to him for 30 days. Since, he has
been paid lesser amount of notice pay, his retrenchment is
illegal. He has further contended that no seniority list was
prepared and at the time of terminating his services junior
persons to him namely Bharosibai, Bhuribai, Mahaveer
Meena, Ramsingh and Girraj were in the job. Thus, his
retrenchment is in violation of Section 25-F and G of the
I.D.Act. The workman has prayed to reinstate him with
back wages and all consequential benefits.
3. In reply, the non-applicant has raised preliminary
objection regarding maintainability of the claim on the
ground that non-applicant is not an ‘industry’ within the
meaning of Section 2(J) of the I.D. Act. The non-applicant
has denied that the workman was employed on 2-8-96 as
daily wager class IV servant. The non-applicant has averred
that workman was employed as daily wager for performing
only casual work. It has been denied that services of the
workman were earlier terminated on 18-10-99. The non-
applicant has also averred that while terminating the
services of the workman vide order dated 29-5-04, amount
of notice pay and compensation had been paid to him as
per provisions of the Section 25-F of the I.D. Act.
4. The non-applicant has further averred that the persons
said to be juniors and retained by the non-applicant were
not in the employment of the non-applicant. The non-
applicant has further averred that there were only two
permanent posts of helper and casual work of the mess
was being performed through contractor as per
requirement. The workman has not acquired any legal right
to remain in the employment merely on the ground of
8 years service as daily wager.
5. In evidence, the workman has filed his affidavit
whereas the non-applicant has filed counter affidavit of
Shri Pepsingh Rajawat, Principal, Jawahar Navodaya
Vidyalay, Atru.
6. The workman has filed documents Ex-w-1 to w-14 in
support of his case. The non-applicant has not filed any
document.
7. In view of the pleadings of both the sides the following
questions crop-up for consideration :—
(i) Whether at the time of terminating services of the
workman w.e.f. 29-5-04, the provisions of Section
25-F has been complied with?
(ii) Whether at the time of terminating services of the
workman juniors to him were retained in the job in
violation of Section 25-G of the I.D. Act?
(iii) Whether the non-applicant management is an
‘industry’?
(iv) To what relief the workman is entitled to?
Point No.1
8. Admittedly, the services of the workman were
retrenched vide impugned order dated 29-5-04 (Ex-w-2).
The workman has stated that while he was at his village
during summer vacation, the said order was received by
registered post on 1-6-04. The workman has further stated
that Rs.1560 as notice pay have been paid for 26 days only
whereas as per law Rs. 1800 as notice pay for 30 days were
to be paid to him. In cross-examination he has stated that
he was not getting salary for Sunday.
9. The management witness Shri Pepsing Rajawat has
stated that amount of one months notice pay and
compensation has been paid to the workman as per
provisions of Section 25-F or the I.D. Act. He has further
stated that amount of notice pay and compensation was
paid on the basis of 15 days average pay for the period
during which he was in continuous service. In cross
examination he has stated that record pertaining to one
months notice pay and compensation was available with
the non-applicant.
10. The learned representative for the workman contends
that notice pay has not been paid as per provisions of
Section 25-F of the I.D. Act and mandatory provisions of
Section 25-F have not been complied with. Per contra, the
learned representative for the non-applicant submits that
notice pay as well as compensation have been paid as per
clause (a) and (b) of Section 25-F of the I.D. Act.
11. I have given my thoughtful consideration on the
above submissions.
[Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)]
Hkkjr dk jkti= % vDrwcj 13] 2012@vkf'ou 21] 1934
7637
12. The services of the workman were terminated by the
Office Order dated 29-5-04 (W-2). The relevant para of the
said order is reproduced below :—
‘‘Since Mr. Ram Karan Meena S/o Sh. Shankar Lal
Meena was engaged purely on temporary and daily
wage basis in view of availability of temporary nature
of work in the Navodaya Vidyalaya Atru District
Baran. The temporary nature work is no more
available and his services are no more required now
and are hereby terminated with effect from 29-5-2004.
He is entitled to compensation and one month's pay
in lieu of notice hence, an amount of Rs. 7200
(Rs. Seven Thousand Two Hundred only) on account
of compensation and a sum of Rs. 1560 (One
Thousand five Hundred sixty only) being one
month's pay in lieu of notice, total Rs.8760 (Rs. Eight
Thousand Seven Hundred Sixty only) is being paid
to him with this office order by enclosed cheque
bearing no. 641580 dated 29-05-04 drawn on bank of
SBBJ branch Atru.
He is relieved of his duty on 29-05-2004 in the A/N.’’
13. It is well settled that for a retrenchment to be valid, it
is incumbent upon the employer to fulfill the requirements
of clause (a) and, (b) of Section 25-F of the I.D. Act, Clauses
(a) and (b) of Section 25-F prescribe the imperative
conditions for retrenching a workman. Section 25
envisage’s that no workman employed in any industry who
has been in continuous service for not,less than one year
shall be retrenched by the employer until (a) the workman
has. been given one months notice in writing indicating
thc reasons for retrenchment or the workman has been
paid in lieu of such notice, wages for period of the notice;
(b) the workman has been paid at the time of retrenchment
compensation which shall be equivalent to 15 days average
pay for every completed year of continuous service or any
part thereof in excess of six months.
14. Section 2(aaa) of the I.D.Act lays down the manner
to calculate the average pay of monthly, weekly or daily
rated workman. Section 2(aaa) says that average pay means
the average of the wages payable to a workman in the case
of monthly paid workman in three completed calendar
months, in the case or weekly paid workman in four
completed weeks, in the case of daily paid workman in 12
full working days preceding the date on which the average
pay becomes payable if the workman had worked for three
complete calendar months or four complete weeks or 12
full working days as the case may be and, where such
calculations cannot be made the average pay shall be
calculated as the average of wages payable to a workman
during the period he actually worked.
15. The average pay has to be determined in accordance
with the aforesaid provision. In thc case of a workman who
is being paid wages on monthly basis, his average pay has
to be calculated in accordance with the formula given in
clause (i) of Section 2(aaa) of the Act which would mean
taking the sum total of wages paid to him in three complete
calendar months immediately preceding his retrenchment
and dividing the said amount by three. The principle of 26
working days for determining the compensation payable
in terms of Section 25-F(b) of the Act in such matter is not
relevant.
16. In the present matter, the non-applicant has paid
Rs. 1560 as notice pay and Rs.7200 as compensation.
Average pay for 15 day’s after taking the sum total of wages
paid to him in three complete calendar months immediately
preceding his retrenchment and dividing the said amount
by three comes to Rs. 1800 and it has been admitted by the
non-applicant that the workman had worked for 8 years.
As per clause (b) of Section 25-F the retrenchment
compensation was to be paid equivalent to 15 day’s average
pay for every completed year of continuous service.
The retrenchment compensation for 8 years of
completed service multiplied by 15 day’s average pay i.e.
Rs. 900 would be Rs.7200. It is not the case of the workman
that said amount has not been calculated correctly. Thc
dispute is regarding amount of notice pay.
17. The workman has been paid Rs.1560 as notice pay.
The workman has stated that Rs.1800 should have been
paid as notice pay. It is evident from the amount of
retrenchment compensation paid to the workman that
monthly salary at the time of terminating his services was
Rs. 1800. The management witness has not denied this fact
that workman was getting Rs.1800 as monthly salary.
18. An employee never works and could never be
permitted to work for all the 30 days of the month. He gets
52 Sundays in a year as paid holiday and, therefore, a
worker gets full months wages not by remaining on duty
for all the 30 days within a month but by remaining on work
and doing duties for only 26 days. In present case, the
workman's monthly salary was Rs.1800 but it is evident
from the amount of notice pay i.e. Rs. 560 that the notice
pay has been paid for 26 days only. Thus, the workman has
been paid lesser amount or notice pay under clause (a) of
the Section 25-F of the I.D.Act.
19. Apart that, upon perusal of the impuged
retrenchment order dated 29-5-04, it is evident that the
services of the workman were terminated on 29-5-04 and he
was relieved on the said date. The retrenchment order as
well as the cheque was not given to the workman on the
date of his termination i.e. 29-5-04. The workman has stated
that the impugned retrenchment order was received by him
through registered post on 1-6-04. The management
witness has not denied this fact. Thus, the amount of notice
pay and compensation was paid to the workman after the
date of termination on 29-5-04 and retrenchment order was
also served after terminating services on the said date.
20. It is well settled that retrenchment compensation is
to be paid to the workman before he is asked to go. Section
7638
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 13, 2012/ASVINA 21, 1934
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
25-F postulates two mandatory conditions to be fulfilled
by an employer for effecting a valid retrenchment namely
(i) one months notice in writing indicating the reasons for
retrenchment or wages in lieu of such notice; (ii) Payment
of compensation equivalent to 15 day's average pay for
every completed year of continuous service or any part
thereof in excess of six months. It is also well settled that
the section imposes a mandatory duty on the employer
which is a condition precedent to valid retrenchment of a
workman and contravention of the mandatory requirements
of the section would invalidate the retrenchment and render
it void as intitio. A condition precedent is required to be
fulfilled before the effect of the retrenchment order can
follow.
21. In present ease, the termination order as well as
cheque of compensation were not actually tendered to the
workman on the date of termination i.e. 29-5-04. Sending
termination order along with cheque of retrenchment
compensation and notice pay was not a genuine offer on
the date of termination.It is evident from the documents of
the management itself that amount of retrenchment
compensation and notice pay by cheque was not paid
simultaneously on the date of retrenchment. The workman
was relieved on 29-5-04 whereas the retrenchment order
was served upon him on 27-8-04.
22. For the above reasons, the payment or tender of
compensation and, notice pay to the workman after
retrenchment has taken effect on 29-5-04 has vitiated the
retrenchment and non-compliance with the mandatory
provisions has nullified the retrenchment.
23. In view of above discussions, it is concluded that
vide terminating the services of the workman clause (a)
and (b) of 25-F of the I.D.Act have not been complied with
strictly, therefore, this point is decided in favour of the
workman.
Point No. II
24. The workman in his statement has deposed that at
the time of terminating services juniors to him namely
Bharosibai, Bhuribai, Mahavir Meena, Ramsingh, Girraj etc.
were in the job. The management witness Sh. Pepsing has
stated that the above named persons were not employee
of the non-applicant.
25. The workman in his cross-examination has stated
that above named persons were used to be employed in
case of absence of other employees. He has not produced
any record in respect of aforementioned workers. Except
his bald statement in this regard there is no other material
on record to substantiate his statement that the above
named persons were junior to him and at the time of his
termination they were in the job.
26. Thus, the workman has failed to established that his
termination was in violation of 25-G of the I.D.Act. This
point is decided against the workman and in favour of the
non-applicant.
Point No. III
27. The learned representative for the non-applicant
school contends that the JNV does not fall within the
definition of Section 2(J) of the Act and the vidyalay being
an educational institute, it is not commercial establishment.
Controverting it, the learned representative on behalf of
the workman submits that as per legal proposition laid down
in Banglore Water Supply case, the vidyalay is also an
‘industry’ within the meaning of 2(J) of the Act. In Banglore
Water Supply case reported in 1978 LLJ 349 (SC) the Hon'ble
Apex court has observed and concluded that an educational
institution is an industry in accordance with the parameters
laid down by the Court. The observation is usefully quoted
as below:—
‘‘The final ground accepted by the Court is that
education is a mission and vocation, rather than a
profession or trade or business. The most that one
can say is that this is an assertion which does not
prove itself. Indeed, all life is a mission and a man
without a mission is spiritually still-born. The high
mission of life is the manifestation of the divinity
already in man. To christen education as a mission
even if true is not to negate its being an industry. We
have to look at educational activity from the angle of
the Act, and so viewed the ingredients of education
are fulfilled. Education is, therefore, an industry and
nothing can stand in the way of that conclusion.’’
28. Thc observation made by the Hon’ble Apex Lends
support to the submission advanccd on behalf of the
workman and it is held that the non-applicant institution is
an ‘industry’ as defined under Section 2-J of the Act.. This
point, thererore, is decided in favour of the workman.
Point No. IV
29. On account or the decision of Point no.I &. III in
favour of the workman, it is concluded that the action of
the non-applicant in terminating the services of the
workman from 1-9-05 is not justified and, legal.
30. This legal position is not in dispute that in case of
non compliance of Section 25-F the workman can be
reinstated with other consequential reliefs.
31. Earlier in cases of termination in violation of Section
25-F reinstatement of the workman with full back wages
used to be automatically granted, but keeping in view several
other factors, a change in the said trend is now found in
the recent decisions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court. In a
large number of decisions in the matter of grant of relief of
the kind, Hon’ble Apex Court has distinguished between a
daily wager who does not hold a post and a permanent
employee.
[Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)]
Hkkjr dk jkti= % vDrwcj 13] 2012@vkf'ou 21] 1934
7639
32. In decision reported in (2010) 1 SCC (L and S) 545
Jagbir Singh V/s Haryana State Agriculture Mktg. Board
after considering the earlier decisions referred to therein
on the point should an order of reinstatement automatically
follows in a case of violation of Section 25-F of the I.D.Act
Hon’ble Apex Court has observed that:—
‘‘It would be, thus seen that by a catena of decisions in
recent time, this Court has clearly laid down that an order
of retrenchment passed in violation of Section 25-F
although may be set aside but an award of reinstatement
should not, however, be automatically passed. The award
of reinstatement with full back wages in a case where the
workman has completed 240 days of work in a year
preceding the date of termination, particularly, daily wagers
has not been found to be proper by this Court and instead
compensation has been awarded. This court has
distinguished between a daily wager who does not hold a
post and a permanent employee.’’
33. Continuing this line of approach in decision (2010)
2 SCC (L and S) 376 Hon’ble Apex Court has observed as
under:—
‘‘While the earlier view of the Court was that if an
order of termination was found to be illegal, normally
the relief to be granted would be reinstatement with
full back wages. However, with the passage of time it
came to be realized that an industry should not be
compelled to pay to the workman for the period
during which he apparently contributed little or
nothing at all. The relief to be granted is discretionary
and not automatic. A person is not entitled to get
something only because it would be lawful to do so.
The changes brought out by the subsequent
decisions of the Supreme Court probably having
regard to the changes in the policy decisions of the
Government in the wake of prevailing market
economy, globalization, privatization and
outsourcing was evident. Hence now there is no such
principle that for an illegal termination of service the
normal rule is reinstatement with back wages, and
instead the Labour Court can award compensation.’’
‘‘There has been a shift in the legal position laid
down by the Supreme Court and now there is no
hard- and-fast principle that on the termination of
service being found to be illegal reinstatement with
back wages is to be awarded. Compensation can be
awarded instead, at the discretion of the Labour
Court, depending on the facts and circumstances of
the case.’’
34. In present matter, the workman was not holding any
regular post. Keeping in view the nature of job, nature and
duration of employment, amount already paid as
retrenchmcnt compensation, the laps of time after
termination of the services and having regard the entire
facts and circumstances of the case, instead of reinstating
him the interest of justice will be sub served by paying
Rs.35000 as compensation to the workman instead and in
lieu of relief of reinstatement in service.
35. Accordingly, the reference is answered in affirmative
in favour of the workman and it is held that the action of
the management in termination of the services of the
workman being in violation of clauses (a) and (b) of the
Section 25-F of the Act. is illegal and unjustified. Therefor
the non-applicant is directed to pay compensation to the
workman worth Rs.35000 (Thirty Five Thousand Only)
instead and in lieu of his reinstatement of service. The
payment shall be made within eight weeks from the
publication of the award failing which it shall carry interest
@ 9% per annum.
36. Award as above.
N. K. PUROHIT, Presiding Officer
ubZ fnYyh] 18 flrEcj] 2012
dk-vk- 3142.—vkS|ksfxd fookn vf/kfu;e] 1947 ¼1947 dk
14½ dh /kkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUæh; ljdkj Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad ds
izca/k ra= ds lac) fu;kstdksa muds deZdkjksa ds chp vuqca/k esa
fufnZ"V vkS|ksfxd fookn esa dsUnzh; ljdkj vkS|ksfxd vf/kdj.k]
tcyiqj ds iapkV ¼lanHkZ la[;k 84@04½ dks izdkf'kr djrh gS] tks
dsUnzh; ljdkj dks 18&09&2012 dks izkIr gqvk FkkA
[la- ,y&12012@77@2004&vkbZ vkj ¼ch&I½]
jes'k flag] MsLd vf/kdkjh
New Delhi, the 18th September, 2012
S.O. 3142.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial
Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government
hereby publishes the Award (Ref. 84/04) of the Cent. Govt.
Indus. Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, Jabalpur as shown in
the Annexure, in the Industrial Dispute between the
management of State Bank of India, and their workmen,
received by the Central Government on 18-09-2012
[No. L-12012/77/2004-IR(B-I)]
RAMESH SINGH, Desk Officer
ANNEXURE
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT
INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT,
JABALPUR
No. CGIT/LC/R/84/04
Presiding Officer : SHRI MOHD. SHAKIR HASAN
The General Secretary,
Daily Wages Bank Employees Association,
9, Sanwer Road, Ujjain
. . .Workman
Versus
The Deputy General Manager,
State Bank of India,
Zonal Office, Hamidia Road,
Bhopal (MP)
. . .Management
7640
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 13, 2012/ASVINA 21, 1934
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
AWARD
Passed on this 5th day of September 2012
1. The Government of India, Ministryof Labour vide its
Notification No. L-12012/77/2004-IR(B-I) dated 7-7-2004 has
referred the following dispute for adjudication by this
tribunal:—
‘‘Whether the action of the management of Dy.
General Manager, State Bank of India, Bhopal in
terminating the services of Shri Bhupendra Pal w.e.f.
16-2-95 is legal and justified? If not, to what relief the
workman is entitled to?’’
2. The case of the Union/workman in short is that the
Union is a registered Trade Union and the workman was
member of the Union. The workman was engaged on casual
basis in April 1990. Again he was engaged as casual labour
on 2-12-1994 to 16-2-1995. It is stated that a settlement was
arrived between the management and the Bank Union to
give a chance for permanent appointment to those casual
labour who had worked in between from 1-7-1975 to 14-8-91
for atleast 30 days. It is stated that the workman was called
for interview but he was not taken in the bank service and
the juniors to him were taken in Bank. It is stated that he
was terminated on 16-2-1995 without giving any notice or
without payment of any compensation in violation of the
provision of Section 25-F of the Industrial Dispute Act,
1947. It is stated that the principle of 'last come first go' was
also not followed. It is submitted that the workman be
reinstated with back wages.
3. The management appeared and filed Written
Statement. The case of the management, interalia, is that
the workman Shri Bhupendra Pal was engaged on daily
wages at Ujjain Branch of the State Bank of India (in short
SBI). He worked from April 1990 to October 1990 for 134
days and from 2-12-1994 to 15-2-95 for 53 days in a calendar
year. His contract of work started with opening of the day
and ended with closing of the Branch. His engagement
was on need based looking to the exigency. It is admitted
that an agreement was arrived on 17-11-1987 which was
lateron extended to 31-12-1991 between the management
of SBI and SBI Staff Federation to give a chance for regular
appointment on the conditions settled in the said
agreement. It is stated that during the first span of
engagement from April, 90 to October, 1990, the workman
was below 18 years of age. The condition of age was not
fulfilled by the workman and he was not taken for
considering for permanent appointment in the bank. It is
stated that there is no violation of the provisions of the
Act, 1947. It is submitted that the reference be answered in
favour of the management.
4. On the basis of the pleadings of the parties, the
following issues are settled—
I. whether the action of the management in terminating
the services of Shri Bhupendar Pal w.e.f. 16-2-95 is
legal and justified?
II. To what relief the workman is entitled?
5. Issue No. I
The workman Shri Bhupender Pal is examined in the
case. He has stated that his date of birth is 15-10-1973. This
itself shows that he was below 18 days in October 1990. He
has stated that the Manager had told him that till October
1990 he worked for 134 days and more. He has further
stated that from 2-12-1994 to 15-2-1995 he worked only for
53 days. This itself shows that he had not completed 240
days in twelve calendar months preceding the date of
termination on 16-2-1995. This shows that his case is not
attracted under Section 25 B(2) of the Act, 1947 and
therefore there is no violation of the provision of Section
25-F of the Act.
