रजिस्ट्री सं. डी. एल. ;एनद्ध 04/0007/2003—05 REGD. NO. D. L. (N) 04/0007/2003—05 प्राध्किार से प्रकाशित PUBLISHED BY AUTHORITY
साप्ताहिक
WEEKLY
सं. 27] नई दिल्ली, जून 30—जुलाई 6, 2013, शनिवार/आषाढ़ 9—आषाढ़ 15, 1935
No. 27] NEW DELHI, JUNE 30—JULY 6, 2013, SATURDAY/ASHADHA 9—ASHADHA 15, 1935
भाग में भिन्न पृष्ठ संख्या दी जाती है जिससे कि यह पृथक संकलन के रूप में रखा जा सके
Separate Paging is given to this Part in order that it may be filed as a separate compilation
भाग II—खण्ड 3—उप-खण्ड (ii)
PART II—Section 3—Sub-section (ii)
भारत सरकार के मंत्राालयों ;रक्षा मंत्राालय को छोड़करद्ध द्वारा जारी किए गए सांविध्कि आदेश और अध्सिूचनाएं
Statutory Orders and Notifications Issued by the Ministries of the Government of India
(Other than the Ministry of Defence)
विधि और न्याय मंत्रालय
कार्मिक, लोक शिकायत तथा पेंशन मंत्रालय
(विधि कार्य विभाग)
(कार्मिक और प्रशिक्षण विभाग)
नई दिल्ली, 25 जून, 2013
नई दिल्ली, 26 जून, 2013
का.आ. 1225. —राष्ट्रपति, दिनांक 28 मई, 2013 से श्री हरिन पी. रावल, वरिष्ठ अधिवक्ता का अपर महासालिसिटर, भारत का उच्चतम न्यायालय के पद से त्यागपत्र स्वीकार करते हैं।
[फा.सं. 18(9)/2009-न्या.] आर. एस. शुक्ल, संयुक्त सचिव एवं विधि सलाहकार
MINISTRY OF LAW AND JUSTICE
(Department of Legal Affairs)
New Delhi, the 25th June, 2013
का.आ .1226. —केन्द्रीय सरकार एतद्द्वारा दंड प्रक्रिया संहिता, 1973 (1974 का अधिनियम सं. 2) की धारा 24 की उप-धारा (8) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए दिल्ली विशेष पुलिस स्थापना (केंद्रीय अन्वेषण ब्यूरो) की ओर से नई दिल्ली स्थित दिल्ली उच्च न्यायालय और भारत के सवा ैच्च न्यायालय में आरसी-03(ए)/2004/एसीयू.-IX/नई दिल्ली (हरियाणा का जेबीटी भर्ती घोटाला), मामले से उत्पन्न अपीलों, पुनरीक्षणों तथा इससे संबद्ध अन्य मामलों का संचालन करने के लिए श्री सिद्धार्थ लूथरा, अपर महान्यायधिवक्ता की नियुक्ति से संबंधित अधिसूचना सं. एफ सं. 225/22/2013-एवीडी-II को वापस लेती है।
S.O.1225.—The President is pleased to accept the resignation of Shri Harin P. Raval, Senior Advocate as Additional Solicitor General, Supreme Court of India with effect from 28th May, 2013.
[फा.सं. 225/22/2013-एवीडी-II]
[F.No. 18(9)/2009-Judl.]
राजीव जैन, अवर सचिव
R. S. SHUKLA, Jt. Secy. & Legal Adviser
2786 GI/2013
(3193)3194 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 6, 2013/ASHADHA 15, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] read with Notification No. 33/1994-Cus (NT) dated 1-7-
1994 as amended by Notification No. 122/2004-Cus (NT) MINISTRY OF PERSONNEL, PUBLIC GRIEVANCES AND PENSIONS (Department of Personnel and Training) New Delhi, the 26th June, 2013
S.O. 1226.—In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (8) of Section 24 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Act No. 2 of 1974), the Central Government hereby withdraws the notification No. F.No. 225/22/2013-AVD-II dated 4.4.2013 regarding appointment of Shri Sidharth Luthra, Additional Solicitor General, in Delhi High Court and Supreme Court of India at New Delhi, for conducting appeals, revisions and other matters arising out the case RC 03(A)/2004/ACU-IX/New Delhi (JBT Recruitment Scam of Haryana) on behalf of the Delhi Special Police Establishment (Central Bureau of Investigation).
[F. No. 225/22/2013-AVD-II] dated 25-10-2001 issued by the Ministry of Finance,
Department of Revenue, Government of India, New Delhi,
under Clause (a) of Section 152 of the Customs Act, 1962,
I, Ashok, Commissioner of Central Excise, Bangalore II,
Commissionerate, Bangalore hereby declare Survey No. 9
& 22, Amalapura Village, Madhugiri Road, Arakere Post
falling under Tumkur Taluk, Tumkur District in the State of Karnataka, as warehousing station under Section 9 of the
Customs Act, 1962 for the limited purpose of setting up of
a 100% EOU.
[C.No. IV/16/20/2013/EOU, BG-II]
ASHOK, Commissioner
(वित्तीय सेवाएं विभाग)
RAJIV JAIN, Under Secy.
नई दिल्ली, 21 जून, 2013
वित्त मंत्रालय
(राजस्व विभाग)
(केन्द्रीय उत्पाद शुल्क आयुक्त का कार्यालय, बेंगलूर-II
आयुक्तालय)
बेंगलूर, 21 जून, 2013
सं. 01/2013-14
का.आ. 1228—.—राष्ट्रीयकृत बैंक (प्रबंध एवं प्रकीर्ण उपबंध) स्कीम, 1970/1980 के खंड 3 के उप-खंड (1) के साथ पठित बैंककारी कंपनी (उपक्रमों का अर्जन एवं अंतरण) अधिनियम, 1970/1980 की धारा 9 की उप-धारा 3(ज) और (3-क) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए, केन्द्रीय सरकार, एतद्द्वारा श्री सुनील कुमार माहेश्वरी (जन्म तिथि : 10.08.1964) को उनकी नियुक्ति की अधिसूचना की तारीख से तीन वर्ष की अवधि के लिए अथवा अगले आदेशों तक, जो भी पहले हो, यूको बैंक के निदेशक मण्डल में अंशकालिक गैर-सरकारी निदेशक नामित करती है।
[फा.सं. 6/24/2011-बीओ-I] विजय मल्होत्रा, अवर सचिव
(Department of Financial Services)
का.आ.1227— .—सीमा-शुल्क अधिनियम, 1962 की धारा 152 के खंड (क) के अधीन भारत सरकार, वित्त मंत्रालय, राजस्व विभाग, नई दिल्ली के दिनांक 1 जुलाई , 1994 की अधिसूचना सं. 33/94-सी. शु.(एन.टी.) और वित्त मंत्रालय, राजस्व विभाग, भारत सरकार, नई दिल्ली द्वारा दिनांकित 25-10-2001 के अधिसूचना सं. 122/2004-सी. शु.(एन.टी.) में यथा संशोधित के जरिए मैं, अशोक, आयुक्त, केंद्रीय उत्पाद शुल्क, बेंगलूर-II, आयुक्तालय, बेंगलूर, प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए कर्नाटक राज्य के तुमकूर जिला में स्थित सर्वे सं. 9 एवं 22, अमलपुरा गांव, मधुगिरी रोड, तुमकूर तालूक के अधीन अरकेरे पोस्ट को सीमा शुल्क अधिनियम, 1962 की धारा 9 के अधीन 100% निर्यातोन्मुख एकक (ई.ओ.यू.) को स्थापित करने की सीमित उद्देश्य के लिए भांडागार स्टेशन एतद्द्वारा घोषित करता हूं।
[सी.सं. IV/16/20/2013 ई.ओ.यू., बें.-II]
अशोक, आयुक्त New Delhi, the 21st June, 2013
S.O.1228.—In exercise of the powers conferred
by sub-section 3(h) and (3-A) of Section 9 of the Banking
Companies (Acquisition and Transfer of Undertakings)
Act, 1970/1980 read with sub-clause (1) of clause 3 of
the Nationalized Banks (Management and Miscellaneous
Provisions) Scheme, 1970/1980, the Central Government MINISTRY OF FINANCE
hereby nominates Shri Sunil Kumar Maheshwari (Department of Revenue)
(OFFICE OF THE COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE
BANGALORE-II, COMMISSIONERATE)
Bangalore, the 21st June, 2013
(DoB : 10.08.1964) as part-time non-official director on
the Board of Directors of UCO Bank for a period of three
years, from the date of notification of his appointment or
until further orders, whichever is earlier.
[F.No. 6/24/2011-BO-I]
No. 01/2013-14
S.O.1227.—In exercise of powers delegated to the
undersigned under Section 9 of the Customs Act, 1962
VIJAY MALHOTRA, Under Secy.
[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : जुलाई 6, 2013/आषाढ़ 15, 1935 3195नई दिल्ली, 26 जून, 2013
का.आ. 1229—.—राष्ट्रीयकृत बैंक (प्रबंध एवं प्रकीर्ण उपबंध) स्कीम, 1970/1980 के खंड 3 के उप-खंड (1) के साथ पठित बैंककारी कंपनी (उपक्रमों का अर्जन एवं अंतरण) अधिनियम, 1970/1980 की धारा 9 की उप-धारा 3(ज) और (3-क) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए, केन्द्रीय सरकार, एतद्द्वारा श्री सलाहुद्दीन अंसारी (जन्म तिथि 30.07.1946) को उनकी नियुक्ति की अधिसूचना की तारीख से तीन वर्ष की अवधि के लिए अथवा अगले आदेशों तक, जो भी पहले हो, यूको बैंक के निदेशक मण्डल में अंशकालिक गैर-सरकारी निदेशक नामित करती है।
[फा.सं. 6/29/2011-बीओ-I]
विजय मल्होत्रा, अवर सचिव
New Delhi, the 26th June, 2013
S.O.1229.—In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section 3(h) and (3-A) of Section 9 of the Banking Companies (Acquisition and Transfer of Undertakings) Act, 1970/1980 read with sub-clause (1) of clause 3 of the Nationalized Banks (Management and Miscellaneous Provisions) Scheme, 1970/1980, the Central Government hereby nominates Shri Salahuddin Ansari (DoB : 30.07.1946) as part-time non-official director on the Board of Directors of UCO Bank for a period of three years, from the date of notification of his appointment or until further orders, whichever is earlier.
[F.No. 6/29/2011-BO-I]
VIJAY MALHOTRA, Under Secy.
नई दिल्ली, 26 जून, 2013
का.आ.1230 .—राष्ट्रीयकृत बैंक (प्रबंध एवं प्रकीर्ण उपबंध) स्कीम, 1970/1980 के खंड 9 के उप-खंड (1) और (2) के साथ पठित बैंककारी कंपनी (उपक्रमों का अर्जन एवं अंतरण) अधिनियम, 1970/1980 की धारा 9 की उप-धारा (3) के खंड (ङ) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए, केन्द्रीय सरकार, एतद्द्वारा बैंक ऑफ महाराष्ट्र के विशेष सहायक श्री रामदेव लक्ष्मीचंद सायदीवाल (जन्म तिथि 03.07.1956) को 21.07.2013 को या उसके बाद पद का प्रभार संभालने की तारीख से तीन वर्ष की अवधि के लिए अथवा बैंक ऑफ महाराष्ट्र में उनके कर्मचारी के पद पर बने रहने तक अथवा अगले आदेशों तक, जो भी पहले हो, बैंक ऑफ महाराष्ट्र के निदेशक मण्डल में कर्मकार कर्मचारी निदेशक निुयक्त करती है।
[फा.सं. 6/25/2012-बीओ-I]
विजय मल्होत्रा, अवर सचिव
New Delhi, the 26th June, 2013
S.O.1230.—In exercise of the powers conferred by clause (e) of sub-section (3) of Section 9 of The Banking Companies (Acquisition and Transfer of Undertakings) Act, 1970/1980 read with sub-clause (1) and (2) of clause 9 of The Nationalized Banks (Management and Miscellaneous Provisions) Scheme, 1970/1980, the Central Government hereby appoint Shri Ramadev Laxmichand Saydiwal (DoB : 03-07-1956), Special Assistant, Bank of Maharashtra, as Workmen Employee Director on the Board of Directors of Bank of Maharashtra for a period of three years with effect from the date of his taking over the charge of the post on or after 21-07-2013 or until he ceases to be an Workmen Employee of Bank of Maharashtra or until further orders, whichever is the earlier.
[F.No. 6/25/2012-BO-I]
VIJAY MALHOTRA, Under Secy.
नई दिल्ली, 26 जून, 2013
का.आ.1231 .—राष्ट्रीयकृत बैंक (प्रबंध एवं प्रकीर्ण उपबंध) स्कीम, 1970/1980 के खंड 9 के उप-खंड (1) और (2) के साथ पठित बैंककारी कंपनी (उपक्रमों का अर्जन एवं अंतरण) अधिनियम, 1970/1980 की धारा 9 की उप-धारा (3) के खंड (च) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए, केन्द्रीय सरकार, भारतीय रिजर्व बैंक से परामर्श करने के पश्चात् एतद्द्वारा पंजाब नेशनल बैंक के मुख्य प्रबंधक श्री दिलीप कुमार साह (जन्म तिथि : 24.11.1958) को उनकी नियुक्ति की अधिसूचना की तारीख से तीन वर्ष की अवधि के लिए अथवा पंजाब नेशनल बैंक में उनके अधिकारी के पद पर बने रहने तक अथवा अगले आदेशों तक, जो भी पहले हो, पंजाब नेशनल बैंक के निदेशक मण्डल में अधिकारी कर्मचारी निदेशक निुयक्त करती है।
[फा.सं. 6/17/2012-बीओ-I]
विजय मल्होत्रा, अवर सचिव
New Delhi, the 26th June, 2013
S.O.1231.—In exercise of the powers conferred by clause (f) of sub-section (3) of Section 9 of The Banking Companies (Acquisition and Transfer of Undertakings) Act, 1970/1980 read with sub-clause (1) and (2) of clause 9 of The Nationalized Banks (Management and Miscellaneous Provisions) Scheme, 1970/1980, the Central Government after consultation with the Reserve Bank of India, hereby appoint Shri Dilip Kumar Saha (DoB : 24-11-1958), Chief Manager, Punjab National Bank, as Officer Employee Director on the Board of Directors of Punjab National Bank, for a period of three years, from the date of notification of his appointment or until he ceases to be an officer of the Punjab National Bank or until further orders, whichever is the earliest.
[F.No. 6/17/2012-BO-I]
VIJAY MALHOTRA, Under Secy.
3196 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 6, 2013/ASHADHA 15, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]स्वास्थ्य एवं परिवार कल्याण मंत्रालय
(स्वास्थ्य एवं परिवार कल्याण विभाग)
नई दिल्ली, 9 नवम्बर, 2012
का.आ.1232 .— केन्द्रीय सरकार भारतीय चिकित्सा परिषद अधिनियम, 1956 (1956 का 102) की धारा 11 की उप-धारा (2) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए भारतीय चिकित्सा परिषद से परामर्श करने के बाद, एतद्द्वारा अर्हता के नाम में बदलाव के कारण उक्त अधिनियम की पहली अनुसूची में निम्नलिखित और संशोधन करती ह, अर्थात्ः—
उक्त अनुसूची में-
क) ''अमृता विश्व विद्यापीठ विश्वविद्यालय, कोची, केरल'' के सामने शीर्षक 'मान्याताप्राप्त चिकित्सा अर्हता' [अब के बाद स्तभ (2) के रूप में संदभत] के अंतर्गत अंतिम प्रविष्टि और उससे संबंधित प्रविष्टि के बाद शीर्षक 'पंजीकरण के लिए संक्षेपण' [अब के बाद स्तभ (3) के रूप में संदभत] के अन्तर्गत निम्नलिखित अन्तःस्थापित किया जाएगा, अर्थात्ः-
(2) (3)
''मास्टर ऑफ सर्जरी (जनरल सर्जरी)'' एम एस (जनरल सर्जरी)
(यह एक मान्यताप्राप्त चिकित्सा अर्हता होगी यदि यह अमृता स्कूल ऑफ मेडीसिन, एम्स, कोची में प्रश्क्षिित किए जा रहे विद्यार्थियों के संबंध में अमृता विश्व विद्यापीठम विश्वविद्यालय, कोची, केरल द्वारा मई, 2012 में अथवा उसके पश्चात् प्रदान की गई हो।)
''ओटोेलॉजी एवं लैरिंगलॉजी में डिप्लोमा'' डी एल ओ
(यह एक मान्यताप्राप्त चिकित्सा अर्हता होगी यदि यह अमृता स्कूल ऑफ मेडीसिन, एम्स, कोची में प्रशिक्षित किए जा रहे विद्यार्थियों के संबंध में अमृता विश्व विद्यापीठम विश्वविद्यालय, कोची, केरल द्वारा मई, 2012 में अथवा उसके पश्चात् प्रदान की गई हो।)
''अस्थि रोग विज्ञान में डिप्लोमा'' डी आर्थो
(यह एक मान्यताप्राप्त चिकित्सा अर्हता होगी यदि यह अमृता स्कूल ऑफ मेडीसिन, एम्स, कोची में प्रशिक्षित किए जा रहे विद्यार्थियोेंं के संबंध में अमृता विश्व विद्यापीठम विश्वविद्यालय, कोची, करेल द्वारा मई, 2012 में अथवा उसके पश्चात् प्रदान की गई हो।)
''प्रसूति एवं स्त्री रोग में डिप्लोमा'' डी जी ओ
(यह एक मान्यताप्राप्त चिकित्सा अर्हता होगी यदि यह अमृता स्कूल ऑफ मेडीसिन, एम्स कोची में प्रशिक्षित किए जा रहे विद्यार्थियों के संबंध में अमृता विश्व विद्यापीठम विश्वविद्यालय, कोची,करेल द्वारा मई, 2012 में अथवा उसके पश्चात् प्रदान की गई हो।)
''मेडीकल रेडियो थैरेपी डिप्लोमा'' डी एम आर टी
(यह एक मान्यताप्राप्त चिकित्सा अर्हता होगी यदि यह अमृता स्कूल ऑफ मेडीसिन, एम्स कोची में प्रशिक्षित किए जा रहे विद्यार्थियों के संबंध में अमृता विश्व विद्यापीठम विश्वविद्यालय, कोची, करेल द्वारा मई, 2012 में अथवा उसके पश्चात् प्रदान की गई हो।)
''चर्म रोग, यौन रोग एवं कुष्ठ रोग विज्ञान डी डी वी एल
में डिप्लोमा
(यह एक मान्यताप्राप्त चिकित्सा अर्हता होगी यदि यह अमृता स्कूल ऑफ मेडीसिन, एम्स कोची में प्रशिक्षित किए जा रहे विद्यार्थियों के संबंध में अमृता विश्व विद्यापीठम विश्वविद्यालय, कोची,करेल द्वारा मई, 2012 में अथवा उसके पश्चात् प्रदान की गई हो।)[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : जुलाई 6, 2013/आषाढ़ 15, 1935 3197 (2) (3)
डी सी एच
''बाल स्वास्थ्य में डिप्लोमा'' (यह एक मान्यताप्राप्त चिकित्सा अर्हता होगी यदि यह अमृता स्कूल ऑफ मेडीसिन, एम्स कोची में प्रशिक्षित किए जा रहे विद्यार्थियों के संबंध में अमृता विश्व विद्यापीठम विश्वविद्यालय, कोची,करेल द्वारा मई, 2012 में अथवा उसके पश्चात् प्रदान की गई हो।)
एम डी (रेडियो निदान)
''डाक्टर ऑफ मेडीसिन (रेडियो निदान )'' (यह एक मान्यताप्राप्त चिकित्सा अर्हता होगी यदि यह अमृता स्कूल ऑफ मेडीसिन, एम्स कोची में प्रशिक्षित किए जा रहे विद्यार्थियों के संबंध में अमृता विश्व विद्यापीठम विश्वविद्यालय, कोची,करेल द्वारा मई, 2012 में अथवा उसके पश्चात् प्रदान की गई हो।)
''मेडीकल रेडियो निदान में डिप्लोमा डी एम आर डी
(यह एक मान्यताप्राप्त चिकित्सा अर्हता होगी यदि अमृता स्कूल ऑफ मेडीसिन, एम्स कोची में प्रशिक्षित किए जा रहे विद्यार्थियों के संबंध में अमृता विश्व विद्यापीठम विश्वविद्यालय, कोची, करेल द्वारा मई, 2012 में अथवा उसके पश्चात् प्रदान की गई हो।)
''नेत्र रोग विज्ञान में डिप्लोमा डीे ओ
(यह एक मान्यताप्राप्त चिकित्सा अर्हता होगी यदि अमृता स्कूल ऑफ मेडीसिन, एम्स कोची में प्रशिक्षित किए जा रहे विद्यार्थियों के संबंध में अमृता विश्व विद्यापीठम विश्वविद्यालय, कोची, करेल द्वारा मई, 2012 में अथवा उसके पश्चात् प्रदान की गई हो।)
(ख) ''कालीकट विश्वविद्यालय, करेल'' के सामने शीर्षक मान्यताप्राप्त चिकित्सा अर्हता (अब के बाद स्तभ (2) के रूप में संदभत) के अंतर्गत अंतिम प्रविष्टि और उससे संबंधित प्रविष्टि के बाद शीर्षक 'पंजीकरण के लिए संक्षेपण (अब के बाद स्तभ (3) के स्प में संदभत) के अन्तर्गत निम्नलिखित अन्तःस्थापित किया जाएगा, अर्थात् :—
डॉक्टर ऑफ मेडिसीन (पैथोलॉजी) एम डी (पैथोलॉजी)
(यह एक मान्यताप्राप्त चिकित्सा अर्हता होगी यदि यह मेडिकल कॉलेज, त्रिशूर, केरल, में प्रशिक्षित किए जा रहे विद्यार्थियों के संबंध में, कालीकट विश्वविद्यालय, केरल द्वारा जून, 2012 में अथवा उसके पश्चात् प्रदान की गई हो ।)
(ग) ''राजीव गांधी स्वास्थ्य विज्ञान विश्वविद्यालय, बंगलुरू'' के सामने शीर्षक 'मान्यताप्राप्त चिकित्सा अर्हता' अब के बाद स्तभ (2) के रूप में संदभत, के अ्रंतर्गत अंतिम प्रविष्टि और उससे संबंधित प्रविष्टि के बाद शीर्षक 'पंजीकरण के लिए संक्षेपण' अब के बाद स्तभ (3) के रूप में संदभत, के अन्तर्गत निम्नलिखित अन्तःस्थापित किया जाएगा, अर्थात्ः-
''डाक्टर ऑफ मेडिसिन/मास्टर ऑफ एमडी/एम एस (प्रसूति एवं स्त्री रोग)
सर्जरी (प्रसूति एवं स्त्री रोग)'' (यह एक मान्यताप्राप्त चिकित्सा अर्हता होगी यदि यह नवोदय मेडीकल कॉलेज, रायपुर, कर्नाटक, में प्रश्क्षिित किए जा रहे विद्यार्थियों के संबंध में, राजीव गांधी स्वास्थ्य विज्ञान विश्वविद्यालय, बेंगलुरु द्वारा मई, 2012 में अथवा उसके पश्चात् प्रदान की गई हो ।)
''डाक्टर ऑफ मेडिसिन (फार्मकोलॉजी)'' एमडी (फार्मकोलॉजी)
(यह एक मान्यताप्राप्त चिकित्सा अर्हता होगी यदि यह एक फादर मूलर मेडीकल कॉलेज मंगलौर, कर्नाटक, में प्रश्क्षिित किए जा रहे विद्यार्थियों के संबंध में, राजीव गांधी स्वास्थ्य विज्ञान विश्वविद्यालय,बेंगलुरु, द्वारा मई, 2012 में अथवा उसके पश्चात् प्रदान की गई हो।)
(घ ) ''महाराष्ट्र स्वास्थ्य विज्ञान विश्वविद्यालय, नासिक, महाराष्ट्र'' के सामने शीर्षक 'मान्यताप्राप्त चिकित्सा अर्हता [अब के बाद स्तभ (2) के रूप में संदभत] के अंतर्गत अंतिम प्रविष्टि और उससे संबंधित प्रविष्टि के बाद शीर्षक 'पंजीकरण के लिए संक्षेपण' [अब के बाद स्तभ (3) के रूप में संदर्भित] के अन्तर्गत निम्नलिखित अन्तःस्थापित किया जाएगा, अर्थात्ः-3198 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 6, 2013/ASHADHA 15, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] (2) (3)
''डाक्टर ऑफ मेडीसिन (चर्म, रोग, यौन एम डी (डी वी एल)
रोग एवं कुष्ठ रोग विज्ञान) (यह एक मान्यताप्राप्त चिकित्सा अर्हता होगी यदि यह डॉ॰ वसंतराव पवार मेडीकल कॉलेज एवं अनुसंधान केंद्र, नासिक, महाराष्ट्र, में प्रशिक्षित किए जा रहे विद्यार्थियों के संबंध में, महाराष्ट्र स्वास्थ्य विज्ञान विश्वविद्यालय, नासिक, महाराष्ट्र द्वारा मई, 2012 में अथवा उसके पश्चात् प्रदान की गई ।)
''संज्ञाहरण विज्ञान में डिप्लोमा'' डी ए
(यह एक मान्यताप्राप्त चिकित्सा अर्हता होगी यदि यह डॉ॰ वसंतराव पवार मेडीकल कॉलेज एवं अनुसंधान केंद्र, नासिक, महाराष्ट्र, में प्रशिक्षित किए जा रहे विद्यार्थियों के संबंध में महाराष्ट्र स्वास्थ्य विज्ञान विश्वविद्यालय, नासिक, महाराष्ट्र द्वारा जून, 2012 में अथवा उसके पश्चात् प्रदान की गई हो ।)
''डाक्टर ऑफ मेडीसिन (रेडियो निदान/रेडियोलोजी) एम डी (रेडियो निदान/रेडियोलाजी) (रेडियो निदान)'' (यह एक मान्यताप्राप्त चिकित्सा अर्हता होगी यदि यह डॉ॰ वसंतराव पवार मेडीकल कॉलेज एंंव अनुसंधान केेंद्र, नासिक, महाराष्ट्र, में प्रशिक्षित किए जा रहे विद्यार्थियों के संबंध में, महाराष्ट्र स्वास्थ्य विज्ञान विश्वविद्यालय, नासिक, महाराष्ट्र द्वारा जून, 2012 में अथवा उसके पश्चात् प्रदान की गई हो ।)
''डाक्टर ऑफ मेडीसिन (जनरल एम डी (जनरल मेडीसिन)
मेडीसिन)''
(यह एक मान्यताप्राप्त चिकित्सा अर्हता होगी यदि यह डॉ॰ वसंतराव पवार मेडीकल कॉलेज एंंव अनुसंधान केेंद्र, नासिक, महाराष्ट्र, में प्रशिक्षित किए जा रहे विद्यार्थियों के संबंध में, महाराष्ट्र स्वास्थ्य विज्ञान विश्वविद्यालय, नासिक, महाराष्ट्र द्वारा जून, 2012 में अथवा उसके पश्चात् प्रदान की गई हो ।)
''मास्टर ऑफ सर्जरी (ओटो राईनो एम एस (ई एन टी)
लैरिंगोलॉजी)''
(यह एक मान्यताप्राप्त चिकित्सा अर्हता होगी यदि यह डॉ॰ वसंतराव पवार मेडीकल कॉलेज एंंव अनुसंधान केेंद्र, नासिक, महाराष्ट्र, में प्रशिक्षित किए जा रहे विद्यार्थियों के संबंध में, महाराष्ट्र स्वास्थ्य विज्ञान विश्वविद्यालय, नासिक, महाराष्ट्र द्वारा जून, 2012 में अथवा उसके पश्चात् प्रदान की गई हो ।)
''मास्टर ऑफ सर्जरी (अस्थि रोग एम एस (ऑर्थो)
विज्ञान)''
(यह एक मान्यताप्राप्त चिकित्सा अर्हता होगी यदि यह डॉ॰ वसंतराव पवार मेडीकल कॉलेज एंंव अनुसंधान केेंद्र, नासिक, महाराष्ट्र, में प्रशिक्षित किए जा रहे विद्यार्थियों के संबंध में, महाराष्ट्र स्वास्थ्य विज्ञान विश्वविद्यालय, नासिक, महाराष्ट्र द्वारा जून, 2012 में अथवा उसके पश्चात् प्रदान की गई ।)
''डाक्टर ऑफ मेडीसिन/मास्टर ऑफ एम डी/एम एस (नेत्र रोग विज्ञान)
सर्जरी (नेत्र रोग विज्ञान)'' (यह एक मान्यताप्राप्त चिकित्सा अर्हता होगी यदि यह डॉ॰ वसंतराव पवार मेडीकल कॉलेज एंंव अनुसंधान केेंद्र, नासिक, महाराष्ट्र, में प्रशिक्षित किए जा रहे विद्यार्थियों के संबंध में, महाराष्ट्र स्वास्थ्य विज्ञान विश्वविद्यालय, नासिक, महाराष्ट्र द्वारा जून, 2012 में अथवा उसके पश्चात् प्रदान की गई हो ।)
''मास्टर ऑफ सर्जरी (जनरल मेडीसिन)'' एम एस (जनरल सर्जरी)
(यह एक मान्यताप्राप्त चिकित्सा अर्हता होगी यदि यह डॉ॰ वसंतराव पवार मेडीकल कॉलेज एंंव अनुसंधान केेंद्र, नासिक, महाराष्ट्र, में प्रशिक्षित किए जा रहे विद्यार्थियों के संबंध में, महाराष्ट्र स्वास्थ्य विज्ञान विश्वविद्यालय, नासिक, महाराष्ट्र द्वारा जून, 2012 में अथवा उसके पश्चात् प्रदान की गई हो ।)[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : जुलाई 6, 2013/आषाढ़ 15, 1935 3199 सभी के संबंध में नोटः 1. किसी स्नात्कोत्तर पाठ््यक्रम के लिए प्रदत्त ऐसी मान्यता 5 वर्षों की अधिकतम अवधि के लिए होगी, जिसके उपरांत इसका नवीनीकरण करवाना पड़ेगा।
2. उप-खंड 4 में यथापेक्षित मान्यता के समयपूर्वक नवीनीकरण संबंधी अपेक्षा में असफल रहने का अनिवार्यतः परिणाम संबंधित स्नात्कोत्तर पाठ्यक्रम में दाखिला बंद करने के रूप में निकलेगा।
[सं. यू. 12012/79/2012-एमई(पी-II)]
अनीता त्रिपाठी, अवर सचिव
MINISTRY OF HEALTH AND FAMILY WELFARE
(Department of Health and Family Welfare)
New Delhi, the 9th November, 2012
S.O.1232.— In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (2) of the Section 11 of the Indian Medical Council Act, 1956 (102 of 1956), the Central Government, after consulting the Medical Council of India, hereby makes the following further amendments in the First Schedule to the said Act, due to change of nomenclature of the qualification namely:—
In the said Schedule—
(a) against "Amrita Vishwa Vidyapeetham University, Kochi, Kerala" under the heading 'Recognised Medical Qualification ' [hereinafter referred to as column (2)], after the last entry and entry relating thereto under the heading 'Abbreviation for Registration' [hereinafter referred to as column (3)], the following shall be inserted, namely:—
(2)
(3)
"Master of Surgery(General Surgery)" MS (General Surgery)
(This shall be a recognised medical qualification when granted by Amrita Vishwa Vidyapeetham University, Kochi, Kerala in respect of the students being trained at Amrita School of Medicine, AIMS, Kochi on or after May, 2012.
"Diploma in Otology & Laryngology" DLO
(This shall be a recognised medical qualification when granted by Amrita Vishwa Vidyapeetham University, Kochi, Kerala in respect of the students being trained at Amrita School of Medicine, AIMS, Kochi on or after May, 2012.
"Diploma in Orthopaedics" D. Ortho.
(This shall be a recognised medical qualification when granted by Amrita Vishwa Vidyapeetham University, Kochi, Kerala in respect of the students being trained at Amrita School of Medicine, AIMS, Kochi on or after May, 2012.
"Diploma in Gynaecology & Obstetrics" DGO
(This shall be a recognised medical qualification when granted by Amrita Vishwa Vidyapeetham University, Kochi, Kerala in respect of the students being trained at Amrita School of Medicine, AIMS, Kochi on or after May, 2012.
"Diploma in Medical Radio Therapy" DMRT
(This shall be a recognised medical qualification when granted by Amrita VishwaVidyapeetham University, Kochi, Kerala in respect of the students being trained at Amrita School of Medicine, AIMS, Kochi on or after May, 2012.
3200 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 6, 2013/ASHADHA 15, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)](2) (3)
"Diploma in Dermatology, Venreology & Leprosy" DDVL
(This shall be a recognised medical qualification when granted by Amrita Vishwa Vidyapeetham University, Kochi, Kerala in respect of the students being trained at Amrita School of Medicine, AIMS, Kochi on or after May, 2012.
"Diploma in Child Health" DCH
(This shall be a recognised medical qualification when granted by Amrita Vishwa Vidyapeetham University, Kochi, Kerala in respect of the students being trained at Amrita School of Medicine, AIMS, Kochi on or after May, 2012.
"Doctor of Medicine (Radio Diagnosis)" MD (Radio Diagnosis)
(This shall be a recognised medical qualification when granted by Amrita Vishwa Vidyapeetham University, Kochi, Kerala in respect of the students being trained at Amrita School of Medicine, AIMS, Kochi on or after May, 2012.
"Diploma in Medical Radio Diagnosis" DMRD
(This shall be a recognised medical qualification when granted by Amrita Vishwa Vidyapeetham University, Kochi, Kerala in respect of the students being trained at Amrita School of Medicine, AIMS, Kochi on or after May, 2012.
"Diploma in Opthalmology" DO
(This shall be a recognised medical qualification when granted by Amrita Vishwa Vidyapeetham University, Kochi, Kerala in respect of the students being trained at Amrita School of Medicine, AIMS, Kochi on or after May, 2012.