6. The workman has stated in his evidence that on the
basis of working days, done in the bank, he was called for
interview on 13-2-1997 vide Exhibit W/3 but he was not
appointed and those who had less working days were
appointed in the bank. He has stated in cross-examination
that Paper No. 3/9, which is marked as Exhsibit W/1, is the
notice on the basis of which he had applied for
appointment. Exhibit W/1 is admitted by the management.
This is the notice published calling an application for given
a chance to the casual labour for permanent appointment
in the bank services on the basis of settlement between the
management Bank and the SBI Union. There are certain
conditions laid down in the notice to be fulfilled before
considering his candidature for appointment. The age
criteria was also one of them. Para-2 of the said notice
(Exhibit W/1) runs as follows—
vxj mEehnokj viuh izkjfEHkd vLFkk;h fu;qfDr ds le;
vko';d Fkk ysfdu vLFkk;h lsok ds nkSjku o;Ld gks x;k Fkk rks mls
vk;qlhek ds fy;s j[ks x, ekin.M ds Hkhrj ekuk tk,xk vkSj LFkk;h
fu;qfDr gsrq fopkj fd, tkus dk volj fn;k tk,xkA ijUrq ,sls
mEehnokjksa }kjk o;Ld gks tkus ds ckn dh gh vLFkkbZ lsok dh vofè
dks ekU;rk nh tk,xhA
This clearly shows that the period which is to be
considered, he must be major. The workman has admitted
in his evidence that his date of birth is 15-10-73. This clearly
shows that in 1990 he was minor when he was disengaged.
Thereafter he was engaged only in 1994-1995 for 53 days.
Thus it is clear that the workman was not fit on the basis of
settlement arrived between the management and the Union
as the period of work done for considering his employment
was in minority. This shows that the management has
rightly not considered his candidature.
7. The workman has also filed other documents in the
case which are admitted by the management. Exhibit W2 is
the photocopy of certificate of experience. This is filed to
show that he worked as daily wager form 2-12-94 to 15-2-95
for 53 days. This fact is not disputed by the management.
Exhibit W/3 is the interview letter. This is filed to show that
[Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)]
Hkkjr dk jkti= % vDrwcj 13] 2012@vkf'ou 21] 1934
7641
the workman was called for permanent appointment but he
was not selected. The relevancy has already been
discussed earlier. Exhibit W/4 to W/9 are the letters of the
management to different workers of the Bank whereby the
management paid compensation to those workers but no
notice or compensation was paid to this workman. It is
clear from the above discussion that the case of the
workman is not attracted under Section 25 B(2) of the Act,
1947 and therefore Section 25-F of the Act, 1947 is not
applicable in the case. This shows that he was not entitled
to any compensation in accordance with the Act, 1947.
Exhibit W/10 to W/12 are the appointment letters of different
workers. It is filed to show that they were appointed as part
time workers but he was terminated. The workman has not
pleaded that these workers were also minor at the relevant
period when they were considered for their appointment in
accordance with the settlement. In absence of such plea
and proof it cannot be deduced that they are not eligible
for appointment. Thus oral and documentary evidence of
the workman do not prove his case.
8. On the other hand, management has also adduced
evidence in the case. The management witness Smt. Rita
Shukla is Chief Manager (Adm.), Zonal office, Ujjain. She
has supported this fact in his evidence that the workman
Shri Bhupendra Pal was engaged on daily wages from April
1990 to October 1990 for 134 days and from 2-12-1994 to
15-2-1995 for 53 days. There is no challenge in the cross-
examination. This fact clearly shows that the provision of
Section 25 B (2) of the Act, 1947 is not applicable to consider
his service continuous for a period of one year and therefore
there is no violation of Section 25-F of the Act, 1947. He
has admitted that his candidature was considered for
permanent appointment in view of the settlement but he
was found minor at the time of relevant period when the
said workman was considered for appointment and
therefore he was not selected for permanent service in
terms of settlement. His evidence clearly shows that the
action of the management was legal and justified in
terminating him from service and not selecting him for
permanent appointment. This issue is decided against the
workman and in favour of the management.
9. Issue No. II
On the basis of the discussion made above, it is clear
that the claim of the workman is not justified and he is not
entitled to any relief. The reference is, accordingly,
answered.
10. In the result, the award is passed without any order
to costs.
MOHD. SHAKIR HASAN, Presiding Officer
ubZ fnYyh] 18 flrEcj] 2012
dk-vk- 3143.—vkS|ksfxd fookn vf/kfu;e] 1947 ¼1947 dk
14½ dh /kkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnzh; ljdkj cSad vkWQ jktLFkku
fy- ds izca/kra= ds lac) fu;kstdksa vkSj muds deZdkjksa ds chp
vuqca/k esa fufnZ"V vkS|ksfxd fookn esa dsUnzh; ljdkj vkS|ksfxd
vfèdj.k] Je U;k;ky; tcyiqj ds iapkV ¼lanHkZ la[;k 8@04½ dks
izdkf'kr djrh gS] tks dsUnzh; ljdkj dks 18&09&2012 dks izkIr
gqvk FkkA
[la- ,y&12012@290@2003&vkbZ-vkj- ¼ch&I½]
jes'k flag] MsLd vf/kdkjh
New Delhi, the 18th September, 2012
S.O. 3143.— In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial
Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government
hereby publishes the Award (Ref. 8/04) of the Central
Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court,
Jabalpur as shown in the Annexure, in the industrial dispute
between the management of Bank of Rajasthan Ltd. and
their workmen, received by the Central Government
on 18-09-2012.
[No. L-12012/290/2003-IR (B-I)]
RAMESH SINGH, Desk Officer
ANNEXURE
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT
INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNL-CUM-LABOUR COURT,
JABALPUR
NO. CGIT/LC/R/8/04
PRESIDING OFFICER : SHRI MOHD. SHAKIR HASAN
The General Secretary,
Daily Wages Bank Employees Association,
9, Sanwer Road, Ujjain (MP)
Workman
Versus
The Managing Director,
Bank of Rajasthan Ltd.,
G-3, Sardar Patel Marg, Jaipur (Rajasthan)
Management
AWARD
Passed on this 3rd day of September, 2012
1. The Government of India, Ministry of Labour vide its
Notification No. L-12012/290/2003-IR (B-1) dated 6-2-2004
has referred the following dispute for adjudication by this
tribunal :—
‘‘Whether the action of the management of the
Managing Director, Bank of Rajasthan Ltd. in not
regularizing the services of Shri Kamlesh Bhartiya is
justified? If not, to what relief the workman is entitled
for?’’
7642
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 13, 2012/ASVINA 21, 1934
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
2. The case of the Union/workman in short is that the
workman Shri Kamlesh Bharti was engaged on daily wages
@ Rs. 40 per day against a vacant post of peon-cum-Faras
from 6-6-2001 at Ujjan Branch of the management Bank. It
is stated that he was paid wages in the names of permanent
peon Shri Pankaj and Ashok in five days in sequence. It is
stated that he worked 240 days in a year then he raised
dispute before Asstt. Labour Commissioner (Central)
Bhopal for regular appointed and for payment of bonus.
Therefore he was terminated on 30-9-2002 without notice
and without payment of compensation and engaged Shri
Arun Shukla in his place. It is stated that he was terminated
in violation of Section 25-F, G and N of the Industrial Dispute
Act, 1947 (in short the Act, 1947). It is submitted that the
workman be reinstated and thereafter be regularized with
back wages.
3. The management appearted and filed Written
Statement. The case of the management in short is that
the alleged workman was not appointed on any post of
peon in the management Bank or its branches. Hence the
question of regularization doesnot arise. It is further stated
that the alleged workman had never worked in the Bank
for 240 days or more as claimed by him. The Branch
Manager were not authorized to engage casual labour.
There was no relationship of employer and employee. It
is stated that at Ujjain Branch two permanent staffs namely
Shri Pankaj Joshi and Shri Ashok Thakur were working
and therefore there was no question to take the services
of others. It is also alleged that Shri Ram Nagwanshi
cannot act as a representative of the alleged workman. It
is submitted that the reference be answered in favour of
the management.
4. On the basis of the pleadings of the parties, the
following issues are framed for adjudication-
I. Whether there was relationship of employer and
employee between the management Bank and the
alleged workman?
II. Whether the action of the management is not
regularizing the services of Shri Kamlesh Bhartiya is
justified?
III. To what relief the workman is entitled?
5. Issue No. I and II
For the sake of convenience both the issues are taken
up together. It is also not out of place to say that initially
the reference was started against the Bank of Rajasthan
Ltd. but subsequently duirng the course of the
proceeding the said Bank merged in ICICI Bank. As such
ICICI Bank was also impleaded as party vide order
dated 24-12-2010.
6. To prove the case, the workman Shri Kamlesh Bhartiya
is examined in the case. He was supported his case in his
evidence that the workman was engaged on 6-6-2011 by
Shri Laxman Sharma, the then Manager to do the work of a
peon. The pleading shows that he was engaged on daily
wages. He has stated that he was terminated w.e.f.
30-9-2002. In cross examination he has stated that he did
not receive any appointment letter nor appeared in any
interview of appointment. He has further stated that he has
not certificate to show that he worked 240 days or more. He
has not filed any document to show that his wages paid in
the name of Shri Ashok Thakur and Pankaj Joshi. This
clearly shows that there is no chit of paper to show
relationship of employer and employee nor there is any
document to show that he had worked in the branch of the
Bank. He has stated that he wants service. This creates
doubt in his evidence that instant case is filed for securing
backdoor employment and the evidence appears to be not
reliable.
7. On the other hand, the management has examined
one witness. The management witness Shri Satyanarain
Sharma is Manager-II in the Bank of Rajasthan Ltd. He has
supported the case of the management. He has stated that
it is wrong to say that the alleged workman was engaged
againt the permanent post of peon on 6-6-2001 and worked
till 30-9-2002 continuously by the then Manager of the
their Ujjan Branch of the Bank. He was never appointed
against any post nor any appointment letter was issued.
There is no record in the bank to show that he had worked
in the bank against any post or otherwise. His evidence
clrearly shows that he was never engaged in the bank and
therefore the question of violation of the provision of the
Act, 1947 and the question of regularization in the bank
service doesnot arise. He has been cross-examined at
length but there is nothing to disbelieve this witness. This
shows that there is no chit of paper to show that the
workman was engaged in the bank and there was any
relationship of employer and employee between the
management and the alleged workman.
8. The learned counsel for the management submitted
that there is recruitment rules in the Bank for appointment
of sub staff in the Bank. Admittedly he was not allegedly
appointed in the bank by the procedure for recruitment
rules. As such the question of regularization doesnot arise.
He has relied the decision reported in (2006)4 SCC 1
Secretary, State of Karnataka and others Vrs. Uma Devi
and others, Considering the evidence adduced by the
parties, it is clear that the alleged workman was not
employed in the service of the Bank and there is no violation
of the provision of Section 25-F, 25-G and 25 N of the Act,
1947 and the question of regularization in the service
doesnot arise. Both issues are decided against the Union/
workman and in favour of the management.
9. Issue No. III
On the basis of the discussion made above, it is clear
that the Union/workman has no case and the alleged
workman is not entitled to any relief. Accordingly the
reference is answered.
[Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)]
Hkkjr dk jkti= % vDrwcj 13] 2012@vkf'ou 21] 1934
7643
10. In the result, the award is passed without any order
to costs.
MOHD. SHAKIR HASAN, Presiding Officer
ubZ fnYyh] 18 flrEcj] 2012
dk-vk-3144-—vkS|ksfxd fookn vf/kfu;e] 1947 ¼1947 dk
14½ dh /kkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnzh; ljdkj Hkkjrh; LVsV cSad
ds izca/kra= ds lac) fu;kstdksa vkSj muds deZdkjksa ds chp vuqca/k
esa fufnZ"V vkS|ksfxd fookn esa dsUæh; ljdkj vkS|ksfxd vf/kdj.k]
dkuiqj ds iapkV ¼lanHkZ la[;k 29@2008½ dks izdkf'kr djrh gS] tks
dsUnzh; ljdkj dks 18&09&2012 dks izkIr gqvk FkkA
[la- ,y&12012@43@2007&vkbZ- vkj- ¼ch&I½]
jes'k ¯lg] MsLd vf/kdkjh
New Delhi, the 18th September, 2012
S.O. 3144.— In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial
Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government
hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 29/2008) of the
Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court,
Kanpur as shown in the Annexure, in the industrial dispute
between the management of State Bank of India and their
workmen, received by the Central Government on 18-09-
2012.
[No. L-12012/43/2007-IR (B-I)]
RAMESH SINGH, Desk Officer
ANNEXURE
BEFORE SRI RAM PARKASH, HJS, PRESIDING
OFFICER, CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL
TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT, KANPUR
Industrial Dispute No. 29 of 2008
Between
Sri Ved Prakash Pandey,
Son of Sri Rudra Narain Pandey,
Village Mahuwa,
Post Swadund,
District-Sidharth Nagar.
And
(1) The Branch Manager,
State Bank of India,
Kesherha Branch (Code 3621),
District Sidharth Nagar.
(2) Regional Manager
State Bank of India,
Town Hall Building,
Gorakhpur (UP).
AWARD
1. Central Government, Mol, New Delhi vide notification
no. L-12012/43/2007-IR (B-1) dated 27-07-07 has referred
the following dispute for adjudication to this tribunal—
2. Whether the action of the management of Bhartiya
State Bank Sidharth Nagar in terminating the services of
Sri Ved Parkas Pandey son of Sri Rudra Narain Pandey
Canteen boy cum messenger with effect from 03-01-2004 is
legal and justified? If not to what relief the concerned
workman is entitled?
3. Briefly stated facts of the case of the claimant is that
he was engaged by the opposite party bank at its Kheshraha
Branch code no. 3621 in District Sidharthnagar, U.P. on
01-06-1993. The initial payment of salary of the claimant
was Rs. 360 per month which was subsequently enhanced
to Rs. 500 per month. The salary cheque was issued by the
bank with the joint signature of Manager of the Bank and a
member of the Local Implementation Committee. The salary
cheques were issued to the claimant treating him to be a
canteen boy but the work taken from the claimant was that
of Messenger cum Peon. It is pertinent to mention here
that the branch where the claimant was engaged by bank
was not having any canteen therefore, question to engage
the claimant as canteen boy in the said branch does not
arise. The salary cheques issued by the bank under the
joint signature of the manager and a member of award staff
who is said to be the Secretary of Local Implementation
Committee is to camouflage the whole issue but in fact the
applicant was performing the work of Messenger cum Peon
continuously from 1993. It is the further case of the claimant
that he was regularly deputed to deliver the local daak and
alone he was deputed to deliver daak to Regional office at
Gorakhpur for which he was being paid travelling allowance
by the branch manager of the branch alone and not by the
joint signature of a member of Local Implementation
Committee. It is also stated by the claimant that after
delivering the daak at Regional Office Gorakhpur, he used
to submit his T .A., Foodings and lodging Bills at the branch
and those bills were settled by the branch manager by
issued debit slip. The claimant has also details of debit
slips issued in his favor by the bank in sub Para (a) to (e) of
Para 7 of his statement of claimant showing the date and
amount passed in his favor. It is further claimed by him that
these debit slips demonstrate that the claimant was
performing the regular work of Peon cum Messenger in the
branch. On this ground it is also pleaded by the claimant
that the opposite party bank be directed to produce the
original debit slips through which the travelling allowance/
daily allowance was paid to the applicant and also the local
daak register for the period 1993 and onwards which will
demonstrate that the applicant was also delivering the local
daak regularly.
4. The bank was regularly taking from the claimant the
work of peon cum messenger but to cover up their illegal
action they used to issue salary cheques in the joint
signature of the branch manager and of a member. of the
Local Implementation Committee which is clear violation
of natural justice.
7644
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 13, 2012/ASVINA 21, 1934
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
5. It is denied by the claimant that there ever existed any
canteen at the branch where he was engaged. The payment
vouchers of Tea and Snacks are present in the record of
the bank which will indicate subsisted at the branch where
the claimant was engaged. It is also the case of the claimant
that when he raised his demand before the branch manager
that he should also be paid wages as are being paid to
regularly appointed peon cum messenger then the manager
verbally removed his services with effect from 03.01.04
without giving him any opportunity of hearing, notice or
retrenchment compensation therefore the opposite party
did not follow the provisions of Section 25F and 25N of the
Act whereas he has completed continuous services of
about 11 years and during all the calendar years he had
rendered for more than 240 days of service preceding the
date of his removed.
6. On the basis of above it has been prayed by the
claimant that he should be reinstated in the service of the
bank with full back wages, seniority and other
consequential benefits.
7. Opposite party has filed the written statement
contradicting the aversion of the claimant. It is alleged that
the claimant did not work in the office of the Regional
Manager SBI Gorakhpur even for a day. But claimant
deliberately arrayed him as a party. Only on this ground
alone the claim is not maintainable. It is stated that claimant
was the canteen boy engage by the Local Implementation
Committee whereas LIC is not a banking Company, hence
the claim is not maintainable. There is no relationship of
employer and employee between the bank and the claimant.
It is stated that the claimant had already worked as
temporary messenger in the branch for a period of 86 days
as per urgent need. Bank did not issue him any appointment
letter and after this tenure there existed no relationship
between the parties. In the bank for the welfare of the staff
a fund is created. Canteen activities are one of them. The
branch manager is the ex officio president of the said LIC.
A current account in the staff welfare fund is opened in the
branch which is operated by the Secretary and the member
of LIC. LIC appoints the canteen boy for operating the
activities of the canteen. Salaries are made by LIC to the
canteen boy. It is also stated that at the material time there
were sufficient messengers in the branch but due to urgent
need the claimant offered himself then bank gave him
opportunity to do needful. Thereafter the bank used to
pay the expenses after producing the bills by the claimant.
Primary duty of the claimant was of canteen boy. The
incidental work cannot change his status. Claimant did not
work continuously for more than 240 days in a calendar
year preceding the date of his removal therefore; the
provisions of Section 25F of the Act do not come in picture
in his case.
8. On the basis of above it has been pleaded by the
opposite party that the claim of the petitioner is not
maintainable and is liable to be rejected.
9. Rejoinder has also been filed by the claimant but
nothing new has been pleaded therein.
10. Both parties have filed the documentary as well as
oral evidence. Documentary evidence will be discussed
during the examination of the oral evidence.
11. Claimant has produced himself as Ved Parkas Pandey
Opposite party has produced M. W.l Sri Satya Narain
Pandey who is retired branch manager who had been in the
Kheshara Branch during the period September 2000 to
October 2003.
12. The reference in this case is whether the action of
the opposite party in terminating the services of the
claimant canteen boy cum messenger is legal and justified.
13. Opposite party has claimed that he was engaged
only in canteen being managed under local implementation
committee at the branch but M.W.1 has admitted in the
cross this fact that the claimant has been working as a
canteen boy since 1993 to 2004, so this fact has been
established that the claimant had been working. Now the
claim of the claimant is that there is no such type of canteen
in the branch and in the garb of a canteen boy the work of
a messenger was being taken from him.
14. Now a short question to be decided in this case is
whether the claimant was being treated as a canteen boy
cum messenger during this period.
15. Claimant has summoned the local delivery book and
certain other vouchers and TA bills from the opposite party.
The delivery book is in original. At some of the pages in
the column of messenger the name of the claimant is shown.
When a question was put to MW.1 he has admitted but
stated that the clerks used to write his name in the delivered
book. Whereas the claimant has stated that at page no.
20-22-31 he has delivered the daak. Page no.13 dated
09-08-96 he delivered the daak, page no.34, 35, 37, 38 which
bears different dates he has delivered the daak. Similarly at
page no.43 and so on, page no.60 dated 28-10-03 and dated
12-12-03, he has delivered the daak. He has stated that he
has wrongly stated the fact that he has delivered the daak
on 13-04-04 which he could not understand the question. I
think that this mistake is ignorable. He has claimed that
these entries in the daak register are in his hand writing.
Apart from serving the local daak he used to serve the out
stationed daak and he was used to be paid for that TA and
expenses and these papers are 121-14, which are bills and
vouchers. He further stated that he used to be sent to the
Zonal Office of the Bank at Gorakhpur for serving the daak
for which bank used to pay him the TA and expenses.
He also used to do other misc. work at the branch.
16. Mere denial by MW 1 that these entries are not in
the hand writing of the claimant is not acceptable whereas
he himself has admitted that the name of the claimant as
messenger has been written by the concerned clerks of the
bank. This fortifies the claim of the claimant.
[Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)]
Hkkjr dk jkti= % vDrwcj 13] 2012@vkf'ou 21] 1934
7645
17. From the statement of W.W. 1 and M.W. 1 and from
the documents which have been filed it can be easily
inferred that the work of the messenger was being taken
from the claimant.
18. Now the contention of the bank that he was being
paid Rs.500 per month by the President of LIC. They have
also filed certain ledger sheet papers from page no.
152-15/5 as well as cheques in original which are paper no.
15/6-14. This shows that the bank was taking the work
from the claimant treating him as a canteen boy but the
work of the messenger was also taken.
19. Therefore, from the facts it can be inferred that the
work of canteen boy-cum-messenger was taken from the
workman since the date of his engagement till the date of
his termination. M.W.l has clearly admitted in his evidence
that the claimant had worked continuously during the
period 1993 till the date of his termination leaving leave
and holidays.
20. The opposite party has also admitted in his written
statement that the claimant had worked for 86 days in the
bank, but they have not clearly disclosed the period of this
working. Evidence has also not been given in this shape.
Whereas in the evidence it has been shown that the claimant
had never been engaged by the bank as messenger even
for a single day which is contradictory to the own pleadings
of the bank raised in their reply. Therefore the version of
the bank which is a model employer of the country and it is
expected from the bank that they will come with clean hands
before a forum of law, in such the version as well as evidence
of the bank is not acceptable. W. W.1 has been cross-
examined at length. There is nothing in his evidence which
make his evidence disbelievable, therefore, it is found that
the claimant has been working continuously in the bank
with effect from 01-06-93 to 03-01-2004, who was being
treated as canteen boy-cum-messenger.
21. It has also been stated by W.W. 1 that before removal
of his services the bank has neither paid him retrenchment
compensation, notice pay or retrenchment notice. This fact
appears to be proved by the evidence of parties.
22. Therefore in the given facts and circumstances of
the case the action of the opposite party was not found to
be legal and justified in terminating the services of the
claimant Sri Ved Parkas Pandey. Therefore he is entitled to
be reinstated in the service. Considering the facts and
circumstances of the case he is entitled to 30% of back
wages, but further considering the facts and circumstances
of the case it is held that he is not entitled to regular salary
of peon-cum-messenger with effect from 01-06-93 or from
the date of termination as claimed by him.
Date : 4-9-12
RAM PARKASH, Presiding Officer
ubZ fnYyh] 18 flrEcj] 2012
dk-vk-3145.—vkS|ksfxd fookn vf/kfu;e 1947 ¼1947 dk
14½ dh /kkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa] dsUnzh; ljdkj eS- chlhMh ,tsUlh
izk- fyfeVsM ds izca/kra= ds lac) fu;kstdksa vkSj muds deZdkjksa ds
chp] vuqca/k esa fufnZ"V vkS|ksfxd fookn esa dsUæh; ljdkj vkS|ksfxd
vf/kdj.k@Je U;k;ky; ua- 2] eqEcbZ ds iapkV ikVZ&II ¼lanHkZ la[;k
lhthvkbZVh&2@66 vkWQ 2003½ dks izdkf'kr djrh gS] tks dsUnzh;
ljdkj dks 11&09&2012 dks izkIr gqvk FkkA
[la- ,y&31011@15@2003&vkbZ vkj ¼ch&II½]
'kh'k jke] vuqHkkx vf/kdkjh
New Delhi, the 18th September, 2012
S.O. 3145.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial
Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government
hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. CGIT-2/66 of 2003)
of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal/Labour Court
No-2, Mumbai now as shown in the Annexure in the
Industrial dispute between the employers in relation to the
management of M/s. BCD Agency Pvt. Ltd. and their
workmen, which was received by the Central Government
on 11-09-2012.
[No. L-31011/15/2003-IR(B-II)]
SHEESH RAM, Section Officer
ANNEXURE
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT
INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL NO. 2, MUMBAI
PRESENT
K.B. KATAKE, Presiding Officer
REFERENCE NO. CGIT -2/66 of 2003
EMPLOYERS IN RELATION TO THE MANAGEMENT
OF
M/S. B.C.D. AGENCY PVT. LTD.
The Director
M/s. BCD Agency Pvt. Ltd.
105, Vyapar Bhavan, 1st floor
49, P. D’ mello Road, Mumbai-400 009.
AND
THEIR WORKMEN.
The President
Transport & Dock Workers Union
P.D’ mello Bhavan
P.D’ mello Road,
Carnac Bunder,
Mumbai -400 038.
7646
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 13, 2012/ASVINA 21, 1934
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
APPEARANCES :
FOR THE EMPLOYER : Mr. M.B.Anchan, Advocate
FOR THE WORKMEN: Mr. A.M. Koyande, Advocate
Mumbai, dated the 30th July, 2012.
AWARD PART-II
The Government of India, Ministry of Labour &
Employment by its Order No.L-31011/15/2003-IR (B-II),
dated 29-09-2003 in exercise of the powers conferred by
clause (d) of sub-section (1) and sub-section 2 (A) of
Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 have referred
the following industrial dispute to this Tribunal for
adjudication:
‘‘Whether the action of the management of M/s. BCD
Agency Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai by terminating the services
of Shri Dilip Adhar Kumar Adhikari, Custom Clerk
w. e.f. 30-11-2002 is justified or not? If not, what relief
the workman, Shri Dilip A. Kumar Adhikari is entitled
to?’’
2. The second party workman was charge-sheeted for
altercation with office staff members Mrs. Shaila Mahadik
on 20-02-2002. He was also chargesheeted for not getting
shipment papers i.e. AR-4 and mate receipts belonging to
M/s Tauras Chemicals and Lyka Exports Ltd. kept in the
locker of the company at CWC Dronagiri and the workman
asked Mr. Kashid not to proceed without his consent. He
was also charged for late arrival and misbehavior and non
co-operation with M/s. IPCA, LAPS Ltd. and did not meet
the drivers of M/s. Devram Tukaram Shinde promptly and
threatened and abused them and made them to wait for
long hours. They voiced their grievance to the first party
for his poor performance not phoned to them after reporting
to update and reporting late in the office and remained
absent on 22-02-2002 on the date of memo. Company
sustained heavy loss because of second party workman.
For all these charges, inquiry was conducted against the
second party workman. On the basis of report of the inquiry
officer the service of second party workman came to be
terminated.
3. The second party workman raised industrial dispute
before the Labour Commissioner. As conciliation failed,
the Labour Commissioner submitted his report to the Labour
Ministry. The Labour Ministry sent reference to this
Tribunal. In response to the notice the second part appeared
in this reference. The second party workman filed his
statement of claim at Ex-9. According to him the inquiry
was not fair and proper. The IO was bias and the findings
of the IO are perverse. According to him, he has not
committed any such mischief. Therefore he prays that the
order of termination be set aside and he be reinstated in the
service with full back wages, continuity of service and
consequential benefits.
4. The first party management resisted the statement of
claim by filing their written statement at Ex-22. They denied
that inquiry was not fair and proper and findings were
perverse. According to them sufficient opportunity was
given to the workman and the findings of IO are not
perverse. The charges were proved against the workman
and the punishment of removal from service is just and
proper. Therefore they pray that the reference be rejected
with cost. After framing the issues, issues nos. 1 and 2 in
respect of fairness of inquiry and perversity of findings
were treated as preliminary issues. My Ld. Predecessor in
Award Part-I dt. 19-05-2009 held that inquiry was not fair
and proper and findings are perverse and first party was
directed to justify their action.
5. Following are the issues re-casted for my determination
in this part-II award. I record my findings thereon for the
reasons to follow:
Sr. No. Issues
Findings
1.
Whether first party has proved the
alleged misconduct against the
Yes
workman?
2.
If yes, whether the punishment of
Yes
termination is proportionate
to the proved misconduct?
3.
Whether the workman is entitled to be
No
reinstated ?
4.
What order ?
As per
final order.
REASONS
Issue no.1
6. To prove the guilt management has led evidence of
two witnesses. MW-1 Mr. Gopalkrishna Narayan Pai has
filed his affidavit at Ex-37. MW-2 Shaila Mahadik has filed
her affidavit at Ex-40. Shri G. N. Pai is one of the Directors of
the first party company. He says in his affidavit at Ex-37
that the second party was employed as Custom Clerk in
the Export Division. His duty was to receive export cargo
documents and present the same before the Customs. He
further says that he was not punctual in his duties and due
to his late attendance memo dt. 31/01/2000 (Ex-71) was
issued to him. He further says that he was to attend their
customer IPCA. However he did not attend and they
verified that he was not at the work place and they found
that most of the time he was not available at the work place.
He had neglected the work and due to his negligence
company had suffered huge financial loss and loss to IPCA,
M/s. Taurus Chemicals and M/s. Lyka Export Ltd. He furthers
says that those companies had given complaints against
second party workman. He further says that second party
workman took all export related documents of M/s. Taurus
Chemicals and M/s. Lyka Export Ltd. from Mr. H.C. Kashid
and kept those documents in his custody. He did not
produce these documents before the Customs and
[Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)]
Hkkjr dk jkti= % vDrwcj 13] 2012@vkf'ou 21] 1934
7647
deliberately hid them in the locker, due to which company
sustained great loss. It is also contended in his affidavit
that company had given him mobile phone and motor bike.
Mobile bill shows he was misusing the mobile phone for
his personal calls. It has further come in his affidavit that
due to his late attendance and misbehaviour he was
transferred to Mumbai Office and was asked to do the desk
work. He further says that, on 20-02-2002 he misbehaved
with a female employee Shaila Mahadik and she has
submitted a written complaint against him. A compliant
was also lodged to Police. This witness further says that
the workman had accepted illegal gratification from their
transporter M/s. Shree Ashapura. They have made a written
complaint to that effect to the first party.
7. This witness is one of the Directors of the company.
There is no suggestion to him as to why he is deposing
falsely against a workman who is a Clerk in his company.
His version is supported by the memo dated 31-01-2000
(Ex-71) wherein warning was given to the workman for late
attendance and not contacting them on phone every day
in the morning to take further instructions in respect of the
work. Neither he has any enmity with the workman nor
there is any allegation of victimization. Thus his version
inspires confidence in respect of the charges of late
attendance, mischief in respect of documents and
misbehaviour with some of their customers.
8. The second witness Shaila Mahadik Ex-40 has
contended in her affidavit that, on 20-02-2002 the second
party workman misbehaved with her. She says that after
finishing her work in the computer cabin, when she came
out of the cabin she found that, the workman was sitting
on her chair. She requested him to vacate her chair.
According to her workman refused to vacate her chair and
raised his voice. He asked her whether her name is written
on the chair. His approach was aggressive and very rude.
He threatened her with dire consequence and also
threatened to see her. She further says that, at that time she
was crying and got afraid of and approached to the Director
immediately for action. She had given written complaint
against him. In her cross-examination it was suggested
that since no chair was available second party sat on her
chair. It indicates that the incident is not totally false and
there is substance in the allegation that the second party
had occupied the chair of Smt. Shaila Mahadik and had
altercation with her. It supports the version of the witness
Mrs. Shaila Mahadik that the workman had misbehaved
with her when she asked him to vacate her chair. The
workman has not explained as to why she has made
complaint and allegations against him. From the cross
examinations of both these witnesses, no adverse fact has
come on record. They have no enmity or any grudge against
the second party. They are independent witnesses. Both
these witnesses have no reason to make false allegations
against the workman. On the other hand their version is
supported by the documents and facts on record. From
their evidence it is revealed that both these witnesses are
trustworthy and their testimony can safely be relied upon.
Thus I hold that first party has proved the alleged
misconduct against the workman. Accordingly, I decide
the re-casted issue no.1 in the affirmative.
Issue No. 2
9. On the point of punishment the Ld. adv. for the second
party submitted that the allegations in respect of late
attendance, hiding the documents, not attending and
neglecting the clients are of general and vague nature. He
further submitted that the charge of altercation with female
employee Mrs. Shaila Mahadik is also not of a serious
nature. It was pointed out that as there was shortage of
chairs and sitting arrangements, the workman has sat on
the chair of Smt. Shaila Mahadik. He had no intention either
to insult her or to cause her any inconvenience.Therefore,
the Ld. adv. for the second party submitted that the extreme
punishment of dismissal or removal from service is
shockingly disproportionate to the alleged misconduct.
10. As against this, the Ld. adv. for the first party
submitted that the charges of late attendance, leaving the
office without intimation, not attending the clients, hiding
documents of clients and not producing it before them,
keeping some clients waiting; all these acts of the workman
caused great loss to the first party company. Due to these
acts first party company not only suffered financial loss
but it also affected their reputation adversely. The Ld. adv.
further submitted that due to such behaviour of an employee
of the company, company has sustained loss and also his
behaviour caused harm to the reputation to the company.
He further submitted that such an employee cannot be
tolerated in any institution. The charges are very serious
causing loss to the company and its clients. The behaviour
of the workman also caused great harm to the reputation to
the company. Therefore, he submitted that, the dismissal
or removal from service is adequate punishment for such
misbehaviour. The Ld. adv. for the first party further
submitted that it is common experience of exploitation of
female employees. Such tendency needs to be checked
with iron hands. In the light of above misbehaviour of the
workman, the misbehaviour with female colleagues shows
the tendency of the workman. He submitted that the
tendency of the workman is to create difficulty and problem
to the others wherever he goes. The Ld. adv. further
submitted that such a workman cause harm to the workman
and their unions. Many such workmen are being maintained
in corporate sector with the blessings of their unions. In
my opinion the submission of Ld. adv. for the first party are
not far away from truth. The movement of unions is also
affected by extending protection to such wanton workmen.
In my opinion the charges proved against the workman
indicates that he is not only harmful to his colleagues but
7648
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 13, 2012/ASVINA 21, 1934
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
he is also acting against the interest of the employer.
Though first party has not produced any specific evidence
to show the actual financial loss to them, the clients who
sustained financial loss, inconvenience and insult
ultimately cause to affect the business of the first party.
Furthermore I would like to point out that the workman
behaved arrogantly with his female colleague which also
cannot be viewed lightly. In this backdrop I come to the
conclusion that the punishment of termination of services
of the workman is quite proportionate to the proved
misconduct. Accordingly I decide this issue no.2 also in
the affirmative.
Issue nos. 3 and 4
11. In the light of above discussions, I come to the
conclusion that workman is not entitled to be reinstated.
Thus I proceed to pass the following order :
ORDER
The reference stands rejected with no order as to cost.
Date : 30-07-2012
K. B. KATAKE, Presiding Officer
ubZ fnYyh] 18 flrEcj] 2012
dk-vk- 3146-—vkS|ksfxd fookn vf/kfu;e] 1947 ¼1947 dk
14½ dh /kkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUæh; ljdkj eqEcbZ iksVZ VªLV ds
izcaèra= ds laca) fu;kstdksa vkSj muds deZdkjksa ds chp vuqca/k esa
fufnZ"V vkS|ksfxd fookn esa dsUæh; ljdkj vkS|ksfxd vf/kdj.k@Je
U;k;ky;&1] eqEcbZ ds iapkV ¼lanHkZ la[;k lhthvkbZVh&1@83 vkWQ
2004½ dks izdkf'kr djrh gS tks dsUæh; ljdkj dks 14&09&2012
dks izkIr gqvk FkkA
[la- ,y&31011@7@2004&vkbZ vkj ¼ch&II½]
'kh'k jke] vuqHkkx vf/kdkjh
New Delhi, the 18th September, 2012
S.O. 3146.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial
Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government
hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. CGIT-1/83 of 2004)
of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal/Labour
Court-1, Mumbai now as shown in the Annexure in the
Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the
management of Mumbai Port Trust and their workman,
which was received by the Central Government
on 14-09-2012.
[No. L-31011/7/2004-IR(B-II)]
SHEESH RAM, Section Officer
ANNEXURE
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT
INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL NO. 1,
MUMBAI
Present : JUSTICE G. S. SARRAF, Presiding Officer
Reference No. CGIT-l/83 of 2004
Parties:
Employers in relation to the management of
Mumbai Port Trust
And
Their workmen.
Appearances :
For the Management
:
Mr. Umesh Nabar, Adv.
For the Union
:
Ms. Kunda Samant, Adv.
State
:
Maharashtra
Mumbai, the 30th day of August, 2012
AWARD
The brief facts leading to the present controversy may
be stated thus. On 1-8-1996 a tally and sorting clerk was
arrested by Yellow Gate Police Station in case of theft of
cargo at ‘F’ Princess Dock. It is alleged that the workmen
instigated all the tally clerks to strike down the work from
second shift of 3-8-1996 which crippled the operations at
the port till the second shift of 6-8-1996. It is further alleged
that on 5-8-1996 the workmen led a mob of about two
hundred employees to the office of M.B.I. Kazi, Deputy
Manager who indulged in disorderly behaviour and abused
Kazi and shouted slogans. It is further alleged that the mob
led by the workmen gheraoed and detained the Officers of
the first party for more than seven hours. It is also alleged
that some persons led by the workmen went to the
residential quarters of the first party at ‘Sangam’ at Colaba
where they disturbed the peace and tranquillity of the
colony. The six workmen alongwith two others were
chargesheeted for the misconduct and an enquiry was held
against them under Regulation No.12 of the Mumbai Port
Trust Employees (Classification, Control and Appeal)
Regulations, 1976. The Enquiry Officer vide report
dt.26-11-1998 held that the charges against the six workmen
and two others were not proved. The Disciplinary Authority
however, did not agree with the report of the Enquiry Officer
and ordered penalty of reduction of pay in time scale and
further ordered that the delinquent employees would not
earn any increment during the period of penalty. The
delinquent employees dissatisfied with the order of the
Disciplinary Authority preferred appeals under the
Regulations. The Appellate Authority set aside the order
of the Disciplinary Authority and remanded the matters
back to the Disciplinary Authority for further enquiry and
fresh orders. Pursuant thereto the delinquent employees
were served with show cause notices as the Disciplinary
Authority was not in agreement with the findings of the
Enquiry Officer. Aggrieved by the issuance of the show
cause notices proposing penalty of compulsory retirement
a writ petition No. 999 of 2002 was filed in the Bombay
High Court by the six workmen and one another employee.
By judgement dt. 5-7-2002 passed in the above writ petition
the Bombay High Court directed the Disciplinary Authority
[Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)]
Hkkjr dk jkti= % vDrwcj 13] 2012@vkf'ou 21] 1934
7649
to take into consideration the reply/explanation objectively
and pass appropriate order in accordance with law and the
petitioners were granted time of one month to file reply/
explanation to the show cause notices served upon them
by the Disciplinary Authority. It was also held that in case
the petitioners felt aggrieved by the order of the Disciplinary
Authority then they would be free to challenge the said
order in accordance with law. The six workmen filed replies
to the show cause notices. The Disciplinary Authority after
considering the entire matter imposed the punishment of
compulsory retirement. The workmen filed an appeal. The
Appellate Authority upheld the order of the Disciplinary
Authority.
Out of the eight delinquent employees one Chavan
accepted the penalty imposed upon him of reduction of
pay by five stages and one Meenakshi Sundaram accepted
the punishment of compulsory retirement but the workmen
raised an industrial dispute.
The Central Government then in exercise of its powers
under clause (d) of sub section (1) and sub-section (2A) of
Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act 1947 (hereinafter
referred to as the Act) has made this reference. The terms
of reference given in the schedule are as follows:
Whether the action of the management of Mumbai Port
Trust in termination of employment by way of compulsory
retirement of S/Shri Anil Mohan Shejwadkar, Vijay Bhikaji
Karalkar, Vijay Baburao Patil, Suleman Ibrahim Kadaria,
Arnold Lobo, Motilal Ladusingh, Tally and Sorting Clerks
and GPM Hatchforeman of OBL Section w.e.f. 30-7-2002 is
justified ? If not, what relief these six employees are entitled
to?