(b) against "Calicut University, Kerala" under the heading 'Recognised Medical Qualification' [hereinafter referred to as column (2)], after the last entry and entry relating thereto under the heading 'Abbreviation for Registration' [hereinafter referred to as column (3)], the following shall be inserted, namely:—
"Doctor of Medicine (Pathology)" MD (Pathology)
(This shall be a recognised medical qualification when granted by Calicut University, Kerala in respect of the students being trained at Govt. Medical College, Thrissur, Kerala on or after June, 2012.
(c) against "Rajiv Gandhi University of Health Sciences, Bangalore" under the heading 'Recognised Medical Qualification' [hereinater referred to as column (2)], after the last entry and entry relating thereto under the heading 'Abbreviation for Registration' [hereinafter referred to as column (3)], the following shall be insterted, namely:—
"Doctors of Medicine/Master of Surgery MD/MS (OBG)
(Obstetrics & Gynaecology)"
(This shall be a recognised medical qualification when granted by Rajiv Gandhi University of Health Sciences, Bangalore in respect of students being trained at Navodaya Medical College Raichur, Karnataka on or after May, 2012.
"Doctor of Medicine(Pharmacology)" MD (Pharmacology)
(This shall be a recognised medical qualification when granted by Rajiv Gandhi University of Health Sciences, Bangalore in respect of students being trained at Father Muller Medical College Mangalore, Karnataka on or after May, 2012.
[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : जुलाई 6, 2013/आषाढ़ 15, 1935 3201d) against "Maharasthtra University of Health Sciences, Nashik, Maharashtra" under the heading 'Recognised Medical Qualification' [hereinater referred to as column (2)], after the last entry and entry relating thereto under the heading 'Abbreviation for Registration' [hereinafter referred to as column (3)], the following shall be insterted, namely:—
(2) (3)
"Doctor of Medicine(Dermatology, Venerology MD (DVL)
& Leprosy)"
(This shall be a recognised medical qualification when granted by Maharashtra University of Health Sciences, Nashik, Maharashtra in respect of students being trained at Dr. Vasantarao Pawar Medical College & Research Centre, Nashik, Maharashtra on or after May, 2012.
"Diploma in Anaesthesia" DA
(This shall be a recognised medical qualification when granted by Maharashtra University of Health Sciences, Nashik, Maharashtra in respect of students being trained at Dr. Vasantarao Pawar Medical College & Research Centre, Nashik, Maharashtra on or after June, 2012.
"Doctor of Medicine (Radio Diagnosis/Radiology)" MD (Radio Diagnosis/Radiology)
(This shall be a recognised medical qualification when granted by Maharashtra University of Health Sciences, Nashik, Maharashtra in respect of students being trained at Dr. Vasantarao Pawar Medical College & Research Centre, Nashik, Maharashtra on or after June, 2012.
"Doctor of Medicine(General Medicine)" MD(General Medicine)
(This shall be a recognised medical qualification when granted by Maharashtra University of Health Sciences, Nashik, Maharashtra in respect of students being trained at Dr. Vasantarao Pawar Medical College & Research Centre, Nashik, Maharashtra on or after June, 2012.
"Master of Surgery(Oto-Rhino-Laryngology)" MS(ENT)
(This shall be a recognised medical qualification when granted by Maharashtra University of Health Sciences, Nashik, Maharashtra in respect of students being trained at Dr. Vasantarao Pawar Medical College & Research Centre, Nashik, Maharashtra on or after June, 2012.
"Master of Surgery(Orthopaedics)" MS(Orthopadedics)
(This shall be a recognised medical qualification when granted by Maharashtra University of Health Sciences, Nashik, Maharashtra in respect of students being trained at Dr. Vasantarao Pawar Medical College & Research Centre, Nashik, Maharashtra on or after June, 2012.
"Doctor of Medicine/Master of Surgery MD/MS (Ophthalmology)
(Ophthalmology)"
(This shall be a recognised medical qualification when granted by Maharashtra University of Health Sciences, Nashik, Maharashtra in respect of students being trained at Dr. Vasantarao Pawar Medical College & Research Centre, Nashik, Maharashtra on or after June, 2012.
"Master of Surgery(General Surgery)" MS (General Surgery)
(This shall be a recognised medical qualification when granted by Maharashtra University of Health Sciences, Nashik, Maharashtra in3202 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 6, 2013/ASHADHA 15, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] respect of students being trained at Dr. Vasantarao Pawar Medical College & Research Centre, Nashik, Maharashtra on or after June, 2012.
Note to all: 1. The recognition so granted to a Postgraduate Course shall be for a maximum period of 5 years, upon which it shall have to be renewed.
2. Failure to seek timely renewal of recognition as required in sub-clause-4 shall invariably result in stoppage of admissions to the concerned Postgraduate Course.
[No. U. 12012/79/2012-ME(P-II)]
ANITA TRIPATHI, Under Secy.
नई दिल्ली, 19 नवम्बर, 2012
का.आ.1233 — .—केन्द्रीय सरकार भारतीय चिकित्सा परिषद अधिनियम, 1956 (1956 का 102) की धारा 11 की उप धारा (2) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए, भारतीय चिकित्सा परिषद से परामर्श करने के बाद, एतदद्वारा अर्हता के नाम में बदलाव के कारण उक्त अधिनियम की प्रथम अनुसूची में निम्नलिखित और संशोधन करती है, अर्थात्ः
उक्त अनुसूची में —
(क) ''राजस्थान स्वास्थ्य विज्ञान विश्वविद्यालय, जयपुर'' के सामने शीर्षक 'मान्यताप्राप्त चिकित्सा अर्हता' [अब के बाद स्तंभ (2) के रूप में संदर्भित]के अंतर्गत अंतिम प्रविष्टि और उससे संबंधित प्रविष्टि के बाद शीर्षक 'पंजीकरण के लिए संक्षेपण' [अब के बाद स्तभ (3) के रूप में संदर्भित] के अंतर्गत निम्नलिखित अंतःस्थापित किया जाएगा, अर्थात््ः—
(2) (3)
''डॉक्टर ऑफ मेडीसिन (चर्म रोग, यौन रोग एवं कुष्ठ रोग)'' एम डी (डी वी एल)
(यह एक मान्यताप्राप्त चिकित्सा अर्हता होगी यदि यह राजकीय मेडीकल कॉलेज, कोटा, राजस्थान में प्रशिक्षित किए जा रहे विद्यार्थियों के संबंध में राजस्थान स्वास्थ्य विज्ञान विश्वविद्यालय , जयपुर द्वारा जून, 2012 में अथवा उसके पश्चात प्रदान की गई हो)।
(ख) ''श्री बालाजी विद्यापीठ विश्वविद्यालय पुडुचेरी'' के सामने शीर्षक 'मान्यताप्राप्त चिकित्सा अर्हता' [अब के बाद स्तंभ (2) के रूप में संदर्भित] के अंतर्गत अंतिम प्रविष्टि और उससे संबंधित प्रविष्टि के बाद शीर्षक 'पंजीकरण के लिए संक्षेपण' [अब के बाद स्तभ (3) के रूप में संदर्भित] के अंतर्गत निम्नलिखित अंतःस्थापित किया जाएगा, अर्थात्ः—
(2) (3)
''डॉक्टर ऑफ मेडीसिन (पैथोलॉजी)'' एमडी (पैथोलॉजी)
(यह एक मान्यताप्राप्त चिकित्सा अर्हता होगी यदि यह महात्मा गांधी मेडीकल कॉलेज एवं अनुसंधान संस्थान, पोंडीचेरी में प्रशिक्षित किए जा रहे विद्यार्थियों के संबंध में श्री बालाजी विद्यापीठ विश्वविद्यालय , पुडुचेरी द्वारा अप्रैल, 2012 में अथवा उसके पश्चात प्रदान की गई हो)।
(ग) ''द तमिलनाडु डॉ एम जी आर मेडीकल विश्वविद्यालय , चेन्नई'' के सामने शीर्षक 'मान्यताप्राप्त चिकित्सा अर्हता' [अब के बाद स्तंभ (2) के रूप में संदर्भित] के अंतर्गत अंतिम प्रविष्टि और उससे संबंधित प्रविष्टि के बाद शीर्षक' पंजीकरण के लिए संक्षेपण' [अब के बाद स्तभ (3) के रूप में संदर्भित] के अंतर्गत निम्नलिखित अंतःस्थापित किया जाएगा, अर्थात्ः—
(2) (3)
मास्टर ऑफ सर्जरी (अस्थि रोग विज्ञान) एम एस (अस्थि रोग विज्ञान)
(यह एक मान्यता प्राप्त चिकित्सा अर्हता होगी यदि यहां स्टेंली मेडीकल कॉलेज, चेन्नई में प्रशिक्षित किए जा रहे विद्यार्थियों के संबंध में तमिलनाडु डॉ एम जी आर मेडीकल विश्वविद्यालय, चेन्नई द्वारा अप्रैल, 2012 अथवा उसके पश्चात प्रदान की गई )।
''डॉक्टर ऑफ मेडीसिन (फिजियोलॉजी)'' एम डी (फिजियोलॉजी)
(यह एक मान्यताप्राप्त चिकित्सा अर्हता होगी यदि यह तिरुनेल्वेली मेडीकल कॉलेज, तिरुनेल्वेली में प्रशिक्षित किए जा रहे विद्यार्थियों के संबंध में द तमिलनाडु डॉ एम जी आर मेडीकल विश्वविद्यालय, चेन्नई द्वारा अप्रैल, 2012 अथवा उसके पश्चात प्रदान की गई )[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : जुलाई 6, 2013/आषाढ़ 15, 1935 3203 (घ) ''स्वामी विवेकानंद सुभारती विश्वविद्यालय, मेरठ, उत्तर प्रदेश'' के सामने शीर्षक 'मान्यताप्राप्त चिकित्सा अर्हता' [अब के बाद स्तंभ (2) के रूप में संदर्भित] के अंतर्गत अंतिम प्रविष्टि और उससे संबंधित प्रविष्टि के बाद शीर्षक 'पंजीकरण के लिए संक्षेपण' [अब के बाद स्तभ(3) के रूप में संदर्भित] के अन्तर्गत निम्नलिखित अन्तःस्थापित किया जाएगा, अर्थात्ः-
(2) (3)
''मास्टर ऑफ सर्जरी (जनरल सर्जरी)'' एम एस (जनरल सर्जरी)
(यह एक मान्यताप्राप्त चिकित्सा अर्हता होगी यदि यह सुभार्ती मेडीकल कॉलेज मेरठ, उत्तर प्रदेश में प्रशिक्षित किए जा रहे विद्यार्थियों के संबंध में, स्वामी विवेकानंद सुभार्ती विश्वविद्यालय, मेरठ, उत्तर प्रदेश द्वारा मई 2012 में अथवा उसके पश्चात् प्रदान की गई)
(ड) ''पश्चिम बंगाल स्वास्थ्य विज्ञान विश्वविद्यालय, कोलकाता'' के सामने शीर्षक 'मान्यताप्राप्त चिकित्सा अर्हता' [अब के बाद स्तंभ (2) के रूप में संदर्भित] के अंतर्गत अंतिम प्रविष्टि और उससे संबंधित प्रविष्टि के बाद शीर्षक 'पंजीकरण के लिए संक्षेपण' [अब के बाद स्तभ (3) के रूप में संदर्भित] के अन्तर्गत निम्नलिखित अन्तःस्थापित किया जाएगा, अर्थात्ः-
(2) (3)
''मास्टर ऑफ सर्जरी (नेत्र रोग विज्ञान)'' एम एस (नेत्र रोग विज्ञान)
(यह एक मान्यताप्राप्त चिकित्सा अर्हता होगी यदि यह बर्दवान मेडीकल कॉलेज बर्दवान, में प्रशिक्षित किए जा रहे विद्यार्थियों के संबंध में, पश्चिम बंगाल स्वास्थ्य विज्ञान विश्वविद्यालय, कोलकाता द्वारा मई, 2012 में अथवा उसके पश्चात प्रदान की गई)
''नेत्र रोग विज्ञान में डिप्लोमा'' डी ओ
(यह एक मान्यताप्राप्त चिकित्सा अर्हता होगी यदि यह बर्दवान मेडीकल कॉलेज बर्दवान, में प्रशिक्षित किए जा रहे विद्यार्थियों के संबंध में, पश्चिम बंगाल स्वास्थ्य विज्ञान विश्वविद्यालय, कोलकाता द्वारा वर्ष 1994 से 2006 में प्रदान की गई) ''डाक्टर ऑफ मेडीसिन (सामुदायिक मेडीसिन)'' एम डी (रेडियो निदान/रेडियोलोजी)
(यह एक मान्यताप्राप्त चिकित्सा अर्हता होगी यदि यह बर्दवान मेडीकल कॉलेज बर्दवान, में प्रशिक्षित किए जा रहे विद्यार्थियों के संबंध में, पश्चिम बंगाल स्वास्थ्य विज्ञान विश्वविद्यालय, कोलकाता द्वारा मई, 2012 में अथवा उसके पश्चात प्रदान की गई)
''डाक्टर ऑफ मेडीसिन (मनोचिकित्सा)'' एम डी (मनोचिकित्सा)
(यह एक मान्यताप्राप्त चिकित्सा अर्हता होगी यदि यह बर्दवान मेडीकल कॉलेज बर्दवान, में प्रशिक्षित किए जा रहे विद्यार्थियों के संबंध में, पश्चिम बंगाल स्वास्थ्य विज्ञान विश्वविद्यालय, कोलकाता द्वारा अप्रैल, 2012 में अथवा उसके पश्चात प्रदान की गई)
''डाक्टर ऑफ मेडीसिन (फोरेंसिक मेडीसिन)'' एम डी (फोरेंसिक मेडीसिन)
(यह एकमान्यता प्राप्त चिकित्सा अर्हता होगी यदि यह बर्दवान मेडीकल कॉलेज बर्दवान, में प्रशिक्षित किए जा रहे विद्यार्थियों के संबंध में, पश्चिम बंगाल स्वास्थ्य विज्ञान विश्वविद्यालय, कोलकाता द्वारा मई, 2012 में अथवा उसके पश्चात प्रदान की गई)
''डाक्टर ऑफ मेडीसिन (जनरल मेडीसिन)'' एम डी (जनरल मेडीसिन)
(यह एक मान्यता प्राप्त चिकित्सा अर्हता होगी यदि यह बर्दवान मेडीकल कॉलेज बर्दवान, में प्रशिक्षित किए जा रहे विद्यार्थियों के संबंध में, पश्चिम बंगाल स्वास्थ्य विज्ञान विश्वविद्यालय, कोलकाता द्वारा जून, 2012 में अथवा उसके पश्चात प्रदान की गई)3204 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 6, 2013/ASHADHA 15, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] (2) (3)
''मास्टर ऑफ सर्जरी (जनरल सर्जरी)'' एम एस (जनरल सर्जरी)
(यह एक मान्यताप्राप्त चिकित्सा अर्हता होगी यदि यह बंकुरा सम्मिलानी मेडीकल कॉलेज बंकुरा, में प्रशिक्षित किए जा रहे विद्यार्थियों के संबंध में, पश्चिम बंगाल स्वास्थ्य विज्ञान विश्वविद्यालय, कोलकाता द्वारा जून, 2012 में अथवा उसके पश्चात प्रदान की गई)
''डॉक्टर ऑफ मेडीसिन (बाल रोग विज्ञान)'' एम डी (बाल रोग विज्ञान)
(यह एक मान्यताप्राप्त चिकित्सा अर्हता होगी यदि यह बंकुरा सम्मिलानी मेडीकल कॉलेज बंकुरा, में प्रशिक्षित किए जा रहे विद्यार्थियों के संबंध में, पश्चिम बंगाल स्वास्थ्य विज्ञान विश्वविद्यालय, कोलकाता द्वारा जून, 2012 में अथवा उसके पश्चात प्रदान की गई)
''डॉक्टर ऑफ मेडीसिन (जनरल मेडीसिन)'' एम डी (जनरल मेडीसिन)
(यह एक मान्यताप्राप्त चिकित्सा अर्हता होगी यदि यह बंकुरा सम्मिलानी मेडीकल कॉलेज बंकुरा, में प्रशिक्षित किए जा रहे विद्यार्थियों के संबंध में, पश्चिम बंगाल स्वास्थ्य विज्ञान विश्वविद्यालय, कोलकाता द्वारा जून, 2012 में अथवा उसके पश्चात प्रदान की गई)
''डॉक्टर ऑफ मेडीसिन/मास्टर ऑफ सर्जरी एम डी/एम एस (ओ बी जी)
(प्रसूति एवं स्त्री रोग विज्ञान)'' (यह एक मान्यताप्राप्त चिकित्सा अर्हता होगी यदि यह बंकुरा सम्मिलानी मेडीकल कॉलेज बंकुरा, में प्रशिक्षित किए जा रहे विद्यार्थियों के संबंध में, पश्चिम बंगाल स्वास्थ्य विज्ञान विश्वविद्यालय, कोलकाता द्वारा जून, 2012 में अथवा उसके पश्चात प्रदान की गई)
''डॉक्टर ऑफ मेडीसिन (संज्ञाहरण)'' एम डी (संज्ञाहरण)
(यह एकमान्यता प्राप्त चिकित्सा अर्हता होगी यदि यह नीलरतन सरकार मेडीकल कोलकाता कॉलेज में प्रशिक्षित किए जा रहे विद्यार्थियों के संबंध में, पश्चिम बंगाल स्वास्थ्य विज्ञान विश्वविद्यालय, कोलकाता द्वारा मई, 2012 में अथवा उसके पश्चात प्रदान की गई)
सभी के सम्बंध में नोटः 1 किसी स्नात्कोतर पाठ्यक्रम के लिए प्रदत ऐसी मान्यता 5 वर्षों की अधिकतम अवधि के लिए होगी, जिसके उपरांत इसका नवीनीकरण करवाना पडेगा।
2. उप-खंड-4 में यथापेक्षित मान्यता के समयपूर्वक नवीनीकरण संबधी अपेक्षा में असफल रहने का अनिर्वायतः परिणाम संबंधित स्नात्कोतर पाठ्यक्रम में दाखिला बंद करने के रूप में निकलेगा।
[ सं॰ यू॰ 12012/78/2012-एम ई (पी-II)]
अनीता त्रिपाठी, अवर सचिव
New Delhi, the 19th November, 2012
S.O. 1233.— In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (2) of the section 11 of the Indian Medical Council Act, 1956 (102 of 1956), the Central Government, after consulting the Medical Council of India, hereby makes the following further amendments in the First Schedule to the said Act, due to change of nomenclature of the qualification namely:-
In the said Schedule-
(a) against "Rajasthan University of Health Sciences, Jaipur" under the heading 'Recognised Medical Qualification' [hereinafter referred to as column (2) ], after the last entry and entry relating thereto under the heading 'Abbreviation for Registration' [hereinafter referred to as column (3)], the following shall be inserted, namely:—
[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : जुलाई 6, 2013/आषाढ़ 15, 1935 3205(2) (3)
"Doctor of Medicine (Dermatology, Venerology MD(DVL)
& Leprosy)"
(This shall be a recognised medical qualification when granted by Rajasthan University of Health Sciences, Jaipur in respect of students being trained at Govt. Medical College, Kota, Rajasthan on or after June, 2012.)
(b) against "Sri Balaji Vidyapeeth University, Puducherry" under the heading 'Recognised Medical Qualification' [hereinafter referred to as column (2)], after the last entry and entry relating thereto under the heading 'Abbreviation for Registration' [hereinafter referred to as column (3)], the following shall be inserted, namely:-
(2) (3)
"Doctor of Medicine (Pathology)" MD(Pathology)
(This shall be a recognised medical qualification when granted by Sri Balaji Vidyapeeth University Puducherry in respect of students being trained at Mahatma Gandhi Medical College, & Research Institute, Pondicherry on or after April 2012.)
(c) against "The Tamil Nadu, Dr. MGR Medical University, Chennai" under the heading 'Recognised Medical Qualification' [hereinafter referred to as column (2)], after the last entry and entry relating thereto under the heading 'Abbreviation for Registration' [hereinafter referred to as column (3)], the following shall be inserted, namely:-
(2) (3)
"Master of Surgery (Orthopaedics)" MS(Orthopaedeics)
(This shall be a recognised medical qualification when granted by The Tamil Nadu Dr. MGR Medical University Chennai in respect of students being trained at Stanley Medical College, Chennai on or after April, 2012.)
"Doctor of Medicine (Physiology)" MD(Physiology)
(This shall be a recognised medical qualification when granted by The Tamil Nadu Dr. MGR Medical University Chennai in respect of students being trained at Tirunelveli Medical College, Tirunelveli on or after April, 2012.)
(i) against "Swami Vivekanand Subharti University, Meerut, Uttar Pradesh" under the heading 'Recognised Medical Qualification' [hereinafter referred to as column (2)], after the last entry and entry relating thereto under the heading 'Abbreviation for Registration' [hereinafter referred to as column (3)], the following shall be inserted, namely:-
(2) (3)
"Master of Surgery (General Surgery)" MS(General Surgery)
(This shall be a recognised medical qualification when granted by Swami Vivekanand Subharti University Meerut, Uttar Pradesh in respect of students being trained at Subharti Medical College, Meerut, Uttar Pradesh on or after May, 2012.)
(j) against "West Bengal University, of Health Sciences, Kolkata" under the heading 'Recognised Medical Qualification' [hereinafter referred to as column (2)], after the last entry and entry relating thereto under the heading 'Abbreviation for Registration' [hereinafter referred to as column (3)], the following shall be inserted, namely:-
(2) (3)
"Master of Surgery (Ophthalmology)" MS(Ophthalmology)
(This shall be a recognised medical qualification when granted by West Bengal University of Health Sciences, Kolkata in respect of students being trained at Burdwan Medical College, Burdwan on or after May, 2012.)
"Diploma in Ophthalmology" DO
(This shall be a recognised medical qualification when granted by West Bengal University of Health Sciences, Kolkata in respect of students being trained at Burdwan Medical College, Burdwan from3206 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 6, 2013/ASHADHA 15, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] (2) (3)
1994 to 2006.)
"Doctor of Medicine (Community Medicine)" MD(Community Medicine)
(This shall be a recognised medical qualification when granted by West Bengal University of Health Sciences, Kolkata in respect of students being trained at Burdwan Medical College, Burdwan on or after May, 2012.)
"Doctor of Medicine (Psychiatry)" MD(Psychiatry)
(This shall be a recognised medical qualification when granted by West Bengal University of Health Sciences, Kolkata in respect of students being trained at Burdwan Medical College, Burdwan on or after April, 2012.)
"Doctor of Medicine (Forensic Medicine)" MD(Forensic Medicine)
(This shall be a recognised medical qualification when granted by West Bengal University of Health Sciences, Kolkata in respect of students being trained at Burdwan Medical College, Burdwan on or after May, 2012.)
"Doctor of Medicine (General Medicine)" MD(General Medicine)
(This shall be a recognised medical qualification when granted by West Bengal University of Health Sciences, Kolkata in respect of students being trained at Burdwan Medical College, Burdwan on or after June, 2012.)
"Master of Surgery (General Surgery)" MS(General Surgery)
(This shall be a recognised medical qualification when granted by West Bengal University of Health Sciences, Kolkata in respect of students being trained at Bankura Sammilani Medical College, Bankura on or after June, 2012.)
"Doctor of Medicine (Paediatrics)" MD(Paediatrics)
(This shall be a recognised medical qualification when granted by West Bengal University of Health Sciences, Kolkata in respect of students being trained at Bankura Sammilani Medical College, Bankura Sammilani on or after June, 2012.)
"Doctor of Medicine (General Medicine)" MD(General Medicine)
(This shall be a recognised medical qualification when granted by West Bengal University of Health Sciences, Kolkata in respect of students being trained at Bankura Sammilani Medical College, Bankura on or after June, 2012.)
"Doctor of Medicine/Master of Surgery MD/MS(OBG)
(Obstetrics & Gynaecology)" (This shall be a recognised medical qualification when granted by West Bengal University of Health Sciences, Kolkata in respect of students being trained at Bankura Sammilani Medical College, Bankura on or after June, 2012.)
"Doctor of Medicine (Anaesthesia)" MD(Anaesthesia)
(This shall be a recognised medical qualification when granted by West Bengal University of Health Sciences, Kolkata in respect of students being trained at Nilratan Sircar Medical College, Kolkata on or after May, 2012.)[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : जुलाई 6, 2013/आषाढ़ 15, 1935 3207 Note to all: 1. The recognition so granted to a Postgraduate Course shall be for a maximum period of 5 years, upon which it shall have to be renewed.
2. Failure to seek timely renewal of recognition as required in sub-clause-4 shall invariably result in stoppage of admissions to the concerned Postgraduate Course.
[No. U.12012/78/2012-ME(P-II)]
ANITA TRIPATHI, Under Secy.
नई दिल्ली, 2 जनवरी, 2013
का॰आ॰ 1234. —केन्द्रीय सरकार, भारतीय चिकित्सा परिषद अधिनियम, 1956 (1956 का 102) की धारा 11 की उप-धारा (2) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए भारतीय चिकित्सा परिषद से परामर्श करने के बाद एतद्द्वारा उक्त अधिनियम की पहली अनुसूची में निम्नलिखित और संशोधन करती है नामतः
उक्त अनुसूची में-
(क) ''महाऋषि मार्कंडेश्वर विश्वविद्यालय, मूल्लाना-अम्बाला, हरियाणा'' के सामने 'मान्यताप्राप्त चिकित्सा अर्हता' [इसके आगे कॉलम (2) के रूप में संदर्भित] के अंतर्गत शीर्षक 'पंजीकरण के लिए संपेक्षण' [इसके आगे कॉलम (3) के रूप में संदर्भित] के अंतर्गत अंतिम प्रविष्टि और इससे संबंधित प्रविष्टि के बाद निम्नलिखित अन्तःस्थापित किया जाएगा, अर्थात्ः-
(2) (3)
''डॉक्टर ऑफ मेडीसिन/मास्टर ऑफ एमडी/एम एस (एनाटॉमी)
सर्जरी (एनाटॉमी)''
(यह एक मान्यताप्राप्त चिकित्सा अर्हता होगी जब यह एम॰एम॰ आयुवज्ञान और अनुसंधान विभाग, अम्बाला में प्रशिक्षित किए जा रहे विद्यार्थियों के संबंध में, महाऋषि मार्कंडेश्वर विश्वविद्यालय, मूल्लाना अम्बाला, हरियाणा द्वारा जून, 2012 में अथवा उसके पश्चात् प्रदान की गई हो।)
''डॉक्टर ऑफ मेडीसिन (रेस्पिरेट्रि एमडी (रेस्पिरेट्रि मेडीसिन)
मेडीसिन)''
(यह एक मान्यताप्राप्त चिकित्सा अर्हता होगी जब यह एम॰एम॰ आयुवज्ञान और अनुसंधान विभाग, अम्बाला में प्रशिक्षित किए जा रहे विद्यार्थियों के संबंध में, महाऋषि मार्कंडेश्वर विश्वविद्यालय, मूल्लाना अम्बाला, हरियाणा द्वारा जून, 2012 में अथवा उसके पश्चात् प्रदान की गई हो।)
''डॉक्टर ऑफ मेडीसिन
एमडी (एनेस्थिशिया)
(एनेस्थिशिया)''
(यह एक मान्यताप्राप्त चिकित्सा अर्हता होगी जब यह एम॰एम॰ आयुवज्ञान और अनुसंधान विभाग, अम्बाला में प्रशिक्षित किए जा रहे विद्यार्थियों के संबंध में, महाऋषि मार्कंडेश्वर विश्वविद्यालय, मूल्लाना अम्बाला, हरियाणा द्वारा जून, 2012 में अथवा उसके पश्चात् प्रदान की गई हो।)
''डीप्लोमा ईन एनेस्थिशिया'' डी ए
(यह एक मान्यताप्राप्त चिकित्सा अर्हता होगी जब यह एम॰एम॰ आयुवज्ञान और अनुसंधान विभाग, अम्बाला में प्रशिक्षित किए जा रहे विद्यार्थियों के संबंध में, महाऋषि मार्कंडेश्वर विश्वविद्यालय, मूल्लाना अम्बाला, हरियाणा द्वारा जून, 2012 में अथवा उसके पश्चात् प्रदान की गई हो।)
''मास्टर ऑफ सर्जरी (प्रसूति और स्त्री एम एस (ओ बी जी)
रोग)''
(यह एक मान्यताप्राप्त चिकित्सा अर्हता होगी जब यह एम॰एम॰ आयुवज्ञान और अनुसंधान विभाग, अम्बाला में प्रशिक्षित किए जा रहे विद्यार्थियों के संबंध में, महाऋषि मार्कंडेश्वर विश्वविद्यालय, मूल्लाना अम्बाला, हरियाणा द्वारा जून, 2012 में अथवा उसके पश्चात् प्रदान की गई हो।)3208 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 6, 2013/ASHADHA 15, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] (2) (3)
''मास्टर ऑफ सर्जरी (सामान्य सर्जरी)'' एम एस (सामान्य सर्जरी)
(यह एक मान्यताप्राप्त चिकित्सा अर्हता होगी जब यह एम॰एम॰ आयुवज्ञान और अनुसंधान विभाग, अम्बाला में प्रशिक्षित किए जा रहे विद्यार्थियों के संबंध में, महाऋषि मार्कंडेश्वर विश्वविद्यालय, मूल्लाना अम्बाला, हरियाणा द्वारा जून, 2012 में अथवा उसके पश्चात् प्रदान की गई हो।)
''डॉक्टर ऑफ मेडीसिन/फर्माकॉलोजी'' एम डी (फर्माकॉलोजी)
(यह एक मान्यताप्राप्त चिकित्सा अर्हता होगी जब यह एम॰एम॰ आयुवज्ञान और अनुसंधान विभाग, अम्बाला में प्रशिक्षित किए जा रहे विद्यार्थियों के संबंध में, महाऋषि मार्कंडेश्वर विश्वविद्यालय, मूल्लाना अम्बाला, हरियाणा द्वारा जून, 2012 में अथवा उसके पश्चात् प्रदान की गई हो।)
''मास्टर ऑफ सर्जरी (ऑर्थोपेडीक्स)'' एम एस (ऑर्थोपेडीक्स)
(यह एक मान्यताप्राप्त चिकित्सा अर्हता होगी जब यह एम॰एम॰ आयुवज्ञान और अनुसंधान विभाग, अम्बाला में प्रशिक्षित किए जा रहे विद्यार्थियों के संबंध में, महाऋषि मार्कंडेश्वर विश्वविद्यालय, मूल्लाना अम्बाला, हरियाणा द्वारा जून, 2012 में अथवा उसके पश्चात् प्रदान की गई हो।)
''डीप्लोमा ईन ऑर्थोपेडीक्स'' डी॰ ऑर्थो॰
(यह एक मान्यताप्राप्त चिकित्सा अर्हता होगी जब यह एम॰एम॰ आयुवज्ञान और अनुसंधान विभाग, अम्बाला में प्रशिक्षित किए जा रहे विद्यार्थियों के संबंध में, महाऋषि मार्कंडेश्वर विश्वविद्यालय, मूल्लाना अम्बाला, हरियाणा द्वारा अप्रैल, 2011 में अथवा उसके पश्चात् प्रदान की गई हो।)
''डॉक्टर ऑफ मेडीसिन(बाल एम डी (बाल रोग विज्ञान)
रोग विज्ञान)''
(यह एक मान्यताप्राप्त चिकित्सा अर्हता होगी जब यह एम॰एम॰ आयुवज्ञान और अनुसंधान विभाग, अम्बाला में प्रशिक्षित किए जा रहे विद्यार्थियों के संबंध में, महाऋषि मार्कंडेश्वर विश्वविद्यालय, मूल्लाना अम्बाला, हरियाणा द्वारा अप्रैल, 2011 में अथवा उसके पश्चात् प्रदान की गई हो।)
''डॉक्टर ऑफ मेडीसिन
एमडी (माईक्रोबायोलॉजी)
(माईक्रोबायोलॉजी)''
(यह एक मान्यताप्राप्त चिकित्सा अर्हता होगी जब यह एम॰एम॰ आयुवज्ञान और अनुसंधान विभाग, अम्बाला में प्रशिक्षित किए जा रहे विद्यार्थियों के संबंध में, महाऋषि मार्कंडेश्वर विश्वविद्यालय, मूल्लाना अम्बाला, हरियाणा द्वारा जून, 2012 में अथवा उसके पश्चात् प्रदान की गई हो।)
''डॉक्टर ऑफ मेडीसिन (जैव रसायन)'' एम डी (जैव रसायन)
(यह एक मान्यताप्राप्त चिकित्सा अर्हता होगी जब यह एम॰एम॰ आयुवज्ञान और अनुसंधान विभाग, अम्बाला में प्रशिक्षित किए जा रहे विद्यार्थियों के संबंध में, महाऋषि मार्कंडेश्वर विश्वविद्यालय, मूल्लाना अम्बाला, हरियाणा द्वारा जून, 2012 में अथवा उसके पश्चात् प्रदान की गई हो।)
''डॉक्टर ऑफ मेडीसिन
एम डी (फॉरेंसिक मेडीसिन)
(फॉरेंसिक मेडीसिन)''
(यह एक मान्यताप्राप्त चिकित्सा अर्हता होगी जब यह एम॰एम॰ आयुवज्ञान और अनुसंधान विभाग, अम्बाला में प्रशिक्षित किए जा रहे विद्यार्थियों के संबंध में, महाऋषि मार्कंडेश्वर विश्वविद्यालय, मूल्लाना अम्बाला, हरियाणा द्वारा जून, 2012 में अथवा उसके पश्चात् प्रदान की गई हो।)[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : जुलाई 6, 2013/आषाढ़ 15, 1935 3209 (2) (3)
''डॉक्टर ऑफ मेडीसिन
एम डी (समुदाय मेडीसिन)
(समुदाय मेडीसिन)''
(यह एक मान्यताप्राप्त चिकित्सा अर्हता होगी जब यह एम॰एम॰ आयुवज्ञान और अनुसंधान विभाग, अम्बाला में प्रशिक्षित किए जा रहे विद्यार्थियों के संबंध में, महाऋषि मार्कंडेश्वर विश्वविद्यालय, मूल्लाना अम्बाला, हरियाणा द्वारा जून, 2012 में अथवा उसके पश्चात् प्रदान की गई हो।)
''डॉक्टर ऑफ मेडीसिन
एमडी (रेडियोलॉजी/रेडियो निदान)''
(रेडियोलॉजी/रेडियो निदान)'' (यह एक मान्यताप्राप्त चिकित्सा अर्हता होगी जब यह एम॰एम॰ आयुवज्ञान और अनुसंधान विभाग, अम्बाला में प्रशिक्षित किए जा रहे विद्यार्थियों के संबंध में, महाऋषि मार्कंडेश्वर विश्वविद्यालय, मूल्लाना अम्बाला, हरियाणा द्वारा जून, 2012 में अथवा उसके पश्चात् प्रदान की गई हो।)
सभी के लिए टिप्पणीः 1. स्नातकोत्तर पाठ्यक्रम के लिए स्वीकृति 5 वर्ष की अधिकतम अवधि के लिए होगी, जिसके बाद इसकी पुनरीक्षा की जाएगी।
2. उप-धारा 4 में अपेक्षित अनुसार मान्यता को समय पर नवीकरण नहीं कराने के फलस्वरूप संबंधित स्नातकोत्तर पाठ्यक्रमों में निरपवाद रूप से दाखिला बन्द हो जाएगा।
[सं॰ यू॰ 12012/86/2012-एमई(पी-II)]
अनिता त्रिपाठी, अवर सचिव
New Delhi, the 2nd January, 2013
S.O. 1234.—In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section(2) of the section 11 of the Indian Medical Council Act, 1956 (102 of 1956), the Central Government, after consulting the Medical Council of India, hereby makes the following further amendments in the First Schedule to the said Act, due to change of nomenclature of the qualification namely:—
In the said Schedule—
(a) against "Maharishi Markandeshwar University, Mullana-Ambala, Haryana" under heading 'Recognised Medical Qualification' [hereinafter referred to as column (2)], after the last entry and entry relating thereto under the heading 'Abbreviation for Registration' [hereinafter referred to as column (3)], the following shall be inserted, namely;-—
(2) (3)
"Doctor of Medicine/Master of Surgery (Anatomy)" MD/MS (Anatomy)
(This shall be a recognised medical qualification when granted by Maharishi Markandeshwar University, Mullana-Ambala, Haryana in respect of students being trained at M.M. Institute of Medical Sciences & Research, Ambala on or after June, 2012.) "Doctor of Medicine (Respiratory Medicine)" MD (Respiratory Medicine)"
(This shall be a recognised medical qualification when granted by Maharishi Markandeshwar University, Mullana-Ambala, Haryana in respect of students being trained at M.M. Institute of Medical Sciences & Research, Ambala on or after June, 2012.) "Doctor of Medicine (Anaesthesia)" MD (Anaesthesia)
(This shall be a recognised medical qualification when granted by Maharishi Markandeshwar University, Mullana-Ambala, Haryana in respect of students being trained at M.M. Institute of Medical Sciences & Research, Ambala on or after June, 2012.) "Diploma in Anaesthesia" DA
(This shall be a recognised medical qualification when granted by Maharishi Markandeshwar University, Mullana-Ambala, Haryana in respect of students being trained at M.M. Institute of Medical Sciences & Research, Ambala on or after June, 2012.)3210 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 6, 2013/ASHADHA 15, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] (2) (3)
"Master of Surgery (Obstatrics & Gynaecology)" MS (OBG)
(This shall be a recognised medical qualification when granted by Maharishi Markandeshwar University, Mullana-Ambala, Haryana in respect of students being trained at M.M. Institute of Medical Sciences & Research, Ambala on or after June, 2012.)
"Master of Surgery (General Surgery)" MS (General Surgery)
(This shall be a recognised medical qualification when granted by Maharishi Markandeshwar University, Mullana-Ambala, Haryana in respect of students being trained at M.M. Institute of Medical Sciences & Research, Ambala on or after June, 2012.)
"Doctor of Medicine (Pharmacology)" MD (Pharmacology)
(This shall be a recognised medical qualification when granted by Maharishi Markandeshwar University, Mullana-Ambala, Haryana in respect of students being trained at M.M. Institute of Medical Sciences & Research, Ambala on or after June, 2012.)
"Master of Surgery (Orthopaedics)" MS (Orthopaedics)
(This shall be a recognised medical qualification when granted by Maharishi Markandeshwar University, Mullana-Ambala, Haryana in respect of students being trained at M.M. Institute of Medical Sciences & Research, Ambala on or after June, 2012.)
"Diploma in (Orthopaedics)" D. Ortho.
(This shall be a recognised medical qualification when granted by Maharishi Markandeshwar University, Mullana-Ambala, Haryana in respect of students being trained at M.M. Institute of Medical Sciences & Research, Ambala on or after April, 2011.)
"Doctor of Medicine (Paediatrics)" MD (Paediatrics)
(This shall be a recognised medical qualification when granted by Maharishi Markandeshwar University, Mullana-Ambala, Haryana in respect of students being trained at M.M. Institute of Medical Sciences & Research, Ambala on or after April, 2011.)
"Doctor of Medicine (Microbiology)" MD (Microbiology)
(This shall be a recognised medical qualification when granted by Maharishi Markandeshwar University, Mullana-Ambala, Haryana in respect of students being trained at M.M. Institute of Medical Sciences & Research, Ambala on or after June, 2012.)
"Doctor of Medicine (Biochemistry)" MD (Biochemistry)
(This shall be a recognised medical qualification when granted by Maharishi Markandeshwar University, Mullana-Ambala, Haryana in respect of students being trained at M.M. Institute of Medical Sciences & Research, Ambala on or after June, 2012.)
"Doctor of Medicine (Forensic Medicine)" MD (Forensic Medicine)
(This shall be a recognised medical qualification when granted by Maharishi Markandeshwar University, Mullana-Ambala, Haryana in respect of students being trained at M.M. Institute of Medical Sciences & Research, Ambala on or after June, 2012.)[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : जुलाई 6, 2013/आषाढ़ 15, 1935 3211 (2) (3)
"Doctor of Medicine (Community Medicine)" MD (Community Medicine)
(This shall be a recognised medical qualification when granted by Maharishi Markandeshwar University, Mullana-Ambala, Haryana in respect of students being trained at M.M. Institute of Medical Sciences & Research, Ambala on or after June, 2012.) "Doctor of Medicine (Radiology/Radiodiagnosis)" MD (Radiology/Radiodiagnosis)
(This shall be a recognised medical qualification when granted by Maharishi Markandeshwar University, Mullana-Ambala, Haryana in respect of students being trained at M.M. Institute of Medical Sciences & Research, Ambala on or after June, 2012.) Note to all: 1. The recognition so granted to a Postgraduate Course shall be for a maximum period of 5 years, upon which it shall have to be renewed.
2. Failure to seek timely renewal of recognition as required in sub-clause-4 shall invariably result in stoppage of admissions to the concerned Postgraduate Course.
[No.U.12012/86/2012-ME(P-II)]
ANITA TRIPATHI, Under Secy.
नई दिल्ली, 23 जनवरी, 2013
का॰आ॰ 1235. —भारतीय चिकित्सा परिषद अधिनियम, 1956 (1956 का 102) की धारा 11 की उप-धारा (2) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए केन्द्रीय सरकार, भारतीय चिकित्सा परिषद से परामर्श करके एतदद्वारा उक्त अधिनियम की प्रथम अनुसूची में निम्नलिखित और संशोधन करती हैं नामतः
''महाराष्ट्र स्वास्थ्य विज्ञान विश्वविद्यालय , नासिक के बाद और मान्यताप्राप्त चिकित्सा अर्हता'' शीर्षक [इसके बाद कालम (2) में यथा संदर्भित] के अंतर्गत अन्तिम प्रविष्टि'' के सामनेे ''पंजीकरण के लिए संक्षिप्त रूप'' [इसके बाद कालम (3) में यथा संदर्भित] शीर्षक के अंतर्गत उससे संबंधित प्रविष्टि में निम्नलिखित को अंतर्विष्ट किया जाएगा, नामतः
(2) (3)
''डॉक्टर ऑफ मेडीसिन (माईक्रोबायोलॉजी)'' एम॰डी॰ (माईक्रोबायोलॉजी)
(यह जून 2012 में अथवा उसके बाद महाराष्ट्र आयुर्विज्ञान एवं अनुसंधान संस्थान, लातूर, महाराष्ट्र में प्रशिक्षित किए जा रहे विद्यार्थियाें के संबंध में महाराष्ट्र स्वास्थ्य विज्ञान विश्वविद्यालय , नासिक द्वारा स्वीकृत किए जाने पर मान्यताप्राप्त चिकित्सा अहर्ता होगी)।
सभी के संबंध में नोटः 1. किसी स्नात्कोतर पाठ्यक्रम के लिए प्रदत ऐसी मान्यता 5 वर्षों की अधिकतम अवधि के लिए होगी, जिसके उपरांत इसका नवीनीकरण करवाना पडेगा।
2. उप-खंड 4 में यथापेक्षित मान्यता के समयपूर्वक नवीनीकरण संबंधी अपेक्षा में अफसल रहने का अनिवार्यतः परिणाम संबंध्ि ात स्नात्कोतर पाठ्यक्रम में दाखिला बंद करने के रूप में निकलेगा।
[सं॰ यू॰ 12012/4/2013-एमई (पी-II)]
अनीता त्रिपाठी, अवर सचिव
New Delhi, the 23rd January, 2013
S.O. 1235.—In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section(2) of the section 11 of the Indian Medical Council Act, 1956 (102 of 1956), the Central Government, after consulting the Medical Council of India, hereby makes the following further amendments in the First Schedule to the said Act, namely:—
In the said Schedule—
(a) against "Maharashtra University of Health Sciences, Nashik" the under heading 'Recognised Medical Qualification' [hereinafter referred to as column (2)], after the last entry and entry relating thereto under the3212 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 6, 2013/ASHADHA 15, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] heading 'Abbreviation for Registration' [hereinafter referred to as column (3)], the following shall be inserted, namely;—
(2) (3)
"Doctor of Medicine (Microbiology)" MD (Microbiology)
(This shall be a recognised medical qualification when granted by Maharashtra University of Health Sciences, Nashik in respect of students being trained at Maharasthra Institute of Medical Sciences & Research, Latur, Maharashtra on or after June, 2012.) Note to all: 1. The recognition so granted to a Postgraduate Course shall be for a maximum period of 5 years, upon which it shall have to be renewed.
2. Failure to seek timely renewal of recognition as required in sub-clause-4 shall invariably result in stoppage of admissions to the concerned Postgraduate Course.
[No.U.12012/4/2013-ME(P-II)]
ANITA TRIPATHI, Under Secy.
नई दिल्ली, 23 जनवरी, 2013
का॰आ॰ 1236. —भारतीय चिकित्सा परिषद अधिनियम, 1956 (1956 का 102) की धारा 11 की उप धारा (2) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए केन्द्रीय सरकार, भारतीय चिकित्सा परिषद् से परामर्श करके एतदद्वारा उक्त अधिनियम की प्रथम अनुसूची में निम्नलिखित और संशोधन करती है
नामतः
''पश्चिम बंगाल स्वास्थ्य विज्ञान विश्वविद्यालय , कोलकाता'' के बाद और मान्यताप्राप्त चिकित्सा अर्हता'' शीर्षक [इसके बाद कालम (2) में यथा संदर्भित ] ''अंतर्गत प्रविष्टि'' के सामनेे ''पंजीकरण के लिए संक्षिप्त रूप'' [इसके बाद कालम (3) में यथा संदर्भित ] शीर्षक के अंतर्गत उससे संबंधित प्रविष्टि में निम्निलिखित को अंतर्विष्ट किया जाएगा, नामतः
(2) (3)
''डॉक्टर ऑफ मेडीसिन (पेडीयाट्रीक्स)'' एम॰डी॰ (पेडीयाट्रीक्स)
(यह मई, 2011 में अथवा उसके बाद कलकत्ता नेशनल मेडीकल कॉलेज, कोलकाता में प्रशिक्षित किए जा रहे विधार्थियो के संबंध में पश्चिम बंगाल स्वास्थ्य विज्ञान विश्वविद्यालय, कोलकाता द्वारा स्वीकृत किए जाने पर मान्यताप्राप्त चिकित्सा अहर्ता होगी)।
सभी के संबंध में नोटः 1. किसी स्नात्कोतर पाठ्यक्रम के लिए प्रदत््त ऐसी मान्यता 5 वर्षों की अधिकतम अवधि के लिए होगी, जिसके उपरांत इसका नवीनीकरण करवाना पड़ेगा।
2. उप-खंड 4 में यथापेक्षित मान्यता के समयपूर्वक नवीनीकरण संबंधी अपेक्षा में अफसल रहने का अनिवार्यत परिणाम संबंधित स्नात्कोतर पाठ्यक्रम में दाखिला बंद करने के रूप में निकलेगा।
[सं॰ यू॰ 12012/1/2013-एमई (पी-II)]
अनीता त्रिपाठी, अवर सचिव
New Delhi, the 23rd January, 2013
S.O. 1236.—In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section(2) of the Section 11 of the Indian Medical Council Act, 1956 (102 of 1956), the Central Government, after consulting the Medical Council of India, hereby makes the following further amendments in the First Schedule to the said Act, namely:—
In the said Schedule—
(a) against "West Bengal University of Health Sciences, Kolkata" under the heading 'Recognised Medical Qualification' [hereinafter referred to as column (2)], after the last entry and entry relating thereto under the heading 'Abbreviation for Registration' [hereinafter referred to as column (3)], the following shall be inserted, namely:—
[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : जुलाई 6, 2013/आषाढ़ 15, 1935 3213(2) (3)
"Doctor of Medicine (Paediatrics)" MD (Paediatrics)
(This shall be a recognised medical qualification when granted by "West Bengal University of Health Sciences, Kolkata" in respect of students being trained at Calcutta National Medical College, Kolkata on or after May, 2011.)
Note to all: 1. The recognition so granted to a Postgraduate Course shall be for a maximum period of 5 years, upon which it shall have to be renewed.
2. Failure to seek timely renewal of recognition as required in sub-clause 4 shall invariably result in stoppage of admissions to the concerned Postgraduate Course.
[No.U.12012/1/2013-ME(P-II)]
ANITA TRIPATHI, Under Secy.
नई दिल्ली, 12 फरवरी, 2013
का॰आ॰ 1237. —भारतीय चिकित्सा परिषद अधिनियम, 1956 (1956 का 102) की धारा 11 की उप धारा (2) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए केन्द्र सरकार, भारतीय चिकित्सा परिषद से परामर्श करके एतदद्वारा उक्त अधिनियम की प्रथम अनुसूची में निम्नलिखित और संशोधन करती ह नामतः
उक्त प्रथम अनुसूची में ''मान्यता प्राप्त चिकित्सा अहर्ता'' शीर्षक [इसके बाद कालम (2) में ] के अंतर्गत ''पंडित बी॰ डी॰ शर्मा स्वास्थ्य विज्ञान विश्वविद्यालय, रोहतक, हरियाणा ''के सामने ''पंजीकरण के लिए संक्षिप्त रूप'' [इसके बाद कालम (3) में] शीर्षक के अंतर्गत निम्नलिखित को अंतर्विष्ट किया जाएगा, नामतः
(2) (3)
''बेचलर ऑफ मेडीसिन और बैचलर ऑफ सर्जरी'' एम॰बी॰बी॰एस॰
(यह नवम्बर, 2012 में अथवा उसके बाद पंडित बी॰ डी॰ शर्मा पीजीआईएमएस, रोहतक, हरियाणा में प्रशिक्षित किए जा रहे विद्यार्थियों के संबंध में पंडित. बी.डी. शर्मा स्वास्थ्य विज्ञान विश्वविद्यालय,रोहतक, हरियाणा द्वारा स्वीकृत किए जाने पर मान्यताप्राप्त चिकित्सा अहर्ता होगी)।
''बैचलर ऑफ मेडीसिन और बैचलर ऑफ सर्जरी'' एम.बी.बी.एस
(यह नवम्बर, 2012 में अथवा उसके बाद, महाराजा अग्रसेन मेडीकल कॉलेज, अग्रोहा, हिसार, हरियाणा में प्रशिक्षित किए जा रहे विद्यार्थियों के संबंध में पंडित बी.डी. शर्मा स्वास्थ्य विज्ञान विश्वविद्यालय, रोहतक, हरियाणा द्वारा स्वीकृत किए जाने पर मान्यताप्राप्त चिकित्सा अहर्ता होगी)।
[सं॰यू॰ 12012/83/2012-एमई (पी-II)]
अनीता त्रिपाठी, अवर सचिव
New Delhi, the 12th February, 2013
S.O. 1237.—In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (2) of the Section 11 of the Indian Medical Council Act, 1956 (102 of 1956), the Central Government, after consulting the Medical Council of India, hereby makes the following further amendments due to change of affiliating university in the First Schedule to the said Act, namely:—
In the said First Schedule against "Pt. B.D. Sharma University of Health Sciences, Rohtak, Haryana" under the heading 'Recognized Medical Qualification' [in column (2)] before the first entry and entry relating thereto the heading 'Abbreviation for Registration" [in column (3)], the following shall be inserted, namely:—
(2) (3)
Bachelor of Medicine and M.B.B.S.
Bachelor of Surgery
(This shall be a recognized medical qualification when granted by Pt. B.D. Sharma University of Health Sciences Rohtak, Haryana in respect of students being trained at Pt. B.D. Sharma PGIMS, Rohtak Haryana on or after November, 2012.)
Bachelor of Medicine and M.B.B.S.
3214 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 6, 2013/ASHADHA 15, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)](2) (3)
Bachelor of Surgery
(This shall be recognized medical qualification when granted by Pt. B.D. Sharma University of Health Sciences Rohtak, Haryana in respect of students being trained at Maharaja Agarsen Medical College, Agroha, Hissar, Haryana on or after November, 2012.
[No. U.12012/83/2012-ME(P-II)] ANITA TRIPATHI, Under Secy.
नई दिल्ली, 22 फरवरी, 2013
का.आ. 1238. —केन्द्रीय सरकार भारतीय चिकित्सा परिषद अधिनियम, 1956 (1956 का 102) की धारा 11 की उप-धारा (2) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए भारतीय चिकित्सा परिषद से परामर्श करने के बाद, एतद्द्वारा विश्वविद्यालय के नाम में बदलाव के कारण उक्त अधिनियम की पहली अनुसूची में निम्नलिखित और संशोधन करती हैे, अर्थात्ः
उक्त प्रथम अनुसूची में—
(क) ''महाराष्ट्र स्वास्थ्य विज्ञान विश्वविद्यालय, नासिक'' के सामने शीर्षक 'मान्यताप्राप्त चिकित्सा अर्हता' [अब के बाद स्तंभ (2) के रूप में संदर्भित] के अंतर्गत अंतिम प्रविष्टि और उससे संबंधित प्रविष्टि के बाद शीर्षक 'पंजीकरण के लिए संपेक्षण' [अब के बाद स्तंभ (3) के रूप में संदर्भित] के अंतर्गत निम्नलिखित अंतः स्थापित किया जाएगा, अर्थात्ः—
(2) (3)
''मास्टर ऑफ सर्जरी'' (ऑर्थोपेडीक्स) एम एस (ऑथोपेडीक्स)
(यह एक मान्यताप्राप्त चिकित्सा अर्हता होगी यदि यह एन. के. पी. साल्वे आयुर्विज्ञान संस्थान नागपुर, महाराष्ट्र में प्रशिक्षित किए जा रहे विद्यार्थियों के संबंध में महाराष्ट्र स्वास्थ्य विज्ञान विश्वविद्यालय, नासिक, द्वारा जून 2012 में अथवा उसके पश्चात् प्रदान की गई)।
(ख) ''उत्कल विश्वविद्यालय, ओडीसा'' के सामने शीर्षक 'मान्यताप्राप्त चिकित्सा अर्हता (अब के बाद स्तंभ (2) के रूप में संदर्भित) के अंतर्गत अंतिम प्रविष्टि और उससे संबंधित प्रविष्टि के बाद शीर्षक 'पंजीकरण के लिए संपेक्षण' (अब के बाद स्तंभ (3) के रूप में संदर्भित) के अंतर्गत निम्नलिखित अंतः स्थापित किया जाएगा, अर्थात्ः—
(2) (3)
''डाक्टर ऑफ मेडीसिन
एम डी (माइक्रोबायोलाजी)
(माइक्रोबायोलाजी)''
(यह एक मान्यताप्राप्त चिकित्सा अर्हता होगी यदि यह एस. सी. बी. मेडीकल कॉलेज, कटक, ओडीसा में प्रशिक्षित किए जा रहे विद्यार्थियों के संबंध में उत्कल विश्वविद्यालय, ओडीसा, द्वारा मई, 2012 में अथवा उसके पश्चात् प्रदान की गई)।
(ग) ''विक्रम विश्वविद्यालय, उज्जैन, मध्य प्रदेश'' के सामने शीर्षक 'मान्यताप्राप्त चिकित्सा अर्हता' [अब के बाद स्तंभ (2) के रूप में संदर्भित] के अंतर्गत अंतिम प्रविष्टि और उससे संबंधित प्रविष्टि के बाद शीर्षक 'पंजीकरण के लिए संपेक्षण' [अब के बाद स्तंभ (3) के रूप में संदर्भित] के अंतर्गत निम्नलिखित अंतः स्थापित किया जाएगा, अर्थात्ः—
(2) (3)
''मास्टर ऑफ सर्जरी (प्रसूति एवं स्त्री रोग)'' एम एस (ओ बी जी)
(यह एक मान्यताप्राप्त चिकित्सा अर्हता होगी यदि यह रक्समनीबेन दीपचंद गर्दी मेडीकल कॉलेज, उज्जैन, मध्य प्रदेश में प्रशिक्षित किए जा रहे विद्यार्थियों के संबंध में, विक्रम विश्वविद्यालय, उज्जैन, मध्य प्रदेश, द्वारा सितम्बर, 2012 में अथवा उसके पश्चात् प्रदान की गई)।
''डॉक्टर ऑफ मेडीसिन (विकिरण/निदान)'' एम डी (विकिरण/विकिरण निदान)
(यह एक मान्यताप्राप्त चिकित्सा अर्हता होगी यदि यह रक्समनीबेन दीपचंद गर्दी मेडीकल कॉलेज, उज्जैन, मध्य प्रदेश में प्रशिक्षित किए जा रहे विद्यार्थियों के संबंध में, विक्रम विश्वविद्यालय, उज्जैन, मध्य प्रदेश, द्वारा सितम्बर 2012 में अथवा उसके पश्चात् प्रदान की गई)।
[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : जुलाई 6, 2013/आषाढ़ 15, 1935 3215(2) (3)
''मास्टर ऑफ सर्जरी (नेत्र रोग विज्ञान)'' एम एस (नेत्र रोग विज्ञान)
(यह एक मान्यताप्राप्त चिकित्सा अर्हता होगी यदि यह रक्समनीबेन दीपचंद गर्दी मेडीकल कॉलेज, उज्जैन, मध्य प्रदेश में प्रशिक्षित किए जा रहे विद्यार्थियों के संबंध में, विक्रम विश्वविद्यालय, उज्जैन, मध्य प्रदेश, द्वारा सितम्बर, 2012 में अथवा उसके पश्चात् प्रदान की गई)।
''डॉक्टर ऑफ मेडीसिन (माईक्रोबायॉलोजी)़'' एम डी (माइक्रोबायॉलोजी)
(यह एक मान्यताप्राप्त चिकित्सा अर्हता होगी यदि यह रक्समनीबेन दीपचंद गर्दी मेडीकल कॉलेज, उज्जैन, मध्य प्रदेश में प्रशिक्षित किए जा रहे विद्यार्थियों के संबंध में, विक्रम विश्वविद्यालय, उज्जैन, मध्य प्रदेश, द्वारा सितम्बर, 2012 में अथवा उसके पश्चात् प्रदान की गई)।
''डाक्टर ऑफ मेडीसिन (फार्माकॉलोजी)'' एम डी (फार्माकॉलोजी)
(यह एक मान्यताप्राप्त चिकित्सा अर्हता होगी यदि यह रक्समनीबेन दीपचंद गर्दी मेडीकल कॉलेज, उज्जैन, मध्य प्रदेश में प्रशिक्षित किए जा रहे विद्यार्थियों के संबंध में, विक्रम विश्वविद्यालय, उज्जैन, मध्य प्रदेश, द्वारा सितम्बर, 2012 में अथवा उसके पश्चात् प्रदान की गई)।
''डाक्टर ऑफ मेडीसिन (पैथोलॉजी)'' एम डी (पैथोलॉजी)
(यह एक मान्यताप्राप्त चिकित्सा अर्हता होगी यदि यह रक्समनीबेन दीपचंद गर्दी मेडीकल कॉलेज, उज्जैन, मध्य प्रदेश में प्रशिक्षित किए जा रहे विद्यार्थियों के संबंध में, विक्रम विश्वविद्यालय, उज्जैन, मध्य प्रदेश, द्वारा सितम्बर, 2012 में अथवा उसके पश्चात् प्रदान की गई)।
''डाक्टर ऑफ मेडीसिन (चर्म रोग एम डी (डी वी एल)
विज्ञान, रतिज रोग विज्ञान एवं कुष्ठ रोग)'' (यह एक मान्यताप्राप्त चिकित्सा अर्हता होगी यदि यह रक्समनीबेन दीपचंद गर्दी मेडीकल कॉलेज, उज्जैन, मध्य प्रदेश में प्रशिक्षित किए जा रहे विद्यार्थियों के संबंध में, विक्रम विश्वविद्यालय, उज्जैन, मध्य प्रदेश, द्वारा सितम्बर, 2012 में अथवा उसके पश्चात् प्रदान की गई)।
''डाक्टर ऑफ मेडीसिन (संज्ञाहरण विज्ञान)'' एम डी (संज्ञाहरण विज्ञान)
(यह एक मान्यताप्राप्त चिकित्सा अर्हता होगी यदि यह रक्समनीबेन दीपचंद गर्दी मेडीकल कॉलेज, उज्जैन, मध्य प्रदेश में प्रशिक्षित किए जा रहे विद्यार्थियों के संबंध में, विक्रम विश्वविद्यालय, उज्जैन, मध्य प्रदेश, द्वारा सितम्बर, 2012 में अथवा उसके पश्चात् प्रदान की गई)।
''मास्टर ऑफ सर्जरी (ऑटो राईनो लैरिंगोलॉजी) एम एस (कान, नाक, गला)
(यह एक मान्यताप्राप्त चिकित्सा अर्हता होगी यदि यह रक्समनीबेन दीपचंद गर्दी मेडीकल कॉलेज, उज्जैन, मध्य प्रदेश में प्रशिक्षित किए जा रहे विद्यार्थियों के संबंध में, विक्रम विश्वविद्यालय, उज्जैन, मध्य प्रदेश, द्वारा सितम्बर, 2012 में अथवा उसके पश्चात् प्रदान की गई)।
''डाक्टर ऑफ मेडीसिन (त्वचा रोग विज्ञान, एम डी (डी वी एल)
यौन रोग विज्ञान, एवं कुष्ठ रोग)'' (यह एक मान्यताप्राप्त चिकित्सा अर्हता होगी यदि यह असम मेडीकल कॉलेज, डीबरुगढ़, असम में प्रशिक्षित किए जा रहे विद्यार्थियों के संबंध में, श्रीमंत शंकरदेव स्वास्थ्य विज्ञान विश्वविद्यालय, गुवाहटी, असम, द्वारा वर्ष 2010 में अथवा उसके पश्चात् प्रदान की गई)3216 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 6, 2013/ASHADHA 15, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] (2) (3)
''डाक्टर ऑफ मेडीसिन
एम डी (मनः चिकित्सा विज्ञान)
(मनःचिकित्सा विज्ञान)'' (यह एक मान्यताप्राप्त चिकित्सा अर्हता होगी यदि यह रक्समनीबेन दीपचंद गर्दी मेडीकल कॉलेज, उज्जैन, मध्य प्रदेश में प्रशिक्षित किए जा रहे विद्यार्थियों के संबंध में, विक्रम विश्वविद्यालय, उज्जैन, मध्य प्रदेश, द्वारा सितम्बर 2012 में अथवा उसके पश्चात् प्रदान की गई)।
''डॉक्टर ऑफ मेडीसिन (शिशु रोग विज्ञान)'' एम डी (शिशु रोग विज्ञान)
(यह एक मान्यताप्राप्त चिकित्सा अर्हता होगी यदि यह रक्समनीबेन दीपचंद गर्दी मेडीकल कॉलेज, उज्जैन, मध्य प्रदेश में प्रशिक्षित किए जा रहे विद्यार्थियों के संबंध में, विक्रम विश्वविद्यालय, उज्जैन, मध्य प्रदेश, द्वारा सितम्बर 2012 में अथवा उसके पश्चात् प्रदान की गई)।
''डॉक्टर ऑफ मेडीसिन (सामुदायिक चिकित्सा)'' एम डी (सामुदायिक चिकित्सा)
(यह एक मान्यताप्राप्त चिकित्सा अर्हता होगी यदि यह रक्समनीबेन दीपचंद गर्दी मेडीकल कॉलेज, उज्जैन, मध्य प्रदेश में प्रशिक्षित किए जा रहे विद्यार्थियों के संबंध में, विक्रम विश्वविद्यालय, उज्जैन, मध्य प्रदेश, द्वारा सितम्बर 2012 में अथवा उसके पश्चात् प्रदान की गई)।
''डॉक्टर ऑफ मेडीसिन (फेफ्डों संबंधी चिकित्सा)'' एम डी (फेफ्डों संबंधी चिकित्सा) (यह एक मान्यता प्राप्त चिकित्सा अर्हता होगी यदि यह रक्समनीबेन दीपचंद गर्दी मेडीकल कॉलेज, उज्जैन, मध्य प्रदेश में प्रशिक्षित किए जा रहे विद्यार्थियों के संबंध में, विक्रम विश्वविद्यालय, उज्जैन, मध्य प्रदेश, द्वारा सितम्बर 2012 में अथवा उसके पश्चात् प्रदान की गई)।
''डॉक्टर ऑफ मेडीसिन (सामान्य चिकित्सा)'' एम डी (सामान्य चिकित्सा)
(यह एक मान्यताप्राप्त चिकित्सा अर्हता होगी यदि यह रक्समनीबेन दीपचंद गर्दी मेडीकल कॉलेज, उज्जैन, मध्य प्रदेश में प्रशिक्षित किए जा रहे विद्यार्थियों के संबंध में, विक्रम विश्वविद्यालय, उज्जैन, मध्य प्रदेश, द्वारा सितम्बर 2012 में अथवा उसके पश्चात् प्रदान की गई)।
सभी के लिए टिप्पणीः 1. स्नातकोत्तर पाठ्यकम के लिए स्वीकृत मान्यता 5 वर्ष की अधिकतम अवधि के लिए होगी जिसके बाद इसकी पुनरीक्षा की जाएगी।
2. उप-धारा (4) में अपेक्षित मान्यता को समय पर नवीकरण नहीं कराने के फलस्वरूप संबंधित स्नातकोत्तर पाठ्यक्रमों में निरपवाद रूप से दाखिला बंद हो जाएगा।
[सं॰ यू॰-12012/16/2013-एमई (पी-II)]
अनीता त्रिपाठी, अवर सचिव
New Delhi, the 22nd February, 2013
S.O. 1238.—In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (2) of the Section 11 of the Indian Medical Council Act, 1956 (102 of 1956), the Central Government, after consulting the Medical Council of India, hereby makes the following further amendments in the First Schedule to the said Act, namely:—
In the said Schedule—
(a) against "Maharashtra University of Health Sciences, Nashik" under the heading 'Recognised Medical Qualification' [hereinafter referred to as column (2)], after the last entry and entry relating thereto under the heading 'Abbreviation for Registration' [hereinafter referred to as column (3)], the following shall be inserted, namely:—
(2) (3)
"Master of Surgery (Orthopaedics)" MS (Orthopaedics)
(This shall be a recognised medical qualification when granted by Maharashtra Univesity of Health Sciences, Nashik in respect of[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : जुलाई 6, 2013/आषाढ़ 15, 1935 3217 (2) (3)
students being trained at N.K.P. Salve Institute of Medical Sciences, Nagpur, Maharashtra on or after June, 2012.)
(b) against "Utkal University, Orissa" under the heading "Recognised Medical Qualification" [hereinafter referred to as column (2)], after the last entry and entry relating thereto under the heading 'Abbreviation for Registration' [hereinafter referred to as column (3)], the following shall be insered, namely:—
(2) (3)
"Doctor of Medicine (Microbiology)" MD (Microbiology)
(This shall be a recognised medical qualification when granted by Utkal University, Orissa in respect of students being trained at S.C.B. Medical College, Cuttack, Orissa on or after May, 2012.)
(c) against "Vikram University, Ujjain Madhya Pradesh" under the heading 'Recognised Medical Qualification' [hereinafter referred to as column (2)], after the last entry and entry relating thereto under the heading 'Abbreviation for Registration' [hereinafter referred to as column (3)], the following shall be insered, namely:—
(2) (3)
"Master of Surgery (Obstetrics & Gynaecology)" MD (OBG)
(This shall be a recognised medical qualification when granted by Vikram Univesity, Ujjain, Madhya Pradesh in respect of the students being trained at Ruxmaniben Deepchand Gardi Medical College, Ujjain, Madhya Pradesh on or after September, 2012.)
"Doctor of Medicine (Radiology/Radio Diagnosis)" MD (Radiology/Radio Diagnosis)
(This shall be a recognised medical qualification when granted by Vikram University, Ujjain, Madhya Pradesh in respect of the students being trained at Ruxmaniben Deepchand Gardi Medical College, Ujjain, Madhya Pradesh on or after September, 2012.)
"Master of Surgery (Ophthalmology)" MS (Ophthalmology)
(This shall be a recognised medical qualification when granted by Vikram Univesity, Ujjain, Madhya Pradesh in respect of the students being trained at Ruxmaniben Deepchand Gardi Medical College, Ujjain, Madhya Pradesh on or after September, 2012.)
"Doctor of Medicine (Microbiology)" MD (Microbiology)
(This shall be a recognised medical qualification when granted by Vikram University, Ujjain, Madhya Pradesh in respect of the students being trained at Ruxmaniben Deepchand Gardi Medical College, Ujjain, Madhya Pradesh on or after September, 2012.)