According to the statement of claim filed by the
Transport and Dock Workers Union (hereinafter referred
to as the Union) the punishment of compulsory retirement
imposed against the workmen is illegal, arbitrary,
discriminatory, unreasonable, improper, invalid, perverse,
unjust and void and, therefore, it is liable to be set aside
and the workmen are entitled to be reinstated with full back
wages, continuity of service and the attendant benefits.
On the other hand, the first party has prayed that the
reference be rejected.
Out of the six workmen two—Vijay Bhikaji Karalkar and
Vijay Baburao Patil—have expired. The legal
Representatives of the deceased workman Vijay Baburao
Patil have been taken on record by order dt.3-5-2012 of this
Tribunal.
Following Issues have been framed on 13-10-2006 :
(1) Whether the departmental enquiry held against the
workmen is fair and proper?
(2) Whether the report of the Enquiry Officer is
perverse?
(3) Whether punishment of compulsory retirement
given to the workmen is proper and justified?
(4) What order?
Following Additional Issue has been framed on
2-11-2006. Whether the management proves that the report
of the Enquiry Officer is perverse?
Following Additional Issue has been framed
on 26-8-2012.
Whether the Disciplinary Authority of the first party
employer proves that he was justified in awarding the
punishment of compulsory retirement against the second
party workmen?
The Union has filed six affidavits and the witnesses
have been cross examined by learned counsel for the first
party.
Heard Ms. Samant learned counsel on behalf of the
Union and Mr. Nabar learned counsel on behalf of the first
party.
ISSUE NO. 1
The workmen were not found guilty by the Enquiry
Officer and, therefore, learned counsel for the Union does
not press this Issue. It is, therefore, held that the
departmental enquiry held against the workmen was fair
and proper and Issue no.1 is decided accordingly.
ISSUE NO. 2. AND ADDITIONAL ISSUE FRAMED
ON 2-11-2006: The workmen were not found guilty by the
Enquiry Officer and, therefore, learned counsel for the
Union does not press this Issue. It is, therefore, held that
the report of the Enquiry Officer is not perverse and Issue
No. 2 and Additional Issue framed on 2-11-2006 are decided
accordingly.
lSSUE NO. 3 AND ADDITIONAL ISSUE FRAMED
ON 26-8-2010
Honourable Bombay High Court in its judgement dt.
5-4-2002 passed in writ petition no-999 of 2002 has held as
under :
The reasons which have been recorded by the
Disciplinary Authority for not being in agreement
with the finding of Enquiry Officer cannot be said to
be cryptic or no reasons at all. As the petitioners
have been given show cause notice for proposed
penalty by the Disciplinary Authority, it is open to
the petitioners to appear before the Disciplinary
Authority and set up their defence and show cause
why the proposed penalty should not be awarded.
Obviously, upon petitioners appearance and the
explanation submitted by them, the Disciplinary
Authority will take into consideration the cause and
explanation submitted by them and pass appropriate
order thereon. If the petitioners are aggrieved by the
order so passed by the Disciplinary Authority, it is
always open to them to challenge such order in appeal
under Regulations. It would be, thus, seen that no
prejudice at this stage can be said to have been
7650
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 13, 2012/ASVINA 21, 1934
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
caused to the petitioners by issuance of show cause
notices. The petitioners have adequate remedy of
showing cause before the Disciplinary Authority and
if aggrieved by the ultimate order of the Disciplinary
Authority prefer appeal under Regulations.
All in all, no case for invocation of writ jurisdiction is
made out.
Dismissed in limine.
As regards the order of the Disciplinary Authority
holding the workmen guilty and issuing show cause notice
proposing the punishment of compulsory retirement,
honourable High Court has held that the reasons recorded
by the Disciplinary Authority for not being in agreement
with the finding of the Enquiry Officer cannot be said to be
cryptic or no reasons at all and thereafter has dismissed
the write petition in limine.
The question now remains that whether the punishment
of Compulsory retirement is proper and justified?
Section 11A of the Act is applicable only in the cases of
dismissal or discharge of a workman as clearly mentioned
in the Section itself, In this case the punishment is
compulsory retirement and not dismissal or discharge and,
therefore, Section 11A of the Act is not applicable.
This Tribunal does not act as a Court of Appeal and
substitute its own judgement for that of the Disciplinary
Authority, This Tribunal interferes only when there is want
of good faith, victimisation, unfair labour practice etc. on
the part of the management. There is no proof of any such
allegation in this case.
This Tribunal is not a forum whose task is to dole out
private benevolence to the workmen found guilty of
misconduct. The jurisdiction to interfere with the
punishment awarded by the Disciplinary Authority should
be exercised only when the punishment is shockingly
disproportionate to the degree of guilt of the workmen. I
do not think that the punishment is shockingly
disproportionate in this case so as to warrant interference
by this Tribunal.
For the reasons stated above I am of the opinion that
punishment of compulsory retirement given to the workmen
is proper and justified.
Issue No. 3 : and Additional Issue framed on 26-8-2010
are decided against the workmen.
Issue No. 4 : The workmen are not entitled to any relief.
Award is passed accordingly.
JUSTICE G. S. SARRAF, Presiding Officer
ubZ fnYyh] 18 flrEcj] 2012
dk-vk-3147.—vkS|ksfxd fookn vf/kfu;e 1947 ¼1947 dk
14½ dh /kkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnzh; ljdkj cSad vkWQ cM+kSnk ds
izca/kra= ds lac) fu;kstdksa vkSj muds deZdkjksa ds chp vuqca/k esa
fufnZ"V vkS|ksfxd fookn esa dsUnzh; ljdkj vkS|ksfxd vf/kdj.k@Je
U;k;ky;&1] eqEcbZ ds iapkV ¼lanHkZ la[;k lhthvkbZVh&1@42 vkWQ
2004½ dks izdkf'kr djrh gS tks dsUnzh; ljdkj dks 14&09&2012
dks izkIr gqvk FkkA
[la- ,y&12012@219@2003&vkbZ vkj ¼ch&II½]
'kh'k jke] vuqHkkx vf/kdkjh
New Delhi, the 18th September, 2012
S.O. 3147.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the
Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, the Central Government
hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. CGIT-1/42 of 2004)
of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal/Labour
Court-1, Mumbai now as shown in the Annexure in the
Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to
the management of Bank of Baroda and their workman,
which was received by the Central Government on
14-09-2012.
[No. L-12012/219/2003-IR(B-II)]
SHEESH RAM, Section Officer
ANNEXURE
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT
INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL NO. 1, MUMBAI
Present : Justice G. S. SARRAF, Presiding Officer
Reference No. CGIT-l/42 of 2004
Parties : Employers in relation to the management of Bank
of Baroda
And
Their workman (B.M.Gavali)
Appearances :
For Bank of Baroda
:
Shri Lancy D'Souza
For the workman
:
Shri Amberkar, Adv.
State
:
Maharashtra
Mumbai, dated the 3rd day of September, 2012
AWARD
1. This is a reference made by the Central Government
in exercise of its powers under clause (d) of sub-section
(1) and sub-section (2A) of Section 10 of the Industrial
Disputes Act, 1947 (hereinafter referred to as the Act).
The terms of reference given in the schedule are as follows:
Whether the action of the management of Bank of
Baroda in terminating the service of Shri Bhaskar
M.Gavali w.e.f. 7-1-2003 is legal and justified? If not,
what relief is the concerned workman entitled to?
2. According to the statement of claim the workman
Bhaskar M.Gavli was employed by the Bank of Baroda
(hereinafter referred to as the Bank) in 1996 as a peon at its
Bordi Branch. The workman was given breaks from May
1996 to November 1998 and thereafter he was posted on
the post of one Surati who was working as a peon with the
Bank and was remaining absent frequently. From the year
[Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)]
Hkkjr dk jkti= % vDrwcj 13] 2012@vkf'ou 21] 1934
7651
1998 onwards till the date of his termination i.e. 7-1-2003
the workman worked continuously for more than 240 days
in a year with the Bank. He was terminated in violation of
the provisions contained in Section 25-F of the Act. His
termination is illegal, mala fide and bad in law. The workman
has, therefore, prayed that he be reinstated with full back
wages and continuity of service w.e.f.7 -1-2003.
3. According to the written statement filed by the Bank
the workman was working on casual/temporary basis on
daily wages when required. His non-engagement does not
amount to termination of service or retrenchment under
the provisions of the Act. The workman was engaged by
the Branch Manager of the Bank who had no authority to
recruit sub-staff even on temporary basis and when the
initial entry of the workman was illegal he had no right to
continue in the service of the Bank. The Bank is a
nationalised Bank and appointment to any post in the
Bank is governed by Statutory Rules/Regulations in force
from time to time. Any appointment in the subordinate
cadre had to be made by an authority competent to make
such appointment on a sanctioned vacancy and subject
to fulfilment of eligibility criteria. The Bank engages casual
employees on daily wages when its regular sub-staff are
absent and/or as and when required due to exigency of
work. The General Manager (HRM) of the Bank is the sole
competent authority to authorise/sanction vacancy in
subordinate cadre whether for temporary or regular
appointment. The Bank has denied that the workman
worked continuously for more than 240 days in a year.
The Bank has also stated that the workman does not
acquire the status of Bank employee on mere completion
of 240 days in a year. Hence according to the Bank the
disengagement of the workman cannot be construed as
retrenchment under Section 25-F of the Act. The Bank
has, therefore, prayed that the reference be rejected.
4. The workman has filed rejoinder wherein he has
reiterated his stand.
5. The workman has filed his affidavit and he has been
cross-examined by learned counsel for the Bank. The Bank
has filed affidavit of Arup Kumar Mitra, Branch Head who
has been cross examined by learned counsel for the
workman.
6. Heard Shri Amberkar learned counsel for the workman
and Shri Lancy D'Souza learned counsel for the Bank.
7. It is not disputed that the workman was a casual
employee on daily wages basis and he did work for more
than 240 days during the period of twelve calendar months
preceding his alleged termination.
8. The question is that whether the alleged termination
of the workman amounts to retrenchment and whether the
workman is entitled to reinstatement because of non-
fulfilment of conditions preceding to retrenchment under
Section 25-F of the Act?
9. In AIR 1997 SC 3657 it has been held that:
Every Department of the Government cannot be
treated to be "industry". When the appointments
are regulated by the statutory rules, the concept of
‘‘industry’’ to that extent stands excluded. Admittedly,
they were not appointed to the posts in accordance
with the rules but were engaged on the basis of need
of the work. They are temporary employees working
on daily wages. Under these circumstances, their
disengagement from service cannot be construed to
be a retrenchment under the Industrial Disputes Act.
The concept of ‘‘retrenchment’’, therefore, cannot
be stretched to such an extent as to cover these
employees.
10. In 2006 II CLR 261 honourable Apex Court has again
held as under:
While directing that appointments, temporary or
casual, be regularized or made permanent, courts are
swayed by the fact that the concerned person has
worked for some time and in some cases for a
considerable length of time. It is not as if the person
who accepts an engagement either temporary or
casual in nature, is not aware of the nature of his
employment. He accepts the employment with eyes
open. It may be true that he is not in a position to
bargain— not at arms length—since he might have
been searching for some employment so as to eke
out his livelihood and accepts whatever he gets. But
on that ground alone, it would not be appropriate to
jettison the Constitutional scheme of appointment
and to take the view that a person who has
temporarily or casually got employed should be
directed to be continued permanently. By doing so,
it will be creating another mode of public appointment
which is not permissible. If the court were to void a
contractual employment of this nature on the ground
that the parties were not having equal bargaining
power, that too would not enable the court to grant
any relief to that employee. A total embargo on such
casual or temporary employment is not possible,
given the exigencies of administration and if imposed,
would only mean that some people who at least get
employment temporarily, contractually or casually,
would not be getting even that employment when
securing of such employment brings at least some
succor to them. After all, innumerable citizens of our
vast country are in search of employment and one is
not compelled to accept a casual or temporary
employment if one is not inclined to go in for such an
employment. It is in that context that one has to
proceed on the basis that the employment was
accepted fully knowing the nature of it and the
consequences flowing from it. In other words, even
while accepting the employment, the person
7652
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 13, 2012/ASVINA 21, 1934
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
concerned knows the nature of his employment. It is
not an appointment to a post in the real sense of the
term. The claim acquired by him in the post in which
he is temporarily employed or the interest in that
post cannot be considered to be of such a magnitude
as to enable the giving up of the procedure
established, for making regular appointments to
available posts in the services of the State. The
argument that since one has been working for some
time in the post, it will not be just to discontinue him,
even though he was aware of the nature of the
employment when he first took it up, is not one that
would enable the jettisoning of the procedure
established by law for public employment and would
have to fail when tested on the touchstone of
Constitutionality and equality of opportunity
enshrined in Article 14 of the Constitution of India.
11. In 2006 (110) FLR 773 honourable Apex Court has
held that it is the settled preposition of law that when the
initial appointment itself is void then the provisions of
Section 25-F of the Act are not applicable while terminating
the services of the workman.
12. There is no appointment letter. The workman was
appointed not in accordance with the procedure of
appointment. The Branch Manager who appointed him
was not authorised to make such appointment. The
workman was appointed as casual employee on daily
wages basis. Therefore, assuming that the workman
worked for more than 240 days during the period of twelve
calendar months preceding his alleged termination, in view
of the above decisions of honourable Apex Court, I am of
the view that disengagement or termination of the services
of the workman does not amount to retrenchment and
there is no question of giving any relief to the workman on
ground of non-compliance of the provisions Section 25-F
of the Act.
13. For the reasons stated above the disengagement/
termination of the workman cannot be said to be illegal or
unjustified.
The workman is thus not entitled to any relief.
Award is passed accordingly.
Justice G. S. SARRAF, Presiding Officer
ubZ fnYyh] 18 flrEcj] 2012
dk-vk-3148-—vkS|ksfxd fookn vf/kfu;e] 1947 ¼1947 dk
14½ dh /kkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnzh; ljdkj eSllZ eSlwj feujYl
fyfeVsM ] cSaxyksj ds izca/kra= ds lac) fu;kstdksa vkSj muds deZdkjksa
ds chp vuqca/k esa fufnZ"V vkS|ksfxd fookn esa dsUnzh; ljdkj vkS|ksfxd
vf/kdj.k@Je U;k;ky; ] cSaxyksj ds iapkV ¼lanHkZ la[;k 34@2003½
dks izdkf'kr djrh gS ] tks dsUnzh; ljdkj dks 14&9&2012 dks izkIr
gqvk FkkA
[la- ,y&29012@18@2003&vkbZ vkj ¼,e½]
tksgu rksiuks] voj lfpo
New Delhi, the 18th September, 2012
S.O. 3148.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial
Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government
hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 34/2003) of the
Central Government Industrial Tribunal/Labour Court
Bangalore now as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial
Dispute between the employers in relation to the
management of M/s Mysore Minerals Ltd. (Bangalore) and
their workman, which was received by the Central
Government on 14-9-2012.
[No. L-29012/18/2003-IR (M)]
JOHAN TOPNO, Under Secy.
ANNEXURE
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT
INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT,
‘‘SHRAM SADAN’’,
III MAIN, III CROSS, II PHASE, TUMKUR ROAD,
YESHWANTHPUR,
BANGALORE - 560 022
Dated: 10th July, 2012
Present : Shri S.N. NAVALGUND, Presiding Officer
C.R. No. 34/2003
I PARTY
II PARTY
Shri Puttaswamy Chari,
The Managing Director,
S/o Dasachari,
Mysore Minerals Limited,
Yachanaghatta,
No. 39, M.G. Road,
Nuggehalli Hobli,
Bangalore - 560001
Santa Shivara,
HASSAN
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-29011/18/
2003-IR(M) dated 04-06-2003 for adjudication on the
following Schedule:
SCHEDULE
‘‘Whether the management of Mysore Minerals
Limited is justified in dismissing the services of Shri
Puttaswamy Chari with retrospective effect? If not,
to what relief the workman is entitled to?’’
2. Afrer receipt of the reference pursuant to the notices
issued by this tribunal first party as well as the second
party entered their appearances through their respective
advocates and filed claim statement and counter statement.
After completion of the pleadings my learned Predecessor
while framing a Preliminary Issue as to ‘‘Whether the
domestic enquiry conducted against the first party by the
second party is fair and proper, after receiving the evidence
[Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)]
Hkkjr dk jkti= % vDrwcj 13] 2012@vkf'ou 21] 1934
7653
of the enquiry officer as MW1 and exhibiting copies of
enquiry proceedings; enquiry findings and dismissal order
dated 12-08-1998 as Ex. M1 to M3 for the management and
hearing the arguments addressed by the learned advocates
appearing for both sides by his order dated 19-05-2006
answered the preliminary issue in the 'negative' holding
that the domestic enquiry conducted by the second party
against the first party is 'not fair and proper'. Thereafter
affording several opportunities to the second party to lead
evidence to substantiate the charge since the same was
not availed, by his award dated 1-08-2006 directed the
management to reinstate the first party workman in its
service to the post he held at the time of impugned dismissal
order with full back wages from 1-06-2003 till the date of his
reinstatement with continuity of service for the above said
period and all other consequential benefits. When this
award was assailed by the management before the Hon'ble
High Court of Karnataka in WP No. 17098/2006(L-RES) the
hon'ble High Court by order dated 7th March, 2007 while
observing the lapse on the part of the workman seeking for
reference of the dispute after a period of 5 years of dismissal
ought to have been considered, set aside the award and
remanded the matter. After remand the first party filed
rejoinder to the counter statement but both parties did not
lead any evidence and the learned counsel appearing for
the first party filed his written arguments. Whereas the
learned counsel appearing for the second party addressed
his arguments submitting that the first party being
dismissed in 1998 raised the dispute in the year 2003 after a
lapse of about of about 5 years after availing all benefits
without explanation, he is not entitle for any relief.
3. The case of the first party in brief is that he who
joined the services of the second party in the year 1985 as
a Mining Worker and was rendering his services diligently
and honestly in the year 1997 due to Industrial Health
Hazardousness was suffering from Appendix and
undergone surgery but even thereafter due to his ill health
he availed sick leave from 2-05-1998 and when want to
report duty on 23-5-1998 he was not permitted to resume
duty and he once again reported duty on 11-06-1998 with
medical certificate but instead of allowing him to report for
duty his medical certificate was torn of and one
Mr. Thimmegowda, foreman working in the management
took his signature on some papers and thereafter converted
them into equiry proceedings and on the basis of the finding
of the enquiry officer holding him guilty on the charges of
unauthorized absence from duty w.e.f. 2-05-1998 terminated
his service by order dated 12-08-1998 giving retrospective
effect from 2-05-1998 and inspite of his several requests
the latest by way of representation dated 31-08-2001 no
action was being taken to reinstate him as such he is entitle
for reinstatement with continuity of service, back wages
and other consequential benefits. The management in its
counter statement contentding that the first party since
remained absent from duty unauthorisedly from 2-05-1998
despite memos issued on 18-05-1998 and 11-06-1998 to
report for duty with due explanation for his unauthorized
absence and since failed to respond the domestic enquiry
was initiated and as the enquiry officer after due enquiry
submitted his finding the charge being proved the
impugned order dated 12-08-1998 dismissing him from
service w.e.f. 2-05-1998 the date from which he remained
absent being passed it is just and proper.
4. As already adverted to by me above, though the
domestic enquiry is set aside holding the same as 'not fair
and proper' by order dated 19th May, 2006 even after the
remand by Hon'ble High Court the second party failed to
lead evidence to substantiate the charge of unauthorized
absence. Only because the first party in his claim statement
did not dispute having remained absent from 2-05-1998
that itself is not sufficient to treat his absence since he has
further as unauthorized absence because he has further
asserted that due to the Industrial Health Hazardousness
in the year 1997 as he was suffering from Appendix and
undergone surgery and even thereafter he continued to be
suffering from ill health availed sick leave from 2-5-1998
but the management without sanctioning the sick leave
conducted a farce of enquiry and treated his absence as
unauthorized and passed the impugned dismissal order.