"Doctor of Medicine (Pharmacology)" MD (Pharmacology)
(This shall be a recognised medical qualification when granted by Vikram University, Ujjain, Madhya Pradesh in respect of the students being trained at Ruxmaniben Deepchand Gardi Medical College, Ujjain, Madhya Pradesh on or after September, 2012.)
"Doctor of Medicine (Pathology)" MD (Pathology)
(This shall be a recognised medical qualification when granted by Vikram University, Ujjain, Madhya Pradesh in respect of the students being trained at Ruxmaniben Deepchand Gardi Medical College, Ujjain, Madhya Pradesh on or after September, 2012.)
"Doctor of Medicine (Dermatology, Venerology MD (DVL) and Leprosy)"
(This shall be a recognised medical qualification when granted by Vikram University, Ujjain, Madhya Pradesh in respect of the students being trained at Ruxmaniben Deepchand Gardi Medical College, Ujjain, Madhya Pradesh on or after September, 2012.)3218 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 6, 2013/ASHADHA 15, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] (2) (3)
"Doctor of Medicine (Anaesthesia)" MD (Anaesthesia)
(This shall be a recognised medical qualification when granted by Vikram University, Ujjain, Madhya Pradesh in respect of the students being trained at Ruxmaniben Deepchand Gardi Medical College, Ujjain, Madhya Pradesh on or after September, 2012.)
"Master of Surgery (Oto-Rhino-Laryngology)" MS (ENT)
(This shall be a recognised medical qualification when granted by Vikram University, Ujjain, Madhya Pradesh in respect of the students being trained at Ruxmaniben Deepchand Gardi Medical College, Ujjain, Madhya Pradesh on or after September, 2012.)
"Doctor of Medicine (Psychiatry)" MD (Psychiatry)
(This shall be a recognised medical qualification when granted by Vikram University, Ujjain, Madhya Pradesh in respect of the students being trained at Ruxmaniben Deepchand Gardi Medical College, Ujjain, Madhya Pradesh on or after September, 2012.)
"Doctor of Medicine (Paediatrics)" MD (Paediatrics)
(This shall be a recognised medical qualification when granted by Vikram University, Ujjain, Madhya Pradesh in respect of the students being trained at Ruxmaniben Deepchand Gardi Medical College, Ujjain, Madhya Pradesh on or after September, 2012.)
"Doctor of Medicine (Community Medicine)" MD (Community Medicine)
(This shall be a recognised medical qualification when granted by Vikram University, Ujjain, Madhya Pradesh in respect of the students being trained at Ruxmaniben Deepchand Gardi Medical College, Ujjain, Madhya Pradesh on or after September, 2012.)
"Doctor of Medicine (Pulmonary Medicine)" MD (Pulmonary Medicine)
(This shall be a recognised medical qualification when granted by Vikram University, Ujjain, Madhya Pradesh in respect of the students being trained at Ruxmaniben Deepchand Gardi Medical College, Ujjain, Madhya Pradesh on or after September, 2012.)
"Doctor of Medicine (General Medicine)" MD (General Medicine)
(This shall be a recognised medical qualification when granted by Vikram University, Ujjain, Madhya Pradesh in respect of the students being trained at Ruxmaniben Deepchand Gardi Medical College, Ujjain, Madhya Pradesh on or after September, 2012.)
Note to all: 1. The recognition so granted to a Postgraduate Course shall be for a maximum period of 5 years, upon which it shall have to be renewed.
2. Failure to seek timely renewal of recognition as required in sub-clause-4 shall invariably result in stoppage of admissions to the concerned Postgraduate Course.
[No. U-12012/16/2013-ME(P-II)]
ANITA TRIPATHI, Under Secy.
नई दिल्ली, 8 मार्च, 2013
का॰आ॰ 1239. — भारतीय चिकित्सा परिषद् अधिनियम, 1956 (1956 का 102) की धारा 11 की उप धारा (2) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए केन्द्रीय सरकार, भारतीय चिकित्सा परिषद् से परामर्श करके एतद्द्वारा उक्त अधिनियम की प्रथम अनुसूची में निम्नलिखित और संशोधन करती है।
[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : जुलाई 6, 2013/आषाढ़ 15, 1935 3219उक्त प्रथम अनुसूची में ''मान्यताप्राप्त चिकित्सा अर्हता'' शीर्षक [इसके बाद कालम (2) में ], के अंतर्गत'' ''उत्कल विश्वविद्यालय, ओडीसा के सामने ''पंजीकरण के लिए संक्षिप्त रूप'' [इसके बाद कालम (3) में ] शीर्षक के अंतर्गत निम्नलिखित को अंतर्विष्ट किया जाएगा, नामतः—
(2) (3)
''बैचलर ऑफ मेडीसिन और बैचलर ऑफ सर्जरी'' एम.बी.बी.एस.
(यह प्रतिवर्ष 100 एम॰बी॰बी॰एस . छात्रों के वार्षिक प्रवेश सहित अगस्त, 2012 में अथवा उसके बाद कलिंगा आयुर्विज्ञान संस्थान, भुवनेश्वर, ओडीसा में प्रशिक्षित किए जा रहे विद्यार्थियों के संबंध में उत्कल विश्वविद्यालय, ओडीसा द्वारा स्वीकृत किए जाने पर मान्यताप्राप्त चिकित्सा अर्हता होगी)।
[सं॰ यू॰ 12012/76/2004-एम॰ई॰ (पी-II)]
अनिता त्रिपाठी, अवर सचिव
New Delhi, the 8th March, 2013
S.O. 1239.—In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (2) of the Section 11 of the Indian Medical Council Act, 1956 (102 of 1956), the Central Government, after consulting the Medical Council of India, hereby makes the following further amendments in the First Schedule to the said Act.
In the said First Schedule after "Utkal University, Orissa" and under the heading 'Recognised Medical Qualifi- cation' [hereinafter referred to as column (2)], after the last entry and entry relating thereto under the heading/Abbrevia- tion for Registration' [hereinafter referred to as column (3)], the following shall be inserted, namely:—
(2) (3)
"Bachelor of Medicine and Bachelor of Surgery" MBBS
(This shall be a recognised medical qualification when granted by Utkal University, Orissa in respect of students being trained at Kalinga Institute of Medical Sciences, Bhubaneswar, Orissa with annual intake of 100 MBBS students on or after August, 2012.)
[No. U. 12012/76/2004-ME (P-II)]
ANITA TRIPATHI, Under Secy.
नई दिल्ली, 11 मार्च, 2013
का॰आ॰ 1240. — भारतीय चिकित्सा परिषद् अधिनियम, 1956 (1956 का 102) की धारा 11 की उप-धारा (2) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए केन्द्रीय सरकार, भारतीय चिकित्सा परिषद् से परामर्श करके एतद्द्वारा उक्त अधिनियम की प्रथम अनुसूची में निम्नलिखित और संशोधन करती है, नामतः :—
उक्त प्रथम अनुसूची में ''मान्यताप्राप्त चिकित्सा अर्हता'' शीर्षक [इसके बाद कालम (2) में ] के अंतर्गत ''तीर्थकर महावीर विश्वविद्यालय, मुरादाबाद, उत्तर प्रदेश'' के सामने ''पंजीकरण के लिए संक्षिप्त रूप'' [इसके बाद कालम (3) में ] शीर्षक के अंतर्गत निम्नलिखित को अंतर्विष्ट किया जाएगा, नामत :—
(2) (3)
''बैचलर ऑफ मेडीसिन और बैचलर ऑफ सर्जरी'' एम॰बी॰बी॰एस॰
(यह प्रतिवर्ष 100 एम॰बी॰बी॰एस॰ छात्रों के वार्षिक प्रवेश सहित दिसम्बर, 2012 में अथवा उसके बाद तीर्थकर महावीर मेडीकल कॉलेज एंड रिसर्च सेंटर, मुरादाबाद, उत्तर प्रदेश में प्रशिक्षित किए जा रहे विद्यार्थियों के संबंध में तीर्थकर महावीर विश्वविद्यालय, मुरादाबाद, उत्तर प्रदेश द्वारा स्वीकृत किए जाने पर मान्यताप्राप्त चिकित्सा अर्हता होगी)।
[सं॰ यू॰ 12012/500/2007-एम॰ई॰ (पी-II)]
अनिता त्रिपाठी, अवर सचिव3220 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 6, 2013/ASHADHA 15, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
New Delhi, the 11th March, 2013
S.O. 1240.—In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (2) of the Section 11 of the Indian Medical Council Act, 1956 (102 of 1956), the Central Government, after consulting the Medical Council of India, hereby makes the following further amendments in the First Schedule to the said Act.
In the said First Schedule after "Teerthanker Mahaveer University, Moradabad, Uttar Pradesh" and under the heading 'Recognised Medical Qualification' [hereinafter referred to as column (2)], after the last entry and entry relating thereto under the heading 'Abbreviation for Registration' [hereinafter referred to as column (3)], the following shall be inserted, namely:—
(2) (3)
"Bachelor of Medicine and Bachelor of Surgery" MBBS
(This shall be a recognised medical qualification when granted by
"Teerthanker Mahaveer University, Moradabad, Uttar Pradesh" in
respect of students being trained at Teerthanker Mahaveer Medical
College & Research Centre, Moradabad, Uttar Pradesh with annual
intake of 100 MBBS students on or after December, 2012.)—
[No.U. 12012/500/2007-ME(P-II)]
ANITA TRIPATHI, Under Secy.
नई दिल्ली, 19 मार्च, 2013
का॰आ॰ 1241. —भारतीय चिकित्सा परिषद अधिनियम, 1956 (1956 का 102) की धारा 11 की उप धारा (2) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए केन्द्रीय सरकार, भारतीय चिकित्सा परिषद से परामर्श करके एतद्द्वारा उक्त अधिनियम की प्रथम अनुसूची में निम्नलिखित और संशोधन करती हैं ।
उक्त प्रथम अनुसूची में ''उत्कल विश्वविद्यालय ओडीसा'' के बाद और ''मान्यता प्राप्त चिकित्सा अर्हता'' शीर्षक (इसके बाद कालम (2) में यथा संदर्भित) के अंतर्गत'' अंतिम सामने ''पंजीकरण के लिए संक्षिप्त रूप'' [इसके बाद कालम (3) में यथा संदर्भित] शीर्षक के अंतर्गत उससे संबंधित प्रविष्टि में निम्नलिखित को अंतर्विष्ट किया जाएगा, नामतः—
(2) (3)
''बैचलर ऑफ मेडीसिन और बैचलर ऑफ सर्जरी'' एम॰बी॰बी॰एस॰
(यह प्रतिवर्ष 100 एम॰बी॰बी॰एस छात्रों के वार्षिक प्रवेश सहित अगस्त, 2012 में
अथवा उसके बाद आयुर्विज्ञान संस्थान और एस यू एम अस्पताल, भुवनेश्वर,
ओडीसा में प्रशिक्षित किए जा रहे विद्यार्थियों के संबंध में उत्कल विश्वविद्यालय, ओडीसा द्वारा स्वीकृत किए जाने पर मान्यताप्राप्त चिकित्सा अर्हता होगी)।
[सं॰ यू॰ 12012/84/2004-एम॰ई॰ (पी-II)]
अनिता त्रिपाठी, अवर सचिव
New Delhi, the 19th March, 2013
S.O. 1241.—In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (2) of the Section 11 of the Indian Medical Council Act, 1956 (102 of 1956), the Central Government, after consulting the Medical Council of India, hereby makes the following further amendments in the First Schedule to the said Act.
[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : जुलाई 6, 2013/आषाढ़ 15, 1935 3221In the said First Schedule after "Utkal University, Orissa" and under the heading 'Recognised Medical Qualification' [hereinafter referred to as column (2)], after the last entry and entry relating thereto under the heading 'Abbreviation for Registration' [hereinafter referred to as column (3)], the following shall be inserted, namely:—
(2) (3)
"Bachelor of Medicine and Bachelor of Surgery" MBBS
(This shall be a recognised medical qualification when granted by Utkal University, Orissa in respect of students being trained at Institute of Medical Sciences & SUM Hospital, Bhubaneswar, Orissa with annual intake of 100 MBBS students on or after August, 2012.
[No. U.12012/84/2004-ME(P-II)]
ANITA TRIPATHI, Under Secy.
संचार एवं सूचना प्रौद्योगिकी मंत्रालय
Rule, 1976, the Central Government hereby notifies following offices of the Office of Chief Postmaster
(डाक विभाग)
नई दिल्ली, 1जुलाई, 2013
का॰आ॰ 1242. ——राजभाषा नियम (संघ के शासकीय प्रयोजनों के लिए प्रयोग), 1976 के नियम 10 के उप-नियम (4) के अनुसरण में केंद्र सरकार, डाक विभाग के अध्ीनस्थ कार्यालय मुख्य पोस्टमास्टर जनरल, केरल सकल, तिरुवंनतपुरम के निम्नलिखित अध्ीनस्थ कार्यालयों को, जिसके 80 प्रतिशत से अध्कि अध्किारियों एवं कर्मचारियों ने हदी का कार्यसाध्क ज्ञान प्राप्त कर लिया है, अध्सिूचित करती हैः
1. वरिष्ठ अध्ीक्षक डाकघर कार्यालय, पालक्काड
मंडल—678001
2. अध्ीक्षक डाकघर कार्यालय, तिरूर मंडल—676104
3. वरिष्ठ अध्ीक्षक डाकघर कार्यालय, आलुवा मंडल—683101
4. अध्ीक्षक डाकघर कार्यालय, इडुक्की मंडल—685584
5. डाक भंडार डिपो, तिरुवनंतपुरम—695023
6. अध्ीक्षक डाकघर कार्यालय, तिरुवल्ला मंडल—689101
7. केरल सकल स्टांप डिपो, कोच्चि—682020
General, Kerala Circle. Thiruvananthapuram of the Department of Posts where more than 80% staff has acquired the working knowledge of Hindi:—
1. Sr. Superintendent of Post Offices, Palakkad Division-678001
2. Supreintendent of Post Offices, Tirur Division- 676104
3. Sr. Superintendent of Post Offices, Aluva Division- 683101
4. Superintendent of Post Offices, Iddukki Division- 685584
5. Postal Stores Depot, Thiruvananthapuram-695023
6. Superintendent of Post Offices, Tiruvalla Division- 689101
7. Kerala Circle Stamp Depot, Kochi-682020
8. Superintendent of Post Offices, Manjeri Division- 676121
[No. 11017-1/2011-OL]
MEERA HANDA, Dy. Director General (Philately/OL)
युवा कार्यक्रम एवं खेल मंत्रालय
8. अध्ीक्षक डाकघर कार्यालय, मंजेरी मंडल—676121
[सं॰ 11017-1/2011-रा॰भा॰]
मीरा हाण्डा, उप महानिदेशक (फिलैटली/राजभाषा) नई दिल्ली, 28 जून, 2013
MINISTRY OF COMMUNICATIONS AND
INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY
(Department of Posts)
New Delhi, the 1st July, 2013
S.O. 1242.—In pursuance of Rule 10(4) of the Official Language (use for official purposes of the Union) का॰आ॰ 1243. —केन्द्रीय सरकार एतद्द्वारा राजभाषा (संघ के शासकीय प्रयोजनों के लिए प्रयोग) नियम 1976 के नियम 10 के उप- नियम (4) के अनुसरण में युवा कार्यक्रम और खेल मंत्रालय के स्वायत्तशासी कार्यालय भारतीय खेल प्राध्किरण, नेताजी सुभाष क्षेत्रीय केंद्र, लखनऊ जिसके 80% से अध्कि कर्मचारीवृंद्ध ने हदी का कार्यसाध्क ज्ञान प्राप्त कर लिया है, को अध्सिूचित करती है।
[सं॰ ई-11011/2/2008-हि॰ए॰]
थंगलेमलियन, उप सचिव3222 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 6, 2013/ASHADHA 15, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
MINISTRY OF YOUTH AFFAIRS AND SPORTS
New Delhi, the 28th June, 2013
S.O. 1243.—In pursunce of sub-rule (4) of Rule of 10 of Official Language (use for official purpose of the Union) Rule, 1976, the Central Government hereby notifies Sports Authority of India, Netaji Subhas Regional Centre, Lucknow an autonomous office of Ministry of Youth Affairs and Sports, whereof more than 80% staff have acquired working knowledge of Hindi.
[No. E-11011/2/2008-H.U.]
THANGLEMLIAN, Dy. Secy.
उपभोक्ता मामले, खाद्य और सार्वजनिक वितरण मंत्रालय
(उपभोक्ता मामले विभाग)
(भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो)
नई दिल्ली, 23 मई, 2013
का॰आ॰ 1244. —भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो नियम, 1987 के नियम 7 के उप-नियम (1) के खंड (ख) के अनुसरण मेंं भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो एतद्द्वारा अध्सिूचित करता है कि नीचे अनुसूची में दिये गये मानक(कों) में संशोध्न किया गया/किये गये हैं :-
अनुसूची
क्रम संशोध्ति भारतीय मानक(कों) की संख्या, संशोध्न की संख्या और तिथि स्थापित तिथि संख्या वर्ष और शीर्षक
1 आईएस 11673ः1992 सोडियम संशोध्न की संख्या 4, 31 मई, 2013
हाईपोक्लोराइट की विशिष्टि (पहला मई 2013 पुनरीक्षण)
इस भारतीय मानक की प्रतियां भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो, मानक भवन, 9, बहादुरशाह जफर मार्ग, नई दिल्ली-110 002 क्षेत्रीय कार्यालयोंः नई दिल्ली, कोलकाता, चण्ढ़ीगढ़, चैन्नई, मुम्बई, तथा शाखा कार्यालयोंः अहमदाबाद, बंगलौर, भोपाल, भुवनेश्वर, कोयम्बतूर, गुवाहाटी, हैदराबाद, जयपुर, कानपुर, नागपुर, पटना, पूणे तथा तिरुवन्नतापुरम में बिक्री हेतु उपलब्ध् हैं। भारतीय मानकों को http:/www.//standardsbis.in द्वारा इंटरनेट पर खरीदा जा सकता है।
[संदर्भ सीएचडी 1/आईएस 11673]
डा॰ राजीव के॰ झा, वैज्ञानिक 'एफ' एवं प्रमुख (रसायन)
MINISTRY OF CONSUMER AFFAIRS, FOOD AND PUBLIC DISTRIBUTION
(Department of Consumer Affairs)
(BUREAU OF INDIAN STANDARDS)
New Delhi, the 23rd May, 2013
S.O. 1244.—In pursuance of clause (b) of sub-rule (1) of Rule 7 of the Bureau of Indian Standards Rule, 1987, the Bureau of Indian Standards hereby notifies that amendments to the Indian Standards, particulars of which are given in the Schedule hereto annexed have been issued:—
SCHEDULE
Sl. No. and year of the No. and year of Date from which the
No. Indian Standards the amendment amendment shall have effect
1. IS 11673:1992 Sodium Amendment No. 4 31 May, 2013
Hypochlorite Solution- May 2013
Specification (First revision)
[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : जुलाई 6, 2013/आषाढ़ 15, 1935 3223
Copy of this Standard is avilable for sale with the Bureau of Indian Standards, Manak Bhavan, 9 Bhadur Shah Zafar Marg, New Delhi-110 002 and Regional Offices: New Delhi, Kolkata, Chandigarh, Chennai, Mumbai and also Branch Offices: Ahmedabad,. Bangalore, Bhopal, Bhubaneshwar, Coimbatore, Guwahati, Hyderabad, Jaipur, Kanpur, Nagpur, Patna. Pune, Thiruvananthapuram. On line purchase of Indian Standard can be made at:http:/www.standardsbis.in.
[Ref. CHD 1/IS 11673]
Dr. RAJIV K. JHA, Scientist 'F' & Head (CHD)
नई दिल्ली, 26 जून, 2013
का॰आ॰ 1245. —भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो नियम 1987 के नियम, 7 के उप-नियम (1) के खंड (ख) के अनुसरण मेंं भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो एतद्द्वारा अध्सिूचित करती है कि नीचे अनुसूची में दिय गये मानक (कों) में संशोध्न किया गया/किये गये हैंः—
अनुसूची
क्रम संशोध्ति भारतीय मानक की संख्या, और संशोध्न की संख्या और तिथि संख्या वर्ष
संशोधन लागू होने की तिथि
(1) (2)
(3) (4)
1 आईएस 5476ः1986 पटसन से संशोध्न संख्या 1, मई 2013
सम्बन्ध्ति शब्दों की शब्दावली मई 2013 (पहला पुनरीक्षण)
इस संशोध्न की प्रति भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो, मानक भवन, 9, बहादुरशाह जफर मार्ग, नई दिल्ली-110 002 क्षेत्रीय कार्यालयोंः नई दिल्ली, कोलकाता, चण्डीगढ़, चैन्नई, मुम्बई, तथा शाखा कार्यालयोंः अहमदाबाद, बंगलौर, भोपाल, भुवनेश्वर, कोयम्बतूर, गुवाहाटी, हैदराबाद, जयपुर, कानपुर, नागपुर, पटना, पूणे तथा तिरुवनन्तपुरम में बिक्री हेतु उपलब्ध् हैं।
[संदर्भ टीएक्सडी/जी-25]
प्रभाकर राय, वैज्ञानिक 'ई' एवं प्रमुख (टीएक्सडी)
New Delhi, the 26th June, 2013
S.O. 1245.—In pursuance of clause (b) of sub-rule (1) of Rule 7 of the Bureau of Indian Standard Rules. 1987, the Bureau of Indian Standards hereby notifies that amendments to the Indian Standards, particulars of which are given in the Schedule hereto annexed have been issued:—
SCHEDULE
Sl. No., Title and year of Indian No. and Year of the Date from which the No. Standards
amendment amendment shall have
effect
(1) (2)
(3)
(4)
1 IS 5476:1986 Glossary of Terms Amendment No. 1 May 2013
relating to Jute May 2013
Copy of this amendment is avilable for sale with the Bureau of Indian Standards, Manak Bhavan, 9 Bhadur Shah Zafar Marg, New Delhi-110 002 and Regional Offices: New Delhi, Kolkata, Chandigarh, Chennai, Mumbai and also Branch Offices: Ahmedabad, Bangalore, Bhopal, Bhubaneshwar, Coimbatore, Guwahati, Hyderabad, Jaipur, Kanpur, Nagpur, Patna.
Pune, Thiruvananthapuram.
[Ref. TXD/G-25]
PRABHAKAR RAI, Scientist 'E' and Head (TXD)3224 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 6, 2013/ASHADHA 15, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
नई दिल्ली, 26 जून, 2013
का॰आ॰ 1246. -भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो नियम, 1987 के नियम, के उप-नियम (1) के खंड (ख) के अनुसरण मेंं भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो एतद्द्वारा अध्सिूचित करता है कि जिस भारतीय मानक का विवरण नीचे अनुसूची में दिया गया है वह स्थापित हो गया हैः-
अनुसूची
क्रम स्थापित भारतीय मानक (कों) की संख्या, नये भारतीय मानक द्वारा अतिक्रमित स्थापित तिथि संख्या वर्ष और शीर्षक भारतीय मानक अथवा मानकों, यदि
कोई हो, की संख्या और वर्ष
(1) (2)
(3) (4)
1 आईएस 15884ः 2010 प्रत्यावर्ती - 26-06-2013 दिष्ट धरा -सक्रिय उर्जा के लिए संयोजित स्थैतिक पुनर्भुभुगतान मीटर (श्रेणी 1 व 2) - विशिष्टि
इस भारतीय मानक की एक प्रति भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो, मानक भवन, 9, बहादुरशाह जफर मार्ग, नई दिल्ली-110 002, क्षेत्रीय कार्यालयोंः नई दिल्ली, कोलकाता, चण्डीगढ़, चेन्नई, मुम्बई तथा शाखा कार्यालयोंः अहमदाबाद, बंगलौर, भोपाल, भुवनेश्वर, कोयम्बतूर, गुवाहाटी, हैदराबाद, जयपुर, कानपुर, नागपुर, पटना, पूणे तथा तिरूवनन्तापुरम में बिक्री हेतु उपलब्ध् हैं।
[संदर्भ ईटी 13/टी-46]
डी. गोस्वामी, वैज्ञानिक 'एफ' (विद्युुत तकनीकी विभाग)
New Delhi, the 26th June, 2013
S.O. 1246.—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 Indian Date of No. Indian Standard Standards, if any, Establishment
Superseded by the New
Indian Standard
(1) (2)
(3)
(4)
1 IS 15884 : 2010 Alternating
26-06-2013
Current Direct—Connected Static
Prepayment Meters for Active Energy
(Class 1 and 2)—Specification
Copy of this Standard is available for sale with the Bureau of Indian Standards, Manak Bhavan, 9, Bahadur Shah Zafar Marg, New Delhi-110 002 and Regional Offices : New Delhi, Kolkata, Chandigarh, Chennai, Mumbai and also Branch Offices : Ahmedabad, Bangalore, Bhopal, Bhubaneshwar, Coimbatore, Guwahati, Hyderabad, Jaipur, Kanpur, Nagpur, Patna, Pune, Thiruvananthapuram.
[Ref. ET 13/T-46]
D. GOSWAMI, Scientist 'F' (Electrotechnical Deptt.)[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : जुलाई 6, 2013/आषाढ़ 15, 1935 3225
नई दिल्ली, 27 जून, 2013
का.आ. 1247.- भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो नियम, 1987 के नियम 7 के उपनियम (1) के खंड (ख) के अनुसरण में भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो एतद्द्वारा अधिसूचित करता है कि अनुसूची में दिये मानक(कों) में संशोधन किया गया/किये गये हैंः
अनुसूची
क्रम संशोधित भारतीय मानक(कों) संशोधन की संख्या संशोधन लागू होने संख्या की संख्या वर्ष और शीर्षक और तिथि की तिथि
(1) (2)
(3) (4)
1 आईएस 3024ः 2006 दिशात्मक कण संशोधन संख्या 4
विद्युत इस्पात की चदर एवं पत्ती जून 2013 26 जून, 2013 (दूसरा पुनरीक्षण)
इस भारतीय मानक की प्रतियां भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो, मानक भवन, 9, बहादुर शाह जफर मार्ग, नई दिल्ली-110002, क्षेत्रीय कार्यालयोंः नई दिल्ली, कोलकाता, चंडीगढ़, चेन्नई, मुम्बई तथा शाखा कार्यालयोंः अहमदाबाद, बंगलौर, भोपाल, भुवनेश्वर, कोयम्बतूर, गुवाहाटी, हैदराबाद, जयपुर, कानपुर, नागपुर, पटना, पुणे तथा तिरूवनन्तापुरम में बिक्री हेतु उपलब्ध हैं।
[संदर्भ एमटीडी 4/टी-69]
पी. घोष, वैज्ञानिक 'एफ' एवं प्रमुख (एमटीडी)
New Delhi, the 27th June, 2013
S.O. 1247.—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(s), Indian Standards, particulars of which are given in the Schedule hereto annexed have been established on the date indicated against each :
SCHEDULE
Sl. IS No. & Title of the amendment(s) No. & year of the Date from which No.
Amendment(s)
the amendment
shall have effect (1) ( 2 )
(3)
(4)
1 IS 3024 : 2006 Grain Oriented Electrical Steel Amendment No. 4 26 June ,2013 Sheet and Strip (Second Revision) June, 2013
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. MTD 4/T-69]
P. GHOSH, Scientist 'F' & Head (MTD)
नई दिल्ली, 28 जून, 2013
का.आ. 1248.- भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो नियम 1987 के नियम, 7 के उपनियम (1) के खंड (ख) के अनुसरण में भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो एतद्द्वारा अधिसूचित करता है कि जिन भारतीय मानकों के विवरण नीचे अनुसूची में दिये हैं वे स्थापित हो गये हैं :
3226 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 6, 2013/ASHADHA 15, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]अनुसूची
क्रम स्थापित भारतीय मानक(कों) नये भारतीय मानक द्वारा स्थापित तिथि संख्या की संख्या वर्ष और शीर्षक अतिक्रमित भारतीय
मानक अथवा मानकों,
यदि कोई हो, की संख्या
और वर्ष
1 आईएस 15298(भाग 3)ः 2011/आईएसओ — 30 जून, 2013
20346 : 2004 निजी सुरक्षा उपस्कर भाग 3 संरक्षी फुटवियर (पहला पुनरीक्षण)
इस भारतीय मानक की प्रतियां भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो, मानक भवन, 9, बहादुर शाह जफर मार्ग, नई दिल्ली-110002, क्षेत्रीय कार्यालयोंः नई दिल्ली, कोलकाता, चंडीगढ़, चेन्नई, मुम्बई तथा शाखा कार्यालयोंः अहमदाबाद, बंगलौर, भोपाल, भुवनेश्वर, कोयम्बतूर, गुवाहाटी, हैदराबाद, जयपुर, कानपुर, नागपुर, पटना, पुणे तथा तिरूवनन्तापुरम में बिक्री हेतु उपलब्ध हैं। भारतीय मानकों को http://www.standardsbis.in द्वारा इंटरनैट पर खरीदा जा सकता है।
[संदर्भ सीएचडी 19/आईएस 15298(भाग 3)/आईएसओ 20346]
के. के. पाल, वैज्ञानिक 'ई'
New Delhi, the 28th June, 2013
S.O. 1248—In pursuance of clause (b) of sub-rule (1) of Rule 7 of the Bureau of Indian Standards Rules, 1987, the Bureau of Indian Standards hereby notifies that the Indian Standards, particulars of which are given in the Schedule hereto annexed have been established on the date indicated against each :
SCHEDULE
Sl. No. & Year of the No. & Year of Indian Date of Established No. Indian Stardard Established Standards, if any,
Superseded by the
New Indian Standard
(1) (2)
(3)
( 4 )
1 IS/ISO 15298 (Part 3): 2011/ISO 20346: 2004 — 30 June 2013 Personal Protective Equipment Part 3
Protective Footwear (First 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. On line purchase of Indian Standard can be made at : http://www.standardsbis.in.
[Ref. CHD 19/IS 15298(Part 3)/ISO 20346]
K. K. PAUL, Scientist 'E'
नई दिल्ली, 28 जून, 2013
का.आ. 1249. —भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो नियम 1987 के नियम, 7 के उपनियम (1) के खंड (ख) के अनुसरण में भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो एतद्द्वारा अधिसूचित करता है कि जिन भारतीय मानकों के विवरण नीचे अनुसूची में दिये गए हैं वे स्थापित हो गये हैं।
[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : जुलाई 6, 2013/आषाढ़ 15, 1935 3227अनुसूची
क्रम स्थापित भारतीय मानक(कों) की संख्या नये भारतीय मानक द्वारा स्थापित तिथि संख्या वर्ष और शीर्षक अतिक्रमित भारतीय
मानक अथवा मानकों,
यदि कोई हो, की संख्या
और वर्ष
(3)
(4)
1) (2)
1 आईएस 15298(भाग 2)ः2011/आईएसओ — 30 जून, 2013 20345ः2004 निजी सुरक्षा उपस्कर भाग 2 संरक्षी फुटवियर (पहला पुनरीक्षण)
इस भारतीय मानक की प्रतियां भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो, मानक भवन, 9 बहादुर शाह जफर मार्ग, नई दिल्ली-110002, क्षेत्रीय कार्यालयोंः नई दिल्ली, कोलकाता, चंडीगढ़, चेन्नई, मुम्बई तथा शाखा कार्यालयोंः अहमदाबाद, बंगलौर, भोपाल, भुवनेश्वर, कोयम्बतूर, गुवाहाटी, हैदराबाद, जयपूर, कानपुर, नागपुर, पटना, पुणे तथा तिरूवनन्तापुरम में बिक्री हेतु उपलब्ध हैं। भारतीय मानकों को http://www.standardsbis.in द्वारा इंटरनैट पर खरीदा जा सकता है।
[संदर्भ सीएचडी 19/आईएस 15298(भाग 2)/आईएसओ 20345]
के. के. पाल, वैज्ञानिक 'ई'
New Delhi, the 28th June, 2013
S.O. 1249.—In pursuance of clause (b) of sub-rule(1) of Rules 7 of the Bureau of Indian Standards Rules, 1987, the Bureau of Indian Standards hereby notifies that the Indian Standards, particulars of which are given in the Scheduled hereto annexed have been established on the date indicated against each:
SCHEDULE
Sl. No. & Year of the No. & year of Indian Date of Established No. Indian Standard Established Standards, if any
Superseded by the
New Indian Standard
(1) (2)
(3)
(4)
1 IS/ISO 15298 (Part 2): 2011/ISO 20345:2004 — 30 June 2013 Personal protective equipment Part 2
Safety Footwear (first revision)
Copy of this Standard is available for sale with the Bureau of Indian Standards, Manak Bhavan, 9 Bahadur Shah Zafar Marg, New Delhi-110 002 and Regional Offices: New Delhi, Kolkata, Chandigarh, Chennai, Mumbai and also Branch Offices: Ahmedabad, Bangalore, Bhopal, Bhubaneshwar, Coimbatore, Guwahati, Hyderabad, Jaipur, Kanpur, Nagpur, Patna, Pune and Thiruvananthapuram. On line purchase of Indian standard can be made at: http://www.standardsbis.in.
[Ref. CHD 19/IS 15298(Part 2)/ISO 20345]
K. K. PAUL, Scientist 'E'
नई दिल्ली, 28 जून, 2013
का.आ. 1250. —भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो नियम 1987 के नियम 7 के उपनियम (1) के खंड (ख) के अनुसरण में भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो एतद् द्वारा अधिसूचित करता है कि जिन भारतीय मानकों के विवरण नीचे अनुसूची में दिये गए हैं वे स्थापित हो गये है :
3228 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 6, 2013/ASHADHA 15, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]अनुसूची
क्रम स्थापित भारतीय मानक(कों) नये भारतीय मानक द्वारा स्थापित तिथि संख्या की संख्या वर्ष और शीर्षक अतिक्रमित भारतीय
मानक अथवा मानकों,
यदि कोई हो, की संख्या
और वर्ष
1) (2)
(3)
(4)
1 आईएस 299ः2012 एल्यूमीनो फैरिक — 30 जून 2013 विशिष्ट (पांचवां पुनरीक्षण)
इस भारतीय मानक की प्रतियां भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो, मानक भवन, 9 बहादुर शाह जफर मार्ग, नई दिल्ली-110002, क्षेत्रीय कार्यालयोंः नई दिल्ली, कोलकाता, चंडीगढ़, चेन्नई, मुम्बई तथा शाखा कार्यालयोंः अहमदाबाद, बंगलौर, भोपाल, भुवनेश्वर, कोयम्बतूर, गुवाहाटी, हैदराबाद, जयपुर कानपुर, नागपुर, पटना, पुणे तथा तिरूवनन्तापुरम में बिक्री हेतु उपलब्ध हैं। भारतीय मानकों को http://www.standardsbis.in द्वारा इंटरनैट पर खरीदा जा सकता है।
[संदर्भ सीएचडी 1/आईएस 299]
के. के. पाल, वैज्ञानिक 'ई'
New Delhi, the 28th June, 2013
S.O. 1250.—In pursuance of clause (b) of sub-rule(1) of Rules 7 of the Bureau of Indian Standards Rules, 1987, the Bureau of Indian Standards hereby notifies that the Indian Standards, particulars of which are given in the Scheduled hereto annexed have been established on the date indicated against each:
SCHEDULE
Sl. No. & Year of the No. & year of Indian Date of Established No. Indian Stardard Establishment Standard, if any
Superseded by the
New Indian Standard
(1) (2)
(3)
( 4 )
1 IS 299:2012 Alumino Ferric—Specification — 30 June 2013 (fifth revision)
Copy of this Standard is available for sale with the Bureau of Indian Standards, Manak Bhavan, 9 Bahadur Shah Zafar Marg, New Delhi-110 002 and Regional Offices: New Delhi, Kolkata, Chandigarh, Chennai, Mumbai and also Branch Offices: Ahmedabad, Bangalore, Bhopal, Bhubaneshwar, Coimbatore, Guwahati, Hyderabad, Jaipur, Kanpur, Nagpur, Patna, Pune and Thiruvananthapuram. On line purchase of Indian standard can be made at: http://www.standardsbis.in.
[Ref. CHD 1/IS 299]
K. K. PAUL, Scientist 'E'
नई दिल्ली, 1 जुलाई, 2013
का.आ. 1251.- भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो नियम 1987 के नियम 7 के उपनियम (1) के खंड (ख) के अनुसरण में भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो एतद् द्वारा अधिसूचित करता है कि जिन भारतीय मानकों के विवरण नीचे अनुसूची में दिये गए हैं वे स्थापित हो गये हैं :
[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : जुलाई 6, 2013/आषाढ़ 15, 1935 3229अनुसूची
क्रम स्थापित भारतीय मानक(कों) नये भारतीय मानक द्वारा स्थापित तिथि संख्या की संख्या वर्ष और शीर्षक अतिक्रमित भारतीय
मानक अथवा मानकों,
यदि कोई हो, की संख्या
और वर्ष
(1) (2) (3) (4)
1 आईएस 10558ः2013 एल्यूमीनियम शोर गैंगवे- — अप्रैल 2013
विशिष्टि (पहला पुनरीक्षण)
2 आईएस 3175ः2013 आंतरिक दहन इंजिन-पाइप — मई 2013
जोड़ों के लिए सीलिंग वाशर विशिष्टि (दूसरा पुनरीक्षण)
3 आईएस 3732ः2013 दृढ लाइफरैफैट-विशिष्टि — मई 2013
(पहला पुनरीक्षण)
इस भारतीय मानक की प्रतियां भारतीय मानक ब्यूरो, मानक भवन, 9 बहादुर शाह जफर मार्ग, नई दिल्ली-110002, क्षेत्रीय कार्यालयों नई दिल्ली, कोलकाता, चंडीगढ़, चेन्नई, मुम्बई तथा शाखा कार्यालयोंः अहमदाबाद, बंगलौर, भोपाल, भुवनेश्वर, कोयम्बतूर, गुवाहाटी, हैदराबाद, जयपुर, कानपुर, नागपुर, पटना, पुणे तथा तिरूवनन्तापुरम में बिक्री हेतु उपलब्ध हैं।
[संदर्भ टीईडी/जी-16]
पी. सी. जोशी, वैज्ञानिक 'एफ' एवं प्रमुख (टीईडी)
New Delhi, the 1st July, 2013
S.O. 1251.—In pursuance of clause (b) of sub-rule(1) of Rules 7 of the Bureau of Indian Standards Rules, 1987, the Bureau of Indian Standards hereby notifies that the Indian Standards, particulars of which are given in the Scheduled hereto annexed have been established on the date indicated against each:
SCHEDULE
Sl. No., Years and Title of the No. & year of Indian Date of Established No. Indian Stardard Established Standard, if any
Superseded by the
New Indian Standard
(1) (2)
(3)
(4)
April 2013 1 IS 10558:2013 Aluminium shore gangways—Specification (First revision)
2 IS 3175:2013 Internal combustion engine— May 2013 Sealing washers of pine unions— Specification (Second revision)
3 IS 3732:2013 Rigid liferafts— May 2013 Specification (First revision)
Copy of this Standard is available for sale with the Bureau of Indian Standards, Manak Bhavan, 9 Bahadur Shah Zafar Marg, New Delhi-110 002 and Regional Offices: New Delhi, Kolkata, Chandigarh, Chennai, Mumbai and also Branch Offices: Ahmedabad, Bangalore, Bhopal, Bhubaneshwar, Coimbatore, Guwahati, Hyderabad, Jaipur, Kanpur, Nagpur, Patna, Pune and Thiruvananthapuram.
[Ref. TED/G-16]
P. C. JOSHI, Scientist 'F' & Head (Transport Engg.)3230 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 6, 2013/ASHADHA 15, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
कोयला मंत्रालय
नई दिल्ली, 3 जुलाई, 2013
का॰आ॰ 1252. —केन्द्रीय सरकार को यह प्रतीत होता है कि इससे उपाबद्ध अनुसूची में वर्णित परिक्षेत्र की भूमि में से कोयला अभिप्राप्त होने की संभावना है;
और रेखांक संख्या सी-1 (ई) III एफआर/889-1112, तारीख 2 नवम्बर, 2012, का जिसमें उक्त अनुसूची में वर्णित भू-क्षेत्र अन्तर्विष्ट है, निरीक्षण, वेस्टर्न कोलफील्ड्स लिमिटेड (राजस्व विभाग), कोल इस्टेट, सिविल लाईन्स, नागपुर-440001 (महाराष्ट्र) के कार्यालय में या मुख्य महाप्रबंधक (एक्सप्लोरेशन प्रभाग), केन्द्रीय खान योजना और डिजाइन संस्थान, गोंडवाना पॅलेस, कांके रोड, रांजची—834001 के कार्यालय में या कोयला नियंत्रक, 1 काउंसिल हाउस स्ट्रीट, कोलकाता-700001 के कार्यालय में या जिला कलेक्टर, नागपुर (महाराष्ट्र) के कार्यालय में किया जा सकेगा;
अतः अब, केन्द्रीय सरकार, कोयला धारक क्षेत्र (अर्जन और विकास) अधिनियम, 1957 (1957 का 20) (जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त अधिनियम कहा गया है) की धारा 4 की उपधारा (1) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए पूर्वोक्त अनुसूची में वर्णित भूमि में कोयले का पूर्वेक्षण करने के अपने आशय की सूचना देती है;
पूर्वोक्त अनुसूची में वर्णित भूमि में हितबद्ध कोई व्यक्ति इस अधिसूचना के प्रकाशन की तारीख से नब्बे दिन की अवधि के भीतर क्षेत्रीय महाप्रबंधक, वेस्टर्न कोलफील्ड्स लिमिटेड, नागपुर क्षेत्र, पोस्ट जरीपटका, तहसील नागपुर, जिला नागपुर-440014 (महाराष्ट्र) या महाप्रबंधक, वेस्टर्न कोलफील्ड्स लिमिटेड, भूमि और राजस्व विभाग, कोल इस्टेट, सिविल लाइन्स, नागपुर-440 001 (महाराष्ट्र) के कार्यालय में,-
(i) उक्त अधिसूचना की धारा 4 की उप-धारा (3) के अधीन की गई किसी कार्रवाई से हुई या सम्भवतः होने वाली किसी क्षति के लिए अधिनियम की धारा 6 के अधीन प्रतिकर का दावा कर सकेगी; या
(ii) उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 13 की उप-धारा (1) के अधीन पूर्वेक्षण अनुज्ञप्तियों के प्रभावहीन होने के संबंध में या उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 13 की उप-धारा (4) के अधीन खनन पट्टे के प्रभावहीन होने के लिए प्रतिकर का दावा कर सकेगा और उसे उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 13 की उपधारा (1) के खंड (i) से (iv)में विनिर्दिष्ट मदों की बाबत उपगत व्यय को उपदर्शित करने के लिए पूर्वोक्त भूमि से संबंधित सभी मानचित्रों, चार्टों और अन्य दस्तावेजों को परिदत्त कर सकेगा।
अनुसूची
संगम ब्लॉक
नागपुर क्षेत्र
जिला-नागपुर (महाराष्ट्र)
[रेखांक संख्या-सी-1 (ई)III/एफआर/889-1112, तारीख 2 नवम्बर, 2012]
क्र्र॰ सं॰ ग्राम का नाम पटवारी सर्किल संख्या तहसील जिला क्षेत्रफल टिप्पणी
(हेक्टर में)
1. गोण्डख्ैारी 24 कलमेश्वर नागपुर 22.25 भाग
2. पेन्ढ़ारी 6 हिंगना नागपुर 312.80 भाग
3. बड़धामना 6 हिंगना नागपुर 82.58 भाग
4. सवरधोटा 6 हिंगना नागपुर 129.14 भाग
5. सिन्का 59 हिंगना नागपुर 28.65 भाग
6. संगम 50 हिंगना नागपुर 191.34 भाग
7. खैरी (पन्नास) 50 हिंगना नागपुर 482.47 भाग
8. धानोली (किन्ही) 50 हिंगना नागपुर 126.37 भाग
कुल क्षेत्रः 1375.60 हेक्टर (लगभग)
या 3399.11 एकड़ (लगभग)[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : जुलाई 6, 2013/आषाढ़ 15, 1935 3231 सीमा वर्णनः
क-ख रेखा ग्राम गोण्डखैरी में बिन्दु 'क' से आरंभ होती है और ग्राम गोण्डखैरी से होकर गुजरती हुई, ग्राम गोण्डखैरी एवं ग्राम पेण्ढारी की सम्मिलित सीमा को पार करती है, फिर ग्राम पेण्ढ़ारी से गुजरती हुई ग्राम पेण्ढ़ारी एवं ग्राम वड़धामना की सम्मिलित सीमा को पार करती हुई, ग्राम बड़धामना में से गुजरती हुई बिन्दु 'ख' पर मिलती है।
ख-ग रेखा ग्राम वड़धामना में से गुजरती हुई ग्राम वड़धामना तथा संगम की सम्मिलित सीमा को पार करती हुई ग्राम संगम में बिन्दु 'ग' पर मिलती है।
ग-घ रेखा ग्राम संगम से गुजरती हुई, ग्राम संगम एवं ग्राम धानोली (किन्ही) की सम्मिलित सीमा को पार करती हुई ग्राम धानोली (किन्ही) के बिन्दु 'घ' पर मिलती है।
घ-क रेखा ग्राम धानोली (किन्ही) में से गुजरती हुई ग्राम धानोली (किन्ही) तथा ग्राम खैरी (पन्नासे) की सम्मिलित सीमा को पार करती हुई ग्राम खैरी पन्नासे में से गुजरती है फिर ग्राम खैरी (पन्नासे) एवं सिन्का की सम्मिलित सीमा को पार करती है, फिर ग्राम सिन्का में से गुजरती हुई ग्राम सिन्का एवं ग्राम पेन्ढ़ारी की सम्मिलित सीमा को पार करती है तथा ग्राम पेन्ढ़ारी में से गुजरती है और ग्राम पेन्ढ़ारी तथा ग्राम गोण्डखैरी की सम्मिलित सीमा को पार करती हुई ग्राम गोण्डखैरी में आरंभिक बिन्दु 'क' पर मिलती है।
[सं. 43015/36/2012-पीआरआईडब्ल्यू-I]
वी. एस. राणा, अवर सचिव
MINISTRY OF COAL
New Delhi, the 3rd July, 2013
S.O. 1252.— whereas it appears to the Central Government that Coal is likely to be obtained from the land in the locality described in the Schedule annexed hereto;
And Whereas the plan bearing number C-1(E)III/FR889-1112] dated the 2nd November, 2012 containing of the areas of land described in the said Schedule may be inspected at the office of the Western Coalifields limited (Revenue Department), Coal Estate, Civil Lines, Nagpur-440 001 (Maharashtra) or at the office of the Chief General Manager (Exploration Division), Central Mine Planning and Design Institute, Gondwana Palace, Kanke Road, Ranchi-834 001 or at the office of the Coal Controller, 1, Council House Street, Kolkata-700001 or at the office of the District Collector, Nagpur (Maharashtra);
Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (1) of Section 4 of the Coal Bearing Areas (Acquisition and Development) Act, 1957 (20 of 1957), (hereinafter referred to as the said Act), the Central Govern- ment hereby gives notice of its intention to prospect for coal in the land described in the abforesaid Schedule;
Any person interested in the land described in the aforesaid Schedule may—
(i) claim compensation under section 6 of the said Act for any damage caused or likely to be caused by any action taken under sub-section (3) of Section 4 of the said Act; or
(ii) claim compensation under sub-section (1) of section 13 of the Act in respect of prospecting license ceasing to have effect or under sub-section (4) of section 13 of the Act for mining lease ceasing to have effect and deliver all maps, charts and other documents relating to the aforesaid land to show the expenditure incurred in respect of items specified in clauses (i) to (iv) of sub-section (1) of Section 13 of the said Act.
to the office of the Area General Manager, Western Coalifields Limited, Nagpur Area, Post Jaripatka, Tahsil Nagpur, District Nagpur- 440014 (Maharashtra) or General Manager, Western Coalifields Limited, Land and Revenue Depart- ment, Coal Estate, Civil Lines, Nagpur-440 0014 (Maharashtra) within a period of ninety days from the date of publica- tion of this notification.
3232 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 6, 2013/ASHADHA 15, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]SCHEDULE
Sangam Block
Nagpur Area
District Nagpur (Maharashtra)
(plan bearing number C-1(E)III/FR/889-112, dated 2nd November, 2012)
Sl. Name of village Patwari Circle Tahsil District Area (in Remarks No. Number hectares) 1 Gondkhairi 24 Kalmeshwar Nagpur 22.25 Part 2 Pendhari 6 Hingna Nagpur 312.80 Part 3 Waddhamana 6 Hingna Nagpur 82.58 Part 4 Sawardhota 6 Hingna Nagpur 129.14 Full 5 Sinka 59 Hingna Nagpur 28.65 Part 6 Sangam 50 Hingna Nagpur 191.34 Part 7 Khairi (Pannase) 50 Hingna Nagpur 482.47 Part 8 Dhanoli (Kinhi) 50 Hingna Nagpur 126.37 Part
Total area: 1375.60 hectares (approximately)
or 3399.11 acres (approximately) Boundary description:
A-B: Lines starts from Point 'A' from village Gondkhairi and passes through village Gondkhairi, then crosses the common boundary of villages Gondkhairi and Pendhari and passes through village Pendhari, then crosses the common boundary of villages Pendhari and Waddhamana and meets at Point 'B' in village Waddhamana.
B-C: Line passes through village Waddhamana, then crosses the common boundary of villages Waddhamana and Sangam and meets at Point 'C' in village Sangam.
C-D: Line passes through village Sangam and crosses the common boundary of villages Sangam and Dhanoli (Kinhi) and meets at Point 'D' in village Dhanoli (Kinhi).
D-A: Line passes through village Dhanoli (Kinhi), then crosses the common boundary of villages Dhanoli (Kinhi) and Khairi (Pannase) and crosses the common boundary of villages Khairi (Pannase) and Sinka, then crosses the common boudary of villages Khairi (Pannase) and Pendhari and crosses the common boundary of villages Pendhari and Gondkhairi and meets at starting Point 'A'.
[No. 43015/36/2012-PRIW-I]
V. S. RANA, Under Secy.
नई दिल्ली, 3 जुलाई, 2013
का॰आ॰ 1253.- केन्द्रीय सरकार ने कोयला धारक क्षेत्र (अर्जन और विकास) अधिनियम, 1957 (1957 का 20) (जिसे इसमें इसके पश्चात् उक्त अधिनियम कहा गया है) की धारा 4 की उपधारा (1) के अधीन भारत सरकार में कोयला मंत्रालय के द्वारा जारी की गई अधिसूचना संख्यांक का॰आ॰ 2349, तारीख 29 अगस्त, 2011 जो भारत के राजपत्र के भाग II, खंड 3, उपखंड (ii), तारीख 3 सितम्बर, 2011 में प्रकाशित की गई थी, उस अधिसूचना से संलग्न अनुसूची में विनिर्दिष्ट परिक्षेत्र की भूमि में जिसका माप 103.000 हेक्टर (लगभग) या 254.51 एकड़ (लगभग) है, कोयले का पूर्वेक्षण करने के अपने आशय की सूचना दी थी;
और केन्द्रीय सरकार को यह समाधान हो गया है कि उक्त भूमि में कोयला अभिप्राप्त है।
अतः केन्द्रीय सरकार, उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 7 की उप-धारा (1) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए इससे संलग्न अनुसूची में वर्णित 102.181 हेक्टर (लगभग) या 252.49 एकड़ (लगभग) माप की उक्त भूमि में या उस पर के भू-सतह का अर्जन करने के अपने आशय की सूचना देती है।
टिप्पण 1ः इस अधिसूचना के अधीन आने वाले क्षेत्र के रेखांक संख्या एसईसीएल/बीएसपी/जीएम (पीएलजी)/भूमि/437, तारीख 28 जनवरी, 2013 का निरीक्षण कलक्टर, जिला उमारिया (मध्य प्रदेश) के कार्यालय में या कोयला नियंत्रक, 1, काउंसिल हाउस स्ट्रीट, कोलकाता-700001 के कार्यालय में या साउथ ईस्टर्न कोलफील्ड्स लिमिटेड (राजस्व अनुभाग), सीपत रोड, बिलासपुर-495006 (छत्तीसगढ़) के कार्यालय में किया जा सकता है।
[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : जुलाई 6, 2013/आषाढ़ 15, 1935 3233टिप्पण 2ः उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 8 के उपबंधों की ओर ध्यान आकृष्ट किया जाता है, जिसमें निम्नलिखित उपबंध हैः-
अर्जन के बाबत् आपत्तियॉः
''8. (1) कोई व्यक्ति जो किसी भूमि में जिसकी बाबत् धारा 7 के अधीन अधिसूचना निकाली गई है, हितबद्ध है, अधिसूचना के निकाले जाने से तीस दिन के भीतर सम्पूर्ण भूमि या उसके किसी भाग या ऐसी भूमि में या उस पर के किन्हीं अधिकारों का अर्जन किए जाने के बारे में आपत्ति कर सकेगा।
स्पष्टीकरणः-इस धारा के अन्तर्गत यह आपत्ति नहीं मानी जाएगी कि कोई व्यक्ति किसी भूमि में कोयला उत्पादन के लिए स्वयं खनन संक्रियाएं करना चाहता है और ऐसी संक्रियाएं केन्द्रीय सरकार या किसी अन्य व्यक्ति को नहीं करनी चाहिए।
(2) उपधारा (1) के अधीन प्रत्येक आपत्ति सक्षम अधिकारी को लिखित रूप में की जाएगी और सक्षम अधिकारी, आपत्तिकर्ता को स्वयं सुने जाने, विधि व्यवसायी द्वारा सुनवाई का अवसर देगा और ऐसी सभी आपत्तियों को सुनने के पश्चात् और ऐसी अतिरिक्त जांच, यदि कोई हो, करने के पश्चात्, जो वह आवश्यक समझता है, वह या तो धारा 7 की उप-धारा (1) के अधीन अधिसूचित भूमि का या ऐसी भूमि में या उस पर के अधिकारों के संबंध में एक रिपोर्ट या ऐसी भूमि के विभिन्न टुकड़े या ऐसी भूमि में या उस पर के अधिकारों के संबंध में आपत्तियों पर अपनी सिफारिशें और उसके द्वारा की गई कार्यवाही के अभिलेख सहित विभिन्न रिपोर्टं केन्द्रीय सरकार को उसके विनिश्चय के लिए देगा।
(3) इस धारा के प्रयोजनों के लिए वह व्यक्ति किसी भूमि में हितबद्ध समझा जाएगा जो प्रतिकर में हित का दावा करने का हकदार होगा, यदि भूमि या किसी ऐसी भूमि में या उस पर के अधिकार इस अधिनियम के अधीन अर्जित कर लिए जाते हैं।''
टिप्पण 3ः केन्द्रीय सरकार द्वारा भारत के राजपत्र, भाग II, खण्ड 3, उप-खण्ड (ii) तारीख 4 अप्रैल, 1987 में प्रकाशित अधिसूचना संख्यांक का॰ आ॰ 905, तारीख 20 मार्च, 1987 द्वारा कोयला नियंत्रक, 1, काउंसिल हाउस स्ट्रीट, कोलकाता-700001 को उक्त अधिनियम की धारा 3 के अधीन सक्षम प्राधिकारी नियुक्त किया जाता है।
अनुसूची
पिनौरा डिपिलरिंग ब्लाक, फेज-2, जोहिला क्षेत्र
जिला - उमरिया (मध्य प्रदेश)
[रेखांक संख्या एसईसीएल/बीएसपी/जीएम(पीएलजी)/भूमि/437, तारीख 28 जनवरी, 2013]
भू-सतह अधिकारः
क्र॰ ग्राम का पटवारी जनरल तहसील जिला क्षेत्र टिप्पणी सं॰ नाम हल्का संख्यांक हेक्टर में
संख्यांक
1. देवरी अमहाई 67 334 नौरोजाबाद उमरिया 65.730 भाग 2. पिनौरा 67 413 नौरोजाबाद उमरिया 36.451 भाग
कुलः-102.181 हेक्टर (लगभग)
या 252.49 एकड़ (लगभग) 1. ग्राम देवरी अमहाई (भाग) में अर्जित किए जाने वाले प्लाट संख्याः
87 (भाग), 88 (भाग), 104 (भाग), 105 (भाग),
106 (भाग), 107 (भाग), 108 (भाग), 109 (भाग), 110 (भाग), 111 (भाग), 112 (भाग), 130, 131 (भाग), 132 (भाग), 133 से 139, 140 (भाग), 143 (भाग), 145 (भाग), 147 (भाग), 148 से 183, 184 (भाग), 185 (भाग), 190 (भाग), 191 (भाग), 192 (भाग), 193, 194 (भाग), 195 (भाग), 196 (भाग)।
2. ग्राम पिनौरा (भाग) में अर्जित किए जाने वाले प्लाट संख्याः
493 (भाग), 495 (भाग), 496 (भाग), 547 (भाग), 549 (भाग), 550 (भाग), 551, 552, 553 (भाग), 557 (भाग), 558 से 563, 565 (भाग), 578 से 587, 598 (भाग), 599, 600, 605, 633 (भाग)।
3234 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 6, 2013/ASHADHA 15, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]सीमा वर्णनः
क-ख रेखा, ग्राम देवरी अमहाई में बिन्दु ''क'' से आरंभ होती है और प्लाट संख्यांक 145, 147, 143, 140, 131, 88, 105, 106, 107/2, 107/1, 108, 109, 110, 111 से होकर जाती है फिर ग्राम पिनौरा में प्रवेश करती है और प्लाट संख्यांक 547, 549, 550, 553, 557, 496, 495, 493, 565 से गुजरती है और बिन्दु ''ख'' पर मिलती है।
ख-ग रेखा, ग्राम पिनौरा के प्लाट संख्यांक 565 से होकर प्लाट संख्यांक 563, 578, 586 के पूर्वी, प्लाट संख्यांक 587, 598 के पूर्वी
और दक्षिणी, 599 के उत्तरी और पूर्वी, 600, 605 के पूर्वी सीमा से होती हुई जाती है और बिन्दु ''ग'' पर मिलती है।
ग-घ रेखा, ग्राम पिनौरा के प्लाट संख्यांक 605 के दक्षिणी सीमा और 633 से होकर जाती है फिर ग्राम देवरी अमहाई में प्रवेश करती
है फिर प्लाट संख्यांक 185, 184, 190, 191, 192, 194, 195, 196/1 से होती हुई जाती है और बिन्दु ''घ'' पर मिलती है।
घ-क रेखा, ग्राम देवरी अमहाई के प्लाट संख्यांक 196/1, 196/2, 145 से होकर गुजरती है और आरंभिक बिन्दु ''क'' पर मिलती है।
[सं॰ 43015-05/2011-पीआरआईडब्ल्यू—I]
वी॰ एस॰ राणा, अवर सचिव
New Delhi, the 3rd July, 2013
S.O. 1253.—Whereas by the notification of the Government of India in the Ministry of Coal number S.O. 2349, dated the 29th August, 2011 issued under sub-section (1) of Section 4 of the Coal Bearing Areas (Acquisition and Development) Act, 1957 (20 or 1957) (hereinafter referred to as the said Act), and published in the Gazette of India, Part-II, Section 3, sub-section (ii), dated the 3rd September, 2011, the Central Government gave notice of its intention to prospect for coal in 103.000 hectares (approximately) or 254.51 acres (approximately) of the land 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 the said land specified in the Schedule appended to this notification.
Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (1) of Section 7 of the said Act, the Central Government hereby gives notice of its intention to acquire the land measuring 102.181 hectares (approximately) or 252.49 acres (approximately) as Surface Rights in and over the said land described in the Schedule apended hereto.
Note 1: The plan bearing number SECL/BSP/GM(PLG)/LAND/437, dated the 28th January, 2013 of the area covered by this notification may be inspected in the office of the Collector, District Umaria (Madhya Pradesh) or in the office of the Coal Controller, 1, Council House Street, Kolkata-700001 or in the office of the South Eastern Coalfields Limited (Revenue Section), Seepat Road, Bilaspur-495006 (Chhattisgarh).
Note 2: Attention is hereby invited to the provisions of Section 8 of the said Act which provides as follows:—
Objection to acquisition:
"8. (1) Any person interested in any land in respect of which a notification under 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 any rights in or over such land.
Explanation.—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) 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 the proceedings held by him, for the decision of the Government.
[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : जुलाई 6, 2013/आषाढ़ 15, 1935 3235(3) For the purposes 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 Notificiation Number S.O. 905, dated the 20th March, 1987, published in Part II, Section 3, Sub-section (ii) of the Gazette of India, dated the 4th April, 1987.
SCHEDULE
Pinoura Depillaring Block, Phase-IInd, Johilla Area
District - Umaria (Madhya Pradesh)
[Plan bearing number SECL/BSP/GM(PLG)/LAND 437, dated the 28th January, 2013]
Surface Rights:
Sr. Name of Patwari General Tahsil District Area in Remarks No. village halk number
hectares
1. Deori Amhai 67 334 Nowrozabad Umaria 65.730 Part 2. Pinoura 67 413 Nowrozabad Umaria 36.451 Part
Total:-102.181 hectares (approximately)
or 252.49 acres (approximately) 1. Plot number to be acquired in village Deori Amhai (Part):
87 (P), 88 (P), 104 (P), 105 (P), 106 (P), 107 (P), 108 (P), 109 (P), 110 (P), 111 (P), 112 to 130, 131 (P), 132 (P), 133 to 139, 140 (P), 143 (P), 145 (P), 147 (P), 148 to 183, 184 (P), 185 (P), 190 (P), 191 (P), 192(P), 193, 194 (P), 195 (P), 196 (P)
2. Plot numbers to be acquired in village Pinoura (Part):
493 (P), 495 (P), 496 (P), 547 (P), 549 (P), 550 (P), 551, 552, 553 (P), 557(P), 558 to 563, 565 (P), 578 to 587, 598 (P) 599, 600, 605, 633 (P).
Boundary description:
A-B Line starts from point 'A' in village Deori Amhai and passes through plot number 145, 147, 143, 140, 131, 88, 105, 106, 107/2, 107/1, 108, 109, 110, 111 then enter in village pinoura and passes through 547, 549, 550, 553, 557, 496, 495, 493, 565 and meets at point 'B'.
B-C Line passes in village Pinoura throught plot number 565, along eastern boundary of plot number 563, 578, 586, eastern and southern boundary of plot number 587, 598, northern and eastern boundary of plot number 599, eastern boundary of plot number 600, 605 and meets at point 'C'.
C-D Line passes in village Pinoura along southern boundary of plot number 605, through 633 then enter in village Deori Amhai and passes through 185, 184, 190, 191, 192, 194, 195, 196/1 and meets at point 'D'.
D-A Line passes in village Deori Amhai through plot number 196/1, 196/2, 145 and meets at starting point 'A'.
[No. 43015-05/2011-PRIW-I]