Even in the arguments addressed before me by the learned
advocate appearing for the second party it was only
submitted that because the date of dismissal i.e. of the
year 1998, the dispute being raised in the year 2003 after a
lapse of about 5 years he is not entitle for any relief. But
with due respect to the learned advocate appearing for the
second party only delay in raising the dispute cannot be a
ground to substantiate the impugned action and the delay
can be considered while granting other reliefs. Therefore,
only because there is a delay of 5 years in getting the
reference made for adjudication the reference cannot be
rejected or the impugned action of the management can be
held as justified. Since as already adverted to by me above,
the second party having failed to lead evidence inspite of
setting aside the domestic enquiry on the ground that it
was not fair and proper, this being a case of no evidence
only because the first party had remained absent from
2-5-1998 the action of the management dismissing him for
unauthorized absence cannot be justified. However, having
regard to the unexplained delay of about 5 years in raising
the dispute from the date of dismissal and having regard to
the nature of the job of the first party and no evidence is
adduced being not gainfully employed I feel it just and
appropriate to deny the back wages. Under the
circumstances I pass the following award:
AWARD
The reference is allowed holding that the action of the
management of Mysore Minerals in dismissing the services
of the workman Shri Puttaswamy Chari with retrospective
effect is not justified and that he is entitle for reinstatement
7654
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 13, 2012/ASVINA 21, 1934
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
in its service to the post he held at the time of impugned
dismissal order with continuity of service and all other
consequential benefits without any back wages. In case
the second party failed to give him an order of reinstatement
within one month from the date of publication of the award
from such date the second party will be liable to pay him
the wages applicable to him from that day onwards till he is
actually reinstated.
(Dictated to PA transcribed by her corrected and signed
by me on 10-7-2012).
S.N. NAVALGUND, Presiding Officer
ubZ fnYyh] 18 flrEcj] 2012
dk-vk-3149.—vkS|ksfxd fookn vf/kfu;e] 1947 ¼1947 dk
14½ dh /kkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnzh; ljdkj eSllZ eSlwj feujYl
fyfeVsM ] cSaxyksj ds izca/kra= ds lac) fu;kstdks vkSj muds deZdkjksa
ds chp vuqca/k esa fufnZ"V vkS|ksfxd fookn esa dsUæh; ljdkj vkS|ksfxd
vf/kdj.k@Je U;k;ky; ] cSaxyksj ds iapkV ¼lanHkZ la[;k 35@2003½
izdkf'kr djrh gS tks dsUæh; ljdkj dks 14&9&2012 dks izkIr gqvk FkkA
[la- ,y&29012@16@2003&vkbZ vkj ¼,e½]
tksgu rksiuks] voj lfpo
New Delhi, the 18th September, 2012
S.O. 3149 .—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial
Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government
hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 35/2003) of the Central
Government Industrial Tribunal/Labour Court, Bangalore
now as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute
between the employers in relation to the management of
M/s Mysore Minerals Ltd. (Bangalore) and their workman,
which was received by the Central Government on
14-9-2012.
[No. L-29012/16/2003-IR (M)]
JOHAN TOPNO, Under Secy.
ANNEXURE
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT
INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT
‘‘SHRAM SADAN’’,
III MAIN, III CROSS, II PHASE, TUMKUR ROAD,
YESHWANTHPUR, BANGALORE-560022
Dated: 10th July, 2012
PRESENT : Shri S. N. NAVAL GUND, Presiding Officer
C.R. No. 35/2003
I PARTY
II PARTY
Shri Thimmaiah,
The Managing Director,
S/o Late Thimmaiah,
Mysore Minerals Limited,
Nagara Navile Village & PO,
No. 39, M.G. Road,
Bagur Hobli,
Bangalore -560001
CR Patna Taluk,
Hassan Distt.,
Hasan.
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-29012/16/
2003-IR(M) dated 4th June, 2003 for adjudication on the
following Schedule :
SCHEDULE
"Whether the management of Mysore Minerals
Limited is justified in dismissing the services of the
workman Shri Thimmaiah with retrospective effect?
If not, to what relief the workman is entitled?"
2. After receipt of the reference pursuant to the notices
issued by this tribunal first party as well as the second
party entered their appearances through their respective
advocates and filed claim statement and counter statement.
After completion of the pleadings my learned Predecessor
while framing a Preliminary Issue as to "Whether the
domestic enquiry conducted against the first party by the
second party is fair and proper, after receiving the evidence
of the enquiry officer as MW1 and exhibiting copies of the
enquiry notice; enquiry proceedings, enquiry findings and
dismissal order dated 12-8-1998 as Ex. M1 to M4 for the
management and hearing the arguments addressed by the
learned advocates appearing for both sides, my learned
predecessor by his order dated 19-5-2006 answered the
preliminary issue in the 'negative' holding that the domestic
enquiry conducted by the second party against the first
party is 'not fair and proper'. Thereafter affording several
opportunities to the second party to lead evidence to
substantiate the charge since the same was not availed, by
his award dated 01-08-2006 directed the management to
reinstate the first party workman in its service to the post
he held at the time of impugned dismissal order with full
back wages from 1-06-2003 till the date of his reinstatement
with continuity of service for the above said period and all
other consequential benefits. When this award was
assailed by the management before the Hon’ble High Court
of Karnataka in WP No. 17099/2006(L-RES), the hon'ble
High Court by order dated 7th March, 2007 while observing
the lapse on the part of the workman seeking for reference
of the dispute after a period of 5 years of dismissal ought
to have been considered set aside the award and remanded
the matter. After remand the first party filed rejoinder to the
counter statement but both parties did not lead any
evidence and the learned counsel appearing for the first
party filed his written arguments, whereas the learned
counsel appearing for the second party addressed his
arguments submitting that the first party being dismissed
in 1998 raised the dispute in the year 2003 after a lapse of
about 10 years availing all benefits without explanation of
delay he is not entitle for any relief.
3. The case of the first party in brief is that he who
joined the services of the second party in the year 1982 as
[Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)]
Hkkjr dk jkti= % vDrwcj 13] 2012@vkf'ou 21] 1934
7655
a Mining Worker and was rendering his services diligently
and honestly in the year 1997 due to Industrial Health
Hazardousness was suffered with Appendix and undergone
surgery but even thereafter due to his ill health he availed
sick leave from 26-02-1998 upto 30-04-1998 and even
thereafter having not recovered from illness he intimated
the same to the second party Manager on 2-05-1998 and
the second party management without sanctioning the sick
leave conducting eye wash of a preliminary enquiry for
just half an hour on 19-06-1998 on the basis of the finding
of the enquiry officer holding him guilty on the charges of
unauthorized absence from duty w.e.f. 26-02-1998 terminated
his service by order dated 12-08-1998 giving retrospective
effect from 26-02-1998 and inspite of his several requests
the latest by way of representation dated 31-08-2001 no
action was being taken to reinstate him, he is entitle for
reinstatement with continuity of service, back wages and
other consequential benefits. The management in its
counter statement contending that the first party since
remained absent from duty unauthorisedly from 26-02-1998
despite memos issued on 12-03-1998, 18-05-1998 and
11-06-1998 to report for duty with due explanation for his
unauthorized absence since failed to respond, the domestic
enquiry was initiated and as the enquiry officer after due
enquiry submitted his finding and the charge being proved
the impugned order dated 12-08-1998 dismissing him from
service w-e.f. 26-02-1998 the date from which he remained
absent being passed, it is just and proper.
4. As already adverted to by me above, though the
domestic enquiry is set aside holding the same as 'not fair
and proper' by order dated 19th May, 2006 even after the
remand by the Hon'ble High Court the second party failed
to lead evidence to substantiate the charge of unauthorized
absence. Only because the first party in his claim statement
did not dispute having remained absent from 26-02-1998
that in itself is not sufficient to treat his absence as
unauthorized absence because he has further asserted that
due to the Industrial Health Hazardousness in the year
1997 he was suffering from Appendix and undergone
surgery and even thereafter he continued to be suffering
from ill health availed sick leave from 26-02-1998 to
30-04-1998 but the management without sanctioning the
sick leave conducted a farce of enquiry and treated his
absence as unauthorized and passed the impugned
dismissal order. Even in the arguments addressed before
me by the learned advocate appearing for the second party
it was only submitted that because the date of dismissal is
12-08-1998 the dispute being raised in the year 2003 after a
lapse of about 10 years he is not entitle for any relief. But
with due respect to the learned advocate appearing for the
second party only delay in raising the dispute cannot be a
ground to substantiate the impugned action and the delay
can be considered while granting other reliefs. Therefore,
only because there is delay of about 5 years in getting the
reference made for adjudication the reference cannot be
rejected or the impugned action of the management can be
held as legal and justified. Since as already adverted to by
me above, the second party having failed to lead evidence
inspite of setting aside the domestic enquiry on the ground
that it was not fair and proper, this being a case of no
evidence only because the first party had remained absent
from 26-2-1998 the action of the management dismissing
him for unauthorized absence cannot be justified. However,
having regard to the unexplained delay of about 5 years in
raising the dispute from the date of dismissal and having
regard to the nature of the job of the first party and not
leading any evidence being not gainfully employed, I feel
it just and appropriate to deny the back wages. Under the
circumstances I pass the following award :
AWARD
The reference is allowed holding that the action of the
management of Mysore Minerals in dismissing the services
of the workman Shri Thimmaiah with retrospective effect is
not justified and that he is entitle for reinstatement in its
service to the post he held at the time of impugned dismissal
order with continuity of service and all other consequential
benefits without any back wages. In case the second party
failed to give him an order of reinstatement within one
month from the date of publication of the award from such
date the second party will be liable to pay him the wages
applicable to him from the day onwards till he is actually
reinstated.
(Dictated to PA transcribed by her corrected and signed
by me on 10-07-2012).
S. N. NAVALGUND, Presiding Officer
ubZ fnYyh] 18 flrEcj] 2012
dk-vk- 3150.—vkS|ksfxd fookn vf/kfu;e] 1947 ¼1947
dk 14½ dh èkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnzh; ljdkj eSllZ ckxydksV
lhesUV ,.M baMªLVªht fyfeVsM ] ckxydksV ds izca/kra= ds lac)
fu;kstdksa vkSj muds deZdkjksa ds chp vuqca/k esa fufnZ"V vkS|ksfxd
fookn esa dsUnzh; ljdkj vkS|ksfxd vf/kdj.k@Je U;k;ky;] cSaxyksj
ds iapkV ¼lanHkZ la[;k 34@2003½ dks izdkf'kr djrh gS tks dsUæh;
ljdkj dks 14&9&2012 dks izkIr gqvk FkkA
[la- ,y&29012@8@2011&vkbZ vkj ¼,e½]
tksgu rksiuks] voj lfpo
New Delhi, 18th September, 2012
S.O. 3150.— In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial
Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government
hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 9/2012) of the
Central Government Industrial Tribunal/Labour Court,
Bangalore now as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial
Dispute between the employers in relation to the
management of M/s Bagalkot Cement and Industries Ltd.
7656
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 13, 2012/ASVINA 21, 1934
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
(Bagalkot) and their workman, which was received by the
Central Government on 14-9-2012.
[No. L-29012/8/2011-IR (M)]
JOHAN TOPNO, Under Secy.
ANNEXURE
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT
INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT
‘‘SHRAM SADAN’’,
III MAIN, II CROSS, II PHASE, TUMKUR ROAD,
YESHWANTHPUR, BANGALORE-560 022.
Dated: 24th July, 2012
Present : SHRI S.N. NAVALGUND, Presiding Officer
C.R.No. 09/2012
I PARTY
II PARTY
Shri Ningappa
M/s. Bagalkot Cement and
Hanumanthappa Magi &
Industries Limited,
20 Others, Navjinagar,
BAGALKOT,
Sector No. 52, Plot No. D-2,
KARANATAKA STATE
Navanagar, BAGALKOT
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-29012/8/
2011-IR(M) dated 22-02-2012 for adjudication on the
following Schedule:
SCHEDULE
‘‘Whether the action of the management of M/s.
Bagalkot Cement & Industries Ltd., Bagalkot, in
terminating the services of 21 workmen (as per list
enclosed) is legal and justified? What relief the
workmen are entitled to?’’
2. After receipt of the reference pursuant to the notices
issued both sides entered their appearance through their
respective advocates. After appearance the learned
advocate appearing for the first party filed a memo in respect
of this very dispute they have raised the dispute in KID
No. 27/2011 before the Labour Court, Bijapur and that court
by order dated 03-09-2011 having held that court has got
jurisdiction they do not want to prosecute this reference
and may be permitted to withdraw. To this memo the learned
advocate appearing for the management/second party filed
his objection this reference being made exercising the power
conferred under Section 10(IA) of the Industrial Dispute
Act, 1947 by the Central Government after examining the
conciliation proceedings as such this proceeding cannot
be permitted to be withdrawn.
3. Since as per the first party in respect of this very
dispute their dispute has been entertained by the Labour
Court, Bijapur in KID No. 27/2011 further passing an order
on 3-09-2011 having jurisdiction, in respect of the same
dispute two adjudications cannot be made and as the first
party has chosen to proceed with the dispute raised by
him before the Labour Court, Bijapur he cannot be
compelled to prosecute this reference. Under the
circumstances this reference has to be rejected as
withdrawn. Accordingly as per the memo filed by the learned
advocate for the first party this reference is rejected as
withdrawn.
(Dictated to PA transcribed by her corrected and signed
by me on 24th July, 2012)
S.N. NAVALGUND, Presiding Officer
ubZ fnYyh] 18 flrEcj] 2012
dk-vk- 3151.—vkS|ksfxd fookn vf/kfu;e] 1947 ¼1947 dk
14½ dh /kkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnzh; ljdkj eSllZ vkjih vk;ju
vkSj ekbUl ] cSYykjh ds izca/kra= ds lac) fu;kstdksa vkSj muds
deZdkjksa ds chp] vuqca/k esa fufnZ"V vkS|ksfxd fookn esa dsUnzh;
ljdkj vkS|ksfxd vf/kdj.k@Je U;k;ky;] cSaxyksj] ds iapkV ¼lanHkZ
la[;k 53@2005½ dks izdkf'kr djrh gS] tks dsUnzh; ljdkj dks
14&09&2012 dks izkIr gqvk FkkA
[la- ,y&26011@8@2005&vkbZ vkj ¼,e½]
tksgu rksiuks] voj lfpoA
New Delhi, the 18th September, 2012
S.O. 3151.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial
Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government
hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 53/2005) of the
Central Government Industrial Tribunal/Labour Court,
Bangalore now as shown in the Annexure, in the industrial
dispute between the employers in relation to the
management of M/s Aarpee Iron Ore Mines (Bellary) and
their workman, which was received by the Central
Government on 14-09-2012.
[No. L-26011/8/2005-IR(M)]
JOHAN TOPNO, Under Secy.
ANNEXURE
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT
INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT
‘‘SHRAM SADAN’’,
III MAIN, III CROSS, II PHASE, TUMKUR ROAD,
YESHWANTHPUR, BANGALORE-560022
Dated: 10-8-2012
Present : SHRI S.N. NAVALGUND, Presiding Officer
C.R. No. 53/2005
I st Party
IInd Party
Shri Lingappa, S/o Late
The Managing Partner,
Ranappa P Opp. Patel
M/s. Aarpee Iron Ore Mines
High School,
of Shri R. Pumpapathy,
Bellary Road, Hospet,
24/151, Bellary Road,
Karnataka, Bellary-583201
Hospet, Bellary-583201
[Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)]
Hkkjr dk jkti= % vDrwcj 13] 2012@vkf'ou 21] 1934
7657
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-26011/8/
2005-IR (M) dated 16-11-2005 for adjudication on the
following Schedule:
SCHEDULE
‘‘Whether the action of M/s Aarpee Iron Ore Mines
of Shri R. Pumpapathy, Hospet, in terminating the
services of Shri Lingappa, Ex- Heavy Vehicle Driver
Cum-Dumper Operator without complying the
provisions of ID Act, 1947 is justified? If not, to what
relief the workman is entitled to?’’.
2. Shri Lingappa S/o Late Ranappa (herein after referred
as first party) in his claim statement filed on 24-1-2007 claims
that he who was employed as Driver-Cum-Dumper Operator
in M/s Aarpee Iron Ore Mines of Shri R. Pampathy, Hospet
(herein after referred as Second Party) which is engaged in
mining activities, on 7-11-2002 while working underneath a
Bunker (Crusher Plant) when Iron ore boulder came
crashing down causing serious injury in his chest and
abdomen area was immediately admitted in Kariganur
Welfare Hospital and treated for two months and as the
physician at Hospet who diagnosed that he was suffering
from severe heart problem and later he suffered mild heart
attack and costly medicines were prescribed, he made an
application to the Welfare Commissioner for financial
assistance and later when he approached the second party
to permit him to report for duty he was not permitted to
report for duty as such he approached the Iron Ore Labour
Union, Bellary to help him and the said union addressed a
letter to the Assistance Labour Commissioner (Central) on
23-4-2004 for his intervention and in the conciliation
proceedings the second party contended that he has
resigned from his service and it is not a case of termination
and as the second party did not show and interest of taking
him to work the conciliation ended in failure. He further
alleges that since he suffered an industrial accident could
not attend his duties from 7-11-2002 and after treatment
when he went to report to duty the second party refused to
take him on duty as such it amounts to illegal termination
and that the stand of the second party that he submitted
resignation is false. With these allegations he has prayed
to hold his termination as not justified, unjust, illegal and
void ab initio and directed the second party to reinstate
him with full backwages, continuity of service and other
consequential benefits. Interalia the second party in its
counter statement filed on 24-09-2007 while admitting that
first party was employed as driver cum dumper operator in
the year 1948 in its establishment enaged in mining activities
at Hospet in Bellary District, denying the claim of the first
party that he met with industrial accident on 07-11-2002
contended that as he was suffering from chest pain since
many days and with an ill motive creating a false story that
mines stone hit on his chest while he was on duty filed as
false police complaint before the jurisdictional police and
the jurisdictional police after making detailed investigation
filed 'B' report before the Addl. Civil Judge (Jr. Dn.) and
JMFC Hospet, Bellary and same came to be accepted and
immediately after acceptance of the said 'B' report first party
approached the second party demanding for settlement of
his accounts saying that he has no interest to work and on
27-01-2003 submitted a written voluntary resignation letter
to the second party and while accepting the same his
accounts have been settled and payment was made under
voucher on 01-02-2003. It is further contended on 07-11-
2002 the first party had demanded Rs. 10,000/- towards
advance for his treatment and a sum of Rs. 2,500 was given
as an advance towards medical expenses and thereafter
submitting a resignation letter and settling his account he
has come up with such a flase dispute. Thus the second
party prayed for dismissal of the reference.
3. When the matter came to be posted for evidence on
behalf of second party while filing the affidavit of its Public
Relation Officer Shri K. Basavaraj examining him on oath
as MW1 got marked the letter said to have been given by
the first party seeking the advance payment of Rs. 10,000
dated 07-11-2002; voucher given by the first party regarding
receipt of Rs. 2500 dated 07-11-2002; letter of resignation
said to have been submitted by the first party dated
27-1-2003; voucher said to have been passed regarding
payment of final settlement by the first party dated
01-02-2003; self attested true copy of the medical certificate
produced by the first party in the criminal case; B report
submitted by the police along with the statements of
witnesses recorded by the police during investigation as
Ex. M1 to M6 respectively.
4. Inter alia the first party while filing his affidavit
examining him on oath as WW1 got marked photostat
copies of discharge summary issued by Labour Welfare
Organization, Central Hospital, Kariganur dated 28-01-2003;
certificate issued by a consulting physician of Hospet to
the effect that the first party is suffering from ischemic
heart disease and is taking treatment under him and is
advised further investigation and a copy of the
representation given by him to the welfare administrator as
Ex. W1 to W3 respectively.