V. S. RANA, Under Secy.
isVªksfy;e vkSj izkdfrd xSl ea=ky;
नई दिल्ली, 2 जुलाई, 2013
का. आ. 1254. —केन्द्रीय सरकार को लोकहित में यह आवश्यक प्रतीत होता है कि छत्तीसगढ़ राज्य में पारादीप (उड़ीसा) से रायपुर (छत्तीसगढ़) एवं राँची (झारखण्ड) तक पेट्रोलियम उत्पादाें के परिवहन के लिये इंडियन ऑयल कार्पोरेशन लिमिटेड द्वारा पाइपलाइन बिछाई जानी चाहिए ।
3236 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 6, 2013/ASHADHA 15, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]और केन्द्रीय सरकार को ऐसी पाइपलाइन बिछाने के प्रयोजन के लिये यह आवश्यक प्रतीत होता है कि ऐसी भूमि में जो इस से उपाबद्ध अनुसूची मे वर्णित है, और जिसमें उक्त पाइपलाइन बिछाई जाने का प्रस्ताव है, उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन किया जाए ।
अतः अब, केन्द्रीय सरकार, पेट्रोलियम और खनिज पाइपलाइन (भूमि मे उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन) अधिनियम,1962 (1962 का 50) की धारा 3 की उपधारा (1) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियो का प्रयोग करते हुए उस भूमि में उपयोग के अधिकार का अर्जन करने के अपने आशय की घोषणा करती है ।
कोई व्यक्ति, जो उक्त अनुसूची में वर्णित भूमि में हितबद्ध है,उस तारीख से, जिसको इस अधिसूचना में युक्त भारत के राजपत्र की प्रतियांँ साधारण जनता को उपलब्ध करा दी जाती है, इक्कीस दिन के भीतर, भूमि के नीचे पाइपलाइन बिछाए जाने के लिए उसमें उपयोग के अधिकार के अर्जन के संबधं में श्री दिलीप कुमार अग्रवाल, सक्षम प्राधिकारी, पारादीप- सम्बलपुर-रायपुर-राँची पाइपलाइन परियोजना, ए-13, सेक्टर 1, अवंति विहार, रायपुर -492006 (छत्तीसगढ़) को लिखित रुप में आक्षेप भेज सकेगा ।
vuqlwph
तहसील : जैजैपुर जिला : जांजगीर-चांपा राज्य : छत्तीसगढ
क्र. गांव का नाम खसरा क्षेत्रफल सं. स
ं. हेक्टयर एयर वर्ग मीटर
1 2 3 4 5 6
1 परसदा 177/8 00 09 72
177/9 00 00 92
177/7,177/13 00 03 96
177/12 00 01 76
177/10 00 08 94
286/6 00 01 35
286/3 00 03 00
224 00 03 60
251 00 04 62
164/1 00 04 88
2 हसौद 1652 00 01 00
1696 00 14 94
2264 00 00 43
1676 00 00 35
1677 00 01 91 1 2 3 4 5 6
1693 00 04 59
1690 00 01 98
3 देवरघटा 851 00 00 36
869 00 02 40
792 00 01 87
856 00 01 01
728/1 00 01 89
844,845 00 06 70
4 बैहागुडरू 15 00 02 03
36 00 11 73
795 00 06 94
876 00 01 20
48/1 00 00 45
20 00 00 36
19 00 00 76
738 00 03 26
44 00 02 77
737 00 02 01
33 00 04 17
42 00 07 54
5. तुमीडीह 45/26 00 20 16
46 00 11 44
88 00 00 66
268 00 03 25
293 00 02 08
45/1ज 00 02 45
45/1ठ 00 01 71
266 00 11 15
68 00 00 47
77 00 00 94
53 00 00 55
52 00 02 28
56/6 क 00 03 78
6 कुटराबोड 1556 00 02 95
1551/2 00 07 00[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : जुलाई 6, 2013/आषाढ़ 15, 1935 3237
1 2 3 4 5 6 1 2 3 4 5 6
6 कुटराबोड ;जारीद्ध 1604/4 00 08 46 7 ओडे़केरा 2849/1 00 02 35
1290/3 00 00 20 2852 00 05 28
1562/2 00 00 20 2891/2 00 03 33
1562/4 00 00 53 2897 00 05 58
1388/3 00 00 10 415/3 00 01 12
1388/2,1388/4 00 02 53 495/6 00 02 10
1272/7 00 03 42 2840 /का टुकड़ा 00 05 40
1618 00 01 25 2895 00 01 32
1385/1,1386/1 00 01 18 1408/4 00 03 45
1561 00 00 69 1408/1 00 01 01
1390 00 00 37 1449 00 00 44
1382,1383 00 01 63 1510/2 00 01 11
1378/1 00 01 97 1510/4 00 03 21
1378/4 00 02 29 1513 00 01 22
1299 00 02 92 1543 00 01 29
1303 00 02 44 1098 00 02 46
1302 00 01 66 1095 00 00 56
1304 00 02 50 488 00 00 75
1358/1 00 00 15 494/2 00 01 47
1523 00 00 83 261 00 00 51
7 ओडे़केरा 1097/4 00 09 90 1276/2 00 05 07
1148/3 00 04 36 195 00 00 52
1411/3 00 00 44 31/1 00 01 44
1412/2 00 03 06 53 00 00 58
1462/1 00 02 36
1414/4 00 07 56
1284/2 00 00 53
1414/7 00 04 68
1501 00 01 83
1467/3 00 04 50
1415 00 00 62
1502/1 00 01 37
1400 00 01 65
1502/2 00 05 16 1397 00 00 12
1502/3 00 05 22 44 00 01 27
1510/2 00 01 11 197/2 00 00 56
244/3 00 01 80 412 00 01 15
410 00 03 09
244/6 00 01 40
1286/2 00 00 53
244/7 00 02 60
2851/2 00 02 54
2849/3 00 05 04
2841 00 01 15
2899 00 01 97
3238 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 6, 2013/ASHADHA 15, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
1 2 3 4 5 6 1 2 3 4 5 6
7 ओडे़केरा ;जारीद्ध 2901/2 00 07 75 9 ठठारी ;जारीद्ध 570 00 03 14
1450 00 02 05 102 00 03 63
1394 00 01 12 10 गुचकुलिया 16 00 00 30
8 गलगलाडीह 715/1ह 00 04 46 (महाल नम्बर-1)
715/1भ 00 00 38 11 गुचकुलिया 98 00 12 97
(महाल नम्बर-2)
715/1ङ 00 10 26
70 00 00 70
715/1थ 00 02 73
12 गुचकुलिया 81 00 05 11
715/1 ण 00 01 85 (महाल नम्बर-3)
698 00 00 35
80 00 00 26
700 00 03 47
84 00 00 20
9 ठठारी 238 00 01 86 88 00 00 84
72 00 01 68 98 00 29 16
571 00 00 92 83 00 00 74
247 00 01 50 13 नन्देली 727/1 00 02 52
263/2 00 01 50 (महाल नम्बर-1) 658/2 00 08 04
2545/2 00 08 28 667 00 09 75
597/1 का टुकड़ा 00 00 72 730 00 01 29
248 00 02 39 662 00 04 51
245 00 07 56 811 00 00 54
2024 00 29 14 813 00 02 13
2025 00 09 26 725 00 02 59
2023/ का टुकड़ा 00 32 02 653 00 01 90
666 00 05 41
246/1 00 03 00
818 00 03 91
62,63 00 01 72
663 00 05 89
67 00 00 40
721 00 03 86
2482 00 02 54
719 00 01 91
2520 00 02 00
716 00 00 67
2546 00 03 68
2539 00 01 50 14 नन्देली 690 00 01 96
(महाल नम्बर-2) 692 00 00 31
567 00 00 58
700 00 09 82
237 00 04 01
17 00 10 40
103 00 01 18
101 00 02 51 15 कोटेतरा 322 00 00 42
59,60 00 03 15 261 00 01 85
98 00 00 28 748 00 06 23
[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : जुलाई 6, 2013/आषाढ़ 15, 1935 3239
1 2 3 4 5 6 1 2 3 4 5 6
15 कोटेतरा ;जारीद्ध 310 00 03 96 16 तुसार ;जारीद्ध 460 00 01 06
810 00 00 57 423 00 00 20
329 00 15 30 67 00 00 88
38 00 19 06 140 00 09 88
317 00 05 40 134 00 00 74
911,912/2 00 02 66 456 00 03 74
848 00 01 19 458 00 00 69
274 00 12 52 416 00 00 87
272 00 00 80 111 00 02 52
809 00 00 30 115 00 00 42
34 00 00 54 17 ठूठी 581 00 07 46
306 00 00 95 571 00 04 67
28 00 01 01 678 00 06 84
326 00 01 13 83 00 09 36
841 00 01 47 578 00 03 15
30 00 02 06 650 00 18 00
308 00 01 81 569 00 05 15
847 00 05 88 559 00 07 17
241 00 01 19 544 00 00 89
917 00 00 38 580 00 02 93
325 00 02 20 665 00 17 03
37 00 00 29 545 00 02 27
330 00 06 86 673 00 06 96
16 तुसार 145 00 01 15 557 00 00 61
438 00 00 33 552 00 04 06
66 00 02 61
[सं. आर-25011/2 8/2011-ओआर-I]
439 00 01 19
पवन कुमार, अवर सचिव
455 00 02 83
MINISTRY OF PETROLEUM AND NATURAL GAS
77 00 02 40
New Delhi, the 2nd July, 2013
137 00 01 27
S.O. 1254.—Whereas, it appears to the Central
373 00 00 92 Government that it is necessary in the public interest that
404 00 00 45 for the transportation of petroleum products from Paradip
(Orissa) to Raipur (Chhattisgarh)& Ranchi (Jharkhand), a
642 00 05 40 Pipeline" should be laid by Indian Oil Corporation
16 00 05 84 Limited;
And w]hereas, it appears to the Central Government
136 00 01 57
that for the purpose of laying such pipeline, it is necessary
144 00 01 92 to acquire the right of user in the land under which the
3240 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 6, 2013/ASHADHA 15, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
said pipeline is proposed to be laid and which is described 1 2 3 4 5 6
in the schedule annexed hereto ;
Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred 3 Devarghata 792 00 01 87
by sub-section (1) of Section 3 of the Petroleum and (Contd.) 856 00 01 01
Minerals Pipelines (Acquisition of Right of User in land)
Act, 1962 (50 of 1962), the Central Government hereby 728/1 00 01 89
declares its intention to acquire the right of user therein; 844,845 00 06 70
Any person interested in the land described in the
4 Baihagudru 15 00 02 03
said schedule may, within twenty–one days from the date
on which the copies of the Gazette of India containing 36 00 11 73
this notification are made available to the General Public,
795 00 06 94
object in writing to the acquisition of the right of user
therein or laying of the pipeline under the land to 876 00 01 20
Shri Dilip Kumar Agrawal,Competent Authority, Indian
48/1 00 00 45
Oil Corporation Limited,Paradip – Sambalpur – Raipur –
Ranchi Pipeline Project, A-13, Sector -1, Avanti Vihar, 20 00 00 36
Raipur – 492006, Chhattisgarh.
19 00 00 76
SCHEDULE
738 00 03 26
Tehsil : Jajaipur District: Janjgir State : Chhattisgarh
44 00 02 77
Champa
737 00 02 01
Sl. Name of the Khasara Area
33 00 04 17
No. Village No. Hectare Are Sq.mtr.
42 00 07 54
1 2 3 4 5 6
5 Tumidih 45/26 00 20 16
1 Parsada 177/8 00 09 72 46 00 11 44
177/9 00 00 92 88 00 00 66
177/7,177/13 00 03 96 268 00 03 25
177/12 00 01 76 293 00 02 08
177/10 00 08 94 45/1 G 00 02 45
286/6 00 01 35 45/1Tha 00 01 71
286/3 00 03 00 266 00 11 15
224 00 03 60 68 00 00 47
251 00 04 62 77 00 00 94
164/1 00 04 88 53 00 00 55
2 Hasaud 1652 00 01 00 52 00 02 28
1696 00 14 94 56/6 K 00 03 78
2264 00 00 43 6 Kutrabod 1556 00 02 95
1676 00 00 35 1551/2 00 07 00
1677 00 01 91 1604/4 00 08 46
1693 00 04 59 1290/3 00 00 20
1690 00 01 98 1562/2 00 00 20
3 Devarghata 851 00 00 36 1562/4 00 00 53
869 00 02 40 1388/3 00 00 10
[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : जुलाई 6, 2013/आषाढ़ 15, 1935 3241
1 2 3 4 5 6 1 2 3 4 5 6
1388/2,1388/4 00 02 53 2895 00 01 32
1272/7 00 03 42 1408/4 00 03 45
1618 00 01 25 1408/1 00 01 01
1385/1,1386/1 00 01 18 1449 00 00 44
1561 00 00 69 1510/2 00 01 11
1390 00 00 37 1510/4 00 03 21
1382,1383 00 01 63 1513 00 01 22
1378/1 00 01 97 1543 00 01 29
1378/4 00 02 29 1098 00 02 46
1299 00 02 92 1095 00 00 56
1303 00 02 44 488 00 00 75
1302 00 01 66 494/2 00 01 47
1304 00 02 50 261 00 00 51
1358/1 00 00 15 1276/2 00 05 07
1523 00 00 83 195 00 00 52
7 Odekera 1097/4 00 09 90 31/1 00 01 44
1148/3 00 04 36 53 00 00 58
1411/3 00 00 44 1462/1 00 02 36
1412/2 00 03 06 1284/2 00 00 53
1414/4 00 07 56
1501 00 01 83
1414/7 00 04 68
1415 00 00 62
1467/3 00 04 50
1400 00 01 65
1502/1 00 01 37
1397 00 00 12
1502/2 00 05 16
1502/3 00 05 22 44 00 01 27
1510/2 00 01 11 197/2 00 00 56
244/3 00 01 80 412 00 01 15
244/6 00 01 40 410 00 03 09
244/7 00 02 60
1286/2 00 00 53
2849/3 00 05 04
2851/2 00 02 54
2899 00 01 97
2841 00 01 15
2849/1 00 02 35
2901/2 00 07 75
2852 00 05 28
2891/2 00 03 33 1450 00 02 05
2897 00 05 58 1394 00 01 12
415/3 00 01 12 8 Galgaladih 715/1H 00 04 46
495/6 00 02 10 715/1BHa 00 00 38
2840 /Ka Tukdha 00 05 40 715/1 Anga 00 10 26
3242 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 6, 2013/ASHADHA 15, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
1 2 3 4 5 6 1 2 3 4 5 6
715/1Tha 00 02 73 12 Guchkuliya 81 00 05 11
(Mahal-3) 80 00 00 26
715/1 Anda 00 01 85
84 00 00 20
698 00 00 35
88 00 00 84
700 00 03 47
98 00 29 16
9 Thathari 238 00 01 86
83 00 00 74
72 00 01 68
13 Nandeli 727/1 00 02 52
571 00 00 92 (Mahal-1) 658/2 00 08 04
247 00 01 50 667 00 09 75
263/2 00 01 50 730 00 01 29
2545/2 00 08 28 662 00 04 51
597/1 Ka Tukdha 00 00 72 811 00 00 54
248 00 02 39 813 00 02 13
245 00 07 56 725 00 02 59
2024 00 29 14 653 00 01 90
2025 00 09 26 666 00 05 41
2023/KaTukdha 00 32 02 818 00 03 91
246/1 00 03 00 663 00 05 89
62, 63 00 01 72
721 00 03 86
67 00 00 40
719 00 01 91
2482 00 02 54
716 00 00 67
2520 00 02 00
14 Nandeli 690 00 01 96
2546 00 03 68
(Mahal-2) 692 00 00 31
2539 00 01 50
700 00 09 82
567 00 00 58
17 00 10 40
237 00 04 01
15 Kotetra 322 00 00 42
103 00 01 18
261 00 01 85
101 00 02 51
748 00 06 23
59, 60 00 03 15
310 00 03 96
98 00 00 28
810 00 00 57
570 00 03 14
329 00 15 30
102 00 03 63
38 00 19 06
10 Guchkuliya 16 00 00 30
317 00 05 40
(Mahal-1)
911, 912/2 00 02 66
11 Guchkuliya 98 00 12 97
(Mahal-2) 848 00 01 19
70 00 00 70 274 00 12 52
[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : जुलाई 6, 2013/आषाढ़ 15, 1935 3243
1 2 3 4 5 6 1 2 3 4 5 6
272 00 00 80 115 00 00 42
809 00 00 30 17 Thuthi 581 00 07 46
34 00 00 54 571 00 04 67
306 00 00 95 678 00 06 84
83 00 09 36
28 00 01 01
578 00 03 15
326 00 01 13 650 00 18 00
841 00 01 47 569 00 05 15
559 00 07 17
30 00 02 06
544 00 00 89
308 00 01 81 580 00 02 93
847 00 05 88 665 00 17 03
545 00 02 27
241 00 01 19
673 00 06 96
917 00 00 38
557 00 00 61
325 00 02 20
552 00 04 06
37 00 00 29
[No. R-25011/ 28 /2011-OR-I]
330 00 06 86
16 Tushar 145 00 01 15 PAWAN KUMAR, Under Secy.
श्रम और रोजगार मंत्रालय
438 00 00 33
66 00 02 61
439 00 01 19
455 00 02 83
77 00 02 40
137 00 01 27
373 00 00 92
404 00 00 45
642 00 05 40
16 00 05 84
136 00 01 57 नई दिल्ली, 10 जून, 2013
का॰आ॰ 1255. — औद्योगिक विवाद अध्निियम, 1947 (1947 का 14) की धरा के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार प्रिन्सीपल, सैन्ट स्टीफन कालिज,के प्रबंध्तंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध् में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अध्किरण/श्रम न्यायालय सं. 1, नई दिल्ली के पंचाट (संदर्भ संख्या 141/2012) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 06-06-2013 को प्राप्त हुआ था।
[फा. सं. एल-42012/09/2012—आईआर(डीयू)] जोहन तोपनो, अवर सचिव
MINISTRY OF LABOUR AND EMPLOYMENT
144 00 01 92
New Delhi, the 10th June, 2013
460 00 01 06
S.O. 1255.—In pursuance of Section 2A (2) of the
423 00 00 20
Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central
67 00 00 88 Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 141/
140 00 09 88 2012) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-
Labour Court, No. 1, New Delhi as shown in the Annexure,
134 00 00 74 in the Industrial dispute between the employers in relation
456 00 03 74 to the management of The Principal, St. Stephen's College,
which was received by the Central Government on
458 00 00 69
06/06/2013.
416 00 00 87
[F.No. L-42012/09/2012-IR(DU)]
111 00 02 52
3244 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 6, 2013/ASHADHA 15, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
JOHAN TOPNO, Under Secy.
ANNEXURE
license fees thereof from salary of December, 2010 onward by the principal/management of St. Stephen's College, University of Delhi, Delhi is justified or not? If not, What relief the workman concerned is entitled to?" BEFORE DR. R.K. YADAV, PRESIDING OFFICER, CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL NO.1, KARKARDOOMA COURTS COMPLEX, DELHI.
I.D. No. 141/2012
Mohd. Yasin S/o Wali Mohd. R/o Servants Quarter No. 2, Near Principal's Residence, St. Stephen's College, Delhi University, Delhi-110007
....Workman
Versus
The Principal, St. Stephen's College, Delhi University, Delhi-110007 ..... Management
AWARD
Mohd. Yasin works as a mess helper with St. Stephen College, University of Delhi, since 1992. In the year 2005, his wife suffered burn injuries. On humiliation considerations, St. Stephen's College (hereinafter referred to as the College) decided to accommodate him in quarter No. 2, attached with Principal's residence, as a temporary measure. He assured the College that he will vacate the said quarter as and when so demanded, since the quarter was specially ment to accommodate servants who were attached to the Principal's residence. On 9.11.10, the Principal of the College asked Shri Yasin to vacate the quarter. Shri Yasin did not comply with the request. On 29.11.10, he was again asked to vacate the quarter, which request was also not complied with. The College filed a suit for recovery of possession against Mohd. Yasin, which pends adjudication before Civil Judge, Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi. Mohd. Yasin also filed a Civil suit seeking prohibitory orders against the College, which suit was later on withdrawn by him. Thereafter he approached the Conciliation Officer, thereby raising an industrial dispute before him. Since the College contested his claim, conciliation proceedings ended into a failure. On consideration of failure report, submitted by the Conciliation Officer, the appropriate Govt. referred the dispute to the Central Govt. Industrial Tribunal No. 2, New Delhi, for adjudication, vide No. 42012/09/2012- ID(DU) New Delhi, dated 13.09.2013, with following terms:
"Whether the action of the Principal/Management of St. Stephen's College, University of Delhi, Delhi asking the workman, Mess Helper, Mohd. Yasin S/o Wali Mohd. to vacate the quarter No.2 and non deduction of rent/ 2. Claim statement was filed by Shri Mohd. Yasin (hereinafter referred to as the claimant) pleading therein that he was working as mess helper with the College since 1992. His wife suffered burn injuries in the year 2005, for which she was treated at Sunder Lal Jain Hospital, Ashok Vihar, New Delhi. The claimant was in dire need of a reasonable accommodation, hence applied to the College for allotment of a staff quarter on medical grounds. The College allotted him quarter No. 2, attached with the Principal's residence in Feb. 2008. On 9.11.10, the Principal asked him to vacate the quarter. He sent suitable reply to the letter. On 24.11.10 another notice was sent by the Principal which was also replied by him. Legal notice dated 15.12.10 was received by him, which was also suitably replied. The College filed a civil suit, wherein he had taken an objection that the dispute is an industrial dispute and civil court has no jurisdiction to try it. He filed a civil suit against the College, which was later on withdrawn by him. He details that the College has started deducting license fee towards that quarter from his salary. The College has no right to cancel allotment of the aforesaid quarter. There are about 60 group 'D' emloyees with the College, out of whom 41 employees have espoused his cause. He filed claim before the Conciliation Officer and his dispute was referred for adjudication. He claims that the College may be directed not to ask him to vacate quarter No. 2 attached with the Principal's residence and to restart deduction of licence fee from his salary as usual.
3. Claim was demurred by the College pleading that when wife of the claimant suffered burn injuries in 2005, the claimant was accommodate in quarter No. 2 attached with the Pincipal's residence as a temporary arrangement with a condition that he would vacate it as and when required since that quarter was ment for accommodation of servants attached to the Principals residence like cook, gardner, driver etc. The quarter was not a part of general pool accommodation. As per rules of allotment no quarter is set apart from allotment, on medical grounds. The claimant never made any application for allotment of the quarter on medical grounds. He was called upon to vacate that quarter by way of service of written notices, but he failed to comply the same. The College used to deduct nominal amount of Rs. 900 as a license fee, which was stopped from December 2010. A civil suit for recovery of possession of the said quarter awaits adjudication. Provision of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (in short the Act), are not applicable. The dispute raised by the claimant is not an industrial dispute within the meaning of Section 2(k) of the Act. The claimant is not entitled to[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : जुलाई 6, 2013/आषाढ़ 15, 1935 3245 any relief, hence his claim may be dismissed, pleads the College.
4. Vide notification No. A-11016/3/2009-CLS-II, New Delhi dated 03-04-2013, additional charge of the post of the Presiding Officer, Central Government Industrial Tribunal No. II, New Delhi, was assigned to the undersigned by the appropriate Government and thus, this case reached this Tribunal for adjudication.
5. Arguments were heared at the bar. The claimant with the assistance of Shri B.K. Prasad and Sh. Om Prakash Sharma, Advocates, advanced arguments over the matter. None come forward on behalf of the College to raise their submission. I have given careful considerations to the arguments advanced at the bar and cautiously passed the record. My findings on issues involved in the controversy are as follows.
6. On perusal of reference order No. 42012/09/ 2012-ID(DU) New Delhi, dated 13.09.2013, on the strength on which the dispute was referred for adjudication, it came to light that the dispute was raised by the claimant before the Conciliation Officer as on individual workman. Failure report No. ALC-HQSP/8(16)/ 11 dated 19.01.2012 has been placed over the record by the claimant. This report project that the dispute raised by the claimant was espoused by a group of 41 employees of the College. To support that fact, alleged espousal letter is also available over the record. Contents of this letter bring it over the record that a proposal was made by 41 employees to the effect that the claimant may raise his dispute before the Conciliation Officer and on failure of conciliation proceedings he may get adjudication of industrial dispute from an industrial adjudicator by peaceful means. Therefore a question for consideration would be as to whether the above proposal is an espousal of the cause of the claimant by 41 employees of the College. Before adverting to this exercise, it would be expedient to ascertain as to what "industrial dispute" means? For an answer, definition of the term industrial dispute is to be construed. For sake of convenience, definition of the term "industrial dispute", as defined by section 2(k) of the Act, is reproduce thus:
"(k) "Industrial dispute" means any dispute or difference between employers and employers, or between employers and workmen, or between workmen and workmen, which is connected with the employment or non-employment or the terms of employment or with the conditions of labour, of any persons,"
7. The definition of "Industrial dispute" referred above, can be divided into four parts, viz. (i) factum of dispute, (2) parties to the dispute, viz. (a) employers and employers, (b) employer and workmen, or (c) workmen and workmen, (3) subject matter of the dispute, which should be connected with-(i) employment or non employment, or (ii) terms of employment, or (iii) condition of labour of any person, and (4) it should relate to an "industry".
8. The definition of "industrial dispute" is worded in very wide terms and unless they are narrowed by the meaning given to word "workman" it would seem to include all "employers", all "employments" and all "workmen", whatever the nature or scope of the employment may be. Therefore, except in the case where there can be a dispute between the employers and employers and workmen and workmen, one of the parties to an industrial dispute must be an employee or a class of employees. The first point, therefore, to be noted, perhaps self evident, is that the phrase " employer and workmen", the plural may include singular on either side or any permutation of singular or plural, the masculine including the feminine. In order, therefore, to determine as to whether a controversy or difference or a dispute is an "an industrial dispute' or not, it must first be determined whether the workman concerned or workmen sponsoring his cause satisfy the conditions of clause(s) of section 2 of the Act. Here in the case, the college does not dispute that the claimant is workman within the meaning of clause(s) of section 2 of the Act.
9. The Apex Court put gloss on the definition of "industrial dispute" in Dimakuchi Tea Estate [1958(1) LLJ 500] and ruled that the expression "any person" in clause (k) of section 2 of the Act must be read subject to such limitation and qualification as arise from the context, the two crucial limitations are (i) the dispute must be a real dispute between the parties to the dispute (as indicated in the first two parts of the definition clause) so as to be capable of selttlement or adjudication by one party to the dispute giving necessary relief to other, and (2) the person regarding whom the dispute is raised must be one for whose employment, non employment, terms of employment or conditions of labour, as case may be, the parties dispute for a direct or substantial interest. Where workman raised a dispute as against their employment, the person regarding whose employment, non employer, terms of employment or conditions of labour, the dispute is raised need not be strictly speaking "workman" within the meaning of the Act, but must be one in whose employment, non employer, terms of employment, or conditions of labour the workmen as a class have a direct or substantial interest. The observations made by the Apex Court are to be extracted thus:
"We also agree with the expresssion "any person" is not co extensive with any workman, particular or otherwise, equal with other, that the crucial test is one of community of interest and the person regarding whom the dispute is raised must be one in whose employment, non employment, terms of employment, conditions of labour (as the case may be) the parties to the dispute have a direct or substantial interest. Whether such direct or substantial interest has been established in a particular case will depend on its facts and circumstances."3246 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 6, 2013/ASHADHA 15, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] 10. In Kyas Construction Company (Pvt.) Ltd. [1958 (2) LLJ 66] Apex Court ruled that an industrial dis- pute need not be a dispute between the employer and his workman and that the definition of the expression "indus- trial dispute "is wide enough to cater a dispute raised by the employers's workman with regard to non employment of others, who may not be employed as workman at the relevant time. The Apex Court in Bombay Union of Jour- nalist [1961 (ii) LLJ 436] has observed that in each case in ascertaining whether an individual dispute has acquired the character of an industrial dispute, the test is whether at the date of reference, the dispute was taken up as sub- mitted by the union of the workmen of the employer against whom, the dispute is raised by an individual work- man or by an appreciable number of workemn. In order, therefore, to convert an individual dispute into an indus- trial dispute, it has to be established that it has been taken up by the union of employees of the establishment or by an appreciable number of the employees of the establish- ment. As far as union of the workmen of establishment itself is concerned, the problem of espousal by them gen- erally presents little difficulty, since such workmen who are members of such unions generally have a continuity of interest with an individual employees who is one of their fellow workman. But difficulty arise when the cause of a workman, in a particular establishment is sponsored by a union which is not of the workmen of that establish- ment but is one of which membership is open to work- men of their establishment as well as in that industry. In such a case a union which has only microscopic number of the workmen as its member, cannot sponsor any dis- pute arising between the workmen and the management. A representative character of the union has to be gathered from the strength of the actual number of co workers spon- soring the dispute. The mere fact that a substantial num- ber of workmen of the establishment in which the con- cerned workman was employee were also members of the union would not constitute sponsorship. It must be shown that they were connected together and arrived at an understanding by a resolution or by other means and collectively submitted the dispute.
11. The expression "industrial disputes" has been construed by the Apex Court to include individual dis- putes, because of the scheme of the Act. In Raghu Nath Gopal Patvardhan [1957 (1) LLJ 27] the Apex Court ruled as to what dispute can be called as an industrial dispute. It was laid thereon that (1) a dispute between the employer and a single workman cannot be an industrial dispute, (2) it can not be per-se be an industrial dispute but may be- come if it is taken up by a trade union or a number of workmen. In Dharampal Prem Chand [1965 (1) LLJ 668] it was commanded by the Apex Court that a dispute raised by a single workman cannot become an industrial dispute unless it is supported either by his union or in the ab- sence of a union by substantial number of workmen. Same law was laid in the case of Indian Express Newspaper (Pvt.) Limited [1970 (1) LLJ 132]. However in Western India Match Company [1970 (II) LLJ 256], the Apex Court referred the precedent in Drona Kuchi Tea Estate's case [1958 (1) LLJ 60] and ruled that a dispute relating to "any person becomes a dispute where the person in respect of whom it is raised is one in whose employment, non em- ployment, terms of employment or conditions of labour, the parties, dispute for a direct or substantial interest".
12. What a substantial or considerable number of workmen would be in a given case, depend on particular facts of the case. The fact that an "industrial dispute", is supported by other workmen will have to be established either in the form of a resolution of the union of which workman may be member or of the workmen themselves who support the dispute or in any other manner. From the mere fact that a general union, at whose instance an "in- dustrial dispute" concerning an individual workman is re- ferred for adjudication, has on its roll a few of the work- men of the establishment as its members, it cannot be inferred that the individual dispute has been converted into an "industrial dispute". The Tribunal has therefore, to con- sider the question as to how many of the fellow workman actually espoused the cause of the concerned workman by participating in the particular resolution of the Union. In the absence of a such a determination by the Tribunal, it cannot be said that the individual dispute acquired the character of an industrial dispute and the Tribunal will not acquire jurisdiction to adjudicate upon the dispute. Nev- ertheless, in order to make a dispute an industrial dis- pute, it is not necessary that there should always be a reso- lution of substantial or appreciable number of workmen. What is necessary is that there should be some express or collective will of a substantial or an appreciable mem- ber of the workmen treating the cause of the individual workman as their own cause. Law to this effect was laid in P. Somasundrameran [1970 (1) LLJ 558].
13. It is not necessary that the sponsoring union is a registered trade union or a recognized trade union. Once it is shown that a body of substantial number of workmen either acting through a union or otherwise had sponsored the workman's cause, it is sufficient to convert it into an industrial dispute. In Pardeep Lamp Works [1970 (1) LLJ 507] complaints relating to dispute of ten workmen were filed before the Conciliation Officer by the individual workmen themselves. But their case was subsequently taken up by a new union formed by a large number of co workmen, if not a majority of them. Since this union was not registered or recognized, the workmen elected five representatives to prosecute the cases of ten dismissed workmen. Thus cases of the dismissed workmen were es- poused by the new union, yet unregistered and unrecog- nized. The Apex Court held that the fact that these dis- putes were not taken up by a registered or recognized union does not mean that they were not "industrial dispute".
[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : जुलाई 6, 2013/आषाढ़ 15, 1935 324714. It is not expedient that same union should remain incharge of that dispute till its adjudication. The dispute may be espoused by the workmen of an establishment, through a particular union for making such a dispute an "industrial dispute", while the workman may be represented before the Tribunal for the purpose of section 36 of the Act by a member of executive or office bearer of altogether another union. The crux of the matter is that the dispute should be a dispute between the employer and his workmen. It is not necessary that the dispute must be espoused or conducted only by a registered trade union. Even if a trade union ceases to be registered trade union during the continuance of the adjudication proceedings that would not affect the maintainability of the order of reference. Law to this effect was laid by the High Court of Orissa in Gammon India Limited [1974 (II) LLJ 34]. For ascertaining as to whether an individual dispute has acquired character of an individual dispute, the test is whether on the date of the reference the dispute was taken up as supported by the union of the workmen of the employer against whom the dispute is raised by the individual workman or by an appreciable number of the workman. In other words, the validity of the reference of an industrial dispute must be judged on the facts as they stood on the date of the reference and not necessarily on the date when the cause occurs. Reference can be made to a precedent in Western India Match Co. Ltd. [1970 (II) LLJ 256].
15. With above prelude in mind, now it would be ascertained as to whether the dispute was espoused by considerable number of the workmen in the establishment of the College. The so called espousal letter has been termed as "support letter". Recital of support letter details that the College is taking steps to get the quarter vacated from the claimant. Signatories to that support letter find that action to be unjustified. They proposed that the claimant may raise his dispute before the Conciliation Officer and on failure of conciliation proceedings, the claimant may get it adjudicated from an industrial adjudicator. This support letter nowhere projects that the signatories have taken up the cause of the claimant as their own. The signatories do not intend to raise grievances of the claimant before the authorities under the Act. They simploy advice the claimant to approach the authorities under the Act for redressal of his grievances. It is a crystal clear that the signatories nowhere intend to take up cause of the claimant for redressal by way of associating themselves in adjudication process. It is evident that this support letter is not an espousal of the cause of the claimant before the authorities under the Act.
16. Assuming, though no admitting that the signatories to this support letter intends to espouse the cause of the claimant before the authorities under the Act, yet this support letter would not help his cause. Sub-section (2) of Section 10 of the Act, projects that when an industrial dispute is applied in the prescribed manner and the appropriate Government is satisfied that the persons applying represent the majority of each party, it shall make the reference accordingly, Rule 3 of the Industrial Disputes (Central) Rules 1957 (in short the Rules) projects as to in what form an application under sub-section (2) of the Section 10 of the Act shall be made. Rule 4 provides as to who shall sign the said application and its accompanying statement. For sake of convenience provisions of the aforesaid rules are extracted thus:
"3. Application.—An application under sub-section (2) of section 10 for the reference of an industrial dispute to a Board, Court, Labour Court, Tribunal or National Tribunal shall be made in Form A and shall be delivered personally or forwarded by registered post 1 [to the Secretary to the Government of India in the Ministry of Labour and Employment (in triplicate)] the Chief Labour Commissioner (Central), New Delhi, and the Regional Labour Commissioner (Central), and the Assistant Labour Commissioner (Central) concerned. The application shall be accompanied by a statement setting forth—
(a) the parties to the dispute;
(b) the specific matters in dispute;
(c) the total number of workmen employed in the
undertaking affected;
(d) an estimate of the number of workmen affected
or likely to be affected by the dispute; and
(e) the efforts made by the parties themselves to
adjust the dispute".
"4. Attestation of Application.—The application and
the statement accompanying it shall be signed—
(a) in the case of an employer by the employer himself, or when the employer is an incorporated company or other body corporate, by the agent, manager or other principal of the Corporation.
(b) in the case of workmen, either by the President and Secretary of a trade union of the workmen, or by five representatives of the workmen duly authorised in this behalf at a meeting of the workmen held for the purpose;
(c) in the case of an individual workman, by the workman himself or by any officer of the trade union of which he is a member or by another workman in the same establishment duly authorised by him in this behalf:
3248 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 6, 2013/ASHADHA 15, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]Provided that such workman is not a member of a
different trade union".
industrial dispute. It is not a dispute which answer parameters of Section 2A of the Act, hence the claimant individually cannot raise it. Thus it is evident that the dispute had not acquired status of an industrial dispute. It remained an individual dispute. The appropriate Government was incompetent to refer it for adjudication. The reference order cannot grant jurisdiction to an industrial adjudication to enter into adjudication of the dispute. Claim statement is, accordingly, burshed aside. An award is, passed it be sent to the appropriate Government for publication.
Dated: 16.05.2013
Dr. R. .K. YADAV, Presiding Officer
नई दिल्ली, 10 जून, 2013
का.आ.1256. —औद्योगिक विवाद अध्निियम, 1947 (1947 का 14) की धरा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार प्रोजक्ट डाईरेक्टर, जिरकोनियम प्रोजक्ट एवं अदर्स के प्रबंध्तंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध् में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अध्किरण, चेन्नई के पंचाट (संदर्भ संख्या 19, 20, 21, 22, 35/2009 एवं 89, 90, 91, 92/2009) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 06.06. 2013 को प्राप्त हुआ था।
[फा. सं. एल-42012/14, 15, 16, 17/2010-आई आर (डी यू), सं. एल-42011/26/2010-आई आर (डी यू) सं. एल. 42012/43, 44, 44, 45, 46/2009-आई आर (डी यू)] जोहन तोपनो, अवर सचिव 17. Bare reading of the aforesaid rules make it apparent that an application in case of workmen shall be signed either by the President and Secretary of a trade union or by five representatives of the workmen duly authorized in that behalf at a meeting of the workmen held for the purpose. In case of a dispute relating to dismissal, discharge, retrenchment or otherwise termination of a workman by his employer, the application may be signed by the individual workman himself or by any officer of the trade union or by another workman in the same establishment, duly authorized by him in this behalf. As admitted by the claimant himself application berfore the Conciliation Officer was signed by him individually. It was supported by the aforesaid support letter signed by 41 employees of the College. It is evident that this support letter nowhere answers requirement of rule 4 of the Rules. Form A, appended to the rules lays emphasis that such an application is to be signed by the President and the Secretary of the trade union or five representatives of the workmen duly authorized in that behalf. When claim statement, filed before the Conciliation Officer, was not signed by the signatories of the so called support letters, the claim was not filed before the Conciliation Officer in accordance with the Rules. It cannot be said that the cliam was espoused by considerable number of workmen in the establishment of the College, when it was raised before the Conciliation Officer. The dispute, so raised by the claimant, had not acquired status of an
New Delhi, the 10th June, 2013
S.O. 1256.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Dispute Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 19, 20, 21, 22, 35/2010 and 89, 90, 91, 92/2009) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, Chennai as shown in the Annexure, in the Industrial dispute between the employers in relation to the Project Director, Zirconium Project and others and their workman, which was received by the Central Government on 06.06.2013.
[F.No. L-42012/14, 15, 16, 17/2010-IR(DU), No. L-42011/26/2010-IR(DU),
No. L-42012/43, 44, 45, 46/2009-IR (DU)] JOHAN TOPNO, Under Secy.
ANNEXURE
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT
INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT,
CHENNAI
Tuesday the 30th April, 2013
Present : A.N. JANARDANAN, Presiding Officer
I.D. Nos. 19, 20, 21, 22, 35/2010 and 89, 90, 91, 92/2009
(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 Zirconium Project and their workmen.
[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : जुलाई 6, 2013/आषाढ़ 15, 1935 3249S. I.D. No. Reference 1st party Workman/ 2nd Party/ Appearance No. No. & Date S/Sri Petitioner Respondent for Respondent
1. 19/2010 L-12012/14/ P. Ms. D. 1. Project Director R1 - Sri B. Sekar, 2010-IR(DU) Pillaimuthu Geetha, S. Zirconium Advocate dated Anbazhagan, Project 29.04.2010 Advocates 2. The Security R2-M/s R.
Officer, M/s Jayaprakash, K. Alagu Security Srinivasan, Advocates Services, Tuticorin
2. 20/2010 L-42012/15/ G. Ms. D. 1. Project Director R1 - Sri B. Sekar, 2010-IR(DU) Sahayaraj Geetha, S. Zirconium Advocate dated Anbazhagan, Project 29.04.2010 Advocates 2. The Security R2-M/s R.
Officer, M/s Jayaprakash, K. Alagu Security Srinivasan, Advocates Services, Tuticorin
3. 21/2010 L-42012/16/ M.A.G. Boras Ms. D. 1. Project Director R1 - Sri B. Sekar, 2010-IR(DU) Geetha, S. Zirconium Advocate dated Anbazhagan, Project 29.04.2010 Advocates 2. The Security R2-M/s R.
Officer, M/s Jayaprakash, K. Alagu Security Srinivasan, Advocates Services, Tuticorin
4. 22/2010 L-42012/17/ E. Paulsamy Ms. D. 1. Project Director R1 - Sri B. Sekar, 2010-IR(DU) Geetha, S. Zirconium Advocate dated Anbazhagan, Project 29.04.2010 Advocates 2. The Security R2-M/s R.
Officer, M/s Jayaprakash, K. Alagu Security Srinivasan, Advocates Services, Tuticorin
5. 35/2010 L-42011/26/ Mavatta Ms. D. 1. Project Director R1 - Sri B. Sekar, 2010-IR(DU) Pothu Geetha, S. Zirconium Advocate dated Thozhilalar Anbazhagan, Project 21.09.2010 Sangam Advocates 2. The Security R2-M/s R. Tuticorin Officer, M/s Jayaprakash, K.
Alagu Security Srinivasan, Advocates Services, Tuticorin
6. 89/2009 L-42012/43/ Lionel John Ms. D. 1. Project Director R1 - Sri B. Sekar, 2009-IR(DU) Thanamani Geetha, S. Zirconium Advocate dated Anbazhagan, Project 23.10.2010 Advocates 2. The Security R2-M/s R.
Officer, M/s Jayaprakash, K. Alagu Security Srinivasan, Advocates Services, Tutirorin
7. 90/2009 L-42012/44/ S. Nelson Ms. D. 1. Project Director R1 - Sri B. Sekar, 2009-IR(DU) Geetha, S. Zirconium Advocate dated Anbazhagan, Project 23.10.2010 Advocates 2. The Security R2-M/s R.
Officer, M/s Jayaprakash, K. Alagu Security Srinivasan, Advocates Services, Tuticorin
8. 91/2009 L-42012/45/ P. Nainar Ms. D. 1. Project Director R1 - Sri B. Sekar, 2009-IR(DU) Geetha, S. Zirconium Advocate dated Anbazhagan, Project 23.10.2010 Advocates 2. The Security R2-M/s R.
Officer, M/s Jayaprakash, K. Alagu Security Srinivasan, Advocates Services, Tuticorin3250 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 6, 2013/ASHADHA 15, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6)
(7)
9. 92/2009 L-42012/46/ T. Chendur Ms. D. 1. Project Director R1 - Sri B. Sekar,
2009-IR(DU) Pandi Geetha, S. Zirconium Advocate dated Anbazhagan, Project 23.10.2010 Advocates 2. The Security R2-M/s R.
Officer, M/s Jayaprakash, K. Alagu Security Srinivasan, Advocates Services, Tuticorin
COMMON AWARD
ID 35/2010
The Central Government, Ministry of Labour and Employment vide the above order of references referred the IDs mentioned above to this Tribunal for adjudication.
The schedule mentioned in the order of reference
in the above IDs are as under:
ID 19/2010
"Whether the contract between the management of Zirconium Project, Tuticorin and their contractor M/s Alagu Security Services (P) Ltd. Chennai with regard to employment of 45 security staffs (as annexed) is sham and bogus? If yes, whether the action of the management and contractor, in terminating the services of said workmen, is legal and justified? If not, what relief the workmen are entitled to?"
ID 89/2009
"Whether the contract between the management of Project Director, Zirconium Project and their contractor with regard to employment of Sri P. Pillaimuthu is sham and bogus? If yes, whether the action of the management in terminating the services of the said workman w.e.f. 20.05.2009 is legal and justified? If not, what relief the workman is entitled to?"
ID 20/2010
"Whether the contract between the management of Zirconium Complex and M/s Alagu Security Services (P) Ltd., with respect to employment of Sri A. Lionel John Thanamani is sham and bogus? If yes, whether the action of the management in terminating the services of the above workman w.e.f. 01.05.2009 is legal and justified? If not, what relief the workman is entitled to?"
ID 90/2009
"Whether the contract between the management of Project Director, Zirconium Project and their contractor with regard to employment of Sri G. Sahayaraj is sham and bogus? If yes, whether the action of the management in terminating the services of the said workman w.e.f. 20.05.2009 is legal and justified? If yes, what relief the workman is entitled to?"
ID 21/2010
"Whether the contract between the management of Zirconium Complex and M/s Alagu Security Services (P) Ltd. with respect to employment of Sri S. Nelson is sham and bogus? If yes, whether the action of the management in terminating the services of the above workman w.e.f. 01.05.2009 is legal and justified? If not, what relief the workman is entitled to?"
ID 91/2009
"Whether the contract between the management of Project Director, Zirconium Project and their contractor with regard to employment of Sri M.A.G. Boras is sham and bogus? If yes, whether the action of the management in terminating the services of the said workman w.e.f. 20.05.2009 is legal and justified? If not, what relief the workman is entitled to?"
ID 22/2010
"Whether the contract between the management of Zirconium Complex and M/s Alagu Security Services (P) Ltd. With respect of employment of Sri P. Nainar is sham and bogus? If yes, whether the action of the management in terminating the services of the above workman w.e.f. 28.04.2009 is legal and justified? If not what relief the workman is entitled to?"
ID 92/2009
"Whether the contract between the management of Project Director, Zirconium Project and their contractor with regard to employment of Sri E. Paulsamy is sham and bogus? If yes, whether the action of the management in terminating the services of the said workman w.e.f. 20.05.2009 is legal and justified? If not, what relief the workman is entitled to?"
"Whether the contract between the management of Zirconium Complex and M/s Alagu Security[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : जुलाई 6, 2013/आषाढ़ 15, 1935 3251 Services (P) Ltd. With respect to employment of Sri T. Chendur Pandi is sham and bogus? If yes, whether the action of the management in terminating the services of the above workman w.e.f. 01.05.2009 is legal and justified? If not, what relief the workman is entitled to?"
2. After the receipt of Industrial Disputes, this Tribunal has numbered it as ID 19, 20, 21, 22, 35 of 2010 and 89, 90, 91 and 92 of 2009 and issued notices to both sides. Both sides entered appearance through their Advocates and filed their Claim statements and separate Counter Statements as the case may be. The Counsel for the petitioners filed a memo stating that the workmen whose case is espoused individually or by the Union seek the same relief against the same Management and the nature of the dispute is also the same. Joint enquiry will help the petitioners and the Management to adduce common evidence and it is prayed that the same be allowed. The Respondents endorsed no objection to the demand. On the side of the petitioners WW1 was examined, common evidence was recorded in ID 35/2010 and Ex.W1 to Ex.W31 were marked. On the side of the Respondents, MW1 and MW2 were examined in common and Ex.M1 to Ex.M9 (series) and Ex.M10 and Ex.M11 marked. The award, herein, accordingly is passed as common award for all the IDs and a complete copy of the same containing the signature of the Presiding officer will be kept in each of the separate ID file.
3. The averments in the Claim Statements in ID 35/ 2010 mostly common or the same in all, but with minor variations of individual particulars briefly read as follows :
The petitioners viz. S/Sri P. Pillaimuthu, G. Sahayaraj, M.A.G. Boras, E Paulsamy, Lionel John Thanamanai, S. Nelson, P. Nainar, T. Chenthur Pandi, Mavatta Pothu Thozhilalar Sangam (covering 45 workmen) joined the service of the Respondent. Petitioner Pillaimuthu was employed under the First Respondent as Security Guard from October 2008 through the Contractor. From 20.05.2009 the Respondent did not allow him to work and orally terminated his service. Petitioner G. Sahayaraj was employed under the First Respondent as Security Guard from 01.10.2007 through the Contractor. From 20.05.2009 the Respondent did not allow him to work and orally terminated his service. Petitioner M.A.G. Boras was employed under the First Respondent as Security Guard from October 1991 through the Contractor. From 20.05.2009 the Respondent did not allow him to work and orally terminated his service. Petitioner E. Paulsamy was employed under the First Respondent as Security Guard from December 1999 through the Contractor. From 20.05.2009 the Respondent did not allow him to work and orally terminated his service. Petitioner Lionel John Thanamanai was employed
under the First Respondent as Security Guard from 01.12.1991 through the Contractor. From 01.05.2009 the Respondent did not allow him to work and orally terminated his service. Petitioner S. Nelson was employed under the First Respondent as Security Guard from 18.02.1998 through the Contractor. From 01.05.2009 the Respondent did not allow him to work and orally terminated his service. Petitioner P. Nainar was employed under the First Respondent as Security Guard from 15.04.1990 through the Contractor. From 01.05.2009 the Respondent did not allow him to work and orally terminated his service. Petitioner Chendur Pandi was employed under the First Respondent as Security Guard from 21.04.1997 through the Contractor. From 01.05.2009 the Respondent did not allow him to work and orally terminated his service. The cause of 45 workers as per the list attached with the Claim Statement in ID 35/ 2010 is espoused by the General Secretary of the Union, Mavatta Pothu Thozhilalar Sangam. These 45 workers were employed under the Respondents since they are members of the Petitioner Union. The First Respondent is a project of Deptt. of Atomic Energy of the Union Government, which was proposed to be established in 1990 in Tuticorin. Even before establishing the factory the First Respondent engaged initially 5 local people as Security Guards. They were utilized for all the manual works. The total project area extends to 1300 acres/526 acres. Needing more Security Guards R1 recruited more hands in 1991. Initially those engaged as Security Guards were utilized by R1 to do all odd and sundry jobs at project site assisting the revenue officials, measuring the site, cooking, movement of files, etc. when there were no basic facilities like drinking water, electricity and gravel road amenities. They assisted the Officers of the R1 from the very inception of the project viz. surveying the land and clearing the jungle, etc. as a perennial natured and essential service work. Though engaged by the First Respondent wages were paid through Topaz Security Services. They were not aware of the consequences of the distinction between the First and Second Respondent. From 1990 to 1997 (20 per day) Topaz Security Service, Madurai was given contract and they paid wages to the workers and from 1997 to 2000 (Rs. 30/- per day), the Second Respondent was given contract and from 2000 to 2003 (Rs. 40/-) per day Federal Security Bureau, Madras and from 2003-2008 (Rs. 80/- per day) to Topaz Security Services and from January 2009 till termination (Rs. 3720/- per month) to the Second Respondent was given contract which was said to be for one year. Though several contractors were there the workers continued under all of them employed in the First Respondent premises. The contract between the First and Second Respondent is a sham and fraud denying them legal benefits. The workers-security guards joined the Union in 2007. Demand was made for minimum wages, canteen facilities, wages for weekly off and paid holidays and3252 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 6, 2013/ASHADHA 15, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] absorption under R1. Asst. Labour Commissioner during his visit in September 2008 after enquiry directed R2 to pay Rs. 120/- instead of Rs. 80/- and the differences for October and November 2008. In July 2009 on a strike notice on 25.07.2009 in the conciliation initiated by ALC the 45 workers were terminated from service violating Section-33 of the ID Act. No prior permission had been obtained by the Respondents. Workers had rendered more than 10 years of service under R1. R1 industry is producing Zirconium metal from Zirconium available in beach sand deposits where R1 does the mining of the beach sand and process the same to get Zirconium Oxide further processed to manufacture Zirconium Sponge. The Mines Act 1952 is applicable to the Zirconium Management industry. Mines Act defines the Agency under Section-2(c) and mine under Section-2 from which it is clear that Mines Act does not distinguish between a person employed through an Agent or employed directly by an owner. The workmen engaged through the Second Respondent contract also come under the definition of person employed. R1 engaged more than 100 workmen in their industry and it is project of Nuclear Fuel Complex, a major industrial unit of Deptt. of Atomic Energy. R1 is an industrial establishment. The very contract between the First Respondent and the Second Respondent, the fact that CISF personnel are brought in the place of these workmen also establishes that the job of Security Service is an inevitable job under R1. The CISF is supposed to be engaged only at the plant site and the Zirconium Management is proposing to call for new tender to contract out the security service of township area. The malafide motive of R1 is thus clear. The action is only to punish the workers for joining the Union raising demands. It is unfair labour practice of the R1. The workmen are in difficult situation to make their both ends meet. Fresh recruitments were made for the post of Security Staff after their termination. They are remaining unemployed. Engagement is against the provisions of CLRA Act. Their termination is illegal and unjustified violating Section- 25N, 25G, 25H and 33 of ID Act. Hence it is to be held that the contract is sham and bogus and the termination is illegal and unjustified directing the reinstatement of the workmen with all benefits.
4. Counter Affidavit averments of the First Respondent bereft of unnecessary details are as follows :
Petition is not maintainable in law or on facts. For reasons of strategic importance Department of Atomic Energy is vested with some special provisions and it is the policy of the department that all the operating units under it are guarded by paramilitary forces like Central Industrial Security Force. Initially pending approval of Ministry of Home Affairs sanctioning CISF for Zirconium Complex, Palayakayal, private security had been depended upon for preventing trespass as well as security of the construction materials lying on the open ground extending
to 1300 acres acquired in the year 1991. Private Security Agencies were engaged on open tender basis under which in the past (i) M/s. Topaz Security Services, (ii) M/s. Alagu Security Services (P) Ltd. (iii) M/s. Federal Security Bureau had been engaged from time to time during different periods commencing from 1991 to 2009. Second Respondent was appointed on 31.12.2008 and an agreement was entered into between it and on behalf of Respondent No. 1 by Nuclear Fuel Complex for providing security at a cost of Rs. 40,84,800 per annum for employing 63 personnel to work on round the clock shifts. The arrangement was for a period of 1 year w.e.f. 01.01.2009 or till induction of Central Industrial Security Force in the complex of Palayakayal whichever was earlier. As per Para-8 of the agreement the security personnel were governed by terms and conditions of service entered into with Respondent No. 2. Under no account any claim or lien or service liability or compensation in respect of their employment will lie against the Respondent No. 1. Also, Respondent No. 2 shall abide by all Central and State Acts, Schemes, Rules and Regulations made there under pertaining to employment of labour/security personnel and shall be responsible for payment of contributions for Provident Fund, compensation and claim arising out of such enactments, etc. Respondent No. 2 shall maintain proper records, register of accounts in respect of the personnel engaged by them for security services in the premises of the Zirconium Complex as warranted by all statutory enactments and shall furnish the same to Respondent No. 1 for verification on demand. After four months of the agreement R2 on 30.04.2009 served a conditional notice on NFC either to increase contractual amount by Rs. 40,000 per month on the ground that R2 was incurring a loss of Rs. 40,000 or to terminate the agreement and requested the firm to be relieved from 01.08.2009. Since R2 agreed for a consolidated amount of Rs. 40,84,800 including Service Tax request of R2 could not be acceded to. Hence the termination was accepted and communication dated 25.07.2009 was given. In view of recent terrorist attack in Mumbai using sea route and also the threat perception by the terrorist organizations to the strategic units of DAE, NFC on behalf of Respondent No. 1 has expedited and inducted CISF on 20.07.2009 in conformity with the policy of the department that no project site is left without security. During the force of the contract R2 transferred some of its Security Guards who have subsequently raised disputes. In fact according to R2 services of some of its Security Guards were not terminated but they have been intimated to come and report for duty at Chennai vide letter dated 12.09.2009. R2 was ready to accommodate the Security Guards transferred elsewhere since they had no other unit in Tuticorin after termination of the agreement dated 31.07.2009. Hence the question of termination will not come into picture either by R1 or R2 as stated by petitioner. R2 has also written letter dated 15.08.2009 to[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : जुलाई 6, 2013/आषाढ़ 15, 1935 3253 the Petitioner Union to advise the Security Guards to report for duty without any further delay. R2 agreed to provide the Security Guards with minimum educational qualifications of 8th Standard whereas the Guards were having less than the minimum qualification. Hence R2 asked them to report at Chennai branch. To the Security Guards engaged through private security contractors from 1991 to 31.07.2009 payment was made by contractors only. R1 never paid any payment. There was no employer employee relationship between R1 and the Private Security Guards. R1 also ensured payment of minimum wages by R2. Demand for minimum wages, weekly off, paid holidays and absorption under R1 is a futile exercise. There is no question of termination by R1 or reinstatement by R1. Security Guards were simply workers under various Contractors. There being no mining activity by R1 it will not fall under mine. Mines Act provisions do not apply. ID Act is not applicable to R1 since contract labourers are not its employees. In view of termination having been served and accepted by R2, conciliation proceedings initiated by RLC in response to strike notice dated 25.07.2009 of the Petitioner Union to go on strike from 11.08.2009 is not maintainable Hence there is no question of termination of 45 workers in violation of Section-33 of the ID Act. The agreement between R2 and that on behalf of Respondent is not sham. The notice of termination of contract served by R2 had to be accepted by NLC. There is no question of unfair labour practice. CISF has already been inducted for safeguarding the factory premises of Respondent No. 1. There is no provision dealing with the regularization of workmen as defined in Section-2(1)(b) of Contract Labour (Regulation and Abolition) Act, 1970. No right is conferred upon the contract labour to claim regularization in contravention of the provisions of the Contract Labour Act by Contractor or by the Establishment. The guards cannot invoke theory of legitimate expectation or regularization when appointment could be made only as per selection process. Question of invoking Section-25N or 25L does not arise. The process of the Zirconium project is not a perennial one. The Atomic Power Plant establishment being very sensitive and security of which is to be governed by CISF as decided by Home Ministry in the context of present day security threats from within and outside the country, the private security guards- contract workers cannot claim employment. The claim is to be dismissed.
5. Counter Statement averments of the Second Respondent briefly read as follows:
Petitioner suppressed material facts. R2 as successful tenderer entered into an agreement on 01.01.2009 with R1 to provide complete security coverage for their project area and had engaged 56 Security Guards, 6 Asstt. Security Officers and 1 Security Officer. R1 terminated the contract w.e.f. 31.07.2009 and thereupon R2 sent letters dated 19.10.2010 to all employees individually and advised them to report at Chennai which they did not comply. They insisted to be employed under R1 and alleged to have been terminated from service. R2 never terminated them and is ready to provide job. It is denied that contract between and R1 and R2 is sham and fraud. Demand of minimum wages has already been settled between the parties. There is no violation of Section-33 of the ID Act. There is no unfair labour practice. The dispute is not maintainable as Central Government is not an appropriate authority as regards R2 contractor is concerned. Claim is to be dismissed.
6. Points for consideration are :
(i) Whether the contract between the Management of Zirconium Project and their various Contractors such as M/s Alagu Security Services (P) Ltd., with regard to employment of Security Staff as in the Annexure to ID 35/2010 and the other connected IDs is sham and bogus?
(ii) Whether the action of the management and contractor in terminating the services of said workmen is legal and justified?
(iii) To what relief the concerned workmen are entitled?
7. Joint enquiry of the ID 35/2010 with ID Nos. 19, 20, 21 and 22/2010 and ID Nos. 89, 90, 91 and 92/2009 was allowed on 08.07.2011 as per order on memo filed by the petitioner as conceded to by the Respondents 1 & 2 by endorsement on the same.
8. Common evidence in all the IDs was recorded in ID 35/2010 consisting of the testimony of WW1 and Ex.W1 to Ex.W31 on the side of the petitioners and the oral evidence of MW1 and MW2 and Ex.M1 to Ex.M7, Ex.M8 (series), Ex.M9 (series), Ex.M10 and Ex.M11 on the side of the Respondents.
9. Points (i), (ii) and (iii)
Heard both sides. Perused the records, documents, evidence and written arguments on the side of the R-1. The prominent arguments on behalf of the petitioner include that the Principal Employer having not got registered for entering into contract labour and Contractor not shown to have obtained the license that independent contractor was engaged to supply contract agreement to the First Respondent does not stand substantiated. In the absence of any license there cannot be a valid contract. In the absence of compliance with the provisions there cannot be a valid contract and the same is only sham. When according to MW1, the overall functional control over the contract labour is exercised by First Respondent, Principal Employer it is indicative of the fact that the contract is only sham and nominal and that the workers3254 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 6, 2013/ASHADHA 15, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] are direct workers under the Management. According to MW2, First Respondent has disciplinary control and it only shows that the workers are again direct workers under the First Respondent. Even when without any instruction from the First Respondent to engage the same set of contract workers yet the same workers are engaged under different Contractors and the said fact is indicative of the fact that the workers are under the First Respondent. The Attendance Sheets spreading over periods show at the end of the page signature of the authority of the First Respondent. The post of Security Staff is with perennial natured work and not seasonal. If there is no vacancy now at the planned site. they can be engaged in the township They remained engaged for more than 10 years.
10. Reliance was placed on behalf of the petitioner
to the decisions of the Apex Court in:
BHILWARA DUGDH UTPADAK SAHAKARI S. LTD. Vs. VINOD KUMAR SHARMA DEAD BY L.RS. AND OTHERS (AIR-2011-SC-3546) wherein Apex Court held "2. This Appeal has been filed against the impugned judgments dated 23.08.2004 and dated 21.09.2004 passed by the High Court of Judicature at Rajasthan. 3. This Appeal reveals the unfortunate state of affairs prevailing in the file of labour relations in our country. 4. In order to avoid their liability under various labour statutes employers are very often resorting to subterfuge by trying to show that their employees are, in fact, the employees of a contractor. It is high that this subterfuge must come to an end. 5. Labour statutes were meant to protect the employees/workmen because it was realized that the employers and the employees are not on an equal bargaining position. Hence, protection of employee as required so that they may not be exploited. However, this new technique of subterfuge has been adopted by some employers in recent years in order to deny the rights of the workmen under various labour statutes by showing that the concerned workmen are not their employees but are the employees/workmen of a contractor, or that they are merely daily wage or short term or casual employees when in fact they are doing the work of regular employees". SECRETARY, HARYANA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD Vs. SURESH AND OTHERS (1999-2-LLN-612) wherein it held "Contract Labour (Regulation and Abolition) Act, 1970, S.10 — Concept of contract labour and its effect — Electricity Board of Haryana in order to keep its plants and stations clean and hygienic, awarding the work to a contractor— Work not of seasonal nature — Contract itself stipulating number of employees to be engaged for the said work — Overall control of working of contract labour including administrative control remaining with the Board — Board neither registered as principal-employer nor contractor was licensed contractor — Held, on lifting the veil its clear that there was no contract system with the Board as work was of perennial nature — Contractor has to be kept out — So-called contract system was only a camouflage — Employer-employee relationship is easily visualized — Employees who have worked for more than 240 days in a year are entitled to be absorbed permanently in the Board."
11. On behalf of the Respondent the conspicuous arguments advanced include that it is on a contract for agreement with Second Respondent that security personnel were engaged to work on round-the-clock for one year. As per Para-8 of the agreement the security personnel were governed by terms and conditions of service with no claim or lien for service liability or compensation. R2 was bound to abide by rules and regulations including maintenance of records, registers furnishing the same to Rl. The agreement was terminated for valid reasons after four months. Thereupon the proposal to induct CISF as per the policy of the department was brought about. R2 had transferred some of its security guards elsewhere since they had no other unit in Tuticorin but they did not report for duty there. R1 never maintained Attendance Registers or Wage Registers of Security Guards. Decision on deployment and control on shift working were not of Rl. No appointment order has been issued by R1. There is no disciplinary control over the Security Guards by R1. Direct disbursement of wages was not made by R1. The Zirconium project is never a perennial one. Being very sensitive the security of the area is to be governed by CISF as decided by the Home Ministry. Private contract workers cannot be employed there. Now the unit has gone on stream and is controlled by Government Specialist Security Services. There is no employer-employee relationship between R1 and the Contract Labour. There is no contract with labourers and R1.
12. Considering the pros and cons of the contentions on either side and on the scrutiny of the records, documents and evidence, I am led to the conclusion that there is no force in the contentions on behalf of the petitioner. With the commencement of the unit at Palayakayal engagement of some security personnel having become necessary for various purposes connected with the safety and security of the materials there was started engagement of some private men as security guards initially from the locality and thereafter through the independent contractors. The engagement of contract labour through independent contractors is shown to be in accordance with valid contracts specifying the terms and conditions of such engagement. Though there is need of registration and obtaining of license by the independent contractor the specific case of the Respondent is that license has been obtained though not produced. Though there has been no proof of the fact of license having been obtained and for registration made by the Principal Employer to give rise to the commencement of the contract labour system in the establishment, that perse is[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : जुलाई 6, 2013/आषाढ़ 15, 1935 3255 not to substantiate that system has not commenced there. The Respondent has been able to substantiate that despite the prevalence of the contract labour system under the establishment why it had to switch over to avoiding private contract labour and to engage Government Specialist Security Services. When specialist security guards are appointed from among CISF personnel no doubt it is not with an object of denying the benefits that might be payable to the private security guards that they were engaged and continued as contract labour. Marginal discrepancie in the versions of witnesses tending to show that there has been some control of First Respondent over the work of the contract labour or such other circumstances are not apt to lead to the conclusion that the contract labour is capable of being considered as directly employed under the First Respondent. Even with an attempt to pierce the veil, if any, centering round the contract for supply of labour at no stretch of imagination it can be concluded that there is no real contract and that the contract is mere sham or a camouflage. Therefore, I hold that the contract between the Management of Project Director, Zirconium Complex and their Contractor with regard to the employment of the contract labour is not sham and bogus. There is no termination of them by R1. The termination of the contract labour by Contractor is a misnomer in that due to absence of employment at the original place of engagement they were being transferred to new stations or Chennai at which they have not joined duty. Hence they kept out of employment of their own volition only and there is no actual termination by the Contractor. Consequently, the workmen are not entitled to any relief.
13. 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 30th April, 2013)
A. N. JANARDANAN, Presiding Officer Ex.No. Date Description
Ex.W5 30.04.2009 Order passed in MP No. 1/2009
in WP 7252/2009
Ex.W6 22.06.2009 Conciliation of notice — Nelson
Ex.W7 25.07.2009 Strike notice issued by the Union
Ex.W8 25.07.2009 Strike notice issued to the
Respondents
Ex.W9 28.07.2009 Conciliation notice
Ex.W10 31.07.2009 Failure Report
Ex.W11 15.08.2009 Letter by the First Respondent
to the Petitioner Union
Ex.W12 12.09.2009 Letter from the First Respondent
Ex.W13 24.09.2009 Letter to disburse the wages
Ex.W14 08.10.2009 Letter to the Second Respondent
regarding wages
Ex.W15 08.10.2009 2K Petition regarding bonus
Ex.W16 11.12.2009 Rejoinder filed by the Union
Ex.W17 11.12.2009 Reply from the Second
Respondent
Ex.W18 21.12.2009 Letter from ACL to the Second
Respondent
Ex.W19 05.02.2010 Letter from the First Respondent
regarding attendance register
Ex.W20 12.02.2010 Complaint regarding wages
Ex.W21 10.06.2010 Conciliation notice
Ex.W22 12.08.2010 Reply from the Respondents
Ex.W23 16.08.2010 Conciliation notice
Witnesses Examined:
Ex.W24 Employment certificate issued
For the 1st Party/Petitioner WW1, Sri T. Kurukkalanji by the First Respondent and
For the 2nd Party/Management MW1, Sri K.P.S. other Contractors
Pillai
Ex.W25 — Bonus payable from 01.04.2007
MW2, Sri S. Jayarajan
to 31.12.2008
Documents Marked :
Ex.W26 — Application by M.K. Pandian
On the petitioner's side
Ex.W27 — Application by Kurukalanji
Ex.No. Date Description Ex.W28 — Attendance register from March
1998
Ex.W1 31.03.2007 Advertisement in the news paper
Ex.W29 — List of Members Union
Ex.W2 16.03.2009 Application called for absorption
Ex.W30 16.02.2010 Order passed in W.A.No. 672 of
Ex.W3 April 2009 Dispute raised by Nelson
2009
Ex.W4 30.04.2009 Telegram sent by Mr. Lionel
Ex.W31 — List of Security Staff working in
John Dhanamani
NFC
3256 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 6, 2013/ASHADHA 15, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
Ex.No. Date Description
On the Management's side
Ex.M10 12.08.2010 Copy of the Counter Statement filed by the 2nd Opposite Party before the Assistant Labour Commissioner
Ex.No. Date Description
Ex.M1 31.12.2008 Acceptance letter for providing complete security measure to the project and township site of Zirconium Complex by the Chief Administrative Officer on behalf of the President of India to the 2nd Respondent
Ex. M2 01.01.2009 Agreement between the Department of Atomic Energy, Government of India and 2nd Respondent
Ex.M3 30.04.2009 Requisition letter by the 2nd Respondent to re-consider the quoted rate/termination notice to the Department of Atomic Energy, Government of India, Hyderabad
Ex. M4 28.05.2009 Reply submitted before the Asstt. Labour Commissioner (C), Madurai by the 1st Respondent with reference to the letter dated 21.05.2009
Ex.M5 25.07.2009 Requisition letter by the Chief Administrative Officer for termination of contract to the 2nd Respondent
Ex.M6 12.09.2009 Letter sent to the Chief Administrative Officer by the 2nd Respondent with regard to the status and dispute raised by the petitioner with ACL, Madurai Ex.M11 14.09.2010 Copy of the Counter Statement filed by the 2nd Opposite Party before the Assistant Labour Commissioner
नई दिल्ली, 10 जून, 2013
का.आ.1257. —औद्योगिक विवाद अध्निियम, 1947 (1947 का 14) की धरा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार एग्जीक्यूटिव इन्जीनियर (ई), सी.पी.डब्लू.डी. के प्रबंध्तंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध् में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अध्किरण न. 1, नई दिल्ली के पंचाट (संदर्भ संख्या 31/97) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 06.06.2013 को प्राप्त हुआ था।
[फा. सं. एल-42011/93/1995-आई आर (डी यू)] जोहन तोपनो, अवर सचिव
New Delhi, the 10th June, 2013
S.O. 1257.—In pursuance of Section 2A(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. 31/ 97) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal cum Labour Court No. 1, NEW DELHI as shown in the Annexure, in the Industrial dispute between the employers in relation to the management of The Executive Engineer (E), CPWD, which was received by the Central Government on 06/06/2013.
[F. No. L-42011/93/1995-IR(DU)]
JOHAN TOPNO, Under Secy.
ANNEXURE
Ex.M7 09.05.2008 Copy of the advertisement issued by the 1st Opposite Party together with the tender documents
BEFORE DR. R.K. YADAV, PRESIDING OFFICER,
CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL
TRIBUNAL NO. 1, KARKARDOOMA COURTS,
COMPLEX DELHI
I.D. No. 31/97
Ex.M8 17.04.2009 Copies of the said transfer letters
(series) issued to the petitioners in ID
Nos. 89 (series)to 92 of 2009
and ID Nos. 19 to 22 of 2010
The General Secretary, CPWD Karamchari Union, C-15, Bhai Veer Singh Marg, Goal Market, New Delhi-110001. Workman...
Versus
Ex.M9 19.08.2010 Copies of the letters sent by the (series) 2nd Opposite Party to the petitioners covered by the above disputes advising them to report at Chennai together with acknowledgements/returned covers
The Executive Engineer (E), Hot Mix Ashphalt Plant Division[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : जुलाई 6, 2013/आषाढ़ 15, 1935 3257 CPWD, I.P. Bhawan, New Delhi-110002. Management...
AWARD
Executive Engineer (Electrical), Mechanical & Workshop Division, Central Public Works Department (in short the management) engaged Shri Jaipal Saran as Assistant Operator on muster roll with effect from 01.01.1979, purely on temporary basis. Regular post of Khalasi was offered to him by the management, vide letter dated 16.04.1984. Shri Jaipal Saran accepted that offer and joined on the post of khalasi with effect from 17.08.1984. Shri Sudama Manjhi and Shri Ram Krishan, engaged as Assistant Operator on muster roll in 1981 and 1982 respectively, were also offered posts of Khalasi, which offer was not accepted by them. Subsequently they were regularized on the posts of Assistant Operator by the management in the year 1993. Shri Jaipal Saran felt aggrieved and raised a demand on the management seeking regularization on the post of Operator. When his demand was not conceded to, he approached the CPWD Karamchari Union (in short the union) for redressal of his grievance. The union espoused his cause and raised a dispute before the Conciliation Officer. Since the dispute was contested by the management, conciliation proceedings ended into a failure. On consideration of failure report, submitted by the Conciliation Officer, the appropriate Government referred the dispute to this Tribunal for adjudication vide order No.-42011/93/95/ 1R(DU), New Delhi dated 24.02.1997 with following terms:
"Whether action of the management of the Superintending Engineer Electrical, Co-ordination circle (Electrical) and Executive Engineer (Electrical) Hot Mix Ashphalt Plant Division, C.P.W.D„ New Delhi in not counting the service period of Shri Jaipal Saran, Khalasi as Assistant Operator and thereafter as Operator is justified? If not, what relief the concerned workman is entitled to?"
2. Claim statement was filed by Shri Jaipal Saran pleading therein that he is a member of scheduled caste. He was recruited through employment exchange against direct recruitment quota on sanctioned post of Assistant Operator on muster roll during September 1978. Though he would have been recruited against quota available for scheduled caste as Assistant Operator against regular post yet management violated labour laws and forced him to continue as daily wager Assistant Operator on muster roll. He was kept as daily wage from September 1978 to 11.08.1984. The said act of the management amounts to unfair labour practice. He discharged his duties honestly to the entire satisfaction of his superiors. His services were appreciated from time to time.