5. With the above pleadings and evidence lead by both
sides when the learned advocates appearing for both the
sides were called for arguments the learned advocate
appearing for the first party just submitting that the
signature appearing on the alleged resignation letter is not
of the first party and that it is concocted one to cover up
illegal action against the first party and urged for his
reinstatement with back wages etc. Inter- alia the learned
advocate appearing for the second party taking me through
the documentary evidence produced by him urged that the
7658
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 13, 2012/ASVINA 21, 1934
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
same do prove the contention taken in the counter statement
and thus urged that the first party who resigned from his
job and settled his claim managed to raise this false dispute
claiming termination of his services, as such the same is
liable to be rejected.
6. On appreciation of the pleadings, oral and
documentary evidence brought on record by both sides in
the light of the arguments addressed by the learned
advocates I arrived at the conclusion there is no termination
of the services of the first party by the second party and
that he who resigned from the services and settled his
claim come up with this false claim he being terminated
from service and that he is not entitle for any relief for the
following reasons:
REASONS
7. The contention of the second party that the complaint
filed by the first party that he met with an industrial accident
after investigation was submitted with ‘B’ final report and
same was accepted is proved by producing the copy of his
complaint and ‘B’ summary report at Ex. M6. Further the
documentary evidence produced at Ex.M1 & M2 do reveal
that on 7-11-2002 the first party requested for Rs. 10,000 for
his treatment and on the same day received Rs. 2,500
passing the voucher. In the letter given by him seeking
financial assistance he never whisper having met with
industrial accident. Further Ex. M3 said to be the resignation
letter submitted by him is in his own handwriting wherein
he has clearly stated that since he is not keeping well he
may be relieved of his job setting the amount payable to
him. On 1-02-2003 passed a voucher acknowledging receipt
of Rs. 7,500 specifying it as towards full and final settlement
and ex-gratia. The first party failed to demonstrate his
resignation letter and voucher tendered at Ex. M3 & M4
being fabricated or concocted. He made no attempt to
establish the same being concocted or forged one. Under
the circumstances the claim of the first party that he had
met with an industrial accident and after recovering when
went to report to duty was denied job is not established,
whereas, the second party proved the first party who was
not keeping well vountarily submitted his resignation and
received Rs. 7,500 as full and final settlement and ex-gratia.
In the result I arrived at the conclusion of rejecting the
reference and pass the following award:
AWARD
The reference is rejected holding that there is no
termination of services of the first party by the second
party and that he having resigned volunarily and received
the amount of Rs. 7,500 towards full and final settlment as
well as ex-gratia he is not entitle for any relief.
(Dictated to PA transcribed by her corrected and signed
by me on 10-08-2012)
S. N. NAVALGUND, Presiding Officer
ubZ fnYyh] 19 flrEcj] 2012
dk-vk-3152.—vkS|ksfxd fookn vf/kfu;e] 1947] ¼1947 dk
14½ dh /kkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnzh; ljdkj eSllZ ts- ih- daLVªdlu
izk- fyfeVsM] dksydkrk ds izca/kra= ds lac) fu;kstdksa vkSj muds
deZdkjksa ds chp] vuqca/k esa fufnZ"V vkS|ksfxd fookn esa dsUnzh;
ljdkj vkS|ksfxd vf/kdj.k@Je U;k;ky; ] bjukdqye ds iapkV
¼lanHkZ la[;k 12@2012½ dks izdkf'kr djrh gS ] tks dsUnzh; ljdkj
dks 14&9&2012 dks izkIr gqvk FkkA
[la- ,y&11011@2@2011&vkbZ-vkj- ¼,e½]
tksgu rksiuks] voj lfpo
New Delhi, the 19th September, 2012
S.O. 3152 .—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial
Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government
hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 12/2012) of the Central
Government Industrial Tribunal/Labour Court,
ERNAKULAM now as shown in the Annexure in the
Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the
management of M/s J.P. Construction Pvt. Ltd., (Kolkata)
and their workman, which was received by the Central
Government on 14-9-2012.
[ No. L-11011/2/2011-IR(M)]
JOHAN TOPNO, Under Secy.
ANNEXURE
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT
INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT,
ERNAKULAM
Present: SHRI D. SREEVALLABHAN, B.Sc., LL.B.,
Presiding Officer
(Monday the 25th day of July, 2012/3rd Sravanam, 1934)
I.D. 12/2012
Unions
:
1. The Secretary,
Calicut Airport Workers Union (CITU),
P.O. Calicut Airport, Karipur,
Kerala-673 647.
2. The Working President,
Calicut Airport Contract Employees-
Union (INTUC), Madeena Complex,
Room No. 4, Calicut Airport, Kondotty,
Malappuram, Kerala.
3. The Vice President,
Calicut Airport Contract General-
Workers Union (STU), P.O. Calicut
Airport, Karipur, Kerala-673 647.
Management :
The General Manager,
M/s. J.P. Construction Pvt. Ltd.,
8/47, East Mall Road,
Kolkatta-700 080.
[Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)]
Hkkjr dk jkti= % vDrwcj 13] 2012@vkf'ou 21] 1934
7659
This case coming up for hearing on 25-07-2012 and this
Tribunal-cum-Labour Court on the same day passed the
following:
AWARD
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) Government of
India, Ministry of Labour has referred this industrial
dispute to this Tribunal for adjudication as per Order No.
L-11011/2/2011-IR(M) dated 03-03-2012.
2. The dispute is:
“Whether the demand of contract workers employed
by the contractor M/s. J.P. Construction Pvt. Ltd.,
Kolkata in the establishment of Air India, Air
Transport Services Limited at the Karipur (Calicut)
Airport Dist. Malappuram Kerala is legal and justified?
What relief the workmen are entitled to?”
3. After the receipt of the reference it was numbered as
I.D. 12/2012 of this Tribunal and notice was issued to all
the three unions and the management. After receipt of the
notice neither any of the unions nor the management has
entered appearance in spite of granting several
adjournments. As the unions did not appear and file any
claim statement in can be held that there is no existing
dispute between the unions and the management. It
appears that the unions and the management are not
interested to proceed with the matter. There is no meaning
in keeping this case indefinitely. As the unions and the
management have not turned up there cannot be any
adjudication as to the dispute referred to this Tribunal
and hence under the circumstances 'No Dispute Award' is
passed in this case. The reference is answered accordingly.
Dictated to the Personal Assistant, transcribed and
typed by her, corrected and passed by me on this the 25th
day of July, 2012.
D. SREEVALLABHAN, Presiding Officer
ubZ fnYyh] 19 flrEcj] 2012
dk-vk-3153.—vkS|ksfxd fookn vf/kfu;e] 1947 ¼1947 dk
14½ dh /kkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnzh; ljdkj eSllZ bf.M;u vkW;y
dkjiksjs'ku fyfeVsM ] cjksuh] dkuiqj ds izca/kra= ds lac) fu;kstdksa
vkSj muds deZdkjksa ds chp vuqca/k esa fufnZ"V vkS|ksfxd fookn esa
dsUnzh; ljdkj vkS|ksfxd vf/kdj.k@Je U;k;ky;] dkuiqj ds iapkV
¼lanHkZ la[;k 28@2003½ dks izdkf'kr djrh gS tks dsUnzh; ljdkj dks
14&09&2012 dks izkIr gqvk FkkA
[la- ,y&30012@24@2003&vkbZ vkj ¼,e½]
tksgu rksiuks] voj lfpo
New Delhi, the 19th September, 2012
S.O. 3153.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial
Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government
hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 28/2003) of the
Central Government Industrial Tribunal/Labour Court,
KANPUR now as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial
dispute between the employers in relation to the
management of M/s Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. Barauni
Kanpur and their workman, which was received by the
Central Government on 14-09-2012.
[No. L-30012/24/2003-IR(M)]
JOHAN TOPNO, Under Secy.
ANNEXURE
BEFORE SRI RAM PARKASH, HJS, PRESIDING
OFFICER, CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL
TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOR COURT, KANPUR
Industrial Dispute Case No. 28 of 2003
Sri Satya Narain Rai son of Late Ram Lakhan Rai,
C/o Dr. Santosh Kumar Gupta,
Plot No. 3268, Awas Vikas Yojna No. 3.
Panki Road, Kalyanpur,
Kanpur
Versus
The Senior Operation Manager,
IOCL Barauni Kanpur Pipe Line,
Subedarganj, Allahabad
AWARD
1. Central Government MoL vide notification No. L-
30012/24/2003/IRM dated 21-8-2003, has reference the
following dispute for adjudication to this tribunal.
2. Whether the action of the management of Indian Oil
Corporation Limited in dismissing Sri Satya Narain Rai,
w.e.f. 10-04-99 is justified and legal? If not to what relief the
concerned workman is entitled.
3. Brief facts of the case are.
4. It is alleged that the complainant (since deceased)
was appointed as operator E in Indian Oil Corporation
Limited Barauni Kanpur Pipe Line District, Begusarai, Bihar
on 07-10-67. Since his work and conduct was appreciable
therefore, he was given promotion from Grade E to Grade B
and then Grade C. The claimant has further alleged that he
was an active member of the Trade Union, and he was
ventilating the grievances of his members before the
management which annoyed them. The management served
with a charge sheet dated 08-10-97 on the ground of misuse
of funds received by him as House Building Advance. The
claimant replied the charge sheet that he has not mis-utilized
the house building advance which was not accepted by
the management and they decided to proceed against the
employee departmentally.
5.It is also alleged that he was further issued a second
charge sheet for his unauthorized absence on 21-07-98,
which was denied by the claimant in his reply.
7660
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 13, 2012/ASVINA 21, 1934
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
6. It is also alleged by the claimant that the management
has not conducted any preliminary inquiry into the charges
and the management on their whimsical grounds have
appointed the inquiry officer and the presenting officer
even without considering the reply of the claimant and
without intimating the claimant that the reply to the charges
have not been found satisfactory therefore, it has been
decided by the management to investigate the charges by
appointing inquiry officer and the presenting officer.
7. It is alleged that the inquiry officer has acted under
pressure of the management. He did not Act independently.
He has committed the breach of natural justice. The
management has wrongly based on the finding of the
inquiry officer and the management has terminated his
services on 10-04-99.
8. Lastly it has been prayed that the dismissal order
passed on 10-04-99 illegal and unjustified and is liable to
be set aside and the claimant is entitled to be reinstated in
the service of the management with full back wages and all
consequential benefits.
9. The opposite party has filed their reply vehemently,
denying the allegations of the workman. It is also pleaded
by them that the claimant was served with charge sheet, he
was given full opportunity of his defence by the inquiry
officer and the inquiry officer after considering the evidence
documentary and oral available before him on the inquiry
file has submitted his inquiry report holding the delinquent
employee guilty of the charge which was concurred by the
disciplinary authority and as a result of the same the
delinquent employee was awarded punishment of dismissal
from service vide order dated 10-04-99.
10. It is stated that one of the charge against the
employee was that on his request maximum amount of Rs.
4,00,000 was sanctioned to him against house building
advance which was later on found that he had incurred a
total sum of Rs. 3.64 lacs. The house was built on some
other plot which was also not mortgaged with the
management.
11. The management also issued a second charge sheet
for his serious misconduct for his un-authorized absence.
12. It is also pleaded by the opposite party that the
concerned workman fully participated in the inquiry and
he was given adequate opportunity of his defence and
thereby no rules of natural justice have been violated by
the management during the conduct of the inquiry against
the workman.
13. It is also the case of the management that the
delinquent employee was served with the finding of the
inquiry officer and the concerned employee has also
submitted his submission against the inquiry report and
the disciplinary authority after considering the stand of
the employee has awarded the punishment which can
neither be said to excessive considering the gravity of the
misconduct nor is required to be altered or interfered at the
hands of the Hon'ble Tribunal.
14. Lastly on the basis of above it has been pleaded that
the reference/claim of the workman is devoid of merit and
deserves to be dismissed holding him that he is not entitled
for any relief pursuant to the present reference order.
15. It is stated that the workman instead of availing the
opportunity of filing an appeal before the competent
authority has raised the present industrial dispute before
the RLC which was strongly opposed by the management
but the reference in the case was made without appreciating
the objection of the management.
16. It is also denied by the management that the workman
was victimized due to his trade union activities.
17. On the basis of the pleadings of the parties this
tribunal framed a preliminary issue on the point as to
whether the domestic inquiry conducted by the opposite
party against the workman was fair or not. The above issue
was framed vide order dated 05-08-2011.
18. After hearing arguments of the parties on the above
preliminary issue and after considering the records filed by
the management relating to the conduct of the inquiry this
tribunal by means of a detailed order dated 23-05-12 has
held that the inquiry conducted by the management is just
and fair.
19.
Now in view of above, it is to be seen by the
tribunal especially when the inquiry conducted by the
management has been held to be fair and proper, whether
the punishment awarded to the workman on the basis of
proved charges commensurate with the proved charges.
20.
I have considered the contention of both the sides
coupled with the nature of charges. I have also gone
through the records filed by the management in original.
After giving my anxiours considerations to the records
filed by the management I am of the firm view that the
workman has correctly been found guilty of the charges
and the nature of charges are of so grievous in nature that
it could not be interfered by this tribunal under any
circumstances. The punishing authority has also
considered all the aspect of the matter raised by the
applicant before him and I also find that had there been
any truth in his submission in the contention of the
workman the same could have well considered by the
disciplinary authority. Moreover there is no allegation from
the side of the workman that the disciplinary authority was
biased against him therefore, I am also of the view that the
workman has absolutely failed to prove his case regarding
victimization on account of his trade union activities.
21. The management has placed reliance on a number of
decisions—
1.
2005 (3) Supreme 5 Supreme Court of India page 5
in between Bharat Forzed Company Limited versus
Uttam Manohar Nakatey.
[Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)]
Hkkjr dk jkti= % vDrwcj 13] 2012@vkf'ou 21] 1934
7661
In the above case it is held that the Labour Court or
the industrial tribunal as the case may be, in terms
of the provisions of the act, must act within the
fore corner thereof. The Industrial Courts would
not sit in appeal over the decision of the employer
unless there exist statutory provision in this behalf.
Although its jurisdiction is wide but the same must
be applied in terms of the provisions of the statute
and no other. If the punishment is harsh, albit a
lesser punishment may be imposed, but such an
order cannot be passed on an irrational or
extraneous factor and certainly not on
compassionate ground.
2.
2008 (3) Supreme Today page 217 Supreme Court
of India in between Usha Bruco Mazdoor Sangh
versus Management of M/s. Usha Bruco and
another.
In this case the Hon’ble Supreme Court has held
that the decision of the labour court should not be
based on surmises. It cannot overturn a decision
of the management on ipse dixit. It jurisdiction under
section 11-A of the Act although is a wide one
must be judiciously exercised.
3.
2008 Lab IC 415 SC in between M/s. L&T Komktsu
Limited versus N Udai Kumar.
This ruling is on section 11-A and therein it is held
by the Supreme Court that where the punishment
imposed by the management was termination of
service due to charge of unauthorized absence
which was proved in the inquiry which was fair and
proper and in accordance with the principles of
natural justice, then setting aside the order of
termination by labour court and High Court and
direct reinstatement of employee.
22.
In the result it is held by the tribunal that the
claimant has failed to establish his case before the tribunal
and as a result of the same he is held to be not entitled for
any relief as claimed by him in his claim petition.
23.
Accordingly reference is answered against the
workman and in favour of the management.
RAM PARKASH, Presiding Officer
ubZ fnYyh] 20 flrEcj] 2012
dk-vk-3154.—vkS|ksfxd fookn vf/kfu;e] 1947 ¼1947 dk
14½ dh /kkjk 17 vuqlj.k esa dsUnzh; ljdkj LVsV cSad vkWQ bUnkSj ds
izca/kra= ds lac) fu;kstdksa vkSj muds deZdkjksa ds chp vuqca/k esa
fufnZ"V vkS|kfxd fookn esa dsUnzh; ljdkj vkS|ksfxd vf/kdj.k@Je
U;k;ky; ] tcyiqj ds iapkV ¼lanHkZ la[;k 237@99½ dks izdkf'kr
djrh gS] tks dsUnzh; ljdkj dks 20&09&2012 dks izkIr gqvk FkkA
[ la- ,y&12012@87@99&vkbZ-vkj- ¼ch&I½]
jes'k ¯lg] MsLd vf/kdkjh
New Delhi, the 20th September, 2012
S.O. 3154.— In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial
Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government
hereby publisheds the Award (Ref. No. 237/99) of the Cent.
Govt. Indus. Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, Jabalpur as
shown in the Annexure, in the industrial dispute between
the management of State Bank of Indore and their workmen,
received by the Central Government on 20/09/2012
[No. L-12012/87/99-IR(B-I)]
RAMESH SINGH, Desk Officer
ANNEXURE
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT
INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT,
JABALPUR
NO. CGIT/LC/R/237/99
Presiding Officer: SHRI MOHD. SHAKIR HASAN,
The General Secretary,
State Bank of Indore Karmchari Sangh,
37, Bakshi Gali,
Indore
. . .Workman
Versus
The Managing Director,
State Bank of Indore,
Head Office, 5, Yeshwant Niwas Road,
Indore
. . .Management
AWARD
Passed on this 28th day of August , 2012
1. The Government of India, Ministry of Labour vide its
Notification No. L-12012/87/99/IR(B-I) dated 18-6-99 has
referred the following dispute for adjudication by this
tribunal:—
‘‘Whether the action of the management of State
Bank of Indore in terminating the services of Shri
Rajesh S/o Lalsingh Panwar w.e.f. July 96 is justified?
If not, to what relief the workman is entitled for?’’
2. The Union/workman did not appear inspite of proper
notice through registered post. Lastly the then Tribunal
proceeded the reference exparte against the Union/
workman on 11-4-2008.
3. The management appeared and filed Written statement
in the case. The case of the management, in short is that
the alleged workman Shri Rajesh was never employed by
the management in any branch of the Bank. There was no
relationship of employer and employee between the
management and the alleged workman. The provision of
Industrial Dispute Act, 1947 (in short the Act, 1947) is not
attracted. It is stated that appointment in the sub-staff cadre
7662
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 13, 2012/ASVINA 21, 1934
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
is through a process of recruitment rules and the alleged
workmen was never appointed through any recruitment
process. On these grounds it is submitted that the reference
be answered in favour of the management.
4. On the basis of the pleading of the management and
reference order, the following issues are framed for
adjudication—
I. Whether there is relationship of employer and
employee between the management and the alleged
workman? If yes, then whether the action of the
management in terminating the services of Shri Rajesh
is justified?
II. To what relief the workman is entitled?
5. Issue No. I
To prove the case, the management has adduced oral
evidence. The management witness Shri Amit Bannerjee
is working as Asstt. General Manager at Area Office, Gwalior.
He has supported the case of the management. He has
stated at para 3 that the alleged workman had never worked
in any of the branch of the Bank. This shows that there
was no relationship of employer and employee between
them. He has stated that he was never appointed in the
service of the Bank. His evidence is unrebutted. There is
no reason to disbelieve his evidence. This issue is decided
in favour of the management and against the alleged
workman.
6. Issue No. II
On the basis of the discussion made above, it is clear
that the question of termination doesnot arise when he
was never engaged by the Bank. It is clear that the alleged
workman is not entitled to any relief. The reference is
accordingly answered.
7. In the result, the award is passed without any order to
cots.
MOHD. SHAKIR HASAN, Presiding Officer
ubZ fnYyh] 20 flrEcj] 2012
dk-vk- 3155.— vkS|ksfxd fookn vf/kfu;e 1947 ¼1947 dk
14½ dh /kkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnzh; ljdkj LVsV cSad vkWQ bUnkSj
ds izcaèra= ds lac) fu;kstdksa vkSj muds deZdkjksa ds chp
vuqca/k esa fufnZ"V vkS|ksfxd fookn esa dsUnzh; ljdkj vkS|ksfxd
vf/kdj.k@Je U;k;ky;] tcyiqj ds iapkV ¼lanHkZ la[;k 238@99]
239@99] 240@99] 244@99 vkSj 305@99½ dks izdkf'kr djrh gS]
tks dsUnzh; ljdkj dks 20&09&2012 dks izkIr gqvk FkkA
[la- ,y&12012@88]89]90]244 vkSj 214@99&vkbZ-vkj- ¼ch&I½]
jes'k flag] vuqHkkx vf/kdkjh
New Delhi, the 20th September, 2012
S.O. 3155.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial
Disputes Act, 1947, (14 of 1947), the Central Government
hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 238@99] 239/99,
240/99, 244/99 & 305/99) of the Central Government
Industrial tribunal-cum-Labour Court, Jabalpur as shown
in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the
management of State Bank of Indore and their workman,
received by the Central Government on 20-09-2012.