3. He projects that on 12.08.1984, he was deliberately coerced to join duties as regular work charged Khalasi. The said act on the part of the management also amounts to unfair labour practice, for which they are liable to be prosecuted. He was eligible/entitled for regularization as Assistant Operator from the date of initial appointment in September 1978 in pursuance of memo No.63/01/168-NCS II, dated 31.01.1969. Shri Sudama Manjhi and Shri Ram Krishan, appointed in 1981 and 1982 as Khalasi on muster roll, were promoted as Operator in 1993. They were neither members of scheduled caste nor senior to the claimant. He is entitled to get all attendant benefits since September 1978 for the post of regular work charged Assistant Operator/ Operator. He claims that benefits for the post of Assistant Operator from September 1978 to August 1984 may be accorded and he may be restored to the position of Operator from August 1984 till date, besides payment of wages for the post of Operator thereafter.
4. Claim was demurred by the management pleading that Shri Jaipal Saran was engaged as Assistant Operator with effect from 01.01.1979 purely on temporary basis by the Executive Engineer, Mechanical & Workshop Division, New Delhi. His engagement as Assistant Operator was due to exigencies of work of casual nature. When regular post of Khalasi was available, offer was given to him to join that post. He accepted that offer and joined as regular Khalasi on 17.08.1984. He submitted his joining report accordingly. No unfair labour practice was adopted by the management when offer for the post of Khalasi was made to him. It does not lie in his mouth to claim that he was coerced to join as Khalasi. A casual muster roll worker can only be regularized against a sanctioned post.
5. Shri Sudama Manjhi and Shri Ram Krishan were also offered post of Khalasi, but they opted not to accept that offer. They continued to work as daily rated Assistant Operator on muster roll. To regularize casual workers, working on muster roll, Government of India, created 8982 posts in various categories of work charged establishment and regular classified establishment. When aforesaid posts were created, Shri Sudama Manjhi and Shri Ram Krishan, working as Assistant Operators, were regularized on the post of Assistant Operator. It is wrong to claim that the claimant is entitled for getting his services rendered as muster roll casual employee, counted. He cannot agitate that he is to be restored to the position of Operator, besides financial benefits for that post. His claim, being devoid of merits, may be dismissed, pleads the management.
6. Vide order No.Z/22019/6/2007-IR(C II), New Delhi dated 11.02.2008, case was transferred to Central Government Industrial Tribunal No.II, New Delhi for adjudication by the appropriate Government.
3258 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 6, 2013/ASHADHA 15, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]7. Claimant opted not to testify facts in support of his claim. Shri K.C. Sharma, Assistant Engineer, deposed facts on behalf of the management.
8. Vide notification No.A-11016/3/2009-CLS II, New Delhi dated 03.04.2013, additional charge of the post of the Presiding Officer, Central Government Industrial Tribunal No.II, New Delhi, was assigned to the undersigned by the appropriate Government and thus the case reached this Tribunal for adjudication.
9. Arguments were heard at the bar. Shri B.K. Prasad, authorized representative, advanced arguments on behalf of the claimant. Shri Subhash Chandra, Assistant Engineer, presented facts on behalf of the management. 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:
10. Shri K.C. Sharma, Assistant Engineer, swears in his affidavit Ex. MW1/A, tendered as evidence, that the claimant was engaged as Assistant Operator on muster roll purely on temporary basis by the Executive Engineer, Mechanical & Workshop Division, New Delhi. When he was working on muster roll as Assistant Operator, he was offered appointment as Khalasi on regular basis, vide order No.10(5)/DCEC-VII/E-3/1427 dated 16.08.1984. He accepted the offer and joined as Khalasi on regular basis with effect from 17.08.1984. He submitted his joining report, which is Ex. MW1/2. A Khalasi is promoted on the post of Assistant Operator on the basis of his seniority and that too after passing departmental test.
11. Casual/muster roll workers can be regularized against sanctioned post only. Regular posts were created for regularization of casual workers, working on muster roll/hand receipt posts, vide order No/38/2/87/ECX dated 30.09.1992 and as such eligible daily rated workers were regularized according to their seniority. The said order is Ex. MW1/3. Shri Sudama Manjhi was working as Assistant Operator on daily wages. He passed departmental test for regularization to the post of Operator. When post was available, he was appointed to the post of Operator vide order dated 19.03.1993, which is Ex. MW1/6.
12. Facts unfolded by Shri Sharma remained un- assailed. Therefore, out of facts pleaded by the parties and those testified by Shri Sharma, it emerged that the claimant was engaged as Assistant Operator on muster roll purely on temporary basis on 01.09.1979. Management engages muster roll employees in terms of following instructions:
I. The muster roll labour should be employed for essential works or original work done departmentally and to the barest minimum. They should not be engaged for long period on jobs relating to repairs (Memo No. 615- EIV/WC dated 02.06.1964)
II. Supervisory staff should not be employed on muster roll (Memo No. 615- EIV/WC dated 19.07.1954)
III.The muster roll staff should not be employed for more than a year. All posts against which persons are employed for more than a year should be taken on W.C. Estt. and suitable persons be employed on these jobs(Memo No.615-EIV/WC dated 14.09.1954).
IV. The muster roll staff should be employed on (RTC) jobs of purely casual nature and services of such employees should be terminated immediately on completion of the job on which they are employed. The employment of muster roll labour from 3 months to six months should be approved by the superintending Engineer and six months to a year by the Chief Engineer/Engineer- in-Chief. (23/3/58; EIV(A) dated 27.06.1958).
13. As projected above, a muster roll labour is to be engaged to the barest minimum. He cannot be engaged for a period of more than one year. In case muster roll employee is engaged on a post for more than a year, the said post is to be taken on work charged establishment and suitable person is to be employed on such post. Service of muster roll employee is to be terminated immediately on completion of the job on which he is employed. In case of employment of muster roll employee is for 3-6 months, it may be approved by the Superintending Engineer. Thus, it is evident that muster roll employee cannot expect continuity of his service. Sword of Damocles hangs over his head and he is always under a fear that his services may come to an end on completion of the job, on which he is employed.
14. Conscious of these propositions, claimant accepted offer of appointment on the post of regular Khalasi, when it was so made to him by the management on 16.08.1984. He submitted his joining report on 17.08.1984. On acceptance of the post of regular Khalasi, he no more remained a muster roll Assistant Operator. Shri Sudama Manjhi and Shri Ram Krishan, working as Assistant Operator on muster roll since 1981 and 1982 respectively, were also offered posts of Khalasi, which they opted not to join. They continued working as Assistant Operator on muster roll, on casual basis. Therefore, claimant reached different pedestal than one on which Shri Sudama Manjhi and Shri Ram Krishan, were placed, when he joined services as Khalasi on 17.08.1984. He cannot claim equality with these two muster roll casual Assistant Operators.
15. In Surender Singh (2007 (115) FLR 1003) the Apex Court, commanded Government of India to create some posts in various categories in work charged establishment and regular classified establishments for regularization of muster roll workers, working with the management since long. In consonance with the directions so given, the Government of India created 8982 posts in[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : जुलाई 6, 2013/आषाढ़ 15, 1935 3259 various categories of work charged establishment and regular classified establishments. When these posts were created, Shri Sudama Manjhi and Shri Ram Krishan were senior enough to be regularized on the post of Assistant Operator, hence the management regularized their services as such. Arbitration award for re-categorization and reclassification of workmen in establishment of the management was passed in the year 1988. It was implemented with effect from 01.01.1973 (notionally) and financial benefits were accorded with effect from 01.04.1981. On implementation of the Arbitration award, post of Assistant Operator was merged with the post of Operator. As such, Shri Sudama Manjhi and Shri Ram Krishan reached the position of Operator. It is how the heart of the claimant started wailing. Hind sight made him to visualize that in case he would have continued working as Assistant Operator on muster roll, he was bound to reach the position of Operator. He lost sight of uncertainty, which prevailed till additional posts were created by the Government of India. Above circumstances make it apparent that the claimant cannot put his case at par with Shri Sudama Manjhi and Shri Ram Krishan.
against the claimant. It be sent to the appropriate Government for publication.
Dated : 25.04.2013
Dr. R. K. YADAV, Presiding Officer
नई दिल्ली, 10 जून, 2013
का.आ. 1258. — औद्योगिक विवाद अध्निियम, 1947 (1947 का 14) की धरा 17 के अनुसरण में, केन्द्रीय सरकार कमिशनर, एम॰सी॰डी॰ के प्रबंध्तंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध् में निदष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अध्किरण न.-1 नई दिल्ली के पंचाट (संदर्भ संख्या 73/2012) को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 06-06-2013 को प्राप्त हुआ था।
[फा॰ सं॰ एल-42011/214/2011-आईआर (डी यू)]
जोहन तोपनो, अवर सचिव
New Delhi, the 10th June, 2013
S.O 1258.— In pursuance of Section 2A (2) of the Industrial Dispute Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 73/ 2012) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum- Labour Court No.1, New Delhi as shown in the Annexure, in the Industrial dispute between the employers in relation to the management of The Commissioner, MCD, which was received by the Central Government on 06/06/2013.
[F.No.L-42011/214/2011-IR(DU)]
JOHAN TOPNO, Under Secy.
ANNEXURE
16. Admittedly post of Assistant Operator, which merged with the post of Operator, is promotional post. Claimant was required to pass departmental test for that promotion, which he never attempted. On the other hand, Shri Sudama Manjhi and Shri Ram Krishan passed that departmental test. This proposition also makes line of demarcation in the two situations very clear and visible. Thus, it is evident that the claimant cannot claim equality with Shri Sudama Manjhi and Shri Ram Krishan. He also failed to project case for regularization of his service on the post of Assistant Operator, since on the date of creation of additional posts, while working as regular Khalasi with the management. Those additional posts were not meant for persons like the claimant, who initially worked as muster roll employee and subsequently got regular appointment with the management.
BEFORE DR. R.K. YADAV, PRESIDING OFFICER,
CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL
TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT NO. 1,
KARKARDOOMA COURT
COMPLEX, DELHI
I.D. No.73/2012
Shri Fateh Singh through
The General Secretary,
Delhi Municipal Karamchari Ekta Union (Regd.)
780, Bali Maran,
Delhi-110006.
. . .Workman
Versus
17. In view of the reasons detailed above, it is crystal clear that the claimant does not have a case for counting of his service rendered by him as Assistant Operator on muster roll, not to talk of his regularization on the post of Operator when additional posts of 8982 posts were created in various categories of work charged establishment and regular classified establishment of the management. His claim is devoid of merits. It is announced that the management has not acted in an illegal or unjustified manner when services, rendered by the claimant, as Assistant Operator on muster roll, were not counted and he was not regularized as Assistant Operator/ Operator, on creation of posts referred above. Action of the management is found to be justified also. Claim put forward by the claimant is brushed aside. An award is, accordingly, passed in favour of the management and The Commissioner, Municipal Corporation of Delhi (MCD) Town Hall, Chandni Chowk, Delhi-110006
. . .Management3260 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 6, 2013/ASHADHA 15, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)]
AWARD
Municipal Corporation of Delhi (in short the Corporation) engages sweepers on muster roll. Workers engaged on muster roll crave for regularization of their services. Considering the demand raised by the employees for regularization of their services, the Corporation framed policy for their regularization in a phased manner, subject to availability of posts and funds. In pursuance of policy for regularization of muster roll employees in phased manner, the Corporation regularized services of Shri Fateh Singh, in September 2006, who was working as safai karamchari. Feeling aggrieved by that act of the Corporation, Shri Fateh Singh approached the Delhi Mazdoor Karamchari Ekta Union (in short the union) for redressal of his grievance. The union raised demand for regularization of service of Sh.Fateh Singh with effect from 01.04.2000, which demand was not conceded to by the Corporation. The union raised a dispute before the Conciliation Officer. Since the Corporation contested the claim, conciliation proceedings ended into a failure. 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-42011/214/2011-1R(DU), New Delhi dated 13.03.2012 with following terms:
"Whether action of the management of Municipal Corporation of Delhi in regularizing the workman, Shri Fateh Singh, S/o Shri Jai Kishan, safai karamchari, with effect from September 2006 instead of 01.04.2000 is legal and justified? What relief the work entitled to and from which date?"
2. Claimant, Shri Fateh Singh, was called upon by the Tribunal to file his claim statement. He opted not to file claim statement. He made a statement on oath claiming that since his services have been regularized, dispute between him and the Corporation stood satisfied. Thus, it emerged that Shri Fateh Singh does not want to raise grievances before the Tribunal.
safai karamchari with effect from 01.04.2003 and all consequential benefits have been released in his favour. Shri Fateh Singh feels satisfied from the above situation and does not want to raise grievances against his employer. Consequently, it is evident that dispute between Shir Fateh Singh and the Corporation no more remains to be adjudicated. Resultantly, an award is, accordingly, passed. It be sent to the appropriate Government for publication.
Dated : 03.05.2013
Dr. R. K. YADAV, Presiding Officer
नई दिल्ली, 10 जून, 2013
का. आ. 1259. — औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947,(1947 का 14) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण म—, केन्द्रीय सरकार कमिशनर, एम॰सी॰डी॰ के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण न. 2, नई दिल्ली के पंचाट (संदर्भ संख्या 72/2012 को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 06-06-2013 को प्राप्त हुआ था।
[फा॰ सं॰ एल -42011/215/2011-आई आर (डीयू)]
जोहन तोपनो, अवर सचिव
New Delhi, the 10th June, 2013
S.O. 1259.— In pursuance of Section 2A (2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 70/ 2012) of the Central Goverment Industrial Tribunal cum Labour Court No. 1, New Delhi as shown in the Annexure, in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of The Commissioner, MCD, which was received by the Central Government on 06-06-2013.
[F.No. L-42011/215/2011-IR(DU)]
JOHAN TOPNO, Under Secy.
ANNEXURE
BEFORE DR. R.K. YADAV PRESIDING OFFICER
CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL
TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT NO.1,
KARKARDOOMA COURT COMPLEX, DELHI
I.D.No.72/2012
3. Corporation presented facts before this Tribunal, detailing therein that initially services of Shri Fateh Singh were regularized with effect from 12.09.2006 as safai karamchari. He accepted the proposal and joined as safai karamchari with the Corporation. Subsequently, when Shri Fateh Singh raised the issue, his case was considered again. On consideration of facts, service of Shri Fateh Singh was regularized as safai karamchari with effect from 01.04.2003, vide office order No.1798/DAIII-AC/ DEMS(HQ) dated 17.06.2011. All consequential benefits have also been released in his favour.
4. Out of facts presented by the Corporation and, the statement made by Shri Fateh Singh, it crystallizes that services of Shri Fateh Singh have been regularized as Shri Dal Chand through The General Secretary, Delhi Municipal Karamchari Ekta Union (Regd.) 780, Bali Maran, Delhi-110006. Workman[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : जुलाई 6, 2013/आषाढ़ 15, 1935 3261
Versus
The Commissioner, Municipal Corporation of Delhi (MCD) Town Hall, Chandni Chowk, Delhi-110006 Management
regularized as safai karamchari with effect from 01.04.2003, vide office order No.1798/DAIII-AC/ DEMS(HQ) dated 17.06.2011. All consequential benefits have been released in his favour.
AWARD
Municipal Corporation of Delhi (in short the Corporation) engage) sweepers on muster roll. Workers engaged on muster roll crave for regularization of their services. Considering the demand raised by the employees for regularization of their services, the Corporation framed policy for their regularization in a phased manner, subject to availability of posts and funds. In pursuance of policy for regularization of muster roll employees in phased manner, the Corporation regularized services of Shri Dal Chand, in September 2006, who was working as safai karamchari. Feeling aggrieved by that act of the Corporation, Shri Dal Chand approached the Delhi Mazdoor Karamchari Ekta Union (in short the union) for redressal of his grievance. The union raised demand for regularization of service of Dal Chand with effect from 01.04.2000, which demand was not conceded to by the Corporation. The union raised a dispute before the Conciliation Officer. Since the Corporation contested the claim, conciliation proceedings ended into a failure. 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: 42011/215/2011-IR(DU), New Delhi dated 13.03.2012 with the following terms:
"Whether action of the management of Municipal Corporation of Delhi in regularizing the workman, Shri Dal Chand, S/o Shri Chhatar Singh, safai karamchari, with effect from September, 2006 instead of 01.04.2000 is legal and justified? What relief the work entitled to and from which date?
2. Claimant, Shri Dal Chand, was called upon by the Tribunal to file his claim statement. He opted not to file claim statement. He made a statement on oath claiming that since his services have been regularized, dispute between him and the Corporation stood satisfied. Thus, it emerged that Shri Dal Chand does not want to raise grievances before the Tribunal.
4. Out of facts presented by the Corporation and the statement made by Shri Dal Chand, it crystallizes that services of Shri Dal Chand was regularized as safai karamchari with effect from 01.04.2003 and all consequential benefits have been released in his favour. Shri Dal Chand feels satisfied from the above situation and does not want to raise grievances against his employer. Consequently, it is evident that dispute between Shir Dal Chand and the Corporation no more remains to be adjudicated. Resultantly, an award is, accordingly, passed. It be sent to the appropriate Government for publication.
Dated : 03.05.2013
Dr. R. K. YADAV, Presiding Officer
नई दिल्ली, 10 जून, 2013
का॰.आ. 1260. — औद्योगिक विवाद अधिनियम, 1947, (1947 का 14) की धारा 17 के अनुसरण म—, केन्द्रीय सरकार कमिशनर, एम॰सी॰डी॰ के प्रबंधतंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच, अनुबंध में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अधिकरण न. 1, नई दिल्ली के पंचाट (संदर्भ संख्या 70/2012 को प्रकाशित करती है, जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 06-06-2013 को प्राप्त हुआ था।
[फा॰सं॰ एल - 42011/216/2011 - आई आर (डीयू)]
जोहन तोपनो, अवर सचिव
New Delhi, the 10th June, 2013
S.O. 1260 In pursuance of Section 2A (2) of the Industrial Dispute Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the award (Ref. No. 70/ 2012) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal- cum-Labour Court No. 1, New Delhi as shown in the Annexure, in the Industrial dispute between the employers in relation to the management of The Commissioner, MCD, which was received by the Central Government on 06/06/2013.
[F.No. L-42011/216/2011-IR(DU)]
JOHAN TOPNO, Under Secy.
ANNEXURE
BEFORE DR. R.K. YADAV PRESIDING OFFICER
CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL
TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT NO.1,
KARKARDOOMA COURT COMPLEX, DELHI
3. Corporation presented facts before this Tribunal, detailing therein that initially services of Shri Dal Chand were regularized with effect from12.09.2006 as safai karamchari. He accepted the proposal and joined as safai karamchari with the Corporation. Subsequently, when Shri Dal Chand raised an issue, his case was considered again. On consideration of facts, service of Shri Dalchand was I.D.No.70/20123262 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 6, 2013/ASHADHA 15, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] Shri Jagan through The General Secretary, Delhi Municipal Karamchari Ekta Union (Regd.) 780, Bali Maran, Delhi-110006.
. . .Workrnan
Versus
The Commissioner, Municipal Corporation of Delhi (MCD) Town Hall, Chandni Chowk, Delhi-110006
. . .Management regularized with effect from 11.09.2006 as safai karamchari. He accepted the proposal and joined as safai karamchari with the Corporation. Subsequently, when Shri Jagan raised an issue, his case was considered again. On consideration of facts, service of Shri Jagan was regularized as safai karamchari with effect from 01.04.2003, vide office order No.1741/DA-III-AC/ DEMS(HQ) dated 17.06.2011. All consequential benefits have been also released in his favour.
AWARD
Municipal Corporation of Delhi (in short the Corporation) engages sweepers on muster roll. Workers engaged on muster roll crave for regularization of their services. Considering the demand raised by the employees for regularization of their services, the Corporation framed policy for their regularization in a phased mananer, subject to availability of posts and funds. In pursuance of policy for regularization of muster roll employees in phased manner, the Corporation regularized services of Shri Jagan, in September 2006, who was working as safai karamchari. Feeling aggrieved by that act of the Corporation, Shri Jagan approached the Delhi Mazdoor Karamchari Ekta Union (in short the union) for redressal of his grievance. The union raised demand for regularization of service of Jagan with effect from 01.04.2000, which demand was not conceded to by the Corporation. The union raised a dispute before the Conciliation Officer. Since the Corporation contested the claim, conciliation proceedings ended into a failure. 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: 42011/216/2011-IR(DU), New Delhi dated 13.03.2012 with following terms:
"Whether action of the management of Municipal Corporation of Delhi in regularizing the workman, Shri Jagan, S/o Shri Hukum Singh, safai karamchari, with effect from September 2006 instead of 01.04.2000 is legal and justified? What relief the work entitled to and from which date?"
2. Claimant, Shri Jagan, was called upon by the Tribunal to file his claimstatement. He opted not to file claim statement. He made a statement on oath claiming that since his services have been regularized, dispute between him and the Corporation stood satisfied. Thus, it emerged that Shri Jagan does not want to raise grievances before the Tribunal.
3. Corporation presented facts before this Tribunal, detailing therein that initially services of Shri Jagan were 4. Out of facts presented by the Corporation and the statement made by Shri Jagan, it crystallizes that services of Shri Jagan have been regularized as safai karamchari with effect from 01.04.2003 and all consequential benefits have been released in his favour. Shri Jagan feels satisfied from the above situation and does not want to raise grievances against his employer. Consequently, it is evident that dispute between Shri Jagan and the Corporation no more remains to be adjudicated. Resultantly, an award is, accordingly, passed. It be sent to the appropriate Government for publication.
Dated : 03.05.2013
Dr. R.K. YADAV, Presiding Officer
नई दिल्ली, 11 जून, 2013
का॰आ॰ 1261.— औद्योगिक विवाद अध्निियम, 1947 (1947 का 14) की धरा 17 के अनुसरण में केन्द्रीय सरकार सिंडिकेट बक के प्रबंध्तंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच अनुबंध् में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय सरकार औद्योगिक अध्किरण/श्रम न्यायालय, बंगलोर के पंचाट (संदर्भ संख्या सी. आर नं॰ 44/2009) को प्रकाशित करती है जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 5.6.2013 को प्राप्त हुआ था।
[फा.संं॰ एल-12012/26/2009-आई आर (बी-II)]
शीश राम, अनुभाग अध्किारी
New Delhi, the 11th June, 2013
S.O. 1261.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947(14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. CR No. 44/2009) 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 Syndicate Bank and their workman, which was received by the Central Government on 5.06.2013.
[F. No. L-12012/26/2009-IR (B-II)]
SHEESH RAM, Section Officer[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : जुलाई 6, 2013/आषाढ़ 15, 1935 3263
ANNEXURE
not produce any documentary evidence. The learned advocate appearing for both the sides have filed their written arguments.
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT
INDUSTRIAL TRIUBNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT,
BANGALORE
Dated : 28th May 2013
PRESENT : SHRI S. N. NAVALGUND, Presiding Officer
C R No. 44/2009
I Party II Party Shri Devendrappa S Madiwal, The General Manager (P), C/o Ramling Raichurkar, Syndicate Bank, Regional At PO Mulegaon, Office, Nodal I R Cell, Solapur Tehsil, No. 69, 9th Main, 3rd Solapur (Maharashtra). Block, Jayanagar,
B'lore— 011.
APPEARANCES :
1 Party : Shri T Narayan Swamy,
Advocate
II Party : Shri Ramesh Upadhyaya,
Advocate
AWARD
1. The Central Government vide order No. L-12012/ 26/2009-IR (B-II) dated 18.08.2009 in exercise of the power conferred by clause (d) of sub-section (1) and sub- section (2A) of Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947) made this reference for adjudication with the following schedule:
4. The I Party in his claim statement claims that he was appointed as an Attender by the II Party in the year 1983 at Shahbad Branch and that on 16.12.2003 he was asked to encash a cheque and on the same day pursuant to a Police Complaint filed against him he was taken to the Police Custody and that a case was filed against him in CC No. 99/2000 before Judicial Magistrate, I Class, Shahbad and that he has been honourably acquitted through judgement dated 26.08.2006 and thereafter he submitted representation to the II party along with copy of the judgement with a request to reinstate him but the II Party denied as a result he approached the ALC(C), Bellary and as the II Party took adamant stand he submitted a failure report and consequently the Central Government made this reference for adjudication. Inter alia, the II party in its counter statement contend that service of I Party was availed as Temporary Attender at Shahbad Branch and that he who was entrusted with a cheque of Rs. 1,50,000.00 drawn on State Bank of Hyderabad, Shahbad Branch for• encashment he returned saying that same is lost and then on a complaint filed by the then Manager, R Shankar Swamy, at Shahbad Police Station the said police while registering a case recovered the said cash from the house of the I Party and charge sheeted him for the said offence, hence, his services as a Temporary Sub-staff is discontinued.
SCHEDULE
"Whether the action of management of Syndicate Bank in not considering for reinstatement and re- empaneling (Status Quo) in respect of Shri Devendrappa S Madiwal is legal and justified? What relief the workman concerned may be entitled?"
2. On receipt of the reference while registering it in C R 44/2009 when notices were issued to both sides they enter their appearance through respective -advocates and filed the claim statement of the I Party on 25.05.2010 and the counter statement of the II party on 06.12.2010.
3. After completion of the pleadings when the matter was posted for evidence of the II party, the learned advocate while examining R Shankar Swamy who worked as Branch Manager of Shahbad Branch at the relevant time as MW 1 closed his side. Inter alia, the I party while filing his affidavit examined himself on oath as WW 1 and did 5. At the outset, I may say the wording reinstatement in the schedule is restoring the name of the I Party in the empanelled list of the II Party and not more than that and keeping in mind this position, I now proceed to consider whether the claim of the I Party for re- empanelling his name is justified or not. According to the evidence of R Shankar Swamy, MW 1 he worked as Branch Manager at Shahbad Branch from May 2003 to May 2007 and that I Party was in the empanelment of that Branch as Temporary Attender and his services used to be taken in the absence of Permanent Attender and that on 16.12.2003 when Vijay Kumar Kulkarni Permanent Attender was on leave services of I party was availed and was sent to State Bank of Hyderabad, Shahbad Branch with a cheque drawn on State Bank of Hyderabad, Shahbad Branch for Rs. 1,50,000.00 intimating him to wait for him for encashment of cheque but around 1115 hrs. he returned to Bank stating that he had encashed the cheque and while coming back towards the bank somebody snatched it and that suspecting his conduct he lodged a complaint at Shahbad Police Station and then during investigation Police found cash in his house and ceased and thereafter I Party never came to the Bank. Thus it is not a case of illegal retrenchment attracting Section 25(F)(O) of the3264 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JULY 6, 2013/ASHADHA 15, 1935 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] सरकार औद्योगिक अध्किरण/श्रम न्यायालय मुम्बई के पंचाट (संदर्भ संख्या सी जी आई टी-1/10 आफ 2008) को प्रकाशित करती है जो केन्द्रीय सरकार को 6.6.2013 को प्राप्त हुआ था
[फा.संं. एल-31012/01/2007-आई आर (बी-II)]
शीश राम, अनुभाग अध्किारी
New Delhi, the 11th June, 2013
S.O. 1262.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the Award (Ref. No. CGIT- 110 of 2008) of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal/Labour Court, Mumabi now as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of M/s Travel and Shipping Private Ltd., and their workman, which was received by the Central Government on 06.06.2013.
[F. No. L-31012/01/2007-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-110 of 2008
Parties: Employers in relation to the mamagement of M/s. Travel & Shipping Private Limited
and
Their workman Natha Sahadu Landge
APPEARANCE:-
ID Act and as the I Party claims that he has been acquitted of the alleged offence registered against him at Shahbad Police Station consequent to the loss of cheque amount and immediately after delivery of judgement by the competent criminal court he approached the Manager of Shahbad Branch with a copy of the judgement with a request to re-empanel him and same was refused. Since the claim of the I Party that he has been acquitted in CC No. 99/2004 on the file of JMFC, Shahbad registered pursuant to the complaint filed by MW 1 is not seriously challenged but MW 1 has categorically admitted in his cross-examination that after order in C C No. 99/2004 on the file of JMFC, Shahbad on 26.08.2006 I Party did approach him and that he refused to give him work. When MW 1 was the Branch Manager of Shahbad Branch at the relevant time and pursuant to the complaint filed by him against I Party he was charge sheeted in CC No. 99/2004 on the file of JMFC, Shahbad, when his claim that he has been honourably acquitted in the said case through judgement dated 26.08.2006 and that immediately he approached the MW 1 with copy of the judgement with a request for work and he refused to give him work in the absence of any evidence by the II Party that he/I Party did hide the amount encashed by him at his house and reported the same snatched while he was on his way back after encashment there is no justification for the II Party to refuse to restore his name in the empanelment of the temporary sub-staff of the Shahbad Branch. Under the circumstances, I have arrived at onclusion the action of the management of Syndicate Bank in not considering for reinstatement and re-empanelling (status-quo) in respect of Sh. Devendrappa S Madiwal is not legal and justified and that I Party is entitle for restoration of his name in the empanelled list of II Party Shahbad Branch. In the result, I pass the following Order:
For the Management : No
For the Workman : Mr. Gavas, Advocate
ORDER
Mumbai, dated 03rd day of April, 2013.
AWARD
"The reference is allowed holding that the action of the management of Syndicate Bank in not considering for reinstatement and re-empanelling (status-quo) in respect of Sh. Devendrappa S Madiwal is not legal and justified and that he is entitle for restoration of his name in the empanelled list of Temporary Sub-staff of II Party Shahbad Branch."
(Dictated to U.D.C., transcribed by him, corrected and signed by me on 28th May 2013).
S. N. NAVALGUND, Presiding Officer
नई दिल्ली, 11 जून, 2013
का.आ. 1262. —औद्योगिक विवाद अध्निियम, 1947 (1947 का 14) की धरा 17 के अनुसरण में केन्द्रीय सरकार मैसर्स ट्रेडर और शिपापिंग प्राईवेट लि॰ के प्रबंध्तंत्र के संबद्ध नियोजकों और उनके कर्मकारों के बीच अनुबंध् में निर्दिष्ट औद्योगिक विवाद में केन्द्रीय 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. The terms of reference given in the schedule are as follows:
"Whether there is an employer-employee relationship between M/s Travels & Shipping Pvt. Ltd. Mumbai and Shri Natha Sahadu Landge? If yes whether the demand of Shri Natha Sahadu Landge to reinstate him in service with full back wages and continuity of service w.e.f. 30.12.1999 with all attendant benefits is legal, proper and justified? If so, to what relief Shri Natha Sahadu Landge is entitled to?"
2. As per the order-sheet dated 06.1.2012 the workman Natha Sahadu Landge has expired. Thereafter[भाग II—खण्ड 3(ii)] भारत का राजपत्रा : जुलाई 6, 2013/आषाढ़ 15, 1935 3265 learned counsel for the workman has sought a number of adjournments for filing application to bring legal representatives of the deceased workman on record. Learned counsel for the workman today submits that he has informed the heirs of the deceased workman but nobody has contacted him and, therefore, he is not filing application for bringing legal representatives of the deceased workman on record.
3. Since the workman has expired and no application has been filed to bring his legal representative on record, therefore, these proceedings abate.
4. Award is passed accordingly.
JUSTICE G. S. SARRAF, Presiding Officer
नई दिल्ली, 1 जुलाई, 2013
का.आ. 1263 —जबकि कोड संख्या डी डल/5470 के अंतर्गत दिल्ली क्षेत्र में मैसर्स जुबिलेंट लाईफ साईंसिज लिमिटेड (एतदुपरान्त प्रतिष्ठान के रूप में संदर्भित) ने कर्मचारी भविष्य निध् िएवं प्रकीर्ण उपबंध् अध्निियम, 1952 (1952 का 19) (एतदुपरान्त अध्निियम के रूप में संदर्भित) की धरा 17 की उप-धरा (1) के खण्ड (क) के अंतर्गत छूट के लिए आवेदन किया है।
2. और जबकि केन्द्रीय सरकार के विचार में, अशदान की दरों के संबंध् में उक्त प्रतिष्ठान के भविष्य निध् िनियम उक्त अध्निियम की धरा 6 में विनिर्दिष्ट नियमों की तुलना में कर्मचारियों के लिए कम उपयुक्त नहीं ह और कर्मचारी उक्त अध्निियम अथवा कर्मचारी भविष्य निध् ियोजना, 1952 (एतदुपरांत योजना के रूप में संदर्भित) के अंतर्गत सदृश स्वरूप के किसी अन्य प्रतिष्ठान में कर्मचारियों के संबंध् में दी जाने वाली अन्य भविष्य निध् िप्रसुविधओं का भी लाभ उठा रहे ह।
3. अतः केन्द्रीय सरकार, अब उक्त अध्निियम की धरा 17 की उप धरा (1) के खण्ड (क) द्वारा प्रदत्त शक्तियों का प्रयोग करते हुए इस संबंध् में समय-समय पर विनिर्दिष्ट शर्तों के अध्यध्ीन, उक्त प्रतिष्ठान को अगली अध्सिूचना तक 01.05.1996 से उक्त योजना के सभी उपबंधें के प्रभाव से छूट प्रदान करती है।
[संं॰ एस-35015/14/2012-एसएस-II)]
सुभाष कुमार, अवर सचिव
New Delhi, the 1st July, 2013
S.O. 1263.—Whereas M/s Jubliant Life Sciences Ltd. [under Code No. DL/5470 in Delhi region] (hereinafter referred to as the establishment) has applied for exemption under clause (a) of sub-section (1) of Section 17 of the Employees' Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 (19 of 1952) (hereinafter referred to as the Act).—
2. And whereas in the opinion of the Central Government, the rules of the provident fund of the said establishment with respect to the rates of contribution are not less favourable to employees therein than those specified in section 6 of the said Act and the employees are also in enjoyment of other provident fund benefits provided under the said Act or under the Employees' Provident Funds Scheme, 1952 (hereinafter referred to as the Scheme) in relation to the employees in any other establishment of similar character.
3. Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers con- ferred by clause (a) of sub-section (1) of Section 17 of the said Act and subject to the conditions specified in this regard from time to time, the Central Government, hereby, exempts the said establishment from the opera- tion of all the provisions of the said Scheme with effect from 01-05-1996 until further notification.
[No. S-35015/14/2012-SS-II]
SUBHASH KUMAR, Under Secy.
Printed by the Manager, Govt. of India Press, Ring Road, Maya Puri, New Delhi-10064 and Published by the Controller of Publications, Delhi- 110054.