[No. L-12012/88,89,90,244 & 214/99-IR(B-I)]
RAMESH SINGH, Desk Officer
ANNEXURE
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT
INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT,
JABALPUR
Presiding Officer : SHRI MOHD. SHAKIR HASAN
Case No. CGIT/LC/R/238/99, 239/99,
240/99, 244/99 & 305/99
The General Secretary,
State Bank of Indore Karmchari Sangh,
37, Bakshi Gali, Indore
...Workman/Union
Versus
The Managing Director,
State Bank of Indore,
Head office, 5, Yeshwant Niwas Road,
Indore
...Management
AWARD
Passed on this 30th day of August 2012
1 (a) The Government of India, Ministry of Labour vide
its Notification No. L-12012/88/99-IR(B-I) dated 18-6-99 has
referred the following dispute for adjudication by this
tribunal:—
‘‘Whether the action of the management of State
Bank of Indore in terminating the services of Shri
Bheru Singh S/o Nirbhay Singh Solanki w.e.f. Sept.
97 is justified? If not, to what relief the workman is
entitled for?’’
2. (b) The Government of India, Ministry of Labour vide
its Notification No. L-12012/89/99-IR(B-I) dated 18-6-99 has
referred the following dispute for adjudication by this
tribunal:—
‘‘Whether the action of the management of State Bank
of Indore in terminating the services of Shri Prakash
Chandra Chouhan w.e.f. Oct-97 is justified? If not, to what
relief the workman is entitled for?’’
(c) The Government of India, Ministry of Labour vide
its Notification No. L-12012/90/99-IR(B-I) dated 18-6-99
has referred the following dispute for adjudication by this
tribunal :—
[Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)]
Hkkjr dk jkti= % vDrwcj 13] 2012@vkf'ou 21] 1934
7663
‘‘Whether the action of the management of State
Bank of Indore in terminating Shri Prem Narain S/o
Moolchand Tiwari w.e.f Nov-97 is justified? If not, to
what relief the workman is entitled for?’’
(d) The Government of India, Ministry of Labour vide
its Notification No.L-12012/244/99-IR(B-I) dated
28-6/5-7/99 has referred the following dispute for
adjudication by this tribunal:—
‘‘Whether the action of the management of State
Bank of Indore in terminating the services of
Shri Radhey Shyam Yadav w.e.f. May 1995 is justified?
It not, to what relief the workman is entitled for?’’
(e) The Government of India, Ministry of Labour vide
its Notification No.L-12012/214/99-IR(B-I) dated 28-29/9/
1999 has referred the following dispute for adjudication
by this tribunal:—
‘‘Whether the action of the management of State
Bank of Indore in stopping the two annual increments
in R/o Shri Akhilesh Tiwari, Peon-Farrash with
cumulative effect is justified? If not, to what relief
the workman is entitled for?’’
3. All the five reference cases are taken up together as
all are between the same parties and with respect of
common subject matter.
4. The Union/workmen did not appear in any of the
reference case inspite of proper services of notice for last
about ten years. Lastly all the reference proceeded exparte
against the Union/workman on 29-1-2010 and in reference
Case No. 244/99 on 10-6-2010.
The management appeared in all the cases but did not
file any Written Statement. An application is filed by the
management stating therein that the workmen were never
engaged in the Bank nor was in employment of the Bank
at any time. It is stated that there was no relationship of
employer and employee. It is stated that the Union/
workmen has not raised any dispute by filing any statement
of claim for such a long time. It is stated that this shows
that the workmen are not interested to content the
references and no dispute award be passed.
6. Perused the records. It is clear that the Union or the
workmen have not raised any dispute before the Tribunal.
This shows that either there is no dispute or they are not
interested in the reference cases. This shows that presently
there is no dispute between the parties. Accordingly the
references are answered.
7. In the result, a common no dispute award is passed
in all the references without any order to costs.
MOHD. SHAKIR HASAN, Presiding Officer
ubZ fnYyh] 20 flrEcj] 2012
dk-vk- 3156-—vkS|ksfxd fookn vf/kfu;e] 1947 ¼1947 dk
14½ dh /kkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnzh; ljdkj LVsV cSad vkWQ
bUnkSj] ds izca/kra= ds lac) fu;kstdksa vkSj muds deZdkjksa ds chp
vuqca/k esa fufnZ"V vkS|kSfxd fookn esa dsUnzh; ljdkj vkS|ksfxd
vfèdj.k@Je U;k;ky;] tcyiqj] ds iapkV ¼lanHkZ la[;k
228@98½ dks izdkf'kr djrh gS] tks dsUnzh; ljdkj dks 20&09&2012
dks izkIr gqvk FkkA
[ la- ,y&12012@62@98&vkbZ-vkj- ¼ch&I½]
jes'k ¯lg ] MsLd vf/kdkjh
New Delhi, the 20th September, 2012
S.O. 3156.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the
Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central
Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 228/
98) of the Cent. Govt. Indus. Tribunal-cum-Labour Court,
Jabalpur as shown in the Annexure, in the industrial dispute
between the management of State Bank of Indore and
their workmen, received by the Central Government
on 20-09-2012
[No. L-12012/62/98-IR(B-I)]
RAMESH SINGH, Desk Officer
ANNEXURE
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT
INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT,
JABALPUR
NO. CGIT/LC/R/228/98
Presiding Officer: SHRI MOHD.SHAKIR HASAN
General Secretary,
Daily Wages Bank Employees Association,
9, Sanwer Road,
Ujjain
...Workman
Versus
Managing Director,
State bank of Indore,
Head Office, 5, Y.N.Road,
Indore
...Management
AWARD
Passed on this 4th day of September, 2012
1. The Government of India, Ministry of Labour vide its
Notification No.L-12012/62/98-IR(B-I) dated 15-10-98 has
referred the following dispute for adjudication by this
tribunal:-
‘‘Whether the management of Managing Director,
State Bank of Indore in terminating the services of
Shri Shailendra Parihar w.e.f. 30-6-93 and not
regularizing him is justified? If not, to what relief the
workman is entitled for?’’
2. The case of the Union/workman in short, is that
the workman Shri Shailendra Parihar was engaged
on daily wages on 20-11-84 by the management Bank,
He was paid wages weekly by way of vouchers. He
7664
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 13, 2012/ASVINA 21, 1934
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
worked 8 hours per day continuously and was
terminated on 30-6-93 without notice and three
months pay. It is stated that there is a violation of the
provision of Section 25-F of the Industrial dispute
Act, 1947 ( in short the Act, 1947) and of Shastri
Award. The principle of first come last go was also
not adopted. It is also stated that after removing him,
the management had engaged other daily wages
employee. It is stated that the workman had worked
more than 240 days. It is submitted that the workman
be taken in employment in permanent service with
full back wages.
3. The management appeared and filed Written Statement
in the case. The case of the management, inter alia, is that
the services of the workman was utilized in the Dhar Branch
of the Bank as a temporary peon for the period from
20-11-84 to 16-2-85 for 75 days only. He was paid wages as
had been agreed by him. The certificate given by the
workman that he worked from 1-3-1985 to 30-6-93 is not
genuine and is managed by the workman. He was never
given any regular appointment nor he worked in the bank
for more than 240 days. As such his case doesnot cover
under the provision of the Act, 1947. It is submitted that
the workman is not entitled to any relief.
4. On the basis of the pleadings of the parties the
following issues are framed for adjudication :
I. Whether the action of the management in terminating
the services of Shri Shailendra Parihar w.e.f. 30-6-93
is justified?
II. To what relief the workman is entitled?
5. Issue No. I
The workman has adduced oral and documentary
evidence in the case. The workman Shri Shailender Parihar
has supported his case in examination-in-chief. In cross-
examination he has denied that he was appointed for the
period of 75 days only. He has filed the said appointment
letter which is marked as Exhibit W/11. The said document
clearly shows that he was appointed temporary for a fixed
period of 75 days from 20-11-84 to 16-2-85. He has stated
that thereafter he was terminated. It is clear that the period
was not extended and therefore after completion of the
period the workman was terminated. The provision of
Section 2( 00 )(bb) of the Act is applicable and he is not to
be termed as retrenched employee. At para 13 he has stated
that he had worked under number of Branch Managers of
the Bank but there is no such pleading. It appears to be
after thought. He has stated that he had not appeared in
any examination.
6. The workman has filed documentary evidence in the
case. Exhibit W/1 is the reference order dated 15-10-1998.
Exhibit W 12 is the certificate of the work of 75 days from
20-11-84 to 16-2-85. This fact is admitted by the management
in his pleading that he was engaged on temporary basis for
a fixed period. Exhibit W/3 is payment statement of the
above period which is an admitted fact that he was engaged
for 75 days.
7. Exhibit W/4 is the certificate dated 8-3-95. This is filed
to show that the workman had worked continuously from
1-3- 85 to 30-6-93. The management has challenged the
genuineness of the said certificate. The workman has stated
in para 14 that the said certificate was given by the cashier
of the Bank on the saying by the Manager. This itself shows
that the cashier was not competent to give any certificate
of experience. Moreover there is nothing to show that the
then Manager had told the cashier to furnish him a
certificate. The said cashier is also not examined. The
certificate is also contradicted by Exhibit W/8 which is also
filed by the workman which shows that from 17-2-85 to
1993, he had worked only for 140 days. This itself shows
that the said certificate (Exhibit W/4) appears to be not
genuine and reliance cannot be placed.
8. Exhibit W/5 is the settlement dated 13-7-93 arrived
between the management and the Union. This settlement
is not applicable as the above discussion shows that he
had not worked more than 240 days. Exhibit W/6 is the
application dated 13-8-93 filed for appointment on the basis
of 75 days work done from 20-11-84 to 16-2-85. Exhibit
W/7 is the reply filed by the management before Labour
Enforcement Officer (Central), Indore wherein the statement
of work done was annexed. The said annexure clearly
shows that the workman had worked only 140 days from
17-2-85 to 1993. This clearly shows that the provision of
Section 25-F of the Act, 1947 is not attracted. Exhibit W/8 is
regarding payment of bonus of 75 days of the period of
2-11-84 to 16-2-85. Exhibit W/9 and W/10 are with respect
of work of cleaning and Hamali in the bank. There is nothing
to show that it is related to the workman. Exhibit W/11 is
temporary appointment of 75 days of the workman. The
relevancy is already earlier discussed. Exhibit W/12 is the
advertisement for recruitment in the bank who had earlier
engaged 240 days in twelve months. It is clear from the
above evidence that the workman had not worked 240 days
by the entire engagement in the Bank. Thus the oral and
documentary evidence of the workman clearly shows that
he had not worked 240 days in twelve calendar months
preceding the date of termination to attract the provision
of Section 25-B(2) of the Act, 1947. As such the provision
of Section 25-F of the Act, 1947 is not applicable. There is
no specific pleading and evidence as to who had been
subsequently engaged in the bank after his disengagement.
There is no case of "first come last go".
9. On the other hand, the management witness Shri
Suresh Chandorkar is examined in the case. He is Branch
Manager at Pipli Bazar Ghat Branch of the Bank. He has
supported the case of the management. He has admitted
the documents of the workman which itself shows that
there is no violation of the Act, 1947. Thus it is clear that
the action of the management is justified. This issue is
[Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)]
Hkkjr dk jkti= % vDrwcj 13] 2012@vkf'ou 21] 1934
7665
decided against the workman and in favour of the
management.
10. Issue No.II
Admittedly he was engaged for 75 days. Thereafter he
was engaged on daily wages. Admittedly he was not
recruited through any process of appointment. This shows
that there is no case of regularization. This issue is also
decided against the workman and in favour of the
management.
11. Issue No. III
On the basis of the discussion made above, it is clear
that the action of the management in terminating and in not
regularizing as has been claimed by the workman is justified.
The workman is not entitled to any relief. The reference is,
accordingly, answered.
12. In the result, the award is passed without any order
to costs.
MOHD. SHAKIR HASAN, Presiding Officer
ubZ fnYyh] 20 flrEcj] 2012
dk-vk-3157.—vkS|ksfxd fookn vf/kfu;e 1947] ¼1947 dk
14½ dh /kkjk 17 ds vuqlj.k esa dsUnzh; ljdkj eSllZ Vh-,-,u-,e-
,-th- lyse ds izca/kra= ds lac) fu;kstdksa vkSj muds deZdkjksa ds
chp] vuqca/k esa fufnZ"V vkS|ksfxd fookn esa dsUnzh; ljdkj vkS|ksfxd
vf/kdj.k@Je U;k;ky;] pSUubZ ds iapkV ¼lanHkZ la[;k 22@2009½
dks izdkf'kr djrh gS ] tks dsUnzh; ljdkj dks 14@9@2012 dks izkIr
gqvk FkkA
[la- ,y&27011@4@2008&vkbZ-vkj- ¼,e½]
tksgu rksiuks] voj lfpo
New Delhi, the 20th September, 2012
S.O. 3157.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial
Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government
hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 22/2009) of the Central
Government Industrial Tribunal/Labour Court, Chennai now
as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between
the employers in relation to the management of
M/s. TANMAG (Salem) and their workman, which was
received by the Central Government on 14-9-2012.
[No. L-27011/4/2008-IR (M)]
JOHAN TOPNO, Under Secy.
ANNEXURE
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT
INDUSTRIAL
TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT CHENNAI
Thursday, the 9th August, 2012
Present : A.N. JANARDANAN, Presiding Officer
INDUSTRIAL DISPUTE NO. 22/2009
(In the matter of the dispute for adjudication under
clause (d) of sub-section (1) and sub-section 2(A) of
Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947),
between the Management of TANMAG and their
Workmen)
BETWEEN
The General Secretary
:
1st Party/Petitioner
Salem, Dharmapuri, Namakkal,
Union
Erode Mavatta
Pokuvarathu Matrum Podhu
Thozhilalar Sangam
21, Vivekananda Street
Salem-7
Vs.
The Managing Director
:
2nd Party/
Respondent
TANMAG , 5/63, Omalur Road
Jagirammapalayam,
Salem-2
Appearance :
For the 1st Party/Petitioner Union: Shri V. Ajoy Khosh &
Porkodi, Advocates
For the 2nd Party/Management :
M/s M.R. Raghavan,
Advocate
AWARD
The Central Government, Ministry of Labour and
Employment vide its Order No. L-27011/4/2008-IR(M) dated
30.01.2009 referred the following Industrial Dispute to this
Tribunal for adjudication.
The schedule mentioned in that order is:
‘‘Whether the management of TANMAG, Salem in
paying a less salary to HMV Drivers when compared
to LMV Drivers is justified? What relief the HMV
Drivers are entitled to?’’
2. After the receipt of Industrial Dispute, this Tribuanl
has numbered it as ID 22/2009 and issued notices to both
sides. Both sides entered appearance through their
respective counsel and filed Claim and Counter Statement
as the case may be. Thereafter the Industrial Dispute stood
posted for filing Claim Statement followed by Counter
Statement. There has not been the representation on either
side continuously for a good number of postponements
of the case. Therefore, at the last the petitioner union was
called absent and the Respondent also was called absent
and set ex-parte.
3. Both the parties though entered appearance,
thereafter continuously remained absent and thereby failed
to file any Claim or Counter Statements complete with
7666
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 13, 2012/ASVINA 21, 1934
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
relevant documents, list of reliance and witnesses as
instructed to do so under the very reference or on the
direction of this Tribunal. Therefore, there was no material
before this Tribunal to find out under what support the
reference is to be answered.
4. From the couching terminology in the reference, it
was legitimate for this Tribunal to presume that under the
Management of TANMAG there are two categories of
Drivers viz. (i) HMV Drivers and (ii) LMV Drivers, that
LMV Drivers are paid comparatively more salary than to
HMV Drivers. The question to be considered is whether
such payment of lesser salary to HMV Drivers than to
LMV Drivers is justified. In this ID both the parties were
absent to prosecute or defend their respective claims or
defence as the case may be. Since the reference is at the
instance of the petitioner, the initial burden is upon him to
prove that payment of lesser salary to the HMV Drivers is
justified or not. Under the Indian Evidence Act when a
party wishes to make believe the Court, the existence of a
certain fact it is for that party to adduce evidence to prove
that. There is a maxim the meaning of which is to the effect
that when both are at equal faults the condition of the
defendant (herein the “Respondent”) is better. There is
another principle that when both sides adduce evidence
the burden of proof loses its importance. So viewed, it
could also mean that when both sides do not adduce
evidence, the burden of proof loses of its importance. In
this case both sides have not even presented their
pleadings or supporting documents.There is hardly any
material to tilt a decision by way of answer to the reference
in favour of either party. However, invoking the concept
of burden of proof as being on the Firsty Party Petitioner
as mentioned above and since he has not discharged the
initial burden of satisfying the Tribunal by adducing any
evidence, it is only to be found that payment of less salary
to HMV Drivers compared to LMV Drivers cannot be held
not justified and therefore is justified in the absence of
material to adopt a contra view.
5. Thus for the default of both sides an ex-parte award
was passed against the petitioner as per order dated
14-07-2009.
6. As per order dated 06-05-2010 on IA 34/2010 ex-parte
award was set aside and ID was restored to file. Thereafter
petitioner filed Claim Statement and Respondent filed
Counter Statement.
7. The averments in the Claim Statement briefly read as
follows:
There are two categories of employees under the
Respondent. First category employees are workmen
employed in the operation and allied work in the mines
and the other category of employees is staff employed in
the office. First category employees are governed by
conditions of service by way of settlements. Second
category employees are given scales of pay and other
benefits on par with government servants leaving a
disparity among them. The first category workmen
employed in mining operation, though forms the backbone
of the establishment their scales of pay and other benefits
are less compared to the staff employed in the office. It is
totally unjustified for the one and the same categories of
employees, like the Drivers whose case is espoused herein.
In the case of work of Drivers under any category the
nature of work is one and the same with no difference. In
the work carried out irrespective of the category
differentiation Drivers belonging to staff category known
as LMV Drivers operate only light motor vehicles like Car,
Jeep, etc. Drivers under the workmen category known as
HMV Drivers are operating Heavy Motor Vehicles such
as Water Lorry, Explosive Van, School/Staff Bus, Dippers,
Tumbers and other earth moving equipments. The second
category drivers are most skilled and doing hazardous
work. They are entitled to more and extra benefits than the
other. But shocking reality is that they get only about
1/3rd of the salary of the other category. Even a new entrant
Staff Driver gets more than the salary paid to the Drivers
belonging to other category who rendered more than 20
years of service. Though there is provision for conversion
and promotion of HMV Drivers to LMV Drivers after
completion of 8 years of service that is not given to HMV
Drivers. HMV Drivers are also asked to drive the cars and
jeeps without the corresponding payment. Originally there
were 30 HMV Drivers which have now been reduced to 13
due to death, retirement, etc. Similarly there was only 10
LMV Drivers which is now reduced to 4 working. Six posts
in the LMV Drivers category are vacant. Instead of
promoting the HMV Drivers Respondent is using
Mazdoors with Driving License in their place. The 13 HMV
Drivers have crossed 50 years of age. Though they belong
to Skilled Grade-I their scales of pay are not equal to LMV
Drivers. Again they have not been given scales of pay on
par with the same category of HMV Drivers in Skilled
Grade-I under other Public Sector Undertakings of
Government of Tamil Nadu like TNEB, Tamil Nadu Minerals
Ltd. and other comparable industries. The recognized
unions did not heed to the specific grievance of HMV
Drivers. Their demand for same scales of pay and other
benefits to HMV Drivers on par with LMV Drivers being
not considered the ID is raised which having failed the
reference is caused to be made. The denial is wholly
unjustified and is liable to be interfered with apart from
being arbitrary, unreasonable, unjust and violative of
Articles-14, 16 and 21 of the Constitution. Sub-classifying
them into such two categories is without any rational nexus
and is treating equals as un-equals arbitrarily and
discriminatorily. In terms of added skill and hard labour
while the HMV Drivers were to have been paid better they
are actually deprived of equal treatment and benefits
unreasonably. Not extending the same scales of pay and
allowances and benefits is contrary and opposed to the
doctrine of equal pay for equal work and opposed to the
[Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)]
Hkkjr dk jkti= % vDrwcj 13] 2012@vkf'ou 21] 1934
7667
provisions of Equal Remuneration Act and Article-39(d)
of the Constitution. It is also opposed to principles of
region-cum-industry due to denial of parity with the HMV
Drivers in other Public Sector Undertakings which is again
on par with the government servants. Not giving
promotion to them and engaging Mazdoors in the vacancy
of LMV Drivers is mala fide. Denial of corresponding pay
of LMV Drivers when HMV Drivers are utilized in their
places is illegal. Giving all the HMV Drivers only the same
scale of pay and benefits though doing work with different
skill and high skill is unjust. Hence the claim for on par
treatment with LMV Drivers from date of their entry into
service with arrears and all consequential benefits and
also to give higher scales of pay to HMV Drivers
depending upon the work and skill.
8. Counter Statement averments briefly Read as follows:
All the employees who were on the rolls of the private
company i.e. Salem Magnesite (P) Ltd. were
transferred to the second party by taking over by
the Government of Tamil Nadu as per G.O.M.S. No.
41 Industries Department dated 10-1-1979. After
taking over the dual categories of Drivers i.e.
workman category and staff category continued. The
workmen category Drivers have been receiving
wages on the basis of 12(3) wage settlements since
1980. As an accepted practice of maintaining two
categories of Drivers under the Respondent the same
was recognized by the workmen drivers under
settlements from 1-1-1980. The last settlement entered
on 14-6-2007 was in force till 30-11-2011. So the
workmen drivers are estopped from the claim herein
made. Against the accepted practice now it is not
open to the workmen drivers to demand the pay parity.
The Staff Drivers also drive heavy earth moving
equipments. It is not correct that workmen drivers
get 1/3rd salary of Staff Drivers. It is denied that they
were given promotion. With effect from 1-1-2004 grade
revisions are given to them on completion of 8 years
of service. It is denied that work done by both the
categories are one and the same. It is denied that
HMV Drivers are more skilled and do hazardous work.
HMV Drivers cannot be promoted as LMV Drivers,
it being not a promotional post. Demand for the same
scale of pay in Tamil Nadu Electricity Board, etc. is
not based on acceptable materials. Demand is not
just and legal. There is no violation of Article-14, 16
and 21 of the Constitution. There is no arbitrary or
discriminatory treatment. Nature of work is one and
the same is denied. Equal Remuneration Act and
Article-39(d) of the Constitution may not apply.
Principle of region-cum-industry may not apply.
Question of promotion is beyond scope of the present
dispute. Wages are paid on the basis of settlement
and there cannot be any discrimination in pay among
Workmen Drivers. Dispute is not maintainable, it not
being espoused by majority of the workmen. Union
has not been authorized to raise the dispute in a
legal manner. Demand is to be dismissed.
9. Points for consideration are:
(i) Whether paying a less salary to HMV Drivers
compared to LMV Drivers is justified?
(ii) To what relief the HMV Drives are entitled?
10. Evidence consists of the oral evidence of WW1 and
Ex. W1 to Ex.W20, (of which Ex.W16 to Ex.W20 are marked
subject to objection of the Respondent that they are not
comparable with the employment in Respondent Institution)
on the petitioner's side and the oral evidence of MW1 and
Ex.M1 to Ex.M23 on the Respondent’s side.
Points (i) & (ii).
11. Heard both sides. Perused the records, documents
and evidence. The arguments mainly advanced on behalf
of the petitioner are that interse both the categories of
Drivers there is no difference in regard to the nature of
work. The work of HMV Drivers is more risky. Both are
engaged for work on rotation basis. Section (4) of Equal
Remuneration Act and Article-39(d) of the Constitution
mandate equal remuneration for equal work. Section-3 of
the ID Act has overriding effect over contract, award or
settlement. There cannot be estoppel against the statute.
Demand of the workmen is justified. Being a Public Sector
Undertaking under State of Tamil Nadu as a model employer
the claim is to be allowed.
12. Contra arguments advanced on behalf of the
Respondent are that there is classification of both
categories of Drivers into workman category and staff
category. Staff category Drivers are again governed by
circulars issued by the Public Sector Undertaking and not
by way of settlements as in the case of workman category
who are absorbed employees coinciding with the taking
over of the establishment from the original private owner
viz. Salem Magnesite. The difference originated in 1980
and existing even now. Settlement cannot be read in
piecemeal but has to be taken as a whole. For equal wages
there should be an assertion that it is so on specific terms.
When classification is on intelligible differentia it is
reasonable classification. The equality has to be in terms
of all the factors like qualification, nature of work, etc. Even
after the dispute petitioner accepted subsequent wage
revision as is seen from Exts. W18, 19 and 20 without
objection or any reservation thereby acquiescing to the
settlement. There cannot be comparison with incomparable
institutions or personnel. That is the rationale behind
government not standardizing pay of different
Corporations.
13. Both sides placed reliance on the decisions of the
Apex Court and High Courts as below.
Decision relied on behalf of the petitioner are :
7668
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 13, 2012/ASVINA 21, 1934
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
-
RANDHIR SINGH VS. UNION OF INDIA AND
OTHERS (1982-1-SCC-618) Apex Court held "The
Drivers in the Delhi Police Force perform the same
functions and duties as other drivers in service of
the Delhi Administration and the Central
Government. If anything, by reason of their
investiture with the 'powers, functions and
privileges of a police officer', their duties and
responsibilities are more arduous. There is,
therefore, no reason for giving them a lower scale
of pay than others. The argument that the drivers
of the Delhi Police Force and the other drivers
belong to different departments and that the
principle of ‘equal pay for equal work’ is not a
principle which the courts may recognize and act
upon is unsound”.
-
SURINDER SINGH AND ANOTHER VS. THE
ENGINEER-IN- CHIEF, CPWD AND OTHERS
(1986-1-LL-403) Supreme Court held “Daily wage
employees of Central Public Works Department are
entitled to pay and allowances on par with
permanent employees -Central, State Governments
and public sector undertakings should function as
model employers".
-
MACKINNON MACHENZIE AND CO. LTD. VS.
AUDREY D’COSTA AND ANOTHER (1987-1-
LLJ-536) Supreme Court held “Lady Stenographers
paid less remuneration than male stenographers-
For deciding whether a work is similar or same in
nature or another work, a broad view should be
taken -Difference in details cannot defeat claim for
equality -Duties actually performed should be taken
into account and not those theoretically possible -
Settlement between parties cannot override Act and
should yield to attract sub- section 1 of Sec. 4 of
the Act”.
-
FCI WORKERS UNION VS. FOOD
CORPORATION OF INDIA AND OT EHRS (1990-
Supp-SCC-296 Supreme Court held “Labour Law-
Parity in employment -Wages-Zone-cum-same
employer principle -Departmentalized labour of
Food Corporation of India -Corporation directed
to revise the wage structure of the departmentalized
labour employed at depots in Bihar; Orissa, Assam,
U.P. and Delhi regions and bring their wages at the
same level as the wages of the departmentalized
labour employed at Calcutta Port and the Calcutta
city godowns and depots of the corporation in the
State of West Bengal - Benefit of the revision should
be granted w.e.f. 01-01-1974 the date from which
the wages of the departmentalized labour employed
at Calcutta Port were revised in 1977”.
-
HARYANA STATE ATHYAPAK SANGH AND
OTHERS VS. STATE OF HARYANA (1990-Supp.-
SCC-306) Supreme Court held Service Law -Parity
in employment -Equal pay for equal work-teachers
of Government aided schools -Entitled to pay
scales revised at par with those of Government
school teachers as also additional D.A. on the basis
of revised pay scales and arrears of such D.A. as
found payable - Supreme Court's decision dated
July 28, 1988 clarified and explained’’.
-
DHIRENDRA CHAMOLI AND ANOTHER VS.
STATE OF UP (1986-11-LLJ-134) wherein Supreme
Court held "Constitution of India—Art. 14—Equal
pay for equal work—Employees engaged as casual
worker on daily wage basis—Performing identical
work as Class-IV employees of Nehru Yuvak
Kendras—Employees engaged on casual basis not
paid the same salary and allowances—Class-IV
employees engaged on casual basis entitled to same
salary and allowances like employees appointed
on regular basis—Acceptance on the part of casual
employees to get daily wages and not the same
wages as regular employees is no answer to the
constitutional guarantee under Art. 14—Appointed
against sanctioned posts or otherwise does not
make any difference".
On behalf of the Respondent the following
decisions have been relied on :
-
STATE OF TAMIL NADU AND ANOTHER VS.
M. R. ALAGAPPAN AND ANOTHER (1997-2-
LLJ-711) wherein Supreme Court held ‘‘It is open to
the State to prescribe different scales of pay for
different cadres having regard to the nature of
duties, responsibilities and educational
qualifications—If the classification made by the
State between two classes of employees is founded
on rational basis having nexus with the objects to
be achieved, the classification must be upheld—
The principle is applicable only among equals but
not among un-equals’’.
STATE OF UP AND OTHERS VS. J. P.
CHAURASIA AND OTHERS (1989-1-LLJ-309)
wherein Supreme Court held ‘‘The principle of equal
pay for equal work has no mechanical application
in every case. It has to be read into Art. 14 which
permits reasonable classification founded on
different basis. In service matters, merit or
experience could be the proper basis for
classification to promote efficiency in
administration. One learns by experience as much
as by other means. It cannot be denied that the
quality of work done by persons of longer
experience is superior to the work of a new-comer’’.
HERBERTSONS LTD. VS. THE WORKMEN OF
HERBERTSONS LTD. AND OTHERS (AIR-1977-
SC-322) wherein Supreme Court held “27 It is not
[Hkkx II—[k.M 3(ii)]
Hkkjr dk jkti= % vDrwcj 13] 2012@vkf'ou 21] 1934
7669
possible to scan the settlement in bits and pieces
and hold some parts good and acceptable and
others bad. Unless it can be demonstrated that the
objectionable portion is such that is completely
outweighs all the other advantages gained the
Court will be slow to hold a settlement as unfair
and unjust. The settlement has to be accepted or
rejected as a whole and we are unable to reject it as
a whole as unfair or unjust.’’
14. I find considerable force in the case mooted on behalf
of the petitioner for equal treatment in the matter of payment
of salary to HMV Drivers Compared to LMV Drivers. As is
admitted the two categories of employees in the category
of Drivers came into being through different methods, while
first category employees are workmen employed in the
operation and allied work in the mines, the other category
of Drivers are Office Drivers. Again while the first category
of employees came to be governed by conditions of service
by way of settlements, the second category of Drivers
came to be given pay and benefits on par with Government
servants. The first category Drivers happened to be given
less pay compared to the Staff Drivers in the Office. Both
categories of Drivers are doing the same nature of work
without a difference. While the second category of Drivers
drive only Light Motor Vehicles, the HMV Drivers operate
heavy vehicles. They belong to the category of Drivers
with more skill and are doing hazardous work. The HMV
Drivers also drive LMV Vehicles when it is asked to do so
without the corresponding enhanced payment. The denial
of pay parity is arbitrary, unreasonable and injust and
further violates Articles-14, 16 and 21 of the Constitution.
Their sub-classification in the manner above is without
any rationale nexus and amounts to equals being treated
as unequals. Actually they have had to be paid better than
the other. It is opposed to the provisions of Equal
Remuneration Act. According to the Respondent these
two categoreis happened to be maintained under an
accepted practice which came to be recognized by the first
category Drivers under different settlements commencing
from 01-01-1980 and continued in the settlement dated
14-06-2007 expired by 30-11-2011. So to say it is argued
that the workmen HMV Drivers are estopped from the
present claim against the accepted practice. While question
of promotion is beyond the scope of the present reference,
principle of Region-cum-Industry also cannot be applied
to the case of the petitioner because for the same the
institutions should be comparable with that of the
petitioners.
15. The present concern is whether payment of less
salary to HMV Drivers compared to LMV Drivers is
justified? Evidently both the categories of the workmen
are Drivers. There is no rationale nexus for their sub-
classification into the presently obtaining two categories.
For some reason, not forthcoming the classification
originated even before the Company remained in the private
sector while it was taken over by the Tamil Nadu State
Government, the said classification continued, the service
conditions for the first category workers continued to be
governed by the settlements passed from time to time and
those of the second category happened to be governed by
circulars issued by the Department. Evidently it is brought
home that there is no rational nexus for such a classification
though the case of the Respondent is that there is rationale
nexus for the classification. Again though the case of the
Respondent is that nature of duty is not one and the same,
without elucidation how the same type of employees/Drivers
stand differentiated in terms of the duties done by them as
Drivers? The fact that the HMV Drivers work in mines
usually and that the LMV Drivers work as Office Drivers is
not apt to demonstrate any difference with regard to the
nature of the duties as Drivers. Again the further fact that
the first category Drivers operate HMV and the other
category Drivers operate LMV also does not constitute
any difference as to the nature of work done by both. In
terms of qualification that of first category Drivers is more
skilled and higher. Here the classification is not shown to
be on any intelligible differentia. What is in evidence is
that in fact both categories of Drivers operate both types
of vehicles by rotation. Even while so the first category
workers are not paid the corresponding wages of LMV
Drivers. This situation also strengthens the fact that both
type of Drivers are doing the same work with the same
nature of duty and are not at all to be differentiated or
discriminated in regard to payment of their salaries. When
admittedly the differentiation came into vogue by way of
practice the said practice is to give way to statutoty
provisions like the Equal Remuneration Act and to the
Consitution. The first category workmen employed in
mining operation when claim to form the backbone of the
establishment, the said proposition is not denied except in
a bald manner. Hence that is also apt to be true. Their case
of being more skilled and are doing hazardous work is also
only apt to the true. Discernibly they are entitled to more
and extra benefits. But instead let them receive at least
parity treatment. The aforesaid decisions show that
settlements cannot prevail over the statutory mandates to
deny the claim of the petitioners. There cannot be estoppel
against statute. On the same ratio it could well be said that
despite the settlement the petitioner can estop the same in
view of the overriding impact of the statutory provisions
viz. Equal Remuneration Act and Article-39(d) of the
Constitution. A custom or practice cannot override a
statutory provision regarding the matter. The only fact is
that a practice which was unreasonable from the very
inception came to be questioned only at a distance of time
by raising the ID at a later point of time. While the decisions
relied on behalf of the peritioner are discernibly relevant
for the dispute it is not so as regards the decisions relied
on behalf of the Respondent.
7670
THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : OCTOBER 13, 2012/ASVINA 21, 1934
[PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
16. On all the above consideration I am to hold that
payment of less salary to HMV Drivers compared to LMV
Drivers is not justified and the claim for on par treatment
with LMV Drivers is legal and justified. Resultantly it is
ordered that the HMV Drivers shall be given salary and
other benefits on par with LMV Drivers from the date of
taking over of the Company by the Government of Tamil
Nadu but the payment of arrears is restricted from the date
of reference.
17. 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 9th August, 2012)
A.N. JANARDANAN, Presiding Officer
Witnesses Examined:
For the 1st Party/Petitioner Union:
WW1, Sri V.K.
Chezhiyan
For the 2nd Party/Management:
MW1,
Sri
P.
Gowdhaman
Documents Marked:
On the petitioner’s side
Ex. No.
Date
Description
Ex. W1
23-04-2002
Certificate of Registration of Trade
Union issued to the 1st Party
Ex.W2
-
Representation given by the 1st
Party Union to the 2nd Party
Management
Ex.W3
27-09-2005
Representation given by the 1st
Party Union to the 2nd Party
Management
Ex.W4
17-08-2007
1st Party Union's representation to
the 2nd Party
Ex.W5
18-09-2007
Remarks filed by the 2nd Party
Management beore the Assistant
Commissioner of Labour (Central),
Chennai
Ex.W6
16-04-2008
1st Party Union's reply to the
remarks filed by the 2nd Party
Management
Ex.W7
18-08-2008
Failure report
Ex.W8
30-01-2009
Order referring the dispute for
adjudication to this Hon'ble
Tribunal
Ex.W9
05-06-2009
1st Party Union's representation to
the 2nd Party Management
Ex.W10
-
List of HMV/EME Drivers
employed in the 2nd Party
Management
Ex.W11
-
Copies of the Identification Cards
issued to the HMV/EME Operators/
Drivers
Ex.W12
-
The pay-slips of Light Motor
Vehicle Drivers of the 2nd Party
Management
Ex.W13
-
The pay-slips of HMV/EME
Operators/Driver of the 2nd Party/
Management
Ex.W14
-
The pay-slip of a Driver employed
in NLC, Neyveli
Ex.W15
-
The pay-slip of a Driver employed
in Tamil Nadu State Transport
Corporation, Salem
On the Management's side
Ex.No.
Date
Description
Ex.M 1
10-01-1979
G. O. MS. No. 41
Ex.M 2
18-01-1979
Letter Ms.No. 617/D1/79 from
Government to 2nd Party
Ex.M 3
19-04-1980
Settlement under Section 12(3)
Ex.M 4
05-07-1983
Settlement under Section 12(3)
Ex.M 5
19-08-1985
Settlement under Section 12(3)
Ex.M 6
17-08-1987
Settlement under Section 12(3)
Ex.M 7
19-10-1990
Settlement under Section 12(3)
Ex.M 8
13-05-1995
Settlement under Section 12(3)
Ex.M 9
25-09-1996
Settlement under Section 12(3)
Ex.M 10 31-03-1998
Settlement under Section 12(3)
Ex.M 11 21-09-2001
G. O. MS. No. 363
Ex.M 12 16-07-2003
Settlement under Section 12(3)
Ex.M 13 14-06-2007
Settlement under Section 12(3)
Ex.M 14 14-06-2007
Office Order No. 182
Ex.M 15 22-02-1992
Order of appointment of M. Sivaraj
Ex.M 16 13-07-2010
Order of appointment of J.
Jayaseelan
Ex.M 17 06-10-1980
Order of appointment to C.
Arumugam
Ex.M 18 01-10-2010
Service Book of M. Sivaraj
Ex.M 19 28-07-2010
Service Book of J. Jayaseelan
Ex.M 20 10-05-2010
Service Book of C. Arumugam
Ex.M 21 Sept. 2010
Pay-Slip of C. Arumugam
Ex.M 22 Sept. 2010
Pay-Slip of J. Jayaseelan
Ex.M 23 Feb. 2010
Pay-Slip of M. Sivaraj
ubZ fnYyh] 25 flrEcj] 2012
dk-vk-3158.—jk"Vªifr] Jh jatu dqekj lju dks] 17&09&2012
ls dsanzh; ljdkj vkS|ksfxd U;k;/khdj.k&lg&Je U;k;y;] la[;k %
1] /kuckn ds ihBklhu vf/kdkjh ds :i esa 65 o"kZ dh vk;q iwjh gksus
vFkkZr~ 21&01&2018 rd vFkok vxys vkns'kksa rd] tks Hkh igys gks]
fu;qDr djrs gSa %—
[ la- ,&11016@05@2011&lh,y,l&II]
vt; tks'kh] voj lfpo
New Delhi , the 25th September, 2012
S.O. 3158.—The President is pleased to appoint Shri
Ranjan Kumar Saran as Presiding Officer of the Central
Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court No.1
Dhanbad w.e.f. 17.09.2012 for a period upto 21-01-2018 i.e.
till attaining the age of 65 years or until further orders
whichever is earlier.
[No. A-11016@05@2011-CLS-II]
AJAY JOSHI, Under Secy.
Printed by the Manager, Government of India Press, Ring Road, Mayapuri, New Delhi-110064
and Published by the Controller of Publications, Delhi-110054.